User talk:Binksternet/Archive14

Fireboat Phoenix
Thanks for your welcome message and for your suggestions on Phoenix (fireboat). Looks like you've already implemented many of them - I'm definitely interested in expanding the article, so let me know when you're finished! Appreciate other tips on ways to contribute, too.

Thanks, loren Microfirmware (talk) 02:54, 1 April 2011 (UTC)


 * You're right, I jumped on the expansion... I guess I couldn't wait. I will write up a to-do list on the article's talk page. Binksternet (talk) 04:39, 1 April 2011 (UTC)


 * Great - I'll try to hit some of the to-do's this weekend. It's looking good! Thanks again for the help/mentoring. Microfirmware (talk) 16:36, 1 April 2011 (UTC)


 * I agree the article is looking good. What's left to do is describe more about the tallships and Fleet Week appearances, and to talk about the big overhaul job. When did the tower monitor get built? Binksternet (talk) 17:03, 1 April 2011 (UTC)

The Hardest Day
Hi

After your intervention in the Seige of Malta article, could you please look at the The Hardest Day. I am fed up of Dapi's attitute towards IP editors. I have made two constructive edits to this article: addressing grammar mistakes, spelling mistakes, translation mistakes, inserted links to relevent articles and he simply reverts them without reviewing them.

I have made this accusation on this talkpage as well and he simply ignores the fact that this project is aimed at co-operation. Surely it is vandalism to remove constructive edits that reinsert these type of mistakes? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 82.8.192.142 (talk) 13:02, 1 April 2011 (UTC)


 * You are using the concept of cooperation as a blunt instrument. Is that the proper spirit? I do not like the way you interact with Dapi89, and vice versa. If you had a registered username, methinks you would be more considerate. Binksternet (talk) 13:09, 1 April 2011 (UTC)
 * I probably would you are right. I did start off attempting to be civil however after being told point blank that every edit i made was wrong and having every constructive edit i made reverted by him: AGF sort of went out the window.
 * Co-operation works both ways, I have made numerous edits across various pages across the wiki, with yes some changes being partially reverted, suggestions on talk pages not taken up etc but that is the nature of co-operation; am fine with it.
 * Regardless, Dapi is a registered member, that has not stopped him slandering me at every opportunity, even when he has been proven wrong, employing language and straw man arguments to make him look like the incident victim who is just fighting a hell bound vindictive IP out to get him.
 * How is fixing his typos in this article, inserting a couple of related links a troublesome edit that needed to be reverted as he claimed in his edit summary … he actually then reinserted some of the changes I made after slandering me: that isn’t exactly AGF co-operation. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 82.8.192.142 (talk • contribs)


 * The instances where you are right and Dapi89 is wrong are overshadowed by your fractious interaction style. You might win a battle or two but I don't see you winning the war. Binksternet (talk) 17:06, 1 April 2011 (UTC)


 * I dont want to win a war, i just want to be able to make the odd edit here and there and not have them instally reverted when they are construtive edits: why is that so hard? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 82.8.192.142 (talk) 17:22, 1 April 2011 (UTC)

100 DYK medal for you too

 * How shiny! Thanks! Binksternet (talk) 00:40, 2 April 2011 (UTC)

Too Loose
Greetings. Thanks for defending Toulouse as Gardel's birthplace. More than one set of eyes keeping watch may put the birthplace "controversy" on permanent hiatus. Once can hope! Tapered (talk) 02:17, 2 April 2011 (UTC)


 * I was solidly in the camp of "it's undecided, too many conflicting sources" until the Toulouse sources got so solid and scholarly: UNESCO. That settled the matter for me. Binksternet (talk) 02:20, 2 April 2011 (UTC)

DYK for Dan Dugan (audio engineer)
— HJ Mitchell &#124;  Penny for your thoughts?   08:03, 3 April 2011 (UTC)

ambassador program
Hi! I see you signed up at Online Ambassadors/Mentors as a mentor for the ambassador program. That's supposed to be for people who have applied and been accepted as Online Ambassadors; see Online Ambassadors/Apply. But looking over your contributions briefly, it looks like you'd make a great ambassador; please do apply! In the meantime, I'll remove your entry from the mentors list. Cheers --Sage Ross - Online Facilitator, Wikimedia Foundation (talk) 15:27, 4 April 2011 (UTC)


 * Okay, thanks. I was looking earlier for the correct way to apply, and did not find it. Right now, the application button seems to put in the name Bhavanakarthik rather than my own. I'll see if I can make it work for me. Binksternet (talk) 17:18, 4 April 2011 (UTC)
 * Great! Just replace "YOURUSERNAME" with your actual username, and it will load up the application template.--Sage Ross - Online Facilitator, Wikimedia Foundation (talk) 17:26, 4 April 2011 (UTC)

Confused
I do not think I harmed the article, posting the coordinates of a secret base is probaly not lawful. With the location anyone can go there whenever they feel like it. I just erased the coordinates so no one will go to the base and try to mess with it. Thomasbum98 (talk) 20:41, 4 April 2011 (UTC)Thomasbum98


 * Wikipedia is not censored, and the information provided is public, not secret. Base security will keep people out; no worries. Binksternet (talk) 20:44, 4 April 2011 (UTC)

Social Purity
I'm just wondering why the social purity analysis is relevant when it has nothing to do with the article. Thanks. NYyankees51 (talk) 19:50, 5 April 2011 (UTC)


 * Because it has to do with Anthony's words misused by pro-life groups. It is perfectly on topic. Binksternet (talk) 20:46, 5 April 2011 (UTC)

Arbitration/Requests/Case/Henri Coanda closed
An arbitration case regarding Henri Coandă has now closed and the final decision is viewable at the link above. The following remedies have been enacted:


 * is prohibited from editing or commenting on articles about the Coandă-1910 aircraft, its inventor Henri Coandă, or the history of the jet engine. This topic-ban shall be effective indefinitely, but Lsorin may request that it be terminated or modified after at least six months have elapsed. In considering any such request, the Committee will give significant weight to whether Lsorin has established an ability to edit collaboratively and in accordance with Wikipedia policies and guidelines in other topic-areas of the project.


 * The topic-ban imposed in this decision applies to all pages in all namespaces. However, the topic-ban does not preclude Lsorin from (1) responding to good-faith, reasonable inquiries from other editors on his user talkpage seeking information about the Coandă-1910, as long as Lsorin does not misuse this permission; (2) participating in the arbitration enforcement discussion of any allegation that he violated the topic-ban; or (3) posting an authorized request for the lifting or modification of the topic-ban after the specified time period has elapsed.

On behalf of the Arbitration Committee, Salvio  Let's talk about it! 21:51, 5 April 2011 (UTC)
 * Discuss this


 * Thank you for your time and attention. Binksternet (talk) 00:45, 6 April 2011 (UTC)

Shure 58
Since you removed the Beta 58 from the SM58 article, how about adding it to Shure Beta 58A. Bubba73 You talkin' to me? 14:47, 6 April 2011 (UTC)


 * I could... but I don't see the notability of that microphone. It did not make any big splash in the industry, did not win awards. Binksternet (talk) 14:57, 6 April 2011 (UTC)

April 2011 Newsletter for WikiProject United States
--Kumioko (talk) 17:17, 6 April 2011 (UTC)

Reward for job well done...
I appreciate your throughout review of Max Weber. Could you take a look at the GA review at Karl Marx? It was first speedily passed, then unclearly challenged and is now a bit of a mess. A proper review would be much appreciated... --Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus 22:50, 6 April 2011 (UTC)


 * Some reward! LOL. :P
 * I will consider it. Binksternet (talk) 22:53, 6 April 2011 (UTC)

Conservatism
I noticed you joined WPConservatism. I just wanted to bring to your attention that we are "dedicated to improving Wikipedia's coverage of topics related to conservatism." One of the ways we improve coverage is by adding nav boxes so that readers, and editors, can easily navigate conservatism articles. You have nominated 3 conservatism nav boxes for deletion. This seems to run counter to our stated purpose. You made a few suggestions for improving the nav boxes. Now that you are a member, I think it would be a wonderful gesture if you would withdraw the noms and engage our 20 or so members in implementing the improvements you have outlined. This should prove to be useful.Lionel (talk) 23:18, 6 April 2011 (UTC)


 * I still have grave doubts about the nav boxes, and I don't think I am ready to suggest improvements. Thanks for the note. Binksternet (talk) 23:23, 6 April 2011 (UTC)
 * I want to point out that I feel I am improving the coverage of conservatism topics by deleting the ill-considered nav boxes. Such poorly considered and inadequately prepared templates do not help. My work for the project has not run counter to the the project's stated purpose; it has only run counter to your over-eager promotion of conservatism as an ideology.
 * I have been a de facto member since the beginning of the project. I am very interested in seeing conservatism covered properly in related articles at Wikipedia. What I am not interested in is evangelizing conservatism as an ideal or as an example for people to follow. There are times when conservatism fails to satisfy the human condition. If we cover conservatism accurately instead of ideologically, we cover it without taking away from the breadth of human experience. Wikipedia exists to chronicle the widest possible sweep of human attitudes and politics. Binksternet (talk) 06:22, 7 April 2011 (UTC)

SBA dispute
While I agree with your recent edits, I think you may have violated 1RR. Wouldn't want to see you blocked. Roscelese (talk ⋅ contribs) 18:00, 7 April 2011 (UTC)


 * I considered that my edit was a collaborative building of the article rather than a revert. I saw it as a collegial cooperation with NYyankees51 in making Schiff's stated position more clear. Binksternet (talk) 18:05, 7 April 2011 (UTC)


 * It's possible. (I was also about to add the quote back, but was ECd.) Roscelese (talk &sdot; contribs) 18:07, 7 April 2011 (UTC)


 * In further explanation, my two edits today were not about the same wording:
 * 04:59, April 7, 2011: Binksternet removed the word "But".
 * 16:53, April 7, 2011: NYyankees51 added the word "However", removed the Schiff quote about "very dangerous" and replaced it with a new quote by Schiff about "bottom line".
 * 17:30, April 7, 2011: Binksternet gave the page both quotes about "very dangerous" and about "bottom line". Removed the word "However". No removal of the word "But" as it is not even present to remove. Not a 1RR violation. Binksternet (talk) 18:15, 7 April 2011 (UTC)
 * I disagree, Bink -- NYY added "But", you removed it, NYY added "However", you removed it. I agree with Ros that self-reverting would be a good thing here. It'd be a crying shame to block you over a single conjunction. --SarekOfVulcan (talk) 19:55, 7 April 2011 (UTC)
 * Reverted self. I see how your interpretation adheres to the spirit. Binksternet (talk) 19:57, 7 April 2011 (UTC)
 * I appreciate it, thanks. --SarekOfVulcan (talk) 20:04, 7 April 2011 (UTC)

The sentence I changed said that they "point out" that the quotes are misattributed. WP:SAY applies to that. NYyankees51 (talk) 16:25, 22 July 2011 (UTC)

Collaborative
Today's favorite comeback: "I also throw at your face Wikipedia is a collaborative work." 'Nuff said. Binksternet (talk) 21:16, 7 April 2011 (UTC)

Your revert
With regard to this revert of yours (which I think you, rather than I, should undo), may I point out that, in context, "only pagans and Jews" did not suggest that pagans and Jews are of no importance. The section is about early Christians, and in spite of what an earlier editor had said, two of the three cited sources did not claim that early Christians held the belief in question. You have now restored that false claim. (Besides, that was not the only element you reverted.) Esoglou (talk) 20:52, 8 April 2011 (UTC)

Article for deletion debate
The article Young Conservatives of Texas has been nominated for deletion at AfD. Your input as to whether or not this article meets notability standards is invited. Thank you. Carrite (talk) 17:04, 9 April 2011 (UTC)


 * You have been canvassing other editors, a practice that goes against WP:CANVASS. It would have been appropriate to post once to the Conservatism project. Binksternet (talk) 17:17, 9 April 2011 (UTC)

Mainstream v. Mainline
Just FYI, there are no Mainstream Protestants, while there are Mainline Protestants and some mainliners are members of the RCRC. - Haymaker (talk) 18:55, 10 April 2011 (UTC)

RE: gun-jumping
I'm not a superstitious man, but I think you just jinxed it for me! Pretty soon we'll see a wave of clowns with Delete and Merge all !votes.  bahamut0013  words deeds 16:53, 11 April 2011 (UTC)


 * DELETE DELETE DELETE. LOL. Binksternet (talk) 16:57, 11 April 2011 (UTC)
 * Wise man say "man who stand on toilet is high on pot."  bahamut0013  words deeds 17:04, 11 April 2011 (UTC)

Area 51
Yeah, key word was SUGGESTED! Two government officials were referenced in the letter: the FBI director and the Air Force investigator. Did you even bother to read it? It did come out on the FBI's website you know. Letter is encyclopedic and should be mentioned somewhere. I challenge you to find better government evidence about that. No wonder hardly any new users try to edit anything. The letter is perfect for that section of the article. You're just hating because you didn't find it and get to edit it first. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Jakobees (talk • contribs) 05:52, 12 April 2011 (UTC)


 * I'm dubious of any reference that is from a WP:PRIMARY source such as the FBI's archives, when secondary sources are what Wikipedia is built on. Primary sources are for reporters and book authors, not for encyclopedia writers. The Hottel bit will be perfectly appropriate when a secondary source, reliable and verifiable can be found to back up the assertions. Binksternet (talk) 05:59, 12 April 2011 (UTC)


 * http://news.yahoo.com/s/livescience/20110411/sc_livescience/fbisufofileproofofroswell
 * http://uk.news.yahoo.com/38/20110411/tod-fbi-documents-indicate-ufo-landings-045b8e8.html ::Jakobees (talk) 01:49, 13 April 2011 (UTC)


 * Wow. Even a cursory reading of the Yahoo news item shows that the Hottel memo has been dismissed by experts for at least a decade. It has no significance. Binksternet (talk) 05:40, 13 April 2011 (UTC)

Precautionary principle
Is it really wanted by WikiProject Conservatism? I don't see the connection. — Arthur Rubin (talk) 07:46, 12 April 2011 (UTC)


 * I see a tangential connection, which is enough for any project to place a banner on the talk page. Binksternet (talk) 07:48, 12 April 2011 (UTC)

DYK for Phoenix (fireboat)
The DYK project (nominate) 08:02, 13 April 2011 (UTC)

Retiring from Wikipedia
I just wanted to let you know that I am retiring from Wikipedia effective this weekend. It is not with any issue on policy, other users, or Wikipedia itself. My priorities have changed in the fact that I am engaged to be married along with a job related exam that I will be taking in October.

Thank you for working with me on various projects throughout the Wikipedia. Chris (talk) 14:24, 15 April 2011 (UTC)

DeZurfication
Nice work removing references to self-published sources. Edison (talk) 02:44, 17 April 2011 (UTC)


 * Thank you. I am taking my time so that I don't leave a mess. Binksternet (talk) 02:47, 17 April 2011 (UTC)

SOviet Airwomen
Hello, how are You doing? I hope you are doing well... Just one question: my book about the Sovviet airwomen has been released... I should add some of the datas and informations that I discovered... May I quote myself? I am afraid not... regards --Gian piero milanetti (talk) 10:46, 17 April 2011 (UTC)


 * At SELFCITE it says you can cite your own work but not too much. If challenged you should "defer to the community." At WP:CITESELF it says that if you published the book yourself, it will not be useful: "self-published media, such as books... are largely not acceptable as sources." Who published your book? Binksternet (talk) 14:57, 17 April 2011 (UTC)

April 2011 reply
Please clarify on your claim that I added commentary or personal analysis in any of my edits. You claim that I violate NPOW without any specification on why.

This is my edits: 1. I removed the anti-prostition strawman argument "People who support legal prostitution argue that prostitution is a consensual sex act between adults and a victimless crime, thus the government should not prohibit this practice.". This is not something that supporters of legal prostitution claims. In is also unsourced, which is not strange as it is a strawman argument against prostitution.

2. I added "claims" to the text in various places where anti-prostitution argumentation states quoted opinion as if they are facts. None of their references are to anything but personal opinions of anti-prostitution activists.

3. I removed the redundant statement from the "Sweden, Norway and Iceland" section that is irrelevant to general discussion.

4. I also removed an unsourced anti-prostitution statement as the google book reference is broken, hence it is not verifiable.

5. On one of the anti-prostitution activist citations I also clearified who made it and that it is a personal opinion, not a fact.

Now tell me how any of those edits breaks the NPOW.

Also ALL text in the general section is currently biased towards anti-prostitution, so how is any of these edits making the the text more unbalanced. It is totally impossible to make a all anti-prostitution text more unbalanced.

188.126.90.240 (talk) 04:28, 19 April 2011 (UTC)

Reply to Comment about focus on lead (in the 1953 coup)
(pasted from talk page in case you missed it there.) I can't really disagree that working from the bottom (sections) up to the top (lead) is preferable, it's just that many wikipedia users just read the article lede and it was so difficult to get any changes made at all in the article, why not work on the most important part. --BoogaLouie (talk) 16:07, 19 April 2011 (UTC)


 * It's well nigh impossible to make the lead say what you want and still have it conform to the guideline at WP:LEAD. I see no way forward besides fixing the whole thing, bottom first. Binksternet (talk) 16:11, 19 April 2011 (UTC)

Thanks
Thanks! XLerate (talk) 22:41, 19 April 2011 (UTC)


 * You bet! :D
 * Binksternet (talk) 23:01, 19 April 2011 (UTC)

Change in the Metapedia article
"unneeded change" - is that a joke, or what. The change makes it better, more accurate, just look at the referenced book. There's no point in saying "unneeded change". The question is - which description is more precise. Not only Klein identifies its primary movement as white nationalist, the German source also calls it a "nationalist counterpart". 84.136.241.77 (talk) 18:14, 20 April 2011 (UTC)


 * Discussion at article talk page. Binksternet (talk) 18:18, 20 April 2011 (UTC)

Coanda
There have been huge edit wars at this article over the allegation that Coanda invented the first jet engine (or at least I think that's what it's about. See the search results for Coanda on WP:AN and the many, many, many edit wars over this mess that have made it to the 3RR noticeboard and even AN/I. At least one editor who is known to IP-hop usually edits from similar IP ranges as your vandal . I don't know what to do about any of this, but I wasn't sure if you were familiar with the mess so I thought I'd give you a heads-up. --NellieBly (talk) 20:47, 20 April 2011 (UTC)


 * Yes, I am quite aware. I drove the initiative to get the Coanda-1910 article to GA status, and in the process I bumped into several editors who used edit warring techniques to try and put the Romanian POV into the article, against the world mainstream view. I asked for and received an IP range block last October to get rid of this guy from the IP 79.116.20x.xxx located in Brasov, Romania, for a while, but the block was temporary. He's back, and as before he does not care one bit about his misbehavior because his IP changes so often. Binksternet (talk) 20:58, 20 April 2011 (UTC)


 * Is it possible that this IP user is Lsorin? I'm just asking. It might be useful to have a checkuser done to find out, becuase if it is, it's a violation of the Arbcom rulings. Anway, it would probably be useful to ask that Coanda-1910 and Henri Coandă‎ be semi-protected for for several months. - BilCat (talk) 01:12, 21 April 2011 (UTC)


 * There are too many stylistic differences I can see between Lsorin and the Brasov dude to say that I think a checkuser would do any good. Lsorin travels the world—a little—but he is an ex-patriot Romanian, living outside the country. I don't think he returns to Romania so often that he can post, at times, daily comments from Brasov. Binksternet (talk) 04:38, 21 April 2011 (UTC)


 * OK, thanks, I figured you would know. - BilCat (talk) 05:28, 21 April 2011 (UTC)

Good news, everyone!
The A-Class Review for the Frank Buckles article was closed and promoted just moments ago. I want personally thank you for your help on the article and hope to work again with you on the FAC in the near future. :) -  Neutralhomer •  Talk  • 10:24, 21 April 2011 (UTC)

Another question re lead (in the 1953 coup)
How about simultaneous changes? e.g. I write a paragraph on execution of overthrow like this



Zahedi coup
On August 19 a noisy pro-Shah demonstration marched from the red light district to the bazaar to Mosaddeq'shouse. The gendarmerie also transported 800 farm hands from the royal stables in Veramin to central Tehran. Many anti-Mosaddeq demonstrators were killed attempting to overrun Mosaddeq's house by armed defenders, but in the afternoon General Zahedi, commanding 35 Sherman tanks surrounded the premier's residence. A nine-hour battle ended with 300 people dead, Mossadeq fleeing and his house burnt. Zahedi was installed to succeed Prime Minister Mosaddeq.

... in body of article, and shorter text (for example: "After several days of mass confusion, however, a pro-Shah mob marched on Mosaddeq's residence, which was also attacked by a tank column led by retired General Fazlollah Zahedi.[17] The prime minister fled when his defenders were overwhelmed.[18]") for lede? Do you see any policy guideline violation in that? --BoogaLouie (talk) 14:51, 21 April 2011 (UTC)

Gian + his book
Good, thanks. Dapi89 (talk) 15:00, 21 April 2011 (UTC)

What's YOUR deal, friend?
DocKino (talk) 20:33, 21 April 2011 (UTC)


 * This does not have to be a shouting match. Binksternet (talk) 20:47, 21 April 2011 (UTC)

Who published?
Hi, I had not seen Your question... My publisher is IBN Editore, as You can see here... http://www.aviolibri.it/prodotti/8678_gian_piero_milanetti_le_streghe_della_notte_la_storia_non_detta_delle_eroiche_ragazze_pilo.php?page=1&ordina=data_inserimento --Gian piero milanetti (talk) 20:51, 21 April 2011 (UTC)

Litvyak Kills
Hello, have You seen the table of Litvyak kills, with name of pilot and units involved? I was so pleased at first to see it, as I am struggling hard to find those datas, checking all books that could refer to Litvyak available on the market, Bergstrom texts, books about JG 52, JG 3, Bographies of German aces, Bundes ARchives researches... but I NEVER found those informations - except those of the double Bf 109 kills in March. As I see there is no reference about those kills. I sent a message to RusoArgentino, but anyway I am rather startled... --Gian piero milanetti (talk) 06:10, 22 April 2011 (UTC)


 * I cannot confirm all of the kills in the table. The last version of the article with a list of confirmed kills, each credited to the right sources, was this one. Even this one did not have perfect sourcing, as the popular-but-inaccurate book by Myles was used. Binksternet (talk) 14:52, 22 April 2011 (UTC)

quote for Vacuum Tube?
Would you mind adding the relevant sentence to the citation you added using the quote parameter, since that is not an easily verified source? Thanks, —EncMstr (talk) 20:29, 22 April 2011 (UTC)


 * Okay, easy enough. I quoted the book on the talk page so I'll just port that over. Binksternet (talk) 21:03, 22 April 2011 (UTC)


 * Thanks! —EncMstr (talk) 22:42, 22 April 2011 (UTC)

SPLC sources in AFA talk page
Binksternet:

Congratulations on an absolutely great job in researching all those sources. It must have taken multiple hours. My hat's off to you. Thanks very much.

Regards, — Becksguy (talk) 03:51, 23 April 2011 (UTC)


 * You're welcome! Binksternet (talk) 14:08, 23 April 2011 (UTC)

David Lane
Hi. I've nominated David Lane (activist), an article you worked on, for consideration to appear on the Main Page as part of Did you know. You can see the hook for the article here, where you can improve it if you see fit. Lionel (talk) 03:41, 26 April 2011 (UTC)


 * Ah! The article was already suggested and approved for the DYK section of the Main page. I removed your nomination of it as an unnecessary redundancy. Sorry! Binksternet (talk) 03:59, 26 April 2011 (UTC)

Obama
Hi Binksternet, just to clarify, was your oppose vote in reference to my proposal or the IP user's? NYyankees51 (talk) 00:43, 28 April 2011 (UTC)


 * Ah, it was the IP. I'll clarify. Binksternet (talk) 00:53, 28 April 2011 (UTC)


 * Okay, thanks. NYyankees51 (talk) 16:52, 28 April 2011 (UTC)

Avid
Who are you to change this page with such disregard to the history of the product development? The people listed, and the section in general, are of great importance to the development of the Media Composer product. Let's not enter into a wheel war, besides I have the edge on you as I would be the last in the 3 revert rule. Leave this section alone, or I'll seek out and destroy every entry you make. I am a retired hollywood editor and I have nothing better to do but find you.... Have a nice day... —Preceding unsigned comment added by 68.53.49.212 (talk) 04:35, 28 April 2011 (UTC)


 * Neither of us can "wheel war" as we are not administrators. Your additions to the AVID article were very low quality, unnecessary to the story of the company. You inserted a list of people who were certified early, as if if that makes them notable, as if AVID gives such people special consideration. There was no story in your addition. Binksternet (talk) 05:13, 28 April 2011 (UTC)

The Bugle: Issue LXI, March 2011
To stop receiving this newsletter, please list yourself in the appropriate section here. To assist with preparing the newsletter, please visit the newsroom. BrownBot (talk) 01:18, 29 April 2011 (UTC)

DYK for David Lane (activist)
The DYK project (nominate) 00:03, 1 May 2011 (UTC)

Talkback
02:31, 1 May 2011 (UTC)

02:46, 10 June 2011 (UTC)

SBA/"pro-life feminism"
This looks like it's going to take a loooooooong time. Adequately dug in? :) Roscelese (talk ⋅ contribs) 23:33, 5 May 2011 (UTC)


 * I'm not going anywhere. Much of the task ahead is education. Binksternet (talk) 17:25, 6 May 2011 (UTC)

May 2011 Newsletter for WikiProject United States
.--Kumioko (talk) 01:53, 6 May 2011 (UTC)

DYK for Coaxial speakers
The DYK project (nominate) 12:03, 9 May 2011 (UTC)

Coaxial speakers
Nice expansion, but shouldn't the title be Coaxial loudspeaker in accordance with naming conventions? – ukexpat (talk) 13:22, 9 May 2011 (UTC)


 * I briefly considered moving the article but I shelved the question rather than investigating it. You are probably right! Binksternet (talk) 19:24, 9 May 2011 (UTC)


 * I went ahead and boldly moved it. – ukexpat (talk) 12:59, 10 May 2011 (UTC)

DYK for Gain before feedback
The DYK project (nominate) 18:02, 11 May 2011 (UTC)

The Bugle: Issue LXII, April 2011
To stop receiving this newsletter, please list yourself in the appropriate section here. To assist with preparing the newsletter, please visit the newsroom. BrownBot (talk) 21:56, 17 May 2011 (UTC)

Susan Wicklund article
Any way in which you think it could be improved? (Or suggestions for a DYK hook?) As I noted in my edit summary when I posted, I have sources for and will probably write a short bit on the SCOTUS case Lambert v. Wicklund, and have sixish radio and TV sources that I haven't investigated yet for technical reasons (I can link if you'd like), but anything else that I should put in? Roscelese (talk ⋅ contribs) 01:51, 23 May 2011 (UTC)


 * How about a photo or two of places that she has worked or lived? Nothing current, though; you would not want to arm her enemies. For a hook, you could describe (as neutrally as possible) how Wicklund was the root of the 1992 privacy law. I can't think of anything else that the article needs off the top of my head. Binksternet (talk) 06:13, 23 May 2011 (UTC)


 * That sounds like a good idea for photos. I'll see what I can do - I tried really hard to find a free image of her but couldn't. Will probably post a request of some sort anyway, on the chance that someone has been to an event where she's spoken and has a picture. Roscelese (talk &sdot; contribs) 16:12, 23 May 2011 (UTC)


 * Ideally, an image of her speaking would be taken from behind showing the audience and her back to the photographer. I just don't think this woman needs any additional face recognition in her life. Binksternet (talk) 18:09, 23 May 2011 (UTC)


 * Other suggestions: non-free fair use image of the Mountain Country Women's Clinic logo, or the book cover, or the logo of the Trust Women Fund (that is, if Wicklund founded it). Ignoring any concern for privacy, here's one on Flickr alongside Nancy Keenan but with all rights reserved for NARAL... they might be persuaded to change the copyright to CC-SA 2.0 or something. Binksternet (talk) 18:38, 23 May 2011 (UTC)
 * Eh...maybe I'm just overly cautious about fair use, but I don't find the rationales terribly convincing. Couldn't find free images of the clinics either. I'll probably punt this one to someone who knows more about copyright than I do (everything I've uploaded is PD). Roscelese (talk &sdot; contribs) 18:54, 23 May 2011 (UTC)

The Great American Wiknic
Hi there, just wanted to let you know -- I've just reshuffled the SF Meetup page a bit, making a separate page for the Wiknic so that hopefully newbies will be able to figure out what's up more easily. I moved your discussion about the Botanical garden to the talk page there -- hope that's OK. I also added your name on the list of possible participants: Meetup/San Francisco/Wiknic I hope you're still planning to come! -Pete (talk) 23:24, 24 May 2011 (UTC)


 * Thanks! Binksternet (talk) 04:22, 25 May 2011 (UTC)

Members' input needed at WikiProject Women's History
Hello. I'm writing to you as your name is listed on the members page for WikiProject Women's History. In recent discussions at the project, most notably here, several members have indicated that the scope of the project may need to be more clearly defined and communicated. I have set up a workshop page for this, but it obviously needs as wide a participation as possible to achieve genuine consensus and to allow the project to move forward. You'll find the workshop here.

If you no longer consider yourself an active member of the project, it would help if you could indicate this on the members' page. This will allow us to better gauge how much people-power we actually have. Best wishes, Voceditenore (talk) 04:55, 25 May 2011 (UTC)

File:Fake-amp-stacks-immortal-metal-band.jpg listed for deletion
A file that you uploaded or altered, File:Fake-amp-stacks-immortal-metal-band.jpg, has been listed at Files for deletion. Please see the to see why this is (you may have to search for the title of the image to find its entry), if you are interested in it not being deleted. Damiens .rf 21:47, 26 May 2011 (UTC)

Bruce Jackson (audio engineer)
I don't know if you have not noticed, or just not got around to responding, but I have started a GA review of Bruce Jackson (audio engineer). I have paused the review awaiting a response. Regards,  Spinning Spark  16:54, 29 May 2011 (UTC)


 * Good going! Binksternet (talk) 03:45, 30 May 2011 (UTC)

Please review
Don't just say it, prove it Please link to an/i you alleged I filed, and if by any chance you will not be able to find it, maybe consider striking your comment? Also you have no real information neither about IP nor about the user that was born out of that IP, and how they both IP and the user were involved with me, and only with me. I hope that as a reasonable user you'd agree that commenting on something you have no information about is rather unwarranted.--Mbz1 (talk) 19:59, 30 May 2011 (UTC)


 * My conclusions about the IP editor who became User:Westbankfainting were reached after examining the edit histories of both. If there was something deleted, I would not have seen it. Also, if there was some IRC or off-site interaction, I would not have seen it. Regarding the AN/I, I assumed there was one or the editor would not have been blocked. I will note on the user's talk page that I was wrong and there was not one. Which is kind of odd, don't you think? Binksternet (talk) 20:31, 30 May 2011 (UTC)


 * Actually there's nothing odd. The block was done after this message. As you see I did not even asked to block the user. I asked for an advise in a rather calm tone. What is rather odd that you have such a difficult time to assume good faith.--Mbz1 (talk) 21:01, 30 May 2011 (UTC)


 * Heh heh... Your final bit of sour tone misrepresenting my AGF entertains me as unnecessarily petty. You have a fantastic sense of framing in photography but in social dynamics your world is a battleground. Binksternet (talk) 00:27, 31 May 2011 (UTC)

Right
Hey Bink. The first choice was CON, but it was taken. I looked up RIGHT and it was pointing to one of Ed Poor's userpages. I asked him if he was using it anymore and he said no. For 6 years noone at Rights made any effort to obtain this redir. Lionel (talk) 03:35, 31 May 2011 (UTC)


 * Okay, thanks for the message. Binksternet (talk) 03:38, 31 May 2011 (UTC)

Notification of Automated Replies
Hey Binksternet, This is a friendly notification to inform you that automated notices are submitted to reported users on the WP:AN/EW noticeboard by User:NekoBot periodically during reviews of the page content to save editors from having to post their own notices and directly link to the report in question. Please see Bots/Requests_for_approval/NekoBot and User:NekoBot for more information. -=- Adam Walker -=- 15:30, 31 May 2011 (UTC)


 * Okay, thanks. Binksternet (talk) 15:40, 31 May 2011 (UTC)

1953 coup
I'm notifying contributors to the 1953 Iranian coup article about a proposed change in the article posted on the talk page, that adds information about events leading up to the coup. Only a couple of comments so far. Am planning to request comments WP:RfC later. --BoogaLouie (talk) 23:50, 31 May 2011 (UTC)

DYK nomination of Desegregation in the United States Marine Corps
Hello! Your submission of Desegregation in the United States Marine Corps at the Did You Know nominations page has been reviewed, and there still are some issues that may need to be clarified. Please review the comment(s) underneath your nomination's entry and respond there as soon as possible. Thank you for contributing to Did You Know!
 * Note: I have not looked at the article myself. I'm merely notifying you that a reviewer had issues with your nomination. M AN d ARAX  •  XAЯA b ИA M  00:06, 1 June 2011 (UTC)


 * Yes, thanks. I'm working on the article to bring it up to snuff. Binksternet (talk) 00:29, 1 June 2011 (UTC)

Edit warring at Susan B. Anthony List
Just a note to warn you against edit warring at Susan B. Anthony List, an abortion-related article which is under 1RR sanctions. Note that an observed pattern of slow edit warring can still result in a block. Thank you. PeRshGo (talk) 03:24, 1 June 2011 (UTC)

DYK for Desegregation in the United States Marine Corps
Casliber (talk · contribs) 17:03, 1 June 2011 (UTC)


 * Thanks for participating! You've been Tumblred by the National Archives at . :-) Many people here were very impressed with the amount of work you put into this at such breakneck speed. It just goes to show the potential of Wikipedia. Dominic·t 17:12, 1 June 2011 (UTC)


 * You are welcome. I saw an opportunity with the very next image and I jumped on it. The timing was good relative to my off-wiki life, allowing me to spend some solid hours on the article. Best wishes going forward with the "Today's Document" feature at National Archives. I will assist where I can. Binksternet (talk) 17:16, 1 June 2011 (UTC)

DYK for Charles A. Lindbergh Chair in Aerospace History
Materialscientist (talk) 00:03, 4 June 2011 (UTC)

Making a separate article
Do you think it makes sense to make a separate article at 2011 Ahwazi protests? The sources I would be using would include Al Arabiya, Al Bawaba, Los Angeles Times, another Al Arabiya, Human Rights Watch, Radio Free Europe/Radio Liberty, and The Guardian. Silver seren C 04:56, 4 June 2011 (UTC)


 * Those protests easily meet the general notability guideline. Binksternet (talk) 13:22, 4 June 2011 (UTC)

The Bugle: Issue LXIII, May 2011
To begin or stop receiving this newsletter, please list yourself in the appropriate section here. To assist with preparing the newsletter, please visit the newsroom. BrownBot (talk) 22:10, 4 June 2011 (UTC)

Jet blast deflector
Hi Binksternet!

Yesterday I was reading some of your articles, especially the FA for some possible pointers and ran across the following oddity on Jet blast deflector. The image on that page appears very dark and may be a negative of, but this is the image when 'thumb' or '200px', for example, are not used. The overly large image, sorry about that, seems fine on Wikimedia Commons without 'thumb' or a sizing. At first I thought a better image is needed so I tried to upload as it occurs on the web and apparently occurring on the de.wikipedia.org. On there the page url=http://de.wikipedia.org/wiki/Windschutzzaun, also has what appears to be a very dark, possibly negative image. I don't as yet know how to solve this problem, but I wanted to let you know. Cheers! Marshallsumter (talk) 23:04, 8 June 2011 (UTC)


 * Thanks for the note but all of those images look okay to me, the same image just different sizes. I don't know what's different about how you are viewing them and how I am... Sorry! Binksternet (talk) 23:11, 8 June 2011 (UTC)

Women's History Project – Final call for comments on the Scope draft
Our workshop on revising and clarifying the scope of our project has produced a draft outlining our project's scope and criteria for article inclusion. Please join us at Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Women's History/Scope workshop to discuss this document. There's a separate section beneath it for final comments, which will remain open through Tuesday, June 14th. As Cynwolfe says "with good participation, we should be able to revise our project page soon, clearing up the issues we've been dealing with and preparing us to go on to the fun stuff." Best wishes, Voceditenore (talk) 12:59, 10 June 2011 (UTC)

User:Ion_G_Nemes
I wonder who is this user that admonish me for something I did 6 months ago (problem solved long time ago)? I don't know him, didn't edit anything with him, had no discussion with him as far as I know, I see that you gave him some warnings... man with one red shoe 02:33, 11 June 2011 (UTC)


 * I, too, think he is a sock. Binksternet (talk) 06:15, 11 June 2011 (UTC)


 * I reported him on WP:ANI for not leaving me alone, feel free to contribute your opinion there if you indeed think he's a malicious sock. Personally I just want him off my back. man with one red shoe 14:47, 22 June 2011 (UTC)

Thanks
"That pogo stick would make an audible tone..."

This sort of comment is one of the things that I love about the Wikipedia community. Thanks for making me smile today. WhatamIdoing (talk) 23:28, 11 June 2011 (UTC)


 * Hey, it's my job! I'm an audio engineer. :D
 * Binksternet (talk) 23:39, 11 June 2011 (UTC)

Record Plant East
You redirected this page to itself. I pointed it where I thought it should go. Thanks Gurch (talk) 00:43, 12 June 2011 (UTC)


 * Oops. Thanks! Binksternet (talk) 00:57, 12 June 2011 (UTC)

Further AN/I Stuff (sigh)
Your name (as well as mine) has been brought up again in the Hay vs. Roz thread. Hay didn't bother to notify either of us, so just in case you've been too bored to watch... PhGustaf (talk) 03:16, 12 June 2011 (UTC)

DYK nomination of Record Plant
Hello! Your submission of Record Plant at the Did You Know nominations page has been reviewed, and there still are some issues that may need to be clarified. Please review the comment(s) underneath your nomination's entry and respond there as soon as possible. Thank you for contributing to Did You Know! Viriditas (talk) 12:11, 12 June 2011 (UTC)
 * I made another comment. Viriditas (talk) 09:40, 13 June 2011 (UTC)
 * One more try, and let's pass this thing, OK? Viriditas (talk) 14:57, 13 June 2011 (UTC)
 * I am sorry to report that a new problem has come up. It's nothing that you can't fix quickly, however. Viriditas (talk) 03:43, 14 June 2011 (UTC)

June 2011 Newsletter for WikiProject United States
--Kumioko (talk) 17:16, 12 June 2011 (UTC)

IAF B-17
I got the photo from the Israeli Air Force page.Articseahorse (talk) 18:31, 12 June 2011 (UTC)
 * Okay, but a photo is not usually enough to use as a reference, nor is a URL that points to Wikipedia. The better reference would be a book or magazine article. Binksternet (talk) 02:05, 13 June 2011 (UTC)

I do not know where that photo came from. I assumed that it was accepted for the IDF Air Force that I could use it for the B-17 section as proof that they were used by the IDF. Articseahorse (talk) 05:08, 13 June 2011 (UTC)
 * Proof isn't specifically needed until the fact is challenged. If someone challenges whether B-17s were used by Israel, any one of several excellent books can be cited: . There is no need to cite a photograph; photos can be falsified. Binksternet (talk) 06:15, 13 June 2011 (UTC)

DYK for Record Plant
Materialscientist (talk) 12:04, 17 June 2011 (UTC)

Thank you
This is to say thanks for the 25 DYK Medal you placed on my page. Very grateful. A friend called -- CrossTempleJay   →  talk 20:15, 18 June 2011 (UTC)


 * You're welcome. It's good that you are working to globalize Wikipedia through the addition of more information about Ghana. So few are in a position to do so! Binksternet (talk) 21:46, 18 June 2011 (UTC)

DYK for Faith and Freedom Coalition
The DYK project (nominate) 18:03, 20 June 2011 (UTC)

Nagato
Hello Binksternet. I saw some of your work over at the Battle of Midway article. Would you mind coming by the piece on the Japanese battleship Nagato and see if you can help bring a consensus opinion to the lead section regarding whether or not the ship was considered obsolete by the IJN admiralty at the outset of the war. I think not, but your opinion would be appreciated. Thanks. Gunbirddriver (talk) 04:19, 22 June 2011 (UTC)

Mediation around Abortion articles location
After the latest move request has landed up with about equal numbers for both sides I've started a mediation request. Please indicate there if you wish to participate. Thanks. -- Eraserhead1 &lt;talk&gt; 18:42, 23 June 2011 (UTC)


 * My name's not listed to accept mediation. Binksternet (talk) 18:45, 23 June 2011 (UTC)


 * You can still add it. NYyankees51 (talk) 04:59, 24 June 2011 (UTC)

Pasch
Could you clarify which edit to Pasch's article you are objecting to, and led you to place a warning template on my talk page?--Tdl1060 (talk) 15:47, 24 June 2011 (UTC)
 * Answered on your talk page. Binksternet (talk) 16:42, 24 June 2011 (UTC)
 * The Doyle budget increased spending by 9.63%. How is that "the deepest spending cuts in Wisconsin's history"?--Tdl1060 (talk) 16:59, 24 June 2011 (UTC)
 * How about this?
 * "The original proposed budget already includes $2.2 billion in spending cuts – the largest and deepest in Wisconsin history." Gordon Hintz press release
 * "That is why we made hard choices and cut over $3 billion in spending ndsh the deepest cuts in Wisconsin's history." Tom Nelson press release
 * "The budget contained more than $3 billion in spending cuts, the deepest in state history." Jeff Smith campaign website
 * "The governor’s 2009–2011 budget hinges on government-wide cuts, federal funds and a reprioritization of state money. Doyle calls for a $2.2 billion cut in the state budget by enacting a one percent decrease in funding for every department." Article in CCN Magazine - Community Connections News
 * "What it all means is that Governor Doyle and legislators must find an additional $1.6 billion in spending cuts or revenue increases -- or a combination of both -- to fill a budget hole previously estimated to be about $5 billion." Wisconsin State Bar
 * This shows there is another side to the story. Binksternet (talk) 17:26, 24 June 2011 (UTC)

request filed for clarification
Good day,

A request for clarification has been filed with Arbcom relative to a case in which you were involved or might be affected by. Communikat (talk) 17:15, 25 June 2011 (UTC)

415 Records
Hello Binksternet. I thought I'd drop a note...I'm restoring the copyright problem template at 415 records, that I placed a while ago, and which you removed. While I agree with your rationale, and do not wish to create any sort of awkward situation with you or any of the editors/contributors on the article, the copyright issue remains unresolved. Soooo...Please do not take offense when I say that as far as I know, the submitter still needs to follow the appropriate process to release such material for use here, which insofar as can be ascertained, he has not. Leaving a note on the talk page does not meet the requirements. Also, as is noted in bold at the top of the template added, please do not restore the material again until the matter is resolved. Thank you. There are instructions on the template that you can use to help resolve it, including participating in the discussion on the topic at copyright problem investigation page, here. d u f f  09:08, 26 June 2011 (UTC)


 * Thanks for the note. Binksternet (talk) 14:10, 26 June 2011 (UTC)


 * Thanks for putting up with me long enough to allow me to better understand the process as well.  d u f f   02:51, 28 June 2011 (UTC)
 * 'S cool!
 * Binksternet (talk) 04:40, 28 June 2011 (UTC)

The Automatt
Binksternet - this is a great article, very well researched and organized. Thank you for doing this.

By the time I started working there, ca 1983, Room A had a Trident TSM console with automation, Room B had a Harrison, and Room C had a smaller trident, I think it was the 80b. David Kahne's production room upstairs was frequently used by Carlos Santana, and there was a rehearsal room upstairs that the Starship often used. In 1983, Sandy Pearlman subleased Studio C and called it "Time Enough World Enough Studios" and kept a lock on it until The Automatt closed. After its closing he moved it to Harbor Sound in Sausalito. Those of us who were in the middle of projects continued them primarily at Studio D or The Plant in Sausalito, at Fantasy in Berkeley, and at Narada's Tarpan studios in San Rafael.

Some other artists who were recorded there included a young Tori Amos, doing demos with Narada Michael Walden; the Pointer Sisters; and I believe at least a few tracks from the first Whitney Houston record produced by NMW. I don't think that I produced "Hands on Ice" there (I could be mistaken) but I know we recorded about an LPs worth of material with The Big Race, who later morphed into Pray_for_Rain_(band). I also produced much of the soundtrack to the short film "Architects of Victory", written by Jeffrey Kimball and Warren Leight. The whole of the LP "Good News About Mental Health" by The Afflicted was produced by me in Studio C with Paul Mandl engineering in 1983. Are you certain that the Automatt closed in 1984? I seem to recall still working there in 1985 but I could be mistaken.

It might be worth mentioning that Paul Stubblebine had a mastering room on the first floor, that the studio had its own tiled echo chamber as well as an EMT 250 Gold Foil reverb and an EMT 140.

DanielLevitin 19:39 26, June 2011 —Preceding undated comment added 18:43, 26 June 2011 (UTC).

Side note, Binksternet, on The Automatt, related to the 415 Records article: I left a comment/question on the discussion page at Talk:The Automatt & if either you nor DanielLevitin wouldn't mind poking your head in there to address it, I'd appreciate it very much. Thanks! d u f f  20:32, 27 June 2011 (UTC)

Record Plant
I'm interested to know where you're getting your information. Would you mind sharing it with me? The articles you cited are almost exactly what I had collected for my own use. As to photos, I have boxes and boxes. Identifying everyone is on my list of things to do. SamStone12 (talk) 07:19, 29 June 2011 (UTC)SamStone12


 * Replying on your talk page. Binksternet (talk) 14:39, 29 June 2011 (UTC)


 * there is a response to your recent post on my talk page SausHistorian (talk) 19:08, 1 July 2011 (UTC)

DYK for The Automatt
Materialscientist (talk) 18:04, 30 June 2011 (UTC)


 * Congratulations, Binksternet!  d u f f   20:57, 30 June 2011 (UTC)


 * Fun times! Binksternet (talk) 21:09, 30 June 2011 (UTC)

McCune Article
Hello Binky, we have not met online or offline, however you seem extremely knowledgable about some articles I am creating. I would love your input and expert eye at McCune Audio/Video/Lighting. I was also wondering if you help with the "redirect" from McCune Sound Service. All the best. Mix Minus (talk) 18:54, 1 July 2011 (UTC)


 * Fixed the redirect. I will keep your McCune page on my watchlist and improve it as I get the chance. Binksternet (talk) 19:56, 1 July 2011 (UTC)

Disputed non-free use rationale for File:HS Newsreel Wong.jpg
Thank you for uploading File:HS Newsreel Wong.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 within a few days in accordance with our criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions, please ask them at the media copyright questions page. Thank you. J Milburn (talk) 12:47, 3 July 2011 (UTC)

Completely new abortion proposal and mediation
In light of the seemingly endless disputes over their respective titles, a neutral mediator has crafted a proposal to rename the two major abortion articles (pro-life/anti-abortion movement, and pro-choice/abortion rights movement) to completely new names. The idea, which is located here, is currently open for opinions. As you have been a contributor in the past to at least one of the articles, your thoughts on the matter would be appreciated.

The hope is that, if a consensus can be reached on the article titles, the energy that has been spent debating the titles of the articles here and here can be better spent giving both articles some much needed improvement to their content. Please take some time to read the proposal and weigh in on the matter. Even if your opinion is simple indifference, that opinion would be valuable to have posted.

To avoid accusations that this posting violates WP:CANVASS, this posting is being made to every non-anon editor who has edited either page since 1 July 2010, irrespective of possible previous participation at the mediation page. HuskyHuskie (talk) 20:04, 4 July 2011 (UTC)


 * Right, I'm well aware and already a participant. Binksternet (talk) 19:36, 4 July 2011 (UTC)

Pon de Floor
04:26, 5 July 2011 (UTC)

Oakland Climate - Rand McNally
Direct sources are tough to come by. This link has the date of the Rand study plus another: http://www.oaklandchamber.com/relocation/facts.asp. This link is the Outside Magazine article that references the Rand study: http://dougfuller.files.wordpress.com/2008/07/where-to-live-now-oakland_page_2.jpg --Fizbin (talk) 19:39, 7 July 2011 (UTC)


 * The Chamber of Commerce quotes sources, which is better than I thought. Binksternet (talk) 19:56, 7 July 2011 (UTC)

Thanks
Hello B. Thanks for cleaning up all of the recent edits at The Great Race made by various IP's. I started to go through it last night and my brain started filling up with cotton candy so I went to sleep instead. I thought things were looking dubious so I am glad that you took the time to do things properly. Thanks again and cheers. MarnetteD | Talk 22:00, 7 July 2011 (UTC)


 * You're welcome! The fun continues, especially since there are good sources. Binksternet (talk) 22:02, 7 July 2011 (UTC)

Graham Holliman
Hey, it's been a while. This design has caught my interest but I can find little good information on it, except for the South African from AVforum who claims to have been successful in making one, has the original instructions, and made a pdf to share with people. No one on DIY forum, where I have revived one of the old threads on it, seems to have tried to make one, although they have tried knock offs. I don't understand why no one seems to have built one to the instructions given by the South African. Besides this enclosure, Mr. Holliman seems to have no other real significance, and between that and the lack of enthusiasm surrounding the design makes me wonder if it is really worth it's salt or if Holliman filed the patents just to satisfy his ego. I found that interesting thread you started in 2008 asking about some of the earliest subwoofers like the 8182, and it was interesting to hear of the mamoth designs people made to overcome the inefficiency and power issues back then. This design is suppossed to be efficient in it's intricacy, it's basically a low excursion driver (not sure if the original intention was a 15 or 18 inch, but I'd be willing to bet 18 as oddly large drivers in the 30's of inches were sometimes used back then, driver firing into a small diameter hole in an otherwise very, very small space with it's back side exposed, which then excites a helmholtz resonator, which, although aparantly tuned high by itself, is low with the combonation and supossedly the enclosure actually lowers the driver's Q in order to accurately produce frequencies as low as 5 Hertz, with Holliman claiming the ability to well fill in the 7 to 25 Hz range. The resonator terminates with two long, slowly tapering bass reflex "tubes," they are specifically not horns. What do you know about this enclosure? Your help would be appreciated. If I had reliable instructions to go by, and some good renders or pictures, I would be glad to give it a shot, but all I can find seems a little suspiciously to be just hearsay. To find a driver like the one Holliman was using would be quite difficult, but I would assume the closest match to be a tight, low excursion driver such as a Peavy instrument/PA driver, not a high excursion, low quality car driver as others have suggested. At those frequencies (which is actually a wide range, over three entire octaves) I believe any significant physical motion of the driver would kill the quality and result in much distortion and harmonics. Another driver I was considering was the Focal 18, but this is quite extremely expensive, and I am leery of Focal, as they make exotic designs like the "Dome" which leads me to believe you are paying for it's uniqueness rather than just quality. What do you know about this striking enclosure design? Daniel Christensen (talk) 18:09, 8 July 2011 (UTC)


 * I have not heard of this enclosure design. Sounds interesting! Binksternet (talk) 18:15, 8 July 2011 (UTC)


 * Graham Holliman Velocity-Coupled Infra Bass speaker design.jpg
 * Please Google search Graham Holliman, here is the main thread I revived: http://www.diyaudio.com/forums/subwoofers/3238-graham-holliman-velocity-coupled-infra-bass-speaker.html
 * Here is another thread: http://www.diyaudio.com/forums/subwoofers/88593-5-25-hz.html
 * Here is the thread on AVforum (not AVS): http://www.avforums.com/forums/subwoofers-tactile-transducers/139495-infrasonic-bass-generator.html


 * Here is the patent:
 * http://worldwide.espacenet.com/publicationDetails/description?CC=GB&NR=2037534&KC=&locale=en_gb&FT=E
 * The Graham Holliman Velocity-Coupled Infrabass Speaker


 * A lot about it seems to be a mystery that one can really lose themselves in. I only stumbled across it in a whimsacal search of "infrasonic subwoofer," speaking of which, have you ever auditioned a rotary woofer installation? There are six installed in the Niagara's Fury attraction at the falls, I have never been. Part of the intention of such a design was, according to Holliman, intended to cover left out "bass transients," which he said optimally would require down to 3 Hz response, sounds like he could be refering to the ultra lowness of say the movement of a bass string as you wiggle it, or let go of it to switch to the next. I know that any guitar pickup goes as slow as you can move the string by pushing on it. The design, at such a low frequency, seems as though it would be critically dependent on the room, which would have to be as well sealed as possible, becuase it's basically just de/com pressing the air in it, similar to a rotary woofer at 0 Hz/DC, it's just compressing the air in the listening room. At this point, you might as well just build a large enough sealed enclosure with a little door for you to get inside :D Daniel Christensen (talk) 19:24, 8 July 2011 (UTC)
 * Okay, when you go to the patent page you need to click on the Original Document link located on the left to see the pictures. They are rough illustrations. Daniel Christensen (talk) 21:26, 8 July 2011 (UTC)


 * Here is the diagram of the unit, http://www.flickr.com/photos/rcadimensia/5916852260/in/photostream/ it's just a big chamber firing over a helmholtz resonator, basically the "blowing over the top of a bottle effect." The vertically oriented outside tapered chamber is specifically not acting as a horn, I believe. Daniel Christensen (talk) 00:12, 9 July 2011 (UTC)

Steinway & Sons again
Hi there. I am not active on wikipedia anymore, but I just noticed that the article is back to its "old" style (the fanoftheworld style). I think, based on the kind of articles edited by the user, that the new major editor of this article (User:Peoplefromarizona) is a puppet of banned user User:fanoftheworld (who has continued editing the same article using User:Rerumirf and other accounts). Best.--Karljoos (talk) 12:38, 10 July 2011 (UTC)

Pro-Life
This is better put here than at the the Discussion page

1) On a friendly humorous note, when I saw your contributions and talk page, I wondered how you could take the position I mistakely thought you were taking! 2) Based on what you've written on the pro life Discussion page, I'm willing to wager half of my wealth that you don't write ad copy for a living or do PR! I think you're dead, flat wrong about the wording of that sentence. I believe the wording of the first version conveys an unconscious message that abortion is murder. If you want to revert it, feel free. I've at least cleaned up the rest of the spin.

Regards, Tapered (talk) 03:11, 11 July 2011 (UTC)


 * Please have a look @ the edit I made just a few minutes ago. It's another example of spin language skillfully embedded. I didn't change content, just the way it's worded. I think this illustrates what I'm doing. Also, I don't let spin language that concurs w/ my opinion stand either. Spin is spin. Tapered (talk) 01:59, 13 July 2011 (UTC)

Your intelligent criticism, even if I disagree with it, has convinced me to stop taunting. Thanks. Tapered (talk) 01:46, 14 July 2011 (UTC)

DYK for Quiet Birdmen
— HJ Mitchell &#124;  Penny for your thoughts?   16:04, 12 July 2011 (UTC)

DYK for H. S. Wong
Calmer  Waters  00:03, 14 July 2011 (UTC)

July 2011
You currently appear to be engaged in an edit war&#32; according to the reverts you have made on Adolf Hitler. Users are expected to collaborate with others and avoid editing disruptively. In particular, the three-revert rule states that: If you find yourself in an editing dispute, use the article's talk page to discuss controversial changes; work towards a version that represents consensus among editors. You can post a request for help at an appropriate noticeboard or seek dispute resolution. In some cases it may be appropriate to request temporary page protection. If you continue to edit war, you may be blocked from editing without further notice. Santista1982 (talk) 15:16, 16 July 2011 (UTC)
 * 1) Making more than three reversions on a single page within a 24-hour period is almost always grounds for an immediate block.
 * 2) Do not edit war even if you believe you are right.

The Bugle: Issue LXIV, June 2011
To receive this newsletter on your talk page, join the project or sign up here. If you are a member who does not want delivery, please go to this page. BrownBot (talk) 22:32, 16 July 2011 (UTC)

DYK nomination of Article
Hello! Your submission of Article at the Did You Know nominations page has been reviewed, and there still are some issues that may need to be clarified. Please review the comment(s) underneath your nomination's entry and respond there as soon as possible. Thank you for contributing to Did You Know! Truthkeeper88 (talk) 03:08, 17 July 2011 (UTC)

Charles Ives entry appropriate footnote to mention of Stephen Foster
Why did you you remove? SLY111 — Preceding unsigned comment added by 68.173.89.63 (talk) 05:16, 17 July 2011 (UTC)

Thanks
I don't know what I was thinking! Ed [talk] [majestic titan] 07:13, 17 July 2011 (UTC)

Do not edit war – 3RR notice
Please do not engage in edit warring to add detailed text about Steinway Musical Instruments to Steinway & Sons and without explaining why you keep doing it. Editors are not allowed more than three reverts in 24 hours, yet fewer reverts can be interpreted as edit warring, with serious consequences. Edit warriors may be blocked. Please read WP:3RR, Tendentious editing and the talk pages of articles. --Peoplefromarizona (talk) 17:38, 19 July 2011 (UTC)


 * Thanks for the return notice... I'm well aware of the state of that article and the nature of your promotional editing. Binksternet (talk) 17:42, 19 July 2011 (UTC)


 * Thank you for the notice on my talk page. It is funny to see you write that notice on my talk page, when you are engage in edit war and when you are violating the 3RR.
 * I don't see that your statement – "...and the nature of your promotional editing" – has anything at all to do with your edit war and your violation of 3RR, but I see your statement as yet an example of your way of argumentation. --Peoplefromarizona (talk) 18:02, 19 July 2011 (UTC)

Talkback
morelM William 02:19, 20 July 2011 (UTC)
 * Please check my response to your comments. morelM William 04:27, 20 July 2011 (UTC)

The WikiProject National Archives Newsletter
The first ever WikiProject National Archives newsletter has been published. Please read on to find out what we're up to and how to help out! There are many opportunities for getting more involved. Dominic·t 21:17, 20 July 2011 (UTC)

DYK for Remote recording
Gatoclass (talk) 00:10, 22 July 2011 (UTC)

ReplayGain
Requested move did not happen because of no consensus. Was it your intent to block consensus? You last comment leads me to think not. If you feel you have been misread, I urge you to contact the administrator involved and clarify your position on this. --Kvng (talk) 04:33, 22 July 2011 (UTC)


 * Strange result, mostly because not enough people commented. I'll drop a note... Binksternet (talk) 14:43, 22 July 2011 (UTC)


 * It looks like a conservative reading of WP:CON. Thanks for looking in to it. --Kvng (talk) 16:30, 22 July 2011 (UTC)


 * Does it look like this will get resolved somehow or do I need to submit another move request? --Kvng (talk) 22:03, 26 July 2011 (UTC)


 * I just now left a note at the closing admin's talk page. Didn't get to it earlier. Let's see what he says. Binksternet (talk) 22:31, 26 July 2011 (UTC)

DYK for On Becoming Baby Wise
EncycloPetey (talk) 16:04, 22 July 2011 (UTC)

Talkback
Dougweller (talk) 16:16, 23 July 2011 (UTC)

July 2011 Newsletter for WikiProject United States
--Kumioko (talk) 23:54, 23 July 2011 (UTC)

NPOV and other rules
I have noted in the recent exchanges regarding Steinway & Sons that you are inclined to further Wikipedia policies such as NPOV, non advertising, copyvio, etc. (yes, I admit that had I known it would blow-up like this I might never have brought up Samick - even though I believe it to be a key historical event in the company history) As someone experienced in the application of these rules, as well as appearing to have remarkable research and sourcing skills, I was wondering (and given that you may be oversaturated with Steinway at this point) if you had ever looked at USS Iowa turret explosion ? That article is one of the most misleading and biased I have seen on Wikipedia. However, it espouses an overwhelmingly POPULAR bias, and thus is rather immune to any criticisms such as those I offered on its talk page some time ago. Basically, perverting logic (saying that proof of a potential cause equates to ruling out another or decides the cause; ignoring the official unknown cause status; misquoting to assert facts that deny comon sense and physics) and making interpretations from an already biased source without any attempt at balance in material inclusion, would describe the author's approach. But, partially out of fear of reprisal, and also politically recognizing the risks that come with opposing a popular viewpoint (even though my own is one of simply wanting to see facts and NPOV, not to take the side of the original, equally flawed Navy finding), I and others stay away.

If you are braver than I, and interested in improving the Wikipedia, there is far more bias at this article than at S&S - and perhaps a little time for everyone to cool off with regard to Steinway would allow for its faults to be addressed later with less contention ?--Rwberndt (talk) 14:01, 24 July 2011 (UTC)


 * Big assignment, no promises. Binksternet (talk) 14:41, 24 July 2011 (UTC)

Would you please just stop already
Your frequent snyde remarks about my political philosophy and speculation about my motivations for editing are a violation of NPA and completely inaccurate. In the interests of collegialism I've been patient but this is getting completely out of hand. You are entitied to your opinion that I hold "extreme socially conservative views." Of course you only have the most basic inkling of what my views are and how you even attempt to classify them as "extreme" is an affront to civility. Since you really don't know I'd appreciate it if you would keep it to yourself. Believe it or not I am not a huge Reagan fan. So you're wrong again. So why does Reagan figure so prominently in the project? Because there are hundreds of Reagan articles. There are more Reagan-related FA, GA, FM, DYK pages than any other topic in Conservatism. The very best articles in the project are Reagan related. Of course they are going to be showcased and highlighted. It's not my fault that editors prefer to create and improve articles about Reagan over any other topic. Same with the American emphasis of the project. Editors create, edit and are just more interested in American conservatism than any other variant. If you were at all interested in improving the project you would know this. You would be tagging what non-US articles there are instead of spending your time watching my contributions and bitching about non-existent advocacy at the talk page. As a matter of fact I have worked tirelessly to find non-US articles. One of the issues is that non-US articles are poorly categorized. In case you haven't noticed I have revamped the Conservatism cattree and added almost a hundred non-US cats. Maybe between whining fits you could categorize some articles into the cats I've created. Ah, hope springs eternal. – Lionel (talk) 20:56, 25 July 2011 (UTC)


 * I will stop adding my conjecture about your conservatism. Will you respond to my question at Establishing a guideline for inviting members? Will you respond to LittleJerry's question at This should be Project Conservatism not Project Modern American Conservatism? The project has unanswered problems with its basic reason for being. Binksternet (talk) 21:42, 25 July 2011 (UTC)

Moving Replay Gain
Based on your additional input these was support for the move. Rather then reopen, it made more sense to just move the page. So I did that already. Vegaswikian (talk) 23:06, 26 July 2011 (UTC)


 * Thank you! Binksternet (talk) 23:08, 26 July 2011 (UTC)

DYK for Severed Ways
Thanks from me and the wiki Victuallers (talk) 06:13, 28 July 2011 (UTC)

C Gardel
Thanks for the help @ Carlos Gardel while I was 'distracted! Tapered (talk) 01:25, 31 July 2011 (UTC)


 * You bet. It's clearly of interest to both of us. Binksternet (talk) 01:33, 31 July 2011 (UTC)

Caribbean Airlines Flight 523
Hello Binksternet, We're working together on the article. I found this aerial shot here from msnbc, which shows the downed aircraft just yards passed the runway. The tail wings are basically resting atop the perimeter fence with the section between tail wings and main wings resting on the socalled "road" past the fence. This contradicts some of the press reports. Joerg, the BajanZindy (talk) 13:50, 31 July 2011 (UTC)


 * The written descriptions which don't match this image should be thrown out. Binksternet (talk) 15:42, 31 July 2011 (UTC)

Some sweet strawberries

 * Wow, flavorful! I can smell them all the way from Oakland. :D
 * Binksternet (talk) 20:23, 31 July 2011 (UTC)