Jump to content

User talk:Ronhjones

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

This is an old revision of this page, as edited by Media Maven (talk | contribs) at 21:11, 3 January 2013 (→‎username-change request: MCT Susan --> SusanYoo -->MediaMaven). The present address (URL) is a permanent link to this revision, which may differ significantly from the current revision.

Status: Unknown


Friday
7
June
22:23 UTC
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.


Note for other Admins - If you want to change any action I have done, then you may do so without having to wait for a reply from me. Your judgement at the time should be sufficient.
Note: To any interested parties. This is my main account, there are no edits under my current IP address 109.224.128.22; a few minor edits under my old static IP address 87.127.178.158, my work IP address (but that is shared, and not all the edits there are mine) 193.113.135.87 or 193.113.135.112 I also have User:Ronjones for logging in outside home.
All threads on this page will be archived after 14 days of non - activity.

User:MrKIA11/Archive Box

TUSC token 8fd3211ebe04214532d860745d268de2

I am now proud owner of a TUSC account!

Vandalalism in the Karnataka article

Dear Ron, earlier on 30th October, I had left this message for you: (:Hi Sir, there is once again vandalism first by user 69.112.23.166 in two articles Satyasraya and Veera Ballala II articles. Now I strongly suspect he is logging from a different computer showing a different IP address as 69.112.22.179 and is posing as a different user but is indulging in the same kind of vandalism. He is reverting my edits without any discussion. This is for your information. Kindly treat this as a complaint against both these anonymous users. Also, without discussion Pied hornbill is reverting my contributions to the Karnataka article despite reasons given and excerpts from reliable sources quoted by me in the talk page of that article. Pls. intervene on that issue also.)

The Karnataka article was semi-protected for a month thereafter (probably by you or thebestofall007) along with the Satyasraya and Veera Ballala II articles. Now, the semi-protection has been removed (ostensibly, on the presumption that Pied hornbill and other will not resort to unauthorized reversion of edits, that too without initiating any discussion etc. Now as I myself saw the Karnataka page after more than a month, I noticed that this user has reverted that very portion which I had contributed to the article. Possibly, this and(/or) another user had been reported to the admins, but requests to him even on the talk page of the article for discussions before resorting to reversion of edits have had no impact on him. I have reported the matter to thebestofall007 also. Can you intervene so that order is restored. Many thanks in advance. You can reply to me on my talk pageSrirangam99 (talk) 10:58, 7 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Since you are both logged in editors, there no point in adding semi-protection. I can only refer you to Wikipedia:Dispute resolution, if he chooses not to discuss then those who help there can make their own conclusions.  Ronhjones  (Talk) 20:54, 7 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Hi Ron, I left several messages on Pied Hornbill's talk page asking him to discuss. I have no problems if you refer both of us to Wikipedia dispute resolution. Srirangam99 (talk) 11:05, 9 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Since there is just the two of you - I suggest you request an independent third opinion at Wikipedia:Third_opinion - you should get help with someone who is completely unbiased, and will make a rational decision based on the arguments.  Ronhjones  (Talk) 14:23, 9 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Sir, greetings and wish you a Merry Christmas. Today we in India also celebrated an important but a bit less known festival of Vaikuntha Ekadashi - in which worship of the Hindu God Vishnu is performed. Anyways, that's it about the festivities.
Now another user with just an IP address i.e. ‎69.115.128.246 is again reverting my edits to the Veera Ballala II and Satyasraya articles. Earlier also, there was another vandal using two IP addresses who was vandalizing articles in which I have contributed. I do not want to request for semi-protection as I am not afraid of them, but such elements are disturbing the direction which articles have to take with contribution from various wikipedians, including newbies like me. I for one, do not claim I am perfect, but I am always very open to discussions about veracity of information, reliable sources quoted by us etc. These guys simply revert without giving us notice for discussions, that is the problem. You may reply on my talk page. Many thanks in advance.Srirangam99 (talk) 16:24, 24 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Same old articles, yet another IP hopping vandal. Semi-protected again, let them discuss on the talk page as they are unable to provide any real rationale otherwise.  Ronhjones  (Talk) 17:16, 24 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Many thanks for your help. I noticed just now, the same IP/user has also vandalized the Western Chalukya Empire article. I usually do not recommend this action, but considering his/its resorting to unauthorized reversions and more importantly, not discussing edits or content, I think in order to preserve sanctity of the articles and letting meaningful edits remain, this user deserves to be blocked. Of course Ron, you can decide what is best.Srirangam99 (talk) 17:43, 25 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]
The IP is not so active there, we'll leave that for now. He may be more active when he can't get at the other articles - let's wait and see.  Ronhjones  (Talk) 22:31, 25 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks for your response. It seems this I.P.'s basic interest lies in my edits to articles related to the State of Karnataka in India, and of articles related to kingdoms and dynasties/kings from that area. All he does is simply reverts my edits (with just a silly comment - reverted vandal) This he did around 3-4 times in the Vikramaditya VI article, where I have just restored the page to the status where it was before his unauthorized reverts.Srirangam99 (talk) 04:18, 26 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]
I've blocked that IP - be warned, he may well switch addresses.  Ronhjones  (Talk) 20:54, 26 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Yeah I know the ways of these vandals. But I guess there nothing more we can do except make sincere efforts to protect sanctity of articles which are nothing but results of the sincere efforts of scores of contributors. Nothing's perfect, I suppose. Just for info, his earlier I.P. proxy probably was 69.112.23.166,logging from where he caused commotion in the same article and using the same comment 'reverted vandal'.Srirangam99 (talk) 13:58, 27 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Deletion of File:Omelan_Pleszkewycz.jpg

I don't understand why this is marked for deletion. It's a picture I scanned of my grandfather, a photo among many others of the family I got, after he died. I don't know who took it - an uncle or other family member perhaps - and it will never be known (there is no note indicating who took it). So such images aren't allowed on wikipedia?Pelmeni (talk) 06:24, 18 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]

I have no control over what you wrote when you uploaded the image - I can only go on what is presented to me. It says "Source - Given to me by the subject of the picture." and "Permission - Evidence: Will be provided on request.". Thus we need to see the permission or correct the data. You did not state any relationship, so we cannot assume you have inherited the copyright. This photo was taken in the 1950s you said - by who? - the person who took the photo owns the copyright, not the subject of the picture. If it was taken by a family member, and you have inherited from that member, then it's likely you own the copyright (the photo is too young to be copyright free) and we can then alter the image data - if that is the case then let me know and I will alter it for you.  Ronhjones  (Talk) 19:52, 18 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks for the reply. I have no idea who took the picture in the 1950s. It may have been a relative. It was given to me along with many other old photos. I cannot exclude that iot wasn't taken byu someone else, but there is nothing about any copyright or studio on the back of the picture so I assume it was taken by someone else in the family, or a friend. The person who took the picture is likely no longer around and my grandfather isn't around to say who took it (and if he were, I doubt he would remember - this was from the 50's). It's a random family picture but a nice one of this person.Pelmeni (talk) 01:33, 19 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]
The main question is then are you the actual beneficiary of those photographs? Then one can presume you probably have the copyright. Or was someone else the beneficiary (older brother, uncle, etc.) and they just gave you a copy to keep?  Ronhjones  (Talk) 02:24, 20 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Grandfather lived with my dad in his last years; after he died I was asked which old photos did I want to have for myself and this is one of the ones I got. This isn't a copy of a photo that somebody else owns.Pelmeni (talk) 03:39, 20 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]
My guess is that you probably do own the copyright as a direct descendant. I see you have e-mailed OTRS - that is probably the best solution - it will stop any further tagging of the image.  Ronhjones  (Talk) 20:51, 20 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks!Pelmeni (talk) 20:57, 20 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Deletion of Advice Polack

G'day Ron, regarding your deletion of this article, please see User talk:The Blade of the Northern Lights#Advice re pullback and User talk:John Vandenberg#Poland internet culture (and the sections which follow). I would appreciate it if you undeleted this article, and sent it to AFD if you are convinced it is problematic. Cheers, John Vandenberg (chat) 03:40, 19 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]

I see The Blade of the Northern Lights has undeleted it anyway - fine, but the end of the first paragraph is still a racist slur which is unreferenced.  Ronhjones  (Talk) 02:27, 20 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]
It was referenced in the body of the article. John Vandenberg (chat) 03:27, 20 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Then why has someone else put "[citation needed]" by that statement? I don't see many reliable sources...  Ronhjones  (Talk) 20:14, 20 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]

British Chess Magazine

Hi Ron,

I am co-editor and photographer for the British Chess Magazine. In fact, also the IT Manager.

I have come to the conclusion that I do not understand how to publish images that I have created.

I keep seeing messages telling me that my own material is not publishable.

Can you give a very simple instruction on what I am doing wrong please?

I have uploaded the October 2012 cover of the magazine: in simple, non-jargon terms what have I done wrong and what do I need to correct?

Best Regards,

Dr. John Upham, British Chess Magazine — Preceding unsigned comment added by Jeupham (talk • contribs) 15:41, 20 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]

All editing in Wikipedia if effectively anonymous - be it as an IP or logged in user. There is no way within the Wikipedia system that shows who a user is - unless they care to say on their user page (and that could be false). If a user uploads an image, never seen before, and they claim to own the copyright - then we have no reason to disbelieve them. If a user uploads an image that is found elsewhere before uploading to Wikipedia - then how can we tell if it's the uploader's image or he's just copied it off the web page? - we cannot (and far too many people do copy off of web pages...!), so we need more evidence of ownership (see below). That takes care of "normal" photographs. When we move on to book covers / posters / album covers, then we hit more problems as these are now copies of existing 2D images - e.g. a Poster could have parts of various photos (different photographers), original artwork (cartoonists, etc.). The owner of such posters may own the copyright of all the elements or he may just have a license to use those images for his application, with the original photographer still holding the main copyright. That is further complicated by the fact that all free images have, at worse, CC-BY-SA license - this allows derivatives and full commercial use, so for example, a poster on Wikipedia that had a photo of a person could be used to crop out that image (a derivative), and then legally sold (commercial) - and all the original photographer gets is a small mention of who took the picture.
Your options... (see also WP:DCM)
  1. Fill and send in the form at commons:Commons:Email_templates/Consent quoting the urls of all your images, to the e-mail address shown on that page - you will get a ticket number applied to each image - you can also (later) ask for the same license ticket to be applied for subsequent images uploaded. OR
  2. If the images of the covers are on the web - then add a CC-BY or CC-BY-SA license box from http://creativecommons.org/choose/ onto that web page to show the image is released under that license.
Either option declares that you own all the copyright(s) of the image - only you can decide if that's true - and that you are allowing commercial re-use.
You could alternatively go for non-free use, with {{Non-free book cover}} and a WP:FURG - but I guess you could really only use one per article, and it might get deleted if there is an image of a living person which is not that small. The non free image would also have to be about 300px wide max, and low resolution.  Ronhjones  (Talk) 20:45, 20 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Request To Help Creating An Article

Hi there, I am about to create an article on english wikipedia about the Asean India Association. So that I have uploaded a logo [:[File:Asean India.jpg|thumbnail|Asean India Association Logo]], the logo is official and public usable, many other sites are using this logo. Can you permit me to use the logo to create the article Asean India, many information are there which I can contribute to this article. So when you come from your holiday please help me creating an large article. Priyanku (talk) 12:13, 19 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]

The logo may be in Public view on the web page - but it's not there for Public Re-use. The web page shows quite clearly Copyright Publc Diplomacy Division, Ministry of External Affairs, Government of India 2012. All Rights Reserved.. "All Rights Reserved" images cannot be used in Wikipedia - Wikipedia allow for full commercial re-use of all images. Suggest you change it to a non free image with a {{non-free logo}} and a WP:FURG  Ronhjones  (Talk) 20:56, 20 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Okay, Thanks for your help, understanding me about the copyright of images from a website. now can i create the article without a logo, so that further i ask the association to grant or donate their logo to the english wikipedia. Priyanku (talk) 06:50 21 Dec 2012 (North east India time zone) —Preceding undated comment added 13:23, 21 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]

PLEASE PLEASE PLEASE

Lock the Mesoamerican long count calendar until the Bloody 2012 doomsday balderdsh is over. Senor Cuete (talk) 02:06, 21 December 2012 (UTC)Senor Cuete[reply]

OK  Ronhjones  (Talk) 02:12, 21 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks but it's not coming up as locked??? Senor Cuete (talk) 02:18, 21 December 2012 (UTC)Senor cuete[reply]
OK I see: no lock icon but when I bring up an edit page there's a red warning about only autoconfirmred users. Thank so much. Senor Cuete (talk) 02:20, 21 December 2012 (UTC)Senor Cuete[reply]
I forgot the padlock (it was 2am!) - it's just a guide, it's not necessary to lock the page  Ronhjones  (Talk) 19:54, 21 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Ho ho ho

The story of the 4th Wiseman

I do believe that this card explains
a lot of the hitherto misunderstood
and even ignored origins of a variety of Christmas stories.
I am considering writing an article about the theology involved
but am having a difficult time with sources.
Oh well,
have a good one, it does appear
that we have made it through the worst of 2012,
which is a great start to 2013
Einar aka Carptrash (talk) 16:08, 24 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]

LOL. Like it. Let's hope 2013 is better than 2012 in many ways - less rain would be nice, this must be getting on for the wettest year on record for the UK.  Ronhjones  (Talk) 17:11, 24 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]
And in New Mexico it brought us near drought. Too bad that we can't work something out. Carptrash (talk) 20:50, 24 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Rather a long pipeline, I feel. Good challenge for some engineer! ;-) Maybe better to concentrate on how to make sure the jet stream always goes north of the UK (and takes all the rain away), rather than being stuck over northern France. Ronhjones  (Talk) 21:01, 24 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Good idea. blame it on the French. Here in the USA we manage to blame much of our bad weather on Canada. Certainly the cold blast that we just got is their fault. Carptrash (talk) 21:06, 24 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]

File:Traffic on Federal Route 22 near Tamparuli.JPG

Hello.

I refer to the photograph that I have uploaded above. I have noticed that you have added the {{watermark}} tag onto the file description page. I would like to inform you that my camera (which I used to take this photograph) does not add watermarks to photographs, nor do I have any clue on how to add them. If you are referring to the date and time on the lower right corner which is easily seen, it's because my camera automatically prints out the date and time according to it's settings, but I don't think it qualifies as a watermark nor as credits. Can you please clarify? Thanks. Pizza1016 (talk | contribs | uploads | logs) 03:43, 26 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]

We would still call it a watermark - it not part of the image, it's been added to the image - in this case by the camera - don't worry someone will take it out (eventually!)  Ronhjones  (Talk) 20:35, 26 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]
OK then. Pizza1016 (talk | contribs | uploads | logs) 00:12, 27 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]

The Signpost: 24 December 2012

Thanks

I uaed the table as you edited it. There is still a structural error.1archie99 (talk) 06:47, 26 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Fixed it. I think the problem comes from you using long hyphens in the table, and I think the wiki syntax needs standard hyphens, hence when I added the bar and short hyphen it made the new line. Sometimes better to use – and — when you don't want a standard short hyphen.  Ronhjones  (Talk) 20:48, 26 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]

user request

I removed the prod from Jack Moule because since notability as a national champion is pretty clear, this would require consensus at AfD. I could send it there, but since I would oppose deletion, my nominating it might cause confusion. If you think it should be deleted, it would be better for you to be the one to nominate it. DGG ( talk ) 02:26, 28 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Not up to me - I'll have to talk to the subject as OTRS - he wants it deleted.  Ronhjones  (Talk) 18:46, 28 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Quality Rating

The talk page does have a quality rating. It is class=B. I've put it on the page myself, removed it, put it back, confirmed it each time, yet the article will not de-categorize. On getting your message, I checked the history - none of my edits are there. This is very weird; I checked and rechecked several times! Anyway I did it once again, and now it has worked. Thank you.
kcylsnavS{screechharrass} 19:30, 29 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Maybe some weird server bug didn't cause you edit to sync with the main Florida server. We will never know...  Ronhjones  (Talk) 19:38, 29 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Article's creator

But the first edit was a redirect, and the next was a move. The history doesn't identify it as a page creation. Am I missing something? Isn't there a "former" page?
kcylsnavS{screechharrass} 00:22, 30 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, Ronhjones. You have new messages at Svanslyck's talk page.
You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.

I'm looking for an opinion

I've been corresponding with an artist and had this exchange:

"I wrote: "Thirdly, it is my understanding that as the creating artist you own the copyrights to images of the monument.  I have taken a series of pictures during my visits to Glendale and would like to use those.  I am very comfortable showing these to you as part of the getting permission process."
The artist, Joe Tyler replied: "As far as pictures go, I feel that the memorial belongs to all who see it and I have no problem with you sharing the images."

Is this enough permission to use my pictures of his work? I have started the article here and wanted to add a picture, but decided to run it past you first. Einar aka Carptrash (talk) 01:59, 30 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]

It's a good start (I do wish the US would have a FoP like my country...), why not forward it to me at OTRS - make sure the e-mail adresses are included. Maybe we can firm up the permission that way. The main problem we have, is that I see a lot of these and when I tell the creator that the Wikipedia image can be used for any purpose, including commercial - they get cold feet. Send to info-en AT wikimedia DOT org (tidy that up... stops the spammers) and put my name at top. Let me know here and I will go and look for it.  Ronhjones  (Talk) 20:03, 30 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Got it. It's mine  Ronhjones  (Talk) 21:27, 30 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]
That should take it to the next stage. Perhaps I should have mentioned before that I would like this release to function for a bunch of pictures. The memorial in question is a complicated one with a lot of parts to it. Carptrash (talk) 21:40, 30 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]
See how he goes with the first one, you can then just ask to agree to the rest in the same way.  Ronhjones  (Talk) 22:16, 30 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Sounds good. Carptrash (talk) 22:31, 30 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]

The Signpost: 31 December 2012

Manulife Financial article edits

Many thanks for your help and instructions regarding the copyrighted images on the Manulife article. We are currently working on a solution to be able to have the images included in the article. While we work on the solution, would it be possible for you to please consider making our text edits requested on the article? Please reply on Talk:Manulife Financial. Thank you Jcsmg (talk) 15:37, 2 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

username-change request: MCT Susan --> SusanYoo -->MediaMaven

Hi there,

I believe my Username (MCT Susan) has not been changed, as per your approval of my name-change request.

I think the easiest way to see what I mean is to visit MCT Susan's talk page?

You'd advised me to post on http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:CHU.

I believe this page ultimately sends me to post to this User rename log: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Special:Log/renameuser.

I only understood today that this might be where I need to post your approval.

As far as I can tell, the MCT Susan username has not yet been changed to SusanYoo.

One complication -- I would like to use a pseudonym now, instead of my real name. I came across a warning while researching this process, that using your real name can result in harassment.

Therefore, I'd like to change my username to MediaMaven.

I've posted an Unblock-un request to that effect on my User talk page (for MCT Susan).

Can you please let me know if there's anything else I need to do? And if not, when I can start operating with my new Username?

Thank you very much for any (more) assistance you can provide. You've already been very helpful. I will now research COI guidelines, to see if I can get an unbiased article on MCT, with good sources, posted somehow. I know a lot of people have looked up this news agency online, and because it is used by close to 600 newspapers in the U.S. and abroad, I think it would be helpful to the public if Wikipedia includes the article.

Happy New Year!

Best, Susan Yoo (aka, I hope!, MediaMaven)

p.s. can you please reply on http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User_talk:MCT_Susan? I'm worried that if you reply here, I won't receive an e-mail, and I won't know you've replied.

Replied  Ronhjones  (Talk) 20:49, 2 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

New message from Media Maven, Jan. 3, 2013

Hi Ronhjones!

Thanks again for helping me changing my username yesterday -- much appreciated!

I've created this article and am awaiting review:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia_talk:Articles_for_creation/MCT

Can you please take a look at it and tell me what you think?

Thanks for helping me get started!

Best, Media Maven

p.s. can you please reply on http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User_talk:Media_Maven?

Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk:Ronhjones&oldid=531149239"