Jump to content

User talk:Ronhjones: Difference between revisions

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Browse history interactively
← Previous editNext edit →
Content deleted Content added
VisualWikitext
MiszaBot III (talk | contribs)
597,462 edits
m Archiving 3 thread(s) (older than 14d) to User talk:Ronhjones/Archive 13.
Aviyal (talk | contribs)
579 edits
→A walking kitten!!!: new WikiLove message
Line 166: Line 166:
</div>
</div>
<!-- EdwardsBot 0222 -->
<!-- EdwardsBot 0222 -->

== A walking kitten!!! ==

[[File:Kitten (06) by Ron.jpg|left|150px]]
A walking kitten for the fast paced administrator. Thanks for IPBE

/\ [[User talk:Aviyal|<font style="font-variant:small-caps">talk←</font>]]<span style="border:1px solid yellow;">'''&nbsp;[[User:Aviyal|Aviyal]]&nbsp;'''</span>[[Special:Contributions/Aviyal|<font style="font-variant:small-caps">→track</font>]]) /\ 20:54, 24 January 2012 (UTC)
<br style="clear: both"/>

Revision as of 20:54, 24 January 2012

Status: Unknown


Wednesday
30
October
03:33 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.


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!
Spring has arrived - time to play boats, don't expect to see me much at the week-end (unless it's raining...)

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.
Leave me a message
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!

WPF1 Newsletter (May)

This newsletter is being delivered to you because you signed up to this list. If you wish to stop receiving it, please remove your name. — Preceding unsigned comment added by ChzzBot (talk • contribs) 16:54, 6 June 2011 (UTC)

hi

talkback

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

talkback

Hello, Ronhjones. You have new messages at Winstonsmith99's talk page.
You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.

Re:Leandro's moves

It's a tough one, because it started out at 2011 Trofeo Línea season (through a likely sock of his, Leandro de Souza on 27/1), before being moved to 2011 Trofeo Linea season (on Leandrokillers, on 15/8), and went to the eventual 2011 Trofeo Linea Brasil season on 2/1 this year. I have no idea really which it is meant to be...His edits are baffling to say the least... Craig(talk) 02:14, 9 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Keep an eye on Tksouza (talk · contribs). Seems to be similar patterns to our Brazilian friend. Craig(talk) 13:42, 23 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

I modified some images ([1],[2],[3]) uploaded under CC-BY-SA-3.0, removing branding labels. The original uploader is threatening legal action here. One of us has misunderstood the right to modify with attribution. I noticed you have been in communication with that editor concerning some of these images. Please advise. Jojalozzo 17:40, 12 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

WP:NLT. User blocked. User's should not edit while legal threats are outstanding. I would expect any unblock request to have to agree for him to remove that line from your talk page (so please don't remove it yourself)  Ronhjones  (Talk) 21:11, 12 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]
In your opinion, was it ok to modify the images as I did? Jojalozzo 22:01, 12 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]
I see no problems - http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/3.0/

Template:PTon::::You are free:

to Share — to copy, distribute and transmit the work
to Remix — to adapt the work
to make commercial use of the workTemplate:PToff
You have adapted the work to just remove a logo - it has no effect on the overall subject (in reality the item would work just as well with or without the logo, it's not a functioning part of the subject). Logos and watermarks are often removed from images here. You have correctly attributed the work, and applied the same CC license. I suspect the user was hoping for a bit of free advertising...  Ronhjones  (Talk) 22:16, 12 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

DevOps criticism section added back

Hi, you helped me out with an issue with a badly sourced, negative section continually being added back to the DevOps article. A new anonymous editor has added the section back again. I reverted it, but I'm guessing they'll try to get it back. I've added a message to this new anonymous user's talk page about visiting the article's talk page. Onlynone (talk) 19:07, 15 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Both resolve to good old BT - as one who lives in UK, BT always use dynamic IP - I would wager they are the same person. Only one way to stop the IP hopping vandals - Page is semi-protected.  Ronhjones  (Talk) 20:57, 15 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Message also placed on Talk:DevOps to explain the protection.  Ronhjones  (Talk) 21:06, 15 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Toying around with new file upload mechanism

Hi Ronhjones, User:Maryana (WMF) told me you might be interested in discussing ideas about a new file upload mechanism. I've been toying around with a wizard-like upload form I have drafted at User:Future Perfect at Sunrise/Upload forms draft. The wizard functionality works with javascript, which is currently at User:Future Perfect at Sunrise/uploadscript.js. So far, it doesn't actually do anything yet; it just displays the sequence of input elements and prompts, as a kind of "proof of concept".

If people think it worthwhile, it might be deployed as a gadget some day, but it will take some more work. Any feedback, ideas, improvements or help with the further coding would be greatly appreciated.

Fut.Perf. ☼ 23:50, 16 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

You might like to compare it with what I started at Wikipedia:Image copyright wizard - that was a no script system - just to try to find the correct template and show it. The trouble I see with yours is line 1 - "This file is entirely my own work" - defining "my own work" is the key issue - far, far, too many people (even more so in the far east...) regard the picture taken with their own camera in their own hands to be "theirs". Then we get into all the issues - e.g.
  • Picture of a Flordia Disneyworld monster - US,3D art, post 1990 - not allowed.
  • Picture of the Louvre pyramid - new(ish) French building, no Freedom of Panorama for buildings. - not allowed
  • Look at Seoul Metropolitan Subway stations - I think all those images will have to go - haven't got round to all of them yet - South Korea - no Freedom of Panorama for buildings. - not allowed
  • Pictures of posters, DVD covers, book covers, etc.
  • and many, many more. The uploader will say "I took this myself, so I offer for use in Wikipedia"
  • Best one for last - screenshot of Pakistan TV - with something like "picture is freely sent out, so I can take it and upload it here"
I was trying to break down into sections what the subject was that the editor had taken, and then trying to lead them onto the correct section. It's sort of gone into a bit of limbo - when I saw the potential list of tags at WP:ICT/ALL then my heart sunk quite a bit.
Since I've been involved this month with Wikipedia:WikiProject_Images_and_Media/Commons/Drives/Jan_2012, I realise that I really need to change the Wikipedia:Image copyright wizard/Free media page and try to steer the editor to commons - otherwise as fast as we are moving the images from en-Wiki to commons, others are uploading more images - it's like trying to empty a bath with the taps full on!
Good luck with the coding - it takes me ages to get js just right - usually I forget a ; somewhere! I learnt far too many computer languages, and sometimes it gets a bit muddled...  Ronhjones  (Talk) 00:22, 17 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks for your thoughts. I had also considered adding special categories for the "photograph of artwork" ("double-copyright") situations. Unfortunately, I came to the conclusion that they are just so complex and manifold that putting them into this wizard structure would more or less blow up the whole thing. That's because the problem poses itself not only with the "own work" photographs, but with others too. Basically, we have a three-dimensional classification of situations, where almost every combination is possible:
  1. Kind of object:
    1. 2-dimensional artwork
    2. 3-dimensional artwork, in F.o.P. situation
    3. 3-dimensional artwork, in Non-F.o.P. situation
  2. Status of object:
    1. PD-old
    2. Copyrighted, legitimate fair use / NFCC situation
    3. Copyrighted, not fair use
    4. Free release by artist
  3. Status of photograph:
    1. Uploader's own work
    2. Third party photographer, with free license
    3. Third party photographer, without free license
    4. Artist's own work
I'm really not sure how to package that.
As for the "free images go to Commons" topic, that's another stumbling block. I'm a bit skeptical about pushing people too hard in that direction, because it may come across as sending conflicting messages. In terms of copyright policy, we want to send them the message: "free files good, non-free files bad". But now, in terms of uploading venues, we're also sending the message: "free files bad, non-free files good". Quite confusing. And surely the first message is fundamentally the more important one to get across. Fut.Perf. ☼ 00:59, 17 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]
I doubt if we could stop them adding free a one to en-WP if they so want - unless there's some policy change OR some clever software by the Foundation to route a free upload straight to commons (wouldn't that be nice! - where do we suggest that option?). We just need to advise them that they can upload here (and it will be moved later by volenteers), or they may try to upload to commons direct. I would like to at least tell them that it will end up on commons - I do get the feeling that there are some uploaders who upload to en-wiki, rather than commons, because they feel/know that there's more chance of the image being kept... ;-) As for your list - I'm with you all the way, but how do explain such a complex situation to the layman? The way my "wizard" was going was not going to be for use at upload time - it's too involved and will only be more so, but more as a potential solution when the editor get a nice CSD appearing on his talk page.  Ronhjones  (Talk) 20:32, 17 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]
About the photo-of-artwork scenarios: I'm basically still at a loss. I'm trying to come up with a decision workflow that can be modelled in the upload wizard, but it's really hard to do without adding a huge lot of complexity and duplication of stuff. About the Free-files-to-Commons thing, how about the following scenario:
(a) our new wizard tries to figure out if the user has a unified account on Commons. (Should be possible through some API calls)
(b) if the user has provided a decent account of the copyright situation and it's a free file, and if he has a Commons account, the wizard adds a set of radio buttons at the bottom, right above the "submit" button:
Yes, I want this file to be available on all Wikipedias and its sister projects in all languages. It will be hosted on the Wikimedia Commons wiki.
No, I want this file to be available only on the English Wikipedia. It will be hosted locally on this wiki (but somebody else might later decide to move it to Commons anyway.)
(c) if the user chooses the Commons option, the wizard opens a pop-up window to make sure the user is logged in at Commons, and then sends the upload API command straight there. This might be technically possible.
However, I think I would want to add this functionality only after a testing period to see how many bad uploads are still made after the change in the description forms. Because right now the proportion of bad items among the (claimed) free uploads is so high I think we wouldn't want to dump them on Commons unfiltered. It's easier to keep track of the bad apples if they upload here. Fut.Perf. ☼ 11:00, 19 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Sounds like a nice logical sequence - I agree that we need a system to try to filter out the bad uploads (sorry, most of the bad uploads - nothing will ever be perfect!) before we can consider some pass through to commons, another idea that did come to mind was some sort of {{potential move to commons}} added automatically when a free upload was declared - just to put it in some category for checking and then moving.  Ronhjones  (Talk) 19:19, 19 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

The Signpost: 16 January 2012

A walking kitten!!!

A walking kitten for the fast paced administrator. Thanks for IPBE

/\ talk← Aviyal →track) /\ 20:54, 24 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk:Ronhjones&oldid=473042443"