User talk:Huon
Add topicTalk page archives |
|---|
|
Hi, while I have never run across Sparda2k1 before today, I see that he was recently unblocked by you. I would strongly recommend re-blocking him, as I just reverted an edit by him that did the exact same thing he was blocked for, which he promised he wouldn't do anymore. There was no communication on the talk page for these edits. Just wanted to give you a heads up. Katniss May the odds be ever in your favor โฅ 22:30, 10 January 2020 (UTC)
a message
[edit]"do you have more to say than my name?" of course, who do you "think" you are?!
we didn't said less than your "name" "smarty" one and you don't have to be derisive to other people!
you are just another dumbshit a$$hole "firm", "company" and nothing more than that!
you didn't had to block our account by confusing it with other I.P.s from this internet cafe here and accusing us for "actions" we didn't done unnecessarily without reason!
you "understood" or you need special explanation?! because you are saying whatever comes in your mind with "firstlies and secondlies" (and others can count!) of what is "permitted" or not and such stuff pretending the "unmistakeable", keep them for yourself, we were just trying to help that's all and we get misunderstandings with blocks!
"....you are engaging in block evasion,...." no we are not engaging in "block evasion" as you are saying and we don't like to, there were and other users from this internet cafe here and confused our I.P. with other I.P.s!
"you should contest the block on your original account instead of creating new accounts or editing without an account" no matter editing with account or editing without account it is still blocked!
and who told you that our original account was blocked? our original account was not blocked to be contested as you are saying until a change happened with a blocked I.P. from this internet cafe here!
also you are wrong, wikipedia doesn't allow creation of new accounts from blocked I.P.s, our account was created before it was confused with a blocked I.P. from this internet cafe here! โ Preceding unsigned comment added by 185.65.206.148 (talk) 21:42, 16 January 2020 (UTC)
- As soon as you say "our account", you admit that it's a shared account, something that Wikipedia does not permit and that requires the account to be blocked. You should also take a look at WP:MEAT: When there's a group of people that are editing with the same objectives, Wikipedia treats them as one - and that means that a block of one of them is treated as a block of all of them, and any attempt to edit despite such a block is block evasion and will see the evading IP or account blocked as well. You were evading blocks, for example on 212.251.7.112, when I blocked User:0guests0, and you have continued to evade blocks. You have also continued to edit-war.
- The question you apparently object the most to, whether you have more to say than my name, was in the Wikipedia help chat on IRC when your two previous comments were "@+Huon" and "@Huon", more than ten minutes apart, with multiple substantial comments addressed to you in between. Of course the response to that question again was "@Huon"...
- I'll now block this IP address as well. You were given advice on how to proceed on your account's user talk page. Huon (talk) 22:32, 18 January 2020 (UTC)
COI editor unblocked in 2016 to change username never did so
[edit]In 2016, you unblocked User:PennDesign Communications so that he or she could change his or her username into something that complies with our policies. He or she never did so and has resumed editing. Can you please reblock this account and reinforce our COI and Paid Editing policies with this editor or group of editors? Thanks!
(@OhNoitsJamie: You were also involved in the block, too, so you might like to know about this.) ElKevbo (talk) 16:06, 20 January 2020 (UTC)
- @ElKevbo: The username issue is resolved, and I have left a note at the editor's user talk page explaining the problems with their conduct and pointing out the disclosure requirements. While I'm not happy with their conduct, I don't think it's worthy of an immediate block. If there are further concerns, WP:AIV deals not only with vandals but also with (blatant) spammers; for less blatant spam WP:COIN may be a better venue. I have also gutted the article to remove large chunks of unsourced or self-sourced content. Huon (talk) 22:35, 21 January 2020 (UTC)
- Thanks! ElKevbo (talk) 23:25, 21 January 2020 (UTC)
Orphaned non-free image File:EClerx logo 2014.png
[edit]
Thanks for uploading File:EClerx logo 2014.png. 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 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 for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).
Note that any non-free images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described in section F5 of the criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. --B-bot (talk) 18:27, 21 January 2020 (UTC)
Weitzman School of Design at Penn
[edit]Dear Huon,
In the interest of public information, I respectfully request that the historical narrative on the School of Designโs page be restored to the state before I made my edits this week. Because of my lack of familiarity with the Wikipedia interface, I misunderstood that my edits were not being submitted for review by Wikipedia, but instead were being applied to the page in real time when I โpublishedโ them. My intention was to bring the page up to date by (1) removing references to โPennDesign,โ since the School has not operated under that name since August of 2019; (2) removing the names of individuals listed on the page as members of the faculty who have are no longer teaching at the School, where the implication was that they were currently on the faculty; and (3) editing the list of degrees offered at the School to reflect the current offerings. My intention was not to โaggrandizeโ the School, but instead to provide information that would better serve Wikipedia users. I understand you may have additions to the page, but it seems regrettable that 150 years of history have been expunged from the historical record. I now understand the desired changes are to be flagged with "request to edit" notations for consideration by Wikpedia editors. Thank you for considering my request. โ Preceding unsigned comment added by PennMGrant (talk โข contribs) 14:18, 22 January 2020 (UTC)
- @PennMGrant: Before I gutted the article, it had been tagged for "wording that promotes the subject in a subjective manner without imparting real information" for six years. I do not think you added (most of) that wording, but irrespective of who added it, it needed to be removed. Beyond the puffery, most of the history section was just a long list of names of past faculty, most of whom appear to not be all that notable. What the article lacked entirely were reliable sources that are independent of the subject. I thus removed most of the article that just represented "what Penn wants to say about Penn" and replaced it by a little information based on the most substantive independent source I came about while checking the name change. The "public information" I removed from the article largely is still on Penn's website, I believe. No independently sourced information got lost (because there was none to begin with). Admittedly the article now focuses too much on one recent event and should be expanded, but that should be done based on independent sources discussing the Weitzman School and its history (which would need to be found), not based on Penn's own website. Huon (talk) 21:35, 22 January 2020 (UTC)
US patent is hardly an Indian invention?
[edit]Obviously you're clueless about patents. A patent can be applied for, and granted, in countries A, B, C and D, for work done in country X. The location of an invention and the countries in which it is patented are unrelated. Sooku (talk) 05:48, 25 January 2020 (UTC)
- Sooku, it would have been nice if you had left any clue what this is about, such as a diff or at least a link to the article in question. If this is about Bose at Talk:List of Indian inventions and discoveries and my comment from 2012, then I stand by my statement that "getting a US patent" is not itself an Indian invention. Bose probably invented something that got patented in the US, but the content I removed back in 2012 did not say what it was. Do you propose adding an entry to the list that says, "Unknown, invented by Bose and patented in the US"? I would oppose that. If we knew what he got the patent for, we could discuss whether that is significant enough to be mentioned in the list. Do you know what it was? Huon (talk) 22:07, 25 January 2020 (UTC)
Thank you Huong. Please see http://web.mit.edu/varun_ag/www/bose.html โ Preceding unsigned comment added by Sooku (talk โข contribs) 02:41, 7 February 2020 (UTC) AND https://www.edn.com/jc-bose-patents-radio-wave-detector-september-30-1901/ Sooku (talk) 02:45, 7 February 2020 (UTC)
- While neither of those sources appears particularly reliable to me, what they say is that Bose invented "the use of galena (lead sulfide) crystals contacted by a metal point for detecting millimeter electromagnetic waves", ie a solid-state diode detector. However, it appears that Bose's invention didn't catch on and that useful solid-state diode detectors, ones based on silicon instead of galena, were invented by someone else. I'm not sure it's worth mentioning in the list that Bose invented what turned out to be a dead end, but that's a discussion that should be had at Talk:List of Indian inventions and discoveries. Huon (talk) 22:19, 7 February 2020 (UTC)
Huon -- looks like you accept but don't acknowledge my point that a US patent CAN come from an Indian invention. It did not seem to me that you understood that. Now you impose a personal value judgment to withhold objective information, that JC Bose was in fact issued a US patent (No. 755,840, issued 29 March 1904). That is a fact and it belongs in his biography. It is not for you or for me to decide its significance; that is the reader's job. Please note, the current Article says that Bose did not want to apply for patents, which (even you will agree) is false. Sooku (talk) 22:41, 3 March 2020 (UTC)
- Sooku, I indeed accept that an Indian invention can be patented in the US. I never disputed that. I did state that "getting a US patent" is not itself an Indian invention - others were getting US patents long before an Indian did. Maybe you misunderstood that?
- Jagadish Chandra Bose's biography already mentions his US patent and provides quite a bit of context, such as Bose's general dislike of patenting which seems to have been overcome only once, for this one patent. I don't see why I should disagree with statements that to me appear based on reliable published sources. Do you know of sources of similar or greater reliability that state Bose was in favor of patenting? Then please present them at Talk:Jagadish Chandra Bose.
- That said, we of course have an editorial duty to discern between the important and the unimportant. The list of Indian inventions and discoveries is not meant to exhaustively list every single thing ever patented by an Indian. For example, in 2018 alone Indian residents were granted 2,311 patents - and that's only Indian patents, I believe, not including, say, US patents granted to Indians. If we tried to list all those inventions, the list would become so huge that it would be useless. Wikipedia is not a patent database. Either way, whether a specific invention should be included in the list should be discussed at Talk:List of Indian inventions and discoveries, not here. Huon (talk) 23:23, 4 March 2020 (UTC)
Sorshe Ilish
[edit]Hello, I saw you edited Sorshe Ilish, this Bangladeshi jingoistic editor again changed the place of origin to Bangladesh, instead of Bengal. It is clearly a Bengali dish, however, this user on multiple article is changing Bengali dishes to Bangladeshi dishes. Others are Chomchom and Bakarkhani. (2600:1001:B026:1B66:E109:6E3B:A16F:A5C9 (talk) 05:43, 9 February 2020 (UTC))
- Also, their (Za-ari-masen) reversals in Kazi Nazrul Islam and Gauแธa (city) is filled with Bangladeshi jingoism. (2600:1001:B026:1B66:E109:6E3B:A16F:A5C9 (talk) 05:46, 9 February 2020 (UTC))
- While I agree on shorshe ilish which indeed is Bengali and not just Bangladeshi, many of the the other edits are entirely appropriate, and your main concern https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Kazi_Nazrul_Islam&diff=prev&oldid=939752337 here], for example seems to be that the word "Indian" got removed - without providing any justification why it belongs or why only jingoism could motivate the removal. There is no attempt from your side to resolve the issue on the talk pages, and of course there's also Wikipedia:Sockpuppet_investigations/Highpeaks35. I think you should reconsider your own conduct. Huon (talk) 21:18, 9 February 2020 (UTC)
Sock IPs
[edit]Hi, it appears edits by is pretty much a block evasion by . The new IP started edit warring in multiple articles right after the first IP got blocked. Using pretty much the same wordings in talkpages, (nationalism/jingoism) etc. It looks like there is a IP-hopping in multiple articles by the same person. Za-ari-masen (talk) 13:23, 13 February 2020 (UTC)
- Unfortunately the IPv6 range is a little too large to block. I'll look into semi-protecting the most affected articles, but it feels like playing whack-a-mole either way. Huon (talk) 18:19, 14 February 2020 (UTC)
