User talk:Ronhjones/Archive 10

This is an archive of past discussions with User:Ronhjones. Do not edit the contents of this page. If you wish to start a new discussion or revive an old one, please do so on the current talk page.

Archive 5

←

Archive 8

Archive 9

Archive 10

Archive 11

Archive 12

→

Archive 15

Looks good to me, although I am rather tired and my perception could be a bit off! Cs-wolves(talk) 00:02, 28 March 2011 (UTC)

That's because we've all lost 1hr sleep!  Ronhjones  ^(Talk) 21:19, 28 March 2011 (UTC)

True, although staying up through the night for the Grand Prix yesterday perhaps wasn't the best move... Cs-wolves(talk) 23:02, 28 March 2011 (UTC)

Freeview video recorder :-)  Ronhjones  ^(Talk) 23:12, 28 March 2011 (UTC)

Hmm...I had to think of some way to stay awake having nodded off during practice after waking up for it! Cs-wolves(talk) 00:52, 29 March 2011 (UTC)

Happy First Edit Day, Ronhjones, from the Wikipedia Birthday Committee! Have a great day!

I bet you didn't even know it was your wiki-birthday, did you? ;) -- œ^™ 06:13, 29 March 2011 (UTC)

No I didn't! Thanks You for your reminder.  Ronhjones  ^(Talk) 18:17, 29 March 2011 (UTC)

Hi, this article was A7'ed by you. Benno was a moderately successful solo artist in the 1970s, with a charting record in 1972 ([1]). He released a handful of albums on Polydor Records and also played with Leon Russell in the group The Asylum Choir. This is enough to meet WP:MUSIC, and I was hoping you could restore the article so I can improve it with this information. Chubbles (talk) 21:02, 29 March 2011 (UTC)

Yeeees. The version I deleted (there have been 5 before that) was 2 lines long and stood no chance of survival. The best I can do for you is to restore everything as a userfied page, then you can look back at earlier versions and try to assemble a proper article. Then when it's complete you can get it moved back to article space.  Ronhjones  ^(Talk) 21:10, 29 March 2011 (UTC)

Now at User:Chubbles/Marc Benno - use the page history to see the earlier versions.  Ronhjones  ^(Talk) 21:15, 29 March 2011 (UTC)

Restored. This page was subject to a hell of a lot of abuse by many authors, at least a half dozen - it's almost a textbook example of Wikipedia "failing" at the hands of editors who aren't doing enough work or understanding the system properly. I wish you hadn't deleted it the first time around, when it was PRODDed for not meeting WP:MUSIC even though at the time it contained information which demonstrated that he did in fact pass the guideline. Chubbles (talk) 13:32, 30 March 2011 (UTC)

The joy of many editors all doing their own thing... Glad you have managed to sort it out. Of course, it cannot be PRODed again, so that will help give some stability.  Ronhjones  ^(Talk) 19:20, 30 March 2011 (UTC)

Ron, Thanks for 1st April ! ? C.Cleeve (talk) 09:19, 2 April 2011 (UTC)

Looking for the file in question on Commons, and am looking for some assistance on that... SchuminWeb (Talk) 15:19, 2 April 2011 (UTC)

Thanks for noting your web archive search for this image; I'm always hesitant to delete old PD-self images as copyvios because they might have been copied from Wikipedia, so this resolves all my questions. Curious, though: why not just delete it yourself? Talkback, please. Nyttend (talk) 02:03, 3 April 2011 (UTC)

I always think it's a bit like being "judge and jury", if I spot a copyvio and delete it, and it's nice to have a second opinion - none of us are perfect, I may miss something. Also I tend to use Twinkle to add the CSD, that then tells the author what is happening (but only if I select tag, rather than delete) - otherwise the author knows nothing why the article/image was deleted - also a large string of copyvio warnings on the editor's talk page may help suggest more action is required if they keep repeating their bad ways.  Ronhjones  ^(Talk) 19:24, 3 April 2011 (UTC)

Thanks for the help! Just wanting to know that I've given a contradictory second opinion on File:Bedford Oct 2006 - 20.JPG — if I read the Flickr description page properly, it was either taken or uploaded to Flickr (or both) a year after the image was uploaded here. Again, if you reply here, please leave a talkback. Nyttend (talk) 20:52, 3 April 2011 (UTC)

Just goes to show we are not perfect! - but something is odd, that pic is an exact match of the flickr picture - one can overlay the two pics exactly. There must be another original out there...  Ronhjones  ^(Talk) 20:57, 3 April 2011 (UTC)

Yeah, I suspect you're right; this would be far easier to understand without the dates. Do you know how to use Tineye? I've never done it. Nyttend (talk) 21:00, 3 April 2011 (UTC)

I'm using the tineye firefox add-in - http://www.tineye.com/plugin - one opens the WP page, clicks in the image (to see full size) and right mouse click "Search Image on TinEye" - TinEye result page opens in a new tab - get a list of matches with sizes, click compare under an image, and it open a sub window where you can flick between each image quickly to see the matching. NB: 50 searches per day max.  Ronhjones  ^(Talk) 21:24, 3 April 2011 (UTC)

Hm, okay; if you haven't already, could you please run this image through it? I've nominated it for deletion at FFD, although if you find a third page that could be a source for both this and Flickr, please note that the image is also on Commons, so you could tag it as a copyvio there if you find a source page. Nyttend (talk) 21:33, 3 April 2011 (UTC)

I did, and it's perfect, except the flickr one has more content, the WP one is a crop.  Ronhjones  ^(Talk) 21:35, 3 April 2011 (UTC)

A formal Request for Comment has now been started on this topic. Feel free to contribute; best, Ironholds (talk) 19:33, 3 April 2011 (UTC)

Ron, Hi there, I'm new company page to Wikipedia and it says that you just deleted my page. Can you please tell me why? I'm trying to teach myself how to add a page and so I'm not sure what happened. Any help would be greatly appreciated.

Christy Electric Monkey — Preceding unsigned comment added by Cagness (talk • contribs) 19:56, 4 April 2011 (UTC)

You blanked the page. Where the only substantial content is by one editor, and then he blanks it, it is assumed that the page is not wanted any more - see WP:CSD#G7  Ronhjones  ^(Talk) 19:59, 4 April 2011 (UTC)

Earlier you were insturmental in helping to change the title of an article. I think there's an issue with another article. I don't know how, or if I'm even permitted, to make the change. The article is W. Thacher Longstreth. The title should be "Thacher Longstreth", as this is how he was known. If this is not possible, then at the least, "Thacher Longstreth" should redirect to W. Thacher Longstreth, which it currently does not. Any assistance you could offer me would be appreciated. Regards. Joefromrandb (talk) 08:48, 4 April 2011 (UTC)

You could move the page - but you might find opposition. I had a quick look and there are several refs quoted that use the "W". So a move should be proposed by adding this text {{subst:RMtalk|Thacher Longstreth|Reason for move.}} to the bottom of the talk page Talk:W. Thacher Longstreth (changing the "reason for move"). Or you could create a redirect as suggested at Thacher Longstreth - just enter this text #REDIRECT [[W. Thacher Longstreth]] into the page and save.  Ronhjones  ^(Talk) 19:49, 5 April 2011 (UTC)

Well, for instance, I recently edited the Roger Waters article. Even though his name is George Waters, and that is noted in the article, the article's title is still "Roger Waters", as that's how he is known. Similarly, Councilman Longstreth did not go by "W. Thacher". He was known to the public as "Thacher Longstreth". But my main issue is that "Thacher Longstreth" does not even redirect to the article. I will attempt to follow the advice you offered, and I thank you for your help. Joefromrandb (talk) 20:24, 5 April 2011 (UTC)

I went with the redirect, as it seemed the simplest way to settle the issue. At least now, someone who types in "Thacher Longstreth" will be able to find the article, which was my main concern. I don't think that a move is necessary, although I would support it should the issue arise. Thank you again for helping me. Joefromrandb (talk) 05:22, 6 April 2011 (UTC)

• After your warnings in User talk:84.92.11.89, he has continued to edit page Alphablocks and his edits to it have been reverted 3 times more. So far he has edited only page Alphablocks: see http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Special:Contributions&limit=500&target=84.92.11.89 . Anthony Appleyard (talk) 21:30, 5 April 2011 (UTC)

I saw him last night on Huggle, he kept blanking sections. Let's see if block helps - maybe he discuss it now  Ronhjones  ^(Talk) 21:35, 5 April 2011 (UTC)

Hi Ron, Could you please take a quick look at my request for confirmed access. Thanks and cheers. It is right here mauchoeagle 22:55, 5 April 2011 (UTC)

There is no backlog there, I'm sure an admin that frequents the page will see to it soon.  Ronhjones  ^(Talk) 22:58, 5 April 2011 (UTC)

Hi Ronjones - you've been very helpful in the past and I wonder if I can troubleshoot an issue with you. The following page, Black Swan dance double controversy, is getting a lot of activity from IPs - not so much vandalism as edits which don't really comply with WP policies or are poorly formatted, misspellings etc. So I'm not sure if we're talking about a temporary lock. But since this is a topical article, I think it should be watched by admins - I'm technically on wikibreak and thus don't have so much time to spend on the WP. Anyway, perhaps you can add it to your watch list or have another admin watch it. Thanks, -Classicfilms (talk) 16:33, 6 April 2011 (UTC)

OK, I've added to watch list. It doesn't seem that bad at all, I see not real recent vandalism, looks like all editors are trying (in their own way) to improve it. Spelling mistakes are easily fixed (thank goodness FF3 can have a spell checker add on! my spelling is terrible). There's certainly no case for any protection at present.  Ronhjones  ^(Talk) 19:04, 6 April 2011 (UTC)

Great, I appreciate it. I felt the same way, though I appreciate you adding it to your list. I've been having to make multiple fixes (more than just spelling -- ref formatting, incorrect information that needed to be fixed etc., more due to oversight I suspect than anything else) and I really need to take a break. Thanks for your help.-Classicfilms (talk) 19:30, 6 April 2011 (UTC)

Hi Ron. I would suggest to tag the chemical structures that are of bad quality with {{Low quality chem}} instead or in addition to categories. This would allow to go an unbureaucratic way (as suggested here), if an image has been tagged for e.g. one month, is orphaned and there is no objection. --Leyo 08:12, 8 April 2011 (UTC)

I've answered my plans at http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia_talk%3AWikiProject_Chemistry&action=historysubmit&diff=423069965&oldid=423069531, tagging with a {{Low quality chem}}, might leave it there for ever, and we can't PROD images.  Ronhjones  ^(Talk) 19:59, 8 April 2011 (UTC)

I don't know what "I've changed your template to a name change one" means. I don't know if that means my user name has been changed. I don't know if that means I'm allowed to change it, or how to do it.

Can someone either just change my user name to LLOM1276 as requested, or change it to ZQFXGNNNRTH1276, or tell me in simple terms exactly how to do it.

Thanks

Londonlibraryofmusic (talk) 12:41, 9 April 2011 (UTC)

You have been approved to change it to LLOM1276 by jpgordon on your talk page - click on the "Wikipedia:Changing username" link in the green box on your talk page.  Ronhjones  ^(Talk) 22:36, 10 April 2011 (UTC)

When, as you say "it can't be long before the phrase shows up in a magazine column or some other sort of recorded discourse", it does show up in a reliable source, we can add it in, so you have your mission - find the source. Ronhjones (Talk) 23:06, 3 December 2009 (UTC)

American comedian and satirist George Carlin in his famous c.1972 Filthy Words diatribe clearly includes a reference to biting brown. It can be viewed here at ~3:30m: 2. Ronhjones, do we have your agreement this is a "recorded discourse"?

4.14.2011

"Well... we're waiting?"

Originally posted on your userpage by 180.210.203.173 (talk), moved to talk by T H F S W (T · C · E).

And what sort of reference is "~3:30m: 2" - it makes no sense. Anyway, the inclusion is not just up to me, pages are constructed on consensus. If you have a reference in the true meaning of Wikipedia's reliable source then a discussion should be started on the articles talk page.  Ronhjones  ^(Talk) 22:54, 14 April 2011 (UTC)

Consensus was that someone made this term up, and therefore should not be included among legitimate slang. Consensus was wrong. This isn't the OED so I don't think it's the first utterance that counts, it just needs to be a good one. Not sure, but the Carlin quotes could be both. George Carlin at three minutes, thirty seconds into the link that was provided said "Bite the Brown". That was 1972. (The '2' was the link to the reference... again more dust thrown up to discredit. C'mon Ron, you're a heavy user of this site - you knew what that was....)

So if consensus was wrong, and it clearly was, why were super editors like you not more aggressive in defending the truth? I'm sure you never even read any of it - how could you? You would just come in and lock it down after false complaints of 'vandalism' piled up. Such nonsense.

Remember again, that whole thing started because it was claimed that the phrase Bite the Brown as a synonym for Anilingus was "made up". Well, maybe, but surely not by the person trying to add to that wiki. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 180.210.203.173 (talk) 00:17, 15 April 2011 (UTC)

Your reference only links to 2 - a page on Wikipedia about the number 2, nothing else. Also Wikipedia is WP:NOTTRUTH. I'm no super editor, prose is definitely not my thing, I just try to make sure the content follows the policies.  Ronhjones  ^(Talk) 00:32, 15 April 2011 (UTC)

Ron, it's as cut/pasted quote. Link to the numeral 2 isn't the point. Originally it linked to a George Carlin bit from 1972, discrediting the entire argument against the edits. More lame dust...

What do we do when I show you a reference from 1972? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 180.210.203.173 (talk) 05:05, 15 April 2011 (UTC)

Don't show me, just give the full reference at Talk:Anilingus as ask if the source is reliable enough to allow the inclusion in the Article. It will be up to the community to give you an answer. Have a read first of WP:DISPUTE - if you don't like the answer you get, then that page gives you some options to explore.  Ronhjones  ^(Talk) 19:09, 15 April 2011 (UTC)

Fair enough. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 70.32.45.243 (talk) 02:24, 16 April 2011 (UTC)

Could you please take a look here: [2] and give your input. Thanks. mauchoeagle 00:31, 15 April 2011 (UTC)

Bit of a grey area, but I think it needed to go under Wikipedia:RD2#2.  Ronhjones  ^(Talk) 00:37, 15 April 2011 (UTC)

Thanks, Ron. mauchoeagle 00:42, 15 April 2011 (UTC)

Ron, I need heelp. Can you move this picture here Thanks. mauchoeagle 00:45, 15 April 2011 (UTC)

Thanks. mauchoeagle 00:49, 15 April 2011 (UTC)

Thanks for uploading File:JenniferSebnemSchaefer1.jpg. You don't seem to have indicated the license status of the image. Wikipedia uses a set of image copyright tags to indicate this information; to add a tag to the image, select the appropriate tag from this list, click on this link, then click "Edit this page" and add the tag to the image's description. If there doesn't seem to be a suitable tag, the image is probably not appropriate for use on Wikipedia.

For help in choosing the correct tag, or for any other questions, leave a message on Wikipedia:Media copyright questions. Thank you for your cooperation. --ImageTaggingBot (talk) 23:05, 16 April 2011 (UTC)

Fixed - how I hate getting FU right...  Ronhjones  ^(Talk) 23:12, 16 April 2011 (UTC)

Thanks for uploading File:JenniferSebnemSchaefer2.jpg. You don't seem to have indicated the license status of the image. Wikipedia uses a set of image copyright tags to indicate this information; to add a tag to the image, select the appropriate tag from this list, click on this link, then click "Edit this page" and add the tag to the image's description. If there doesn't seem to be a suitable tag, the image is probably not appropriate for use on Wikipedia.

For help in choosing the correct tag, or for any other questions, leave a message on Wikipedia:Media copyright questions. Thank you for your cooperation. --ImageTaggingBot (talk) 23:06, 16 April 2011 (UTC)

Fixed - how I hate getting FU right...  Ronhjones  ^(Talk) 23:12, 16 April 2011 (UTC)

The WikiProject Formula One Newsletter Year IV · Issue 3 · March 7, 2011 – April 4, 2011 Previous month's issue
New users New members – Ghtoti14 (talk · contribs) (March 22) New recipients – Ronhjones (talk · contribs) (March 9) Ghtoti14 (talk · contribs) (March 22) New editors – WikiProject news Check out Apterygial's My Insane Idea userproject, which aims to improve the 2008 Formula One season article and that season's Grands Prix to Featured Topic status. Newsletter news The newsletter is now being delivered automatically, by User:MessageDeliveryBot. From this issue onwards, the bot will only deliver to active editors (i.e. those who have edited within the preceding three months).	Article developments Formula One articles by quality and importance Quality Importance Top High Mid Low NA Total FA 5 8 13 FL 3 6 3 4 16 GA 2 9 32 81 124 B 24 29 53 104 210 C 30 70 120 337 557 Start 12 121 376 1,431 1,940 Stub 6 117 1,297 1,420 List 10 23 23 1 57 Category 720 720 Disambig 17 17 File 181 181 Portal 34 34 Project 113 113 Redirect 1 1 12 2,168 2,182 Template 344 344 NA 1 1 Other 1 5 6 Assessed 73 257 732 3,289 3,584 7,935 Total 73 257 732 3,289 3,584 7,935 WikiWork factors (?) ω = 21,326 Ω = 5.00 See also: Wikipedia:WikiProject Formula One/Article alerts
Editors' Comment Users are always welcome to help us with this newsletter. If you are interested, please leave a message on an existing editor's talkpage or sign up on the "Contributors" list of the central newsletter page, and we will tell you everything you need to know and answer your questions. Current contributors – Midgrid (talk · contribs) Cs-wolves (talk · contribs) Chubbennaitor (talk · contribs) How to help WPF1 – Expand the articles in Category:Formula One stubs. Read the project to-do list and help to complete the tasks: Article requests: Erich Zakowski, Daniele Coronna, Hans Fouche, Chris Radage, Giorgio Stirano, Steve Tarrant, Intertechnique, 10 Tenths, Elf Masters Copyedit: Bahrain Grand Prix, History of Formula One, Monaco Grand Prix, 2006 San Marino Grand Prix, Rob White (Formula One), Rob Smedley Expand: F1-X Dubai, Honda RA271, Paddy Lowe, Red Bull RB3, Spyker F1, Toyota TF107, BMW Sauber F1.07, Mario Theissen, Franz Tost, Chinese Grand Prix, Colin Kolles, Concorde Agreement, Formula One Constructors Association, McLaren MP4/1, Ove Andersson, Bob Bell, Korean International Circuit, Grand Prix Drivers' Association, Spyker F8-VII, Arai (company), Shoei, Schuberth Helme GmbH, Bell Racing Company, Jim Bamber, Nazir Hoosein, Formula One video games, Make Cars Green, Jonathan Legard, Michael Turner (illustrator) more Update: History of Formula One, Toyota, Robert Doornbos, Formula One regulations, 2024 Formula One season, Scuderia Toro Rosso, Super Aguri F1, Divina Galica, Grand Prix World Championship Images needed: Max Mosley, Sakon Yamamoto, Jordan Grand Prix circa 1992-1997, Paddy Lowe, 2008 Turkish Grand Prix more For more work, see this generated list or the Auxiliary list
Images Below is the F1 Picture of the month (found here). The picture has to be one uploaded in the last month and only from the current season. It is exclusive to the Newsletter. REMEMBER, YOU CAN VOTE. New images 2011
Article of the month - 2011 Australian Grand Prix The 2011 Australian Grand Prix (formally the 2011 Formula 1 Qantas Australian Grand Prix) was a Formula One motor race held on 27 March 2011 at the Albert Park Circuit in Melbourne. It was the 76th race in the combined history of the Australian Grand Prix that dates back to the 100 Miles Road Race of 1928. Originally planned as the second race of the 2011 Formula One season, it became the season opener with the cancellation of the Bahrain Grand Prix due to civil unrest in the country. The race, contested over 58 laps, was won by the reigning World Champion Sebastian Vettel, driving for Red Bull Racing, after starting from pole position. Lewis Hamilton finished second in a McLaren, and Renault's Vitaly Petrov completed the podium in third place, the first podium finish of his career and the first podium finish for a Russian national. (More...)
Drivers' Championship Position Driver Team Points 1st Sebastian Vettel Red Bull 25 2nd Lewis Hamilton McLaren 18 3rd Vitaly Petrov Renault 15 4th Fernando Alonso Ferrari 12 5th Mark Webber Red Bull 10 6th Jenson Button McLaren 8 7th Felipe Massa Ferrari 6 8th Sébastien Buemi Toro Rosso 4 9th Adrian Sutil Force India 2 10th Paul di Resta Force India 1 11th Jaime Alguersuari Toro Rosso 0 12th Nick Heidfeld Renault 0 13th Jarno Trulli Lotus 0 14th Jérôme d'Ambrosio Virgin 0 Timo Glock Virgin 0 Michael Schumacher Mercedes GP 0 Nico Rosberg Mercedes GP 0 Rubens Barrichello Williams 0 Pastor Maldonado Williams 0 Heikki Kovalainen Lotus 0 Sergio Pérez Sauber 0 Kamui Kobayashi Sauber 0 Narain Karthikeyan Hispania 0 Vitantonio Liuzzi Hispania 0 Constructors' Championship Position Constructor Entered Chassis Points 1st Red Bull Racing RB7 35 2nd Vodafone McLaren Mercedes MP4-26 26 3rd Scuderia Ferrari Marlboro 150° Italia 18 4th Lotus Renault GP R31 15 5th Scuderia Toro Rosso STR6 4 6th Force India F1 Team VJM04 3 7th Team Lotus T128 0 8th Marussia Virgin Racing MVR-02 0 Mercedes GP Petronas MGP W02 0 AT&T Williams FW33 0 Sauber F1 Team C30 0 Hispania Racing F1 Team F111 0 See 2011 Formula One season for more information
Australian Grand Prix Driver Constructor Race Time 1st Sebastian Vettel Red Bull 1:29:30.259 2nd Lewis Hamilton McLaren + 22.297 3rd Vitaly Petrov Renault + 30.560 4th Fernando Alonso Ferrari + 31.772 5th Mark Webber Red Bull + 38.171 6th Jenson Button McLaren + 54.304 7th Felipe Massa Ferrari + 1:25.186* 8th Sébastien Buemi Toro Rosso + 1 lap 9th Adrian Sutil Force India + 1 lap 10th Paul di Resta Force India + 1 lap Fastest Lap: Felipe Massa; 1:28.947, on lap 55 Australian Grid Line up Driver Constructor Time Row one Sebastian Vettel Red Bull 1:23.529 Lewis Hamilton McLaren 1:24.307 Row two Mark Webber Red Bull 1:24.395 Jenson Button McLaren 1:24.779 Row three Fernando Alonso Ferrari 1:24.974 Vitaly Petrov Renault 1:25.247 Row four Nico Rosberg Mercedes GP 1:25.421 Felipe Massa Ferrari 1:25.599 Row five Kamui Kobayashi Sauber 1:25.626 Sébastien Buemi Toro Rosso 1:27.066 * Sergio Pérez (7th, + 1:05.845) and Kamui Kobayashi (8th, + 1:16.872) were disqualified post-race for a technical infringement – Saubers disqualified over technical infringement Friday Practice 1 – Webber leads Red Bull one-two in Australia Friday Practice 2 – McLaren's turn for a Melbourne one-two Saturday Practice – Vettel storms to the top Qualifying – Untouchable Vettel wows with Albert Park pole Race – Invincible Vettel wins with ease in Melbourne

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.

Apologies for the late delivery of this month's newsletter; the automated delivery system appears not to be working at present.--Midgrid(talk) 23:32, 16 April 2011 (UTC)

I didn't get it what you want me to do... do u want picture of me and my passport to prove i scan my own passport it?.. i think you didn't see Metadata ... its clearly HP all in one (printer,scanner and copier) to scan my passport...--Muzi (talk) 10:37, 19 April 2011 (UTC)

You can take a picture, but you cannot take the copyright away from owner- thus the phrase you added (via a template) "I, the copyright holder of this work" cannot be true. It may be the case that copyright has run out - that will depend on the copyright laws of India, and when they designed that version. Wikipedia:Copyright situations by country says for India - "Life+60" - which means the copyright runs out 60 years after the death of the designer, or 60 years after publication if the designer is unknown. If the passport design has been exactly the same since 1950 then it may have expired. You are more than welcome to get a second opinion - file image problems are very complex, and we don't get it right all the time, hence the delayed deletion process - if you wich to check, you are welcome to post a question at Wikipedia:Media copyright questions  Ronhjones  ^(Talk) 19:30, 19 April 2011 (UTC)

OR you could, if it's applicable use a "Non-free media use rationale" template instead of the "PD-self" template  Ronhjones  ^(Talk) 19:34, 19 April 2011 (UTC)

I don't know whats Non-free media use rationale template is... Now i don't even care i am no longer write anything on wikipedia.... I was the one who start Indian passport .. Oz Passport , NZ passport...etc. if you want to delete picture just go a head . I don't want any second opinion do anything you want and delete other pictures to which i have upload ... --Muzi (talk) 10:28, 20 April 2011 (UTC)

If you don't want them to stay then that's your decision. I am trying to suggest ways to keep the pictures. Wikipedia has to have strong rules on copyright - the Wikipedia Foundation is, in essence, a charity - an expensive court case on image copyright violation could do great damage to it. This is not the first time this image has come up for deletion - your first upload of "File:Indian passport Cover.JPG was deleted on 29 October 2006 for the same reasoning. Since then the rules have been made more clearer for us to tag these files for deletion, and as for your other pictures, some of them will have to go the same way for the same reason. As you say you aren't interested, I won't bother adding more templates to your talk page.  Ronhjones  ^(Talk) 19:17, 20 April 2011 (UTC)

Hi Ron,

I have replied your message regarding the Fair use policy for the image I uploaded over here http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User_talk:Palar#Fair_use_rationale_for_File:138950.jpg

Thanks Palar (talk) 14:23, 22 April 2011 (UTC)

Why was it deleted? Didnt it have enough sources? I'm about to restart the artical because the subject meets notability guidlines and it would be easier if I had something to work with... U can reply on my page if u want DCcomicslover (talk) 16:40, 24 April 2011 (UTC)DCcomicslover

Hi would it be possible for you to look on my talk page? Someone is, i think, bringing an agenda and using the editing of my article to promote it, and give advice if you have any. Cheers--Hughlay1407 18:14, 26 April 2011 (UTC) — Preceding unsigned comment added by Hughlay1407 (talk • contribs)

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Xhamster is suitable for inclusion in Wikipedia according to Wikipedia's policies and guidelines or whether it should be deleted.

The article will be discussed at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Xhamster until a consensus is reached, and anyone is welcome to contribute to the discussion. The nomination will explain the policies and guidelines which are of concern. The discussion focuses on good quality evidence, and our policies and guidelines.

Users may edit the article during the discussion, including to improve the article to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the article-for-deletion template from the top of the article.  Ronhjones  ^(Talk) 22:33, 26 April 2011 (UTC)

I actually wouldn't wait for this image's deletion. I had originally uploaded it for demonstration purposes for the other editors and knew that it was going to be deleted within seven days...little did I know that it's been up there for all this time ;). Cheers, --Marshal Bagramyan (talk) 22:20, 27 April 2011 (UTC)

I'll kill it as requested by author then.  Ronhjones  ^(Talk) 22:22, 27 April 2011 (UTC)

I notice you have tagged File:Lawdiploma.jpg as missing evidence of permission. In case you didn't realise, the uploder, Mnbitar (talk · contribs), died in February 2011, and hence it is now unlikely that permission will be received. CT Cooper · talk 23:24, 27 April 2011 (UTC)

One never knows the state of the original uploader, there have been plenty who just open an account, upload a few pictures and never come back - it's unlikely that those pictures will ever get permission as well. Not a lot we can do. At least this one is an orphan, so if it goes, it won't degrade any article.  Ronhjones  ^(Talk) 23:35, 27 April 2011 (UTC)

Hi! Related to File:S. B. Dissanayake.jpg and File:Hon. Gamini Dissanayake.jpg, if I'm not mistaken, per WP:CSD, as an editor who is not the original uploader, I am permitted to remove the CSD tags. Apologies if I'm wrong though, I haven't been too active here of late.

With regard to the images themselves, the uploader claims he has been given the copyright of the images, and he is releasing them to PD. I understand it's not perfect, and we have to assume good faith on his part. But how is that different to the thousands of images on here that have been taken from Flickr? We've just assuming the original flickr uploader actually took the images and owns the copyright, but we have no way to verify that claim. So say, instead of been truthful, if Photos by Anuradha (talk · contribs) had uploaded these pics to flickr, claimed that he'd taken them and owned the copyright, no one would have questioned it.

Tineye turns up zero results, so it's pretty clear the uploader didn't steal these images from somewhere online. I don't see any reason to doubt his claims, and personally I don't see anything wrong with these images. --snowolfD4 ^{( talk / @ )} 14:46, 28 April 2011 (UTC)

If you are convinced it's fine then OK. I never do edit wars :-) It's always likely to get tagged again (not for CSD - that's only once - it would be FfD) by other editors in the future. True there are some old photos on WP that would not survive for 5 minutes should they have been uploaded now. But there is no rule for old photos (I already checked) - we have to apply the same rules as a photo being freshly uploaded. As for Flickr, there aren't that many bad ones any more (Or I haven't found them yet!) - the Flickr policy is easy to implement anyway, so long as it's CC-BY or CC-BY-SA, it can stay, the other 4 types can't. Most (good) Flickr images are now on commons, anyway - and I move them there if I find them (then the commons FlickrBot checks the license automatically, and records the result). I use TinEye, but I have to say, it does miss a lot of images - which I have found on Google Images (but that can take looking at a lot of pages of images - unless one is lucky and the uploader did not change the size!).  Ronhjones  ^(Talk) 20:10, 3 May 2011 (UTC)

I noticed that a file I had uploaded was recently deleted as per your suggestion. The reason was "Copy of a newsletter, published in Finland. I would suspect that copyright on a 1983 Finnish magazine is still intact."

This image was in fact the cover of a photocopied newsletter with a small circulation, not a magazine. The cover layout was designed by me (the sole editor), and the cover image was a photograph I had taken. I consider myself as the owner of the copyright. Any suggestions how I can prove this without fearing that my files will be deleted in the future?

Eisaksso (talk) —Preceding undated comment added 13:10, 2 May 2011 (UTC).

The best way is to use the template:information template - the template page gives some good information on how to fill in. My extra advice is do not use your own name! We can't relate names to user names, so for "author" use your username - enter as [[User:Eisaksso]] - then we see the "author" is the same as the "uploader". The more explanation you give in the description, then the easier it will be. If the image appears somewhere on the web, someone will find it - if you know it is published on-line then have a review of WP:DCM. Also consider uploading to commons, images here can only be used by English Wikipedia, on commons they could be used by any Wikipedia (even the Finnish one). If you want me to undelete it here to add suitable data as I have described, then leave me a note, and if you want me to then move it to commons after you have completed the data, then let me know that as well.  Ronhjones  ^(Talk) 20:26, 3 May 2011 (UTC)

Hi Ron, Re: your post on my User Page. [3] I personally took a photo of the RAAM currency and placed the image in commons and released all rights to the image. Is this not enough? If not, can you please explain why, in a sentence or two without requiring me to read pages of technical jargon? Many thanks, -- — Keithbob • Talk • 20:53, 21 April 2011 (UTC)

The image is not in Commons, it's on en-Wikipedia - which is why you have a message on this Wiki. While you can take the photo, you cannot take the copyright away from the owner/designer. You could try to obtain permission (see WP:DCM) from the owner, if you know who issues the notes.

If you can find a web link that specifies that this note is in the public domain or has an appropriate CC license, then you can just add that link to the page and remove the di-no-permission.

Another solution might be to remove the PD template and change the image to a Fair use. If so, then I would suggest adding

• {{Non-free currency}}
• and a filled in FUR template based on...

{{Non-free use rationale
| Description       = 
| Source            = 
| Article           = 
| Portion           = 
| Low_resolution    = 
| Purpose           = 
| Replaceability    = --~~~~
| other_information = 
}}

Note that you need a FUR for each Article the picture is used in!

Hope that makes some sense. If you want me to start adding the Free Use bits for you (and you then fill in any gaps), then come back  Ronhjones  ^(Talk) 21:15, 21 April 2011 (UTC)

Dear Ron, thank you for your patience and assistance. I have revised the Licensing by adding a FUR template as you have suggested above. Would you kindly check and see how I did? [4] Many thanks, -- — Keithbob • Talk • 15:43, 22 April 2011 (UTC)

Almost there... I've added a second FUR as there are 2 aticles that use the image - please check the second one. I've reduced the pic down to a reasonable size for Fair Use.  Ronhjones  ^(Talk) 22:41, 25 April 2011 (UTC)

Sorry I forgot about the second artcle (GCWP) using the image. I checked and both FUR's look good to me. Is there anything else I need to do?-- — Keithbob • Talk • 01:17, 26 April 2011 (UTC)

I can't think of anything else, someone will pop up if we've missed anything. :-)  Ronhjones  ^(Talk) 23:54, 5 May 2011 (UTC)

		The Good Heart Barnstar
		Thank you for your patient, kind and helpful attitude! We need more of this on Wikipedia. — Keithbob • Talk • 18:26, 28 April 2011 (UTC)

Many thanks, not had this one before. :-)  Ronhjones  ^(Talk) 23:49, 5 May 2011 (UTC)

Hello, I'm not sure what exactly you are talking about. I have noticed today that someone seems to have inappropriately removed a photo (the above). I'm going to attempt to restore it and failing that will upload a new copy. CyntWorkStuff (talk)

The picture was claimed to have come from http://www.nyabn.org/brenda/images/BrendaHowardEarly90s.jpg. One either needs a link to a statement on that site that shows the Creative Commons License, or to get someone from www.nyabn.org to e-mail the permission to Wikipedia. The full details are laid out at donating copyright material  Ronhjones  ^(Talk) 23:22, 5 May 2011 (UTC)

I know that permission was given by the photographer who donated the image to the group and the group itself (she was a founder). This is the problem that come from constant changes to things. People such as myself who only log in infrequently and who complied with all the necessary steps at the time then find things deleted or annoyed officious squawking and flitterings about posted on pages because Wikipedia has changed the rules once again. Sigh CyntWorkStuff (talk)

The rules change because they were being abused. Far too many images with "I've got permission", and of course they never did. Sadly some good ones get caught in the net. But if we ignore the abuse that was occurring, then the outcome could end up with a copyright suit against the Wikipedia Foundation, which at the end of the day is just a charity, and an expensive legal wrangle would not do it any good.  Ronhjones  ^(Talk) 23:48, 5 May 2011 (UTC)

Well I'm not altogether sure what was wrong in this case. But 1st I'm trying to reload it and then I'll try to put on whatever verbiage you all want. CyntWorkStuff (talk)

OK uploaded. Now what language do they need to have added to this now to keep everything on the up and up? CyntWorkStuff (talk)

The full explanation is at WP:DCM. In my opinion the more "bombproof" method is to ..

1. Use the Template:Information template to set up your fields on the image page.
2. Get the photographer to email, ideally using the language from the template at WP:CONSENT to permissions-en@wikimedia.org, and place {{OTRS pending}} in the permission field.

Once the OTRS volunteers get the email they will replace the pending template with an approval ticket. The image should then never be in question as to it's license.  Ronhjones  ^(Talk) 00:23, 6 May 2011 (UTC)

Here's a typical example File:ShannonLisa.jpg  Ronhjones  ^(Talk) 00:28, 6 May 2011 (UTC)

OK. Well I THINK I put everything on correctly. And will get an email or two sent to the address specified. The thing that is odd to me is what is left (a fake, flatering and 'overly optomistic' shall we say resume, someone else's college art project, etc.) as opposed to what is taken down. Oh well. So now I'll also have to go and see why they took down some movie posters attached to their respective films. *smile* CyntWorkStuff (talk)

We get round to the more useless files as well. I did several files at FfD on the basis of WP:NOTHOST only last week - and all the best files get moved to commons. Anyway, time for bed...  Ronhjones  ^(Talk) 00:58, 6 May 2011 (UTC)

Hi Ronhjones, good job for the chemistry articles! Would you mind taking a look at the very first article I just have created on Cerimetry? It is still a temporary subpage (not published yet); I've just created the page today. Your contribution would be appreciated. Thanks a lot in advance, Burgundy111 Burgundy111 (talk) 23:49, 6 May 2011 (UTC)

Urgh. Inorganic chemistry, not my field at all - just got through that section at degree level - give me the physical and organic any day... :-( - layout looks OK, but http://www.google.co.uk/#hl=en&xhr=t&q=%22In+the+second+and+third+row+transition+metals%2C+only+the+early+elements+would%22&cp=78&pf=p&sclient=psy&newwindow=1&safe=off&source=hp&aq=f&aqi=&aql=&oq=%22In+the+second+and+third+row+transition+metals,+only+the+early+elements+would%22&pbx=1&fp=4ffca68393f93048 shows you are not re-phrasing enough from the original article - and if I can easily find it, just wait until the copyright bot gets it hands on it, but I can't see the full original without paying... (Google is allowed to see the text).  Ronhjones  ^(Talk) 00:02, 7 May 2011 (UTC)

how do you extract sulfur from diallyl disulfide?

hello Ronhjones can you please help me with the following as there is nothing in any literature.

1, how can Hydrogen sulfide and sulfur dioxide be produced from diallyl disulfide?

2,what would happen if copper were reacted with diallyl disulfide?

3, or is there an easy route from isothiocyanate to get sulfur?

I thankyou for any assistance you can give and I know we can erase ignorance.

yours faithfully jason Jasonwithey (talk) 18:43, 8 May 2011 (UTC)

p.s please answer on my talk page if possible thankyou again.

What part of this is unclear to you? — Xiong熊talk* 09:44, 9 May 2011 (UTC)

None. Twinkle does not read editnotices, and I suspect never will. Most templating tools just add the template, the user never sees the talk page.  Ronhjones  ^(Talk) 19:24, 9 May 2011 (UTC)

Then don't use the tool. Don't tag my page again. Thank you. — Xiong熊talk* 20:30, 9 May 2011 (UTC)

No. I and hundreds of others will use the tools.  Ronhjones  ^(Talk) 20:58, 9 May 2011 (UTC)

Hi, Ronhjones. As you are an expert in the field of images' copyright issues, I would like to ask your opinion about two recently added images. Uploader of images File:227899 220916007919115 190360330974683 933110 2715285 n.jpg and File:Noahsark555.jpg declares that these images are his own work. However, this seems highly unlikely. Beagel (talk) 10:34, 9 May 2011 (UTC)

Not an expert (yet), but certainly gaining plenty of experience. Looks like both were on commons, first one has gone, and the second one is set to follow it. Commons tends to be much quicker at getting rid of copyvios.  Ronhjones  ^(Talk) 19:28, 9 May 2011 (UTC)

The photo is of the cover of my own passport, I scanned it and uploaded it. I think that's well within the copyright explanation I gave, no? Thanks anyway, Yazan (talk) 16:07, 10 May 2011 (UTC)

It's your passport. It's not your design on the cover. Scanning or taking a photo does not transfer the copyright from the originator to yourself. You are not the copyright holder. You just need to find out if the Syrian government claims copyright.  Ronhjones  ^(Talk) 19:21, 10 May 2011 (UTC)

The other option is by "Fair Use" - here's the example from my country - File:Ukpassport-cover.jpg  Ronhjones  ^(Talk) 20:02, 10 May 2011 (UTC)

Please do something about the personal attacks that have been made by User:Juri Koll towards myself and User:Prof.rick in the past. Juri Koll has also reverted any edits that Prof.rick and I had made in the past even though we had provided proof with our edits. Juri Koll has left the Richard Kastle page to be to his likings and so it is to be considered biased. I am sure you can access the previous comments left by Juri Koll.

I understand that I had performed vandalism in early 2010 but it was due to nothing being done about the Richard Kastle page and so I felt it was the only way to get an administrator's attention as I did not know any other possible way to bring the attention towards the page. People make mistakes but for Juri Koll it has gone way too far. Just take a look at previous comments he had left on my talk page and Prof.rick's talk page.

I do hope that you can something about this.

Thank You, Randyrhoads1fan (talk) 15:06, 11 May 2011 (UTC)

I think you will have a hard time trying to change that article, many be time to drop the stick. It may well appear to be biased in terms of "all positive data", but that's how some turn out. For such a small article there's a very large amount of references - far more than we usually get, but it's nice to see so many. To add any other slant on the person you will just have to find some other data with just as good references.  Ronhjones  ^(Talk) 21:22, 12 May 2011 (UTC)

The photo is of the cover of my own passport, I scanned it and uploaded it. I think that's well within the copyright explanation I gave, no? Thanks anyway, Yazan (talk) 16:07, 10 May 2011 (UTC)

It's your passport. It's not your design on the cover. Scanning or taking a photo does not transfer the copyright from the originator to yourself. You are not the copyright holder. You just need to find out if the Syrian government claims copyright.  Ronhjones  ^(Talk) 19:21, 10 May 2011 (UTC)

The other option is by "Fair Use" - here's the example from my country - File:Ukpassport-cover.jpg  Ronhjones  ^(Talk) 20:02, 10 May 2011 (UTC)

Please do something about the personal attacks that have been made by User:Juri Koll towards myself and User:Prof.rick in the past. Juri Koll has also reverted any edits that Prof.rick and I had made in the past even though we had provided proof with our edits. Juri Koll has left the Richard Kastle page to be to his likings and so it is to be considered biased. I am sure you can access the previous comments left by Juri Koll.

I understand that I had performed vandalism in early 2010 but it was due to nothing being done about the Richard Kastle page and so I felt it was the only way to get an administrator's attention as I did not know any other possible way to bring the attention towards the page. People make mistakes but for Juri Koll it has gone way too far. Just take a look at previous comments he had left on my talk page and Prof.rick's talk page.

I do hope that you can something about this.

Thank You, Randyrhoads1fan (talk) 15:06, 11 May 2011 (UTC)

I think you will have a hard time trying to change that article, many be time to drop the stick. It may well appear to be biased in terms of "all positive data", but that's how some turn out. For such a small article there's a very large amount of references - far more than we usually get, but it's nice to see so many. To add any other slant on the person you will just have to find some other data with just as good references.  Ronhjones  ^(Talk) 21:22, 12 May 2011 (UTC)

Re your note, please feel free to delete this file; and thanks for taking the trouble. --Anthonyhcole (talk) 01:47, 18 May 2011 (UTC)

I'll let it run it's course. Maybe someone will find a use for it and construct a Fair Use Rationale for it.  Ronhjones  ^(Talk) 19:17, 18 May 2011 (UTC)

Thanks for your message, but no, I won't bother. Last time I sent an OTRS it was such a hassle. If you don't accept my statement of permission, go ahead and delete. I don't care. If you want to reply, please do so on my talk page. Greetings, --Janke | Talk 06:36, 18 May 2011 (UTC)

The choice is yours, If I didn't tag it then someone else would have sooner or later. At least you are still a regular editor to see the message, there are plenty who are not around any more.  Ronhjones  ^(Talk) 19:16, 18 May 2011 (UTC)

I believe you are mistaken regarding File:Togolese passport.png. The stuff you posted on my talk page is not applicable for multiple reasons, the main ones being the assumed distinction between myself and the copyright owner, the qualification "but have previously published it elsewhere", and my least favorite, the assertion that "there is no proof" that I agreed to license it. I guess the huge box with the text "I, the copyright holder of this work, hereby release it into the public domain. This applies worldwide" does not qualify as proof? I am the creator of that file, everything on that page that was written by me and is accurate. I have not published this image anywhere because it took it specifically for wikipedia, uploaded it, and selected the correct license, and clarified my ownership of the image in as explicit a manner as I could. I would like for you to please cancel the nomination for deletion or whatever other action you may have initiated. EAE (Holla!) 02:06, 18 May 2011 (UTC)

You cannot be the copyright holder, that belongs to the Government that issued the passport - you cannot "grab" the copyright by taking a photograph of it. If the Government decides to declare that the imagery is PD then you can have it. One needs to have a good understanding of the Togolese copyright laws. (As for the wording - that's a Wikipedia approved agreed template, to inform an editor that an image of his has been tagged with a no-permission notice - we do not type each one out separately), If the image is use with critical commentary in any article then it is possible to change the license to one from HERE (maybe {{Non-free book cover}}, along with a Fair Use Rationale WP:RAT - see also WP:NONFREE for more information  Ronhjones  ^(Talk) 19:01, 18 May 2011 (UTC)

As you must be an attorney experienced in American, Togolese, and international intellectual property law, in hindsight it's obvious that you would see through my ruse. You win, my attempt to smuggle Togolese government property onto Wikipedia servers is foiled. I wonder what other contraband of mine you will find. Time to make my getaway. You coppers will never get my media alive. EAE (Holla!) 05:10, 21 May 2011 (UTC)

I am not American, and never will be...  Ronhjones  ^(Talk) 22:35, 21 May 2011 (UTC)

Good to know there are people who can't read outside of the US too. EAE (Holla!) 07:28, 22 May 2011 (UTC)

I can read very well, thanks, especially Wikipedia's policies.  Ronhjones  ^(Talk) 14:04, 22 May 2011 (UTC)

Hello. You recently marked a file I uploaded for deletion, but I'm not sure why. The photo is one that I took myself and has not been published elsewhere. I released the image into the public domain and added the appropriate tag (I thought). Has Wikipedia policy changed since I uploaded the file? Please advise on what I need to do to prevent the deletion. Thank you. ShockerHelp (talk) 03:04, 18 May 2011 (UTC)

I don't think policy has changed too much, but it has become much more focused on making sure that the image is really correctly described and licensed. There were a lot of "I have permission" statements, which frankly were not true. Last year saw the introduction of the pseudo-speedy system which allows tagging the image for "no source", "no license", "no permission", "no fur", etc. with a grace period of a week for the uploader to fix the problem. I think toys are in a bit of a grey area as regards copyright, but the fact that there is also the card with artwork on it swayed my decision, and the majority of toys on Wikipedia are all in the non-free use category. Note my last answer above - the copyright always belongs to the manufacturer, even if you take a photo. Anyway, I would suggest change it to Fair Use - and I suggest have a look at this image of a toy File:Hungrrr-toy.jpg, which should help you compose your page. If you do decide to do that, then just remove the whole of the "di-no-permission line" when you edit it.  Ronhjones  ^(Talk) 19:13, 18 May 2011 (UTC)

Thanks for the thoughtful reply. I'll follow your advice in the future. I'm not concerned enough with the image to bother with it further, so delete away =) ShockerHelp (talk) 01:11, 19 May 2011 (UTC)

Nice to know that has helped you for the future. OK, done.  Ronhjones  ^(Talk) 19:08, 19 May 2011 (UTC)

Hi, I removed the deletion tag from there and commented at file talk. Please let me know there or here if I am in error as I'm not a copyright expert, but it seems to me that the statement at the source page credibly states that the author has released the work under a compatible license. What do you think? --John (talk) 04:23, 26 May 2011 (UTC)

Replied at file talk.  Ronhjones  ^(Talk) 20:50, 26 May 2011 (UTC)

I followed the guidelines of adding {{OTRS}} (or whatever the correct syntax is; it escapes me at the moment) to the page to ask for a request of an extension. I sent an email to permissions to permit the page using the recommended consent form. I thought this is what I needed to do, no?

In the future, especially for new folks to wikipedia editing like me, it's helpful to not delete an image and then say why, but rather flag it or reach out to the person first to attempt to rectify. I think I'm OK now, with the consent letter covering all images in use on the Mathcad page. - 96.233.39.63 (talk) 01:21, 27 May 2011 (UTC)

That's exactly why we have the pseudo-speedy system for image issues (the no permission, no source, no fair use, etc) - it allows the uploader a full seven days to sort out the problem - the system allows me to tag the image, and automatically makes sure that the standard message is placed on the uploader's talk page, so that they can deal with the problem. A normal speedy (which wasn't used here), is just that, it would be often gone in under 24 hours. Anyway, I see that the OTRS volunteer has given you the required ticket - that should stop any further issues with these images.  Ronhjones  ^(Talk) 18:48, 27 May 2011 (UTC)

Thanks for clarifying. I meant no malice or strong-arm... just getting used to the syntax. I, too, think I should be OK. If not, simply let me know and I'll respond as soon as I can. Seven days is much more flexible than one. And thanks for the Wikipedia Image 'training' - it is appreciated. Abelniak (talk) 16:04, 31 May 2011 (UTC)

Remember, you don 't have to keep uploading. Nothing is ever removed forever, if there is a delay getting it sorted, then any admin can restore the page when you have sufficient data for the image to remain.  Ronhjones  ^(Talk) 21:52, 31 May 2011 (UTC)

In regard to the above reverenced photograph, please tell me the best and easiest way to resolve this. Let me explain the facts and perhaps you have a good way for me to resolve this. The subject of the article David Winters, sent me this and many others, after I introduced myself to him in the process of writing my first article. It was much by accident, and I have fully disclosed my current connection to him. He has a website http://www.davidwinters.net - most if not all the images are there, can he put a cc3.0sa license on that as copyright holder? This particular image is a back stage photograph by a staff member of his company on his production. Unambiguously he is the copyright holder. He knows why he sent it to me, and in good faith I uploaded it. I understand I need to make it easier to verify the chain of events that led to this. I have a treasure trove of similar images spanning 4 decades, but have been holding them back because of this issue. I was very new when I uploaded this image, and now, usually spend the extra time finding a properly publicly licensed image, or I just take them myself LOL. I have a similar one you cited, which is different subject, but I received it from the estate of the article's subject Gertrude Warner. Her son has taken an active interest in her legacy and has contributed more information to her biography. The image itself is a scan of her copy of a publicity photo for a long forgotten radio show. Could I treat that as a "press kit" type of fair use, but sourcing it is awkward in that I did not find it online, but was sent to me in the manner described. The others you tagged are my original work, I was just not as accomplished at writing documentation when I uploaded those. K3vin (talk) 23:39, 27 May 2011 (UTC)

There are a few good ways to keep the images.

1. Obtain the classic OTRS ticket - yes a bit involved, but it's then locked to the image for ever more.
2. Change the images on a web page(s) to state "cc-by-sa 3.0" - and maybe use a proper cc logo as well (see my web page - I've put it in the menu bar - http://www.crhf.org.uk/)
3. A new one I saw yesterday. The web site made an extra page, just for image release - it just had some text at the top saying the following images were all released under cc-by-sa 3.0, followed by a select group of images that the owner was happy to release. The URL to this page was then used as the permission link. Has the advantage that the web site owner can easily pick and choose what he wants to release, and as the images are on the server already, the actual size of the new page on the web server is insignificant.

The main problem (my view) with both 2 & 3, is that if ever the web site closes down (and it has not been archived by the Web Archive), then your permission technically vanishes.

As for Gertrude Warner, you can use "fair use", as she is deceased - thus satisfying the "non replaceable" part of the FUR. I guess you could use {{Non-free promotional}} or {{Non-free fair use in}} along with your FUR or any other from Category:Non-free_Wikipedia_file_copyright_tags that you think suitable.

For those that are 100% your work, then remove the template, and make sure that the description is filled in to show that it's all your work. Note: we cannot tie real names to user name, so I always suggest to make sure that you use your user name - i.e "taken by K3vin", not "taken by <real name>".

Hope that all makes some sense. Taking the pictures yourself is always easier - and always consider uploading those to commons instead. I have no images on en-Wikipedia, mine are all on commons.  Ronhjones  ^(Talk) 00:17, 28 May 2011 (UTC)

Thanks. I think I have a good understanding. The images you tagged where way before I was paying much attention to the process. Regarding my name - I have been doing Kevin Fillips on my commons stuff.K3vin (talk) 01:34, 28 May 2011 (UTC)

I received your notice about copyrights. I am the artist and creator of these images. in other words, I am Mike Rider. This article has been up for years, with my full permission. I don't know why there's a problem now. could you be more clear about what I need to do to keep my images in an article about me on Wikipedia. Thank you.

Mike Rider (weaselbit) — Preceding unsigned comment added by Weaselbit (talk • contribs) 23:41, 2 June 2011 (UTC)

Ah, the classic problem. We have no way of telling that User:Weaselbit = Mike Rider (if only we could, it would save lots of problems), so I see a painting by Mike Rider and uploaded by Weaselbit, it could be good or it could be bad. Since mid last year we have had the new pseudo-speedy system which allows one week for the author to sort out any missing issues - earlier attempts at just flagging missing parts were mainly ignored. Leave it with me, I will go through them later, and change as appropriate, and then let you know if there are any issues left.  Ronhjones  ^(Talk) 16:15, 3 June 2011 (UTC)

Thank you Ron for your prompt response and help. This kind of thing is confusing sometimes with all the legalese. I was thinking that I had to write a letter for each one and what if I worded it wrong? etc. Mike Rider (weaselbit) — Preceding unsigned comment added by Weaselbit (talk • contribs) 19:44, 3 June 2011 (UTC)

There are standard letters here to use, but I don't think we need to go there. I've done all eight pictures, using the standard Template:information to nicely format the data. In addition I think I have made it very clear that the uploader and artist are one and the same, so there should be no question of copyright problems (I hope - one cannot predict the future here!). Please have a brief check of each one (full list at http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Special:ListFiles&user=Weaselbit), and if one needs a tweak then go ahead.  Ronhjones  ^(Talk) 20:19, 3 June 2011 (UTC)

Curious why you tagged File:Peter Eugene Ball 2006.JPG for CSD F6 (no rational provided) when the editor has released the photo under public domain. Do you believe the editor is unable to release this particular file under these conditions? Kindly Calmer Waters 16:54, 6 June 2011 (UTC)

Ah, never-mind. A freedom of panorama issue I see now. Take care :) Calmer Waters 17:05, 6 June 2011 (UTC)

And the original edit summary says the content is subject to fair use - which is not acceptable for a "PD" image here, it is either PD, CC or fair use, cannot be any 2 of 3.  Ronhjones  ^(Talk) 18:59, 6 June 2011 (UTC)

Yea, took another look, after I messaged you and saw that. At first, I had thought it may have been that he thought he could release the picture because he took it, but rather was a pretty straight forward CV. Had one the other day that had a PD, CC-2.0-NC, and a copyright template. Covering all their bases maybe ;) Anyhow, nice work. Kindly Calmer Waters 19:26, 6 June 2011 (UTC)

that my pictures light up on my watchlist, but three just did. Ron Asheton and Niagara in this case. It look as if you've moved them over to Commons and I am sure that this is a good thing. Einar aka Carptrash (talk) 03:30, 7 June 2011 (UTC)

I moved the files here to remove the extra unnecessary ' in the name, and at the same time tagged to go to commons (I would have moved them last night, but the commons move helper was very slow and not working well).  Ronhjones  ^(Talk) 20:23, 7 June 2011 (UTC)

• See User talk:Ronhjones/Archive 10#User:84.92.11.89: User:84.92.11.89 is still editing page Alphablocks and being reverted. Should page Alphablocks be semiprotected? Anthony Appleyard (talk) 05:15, 7 June 2011 (UTC)

I'm with you all the way. They just are not going to be stopped by short blocks - someone is gaming the system, they know if they wait a short while after the block then the next warning is likely to go back to No.1 - so I've given them a number 3 :-) - they vandalised again!, and we'll have a 1 month's semi trial - let's see what happens when that ends - I will likely expect one of two outcomes...

1. They go away and don't come back, knowing that they can't beat the system.
2. Once the trial ends they will hit it big time.

If it's the second, then the next protect can be longer.  Ronhjones  ^(Talk) 20:19, 7 June 2011 (UTC)

Hi. You rejected a di-replaceable fair use. I don't deal with image deletion that often, but I don't understand how a character image in a BLP article with multiple free actor images is not replace, considering the actor's look doesn't differ much from the character's (see WP:NFC#UUI #1). There is also nothing special in the character image that couldn't be described in words. Would another di tag have been more appropriate in this situation? I just want to know for the next time I am in this situation. Thanks. – sgeureka ^t•c 08:43, 8 June 2011 (UTC)

I rejected it, as there was not a huge amount of images on the article and it does lie within the section of the film. It a bit of a "grey" one. After your message, I was inclined to delete it anyway, then I found Wikipedia:Images_and_media_for_deletion/2007_August_25#File:Donniedarkoskelcostume.jpg on the talk page, with the same concerns, and it was kept. In view of that, I would suggest that it has to stay or do another WP:FfD, as views on such non free images may have changed over the last 4 years.  Ronhjones  ^(Talk) 12:35, 8 June 2011 (UTC)

Thanks. – sgeureka ^t•c 16:14, 8 June 2011 (UTC)

Dear Rohn.. My name is Farid Ghadry (fng18@yahoo.com). My page on Wikipedia has been edited by unsavory characters posting misleading information. Every time I attempted to edit it, it was hacked again with the same information. As a result, I was banned from making any changes or accesses. Further, I personally wrote several articles (you can find them on my Blog at http://ghadry.com) that were somehow deemed as Vandalism or infringing on copyrights of others. I would appreciate looking into the matter so that I can edit my own page and block others from making illicit changes. and against our work for freedom and human rights in Syria. Thank you, Farid Ghadry 301-346-5000 (cell) — Preceding unsigned comment added by 108.28.111.192 (talk) 14:06, 8 June 2011 (UTC)

Oh dear. Where do I start...

1. I assume you are User:Fghadry. A block is just that - once blocked you cannot edit until unblocked. So actually posting here is technically a block evasion. I'll ignore it just this time.
2. No one owns a page on Wikipedia - WP:OWN. If you are the person on the paqe, then Wikpedia does not like you to edit it - WP:AUTOBIOGRAPHY.
3. Anyone can edit the page and add what data they may have found so long as it is properly referenced.
4. Any data added that cannot be verified is deemed to be original research, and as such will be deleted - Wikipedia is an encyclopaedia, not a blog.
5. Any data added that is a copy or even a close copy of any other web site, is a copyright violation, unless the strict rules in donating copyright materials has been followed. Copyright violations are treated very seriously, and will certainly be deleted, and the user warned.
6. A user cannot have a user name that suggests any link to an article that they may edit - thus your user name is not allowed.

I can only suggest that you return to your own talk page, and request an unblock - explain what why you made those edits, and suggest a new user name for yourself. You will probably have to agree not to edit the Farid Ghadry page, but just be allowed to add data to the talk page for other editors to consider adding to the article.

(And please do not edit here as an IP - thanks)

 Ronhjones  ^(Talk) 15:01, 8 June 2011 (UTC)

Hi Ronhjones,

I created a page a few days ago for The Inland Real Estate Group of Companies, Inc. and it was deleted. I'd really appreciate your feedback on how I can make it more objective and more of what Wikipedia is looking for. I saw from your profile that you've edited a ton of high profile entries, so I'd love to learn more about what you think I should do.

Also, if possible, I'd also like to get the entry back. It took me a while to write it, and I didn't save the version with the proper formatting.

Thanks in advance for your help! I've been a huge Wikipedia fan for years! 69.174.58.28 (talk) 17:03, 8 June 2011 (UTC)Andrea from 69.174.58.28 (talk) 17:03, 8 June 2011 (UTC)InlandGroup

Oh no, not again (said the bowl of petunias...)

1. You might read my previous answer above - are you perhaps User:InlandGroup - and you have posted here while blocked?... Once again I will give you the same answer as above, you may not evade a block by using an IP address, and I will ignore it this time if that is the case.
2. Writing about one's own company is almost impossible to do with a neutral viewpoint, since you have so much conflict of interest, and you are extremely unlikely to add anything that is detrimental (unless you have some axe to grind) - hence it is very actively discouraged.
3. If you are User:InlandGroup, then you will have to request unblock at that page by asking for a name change (the correct template is shown in the notice there), and others will ask what you intend to edit. If you are not User:InlandGroup, then I suggest you create an account, then I can either e-mail you the content or make a subpage of your new name (nothing ever gets really deleted). Note that even subpages can be tagged for spam, although most are usually more forgiving, if they see a piece is being worked on. We don't do subpages of IP addresses.
4. If you must work on the Article - good luck - there will be plenty who will oppose you - just see User talk:FaztekSafety to see someone in a very similar situation.
5. A complted article in a subpage is best submitted fro editor review before moving it to article space - WP:PR
6. You may wish to review WP:CORP, which explains what is expected of an organisation page to be able to remain.

 Ronhjones  ^(Talk) 18:57, 8 June 2011 (UTC)

To delete article, Arvind Varma,

Hi Ronhjones,

I started the article Arvind Varma and wish to delete it, I am the major contributor for the page. All the other editors were not major. Please advice how can I delete it. I use the AFD, but not sure if it is right.

Thanks, Akukhun — Preceding unsigned comment added by Akukhun (talk • contribs) 22:31, 8 June 2011 (UTC)

I see you have added a WP:PROD - that's fine. If no ones disagrees, then it will deleted in 7 days.  Ronhjones  ^(Talk) 22:35, 8 June 2011 (UTC)

Hi, thanks for your hard work in deleting expired prods. Just a small request; when you delete an article it is good practice to check for, and delete, the redirects that lead to it otherwise dead-end redirects are left that others have to tidy up. HTH. TerriersFan (talk) 23:40, 9 June 2011 (UTC)

OK, I'll keep my eyes open for them.  Ronhjones  ^(Talk) 23:42, 9 June 2011 (UTC)

Dear Brother,

I respected that you reply ask about source of file however this file is my own work I created it on Adobe Photo Shop therefore I am whole sole owner of this Logo therefore I have full rights to use this logo therefore please remove the tag of source problem.

Best Regards, --Faizanalivarya (talk) 11:30, 10 June 2011 (UTC)

I have updated the File page to reflect your comments above.  Ronhjones  ^(Talk) 22:30, 11 June 2011 (UTC)

Hi Ron, Can you help/explain the following? A friend mentioned that since the 'removal', by someone, of the 'Visit Count', I'd put at the end of 'CUSACK', a 'Rate this Page' box has appeared after 'References', at the end of the piece. Having 'Logged In' I went to have a look and found the box which stated An error has occured. Please try again later. When I went back, a couple of days later, the same message was still there. The friend said that he had no problem completing the ratings which had flagged up Thanks your ratings have been saved and when he clicked on 'View page Ratings' the count had increased by one. I went to have another look. This time without 'Logging In' and found the 'Rate this Page'. I then 'Logged In' and found the same old error message. What do you think, why the difference between being logged In or Out? Are these rating boxes frequently added to pages? On the second point would it be acceptable to reinstate the 'Visit Count' hidden/placed in the 'Discussion' page rather than at the end of the piece where it was found unacceptable? Best Regards C.Cleeve (talk) 14:46, 11 June 2011 (UTC)

I don't think you can have a visit count on a page - and as such it was swiftly removed as "rm non-encyclopaedic content". The Rate this Page thing is a Wikipedia Foundation project and is appearing on quite a few pages - I assume they have made a random test pick. WP has been having problems with caching of late. If you get an error then try purging the cache - if you go the Gadgets page in your preferences, you can add a purge tab (has a * symbol on it), that is handy to force a re-load.  Ronhjones  ^(Talk) 18:45, 11 June 2011 (UTC)

Ron thank you. I've ticked 'Add a Purg Tab...' in My Preferences/Gadgets. In CUSACK (at top of page) went across to the 'select arrow' (to the right of the Star) and clicked on 'Purge'. I hope that I've got your instructions correct and now look forward to seeing 'Rate this Page' working and pleased the piece is part of the Wiki survey. Thank you once again for you time, advice and guidance. C.Cleeve (talk) 09:47, 12 June 2011 (UTC)

You removed a picture that you should not have. I spent hours uploading that picture that I took and following the very complicated Wikipedia guidelines to license it and put it under copyrite. Everything was done according to the text messages I was sent. Please restore it. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Abdul Muhib (talk • contribs) 16:31, 11 June 2011 (UTC)

I assume you mean File:My Inuit Father.JPG - it was correctly deleted because there was no proper license assigned to the image. I have restored it, tidied up the data so far supplied, and given you another 7 days to add whatever license template you wish from WP:ICT/All - please copy the one you want to the License section I have created on the image page. If you do not add one of the templates, then it is likely that someone will delete it again.  Ronhjones  ^(Talk) 18:27, 11 June 2011 (UTC)

P.S. The usual license we suggest is {{cc-by-sa-3.0}}, but it's your choice.  Ronhjones  ^(Talk) 18:34, 11 June 2011 (UTC)

Thanks for the heads-up on the deletion of an image in Category talk:Unclassified Chemical Structures. I'd like to respond meaningfully, but can't unless I can figure out which of my image(s) might be deleted. I spent some time on the discussion page looking for hints on how to do so, but came up empty. How might I find out? Also, may I ask that you reply to my talk page? Thanks. Waitak (talk) 13:39, 13 June 2011 (UTC)

I found the image in question (File:behenic_acid.gif). I've checked, and it's been replaced with an SVG in the article on Behenic acid, so I'd be perfectly happy for it to be deleted. No need for you to respond further, unless you'd like to. Thanks. Waitak (talk) 13:52, 13 June 2011 (UTC)

Hi there, Ronhjones! I'm writing in hopes that I might get some direct advice about my article, which has been declined for admission about 10 times--the rejection is killing me! I have gotten advice on the live chats, read all the information and feedback I can, and made several changes to my article, but with the same outcome. I work for a designer who has a national presence and by all accounts would warrant being "in an encyclopedia", but the feedback I've gotten is that my article "doesn't sufficiently explain the importance or significance of the subject" and that it "appears to read more like an advertisement than an entry in an encyclopedia." I'm truly trying to avoid language that does these things...any advice? I wholeheartedly appreciate your direct feedback. The article is "angela adams designs". Thanks! I guess I'm supposed to sign, Kengajilly (talk) 16:15, 15 June 2011 (UTC) Hope I did it right!

Writing about an employer is strongly discouraged - any employee is very unlikely to add anything controversial or detrimental - and Wikipedia insists on all articles having a neutral point of view, and an employee is likely to have a heavy conflict of interest. So you are already struggling. My suggestions - if you must try to write an article...

1. Always write any new article in user space (e.g User:Kengajilly/Angela Adams Designs), and place {{userspacedraft}} at the start. It can't stop it being suggested for deletion, but you may find more tolerance, while you are working on the article. I would do this for any article - if very difficult to create directly in article space, without a deletion request popping up!
2. Check the following page WP:CORP - you need to satisfy the criteria here for the article to stay.
3. Don't forget to add plenty of good inline reliable sources - independent of the type of organisation, trade papers can be used, but don't rely on them. Don't write paragraphs with no references - it will attract the spam-busters.
4. Before moving the new article into article space, get a review WP:PR, and address all concerns.
5. Anyone who writes part of the article has has a WP:COI, needs to declare it on the article talk page. Editors will not then think you are trying to be secretive.

Hope that clears a few issues for you  Ronhjones  ^(Talk) 19:57, 15 June 2011 (UTC)

I don't know if you recall our brief exchange in 2009 about the performer Run (or, as it turns out, Rún) on the Club Dada stage at Glastonbury, but I finally found them: Official site, MySpace, Facebook. Cheers! --ShelfSkewed Talk 05:23, 17 June 2011 (UTC)

I do remember. Well, eventually you found your answer. Persistence pays off.  Ronhjones  ^(Talk) 19:22, 17 June 2011 (UTC)

Little problem is understatement of the century, my friend! Haha. I think me as well as a few others are getting frustrated at the sub-standard English on certain the Formula One articles by the certain IP individual. Yeah, I thought it'd be slightly difficult, having looked through all the various user-warning and notice templates and we could not see one for sub-standard English, so we did not know how to take it further. It is slightly disruptive, so I suppose that template does fit. I shall let you know if semi-protection is necessary, but if it does amount to it, it'd probably be most of the season articles within the last few years and the current drivers. But yeah, cheers! Cs-wolves(talk) 19:35, 22 June 2011 (UTC)

Ah, cheers for that...It is mainly poor wording, but it's the fact that it has continued after no less than three other users have expressed a concern on the situation on the IP's talk page. But, at least you've saved us asking a question! Haha! Cs-wolves(talk) 21:51, 22 June 2011 (UTC)

Dear Mr.Ronh Jones,

- This is regarding your editing on page 'Savera Nadeem'.

- I am Dr.Nadeem Zaigham from Islamabad, Pakistan. It was me, who made major editing on the above mentioned page on 17:35, 23 June 2011 115.186.152.141. To my surprise, all my amendments were reverted back and later you blocked the editing function.

- Gentleman, I will not ask, why you did so, because you might be having more knowledge about 'MY WIFE TO BE', even more than me. BUT if you need any confirmation/clarification about what I wrote there, please fee free to contact me or 'Savera Nadeem' at the following contacts:

1. Ms.Savera Nadeem,M.A

  sav@nastac.com or 92-51-225 5838
  Research Consultant, NASTAC Islamabad www.nastac.com
  Managing Editor, Intellect Online Family Magazine www.intellectmag.com
  Research work on Classical Music www.maighmalhaar.com

2. Dr.Nadeem Zaigham, M.Sc.,Ph.D.

  nadeem@nastac.com or 92-51-226 0281
  Managing Director, NASTAC Islamabad www.nastac.com 
  Publisher, Intellect Online Family Magazine www.intellectmag.com
  Director Project 'Maighmalhaar', www.maighmalhaar.com

Looking forward for a positive approach and response.

Have a nice day Mr.Ronh Jones,

Best Regards,

Dr.Nadeem Zaigham,M.Sc, Ph.D. Islamabad, Pakistan nadeem@nastac.com — Preceding unsigned comment added by NadeemZaigham (talk • contribs) 08:36, 24 June 2011 (UTC)

Wikipedia is not a blog. You cannot add data to a BLP article unless there are suitable references available to support that data. We have no way of verifying the identity of any editor - all editors are treated equally. This is one reason why editing of any article of which you have a large conflict of interest is greatly discouraged. We have to ensure that the data being added is 100% correct - we cannot do that unless there are significant articles published to back up the data. We cannot accept unpublished data from the subject - that counts as original research and is not permitted. If you wish to add new data, then you may either make them under your user name (User:NadeemZaigham), once autoconfirmed, or add the data to the talk page in the hope that an uninvolved editor will view, verify and add the content for you.  Ronhjones  ^(Talk) 18:34, 24 June 2011 (UTC)

Note that repeated additions of unreferenced data, is a reason to block an account.  Ronhjones  ^(Talk) 18:42, 24 June 2011 (UTC)

Im sorry i bothered the admins, must have been a problem with my browser's cache, im able to edit now :) Your death 66% loaded █████___ please wait 19:55, 25 June 2011 (UTC) — Preceding unsigned comment added by Salh474 (talk • contribs)

OK, odd answer  Ronhjones  ^(Talk) 21:29, 25 June 2011 (UTC)

umm actually the last few words come automatically when i do ~ four times — Preceding unsigned comment added by Salh474 (talk • contribs) 09:31, 26 June 2011 (UTC)

Have you checked "your preferences" to see how your signature is set up - maybe you put some odd text in there without realising it would get used.  Ronhjones  ^(Talk) 17:19, 26 June 2011 (UTC)

Just so you know, this account is/was blocked directly. They were operating a second account, GlovePuppet2 (talk · contribs). TNXMan 15:33, 27 June 2011 (UTC)

You can't win them all, I suppose. He seemed to have a short, but reasonable contribution history as well. Why do they do it?  Ronhjones  ^(Talk) 18:56, 27 June 2011 (UTC)

Hi Ron,

Reference your advice on how to 'highlight the error' to 'management' that the survey placed at the end of the piece was not appearing, when one was Logged In, but was there when you did not Log In - the problem has not resolved itself.

I did try doing what you suggested, some time ago, but without a result.

Any suggestions?

Regards C.Cleeve (talk) 11:53, 28 June 2011 (UTC)

Hmmmm, beat's me. I get a rate this page, and I did rate it to see the effect - and then I get the ratings I gave and it allows me to alter as I desire and re-rate - it also will show the result of 6 ratings given so far. Maybe it's a browser issue? What are you using. Not everything in WP works with IE - as IE does not follow the W3C standards 100%. My only suggestion, as it's a technical question is to raise it at WP:VPT.  Ronhjones  ^(Talk) 12:54, 28 June 2011 (UTC)

Ron,

Sorry to take up your time. Thanks for having a look at it, I thought that it might have been something I had done incorrectly when following your suggested fix.

I'll let it ride, I just thought that 'management' was missing out on data from the 'on line' source where I get the error message of 'try again later'.

Thanks once again - now you can get back to enjoying your sailing this Summer.

Best Wishes C.Cleeve (talk) 09:18, 29 June 2011 (UTC)

Sailing - not on a narrowboat - too many bridges... :-)  Ronhjones  ^(Talk) 19:07, 29 June 2011 (UTC)

Please see http://kaybuena.com/images/sm47-SelfSculpt.html. OK? CHS CharlieSauer (talk) 02:15, 30 June 2011 (UTC)

Pity it was not on the page to start with...  Ronhjones  ^(Talk) 18:26, 30 June 2011 (UTC)

Sorry. I'm a newbie. Is there anything more that is needed to be done now? CHS — Preceding unsigned comment added by 24.242.131.147 (talk) 02:11, 1 July 2011 (UTC)

Don't think so. You've added that to the file data and the deletion request (I'll tidy that up). I would suspect it will be closed as keep  Ronhjones  ^(Talk) 18:38, 1 July 2011 (UTC)

	The Original Barnstar
	Thank you very much for helping me Loopus9 (talk) 01:13, 1 July 2011 (UTC)

Thank you. We do try to help where possible.  Ronhjones  ^(Talk) 18:42, 1 July 2011 (UTC)

The WikiProject Formula One Newsletter Year IV · Issue 6 · June 6, 2011 – July 4, 2011 Previous month's issue
New users New members – F1fans (talk · contribs) (June 7) Alex95-Ukraine (talk · contribs) (June 22) Flyingfinn19 (talk · contribs) (June 23) Britmax (talk · contribs) (June 29) New recipients – Hrhr2 (talk · contribs) (June 30) New editors – WikiProject news Check out Apterygial's My Insane Idea userproject, which aims to improve the 2008 Formula One season article and that season's Grands Prix to Featured Topic status. Newsletter news	Article developments Formula One articles by quality and importance Quality Importance Top High Mid Low NA Total FA 3 3 7 13 FL 1 2 1 4 A 2 2 GA 3 6 10 6 25 B 18 30 35 46 129 C 6 28 38 77 149 Start 16 95 185 618 914 Stub 22 130 1,526 1,678 List 3 9 12 4 28 Category 377 377 Disambig 7 7 Portal 35 35 Project 67 67 Redirect 19 19 Template 149 149 NA 25 25 Assessed 50 195 420 2,277 679 3,621 Total 50 195 420 2,277 679 3,621 See also: Wikipedia:WikiProject Formula One/Article alerts New Good Articles – 1995 Brazilian Grand Prix Deletions – Category:Formula One companies
Editors' Comment Users are always welcome to help us with this newsletter. If you are interested, please leave a message on an existing editor's talkpage or sign up on the "Contributors" list of the central newsletter page, and we will tell you everything you need to know and answer your questions. Current contributors – Midgrid (talk · contribs) Cs-wolves (talk · contribs) Chubbennaitor (talk · contribs) How to help WPF1 – Expand the articles in Category:Formula One stubs. Read the project to-do list and help to complete the tasks: Article requests: Erich Zakowski, Daniele Coronna, Hans Fouche, Chris Radage, Giorgio Stirano, Steve Tarrant, Intertechnique, 10 Tenths, Elf Masters Copyedit: Bahrain Grand Prix, History of Formula One, Monaco Grand Prix, 2006 San Marino Grand Prix, Rob White (Formula One), Rob Smedley Expand: F1-X Dubai, Honda RA271, Paddy Lowe, Red Bull RB3, Spyker F1, Toyota TF107, BMW Sauber F1.07, Mario Theissen, Franz Tost, Chinese Grand Prix, Colin Kolles, Concorde Agreement, Formula One Constructors Association, McLaren MP4/1, Ove Andersson, Bob Bell, Korean International Circuit, Grand Prix Drivers' Association, Spyker F8-VII, Arai (company), Shoei, Schuberth Helme GmbH, Bell Racing Company, Jim Bamber, Nazir Hoosein, Formula One video games, Make Cars Green, Jonathan Legard, Michael Turner (illustrator) more Update: History of Formula One, Toyota, Robert Doornbos, Formula One regulations, 2024 Formula One season, Scuderia Toro Rosso, Super Aguri F1, Divina Galica, Grand Prix World Championship Images needed: Max Mosley, Sakon Yamamoto, Jordan Grand Prix circa 1992-1997, Paddy Lowe, 2008 Turkish Grand Prix more For more work, see this generated list or the Auxiliary list
Images Below is the F1 Picture of the month (found here). The picture has to be one uploaded in the last month and only from the current season. It is exclusive to the Newsletter. REMEMBER, YOU CAN VOTE. New images 1972 1990 2001 2011 File:2011 European GP - Hamilton.jpg File:Button Canada 2011.jpg File:Ferrari 150 Canada 2011.jpg File:Canada 2011 Ferrari Pit.jpg File:2011 European GP - Alonso.jpg File:2011 European GP - Alonso Webber.jpg File:2011 European GP - Massa.jpg File:2011 European GP - Two Ferrari.jpg File:Canada 2011 Post Qualifying Press.jpg File:2011 European GP - On start.jpg
Article of the month – 1995 Brazilian Grand Prix; promoted to WP:GA quality The 1995 Brazilian Grand Prix (formally the XXIV Grande Prêmio do Brasil) was a Formula One motor race held on March 26, 1995 at the Autódromo José Carlos Pace, São Paulo, Brazil. It was the first round of the 1995 Formula One season. The race, contested over 71 laps, was won by Michael Schumacher for the Benetton team after starting from second position. David Coulthard finished second in a Williams, with Gerhard Berger third in a Ferrari. Damon Hill, who started the race from pole position, spun out while leading on lap 30 with an apparent gearbox problem, which was later found to be a suspension failure. Schumacher's win came despite Benetton encountering steering problems with his car during Friday practice, leading to him crashing heavily and necessitating steering component changes for the rest of the event. Despite Schumacher's victory, Hill proved to be faster during the race, and seemed to be on course for a comfortable victory before his sudden retirement. Other notable performances came from Berger, who took the final podium position despite being delayed during one of his routine pit stops due to a problem with a loose wheel nut; Mika Häkkinen, who finished fourth for the McLaren team despite its new car proving to be uncompetitive in pre-season testing; and Mika Salo, who drove strongly in the first half of the race to run third in his first Grand Prix for the Tyrrell team, only to suffer from cramp and drop back to seventh place at the finish. Behind Häkkinen, the other points-scoring finishers were Jean Alesi in the second Ferrari and Mark Blundell, who drove the second McLaren. Blundell was standing in for regular driver Nigel Mansell in the second McLaren until the team could produce a wider chassis in which to accommodate him, as the car's initial cockpit design had proved to be too narrow for him to drive comfortably. Several hours after the conclusion of the race, Schumacher and Coulthard were excluded from the race result as the chemical "fingerprint" of fuel samples from their cars taken after qualifying and the race did not match the specified sample lodged with the Fédération Internationale de l'Automobile (FIA) prior to the event. Berger was thus declared the winner, but the race stewards' decision to exclude them was overturned at an appeal hearing on April 13. Schumacher and Coulthard were reinstated in first and second places respectively, but the two teams did not receive their respective constructors' points. The Ferrari team was unhappy with the decision made at the appeal hearing; Berger called the sport "a joke". The rule concerning the legality of fuels had been changed for the 1995 season, as had the new standardised equipment used for refuelling during the race, the drivers' weighing-in procedure and the conditions of the drivers' racing licences; all of these changes produced controversies which at times threatened to overshadow the race, as did the excessively bumpy condition of the track. The race also marked the first Brazilian Grand Prix to take place since the death of Brazilian triple World Champion Ayrton Senna the previous year; his passing was commemorated in various ways throughout the event. (More...)
Drivers' Championship Position Driver Team Points 1st Sebastian Vettel Red Bull 186 2nd Jenson Button McLaren 109 3rd Mark Webber Red Bull 109 4th Lewis Hamilton McLaren 97 5th Fernando Alonso Ferrari 87 6th Felipe Massa Ferrari 42 7th Nico Rosberg Mercedes GP 32 8th Vitaly Petrov Renault 31 9th Nick Heidfeld Renault 30 10th Michael Schumacher Mercedes GP 26 11th Kamui Kobayashi Sauber 25 12th Adrian Sutil Force India 10 13th Jaime Alguersuari Toro Rosso 8 14th Sébastien Buemi Toro Rosso 8 15th Rubens Barrichello Williams 4 16th Sergio Pérez Sauber 2 17th Paul di Resta Force India 2 18th Pedro de la Rosa Sauber 0 19th Jarno Trulli Lotus 0 20th Vitantonio Liuzzi Hispania 0 21st Jérôme d'Ambrosio Virgin 0 22nd Heikki Kovalainen Lotus 0 23rd Timo Glock Virgin 0 24th Pastor Maldonado Williams 0 25th Narain Karthikeyan Hispania 0 Constructors' Championship Position Constructor Entered Chassis Points 1st Red Bull Racing RB7 295 2nd Vodafone McLaren Mercedes MP4-26 206 3rd Scuderia Ferrari Marlboro 150° Italia 129 4th Lotus Renault GP R31 61 5th Mercedes GP Petronas MGP W02 58 6th Sauber F1 Team C30 27 7th Scuderia Toro Rosso STR6 16 8th Force India F1 Team VJM04 12 9th AT&T Williams FW33 4 10th Team Lotus T128 0 11th Hispania Racing F1 Team F111 0 12th Marussia Virgin Racing MVR-02 0 See 2011 Formula One season for more information
Canadian Grand Prix Driver Constructor Race Time 1st Jenson Button McLaren 4:04:39.5371 2nd Sebastian Vettel Red Bull + 2.709 3rd Mark Webber Red Bull + 13.828 4th Michael Schumacher Mercedes GP + 14.219 5th Vitaly Petrov Renault + 20.395 6th Felipe Massa Ferrari + 33.225 7th Kamui Kobayashi Sauber + 33.270 8th Jaime Alguersuari Toro Rosso + 35.964 9th Rubens Barrichello Williams + 45.117 10th Sébastien Buemi Toro Rosso + 47.056 Fastest Lap: Jenson Button 1:16.956, on lap 69 Canadian Grid Line up Driver Constructor Time Row one Sebastian Vettel Red Bull 1:13.014 Fernando Alonso Ferrari 1:13.199 Row two Felipe Massa Ferrari 1:13.217 Mark Webber Red Bull 1:13.429 Row three Lewis Hamilton McLaren 1:13.565 Nico Rosberg Mercedes GP 1:13.814 Row four Jenson Button McLaren 1:13.838 Michael Schumacher Mercedes GP 1:13.864 Row five Nick Heidfeld Renault 1:14.062 Vitaly Petrov Renault 1:14.085 1 – Total time includes time elapsed under red flag conditions. Friday Practice 1 – Mercedes lead, Vettel crashes out Driver replacement – De la Rosa to stand in for Perez in Canada Friday Practice 2 – Alonso heads Vettel in disrupted session Saturday Practice – Vettel takes control in Canada Qualifying – Vettel on pole but Ferrari on form in Canada Race – Button takes last-gasp win in Canadian epic
European Grand Prix Driver Constructor Race Time 1st Sebastian Vettel Red Bull 1:39:36.169 2nd Fernando Alonso Ferrari + 10.891 3rd Mark Webber Red Bull + 27.255 4th Lewis Hamilton McLaren + 46.190 5th Felipe Massa Ferrari + 51.705 6th Jenson Button McLaren + 1:00.065 7th Nico Rosberg Mercedes GP + 1:38.090 8th Jaime Alguersuari Toro Rosso + 1 lap 9th Adrian Sutil Force India + 1 lap 10th Nick Heidfeld Renault + 1 lap Fastest Lap: Sebastian Vettel 1:41.852, on lap 53 European Grid Line up Driver Constructor Time Row one Sebastian Vettel Red Bull 1:36.975 Mark Webber Red Bull 1:37.163 Row two Lewis Hamilton McLaren 1:37.380 Fernando Alonso Ferrari 1:37.454 Row three Felipe Massa Ferrari 1:37.535 Jenson Button McLaren 1:37.645 Row four Nico Rosberg Mercedes GP 1:38.231 Michael Schumacher Mercedes GP 1:38.240 Row five Nick Heidfeld Renault no time* Adrian Sutil Force India no time* * Heidfeld and Sutil recorded no time in Q3 as they did not attempt a run. Heidfeld started ahead, after leaving the pits during the session and Sutil did not. Friday Practice 1 – Webber quickest for Red Bull in Valencia Friday Practice 2 – Alonso fights back for Ferrari Saturday Practice – Vettel moves ahead in Valencia Qualifying – Vettel on pole as Red Bull dominate Race – Vettel wins from Alonso in Valencia

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.

Delivered by MessageDeliveryBot on behalf of WikiProject Formula One at 19:49, 5 July 2011 (UTC).

Hi Ronhjones; in protecting this page, the contentious section composed of original research (no indication that the published sources refer specifically to this church) and unreliable sources (blogs, message boards) has been preserved. Perhaps you could have another look. I've no dog in this fight. Much obliged, 99.168.84.75 (talk) 15:55, 2 July 2011 (UTC)

It's an edit war - there's no right or wrong page, otherwise we could call it vandalism and block just one editor. Wikipedia is not news, there's no real need to make a page perfect all the time, it gets there by a slower process of consensus. The page is locked for only one week. Assuming that an edit war does not resume, then anyone can edit the page as soon as the protection is over. If I start reverting to a different version then that means I have an interest in a particular version - I don't, so I'm not choosing any particular version. Ronhjones  ^(Talk) 00:41, 5 July 2011 (UTC)

I've encountered a laissez faire approach to this kind of situation in recent months, which is less apt to discern legitimate edits from inadequately sourced POV. As noted above, the current section is supported by personal blogs and original research, the kind of content that once was reverted without question. Such is the reason I've retired my account, and will soon hang up the IP nonsense as well. Thanks, 99.156.70.163 (talk) 13:12, 5 July 2011 (UTC)

It's up to the active editors of the page to decide properly by consensus what they want to keep/delete, not for admins to wade in with all guns blazing - there are only about 1000 active admins anyway, and 10,000,000 editors - we don't have that much spare time to fully investigate page content (~150 pages are edited every minute), unless it's obviously vandalism, or a subject we personally know about.  Ronhjones  ^(Talk) 18:51, 6 July 2011 (UTC)

I appreciate the demographics--I've edited here for 5 years and know that the tide is constant. But we're not talking about guns blazing. What troubles me is the disclaimer re: obvious vandalism or subjects of expertise. Between those extremes lies an ocean of POV and abusive contributions. You did take the responsibility of protecting the page, and that is why I left a note here. To turn a blind eye thereafter is surely your prerogative, but I came here requesting a follow-up--it took me a few minutes to ascertain that the edits in question were unsourced soapboxing. However, as I already indicated, I've recently had other similar encounters, and conclude that Wikipedia has gotten out of control, to the extent that administrators can't or won't go further than dealing with the most obvious abuses, which themselves are of a multitude. One returns to the printed page, wondering why one left. Thanks anyway. 99.156.70.163 (talk) 21:37, 6 July 2011 (UTC)

Hi I just read your message and I was wondering, which exactly of my images are up for debate? If they aren't in use they were probably superseded by better images and I have no problem with their deletion. Thanks, have a nice day. C6541 (T↔C) 13:15, 5 July 2011 (UTC)

It was a general debate about which images should remain (probably moved to commons) and which should be deleted. I see no horrible jpeg molecules in your uploads (one svg has already moved to commons File:4-Methylephedrine.svg).  Ronhjones  ^(Talk) 18:45, 6 July 2011 (UTC)

╟─TreasuryTag►tortfeasor─╢ 21:37, 6 July 2011 (UTC)

╟─TreasuryTag►Boothroyd─╢ 22:09, 6 July 2011 (UTC)

Your recent edits to the template caused issues with the CSS styling of the Special Character template box. Could you please take a look at the following request? Thanks — Io Katai ᵀᵃˡᵏ 05:52, 7 July 2011 (UTC)

Hi Ronhjones. When you have time, and if it's not too much trouble, could you please provide some input at User_talk:Fastily#File:200_from_84.jpg? The thread is a bit long-winded, but in summary, User:Jheald has contested my closures of a few files you nominated at WP:FfD awhile ago. -FASTILY ^(TALK) 00:32, 11 July 2011 (UTC)

OK, have done so. They are not great photos, they'll never survive for long on commons.  Ronhjones  ^(Talk) 19:40, 11 July 2011 (UTC)

regarding File:7TamilMH.jpg. That was a picture I uploaded years ago, (we were all young and innocent once) along with several others at Malvina Hoffman -though not all there are mine. I no longer try to retain images such as that so feel free to delete it/them. Einar aka Carptrash (talk) 16:21, 11 July 2011 (UTC)

Thanks for that, no problem. Times have slowly changed, and plenty of old images will slowly be sorted out.  Ronhjones  ^(Talk) 19:39, 11 July 2011 (UTC)

A thought. Has wikipedia ever had an artist or an heir (copyright holder) complain about the use of an image on wikipedia? Carptrash (talk) 20:19, 11 July 2011 (UTC)

An interesting question, to which I have no answer. The problem is that Wikipedia is much bigger than it was several years ago, it tends to get a very high rank in google, so these old pictures have potentially a bigger audience. Then we must remember that Wikipedia is not a company (it's a charity), it does not have vast amounts of cash to fight off any legal cases - which could get expensive, - remember that any picture here (excluding non-free) can be used for any purpose (even commercial), so a picture might end up being used in lots of places and they will all point to Wikipedia's policy which allows them to copy freely.  Ronhjones  ^(Talk) 21:50, 11 July 2011 (UTC)

Good (opinion) answer. Carptrash (talk) 21:54, 11 July 2011 (UTC)