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 Lordofpyrus (talk | contribs) at 18:51, 2 February 2013 (→‎Dan56 changed unsourced genres. Block him.: new section). The present address (URL) is a permanent link to this revision, which may differ significantly from the current revision.


Sunday
14
July
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.
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!

The Signpost: 14 January 2013

Okay, here is the deal

thumb|150px|left|Matt Gordon I have my family's archives, both written records and that sort of thing as well as photographs. There are numerous copyright issues and we might as well deal with them now. I imagine that the pictures taken in China dating from both sides of 1900 probably are not a problem - or are they? Pictures taken in the USA pre-1923 are not a problem, but how about ones taken after that? Ones shot by my grandfather, an avid photographer, are okay because I am as much the holder of the copyrights as anyone, but how about pictures that have just just ended up in the archives? Work pictures of my father, taken in Sri Lanka, then Ceylon, in the 1950s and 60s? Who knows who took them, might have been a friend, might have been some government photographer. might have been a United Nations photographer? I am claiming that because they have ended up in the Caldwell Kvaran Archives (also sometimes known as the carpchives) that I have as much right to them as anyone. Which brings us to the picture that I just uploaded. Matt Gordon was a guy who had a crush on my mother in high school - she has always stoutly claimed "he was NOT a boyfriend." In any case, he went off to fight the war, joining the Flying Tigers in the Burma, China theatre. While over there he sent my mother a picture of himself. On the front it says, "Yours, Matt" and on the back is a caption in my mother's handwritting. He died while flying back to the USA. What gets him into wikipedia is his roll in the Black Dahlia story, where he is already mentioned. So I am slapping in his picture. And. claiming that I am the person who can put it in the public domain. Or whatever. Please think about all this and drop me a line - at your place is fine. Einar aka Carptrash (talk) 22:24, 21 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

If the photographer is unknown and you have made an effort to look, then it's just 70 years. Thus an image before 1943 with an unknown photographer is now PD. For 1943 or later, you will have to say that you own the copyright. Burma in the WWII would have copyright like UK (since we ruled it! - another loss to the Empire...)  Ronhjones  (Talk) 01:30, 22 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]
So mostly good news, though I am sorry about your Empire. Carptrash (talk) 01:47, 22 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]
The rot started here - American Revolutionary War :-)  Ronhjones  (Talk) 20:03, 22 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]
True enough, you gotta cut that s**t out early or it gets out of hand. Perhaps if we gave you back everything below the Mason Dixon Line we could start all over? Carptrash (talk) 20:18, 22 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Does that mean we get the oil?  Ronhjones  (Talk) 20:20, 22 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]
You can have it all. I support the Texas Secession Movement,(who knew that would be a blue link?) including the oil. It might as well go to a good cause. Carptrash (talk) 20:26, 22 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Your input is requested

Disruptive editor

Hey Ron,

I hate to bother you with this sort of thing again, but could you please take a look at this user for me, please?

He's been making a series of edits to the [[1]], 2012, 2013 and probably half a dozen other pages where he has been changing the font size in tables to 100%. He insists that there is "no logical reason" for it and claims that it is for the benefit of vision-impaired readers, which I can certainly understand, but I know that the motorsport pages use 85% font size in tables as standard. I have told him that he should seek a consensus for this; however, he insists that he does not need it and that there is no established consensus that he has to obey. [2] Furthermore, his attitude is very poor, deleting messages from his Talk page because he does not want to hear what another editor has to say. Prisonermonkeys (talk) 12:31, 23 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

  1. Is there a "Manual of Style" for the pages - if not you need one. Otherwise other's may well jump on the bandwagon. it's like if I'm drawing a chemical structure then I follow this MoS. It's difficult to tell someone what to do when it's not written down and agreed by consensus. It just needs to be a sub page of the Wikipedia:Manual of Style (with a link from the Wikiprojects page to that page(s)). Plenty of Wikiprojects do has their own MoS, it saves lots of problems later.
  2. Yes, some people do delete messages on their talk page, that's life. You just have to take the view that by removing it, they have read it.
  3. As for vision-impaired - most of those will know to hold the ctrl key and use the mouse wheel to zoom - 85% won't make much difference.
If no MoS - I would suggest you raise it one of the Project talk pages.  Ronhjones  (Talk) 20:18, 23 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]
P.S. I see nothing relevant at http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Special%3APrefixIndex&prefix=Manual+of+Style%2F&namespace=4  Ronhjones  (Talk) 20:23, 23 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]
I have tried explaining this to him, but now he is engaging in edit-warring. Prisonermonkeys (talk) 23:38, 23 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]
But you need to be able to show him some policy/guidline/MoS that says the table is at 85%, otherwise it's just your view against his. Start a thread at the Project talk page and resolve what style need to be implemented with a consensus (let him have his view as well), then an MoS can be written which is the majority view.  Ronhjones  (Talk) 23:45, 23 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

The Signpost: 21 January 2013

From the copyright holder of this work

Hi Ronhjones,

I uploaded the following 5 photographs from my family collection which I have the copy rights. When I upload them the wikipedia delete them. Can I pl. get the rights to upload them.

1. Photograph of Ana Seneviratne

2. Wedding Photo of Ana & Krishnajina Seneviratne

3. Photograph of Nalin Seneviratne

4. Photograph of B. D. Rampala

5. Photograph of Nissanka Wijeyeratne with Elephant (Raja)

Waiting to hear from you please

Kind regards,

Anuradha

Photos by Anuradha (talk) 07:39, 25 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

I can undelete them - you don't need to upload again. I think your problem is that you are not linking the account you uploaded the photos with to the claimed copyright holder. I just looked at one of them (I suspect the others are the same) - it was uploaded by User:Photos by Anuradha and states the copyright holder is "Anuradha Dullewe Wijeyeratne" - which then links to User:අනුරාධ - since we expect users to only have one account unless there is a good reason (please see - Wikipedia:Username#Using_multiple_accounts), most people will naturally assume that User:Photos by Anuradha is not User:අනුරාධ and will therefore delete the images. Can you confirm that you have both accounts, then I will sort out the undeletion of the images...
I have checked all deleted images - Can I assume that they are all wanted - I can see...
  • File:Wedding Photo of Ana & Krishnajina Seneviratne.jpg
  • File:Photograph of Ana Seneviratne.jpg
  • File:Photograph of Nalin Seneviratne.JPG
  • File:Photograph of B. D. Rampala.jpg
  • File:Photograph of Nissanka Wijeyeratne with Elephant (Raja) .jpg
  • File:Hon. J.R Jayawardene & Dr. Nissanka Wijeyeratne with Raja.jpg
  • File:G.A.D.E.A Seneviratne.JPG
  • File:Don Granville Nalin Seneviratne,.JPG
  • File:Bamunusinghearachchige Don Rampala.jpg
  • File:Ana Seneviratne.JPG
  • File:Wedding Photo of Ana & Krishna.JPG
  • File:Nalin Seneviratne.JPG
  • File:B. D. Rampala.jpg
  • File:Nalin Seneviratne.JPG
  • File:J.R Jayawardene & Nissanka Wijeyeratne with Raja (elephant).jpg
  • File:Hon. Gamini Dissanayake.jpg
  • File:S. B. Dissanayake.jpg
  • File:Hon. Gamini Dissanayake.jpg
  • File:Udaya Gammanpila.jpg
The following show up in deleted (in en-wiki) as they have been moved to commons, but are OK there and no problem.
I would also stick to using just one account - it will save you lots of problems.  Ronhjones  (Talk) 19:59, 25 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]


From User:අනුරාධ

Hi Ronhjones,

Sorry for the delay in replying to your mail. Thank you for your valuable advice & assistance.

I will stick to use User:අනුරාධ (just one account) and i will stop using User:Photos by Anuradha account from today (27th January 2013)

Pl. undelete the following 5 files only at your earliest convenience & also keep as it is the ones which have been moved to commons as there is no problem with them.

1 File:Wedding Photo of Ana & Krishnajina Seneviratne.jpg

2 File:Photograph of Ana Seneviratne.jpg

3 File:Photograph of Nalin Seneviratne.JPG

4 File:Photograph of B. D. Rampala.jpg

5 File:Photograph of Nissanka Wijeyeratne with Elephant (Raja) .jpg

Thanking you once again,

Kind regards,

Anuradha Dullewe Wijeyeratne (User:අනුරාධ)

Photos by Anuradha (talk) 03:43, 27 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]


Thank you

Hi Ronhjones,

I greatly appreciate your kind assistance & Thank you for the same.

Anuradha Dullewe Wijeyeratne

අනුරාධ (talk) 03:21, 28 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

January 2013 deleted photos

Ronhjones -

Help me understand this, you have deleted the photos due to copyright issues. However, those are truely my own work. Is this the only problem with the images? I am trying to get an understanding. I believe those photos added value to articles. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Knightia13 (talkcontribs) 16:05, 28 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Every editor is effectively anonymous (even with an account) - we have no idea who you really are and no way here of telling. Thus any image that is uploaded elsewhere first is guaranteed to be flagged as a copyright violation, when subsequently uploaded here - plenty of editors check the day's uploads with Google Image search. Always upload here first if you plan to use the image on a web site later. Otherwise you will have to go through one to the two processes described at WP:DCM to release the copyright (the quickest way is to place CC-BY-SA releases on the remote web site - or I've even seen a non-indexed page of a web site just with the images that are released to Wikipedia with the proper CC-BY-SA statement).  Ronhjones  (Talk) 20:16, 28 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

OK, then, what about that: http://www.peopleschoice.com/pca/photos/gallery.jsp?galleryId=1005000005&parent=2013_photos#13 http://www.peopleschoice.com/pca/images/1005002091.jpg

Chronisgr (talk) 23:49, 28 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

http://shootvide.com/christina-aguilera-2/ is the biggest and sharpest version, and the other images on that page has been copied to the Flickr account as well. Flickr users are often not careful about what they upload.  Ronhjones  (Talk) 23:52, 28 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Also known as Flickrwashing commons:Commons:License laundering  Ronhjones  (Talk)

Sig headshot

Thanks for cleaning up after me. ;-) CorporateM (Talk) 00:47, 29 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

No Problem. Never worry about size - the way the images are reduced and cached does not affect performance.  Ronhjones  (Talk) 00:49, 29 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Got it. That's good, because lot of images with decent resolution seem to get more blurry in article-space when they are re-sized. If you ever need something from me to keep an image, don't hesitate to ask. About half of my contributions to Wikipedia are in a PR role and I can usually get the article-subject to give up copyrights with a bit of arm-twisting. CorporateM (Talk) 00:59, 29 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]
When placing an image you might want to consider making the image size a direct multiple - it's easy to reduce a bitmap by 2 or 4..etc., - that's a direct merge of pixels (2x2 to 1x1 or 4x4 to 1x1)- when you reduce by some non power of two then as well as a merge there is some interpolation.  Ronhjones  (Talk) 01:10, 29 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks for the tip! CorporateM (Talk) 01:14, 29 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Hey can I ask you another image question? Just as an example, I have an article in AfC here, which has two non-free images I want to use in the software infobox.[3][4]. The issue is, since it takes AfC longer than a week to review the article, the non-free images will get deleted tomorrow. I try to avoid direct editing where I have a COI, which makes non-free images very inconvenient, since they can't be placed in draft space. But I need editors reviewing my proposed edits to be able to see the image I'm proposing in article-space.

Images do fall under non-controversial edits per WP:COI, so I could put them in myself, but at least one editor I know Noununiquenames has felt in some cases my over-use of images was promotional, and this makes it a COI issue.

Any thoughts/suggestions? I've been pretty sloppy about it thus far and should clean up my act in the image category. CorporateM (Talk) 18:57, 29 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Tricky - you can't use non-free out of article space. I've made an edit - see if you like it.  Ronhjones  (Talk) 20:15, 29 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Yah, that can help a little. I've used this one before. Looks like someone else moved Viralheat to article space, which is nice because the images would have gotten deleted tomorrow. I'll see if editors feel it's long enough to qualify for GA. CorporateM (Talk) 22:07, 29 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Did I do something wrong with this image? It says it will be deleted unless "an email from the copyright owner is sent or forwarded to permissions-en@wikimedia.org" however such an email has already been provided and the image properly tagged by OTRS. CorporateM (Talk) 13:26, 30 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]
I've fixed it - I can't say a lot about OTRS - not sure who actually sent the e-mail for one. There was an e-mail with 4 files described (that's how I found it - a search for "The fighting pair" gave one result), the ticket was approved, and links for three images sent back - looks like one was missed in error. If you send to OTRS, be sure the image has it's ticket after 30 days - it become vulnerable then, as it appears in Category:Items pending OTRS confirmation of permission for over 30 days  Ronhjones  (Talk) 21:44, 30 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]
I cleared that Cat out of files 6 months ago, looks like I will be busy this week...  Ronhjones  (Talk) 21:46, 30 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Ok, thanks! Yes, the email to OTRS was forwarded by me from Heritage Auctions. They auction historical artifacts and have a lot of professional photography of them. I guess in the future I need to get companies to send a separate email for each image. CorporateM (Talk) 21:49, 30 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Not a bad idea, but otherwise just make sure that X images asked for = X image links returned (not X-1)  Ronhjones  (Talk) 22:44, 30 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

File permission problem with File:Tears Of The Enchanted Mainframe - Album Cover.jpg

Regarding File:Tears Of The Enchanted Mainframe - Album Cover.jpg

Although the file in question clearly indicates it is GNU Free Documentation License and Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike 3.0 - an email containing details of the permission for this file has been sent in accordance with WP:OTRS none-the-less. Thanks. Cadillacula (talk) 03:56, 29 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Both web sites state "All Rights Reserved." - that stops it dead without OTRS permission. Also album covers are always regarded as copyright problems unless the main web site shows otherwise. Ronhjones  (Talk) 20:17, 29 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Understood. I designed the album cover, own it and have reached out to the OTRS, so let's prepare to break the norm. Thanks Ron. Cadillacula (talk) 21:23, 29 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]
OK, very few (count on a couple of hands I suspect) album covers have been uploaded by the copyright owner! You are breaking the mould. ;-)  Ronhjones  (Talk) 21:28, 30 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

The Signpost: 28 January 2013

Unblock

Please unblock my another account Piku662, which was blocked by you on my request and now I need to unblock it for some modifications in wikimedia commons which I have made previously from that account. Thankyou.User:Priyanku.PhukanPriyanku.Phukan (Talk) 13:04, 02 Feb 2013 (UTC +5:30)

User:Piku662 account is only blocked on en-Wikipedia. commons:User:Piku662 and commons:User:Priyanku.Phukan are not blocked. But you should stick to one account.  Ronhjones  (Talk) 17:32, 2 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Dan56 changed unsourced genres. Block him.

Sorry for interrupt, that user Dan56 changed unsources music genres, because I don't know what he doing.

Anyway, block Dan56 with expiry time of indefinite, before I will change back into genre correction.