Misplaced Pages

Revision as of 05:50, 17 October 2013

Binksternet	Articles created	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, Archive11 – July–October 2010, Archive12 – October 2010 – January 2011 Archive13 – January–March 2011 Archive14 – April–July 2011 Archive15 – August–October 2011 Archive16 – November–December 2011 Archive17 – January–February 2012 Archive18 – March–April 2012 Archive19 – May–July 2012 Archive20 – August–October 2012 Archive21 – November–December 2012 Archive22 – January–February 2013 Archive23 – March–April 2013 Archive24 – May–June 2013 Archive25 – July–August 2013 Archive26 – September–October 2013

Bernard McNulty

If you think that you can make a legitimate argument for blocking my editing, go ahead and try. One of you will, actually, however, have to find a statement that I have made that is really not supported by one of the copious verifying sources that I provide. Even if you could do this and you can't, it would require that at least one of you actually acquires and reads and understands the source. I'm not greatly concerned, in any event. You, Uncle Milty and Soink are building a nice e history here anyway though, aren't you? Albiet (talk) 03:04, 1 October 2013 (UTC)Albiet

I already said WP:PEACOCK covers it. The guy lived for 50 years in the 19th century. He is barely known today but you want to say he is widely known. This is not the case. Binksternet (talk) 03:43, 1 October 2013 (UTC)

I did not make a personal comment on McNulty's notoriety. I simply relay information from contemporary sources, including the Boston Evening Transcript December 29, 1892, p 5. This is not "Peacock" anything. While you may have no interest in the U.S. Fenian history, that so impacted the course of its (the U.S.'s) political and martial development, other Wikipedians may and other scholars certainly do, as noted by the fact that the Patriot Chief is still in print to this day from several publishers. If you have no interest, regard, or in depth knowledge of a subject, why bother to attempt to edit articles on subject anyway? Something to prove? As to Bernard Nulty's only living some 50 years, Augustin Fresnel lived for only 39 years, his work is now similarly arcane, yet there still exists extraordinary interest in him and his work in some circles.

If editors like you and Soink, on basis of whatever psychodynamic processes may be impelling you, didn't try to baselessly tear down the work of other editors to thwart its nascent development(early as with Bernard McNulty plastering articles with unwarranted "notoriety" tags, knit picking every little word and adjective, threatening and attempting to intimidate and cow),didn't try to baselessly tear down the article's subject historical figures, who have made real contributions, because you either don't appreciate those contibutions and/or understand those contributions and didn't make caustic and baselessly demeaning comments about other editors and their talents and characters, other editors might not overcompensate in attempt to shore their articles in anticipation of such malicious assaults. Why don't you attempt to actually be helpful and supportive of your colleagues instead and to develop both their talents and contributions? In addition to the Fresnel lens, there is another very innovative optical instrument that has been developed. Its called a mirror. Ever tried to use one?

Finally, removing verifying historical sources from articles without sound reason is VANDALISM. This is not just my opinion. Another editor besides me had to go and restore the citation that you without warrant, explanation or reason removed from the Bernard Nulty article. Consider this a statement of concern about these of your activities, if not a first and last warning. From my reconnoiter of your talk page, you seem to already have enough complaint procedure ongoing against you as a result of such and other of your harassing activities without my now wasting my time to compound them. Seems like other Wikipedians are already quite tired of your nonsense antics and hollow threats.Albiet (talk) 12:11, 1 October 2013 (UTC)Albiet

Albeit, as you know I restored the source (Boston Evening Transcript) but we must keep in mind that this is one article from 120 years ago. It does not show that McNulty is famous today. When writing WP, we must be WP:TERSE, so we keep the text as simple and clean as possible. Descriptive terms like "close" friend, etc. are not helpful. These guys IMcNulty, Fresnell, etc., may be interesting and worthwhile, but please don't get offended when other editors clean up some of the material in the articles. Also, please don't accuse other editors of vandalism. That term has a particular meaning in WP. It does not apply when there are disagreements. Rather, bring up your concerns on the article talk page. When you want to WP:PRESERVE sources, that is a good place to do so – and you can justify/defend your contributions there too. Thanks. – S. Rich (talk) 14:57, 1 October 2013 (UTC)

I find the Boston Evening Transcript reference insufficient by itself; it has no article title. Even better would be a quote. I suspect that the long-ago reporter wrote something like "the well-known figure"; if that's the case then it is not enough for us to conclude McNulty was well known, even in his time. Lots of newspaper articles say "well known" without much basis. Binksternet (talk) 15:04, 1 October 2013 (UTC)

The presence online of a plaintive request such as this one looking for more information—anything, really—about McNulty makes me think he was not so well known in his life. There is precious little available about him in digitally scanned books and newspaper articles, which is pretty damning now in 2013, after so many of our print materials have been digitally archived. Binksternet (talk) 15:21, 1 October 2013 (UTC)

(edit conflict)

Insufficient to establish "well known" is true. But it does verify he was around and doing something worthy of newspaper notice at the time. So let's tag reference improvement rather than removing. (And Albiet should check this out: .) I'm not seeking to debate with you, Binksternet; rather, I posted comments more for Albiet's benefit. Let's see if Albiet takes this advice to heart. – S. Rich (talk) 15:31, 1 October 2013 (UTC)

Cassandra Clare

The Cassandra Clare article has some bruhaha over the proposed 'Controversy' section. Someone keeps deleting it...Saintvlas22 (talk) 08:44, 1 October 2013 (UTC)

Let's keep the conversation on that article's talk page. Binksternet (talk) 19:53, 1 October 2013 (UTC)

Randy Rhoads infobox

Hi, I noticed you reverted my edit on Randy Rhoads article because there were no sources. If you actually read the beginning sentence of the article, there is a source supporting his name as Randall William Rhoads. Please actually take the time to read and find the source before you go ahead and decide to revert and/or delete. It'll save a lot of trouble.

Thanks — Preceding unsigned comment added by 172.249.38.97 (talk) 17:31, 1 October 2013 (UTC)

The CSU Northridge source you have been using says "Born Randall William Rhoads on December 6, 1956 at St. John's Hospital in Santa Monica CA, Randy Rhoads lead a life that centered around music until his untimely death on March 19, 1982.". You changed the article to say he was born William Randall Rhoads, which is not in the cited source. Binksternet (talk) 19:52, 1 October 2013 (UTC)

No no no you have it all wrong. Please take a look at the Rhoads talk page, first, and scroll down to birth name, then go to the last entries. The CSUN source is no longer being used to support the claim of his birth name. I found a source, a book actually, that supports his birth name as Randall William Rhoads and it also supports his birth dates and death dates. That book source, is now being used to support his actual birth name, Randall William Rhoads. Take a look at Source #1 in the article, that is the book source we are using. That is why the infobox was updated to Randall William Rhoads, because the book source was found and is now being used to support the claim that his name is Randall William Rhoads. 172.249.38.97 (talk) 22:19, 1 October 2013 (UTC)172.249.38.97

Harvey Whittemore

Thanks for correcting my date error. Ward20 (talk) 04:24, 3 October 2013 (UTC)

Sure thing! Binksternet (talk) 11:51, 3 October 2013 (UTC)

Thanks

Hi, I've gotten several of those thanks messages from you and other editors. How do you send those? Is there a way I can acknowledge receipt? Thanks for your thanks! Yopienso (talk) 18:16, 3 October 2013 (UTC)

The page WP:Notifications talks about it a little bit. Some editors have said they are unable to send the new "thank" notification. If you are able to do so, you would see in a diff the new "thank" option following the time stamp. For instance, in this Bgwhite diff at the TJ article, you would see the word "thank" in parentheses after "edit" and "undo". To me it looks like this:

Revision as of 08:17, October 2, 2013 (edit) (undo) (thank).

Clicking the "thank" link brings up one more confirmation window asking if you really want to do that. :)

Hope that helps! Binksternet (talk) 18:31, 3 October 2013 (UTC)

Oh! It was right there the whole time. I'll have to try it out. Thanks! Yopienso (talk) 18:42, 3 October 2013 (UTC)

Yay. There is no special way to acknowledge receipt of this sort of thanks—you can just comment somewhere to say thank you back, or you're welcome, or whatever. I guess you could thank that person for some other edit they made if it seems likely that they would understand it means something like "backatcha". Binksternet (talk) 21:57, 3 October 2013 (UTC)

I think you can just go to the Edit Summary for the article and, you pick out the edit, and both (undo) and (thanks) should be by each one. Liz 23:01, 3 October 2013 (UTC)

Trimming Captions

Hi, I notice that you have just trimmed a caption to a file I just uploaded which deleted information including the copywright logo. I don't know much about use of copywright material but I was asked by the copywright owner not to change the description they provided to be used. I have therefore undone your change. Should you know better, I would welcome your explanation. Graemp (talk) 13:06, 5 October 2013 (UTC)

Copyright owners of images can direct Misplaced Pages to put specific text on the image page but they cannot direct the captions. Our guideline at WP:CREDITS says "do not credit the image author or copyright holder in the article" unless it is relevant to the article.

At Misplaced Pages:Manual of Style/Trademarks, the guideline says "do not use the ™ and ® symbols, or similar", as much as possible. The copyright symbol falls under "similar" and should not be used. Binksternet (talk) 13:19, 5 October 2013 (UTC)

Blast from the past.

Hello Binksternet, I don't know if you remember me or not but if you do please accept this apology for causing an edit war with you or anyone else. I'm sorry I was acting like a child. Nikhilmn2002 (talk) 05:50, 6 October 2013 (UTC)

Glad to see your Misplaced Pages experience is building. Best— Binksternet (talk) 13:06, 6 October 2013 (UTC)

be a part of something

Hi Binksternet:

Can you please review and fix "Fluorine". If it's too long, just hit bio and hazard sections.-TCO — Preceding unsigned comment added by 71.127.137.171 (talk) 14:18, 6 October 2013 (UTC)

Elements are not my area of expertise. Binksternet (talk) 01:53, 7 October 2013 (UTC)

DYK for The Punk Singer

On 7 October 2013, Did you know? was updated with a fact from the article The Punk Singer, which you created or substantially expanded. The fact was ... that Bikini Kill's Kathleen Hanna wanted to have the documentary film The Punk Singer feature women as experts? The nomination discussion and review may be seen at Template:Did you know nominations/The Punk Singer. You are welcome to check how many hits the article got while on the front page (here's how, quick check) and it will be added 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.

Dick Dale talk page removals

Yes, I removed all of the items with my ip address from the talk page now that the article refers to his original place of birth. Under the wiki guidelines I can remove talk page comments as long as they are my own comments. I think I removed one by mistake the first time with a similar ip address, that was not mine. I left it there this time. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 24.121.103.74 (talk) 18:18, 7 October 2013 (UTC)

You are allowed to remove talk page posts from your user talk page which you do not have because you are editing as an IP address. Please do not delete talk page posts from article talk pages. Binksternet (talk) 18:52, 7 October 2013 (UTC)

Nope, not true. As long as they are my posts on any talk page I can remove them. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 24.121.103.74 (talk) 20:54, 7 October 2013 (UTC)

Taken from the Misplaced Pages Talk Page Guidelines " The basic rule—with some specific exceptions outlined below—is that you should not edit or delete the comments of other editors without their permission." Furthermore, it is recommended to not remove your own comments, but the person who originally placed those comments still has the ultimate right to remove them from any talk page. So please don't revert it again or I will report it as abuse. Thanks. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 24.121.103.74 (talk) 21:01, 7 October 2013 (UTC)

And please don't use the crossout method, I've reverted to what I originally removed. Thanks. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 24.121.103.74 (talk) 21:03, 7 October 2013 (UTC)

I notice that you failed to quote any part of the talk page guidelines. That is probably because there is no support for the removal of one's own comments after they have generated responses and further discussion. Such removal leaves orphaned responses and makes it impossible for new readers to understand what was discussed in the past. That kind of removal is deprecated at WP:REDACT. Check it out. Binksternet (talk) 23:48, 7 October 2013 (UTC)

Then you didn't read my comment here because I did quote the talk page guideline and now I will quote it again, it is very clear, "The basic rule—with some specific exceptions outlined below—is that you should not edit or delete the comments of other editors without their permission." Again it specifically indicates "other editors". Otherwise if it was meant to include my own edits it would state something completely different. And it specifically states that this is the "basic" rule here. The fundamental rule is that people should not edit or delete the comments of other editors for the talk page. And then it goes on to state the guidelines concerning your own edits. It says they "recommend" not removing your own edits. This is not a basic rule, it is a recommendation. I understand your point, but ultimately I wish to remove my own edits and thats my final decision. Others can remove their own edits as well if they feel that the removal of my edits affects their original wording. Thats their choice and this is why the talk page was created. It allows some freedom in discussing the article and nobody is locked in to their original statements here. If I want I could have gone back and edited my statements as well, and make them different from what they originally were, or I could have left them the same. Instead I deleted them. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 24.121.103.74 (talk) 01:30, 8 October 2013 (UTC)

Thoughts about who this sock might be

Hello B. Thanks for the thanks re: The Great Race. I am not sure that it is Bambifan. Per this Misplaced Pages:Long-term abuse/Bambifan101 I thought BambiFan edited from the southern US. I could be out of date on that info though. This problem editor edits in and around LA. I have noticed IPs from that area leaving unsourced info in film article for sometime but I hadn't thought they might be the same person until I saw your edit summaries on that article. Ah well whoever it is many thanks for your vigilance. Cheers. MarnetteD | Talk 19:17, 7 October 2013 (UTC)

Perhaps Bambifan101 moved to L.A.

At any rate, the editor is combative and disruptive. Binksternet (talk) 23:48, 7 October 2013 (UTC)

Thanks

I appreciated your note about my brief copy edit at "Atomic Bombings"—especially considering it comes from someone with 103,000 edits! SeoMac (talk) 05:26, 8 October 2013 (UTC)

You're welcome! :-)

Binksternet (talk) 11:52, 8 October 2013 (UTC)

No thanks...

...for reverting my addition to the Precedence effect article, without first consulting me. I'd wondered whether I should include a reference to commercial products using this effect, but decided not to. I now have to redo my work, thanks to your uncalled-for intrusion.

The principle described is in no way novel, nor does it represent OR on my part. There has been at least one commercial product using it, from a company called Benchmark Acoustics -- which I reviewed in Stereophile magazine 30 years ago.

http://www.ebay.co.uk/itm/Benchmark-Acoustics-Model-ARU-ambience-access-system-review-Stereo-Review-1982-/231045809355 https://www.google.com/patents/US7076071

I am a degreed electrical engineer, and a member of the AES. (My membership was sponsored by Saul Marantz and Jon Dahlquist.) This is not the first time I've had my contributions questioned by someone who hasn't bothered to do their homework. WilliamSommerwerck (talk) 15:29, 9 October 2013 (UTC)

Thanks for the links and clues to the prior works. I found Bob Katz's 1988 review to be particularly helpful: "Extraction vs Generation". I will bring the information back into the article with references. Binksternet (talk) 15:56, 9 October 2013 (UTC)

Thanks!

Just wanted to drop by and say thanks for explaining why you reverted my edit. We are editing the page for a class project at Cornell University and were a little nervous about making edits. Thanks for not "jumping" on me for an incorrect edit and bearing with us as we learn the ropes of the Misplaced Pages community. J grider65 (talk) 01:30, 10 October 2013 (UTC)

Cool project. Let me know if you have any questions about Misplaced Pages's arcana. Binksternet (talk) 02:35, 10 October 2013 (UTC)

Barun De

What other source is reliable then?Bikramjit De (talk) 20:05, 10 October 2013 (UTC)

Talk:Dick Dale

Are you sure archiving Talk:Dick Dale was a good idea? Isn't that kind of giving in to ReadTheGuidelines's trolling? Jackmcbarn (talk) 19:37, 11 October 2013 (UTC)

Perhaps you're right. I wasn't trying to win a contest against him, I was just trying to keep the edit war in check. Binksternet (talk) 19:46, 11 October 2013 (UTC)

Thanks

Thanks so much for filing that sockpuppet report/investigation on the disruptive editor. I had been tracking and digging into his multitudinous socks for some time, but didn't know whether to file an ANI on his continuous and interminable disruptive editing and lack of competence plus sockpuppetry, or what. I'm glad you dug all those socks out yourself and filed an SPI. Thanks again! Softlavender (talk) 21:36, 12 October 2013 (UTC)

You are welcome! Sockpuppets are one of my pet peeves on Misplaced Pages, the other being outright vandalism. I enjoy hunting down socks. Binksternet (talk) 00:14, 13 October 2013 (UTC)

Johnson

The IP has a point. I did say "concludes her account of Johnson's life" and yet I cut off the final sentence. I will massage my phrasing. Hope you are well.--Wehwalt (talk) 11:52, 13 October 2013 (UTC)

Good job. I didn't bother trying to think through the IP's concern—when I noticed the quote had been changed, that fact was all-consuming. Your rephrase works. Binksternet (talk) 12:13, 13 October 2013 (UTC)

Myers Photo

Is there a problem with the photo: Myers plays the pocket trumpet?

The previous photo - Myers plays the flugel horn - has problems with the copyright. The owner of this photo does not agree to with Misplaced Pages allowing free use.

Myers plays the pocket trumprt - belongs to me (Myers)! I own it! I have no problems with the free use of the phot by Misplaced Pages.

Why did you remove it?

JuneteenthDOC (talk) 21:24, 16 October 2013 (UTC)JuneteenthDOC

I saw two photos and I thought the previous one was a much better representation of the man. The second one was practically anonymous with the horn blocking the face. Binksternet (talk) 02:13, 17 October 2013 (UTC)

BLP Violation on Mises Institute.

The reinsertion of the AS template is a BLP violation due to its listing of living individuals not affiliated with vMI. As such, policy demands it be removed from the article. You appear to be editing outside your expertise in this matter. Although the vMI claims to be "the world center of Austrian Eocnomics" in its promotional material, that view is limited to the Institute and its affiliates. Please undo your replacement of the template. SPECIFICO talk 02:30, 17 October 2013 (UTC)

Sorry, but no. The BLP guideline is not applicable. Binksternet (talk) 02:35, 17 October 2013 (UTC)

Edit-warring

You seem to be edit-warring on multiple fronts, including Murray Rothbard and Ludwig von Mises Institute . I've asked you not to make further changes until you discuss them, but you haven't done that, either. I know it's a stretch, but could I possibly convince you to self-revert? MilesMoney (talk) 03:58, 17 October 2013 (UTC)

That's really amusing, coming from you. Binksternet (talk) 04:12, 17 October 2013 (UTC)

Does that mean you won't revert yourself and end the warring? MilesMoney (talk) 04:12, 17 October 2013 (UTC)

You are the warring party. You decide how far you want to push it. I don't think you have a leg to stand on. Don't make this very stupid tussle into your Little Big Horn. Binksternet (talk) 04:24, 17 October 2013 (UTC)

I've been unfailingly civil. You are falling far short of that. The idea that I'm to blame for your behavior doesn't make a whole lot of sense, and it's pretty offensive. MilesMoney (talk) 04:34, 17 October 2013 (UTC)

You are warring. You tag team for your friends like a puppy. I have yet to see you make a significant contribution of your own. Binksternet (talk) 04:50, 17 October 2013 (UTC)

Binksternet, are you looking for or in need of mentorship? Steeletrap (talk) 05:50, 17 October 2013 (UTC)