User talk:Lonaowna

Hi Lonaowna, You removed FileOne organizer stating it was dead. I'm the developer of FileOne organizer/treegonizer and it has never been dead at all. Can you put FileOne back into your list? It is a commercial product now. The website is https://www.treegonizer.com. Do you need more information about the product? If you search on Youtube for FileOne organizer you will see more details about FileOne and that it is actually alive ;-). — Preceding unsigned comment added by 80.101.128.67 (talk) 13:00, 10 October 2017 (UTC)

Hi! List of personal information managers has been trimmed down quite considerably. It now only contains applications that have their own Wikipedia article. So if we wanted to include Treegonizer/FileOne to the list, it first should be considered Notable and we should then create an article about the software. This is in line with WP:NOTDIRECTORY.

Also have a look at Talk:List of personal information managers#Redlinks. If you think Treegonizer/FileOne is notable (i.e. there are multiple third-party sources available), it would be possible to create an article about it.

If you want to discuss this further, I suggest you open a discussion at Talk:List of personal information managers.

--Lonaowna (talk) 13:22, 10 October 2017 (UTC)

Sorry, but I'm afraid it is against the rules of Wikipedia to take that blog as an authoritative source, page on Wikipedia does not add anything in that regard. As far as I can see, accordingly to this https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Blogs_as_sources, we need a source from outside the Internet. I will be happy to get a bit of such information. Which court made that decision? When? Such stuff is easy to find and to show. When it actually happened, of course. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 114.24.23.177 (talk) 14:21, 2 September 2016 (UTC)

Hi, I disagree. See Talk:Gaijin_Entertainment#Controversies_section_has_no_authoritative_sources. Lonaowna (talk) 14:32, 2 September 2016 (UTC)

Hi Lonaowna, can you please provide a source to support your claim that " it's still is called "Adobe Flash Player".. just uses another plugin interface"? My source says: "Pepper Flash Player is maintained by Google, and is newer than Adobe Flash Player. Adobe currently still provides security fixes for Adobe Flash Player. Google provides newer features in Pepper Flash Player. Pepper Flash Player can currently only be used with Chromium (and with Chrome)." https://wiki.debian.org/PepperFlashPlayer Dusty1000 (talk) 08:35, 13 February 2016 (UTC)

Hi Dusty, of course:

• If you go to chrome://plugins/ in a Chrome install without installing any additional plugins, you will see "Adobe Flash Player"
• On their website, Adobe offers (for Windows and OS X) "Flash Player for Opera and Chromium - PPAPI"
• Official Chrome release notes: "This release contains an update to Adobe Flash Player..."

I think the Debian wiki just uses "Pepper Flash Player" as an abbreviation for "(Adobe) Flash Player using PPAPI". The statement that Adobe has nothing to do with the Pepper plugin shipped by Google is just plain not true.

Lonaowna (talk) 10:14, 13 February 2016 (UTC)

Hello fellow Lonaowna! :) Yes, there is a solution to the vandalism problem. You can report persistent vandals to Wikipedia:Administrator intervention against vandalism. But before reporting, the user must have been given enough warnings on their talkpage, escalating from the mildest to the strongest. To give warnings on the talkpage of the vandal, you can use the predefined templates {{subst:uw-vandalism1}}, {{subst:uw-vandalism2}}, {{subst:uw-vandalism3}} and {{subst:uw-vandalism4}} secuentially (you use first 1, then 2, then 3, then 4). After the fourth warning has been given, you can go to "Administrator intervention against vandalism" and say for example:

• {{IPvandal|IP address}} vandalized after final warning ~~~~
• {{Vandal|username}} vandalized after final warning ~~~~

You use IPvandal or Vandal depending on if the user is anonymous (e.g. 123.123.123.123) or a registered user. You can find the complete list of warnings at Wikipedia:Template messages/User talk namespace. The list is huge but the most important messages are the "uw-vandalism" ones.

To summarize:

• You find somebody vandalized a page. You post {{subst:uw-vandalism1|Article}} on their talkpage ("Article" is the name of the vandalized article).
• The user continues to vandalize the same or other article(s). You post {{subst:uw-vandalism2|Article}} on their talkpage.
• The user vandalizes again. You post {{subst:uw-vandalism3|Article}} on their talkpage.
• The user continues vandalizing. You post {{subst:uw-vandalism4|Article}} on their talkpage.
• The user vandalizes for the fifth time. You post a report to "Wikipedia:Administrator intervention against vandalism". An admin will come around to block him.

See for example the talkpage of a user that was warned several times, then a report was issued, and then the user was blocked: User_talk:131.109.81.223.

I hope all this helps you. Ask me again if you have doubts. --Anna Lincoln (talk) 09:12, 23 June 2009 (UTC)

hey, sorry about the links that redirected to the same page, I was trying to start a separate page for ExtUSB, but people seem to like having a ridiculously long page.

Any particular reason you decided to remove a section of the page? Muskeato 15:52, 10 October 2011 (UTC)

I'm sorry for not explaining. I thought this was not much more than speculation. I just reread the source and it looks like it's actually quite concrete about the Wii U. Looks like I misread it! I'm really sorry for removing the section without any further research. Lonaowna (talk) 16:22, 10 October 2011 (UTC)

Thanks for having the courage to stand up and tell me that my references were crap. Sometimes it's difficult to be bold like that. The article has been significantly improved thanks to your tags. --WikiTryHardDieHard (talk) 02:44, 28 February 2014 (UTC)

Hi, thanks so much for your new references! They improve the article a lot. Sorry if I was a bit rude when removing the old ones, I didn't really look in to who placed them and I assumed it had been someone with a commercial incentive.

Thanks again for your work! Lonaowna (talk) 08:07, 28 February 2014 (UTC)

I completely understand. I must admit that at first I was a little offended, but creating a better Wikipedia is much more important than maintaining my ego. I think it's good to be blunt with each other when accuracy is on the line. --WikiTryHardDieHard (talk) 15:10, 28 February 2014 (UTC)

Couldn't agree more. Keep up the good work! Lonaowna (talk) 15:32, 28 February 2014 (UTC)

Hi.

Actually, the sentence that you reverted was half-correct. RTM is unsupported, per your own source. Support for service pack levels before SP2 ended 29 April 2011. Except, there is no SP1, am I right?

Best regards,
Codename Lisa (talk) 09:33, 5 January 2015 (UTC)

Hi, you're completely right. Thanks for noticing! Lonaowna (talk) 10:36, 5 January 2015 (UTC)

Your question here can be answered here. Helpsome (talk) 18:29, 28 January 2015 (UTC)

Thanks for the reply, I understand. Next time please leave a short comment in the edit description, so everyone knows why you undid it (I could not immediately see that it was vandalism). Thanks again! Lonaowna (talk) 18:31, 28 January 2015 (UTC)

Sorry. I was undoing a lot of additions and I didn't take the time to add edit summaries for each one. My mistake. Helpsome (talk) 21:06, 28 January 2015 (UTC)

Re. "free rein" vs. "free reign": It's true that "reign" means "rule" or "dominion" or the like; but the expression "free rein" comes from the days when horse transportation was the rule. If you kept the reins tight, you had a lot of control over the horse; if you held them loosely or let go of them altogether, then the horse could do whatever it wanted. Thus giving someone "free rein" meant giving them lots of autonomy; keeping them on a "tight rein" meant that you were keeping close control.

The phrase's spelling is discussed at Grammarist, at Oxford Dictionaries, and at the NYT's newsroom blog. — Ammodramus (talk) 14:42, 20 February 2015 (UTC)

I'm sorry for not properly researching! Thanks for the lesson! :) Lonaowna (talk) 14:48, 20 February 2015 (UTC)

No problem! I only wish I could write in Dutch (or any other non-English language) half as well as you can in English. — Ammodramus (talk) 15:39, 20 February 2015 (UTC)

Thank you for your kind words. My English is okay... but like you showed me, there is always more to learn! And trust me, it is much more useful to know English than Dutch nowadays. ;) Lonaowna (talk) 16:00, 20 February 2015 (UTC)

I tweaked the LNB section on Noise Figures. The main problem seemed to have been that the article was less than clear. It is basically the input signal to noise ratio divided by the output signal to noise ratio (Noise Factor) and is expressed as a dB value if it is the Noise Figure. It is a ratio of ratios but without that point, the article didn't make much sense. Jmccormac (talk) 12:28, 2 March 2015 (UTC)

Thanks a lot! This makes it much clearer.

I edited the section because I misread it the first time and thought it was wrong, but when I read the Noise Figure article I found out that it was right.

With your edit it is immediately clear, even without reading the other article! Lonaowna (talk) 13:20, 2 March 2015 (UTC)

None of the sources support your claim that Windows 10 only runs on systems with UEFI firmware and forbids use on BIOS firmware. OEMs making officially licensed Windows 10 devices must build them to Microsoft's standards, which include the requirement for use of UEFI firmware with Secure Boot enabled, as with Windows 8. ViperSnake151  Talk  19:32, 18 May 2015 (UTC)

This source clearly says:

The presentation (via Venture Beat), named "Minimum System HW Requirements & Compatibility for Windows Platforms", states the screen size, RAM, storage, graphics and firmware mentioned to run Windows 10. For PCs, the OS would need the UEFI 2.3.1 firmware, ...

It does not say anything about only being valid for OEMs or new pcs. So either this source is incorrect (which it can surely be), but in that case you will need to replace it with another one that says that UEFI is not required. Lonaowna (talk) 19:42, 18 May 2015 (UTC)

Hey, Lonaowna, we helped work on the 2K_resolution page and help it get to a properly edited and cited state, however another user continues to return to the page to reedit 1080p back into the page even after being told repeatedly to view the talk page. Do you mind contacting wikipedia administration about this issue? I've sent an email myself, but it appears we can't get this user to stop vandalizing the page, them claiming hijacking and starting an edit war. The editor is ElkSalmon. I've let multiple messages on the users talk page as well. What can be done about this issue, do you know? Franbunnyffxii (talk) 14:27, 3 June 2016 (UTC)

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Microsoft Windows, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Tablet. Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 10:21, 17 September 2016 (UTC)

Please respond to some reports on wp:aiv for it is crowded. 2602:306:3357:BA0:85B7:9002:A1CD:9C7D (talk) 21:43, 3 November 2016 (UTC)