Misplaced Pages

Revision as of 04:43, 7 January 2008

Archives

2006 Archives 2007 Archives, Part 1 2007 Archives, Part 2 2007 Archives, Part 3 2008 Archives, Part 1

commons:User:JPG-GR

I assert to be the same user as commons:User:JPG-GR JPG-GR 07:38, 26 February 2007 (UTC)

meta:User:JPG-GR

I assert to be the same user as meta:User:JPG-GR JPG-GR 00:35, 11 April 2007 (UTC)

Template:RadioTranslators

There is a bug in the RadioTranslators template -- there is nothing that differentiates AM stations from FM stations, as all stations link to the FCC's FM database. In the Moody Broadcasting Network article, there's a list using this template, but the network has several affiliates on the AM band. Could the template be adjusted so that the station could link to the correct database? Thanks again. -- azumanga (talk) 03:15, 7 January 2008 (UTC)

There is no such thing as a licensed AM radio translator in the United States. These stations you speak of are either not translators or are not licensed. The use of this particluar template in this particular situation is invalid. JPG-GR (talk) 03:17, 7 January 2008 (UTC)

Try utilizing {{RadioRebroadcasters}} instead. JPG-GR (talk) 03:20, 7 January 2008 (UTC)

The Moody Broadcasting Network list is showing incorrect and misleading information. Nothing on there says if the stations are 24/7 translators of MBN or part time.

If this is the file that you are using for the list, it says there "Moody’s Owned and Operated Stations, Translator Outlets, and Satellators (highlighted in blue) carry the complete schedule of Moody Broadcasting programs. Our affiliate stations (in black type) carry a portion of this programming." The stations on the list should be divided like-wise so it is not misleading. As it stands now, it seems like all the stations listed carry the full schedule of MBN programming, when they do not...or are all owned by MBN, when they also are not. - NeutralHomer 03:27, 7 January 2008 (UTC)

Keep the article discussion to the actual article's talkpage, NH. And, kindly remove my talk page from your watchlist. JPG-GR (talk) 03:28, 7 January 2008 (UTC)

You created the list, so it is your job to make it work correctly. I will do that for you. - NeutralHomer 03:30, 7 January 2008 (UTC)

I made the template. If you actually checked the history of the article before accusing me of adding false info to Misplaced Pages, you'd see I've never even edited the article. So, knowing I won't get the apology you owe me for once again falsely accusing me of something with no proof whatsoever, kindly take the article discussion to the actual article's talkpage and remove my talk page from your watchlist. JPG-GR (talk) 03:34, 7 January 2008 (UTC)

Moreover, nothing on Misplaced Pages is a "job." Nor, it is your job to stalk my edits and talk page CONSTANTLY, though you seem to treat it like your job, and you don't even do it all that well, based on the false accusations. JPG-GR (talk) 03:38, 7 January 2008 (UTC)

That's great and all, but I have updated the page correctly and will be "fixing" the template presently. - NeutralHomer 04:18, 7 January 2008 (UTC)

Template updated from 21 to 30. 21 is not sufficient room for translators/stations in states like Texas or California. - NeutralHomer 04:27, 7 January 2008 (UTC)

(edit conflict) Thank you for proving my point. And there was nothing to be "fixed" with the template - it had yet to be utilized anywhere where there were 30 translators and no station has come along that requires them. I'm reverting those changes because, as stated above, the stations in those lists are NOT translator stations and this template is not the appropriate choice. However, feel free to make the appropriate changes to {{RadioRebroadcasters}}, an appropriate template for this purpose, as I mentioned to Azumanga. JPG-GR (talk) 04:28, 7 January 2008 (UTC)

Check the Texas affiliate section of the ] where there are 26 stations in one section, which is currently "broken" because of your revert. - NeutralHomer 04:35, 7 January 2008 (UTC)

Yes, because for the third time on my talk page, when the discussion should be taking place on the article's talkpage, the wrong template is being used. Does a bold font help, or should I increase the font size? Perhaps you'd like to install Microsoft Agent? JPG-GR (talk) 04:37, 7 January 2008 (UTC)

Perhaps you just don't want to admit you are owning the crap out if this template? I will revert for you...I still have that power. - NeutralHomer 04:39, 7 January 2008 (UTC)

PERHAPS YOU SHOULD TRY READING THE CONVERSATION FOR ONCE. IF YOU AREN'T GOING TO READ WHAT I'M POSTING IN RESPONSE TO YOU ON MY TALK PAGE, STOP FUCKING POSTING ON MY TALK PAGE. JPG-GR (talk) 04:43, 7 January 2008 (UTC)