Misplaced Pages

Revision as of 15:12, 23 August 2010

Binksternet	My articles	Significant contributor	Images	Did you know	Awards

Archives

Archive1 - August 2007 – June 2008, Archive2 - July–November 2008, Archive3 - November 2008 – May 2009, Archive4 - May–July 2009, Archive5 - July–August 2009, Archive6 - September–October 2009, Archive7 - October–December 2009, Archive8 - December 2009 – February 2010, Archive9 - March–April 2010, Archive10 - May–July 2010

100th Infantry Battalion

Hi, You just recently deleted a photo from the 100th infantry battalion because I didnt provide a source. About an hour ago I added a source but it was deleted anyway. I am interning at the Go For Broke National Education Center and have been charged with putting the correct information on pages dealing with Nisei vets. Please tell me what to do so that photos are not deleted from these pages so that everything can run smoothly here on out. I am not one to copyright and would like to do things the right way so this does not happen again. Thank You —Preceding unsigned comment added by Codycoytote (talk • contribs) 17:31, 30 July 2010 (UTC)

See my response at Talk:442nd Infantry Regiment (United States). Binksternet (talk) 17:43, 30 July 2010 (UTC)

Susan B. Anthony List

I put museum in quotes on the reference because it's not actually a museum, it's a website formed in opposition to the museum. BS24 (talk) 19:33, 30 July 2010 (UTC)

The name of the website publisher is "Susan B. Anthony Museum", no quotes around 'museum'. They are in opposition to the "Susan B. Anthony Birthplace Museum", no quotes there, either. Your addition of scare quotes was something I judged petty, which is why I wrote "Petty." in the edit summary. My opinion has not changed. Binksternet (talk) 19:39, 30 July 2010 (UTC)

Welcome to Misplaced Pages. The recent edit that you made to the page Susan B. Anthony List has been reverted, as it appears to be unconstructive. Please use the sandbox for testing any edits; if you believe the edit was constructive, please ensure that you provide an informative edit summary. You may also wish to read the introduction to editing for further information. Thank you. BS24 (talk) 23:59, 30 July 2010 (UTC)

You have already been rebuked for using the same wording on the Susan B. Anthony page. Please don't do it again, the article is fair as it is. BS24 (talk) 23:59, 30 July 2010 (UTC)

This is a formal warning against further edit warring at Susan B. Anthony List. Please use the talk page to discuss removal of cited, neutral text. BS24 (talk) 13:59, 2 August 2010 (UTC)

Please see this notice on the edit warring admin noticeboard and add comments as needed. BS24 (talk) 14:01, 2 August 2010 (UTC)

I'm not necessarily opposed to removing the endorsements list, I'm just wondering how it violates WP:NOTADVOCATE? It's totally neutral, it's just a list. I don't see the harm in keeping it there at the bottom of the article. BS24 (talk) 17:08, 2 August 2010 (UTC)

I see the harm: it forwards the advocacy of SBA List but does not provide encyclopedic information. What the Misplaced Pages article is is a summary of the organization, not an arm of the organization. We summarize important things about them, not list everything they are concerned with. Binksternet (talk) 17:11, 2 August 2010 (UTC)

Hi

I hope this is the correct way to do this; I am totally new at making changes to Misplaced Pages articles and couldn't figure out what was meant by "posting on my Talk page." I assume that this is the way to do it?

Anyway, I was just adding Presonus Studio One Pro to the "Audio Mastering Software" section, as it is a relatively new entry to the scene and includes a powerful mastering suite which really impressed me, especially for a 1.0 release. I didn't understand why my change disappeared as soon as I submitted it and figured it was just something I was doing wrong, so I put it in there again (the last time with a more descriptive title that references the Mastering Suite specifically). I didn't notice the "new message" notice until later. (I didn't even realize that people could send messages back and forth to each other in Misplaced Pages.)

I don't feel strongly one way or another about having my change in here; just thought I'd add it to be helpful to others reading this. There are some examples of the Studio One Mastering Suite in use on YouTube.

So, do what you wish.

Cheers. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 67.136.191.242 (talk) 20:18, 30 July 2010 (UTC)

The article lists gear used at the highest level of audio mastering, not gear used by home studios or anybody not employed solely as a mastering engineer. The Presonus product does not fit the tight definition that has been worked out by previous editors, who came to that decision after all sorts of consumer-level gear was being listed. Binksternet (talk) 20:29, 30 July 2010 (UTC)

Well, that is interesting. If you'd ever used the mastering suite in Studio One, I think you would know that it is FAR beyond something like Audacity. Seriously, Audacity? The "highest level of audio mastering?" Uh, no. Studio One's mastering suite is more on par with Sonar's if anything. Your response really leaves me to wonder what this "tight definition" is that the article is supposedly following, because I certainly don't see it. But whatever. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 67.136.191.242 (talk) 20:57, 30 July 2010 (UTC)

Pot Calling Kettle

On you sent me a 3RR notice ending with "You have removed the bit about the lack of THX certification for Bose Commercial products three times in one day, four times in two days. You are getting very close to meeting the most lenient 3RR interpretation, which could lead to a block" Yet if you follow your edits you will find

1. 14:43, 27 July 2010
2. 02:38, 29 July 2010
3. 10:11, 29 July 2010
4. 22:29, 29 July 2010

So why is the Pot is calling the Kettle black? -- Phoenix (talk) 07:53, 31 July 2010 (UTC)

Because I am certain of my rectitude; certain that the cited text has every right to be in the article. Your removal of relevant information that makes Bose seem less perfect is against WP:NPOV guidelines. My insertion of such information is what allows the article to drop its old advert template, because it contains information that no advertisement would. Binksternet (talk) 08:09, 31 July 2010 (UTC)

Orphaned non-free image File:RCA Studio B - Chet Atkins, Bill Porter.jpg

If you have uploaded other unlicensed media, please check whether they're used in any articles or not. You can find a list of "file" pages you have edited by clicking on the "my contributions" link (it is located at the very top of any Misplaced Pages page when you are logged in), and then selecting "File" from the dropdown box. Note that any non-free images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. SchuminWeb (Talk) 16:42, 31 July 2010 (UTC)

Okay, thanks for going to the trouble of swapping photos in the infobox. I appreciate the effort! Binksternet (talk) 17:30, 31 July 2010 (UTC)

Article Split

I've asked this question to davtra and windows already but what is the best way to get random objective politically uninvolved users to look into "art student scam" and also determine whether it should be split? Thanks. Preciseaccuracy (talk) 19:23, 31 July 2010 (UTC)

I think the best way is to let somebody else rewrite the alleged DEA espionage parts and make it a new article. Looking at your contributions in general, it seems to me as if you are too deeply involved emotionally, that you are pushing a point of view rather than presenting the facts dispassionately. Your writing reflects this, and it gets under people's skin. If someone else writes the article it may have a better chance surviving AfD. Binksternet (talk) 19:45, 31 July 2010 (UTC)

My edits may seem one sided but they were inserted into an already very unbalanced article that stated that allegations of spying were an "urban myth" without any sort of qualification.

A reliably sourced article about spying allegations was put up for deletion and then transformed into an unrelated article about a chinese tourist trap. When I try to add information to the article, a group of editors get's me blocked. They then say that the article is fine and that "all of the previous sources suggested that the salesmen weren't even Israeli, let alone art students.” This was clearly a direct lie that not just one, but a group of editors supported. From this along with numerous other instances it is understandable that it would be difficult to assume good faith on the part of some of the other editors.

However, I would agree to stop editing the article if a group of random objective politically uninvolved users were selected to write the article. This means that everyone on the articles for deletion page combined with those in current discussion shouldn't be involved in editing the article. The new editors should also include other reliable sources and not just the post of which its article has been stated by the salon.com source to be an fbi plant.

If you and Romac plan to start the new article, I highly recommend that you thoroughly go through all of the sources including the fox special on Israel Spying on U.S that describes the art students. Given these sources, there are no grounds for deletion due to lack of coverage nor the pushing of "urban myths" as all sources, most of which came after the post article point to spying allegations as at the very least inconclusive.

• http://www.guardian.co.uk/education/2002/mar/06/internationaleducationnews.highereducation
• http://findarticles.com/p/articles/mi_m1571/is_12_18/ai_84396672/
• http://dir.salon.com/news/feature/2002/05/07/students/index.html
• http://web.archive.org/web/20020321021731/http://real-info.1accesshost.com/janes1.html
• http://atlanta.creativeloafing.com/2002-03-20/fishwrapper.html
• http://www.haaretz.com/print-edition/features/spies-or-students-1.45243
• http://community.seattletimes.nwsource.com/archive/?date=20020307&slug=notspies07
• http://www.forward.com/articles/5250/ This article refers to a different situation of Israelis spying on Canada in 2004 that was dismissed, but treats the 1999-2001 allegations of Israeli spying on the U.S. as inconclusive
• http://www.zeit.de/2002/41/Tuer_an_Tuer_mit_Mohammed_Atta -note: this article is in german, from die zeit, its easy to translate with google or yahoo
• http://web.archive.org/web/20020321021731/http://real-info.1accesshost.com/janes1.html
• 20 minute Four Part Fox News Special with Brit Hume and Carl Cameron about Allegations of Israel Spying on the United States

Preciseaccuracy (talk) 22:17, 31 July 2010 (UTC)

Thanks for those. I have a lot on my plate but I may get involved again with the topic. Binksternet (talk) 22:21, 31 July 2010 (UTC)

Bob Dylan in 1978

Binksternet, I've taken your hint and added more material here . I think it would be dangerous to go into more detail about whether Dylan sold his soul in 1978, or his relationships with his backing vocalists (one of whom became his second wife!) because the problem with this Dylan article is such a complex, creative life has to be summarised. And even major albums such as Desire and Blonde on Blonde get short shrift. Thanks Mick gold (talk) 15:34, 4 August 2010 (UTC)

I well understand the need to summarize, and not overwhelm the article with detail. The details you selected were different than ones I would have; your take on it is more from the standpoint of albums released while mine is more from a personal story about Dylan the man. I would have said that he lost a lot of money in his divorce and for other reasons prior to 1978—that the 1978 world tour's purpose was to shake the money tree, which it did quite well. I might have said that he tired of the Vegas-style arrangements partway through and tried to speed up the concerts to finish them more quickly. I definitely would have said that his future wife joined the tour as backup singer.

Still, what you put is not wrong, and it adds detail for 1978. Thanks for adding that in there. Binksternet (talk) 16:01, 4 August 2010 (UTC)

On mature consideration, I mentioned the money . Mick gold (talk) 18:15, 4 August 2010 (UTC)

Cool! Binksternet (talk) 18:19, 4 August 2010 (UTC)

Clipping (audio) - Repairing a clipped signal

I don't understand why you removed my specification of the article in "Repairing a clipped signal". The 1989 paper by Donoho and Stark shows recovery guarantees for lost information in time-domain signals if something is known about their frequency-band representation. Concretely, if a signal is clipped, the affected samples can be identified and removed from the signal. Donoho and Stark's results now show that if the unclipped signal is known to be sparse in the frequency domain (e.g., only a small frequency band is occupied), then the signal can be recovered perfectly, i.e., without approximations! A second paper by Abel and Smith from 1991 proof this concept on the basis of audio signals. In this paper, the authors consider oversampled audio signals, which causes the frequency band of speech signals to be sparse. This sparsity in the frequency domain enables the authors to use Donoho and Stark's results to perfectly recover the original signal from the clipped signal. It is therefore not correct to claim that hard-clipped signals cannot be restored. If you want to stick to your modification, I don't care. If, however, you want to have the article as precise as possible. I encourage you to use my version instead. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 129.132.69.185 (talk) 16:49, 4 August 2010 (UTC)

You wrote "If, however, the signal to be recovered is sufficiently sparse in the frequency domain (i.e., the signal consists only of a small number of frequencies), perfect recovery is possible." I don't see the relevance of this to real world applications. How "sparse" are we talking about? Voice signals? Because I considered it an interesting lab achievement, I removed that bit and added the word "complex", to say that complex signals cannot be perfectly recovered. I'm open to including the sparse bit if there is an application. Binksternet (talk) 17:59, 4 August 2010 (UTC)

As I mentioned above, If speech signals are highly oversampled and then clipped, there is high chance of perfect recovery (see ). I just wanted to be more precise in a sense that perfect signal-recovery from a clipped signal is indeed possible and not impossible (as it is currently stated in the Wiki article). —Preceding unsigned comment added by 129.132.69.185 (talk) 17:13, 5 August 2010 (UTC)

Fair enough. I inserted the Donoho and Stark piece, and modified other sentences to fit. See if that works for you. Binksternet (talk) 17:35, 5 August 2010 (UTC)

Thanks for the edit! I think it's fine like this.

Link in Fado english page

Hi,

I've submitted a link - www.portaldofado.net - to the page about Fado, but the link is constantly being removed from the links section. I don't understand why is this happening, because the link is in everyone's interest. --87.196.92.121 (talk) 17:22, 7 August 2010 (UTC)

No, the link is in your interest. The link promotes your website, by saying "All you need to know about Fado. Online radio,videos, online shop and much more..."

It is a sales website. Please read Misplaced Pages is not a soapbox or means of promotion. Thank you. Binksternet (talk) 17:32, 7 August 2010 (UTC)

You are such an idiot.... you wrote "delete unneeded commercial links"... and what about the Fnac links on Wikipédia? http://en.wikipedia.org/Fnac Aren't they commercial links? What is your criteria "smart boy"? Above you said:"It´s a sales website"... for your information it is not a sales website, it's a site about fado, featuring news, biographies, reviews, chronicles, videos, forum, online radio, and so on... with a small shop that keeps the site alive, or doensn't Misplaced Pages need money to stay alive too? A sales website, darling, is FNAC! Special:Contributions/87.196.92.121|87.196.92.121]] (talk) 22:51, 7 August 2010 (UTC)

The small shop that keeps it alive is not the only reason why it does not need to go in the article, but it is a good enough reason. Another problem with the website is that fact that it does not have an English version, yet you are trying to put the link into an English encyclopedia. Binksternet (talk) 00:15, 8 August 2010 (UTC)

As I said above, the site has lots of interest issues to everyone who wants to know more about Fado and it's history. Have you thought despite the site is in portuguese people could use google translator? Acting like that, you are putting barriers to knowledge, and that goes in the opposite way to the Misplaced Pages principles. You know that your reason is stupid and petty, I could mention hundreds of websites with comercial interests listed in Misplaced Pages like FNAC for example, but you seem to believe that FNAC has solidarity and charity interests only. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 87.196.92.121 (talk) 02:33, 8 August 2010 (UTC)

Your discussion here violates WP:CIVIL—you have been abusive in calling me an idiot and my reason stupid. I will report any further abusive comments from you, resulting in you being blocked. :I have not addressed your FNAC concern because it does not relate. The FNAC article is about a company, but the Fado article is not. Binksternet (talk) 03:00, 8 August 2010 (UTC)

OK. I was a little bit rough with you, I apologize. But still concerning to the Portal do Fado link: The fado.com link at the english page has no information about fado. If you could check the english version of that site, almost all the menu links are completely empty, with no information at all about fado, and now I'm asking: is that usefull to Fado and to all the visitors who are searching relevant information abou fado? Plaese check these links and confirm by yourself: Artists | News/Press |Gallery/Video | Fado Houses, and more... As you can see the information that really matters is not there, we could say that this is "misleading advertising" and a total waste of time pointing visitors to there. This is de link description:"Website featuring biographies, news, videos and music"....ah!...ah! that must be a joke!

At Portal do Fado (http://www.portaldofado.net/eng/) despite the little shop, the information we provide is usefull, quantitative better, and we are working to update it all the time, and provide more information in english. After this, I leave to your consideration, which of the sites is usefull and contributes to the real knowledge about Fado. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 87.196.131.153 (talk) 11:25, 12 August 2010 (UTC)

Peninsula Banjo Band

Hi, thank you for your messages regarding my posts. I am currently (right now) preparing the main article about the Peninsula Banjo Band hence why the Misplaced Pages links were red. It is not my intention to advertise on Misplaced Pages, I am trying to post factual information. You mention that you removed my entries from and citing it as advertising or promotional. Was this because my Misplaced Pages article on the band itself has not been published yet? I ask because you have other currently living professional musicians (ex. ) and who have articles devoted to their bands. Again with the Jazz Festival entry, its a 38 year old festival and quite famous in the traditional jazz community. I referenced a direct link to the website about the event, was that not appropriate or does this relate back to the original article about the Peninsula Banjo Band not being published yet? Please excuse my amateur efforts and naivete, this is first major effort at Misplaced Pages editing. Your advice and assistance would be greatly appreciated. Regards, Chris Scalhotrod (talk) 23:03, 7 August 2010 (UTC)

I just read your comment regarding , fair enough. My apologies for changing the focus or intention of your article. Regards, Chris Scalhotrod (talk) 23:42, 7 August 2010 (UTC)

You will want to read the guideline for musical artist notability at Misplaced Pages:Notability (music) to get a sense of whether the Peninsula Banjo Band has gained enough notability to have an article on Misplaced Pages. One of the articles I wrote about a banjo player was just barely over the line into notability: Peter R. Arnott. Once you have an article written about the band, the band can be listed in relevant lists of bands.

Regarding the jazz festival listing, I got the sense that your 38th Annual Peninsula Banjo Band Jubilee was not a festival thrown by festival organizers who are jazz aficionados but a get-together—a party—hosted by one band. I am a university-trained musician working as an engineer in the music industry, and I have lived in the Bay Area with my ear to the ground for 27 of the Jubilee's 38 years, but I have never heard of it. It also appears to be as much a bluegrass thing as it is a pop, swing, ragtime, gay nineties and hot jazz thing. It is not a festival that bills itself as jazz. I don't think it is a jazz festival. Binksternet (talk) 00:15, 8 August 2010 (UTC)

First, thank you for your comments and advice for creating articles. I will review the sections that you reference. With regard to the Banjo Jubilee jazz festival, and I mean no disrespect to you, but how is your personal experience a deciding factor? I have lived in the Bay Area for over 40 years and been a musician for 33 years in the Bay Area, New Orleans, and Los Angeles, but I bet there are plenty of music related activities that I am unaware of because they do not pertain to my area of interest.
Yes, the Banjo Jubilee has festival organizers, and with an attendance of 800-1200 I would counter that it can be classified as more than a get-together—a party—hosted by one band, and Bluegrass is rarely on the program. Its a traditional & early jazz event (dixieland, ragtime, favorites of the 1920's, 30's, etc), I can get you tickets if you'd like. But since you did not likely know this, I can understand your opinion and comment.
Within the relative notability of the banjo community, the Peninsula Banjo Band is regarded as one of the top bands. I did a quick scan of the Notability (music) article and I think the band qualifies under these two areas...
6. Is an ensemble which contains two or more independently notable musicians, or is a musician who has been a member of two or more independently notable ensembles.
7. Has become one of the most prominent representatives of a notable style or the most prominent of the local scene of a city; note that the subject must still meet all ordinary Misplaced Pages standards, including verifiability.
Since I'm new to this, I'd appreciate your input.
Additional things to consider because I'm not sure how they fit into the guideline of the article, the band has produced four albums/CDs (there were actually LPs at one point) that are sold worldwide, mostly North America and Japan, but also England and Germany. Also, the band has opened for The Preservation Hall Jazz Band, the Duke Ellington Orchestra and also Patti Page and The Captain and Tennille back in the 70's. Then there's been the performances for Jimmy Stewart, President Clinton, and Vice President Gore. Plus the band has been featured on "Evening Magazine" more times than I can remember plus a segment on "Bay Area Backroads". Its not enough to get them into IMDb.com which sucks, but its better than most.
What do you think? By the way, Peter Arnott is a nice guy, he's performed at the Banjo Jubilee jazz festivals in the past. I just did an article on Charlie Tagawa.
Chris Scalhotrod (talk) 14:13, 8 August 2010 (UTC)

San Francisco Bay Area

Please review the edits at the San Francico Bay Area article. What should be done next (or last) to stop the chicanery there? Regards, Norcalal (talk) 06:42, 8 August 2010 (UTC)

SPI

Just a note that a user with whom you appear to be in a dispute has opened this. I don't think anything will come of it, but just a heads-up. TNXMan 13:52, 8 August 2010 (UTC)

Okay, good to know. What a crock! Binksternet (talk) 14:48, 8 August 2010 (UTC)

If im not mistaking this issue was debated a long time ago on WP....

Hi Bink, after this discussion is done and issue resolved (the use of public forums wont be accepted per current guidelines) Ima gonna wipe out all the materials referenced with these links to forums that violate WP:BLP or whose authors fail to meet WP:N even if a famous engineer (though i might consider to keep those who already have a biography here) ....it'll be a whole lot of reverting (according to you PSW has 150 references already), so are ya gonna support me or oppose me?? Jrod2 (talk) 17:45, 8 August 2010 (UTC)

Each entry must be examined to see who wrote it and what fact it supports, so I cannot make a blanket statement about all entries. I expect that a good number of forum talk entries will be perfectly fine, supporting facts that do not have BLP issues. Binksternet (talk) 17:50, 8 August 2010 (UTC)

Yep, you got it :) Jrod2 (talk) 17:55, 8 August 2010 (UTC)

Greetings

Binkster, Maybe part of what you undid on the Acoustic Spectrogram would be useful and informative for the readers? Specifically the part that describes how to interpret the data:

"The vertical axis represents linear frequency from 0 to 5.5 kHz, and the horizontal axis represents the passage of time (700 milliseconds). SPL is encoded in the color scale with darker colors indicating lower levels."

I'm not sure that the article is improved by the deletion. Would you be ok with me adding this text back? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 1Geek (talk • contribs) 18:51, 8 August 2010 (UTC) --1Geek (talk) 18:53, 8 August 2010 (UTC)

The article is a summary of the subject, not a textbook or instruction manual. Binksternet (talk) 19:14, 8 August 2010 (UTC)

Gearslutz at RSN

Hi. Thank you so much for weighing in at that thread. I'm attempting to summarize viewpoints there, since at this stage numbers seem somewhat divided, and I have included your view in my summary. Please read it over at Misplaced Pages:Reliable sources/Noticeboard#Summarizing; more feedback welcome, since opinions seem divided and speak up if I've misunderstood you or if your opinion has changed. Under the circumstances, I think we need to nail this down, one way or another. :) Thanks! --Moonriddengirl 15:27, 10 August 2010 (UTC)

Wikihounding

Hello, Binksternet. This message is being sent to inform you that there currently is a discussion at Misplaced Pages:Wikiquette alerts regarding an issue with which you may have been involved. Thank you. BS24 (talk) 18:36, 10 August 2010 (UTC)

Thanks... responded there. Not Wikihounding but good shepherding of the Wiki. Binksternet (talk) 22:19, 10 August 2010 (UTC)

DYK for Bobbye Hall

On 15 August 2010, Did you know? was updated with a fact from the article Bobbye Hall, which you created or substantially expanded. You are welcome to check how many hits the article got while on the front page (here's how, quick check ) and add it to DYKSTATS if it got over 5,000. If you know of another interesting fact from a recently created article, then please suggest it on the Did you know? talk page.

Nice work. Does your message on my talk page mean I can claim it as a DYK for me, too? :)--Pawnkingthree (talk) 10:38, 17 August 2010 (UTC)

I don't know, but I think so. I ought to have included you in the process at T:TDYK, by putting your name in along with mine, seeing as how you started the article so shortly before I expanded it. Binksternet (talk) 15:21, 17 August 2010 (UTC)

Don't worry, I just spent a few minutes creating a stub because I was surprised she didn't have an article; you did the hard work.--Pawnkingthree (talk) 11:50, 18 August 2010 (UTC)

The Military history WikiProject Newsletter : LIII (July 2010)

The Military history WikiProject Newsletter: Issue LIII (July 2010) Front page Project news Articles Members Editorial

This has been an automated delivery by BrownBot (talk) 21:13, 18 August 2010 (UTC)

Wife acceptance factor

Please do not edit the wife acceptance factor page in order to be politically correct. There is no need for your edit there. There is a reason why it's called a Wife acceptance factor and that is the most common term.

Appreciated —Preceding unsigned comment added by 123.243.203.94 (talk) 20:15, 19 August 2010 (UTC)

So you wish to ignore the sources using other terms? Misplaced Pages does not. The encyclopedia acknowledges notable variations. Binksternet (talk) 22:13, 19 August 2010 (UTC)

I don't have time at the moment to argue this with you but I am right. I don't want to have to go into great detail of you being a politically correct nazi. I know you contribute to wiki a lot and that is great but you've overstepped your mark here. Please don't make this get nasty. I'll respond in full soon. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 123.243.203.94 (talk) 22:44, 19 August 2010 (UTC)

What kind of time is required for you to give your reason? Certainly, your reason was in your mind the three times you removed that paragraph, once two days ago and twice today. I don't think it is unreasonable for you to mention it briefly rather than dance around the subject.

Being called a "politically correct nazi" is a violation of Misplaced Pages's civility guideline and will not be tolerated. Another policy to consider is Misplaced Pages:No personal attacks. Please keep things on an even keel—we're all volunteers here. Binksternet (talk) 22:57, 19 August 2010 (UTC)

I don't appreciate your smartmouthed/sarcastic responses. Disabling someones editing rights and abusing power is also against the guidelines. Remember, we are all volunteers here, some are just more PC than others :O —Preceding unsigned comment added by 123.243.203.94 (talk) 23:10, 19 August 2010 (UTC)

You have just abused your privilages and it has been screenshotted so that others may correct the situation and penalise you. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 123.243.203.94 (talk) 22:58, 19 August 2010 (UTC)

Ooh, I would be so worried except that I have never heard of this dire method of getting "screenshotted". </sarcasm> Still looking for a good, logical reason rather than posturing and noise. Binksternet (talk) 23:02, 19 August 2010 (UTC)

Now let me respond properly since I have some time. I don't mean to get up your nose but you've clearly abused your power in disabling my editing rights. I will seek that to be rectified and for yours the penalised as a result.

The article you have used as a source contains no mention of this SAF in question. SAF would be a politically correct term that has no bearing. The term is WAF and it stands that way. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 123.243.203.94 (talk) 23:09, 19 August 2010 (UTC)

I have replied to you on my talkpage. 123.243.203.94 (talk) 01:02, 20 August 2010 (UTC)

Mosquito

Seriously, how is a link to a speed curve for a PR machine and test results for the FB.VI vandalism? Added from the cafe, hence different IP. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 114.73.10.103 (talk) 23:45, 19 August 2010 (UTC)

This is content dispute at de Havilland Mosquito, and you have been repeatedly warned, then blocked for edit warring. The vandalism is in the edit warring! I will not comment on content here on my talk page. Binksternet (talk) 01:06, 20 August 2010 (UTC)

August 2010

You currently appear to be engaged in an edit war according to the reverts you have made on Wife acceptance factor. Note that the three-revert rule prohibits making more than three reversions on a single page within a 24-hour period. Additionally, users who perform several reversions in content disputes may be blocked for edit warring even if they do not technically violate the three-revert rule. When in dispute with another editor you should first try to discuss controversial changes to work towards wording and content that gains a consensus among editors. Should that prove unsuccessful, you are encouraged to seek dispute resolution, and in some cases it may be appropriate to request page protection. If the edit warring continues, you may be blocked from editing without further notice. ANowlin 23:55, 19 August 2010 (UTC)

In addition, you inappropriately warned the user for Vandalism, when, if any warning should have been issued, it should have been for unsourced removal of content. The editor was in good faith attempting to remove material, as was discussed when they came to the IRC channel for help. Remember, to be exepmpt from 3RR it must be UNDISPUTABLE vandalism. ANowlin 23:59, 19 August 2010 (UTC)

Good point! I will be more careful in the future. Binksternet (talk) 00:04, 20 August 2010 (UTC)

I regret to inform you, but the editor intends to report you to AN. He/she is scared out of their mind right now. It might help if you smoothed things over on their talk page by apologizing, and maybe surrounding your warning with <s></s>. ANowlin 00:13, 20 August 2010 (UTC)

Yes, I agree it will be good for me to strike out my vandal warning. I had forgotten that was an option, as I do it so seldom. Binksternet (talk) 00:20, 20 August 2010 (UTC)

WP:AN/I Discussion Regarding Your Recent Edits

Hello. This message is being sent to inform you that there currently is a discussion at Misplaced Pages:Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents regarding an issue with which you may have been involved. Thank you. (See this section.) ANowlin 02:32, 20 August 2010 (UTC)

rollback

I've removed your rollback privileges for two reasons:

1. Edit warring on Wife acceptance factor, which you didn't use the tools for, but edit warring is edit warring, and rollbackers can't do that under any circumstance
2. Misuse of rollback

If this was only one issue, I would have come here to try to coach you about edit warring or misusing rollback. Given the compound problems, and your recent blocks for edit warring, I've revoked it. Toddst1 (talk) 02:55, 20 August 2010 (UTC)

At the WP:Rollback page, there is no guideline stating that rollback is removed for any sort of edit warring. Instead, the guideline states "misuse of rollback may cause the feature to be revoked by any administrator." I did not use rollback at wife acceptance factor, and I did not use rollback at the de Havilland Mosquito article you linked to in your second example—in both cases I used Twinkle. I don't think it is an appropriate reaction to take away rollback when it was not employed.

As I explained at the AN/I thread you came from, Twinkle can be used to revert in content disputes as long as a suitable edit summary is added. This is a guideline that I was unaware of until yesterday because it was not located at the WP:Twinkle page before then, it was located at the WP:3RR page. I intend to use appropriate edit summaries in my Twinkle reverts from now on, and of course I take full responsibility in my use of Twinkle.

Please restore rollback which was incorrectly removed. Binksternet (talk) 13:45, 20 August 2010 (UTC)

Let's go for a while without any edit wars. Then let's talk about restoring rollback. Of course, you may appeal this at ANI or WP:PERM. Toddst1 (talk) 14:38, 20 August 2010 (UTC)

Of course there will not be any more edit wars from me. Restoring rollback is another thing altogether, and does not require you to watch me first, unless you are reading some guideline that I have not found. Do you really want to see this at AN/I? I would enjoy building a wiki where an admin's decision to remove a user's rights is supported by a clearly stated guideline rather than determined ad hoc. Binksternet (talk) 23:39, 20 August 2010 (UTC)

Twinkle

Greetings. This message is in response to your comment in AN/I about the lack of functionality in twinkle. Twinkle does have the ability to mark reversions as non-vandalism, seen here. I can see in your edit history that you have used these functions in 2008 and 2009, with your last good faith rollback on February 2, 2009. Since then, everything has been marked as vandal. You might wish to look into your settings, or seek help at Misplaced Pages talk:Twinkle, if the other options are no longer showing for you; as you appear to be experiencing some sort of bug. Cheers. Akerans (talk) 17:19, 20 August 2010 (UTC)

No bug, just blind habit taking over—I was seeing only the red VANDAL link after doing so many of those, and I was not associating the green AGF rollback link with Twinkle. I thought that link was plain old rollback. Thanks for helping me re-examine my habits! Binksternet (talk) 00:08, 21 August 2010 (UTC)

Memorex

Please don't remove content because you feel it's not worthy of a mention, like you have done on multiple occasions with Memorex. Misplaced Pages is not limited like text books, and such petty removal halts future progess in articles. 92.0.250.99 (talk) 19:14, 21 August 2010 (UTC)

At Talk:Memorex you'll see my answer regarding Misplaced Pages:"In popular culture" content and sourcing. Binksternet (talk) 19:47, 21 August 2010 (UTC)