Jump to content

User talk:Ronhjones: Difference between revisions

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Content deleted Content added
Recent edit to protected page: You make a good point.
Line 273: Line 273:
::Note, however, that information taken from the subject's own website is likely to violate our principles of [[:WP:V|verifiability]], [[:WP:NPOV|neutral point of view]], and [[:WP:RS|reliable sources of information]], since there is an [[:WP:COI|obvious conflict of interest]] involved. --[[User:Orangemike|<font color="darkorange">Orange Mike</font>]] &#x007C; [[User talk:Orangemike|<font color="orange">Talk</font>]] 18:55, 29 October 2010 (UTC)
::Note, however, that information taken from the subject's own website is likely to violate our principles of [[:WP:V|verifiability]], [[:WP:NPOV|neutral point of view]], and [[:WP:RS|reliable sources of information]], since there is an [[:WP:COI|obvious conflict of interest]] involved. --[[User:Orangemike|<font color="darkorange">Orange Mike</font>]] &#x007C; [[User talk:Orangemike|<font color="orange">Talk</font>]] 18:55, 29 October 2010 (UTC)
:::And other editors will chop it around, delete bits, add bits, etc. You cannot keep a page static once on Wikipedia. '''[[User:Ronhjones|<span style="border:1px solid black;color:black; padding:1px;background:yellow"><font color="green">&nbsp;Ron<font color="red">h</font>jones&nbsp;</font></span>]]'''<sup>[[User talk:Ronhjones|&nbsp;(Talk)]]</sup> 19:36, 29 October 2010 (UTC)
:::And other editors will chop it around, delete bits, add bits, etc. You cannot keep a page static once on Wikipedia. '''[[User:Ronhjones|<span style="border:1px solid black;color:black; padding:1px;background:yellow"><font color="green">&nbsp;Ron<font color="red">h</font>jones&nbsp;</font></span>]]'''<sup>[[User talk:Ronhjones|&nbsp;(Talk)]]</sup> 19:36, 29 October 2010 (UTC)
::::We just got usable OTRS permission, so if you'll be so kind as to restore the article I'll add the tags for it. [[User:VernoWhitney|VernoWhitney]] ([[User talk:VernoWhitney|talk]]) 01:08, 30 October 2010 (UTC)

Revision as of 01:08, 30 October 2010



Saturday
2
November
Welcome to Ronhjones' Talk page

on English Wikipedia

If you leave a new message on this page, I will reply on this page unless you ask me to reply elsewhere.


Hi there! To keep the flow of conversations, I like to keep threads on one page where possible. So, if you post a message here, I'll probably respond to it here. Conversely, if I post a message on your talk page, you can respond there if you wish; since I've edited your talk page I'll have it on my watchlist. Thanks!

All threads on this page will be archived after 14 days of non - activity.

User:MrKIA11/Archive Box

Talkback

Hello, Ronhjones. You have new messages at Template talk:AfricaProject#Book class.
You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.

PBSKIDS

Hello Ronhjones, thank you for your contributions on articles related to PBS Kids. I'd like to invite you to become a part of Wikipedia:WikiProject PBSKids, a WikiProject aimed at improving the quality of PBS Kids articles on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page for more information. Thanks!

TUSC token 8fd3211ebe04214532d860745d268de2

I am now proud owner of a TUSC account!

Edit

Is this edit constructive? Wayne Olajuwon chat 00:51, 16 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Oooh, another grey area. It's only the sandbox (the template is fully protected, so trials must be done with the sandbox, before requesting a change). I assume his trials did not work... so he deleted them (normally one would copy the whole of the template to the sandbox to trial changes), ideally he should have just reverted back to the version of the last user, if he blanked it and left it that way then I would have just reverted and posted a message that it was better to either revert to the last user before his trials or copy a fresh copy of the template to the sandbox, rather than leaving it blank.

Thanks

Thanks alot for reverting the vandalism on my user talk page. Here's a cookie.

I've found a nickname for you. Wayne Olajuwon chat 22:03, 18 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Can you also block Miaa143 indefinitely because of vandalism? Wayne Olajuwon chat 22:04, 18 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Nice, chocolate chip one I hope.  Ronhjones  (Talk) 22:05, 18 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Okay. Enjoy the cookie. Wayne Olajuwon chat 22:06, 18 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Can you please also block Miaa143 indefinitely because of vandalism? Wayne Olajuwon chat 22:08, 18 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I'm waiting until he vandalises after his final warning.  Ronhjones  (Talk) 22:10, 18 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Okay. Wayne Olajuwon chat 22:13, 18 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Sam Binns / Marcos Senna

Do you still believe Sam Binns replaced Marcos Senna in the Spain World Cup squad?

You did well to revert my asinine edit, but you could have dug deeper. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 90.216.252.125 (talk) 22:23, 18 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]

It was vandalism, it got reverted.  Ronhjones  (Talk) 22:26, 18 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Of course it was - I have just admitted as much! Why don't you revert the reference to Sam Binns also? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 90.216.252.125 (talk) 22:30, 18 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]

If you know it's wrong then change it and explain in the edit summary.  Ronhjones  (Talk) 22:32, 18 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]

To be honest Ron, the prospect of embarrassing this idiot Sam Binns was more enticing to me than any satisfaction gained from simply removing his notoriety. I am aware I have abused the spirit of Wikipedia but I have just drunk three glasses of white wine. Thanks for your work. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 90.216.252.125 (talk) 22:36, 18 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Enjoy the next glass :-)  Ronhjones  (Talk) 22:39, 18 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]

You are a gentleman. Many apologies for having wasted the time of a genuine Wikipedian for a cheap giggle. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 90.216.252.125 (talk) 22:41, 18 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]

ineo Tech Article

Hi Ronhjones,

The article Ineo Tech should not be deleted. Ineo Tech is a major OEM and ODM manufacturing company that obtains many global patented products and Develops New Technology. This article is intended to claim and explain the breakdown of new terminology for Complex RAID also original creator of this technology type not founded in Wikipedia or other sources. The following corrections will apply:

Article editing for removal of other Company name's.

Sincerely, thank you.

Sungwu611 (talk) 23:03, 18 October 2010 (UTC)Sungwu611[reply]

Now there is a "Hangon" template, you should explain fully at Talk:Ineo Tech - otherwise the deletion is not contested. 23:10, 18 October 2010 (UTC)

Hi and thanks

I am always surprised at how many people are watching the 2010 Copiapó mining accident and how quickly vandalism is reverted. An incredible amount of work by many people has gone into to improving the article. Thank you for keeping an eye on it. Cheers, Veriss (talk) 23:31, 18 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Happy to have helped  Ronhjones  (Talk) 23:33, 18 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]

The Signpost: 18 October 2010

Hey there

I took out your addition of some obscure gold compounds used as drugs. I'm thinking that this template is supposed to list all the commonly available gold compounds, those which tend to be used as building blocks for other things perhaps. Do let me know if you feel strongly otherwise. --Rifleman 82 (talk) 04:48, 19 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]

No particular preference. There were so few gold compounds, that I just listed all I found. Feel free to adjust.  Ronhjones  (Talk) 18:47, 19 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Morphan.svg

Can you please take a look at File:Morphan.svg? Based on the reference I added to the article, and on Chemical Abstracts, the structure should not have a double bond in it. Thanks. -- Ed (Edgar181) 11:35, 25 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]

That's Life! I rather cheated, and let SymexDraw construct the formula and the SMILES from the IUPAC name - thus it got a double bond as the IUPAC name was "1,2,3,4,5,6-hexahydro-2,6-methano-azocine". I will re-draw it tonight (I still have the original skc file), and overwrite the one on Commons. Garbage in = Garbage out... Ronhjones  (Talk) 15:50, 25 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Thank you. -- Ed (Edgar181) 16:26, 25 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Huggle templates

Should Huggle use last warning instead of final warning on Huggle final warning templates and regular Wikipedia final warning templates? Wayne Olajuwon chat 20:13, 25 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]

They were "last" once. There were changed to final - e.g. http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Template:Huggle/warn-4&diff=prev&oldid=346439336. I would suggest Wikipedia:Huggle/Feedback may be the best place to ask why. I suspect because Huggle uses it's own set that maybe it's always playing "catch up" with the main warning templates.

P.S. Busy night on Huggle - why is Monday always so bad!  Ronhjones  (Talk) 20:18, 25 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I know because I had school today. Wayne Olajuwon chat 20:23, 25 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]

sry!

sorry i did not know what it did. I thought it would not delete the whole section.

-sincerly

Wikipedia user

E-mail

Reply to me at my E-mail pls. hershelistheman@yahoo.com


-best wishes, Wikipedia user —Preceding unsigned comment added by 217.229.137.40 (talk) 20:40, 25 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Duncan Sandys/Norwood constituency

Kindly rationalise your reversion of my edit on the Norwood constituency page, and consequent "Level 1 warning" and "Level 2 warning" to me. Duncan Sandys was first elected for the seat at the Norwood by-election, 1935, not the 1935 general election.

This is obvious from various sources, including the Gilbert biography of Churchill, the works of Craig or, closer to home, the Norwood page itself which details results of elections in the seat.

I have included a level 1 warning to you in this post for clear use of an auto-bot, which has twice reverted a fact back to inaccurate, misleading and false information on what is meant to be an encyclopedia. In future, please only revert yourself, information which you yourself know to be untrue or unsourced. 217.39.4.234 (talk) 21:08, 25 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]

There is no page "Norwood by-election, 1935", which you put up as a link. There is a page United Kingdom general election, 1935, which link you removed. If you wish to show that he was elected at a by-election and not the main election, then you need to explain with some references what happened. There is no BOT operating here. Ronhjones  (Talk) 21:10, 25 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I invite you to read Gilbert, Prophet of Truth (Vol V of the Churchill biography), p626, or the Constitutional Year Book 1937, p198 ["Constituencies and Elections - England - London Boroughs"]. If these are not to hand then please take a glance at the election results immediately below the list of Members of Parliament for Norwood on that page. It should be painfully obvious that Duncan Sandys was elected at a by-election prior to the 1935 general election; in this case, at a March by-election prior to a November general election. Now kindly do not make further reversions to this page while I add sources. 217.39.4.234 (talk) 21:21, 25 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Which is basically what I said, add some sources, and you remove the potential for reversion. The addition of a red link instead of a blue one without any reason will normally be reverted immediately. It is done so often by vandals.  Ronhjones  (Talk) 21:24, 25 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]
I needn't have bothered, as the article, prior to my revision, already contained Fred Craig's book of 1918-1949 results in the sources. That book contains the results for the seat. A glance at that book would have given the information necessary.
I am currently on a trawl of London seats prior to 1974, and would be very grateful for an absence of attempts to ban, suspend, or warn me while I in one or two cases remove inaccurate information and include facts. 217.39.4.234 (talk) 21:34, 25 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Then may I suggest that the edit summary is your friend. Just a few words explaining will save you a lot of problems. I don't have a browser open (I open FF3 to reply on this page, then it gets closed) - Like others, I vandal fight with Huggle - it just shows us who changed the page, the size of the change, the edit summary and the "before" and "after". With something like 15-30 pages being vandalised every minute, it's the only way we can keep on top of the onslaught.  Ronhjones  (Talk) 21:41, 25 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]

HELP!

i need help with a world geograohy project. Do you mind if i use some of your information?

Wikipedia user P.S.- i need to know soon... like within 2 days. TY in advance. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 217.229.137.40 (talk) 21:03, 25 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]

You may use any Wikipedia data - but it must be attributed - see WP:CC-BY-SA  Ronhjones  (Talk) 21:12, 25 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]

The Signpost: 25 October 2010

Re: Speedies

I see you don't like my speedy templates - it took you a long while to not like them (>1 year). I use them all the time, it's just identical the same system that Twinkle uses using the standard Wikipedia:Template messages/User talk namespace messages, so it was compatible not complicated. I know others use them as well. Now I will have to add all of them to my config, and manually check the warning level each time, or jump into Twinkle. I think that's more complicated. C'ést la vie.  Ronhjones  (Talk) 00:34, 26 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]

There is already a template for telling people not to remove speedy deletion tags, in the template messages list. Why on earth would you want to issue such messages with a four-level warning system? If they remove the template twice, either they read the message and decided to ignore it, in which case just leave generic warnings until they can be blocked, or they didn't read the message, in which case what makes you think leaving the same message three more times will have any effect? Gurch (talk) 12:04, 26 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]
The same argument would apply to the standard warnings Wikipedia:Template messages/User talk namespace where there are {{uw-speedy1}},{{uw-speedy2}},{{uw-speedy3}},{{uw-speedy4}} (also used by Twinkle), but those are there, and I have seen them often used as well. In general removal of speedies is a novice user, changing the message to vandalism after one speedy message could confuse them.  Ronhjones  (Talk) 16:30, 26 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Yep, the same argument applies to the "standard" warnings. Most of them are unnecessary, redundant or overly aggressive, and those that aren't are often so verbose I can't imagine users ever read them. This is, of course, part of the reson Huggle has its own, intentionally terse and limited, warnings in the first place. Gurch (talk) 16:57, 26 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]

help

Hi Ron, I worked on my user page, but I can't seem to get the barnstar back in place. Can you help with that? Thanks. :) Malke 2010 (talk) 21:49, 26 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you.Malke 2010 (talk) 22:13, 26 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]
You're welcome.  Ronhjones  (Talk) 22:18, 26 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Recent edit to protected page

Hi Ron! With this edit, you relocated a {{Main}} template in an article. Unfortunately, there was no consensus for that move. Moreover, the individual asking for it is himself at the centre of the edit war that gave rise to that page being protected. There is currently a discussion on the article talk page suggesting that the move was inappropriate as it suggests that the entire section in which the template is located relates to that one topic when in fact that template relates only to part of that section. Thanks!SpikeToronto 04:37, 28 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]

 Done  … with this edit. Thanks! — SpikeToronto 19:30, 28 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]
That looks a better result - {{Main}} are normally at a section start (I don't know of another one in mid section), hence I saw not problem with the move.  Ronhjones  (Talk) 19:39, 29 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]
You make a very good point. In the end, the editors there made the decision to eliminate the {{Main}} entirely and to just use a contextual wikilink to the topic. Thanks! — SpikeToronto 20:28, 29 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Recently Deleted Page about His Eminency Dr. Hazrat Sheikh Shah Sufi Mohammed Nurul Alam

Hi Ron! You have deleted my page because it was for copyright infringement but I emailed the permissions page telling them that I have permission to use His Eminency's information from his website. How do I put the page back up? The permissions people did not email me back either. What do I do????? Here is the website that I have permission to use http://www.dayemicomplexbangladesh.org/id27.html I also tried flagging my page to tell you guys that i sent out the email. But I do not know if I did it right. Niraleah1 (talk) 05:12, 29 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]

It doesn't work like that. We have no way of knowing who any user is. To us all users are equal. Thus we cannot accept any permission for copyright work use that does not follow the very careful rules laid out on donating copyright materials. In a nutshell there are two choices.
  1. An e-mail from the website owner to permissions-en@wikimedia.org using an e-mail address associated with the website, e.g xxx@dayemicomplexbangladesh.org. - in which case an OTRS ticket will be generated that can be displayed on the articles talk page. OR
  2. Placing suitable license tags on each web page that you intend to use - suitable tags are PD, CC-BY, and CC-BY-SA
E-mails claiming ownership that cannot be verified as being the website owner will not work.
If you can arrange for either one to be done, then the page can be easily restored.  Ronhjones  (Talk) 18:48, 29 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Note, however, that information taken from the subject's own website is likely to violate our principles of verifiability, neutral point of view, and reliable sources of information, since there is an obvious conflict of interest involved. --Orange Mike | Talk 18:55, 29 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]
And other editors will chop it around, delete bits, add bits, etc. You cannot keep a page static once on Wikipedia.  Ronhjones  (Talk) 19:36, 29 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]
We just got usable OTRS permission, so if you'll be so kind as to restore the article I'll add the tags for it. VernoWhitney (talk) 01:08, 30 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]