User talk:Mxn/2019

Disputed non-free use rationale for File:2003 OH passenger plate.jpg
Thank you for uploading File:2003 OH passenger plate.jpg. However, there is a concern that the rationale provided for using this file on Wikipedia may not meet the criteria required by Non-free content. This can be corrected by going to the file description page and adding or clarifying the reason why the file qualifies under this policy. Adding and completing one of the templates available from Non-free use rationale guideline is an easy way to ensure that your file is in compliance with Wikipedia policy. Please be aware that a non-free use rationale is not the same as an image copyright tag; descriptions for files used under the non-free content policy require both a copyright tag and a non-free use rationale.

If it is determined that the file does not qualify under the non-free content policy, it might be deleted by an administrator seven days after the file was tagged in accordance with section F7 of the criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions, please ask them at the media copyright questions page. Thank you.

Also:
 * File:2010 OH passenger plate.png

This bot DID NOT nominate any file(s) for deletion; please refer to the page history of each individual file for details. Thanks, FastilyBot (talk) 01:00, 4 February 2019 (UTC)


 * See User talk:JJMC89.

Paper Townships
I've continued to do research on Ohio's paper townships in preparation for a rewrite of the article. On the talk page, I spoke to you of Huber Heights, and think I may have found something in Ohio's Revised Code (ORC) that speaks to the fact given about Wright-Patterson AFB and the city. ORC 709.01 speaks to a city being unable to annex without the approval of the United States Secretary of Defense. Huber Heights zoning maps seem to show the tiny part located east of Mud Creek on the grounds of the AFB as being within the city's limits, so I assume they either got approval from the Department of Defense or it's just generally thought to be in the city and the city's map are technically in error. So, now I have less confidence in deleting this fact. Maybe I will write Huber Heights to ask them, because it is worthy of note if there are any uninhabited township rumps in Ohio that exist without a local government.

In this same vein, however, there is a part in the code that seems to speak of any uninhabited remnant/rump of a township as automatically being merged with a city: ORC 503.31. The confusing thing about this is the part about the uninhabited remnant already being within the boundaries of an incorporated village or city. Do you understand what they mean by this? If the uninhabited land is already within the boundaries of an incorporated commmunity, then it is already part of said village or city. I'm trying to figure out if the code is supposed to read that an uninhabited remnant is merged to the incorporated community if it is adjacent to said incorporated commmunity. What do you think? Without answering these questions, I feel less confident about rewriting the article. If you can find any clarification in the code on Townships and Municipal Corporations that would be great. --Criticalthinker (talk) 05:05, 14 March 2019 (UTC)


 * Oh, I was able to find that Wayne Township in Montgomery County does, indeed, still exist as a paper township on a tiny part of Wright Patterson AFB. I was able to find this with the Montgomery County GIS map: http://www.mcohio.org/gis/.  Just thought you might be interested.  I am still interested to know if there are any other examples of this in the state, and my questions still stand but I've contacted a few township organizations. --Criticalthinker (talk) 16:52, 14 March 2019 (UTC)


 * ORC 503.31 is about so-called "islands" of unincorporated township land entirely enclosed by a single incorporated village or city. As far as I can tell, it only applies to islands that have no landowning residents; there may be industry within the island. Other, more recent laws establish protections for township residents against unilateral annexation, explaining this intricate pattern in the Loveland–Miami Township limits to preserve a right-of-way to unincorporated residences. You may find the "Legal background" section of this recent Ohio Supreme Court case to be fertile ground for research. – Minh Nguyễn &#x1f4ac; 21:39, 16 March 2019 (UTC)


 * Wow, that court case is very interesting. It'll be interesting to see how it turns out.  Seems pretty clear to me that the city owes the township money, and I'm kind of surprised that even those supposed to be in-the-know didn't seem to understand that without Hamilton removing itself from its township lands as it annexed, that it would owe the townships money it wasn't collecting for them.  Anyway, thanks for explaining ORC 503.31.  I'd gone ahead are rearranged and re-wrote much of the article after I originally wrote you.  I found quite a few additional sources that answered a lot of my questions.  If you see anything that needs changing in the paper township article, feel free to change it. --Criticalthinker (talk) 22:28, 16 March 2019 (UTC)


 * The writ was denied; the PDF I linked to is a slip opinion. Hamilton, Ohio, may need to be corrected, because a footnote speaks of the same 1867 establishment of a "Hamilton Township" as the article, but the deputy county auditor claims it went away at some point. (It's ultimately up to the county to decide what townships are and aren't in existence, based on state law.) Your changes to paper township look fine to me at a glance. I'm glad you were able to sort out the situation with Wayne Township. – Minh Nguyễn &#x1f4ac; 22:39, 16 March 2019 (UTC)


 * Okay, I read pages 12-14 of the case, now - I'd originally only skimmed it. It looks like it was rejected on a technicality and not the merits of the township's argument.  Should the township be more prepared with a figure on how much they feel they are owed, I'd doubt it'd be rejected to go to trial.  Anyway, this is all new and interesting to me, as I've described before how annexation by a city in my homestate of Michigan removes that territory from a township automatically. --Criticalthinker (talk) 23:12, 16 March 2019 (UTC)

Hello, again. I came back across this article, and realize that though I changed it, I am still confused about something. Here is the link:

https://www2.census.gov/geo/pdfs/reference/guidestloc/oh_gslcg.pdf

In the "Places" subsection, it mentions specific examples of 13 cities independent of townships (withdrawn) in one county, but subordinate in another. Just taking Dublin as an example, as far as I can find, it's not independent of its townships in ANY of the three counties its in. In fact, the page for Washington Township, Franklin county mentions Dublin being in Washington Township. Same for the Concord Township, Delware County portion, etc...Are these articles wrong, or is the Census guide I linked to incorrect, or am I reading it incorrectly? I've noticed on a lot of Ohio township articles it speaks of an incorporated city being "in" the township, but I wonder if they just mean that geographically/in the survey township? Because I'm sure some of these cities have withdrawn themselves from these township. Then it speaks of 11 cities (and 3 villages) which contain an entire township, but then are also subordinate in another. They use Dublin as an example, again. But, again, there is no township that it contains unless its withdrawn from a township in one county, and I just don't know? Can you make sense of what the "Places" subsection is talking about and perhaps could explain it more clearly? Are their maps showing which cities overlap parts of townships (i.e. cities that have no withdrawn either partially or completely) and which don't? --Criticalthinker (talk) 19:27, 18 September 2019 (UTC)


 * It isn't uncommon to say that a municipality is "within" a township even if it has withdrawn, particularly if the municipality is an enclave surrounded by the township. Paper townships and municipal withdrawal are fairly obscure concepts. Illustrating the confusion, Washington Township claims on its homepage that it includes the entire city of Dublin – spanning three counties. It's possible that Dublin is subordinate to Washington Township in Franklin County, but I'm pretty sure it isn't possible for a township to exist in multiple counties. Otherwise, Loveland wouldn't need three separate paper townships and Fairfield two. There is a provision for townships to merge, but only within the same county. I think it's more likely that Washington Township shares certain services with Dublin across county lines.  That's not unheard of: Loveland shares several services with Symmes Township, but Symmes Township is still only in Hamilton County, not Warren or Clermont county. Honestly, I'm not inclined to take the Census Bureau publication at face value. I've spent over 11 years cleaning up the Census Bureau's TIGER data for the OpenStreetMap project. Administrative boundaries aren't the bureau's strong suit. – Minh Nguyễn  &#x1f4ac; 04:44, 19 September 2019 (UTC)
 * Oh, I know that townships can't cross lines. As administrative subdivisions, that's true of any state that has them.  I guess I was just kind of curious if the Census guide I linked you to was correct, but more than that, if you have any idea of what they were trying to say in the "Places" subsection?  I guess I'm curious if I need to delete that "fact" in the "Legal fiction" subsection on the "Paper Township" article?  Because, re-reading it, I have no idea what they are trying to say.  Again, just using Dublin as an example, they have it in both categories they list, which seems to imply that it has a paper township, but I haven't been able to confirm this.  And, in fact, it seems like it's subordinate to its townships in every county its in, which would mean it has NO paper townships. --Criticalthinker (talk) 05:36, 19 September 2019 (UTC)


 * I can't say for sure about Dublin. This is the sort of thing one would normally ask a county auditor to figure out, and they might not have clear records either. File:Franklin County, Ohio, 2010.pdf depicts Dublin as independent of Washington and Perry townships in Franklin County (indicated by °) but not subordinate to Jerome Township in Union County. Unusually, the maps seem to show a Washington Township in Delaware County that's coextensive with Dublin, and Dublin is subordinate to it. So Washington Township's website is two-thirds correct. If the census maps are correct – and there's plenty of precedent for them being incorrect on matters of subordination – then this Washington Township in Delaware County would have its own board of trustees, or at least a board that meets concurrently with the one over in Franklin County. However, looking back at the 2011 law and guidance on township mergers, all I can find is a requirement that the merged townships be contiguous, not that they be in the same county.  I'm not sure how an intercounty township would function, but it does seem possible that a single Washington Township is located in both Franklin and Delaware counties after all. – Minh Nguyễn  &#x1f4ac; 09:03, 19 September 2019 (UTC)


 * I suspect what happened is that there was a Washington Township in Delaware County but Dublin annexed all of it, causing the township to become nonfunctioning. Meanwhile, there's still a functioning Washington Township in Franklin County that excludes Dublin but services all of Dublin, including the nonfunctioning township of the same name in Delaware County. Any residents in Delaware County would technically reside in Washington Township and have services provided by (a different) Washington Township but wouldn't vote for township trustees. – Minh Nguyễn &#x1f4ac; 09:14, 19 September 2019 (UTC)
 * I am not seeing on those maps you provided a Washington Township in Delaware County. Here is what I'm seeing: 1. Dublin as a paper township in Franklin (i.e. independent of Washington) and Union (i.e. indepent of Jerome), and 2. The parts of Dublin in Delaware County subordinate (i.e. not withdrawn) to its township.  It doesn't seem more complicated than that.  So I guess my Census guide was correct in that Dublin is independent of its township in one county (Franklin), but subordinate to townships in other counties (Delaware and Union). --Criticalthinker (talk) 19:48, 19 September 2019 (UTC)

Mail!
Legoktm (talk) 21:43, 25 March 2019 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for April 22
Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. An automated process has detected that when you recently edited Butler County, Ohio, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Lakota Local School District ([//dispenser.info.tm/~dispenser/cgi-bin/dablinks.py/Butler_County%2C_Ohio check to confirm] | [//dispenser.info.tm/~dispenser/cgi-bin/dab_solver.py/Butler_County%2C_Ohio?client=notify fix with Dab solver]). Such links are usually incorrect, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of unrelated topics with similar 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) 12:26, 22 April 2019 (UTC)

User:Mxn/CommentsInLocalTime
I happened to come across this, and I love it. I'm just wondering if there are some further customization things I can do.
 * Instead of "Last [Day]", is it possible to just have "[Day]"? So instead of Last Wednesday at 10:00 PM, just Wednesday at 10:00 PM. ✅
 * Change the date format to have the month come before the day: May 29, 2019 at 10:00 PM instead of 29 May 2019 at 10:00 PM ✅
 * Completely disable the hover tooltip ✅

Thanks in advance for your time. Add: Here is my page, for reference: User:Amaury/common.js. Amaury • 04:44, 7 June 2019 (UTC)


 * Glad you like it! To remove the "Last", you could set the format to . To completely disable the tooltip, set the   option to   or the empty array,  . – Minh Nguyễn  &#x1f4ac; 23:04, 9 June 2019 (UTC)
 * Thank you. Got the first one resolved, and technically the third one as well, thanks to the technical Village Pump, where the null solution was already provided. The problem is the dotted underline and the question mark when hovering over the time stamp are still there. Is there any way to resolve that as well and remove that or is it not possible? Thanks again. Amaury (&#9993;) 01:13, 10 June 2019 (UTC)


 * The village pump suggestion to set some CSS is a good one, but for simplicity I’d recommend adding this to your user stylesheet instead:  – Minh Nguyễn  &#x1f4ac; 17:42, 10 June 2019 (UTC)
 * Thank you so much. Exactly how I want it. Amaury (&#9993;) 01:43, 11 June 2019 (UTC)

Hello. I'm having trouble changing date formats for this script to mdy. I'm not sure if it even supports it. Help would be appreciated. 1989 (talk) 16:58, 29 May 2020 (UTC)


 * Hi, the easiest way is to change your date format preference, which affects the whole site including history pages. If you only want to change the format of timestamps in signatures, you'll need to add some customization code to Special:MyPage/common.js that sets one of the supported formats:  – Minh Nguyễn  &#x1f4ac; 21:11, 29 May 2020 (UTC)
 * I've always had the date format preference set to mdy, so that doesn't make a difference. I think something might be broken if that's how it's supposed to work. Plus, the alternative option doesn't work either, and somehow it's conficting with three (or more) scripts I'm using. I even tested it by itself. 1989 (talk) 21:27, 29 May 2020 (UTC)


 * Are you sure you're using my user script and not the official gadget? – Minh Nguyễn &#x1f4ac; 21:50, 29 May 2020 (UTC)
 * Yes I'm sure. I'm currently using it as a global gadget. 1989 (talk) 21:54, 29 May 2020 (UTC)


 * Please uninstall that gadget and follow these instructions to install my user script. Afterwards, you can insert the code above into User:1989/common.js after the line that includes User:Mxn/CommentsInLocalTime.js. Otherwise, if you prefer to continue to use the gadget, these instructions say to set  in your common.js. – Minh Nguyễn  &#x1f4ac; 06:20, 30 May 2020 (UTC)
 * I said above I was using your script globally, not Comments in Local Time. I managed to fix this issue myself, based on your suggestions but trying it a different way. Thanks for trying to help. 1989 (talk) 13:00, 30 May 2020 (UTC)


 * Ah, sorry for misunderstanding; the term "gadget" was throwing me off. Since you're installing it as a global user script, note that the script is designed to be specific to a particular wiki: if it is used on a different wiki in a different language, then it may need to be configured for that language. Unfortunately, the date format preference doesn't affect signatures. Somehow I had misread User:Mxn/CommentsInLocalTime to mean that it respects the date format preference, but it only respected the language preference. (It's been a long while since I wrote this script.) I've just updated the script to respect the user preference and updated the documentation to reflect that change. Nothing changes if you've left the date format preference set to "No preference", but it should match any other choice. Sorry for the misunderstanding earlier. – Minh Nguyễn &#x1f4ac; 19:59, 30 May 2020 (UTC)

2019 US Banknote Contest
Sent by ZLEA at 23:30, 19 October 2019 (UTC) via MediaWiki message delivery (talk)

Update to Cincinnati Bell article
Hello Minh, I work in marketing at CBTS/CinBell and we would like to update our Wiki page with an accurate history and information that reflects that we are more progressive than an "old telephone" company. We are not unaware that Wikipedia is not meant for marketing purposes, but apparently, our "poorly written, mosformatted [sic] and generally bad overhaul" does not pass muster and my CoI strikes anything else I might attempt aside from correcting the most basic information. You have made a lot of edits to this entry in the past and we did keep some of the current version in the redo we would like to see. Would you be willing to look over what we've got and make some suggestions? Thanks, Kim — Preceding unsigned comment added by Kimmerg13 (talk • contribs) 15:46, 22 October 2019 (UTC)


 * Hi, thank you for reaching out about the Cincinnati Bell article. Clearly the article needs some TLC, but I do need to set expectations that the main areas for improvement are going to be factual rather than editorial. These changes you made the other day included some much-needed updates and fill some gaps in the company's history, but it also expressed a point of view about the company being innovative. That's perfectly fine for marketing copy, but Wikipedia needs to stay as neutral as possible. Also, it's important to cite more independent published sources, and narrative prose is preferred over timelines. I've started to clean up and reorganize the current version of the article, but there's still a lot of work to do in terms of incorporating some of the missing facts in your version and backing them up with independent sources. In the future, to avoid misunderstandings, please voice any specific editorial concerns you may have about the article on its talk page or create a draft in your sandbox for others to review. Thank you! – Minh Nguyễn &#x1f4ac; 09:51, 23 October 2019 (UTC)

Speedy deletion nomination of Category:2020 disestablishments in Ohio


A tag has been placed on Category:2020 disestablishments in Ohio requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section C1 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because the category has been empty for seven days or more and is not a disambiguation category, a category redirect, a featured topics category, under discussion at Categories for discussion, or a project category that by its nature may become empty on occasion.

If you think this page should not be deleted for this reason, you may contest the nomination by visiting the page and clicking the button labelled "Contest this speedy deletion". This will give you the opportunity to explain why you believe the page should not be deleted. However, be aware that once a page is tagged for speedy deletion, it may be deleted without delay. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag from the page yourself, but do not hesitate to add information in line with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. UnitedStatesian (talk) 20:20, 11 November 2019 (UTC)

Speedy deletion nomination of Category:2020s disestablishments in Ohio


A tag has been placed on Category:2020s disestablishments in Ohio requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section C1 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because the category has been empty for seven days or more and is not a disambiguation category, a category redirect, a featured topics category, under discussion at Categories for discussion, or a project category that by its nature may become empty on occasion.

If you think this page should not be deleted for this reason, you may contest the nomination by visiting the page and clicking the button labelled "Contest this speedy deletion". This will give you the opportunity to explain why you believe the page should not be deleted. However, be aware that once a page is tagged for speedy deletion, it may be deleted without delay. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag from the page yourself, but do not hesitate to add information in line with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. UnitedStatesian (talk) 17:01, 12 November 2019 (UTC)

Speedy deletion nomination of Category:Populated places disestablished in 2020


A tag has been placed on Category:Populated places disestablished in 2020 requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section C1 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because the category has been empty for seven days or more and is not a disambiguation category, a category redirect, a featured topics category, under discussion at Categories for discussion, or a project category that by its nature may become empty on occasion.

If you think this page should not be deleted for this reason, you may contest the nomination by visiting the page and clicking the button labelled "Contest this speedy deletion". This will give you the opportunity to explain why you believe the page should not be deleted. However, be aware that once a page is tagged for speedy deletion, it may be deleted without delay. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag from the page yourself, but do not hesitate to add information in line with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. UnitedStatesian (talk) 18:44, 12 November 2019 (UTC)

Speedy deletion nomination of Category:Populated places disestablished in the 2020s


A tag has been placed on Category:Populated places disestablished in the 2020s requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section C1 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because the category has been empty for seven days or more and is not a disambiguation category, a category redirect, a featured topics category, under discussion at Categories for discussion, or a project category that by its nature may become empty on occasion.

If you think this page should not be deleted for this reason, you may contest the nomination by visiting the page and clicking the button labelled "Contest this speedy deletion". This will give you the opportunity to explain why you believe the page should not be deleted. However, be aware that once a page is tagged for speedy deletion, it may be deleted without delay. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag from the page yourself, but do not hesitate to add information in line with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. UnitedStatesian (talk) 16:53, 14 November 2019 (UTC)

Google Code-In 2019 is coming - please mentor some documentation tasks!
Hello,

Google Code-In, Google-organized contest in which the Wikimedia Foundation participates, starts in a few weeks. This contest is about taking high school students into the world of opensource. I'm sending you this message because you recently edited a documentation page at the English Wikipedia.

I would like to ask you to take part in Google Code-In as a mentor. That would mean to prepare at least one task (it can be documentation related, or something else - the other categories are Code, Design, Quality Assurance and Outreach) for the participants, and help the student to complete it. Please sign up at the contest page and send us your Google account address to google-code-in-admins@lists.wikimedia.org, so we can invite you in!

From my own experience, Google Code-In can be fun, you can make several new friends, attract new people to your wiki and make them part of your community.

If you have any questions, please let us know at google-code-in-admins@lists.wikimedia.org.

Thank you!

--User:Martin Urbanec (talk) 21:58, 23 November 2019 (UTC)

Proposed deletion of File:2001 OH temporary tag.jpg


The file File:2001 OH temporary tag.jpg has been proposed for deletion&#32;because of the following concern: "unused, low-res, no obvious use"

While all constructive contributions to Wikipedia are appreciated, pages may be deleted for any of several reasons.

You may prevent the proposed deletion by removing the notice, but please explain why in your edit summary or on the file's talk page.

Please consider addressing the issues raised. Removing will stop the proposed deletion process, but other deletion processes exist. In particular, the speedy deletion process can result in deletion without discussion, and files for discussion allows discussion to reach consensus for deletion.

This bot DID NOT nominate any file(s) for deletion; please refer to the page history of each individual file for details. Thanks, FastilyBot (talk) 01:00, 27 November 2019 (UTC)

Translation request
Are you able to help with some translations at User talk:Jimbo Wales? If you don't feel comfortable doing so, please ignore this. Johnuniq (talk) 02:34, 18 December 2019 (UTC)