Jump to content

User talk:ProhibitOnions/Archive5

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

1 · 2 · 3 · 4 · 5
6 · 7 · 8 · 9 · X

Current talk page

Das Boot

I just watched this excellent movie, which elegantly solves the problem of how to make a German war movie which shows individual Germans as good guys without showing the Germans as a whole as the good guys. A question: all the U-boat crew address the captain as something that sounds like "Herr Kollon" or "Herr Kolloin," but never as "Herr Kapitan". What word is this? Adam 03:21, 3 December 2006 (UTC)

I have now been advised that it is "Herr Ka-Leu", naval shorthand for "Herr Kapitan-Leutnant." Adam 08:00, 3 December 2006 (UTC)

Yep, I have the DVD but haven't seen this great film in ages. It's about time I did.  ProhibitOnions  (T) 09:54, 5 December 2006 (UTC)

Hey PO,

Fiddling huh? :-) I tweaked it and made some suggestions in the shop archives! Take your peek(/pick)! NikoSilver 15:28, 6 December 2006 (UTC)

Yep, and it's great! Thanks! ProhibitOnions (T) 20:41, 6 December 2006 (UTC)
Glad you liked the tweaks. The new code which includes the short username follows:

ProhibitOnions (T)

Those onions should be banned anyway, so try tzatziki next time... :-) NikoSilver 11:09, 7 December 2006 (UTC)
Mmmm, now yu're making me hungry! Regards, ProhibitOnions (T) 10:44, 10 December 2006 (UTC)

Rockefeller

You think it's a family member? Relentless. I'm with you on this - there is, like, NO mystery here, and it belongs in the article. Tvoz 18:31, 9 December 2006 (UTC)

Anything's possible. I find this attempted censorship of a long-surpassed minor sex scandal 30 years ago to be a bit ridiculous. It could well be something personal... (In case anyone's wondering, we're talking about Nelson Rockefeller, who died under mysterious circumstances.) ProhibitOnions (T) 21:01, 9 December 2006 (UTC)
You've seen the latest? WHat's the next step, do you think? I believe he's up to 3RR, but probably I am too. I thought my latest citation add was a good one - I'd like to have the actual transcript, but in the meantime this is objective, contemporaneous, and hardly tabloid, any more than PBS is. Tvoz 23:24, 9 December 2006 (UTC)
I've reported the 3RR incident at the administrators' noticeboard. I hope one of the other admins can perhaps persuade this person to cease and desist. Regards, ProhibitOnions (T) 23:47, 9 December 2006 (UTC)
Thanks - he (unsigned, but does he think I can't see history?) just posted a threat on my talk page about violating WP:Living Tvoz 00:07, 10 December 2006 (UTC)
He just reverted it again; after I carefully re-worked the text and added several more objective citations. I've lost count of how many times he has reverted - I have done so 3 times. I do not see how the text in my last edit can be considered in violation of any Wikipedia rule, and I have now been threatened twice. WHat now? Tvoz 07:30, 10 December 2006 (UTC)
Five reverts, one baseless threat, and one wholesale censorship of the talk page. Feel free to add to my 3RR report. ProhibitOnions (T) 10:45, 10 December 2006 (UTC)

Rockefeller matter

Um, I looked through the source and I didn't see the claim made there. Am I missing something? JoshuaZ 06:30, 10 December 2006 (UTC)

Hello Joshua, you mean the PBS transcript? It's at the end. The salient bits:
NARR: Then, day by day, the story of Nelson's death, became clouded by scandal.
The public had been misled. Rockefeller had in fact died at 13 West 54th Street, his Manhattan townhouse, not at his office at Rockefeller Center.
JOE PERSICO: It became known that he had been alone with a young woman who worked for him in undeniably intimate circumstances, and in the course of that evening had died from a heart attack.
Other links point to Vanderbilt University summaries of TV news reports at the time, showing that the death occurred under circumstances other than those described, that Marshak was there, that she inherited something from him, etc. Even so, the Wikipedia version didn't even say anything about intimacy, it only said "in the presence of" Marshak. I can only assume that Rjensen has some sort of personal connection to the case. ProhibitOnions (T) 10:42, 10 December 2006 (UTC)
Per WP:BLP to claim that the young woman in question was Marshak you very much need a reliable source. It would be helpful to move one of the summaries that has the claim and link it right after the statement. JoshuaZ 23:36, 10 December 2006 (UTC)


Ok - this is so not a problem. I have 6 or 7 New York Times articles from the time that name her - her identity is not in doubt. The only thing that isn't really known in a verifiable way is precisely what they were doing when he had the heart attack, and we studiously removed any reference to what it obviously was and let the reader draw conclusions. All the rest is verified over and over. The NYT online links are subscriber-only so not legal here, but I have the actual references so doubters can go to the library and look it up (or pay for articles online if they choose to) - but references do not have to be online. I'll pull it all and post that tomorrow. I may add Ponchitta Pierce too - the New York Times articles name her as well, as the friend Marshack called in a panic to come over - it wa Pierce who called the police. You see this is what we've been saying - the identity of the person in his company has not been in doubt since this happened. The part they don't acknowledge is only the circumstances.
By the way - as I said somewhere - the Times articles and one from Time magazine and a few other places have her name spelled as MARSHACK, so I think we should as well. I don't think the Times would have had that wrong.
And I'm mulling over her separate article - it is ludicrous as it now stands, obviously, so I am going to look around wikipedia and see what precedents there are for similar people and then say what I think we should do. If people agree, we'll do it. If they don't we won't. But this Nelson Rockefeller page must include this information, in order to be a true and not sanitized biographical piece. Tvoz 06:28, 11 December 2006 (UTC)


I have posted the New York Times references and reworked the paragraph a bit as welll - there are 7 NYT articles andthe PBS documentary, and I may be able to pull some Washington Post pieces too. Is this enough verification of a fact that has not been in contention since 1979 - the woman's name? It is even in one of the headlines. Tvoz 10:39, 12 December 2006 (UTC)
Hiya - don't know if you saw there's talk on Megan and on Rocky about merging Megan into Rocky - on Megan talk I am being suggested as the only person who thinks it should remain, although I'm not - don't know what you think, but I thought I'd bring it to your attention. I do intend to expand it, just haven't had a chance. Tvoz | talk 21:45, 3 February 2007 (UTC)
Thanks for letting me know, I'll have a look. Regards, ProhibitOnions (T) 22:07, 3 February 2007 (UTC)

thought you should know

Just saying. Tvoz 20:40, 13 December 2006 (UTC)

happy holidays

Hey P.O. - hope you're having a good holiday, perhaps with a sprinkling of snow. Here in New York temperature is up, and we're having a balmy winter. Which won't last long. Enjoy! Have a berliner! Tvoz 09:23, 25 December 2006 (UTC)

Thanks! It's pretty warm-ish here, too, though I'm stuck indoors doing a boring technical translation for a cheapskate German car maufacturer (and they're not even paying more for Christmas, sigh). Got plenty of pannetone, think I'll skip on the Pfannkuchen... Ho-ho-ho! Best wishes, ProhibitOnions (T) 16:20, 25 December 2006 (UTC)

Thanks for the advice

Thanks for the advice, P.O. Actually, I am still afraid of doing large edits or creating a new article. First, I don't trust my english! hahahaha Second, I was reading about how Wikipedia works, and I found people who left the community offended or hurt. I don't think this is a good idea...

But I will keep helping with small edits and eliminating vandalism. =o)

I don't like the portuguese Wikipedia. =o(

(the four-tildes tip is great!! hahahaha)

Take care, Saulo Paiva 01:32, 28 December 2006 (UTC)

49?

So the obvious question is...... which one did you miss? Tvoz | talk 22:39, 7 January 2007 (UTC)

That was fast! It's Alaska! And it looks like I won't be there anytime soon, as it's a bit out of the way. FWIW, state 48 was South Carolina, several years ago, which involved driving through the western tip of it, but that still counts. Annoyingly, the one Canadian province I haven't been to is Newfoundland and Labrador, so if I ever want to be a completist in both countries I will have to travel to both ends of North America (or be "lucky" and get on a plane that has engine trouble in mid-Atlantic and is forced to land in Gander before being rerouted to... Anchorage or something.)
Happy New Year! ProhibitOnions (T) 22:50, 7 January 2007 (UTC)
I'm impressed. How about a cruise through the Arctic Circle from one to the other? Tvoz | talk 23:04, 7 January 2007 (UTC)
It's the kind of thing I might do, if only such a thing existed (and were cheap). ProhibitOnions (T) 23:36, 7 January 2007 (UTC)

Thanks...

...for the heads up! Do you think I should re-compile everything into a single talk-archive? I like it like this that you get to have your own page. I really can't believe that someone would actually dig into this part of my userspace! Sheesh! NikoSilver 01:21, 8 January 2007 (UTC)

No kidding! Well, at least it looks like you're going to be allowed to keep it... Regards, ProhibitOnions (T) 10:21, 9 January 2007 (UTC)

I noticed you removed a good chunk of the Vector Marketing article, calling it a "clear copyvio". It's not copyvio as far as I can tell, so I put it back, removing some unencyclopedic content added by an anon with fierce anti-Vector views. Years ago, when I was a brand new Wikipedian, I wrote the stub that later evolved into the current version. Today I don't do much besides revert vandalism and blatant POV, and I am no fan or advocate of the current version. However, I g-tested practically every bit of text I didn't write, and every test came clean. Do you know of a print source any of the article is copied from? If so, feel free to redo your edits. (Or redo them anyway, that's fine too.) szyslak (t, c) 08:09, 8 January 2007 (UTC)

The intro to that section stated that it was copied from Vector: "What follows is a detail of Vector Marketing's business model as described by the company itself. Consider the above and take the information and tone with a cup of salt." If true, that's a copyvio, if it's from something the company published. That's why I took it out (apart from the POV in that sentence). ProhibitOnions (T) 10:26, 8 January 2007 (UTC)
That was written by an anon who thinks anything insufficiently critical of Vector is propaganda from the company itself. There are one or two anons who claim Vector is conspiring to control the article, and that anyone who reverts or changes their edits is part of the conspiracy. Oh well, this is a controversial topic that will always attract strong points of view. (By the way, I have no affiliation with Vector, but I do strongly dislike the way they run their business/pyramid scheme.) szyslak (t, c) 00:42, 9 January 2007 (UTC)
...so yeah, I can definitely see how that looked like a copyvio. I'd probably do the same thing if I ran into something like that. szyslak (t, c) 03:05, 9 January 2007 (UTC)

List of films with similar themes and release dates AfD

Hi, you've expressed an opinion in the deletion discussion of this article. I've recently suggested a compromise in hopes of improving the article while keeping both sides happy, and would appreciate if you could revisit the issue. Thanks. --Wafulz 18:32, 9 January 2007 (UTC)

Thanks for working on this, I've had a look. While I don't think "trends in cinema" really describes what this is all about (and as someone had started a vote, I had to vote against it), I'll keep my thinking cap on. Regards, ProhibitOnions (T) 23:09, 9 January 2007 (UTC)

Wonderbra

Thanks for you improvements to the Wonderbra article. I think I did a good job trying to stay neutral since you got an impression that a HanesBrand corporate insider contributed to this. That impression couldn't be farther from the truth. The HanesBrand history of the Wonderbra is actually pretty sparse and I had to do a lot of digging in Canadian newspapers and academic books to build the story. I had to work hard not to be overly critical of the US reintroduction, and what the Playtex (who are now HanesBrand) people did (or rather didn't do). Frankly, I felt they could have done a lot better. I'm a business strategy guy, so my writing style has become overly precise -- hence the over reliance on specific dates in titles etc. Mattnad 16:03, 15 January 2007 (UTC)

Hi Mattnad, no offence meant, it's just that very precise writing about corporations does tend to set off bells. (I've seen a lot of likely insiders add things to McKinsey & Company, for example.) I labeled one heading as "US-centric" because it covered the (re-)introduction of the product to a number of countries, of which the U.S. was last, so it wasn't about "Re-introduction to the U.S. market"; also, headings aren't capitalized unless they include a proper noun. But anyway, kudos for writing like an insider. With a little more polish, I think Wonderbra should qualify as a good article. It gives the interesting and well-sourced background to a product that few people are aware of; as you've seen, many people think it was invented in the U.S. in 1994. ProhibitOnions (T) 14:37, 16 January 2007 (UTC)
No offense taken. Actually saw it as a compliment to my being impartial and factual. Would welcome more polish help from you to help get this to GA status. Any tips?Mattnad 15:39, 20 January 2007 (UTC)

Hi Prohibitonions, thanks for your continued support of the Wonderbra article (and your spirited defense against vandalism). There is one recent change I wanted to check with you. You combined a couple of sentences in the lead to now read:

"Although the brand name was first trademarked in the U.S. in 1935 U.S., the brand was developed in Canada by Moses (Moe) Nadler, founder and main owner of the Canadian Lady Corset Company, who licensed the trademark for the Canadian market in 1939." vs the previous:
"The brand originated with the 1935 U.S. trademark.[1] In 1939, Moses (Moe) Nadler, founding President and principle owner of the Canadian Lady Corset Company (Canadian Lady), licensed the Wonder-Bra trademark and patent for the Canadian market."

I have a couple of concerns about this part of your recent edit (liked the other work though):

  1. It's not really accurate - Moe Nadler did not develop the brand; his son Larry Nadler did that.
  2. The sentence is very long, a bit awkward, and has a typo: "....was first trademarked in the U.S. in 1935 U.S.". Try reading it out loud to see what I mean.
  3. Ironically, you have made that section slightly longer than the previous version: it's now 43 words long, and the previous version was 36 words long.

Take a look at the earlier version. Let me know what you think of going back to it, or some variation.

Best regards. Mattnad 13:29, 26 February 2007 (UTC)

As you've seen, I've made a few changes to the article and will continue to do so. It's not FA yet, but it's certainly approaching GA material. Regards, ProhibitOnions (T) 13:30, 4 March 2007 (UTC)
Yes, I noticed your work. Keep it up. We're getting there. One thing that has long bugged me about the formatting, and perhaps you know enough wiki markup to help, is that table with the patent, and 1950's Wonderbra pictures. I think it may work better if the table were floating, centered in the page, but I'd don't know how to do it. Do you? Mattnad 13:10, 5 March 2007 (UTC)

Berlin Hauptbahnhof

Regarding your recent edit on Berlin Hauptbahnhof, I've removed the DB logo (as it is a fair use logo and should probably not be used on infoboxes) and replaced it with the S-Bahn sign again. The station infoboxes for Germany are so far set up in a way that stations with S-Bahn services display the S-Bahn sign (which is available on the Commons, so no fair use issue like with the DB corporate logo), and stations without S-Bahn services are left blank. --doco (☏) 14:09, 19 January 2007 (UTC)

OK, makes sense, but I'd rather do without an S-Bahn logo altogether, as the station isn't primarily an S-Bahn station, or at least put the logo somewhere further down, or after the name (along with the U-Bahn symbol when it opens). It might seem like quibbling, but for example there are different bus stops for S-Bahnhof Berlin Ostbahnhof(-Erich Steinfurth-Str) and Bahnhof DB-Berlin Ostbahnhof (the front door). "(S) Berlin Hbf" implies just the S-Bahn part, whereas "Berlin Hbf (S)" doesn't necessarily. ProhibitOnions (T) 14:23, 19 January 2007 (UTC)

Unspecified source for Image:RyszardSiwiecSelfImmolation.jpg

Thanks for uploading Image:RyszardSiwiecSelfImmolation.jpg. I noticed that the file's description page currently doesn't specify who created the content, so the copyright status is unclear. If you did not create this file yourself, then you will need to specify the owner of the copyright. If you obtained it from a website, then a link to the website from which it was taken, together with a restatement of that website's terms of use of its content, is usually sufficient information. However, if the copyright holder is different from the website's publisher, then their copyright should also be acknowledged.

As well as adding the source, please add a proper copyright licensing tag if the file doesn't have one already. If you created/took the picture, audio, or video then the {{GFDL-self}} tag can be used to release it under the GFDL. If you believe the media meets the criteria at Wikipedia:Fair use, use a tag such as {{Non-free fair use in|article name}} or one of the other tags listed at Wikipedia:Image copyright tags#Fair use. See Wikipedia:Image copyright tags for the full list of copyright tags that you can use.

If you have uploaded other files, consider checking that you have specified their source and tagged them, too. You can find a list of files you have uploaded by following this link. Unsourced and untagged images may be deleted one week after they have been tagged, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If the image is copyrighted under a non-free license (per Wikipedia:Fair use) then the image will be deleted 48 hours after 05:44, 24 January 2007 (UTC). If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you. Flyingtoaster1337 05:44, 24 January 2007 (UTC)

Yep, it looks like I wasn't specific enough. (It was hard to be, as it was a commie newsreel image, probably therfore PD, that is republished in many Polish sources.) I retagged this a while ago, looks like all is well now. ProhibitOnions (T) 16:15, 4 February 2007 (UTC)

McDonald's menu items

Why did you remove the McCafé, and the "Exclusives" sections?

  • McCafé was not also repeated.
  • The "Exclusives" was intended to be part of a series that was to replace "International Variations" entirely
  • The sections in the "Exclusives" "repeated elsewhere" was not by me, but by a careless Wikipedian.
  • The foods in the "Exclusives" was poorly merged back into "International Variations".

I hate it how I find the McDonald's products more messed up than I left it! I had to do a cleanup at least two times last year! I know you're trying to help, but I was really getting on something cool! Leave me a message at my talk page if you'd like to discuss this a bit more. TheListUpdater 03:32, 29 January 2007 (UTC)

Funny, I was the one who started the article in the first place, and it was pretty tidy then. McCafé was already described elsewhere, and we should first list the standard items before mentioning only Australian specialties. The "exclusives" sections sounded too much like advertising, were in an unusual location, and highlighted only two of McD's 90 countries for no apparent reason. If you want to organize the items by country, this might make sense (but be aware that most regional items are sold in more than one country), but please start with the long list that's already there. ProhibitOnions (T) 12:46, 29 January 2007 (UTC)

FF/O

You're aware that a certain user might come up with the pov again? --32X 20:09, 2 February 2007 (UTC)

Yes, but who cares about him. I appreciate your attempt, but only one problem user doesn't like the correct article name. We don't have to invent a new term to "compromise" with him. ProhibitOnions (T) 20:10, 2 February 2007 (UTC)

Never heard of'em.

who is "ProhibitOnions"

Do you know??? Do I???

Although this guy is Good at lots of things, but i'm also left handed just like him.

—The preceding unsigned comment was added by 72.137.134.30 (talk) 01:49, 3 February 2007 (UTC).

Anyway, he's gooooooooooood!!!
I'll take that as a compliment. Cheers! ProhibitOnions (T) 16:11, 4 February 2007 (UTC)

WikiProject Tyne and Wear

Hi there, I'm currently considering making a wikiproject called Wikipedia:WikiProject Tyne and Wear and I'm just wondering if you would be interested in joining if and when I'ts created as I noticed from a user category you live in Newcastle-Upon-Tyne. It would be all about improving and creating wikipedia articles relating to Tyne and Wear. If you have any questions, comments or would like to show interest then please tell me on my talk page and if you know any other users who maybe interested in joining please feel free to tell them as it will need a few members in order to make it run smoothly. I will also be willing to create the project page and templates etc if there are enough active members. Thanks. TellyaddictEditor review! 15:44, 4 February 2007 (UTC)

It's a great idea, and I'd be glad to help. Just let me know how. ProhibitOnions (T) 16:13, 4 February 2007 (UTC)

ITN superbowl

Just a note that you're setting a precedent removing items from ITN before they are "pushed off" the list by newer items. There's two items older than the superbowl item still on the list. Other than suitability for listing causing removal, there should be no subjective order to the list. --Monotonehell 12:47, 10 February 2007 (UTC)

Fair enough, if I hadn't been interrupted I would have added a couple of new things to it, as I might still do later today. But the two items listed below were at least about longer-term issues, while this was a week-old sports result that is of pretty minor interest outside the U.S. (I note that some U.S. editors wanted to remove the World Cup results from ITN pretty quickly last summer). Seems to me not enough people are bothering with ITN at the moment. ProhibitOnions (T) 13:14, 10 February 2007 (UTC)
It's true. Possibly because no matter what people do with ITN there's always complaints. Most people misunderstand ITN's purpose. It's a pretty thankless job. --Monotonehell 18:08, 10 February 2007 (UTC)

Wikipedia:WikiProject Tyne and Wear

Hi ProhibitOnions/Archive5, I'm pleased to inform you that the proposal for a new WikiProject in which you listed yourself as an interested wikipedian (WikiProject:Tyne and Wear) has gained enough interested users in order to become a proper project on the English Wikipedia. I will be creating the project page, userboxes and templates shortly and hopefully creating a project logo. Thanks for showing your interest and I'll contact you when the Project page and other stuff is created! TellyaddictEditor review! 15:49, 14 February 2007 (UTC)

Glad to hear it! I'll see what I can do! ProhibitOnions (T) 13:28, 4 March 2007 (UTC)

Orphaned fair use image (Image:GAMESCOVER.JPEG)

Thanks for uploading Image:GAMESCOVER.JPEG. The image description page currently specifies that the image is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, the image is currently orphaned, meaning that it is not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the image was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that images for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable under fair use (see our fair use policy).

If you have uploaded other unlicensed media, please check whether they're used in any articles or not. You can find a list of 'image' pages you have edited by clicking on the "my contributions" link (it is located at the very top of any Wikipedia page when you are logged in), and then selecting "Image" from the dropdown box. Note that any fair use images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. This is an automated message from BJBot 10:06, 15 February 2007 (UTC)

Looks like it's gone, but it was superseded by another image I supplied for Mass games. ProhibitOnions (T) 13:27, 4 March 2007 (UTC)

Orphaned fair use image (Image:RabbitTestPolishDVD.jpg)

Thanks for uploading Image:RabbitTestPolishDVD.jpg. The image description page currently specifies that the image is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, the image is currently orphaned, meaning that it is not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the image was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that images for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable under fair use (see our fair use policy).

If you have uploaded other unlicensed media, please check whether they're used in any articles or not. You can find a list of 'image' pages you have edited by clicking on the "my contributions" link (it is located at the very top of any Wikipedia page when you are logged in), and then selecting "Image" from the dropdown box. Note that any fair use images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. This is an automated message from BJBot 15:13, 15 February 2007 (UTC)

Another image superseded by a better one. ProhibitOnions (T) 13:27, 4 March 2007 (UTC)
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk:ProhibitOnions/Archive5&oldid=1164787053"