User talk:Just plain Bill/Archive 2

why not COLLABORATITION?
Hello! I think, the text needs the titel 'Collaboratition', cause it has the definition of it in the first sentence as well... What's your (or other's) opinion??? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 147.86.195.1 (talk) 09:04, 3 January 2011 (UTC)
 * Sorry, I was editing in a hurry. I've put it back. __ Just plain Bill (talk) 18:38, 3 January 2011 (UTC)

Links
Welcome to Wikipedia. Although everyone is welcome to contribute to the encyclopedia, one or more of the external links you added do not comply with our guidelines for external links and have been removed. Wikipedia is not a collection of links; nor should it be used as a platform for advertising or promotion, and doing so is contrary to the goals of this project. Because Wikipedia uses nofollow tags, external links do not alter search engine rankings. If you feel the link should be added to the article, please discuss it on the article's talk page before reinserting it. Please take a look at the welcome page to learn more about contributing to this encyclopedia. Thank you. Gspark220 (talk) 17:38, 28 January 2011 (UTC)

WP:Don't template the regulars This discussion belongs at Talk:Five string violin. Thank you. __ Just plain Bill (talk) 17:43, 28 January 2011 (UTC)

Circle of fifths
Hi. You deleted a link I added on the External links section of http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Circle_of_Fifths. You claimed that "it's not really an improvement". Surely there are other Circle of Fifths diagrams and as such the link I posted is not the only one. But my link does show a Circle of Fifths that can be printed and rotated and it also establishes a relationship between music notes and colors. As such I don't understand your comment. Please explain why you exercised such censorship. Thanks.

B Melo B (talk)

— Preceding unsigned comment added by B Melo B (talk • contribs) 20:40, 30 January 2011 (UTC)
 * First, the link you provided was not to an image of a circle of fifths, but to an index page with numerous topics. I tried a few of the "preview" buttons, but they did not work. The "relationship between music notes and colors" seems arbitrary to me. Do you have a link to some scholarship regarding that relationship? "Censorship" is not a word I take lightly. I prefer to see Wikipedia articles showing useful, relevant links. Wikipedia is not a link farm. __ Just plain Bill (talk) 21:12, 30 January 2011 (UTC)

Well, if instead of just sticking to a preview that didn't work for you you had actually downloaded the file and maybe some of the others you might have seen what it was all about. As for censorship if you don't like that word you can replace it with whatever you like. But that's exactly how I felt when you deleted my post. Anyway, from this short discussion I have already concluded that Wikipedia isn't for me. I couldn't be bothered to defend my opinion against anyone that decides my contributions aren't worth having. If YOU preferto have Wikipedia in a certain way then go ahead and make it whatever way you like. As for the "Do you have a link to some scholarship regarding that relationship?" question I can only reply with "Do you have a link to your own Scholarship credentials?". — Preceding unsigned comment added by B Melo B (talk • contribs) 22:00, 30 January 2011 (UTC)
 * Better to discuss this at the talk pages of the articles where you linked your site. If you wish to "leave and never come back" that is nobody's concern but your own. If you decide to participate, you may be interested to see how reliable sourcing is supposed to work on Wikipedia, and what sort of external links are appreciated.
 * I did download a few of the PDFs on your site, including the circle of fifths, before removing that link. I am still curious about how you decided to link the colors to the keys, which is why I asked about any previous scholarship in the matter. __ Just plain Bill (talk) 22:15, 30 January 2011 (UTC)

User talk:Hyacinth
Your welcome, massively. Hopefully I'm usually if not always on the proper side of the civility line when we interact, as I appreciate your edits and discussion. Hyacinth (talk) 00:42, 10 February 2011 (UTC)


 * I don't know if you've been around long enough to have seen what I feel to have been a change in my "style", which I believe many long term users also notice, that it becomes less positive, more negative, less difficult to not bite newbies, etc. Peak usage the only way I've had heard the trends expressed in a related manner, so I created that essay. Hyacinth (talk) 19:04, 10 February 2011 (UTC)

WikiProject Music theory
Hi! There's an attempt to revive wp:WikiProject Music theory going on, are you interested? --Niklas R Talkpage 15:07, 23 February 2011 (UTC)
 * Thanks! Added to my watchlist. That's about all I can commit at the moment. __ Just plain Bill (talk) 04:56, 24 February 2011 (UTC)

February 2011
Welcome to Wikipedia. Although everyone is welcome to contribute constructively to the encyclopedia, we must insist that you assume good faith while interacting with other editors, which you did not on Horn (instrument). Take a look at the welcome page to learn more about contributing to this encyclopedia. Thank you. ''If you wish to revert good-faith edits, Twinkle has a special button labeled "rollback (AGF)" which you should use. I don't understand your justification as to why the previous edit was bad grammar; please feel free to explain it.'' Nat682 (talk) 05:36, 27 February 2011 (UTC)
 * Nat, nothing in Bill's or summary indicates he did not assume good faith. It's a good idea to glance at a user's contributions before putting a "Welcome to Wikipedia" template on his or her talk page with beginner-level guidance on it tantamount to a reprimand, otherwise you risk appearing to assume bad faith yourself. As for an explanation of the edit, the AHD entry for comprisehas an interesting usage note that applies here. Eric talk 14:24, 27 February 2011 (UTC)
 * Thanks, Eric. Couldn't have said it better myself. My use of Twinkle's neutral "rollback" feature has little to do with my assumption of good faith. __ Just plain Bill (talk) 17:53, 27 February 2011 (UTC)

Talk:Cornet & templates
Thanks - I really couldn't figure out what was going on there. - Special-T (talk) 19:14, 27 February 2011 (UTC)

Featured Sounds Promotions
and

Perception
From now on I'm not going to address disingenuous assertions, questions with obvious or readily found answers and questions that have been asked more than once on the talk page because it just creates miles of clutter. I think this thing that you're calling "Reification of experienced items as an external ideal "reality"" is called "perception", and no it's not a fallacy.

"There is a difference between most instances of experiencing and hallucinating." I should hope so.--Atlantictire (talk) 12:34, 30 April 2011 (UTC)
 * I see you still need to work on those reading comprehension skills, or perhaps you are the one being disingenuous. Perception is perception, not reification. Same goes for sensation. The false dichotomy of 'there's something that's being perceived as this construct "pitch", or else we are all hallucinating.' is still a false dichotomy. Rhetorical shenanigans like that only reduce your credibility.
 * I don't mind your holding strong opinions, but the tools you choose for defending them amount to casuistry. I see those miles of clutter as your own doing, arising from your colorful but only faintly relevant analogies, name-dropping appeals to authority, and your willingness to go off on lengthy tangents without addressing the central topic. __ Just plain Bill (talk) 17:19, 30 April 2011 (UTC)

Tools again
Hello! I finally replied over at Talk:Tools, if you're still interested. I have plenty of time to work on the project now and will be working more in the next few weeks. Regards, Scientific29 (talk) 03:36, 6 May 2011 (UTC)

Saxophone - Crook vs. Neck
Hi Bill. I started a section over on Talk:Tenor saxophone regarding this. I'd appreciate your comments. Regards, -- Man way  17:11, 8 May 2011 (UTC)

Irish/Scots Gaelic mutual intelligibility
Thanks for sticking up for me in this discussion! Siz de sağ olun! I've added a new section because I remembered about a radio programme which has been running in Scotland and Ireland for many years now, jointly presented by a speaker of Scots Gaelic and a speaker of Irish, each using their own languages. I've given links to it. If the two main editors are not prepared to accept this, then I'll just have to assume they're being deliberately stubborn and give up. I also know Turkish and am somewhat familiar with Azeri. This discussion about my own mother tongue (Scots Gaelic) is especially irritating, because I don't believe for a second that someone from Edirne could easily understand Tabriz Azeri if they'd never heard it before -- and yet those two languages can go in as mutually intelligible (which everyone knows they are, in their standard forms), but Scots and Irish Gaelic can't! Hoşca kalın! 77.44.110.91 (talk) 19:40, 18 May 2011 (UTC)
 * Something else -- I searched through the book used to back up the mutual intelligibility of Faroese and Icelandic writing. If you search for Gaelic, you come up with the following quotation on pg 36 (towards the bottom of the list of search results because it's not one of the pages they allow you to read in full), "but some of the Scottish Protestants in the Ulster Plantation were Gaelic-speakers, whose language was often mutually comprehensible with Irish."  The link is http://books.google.co.uk/books?id=1ixmu8Iga7gC&pg=PA106#v=onepage&q=gaelic&f=false, and the book details are at note 23 of the article.  I haven't responded to JorisvS's latest antics because I've now come to the conclusion he's just trolling.  Maybe you might want to do something with this?  I'm certainly not going to bother any more.  And now I really must get on with something more profitable....77.44.110.91 (talk) 21:29, 18 May 2011 (UTC)
 * Sometimes the best one can do in cases like this is grab a bowl of popcorn and watch the drama unfold. I have got my eyes on it, and may hope others do as well. For the most part, I believe Wikipedia's regard for verifiability (in preference to truth) is a good thing, even though it sometimes allows actual facts to fall through the cracks. Be well! __ Just plain Bill (talk) 21:35, 18 May 2011 (UTC)

Vote
Bill, we need your help deciding wether or not to change 'Creation Science' to 'Creation science'. Here's the link: Wekn reven i susej eht (talk) 15:03, 27 May 2011 (UTC)
 * Thanks for the notice. As I have said there, I don't really have a dog in that fight. Be well, __ Just plain Bill (talk) 15:23, 27 May 2011 (UTC)

Clothing laws
I think the article Clothing laws by country is badly in need of expansion. Only 5/6 countries on this list. Do you know any refs we could use for expansding it? Pass a Method talk  19:47, 6 June 2011 (UTC)
 * Nope, I got nothing. Wouldn't know where to start... __ Just plain Bill (talk) 20:44, 6 June 2011 (UTC)

Twinkle on language death: I hope they will discuss...
...as "Latin is dead" is all to "clear" - they should recognize that Latin Lessons are death: of joy - and the Latin language.

By the way - is a strike (with a link to the discussion page) already "Vandalism"? why is the "strike" than at all available for the article pages? Greetings Ūnus ē Latīnīs novīs (talk) 03:15, 20 June 2011 (UTC)
 * Nobody called it vandalism. __ Just plain Bill (talk) 03:41, 20 June 2011 (UTC)
 * not quite nobody: AGF-page(amidst the first paragraph) and the Twinkle-page(also in the 1st paragraph):-(? Ūnus ē Latīnīs novīs (talk) 03:51, 20 June 2011 (UTC)
 * Nobody called your edits vandalism. __ Just plain Bill (talk) 03:54, 20 June 2011 (UTC)
 * Well, nice enough - I felt my assumption was wrong :-/ - could you then help me with this: how can I give notice of "disputedness" to those who "read only"?  Ūnus ē Latīnīs novīs (talk) 04:48, 20 June 2011 (UTC) slowly progressing


 * I've found the "ActiveDiscuss"-template to solve the problem - thx Ūnus ē Latīnīs novīs (talk) 05:51, 20 June 2011 (UTC)

Talkin' shop...
User_talk:Geofferybard Geo Bard Rap 22:37, 29 June 2011 (UTC)

OT Fiddle
I agree with both of your recent edits. Probably true but... Not an established encyclopedic point, rather OR or Essay-like. Geo Bard Rap 01:29, 12 July 2011 (UTC)
 * OK. My real objection to the sentence I took out was the weasel-wording of "Many old time fiddlers" without saying specifically who. That, and the lack of particulars around "concert violinists" and "valued in the thousands" took the whole thing outside the realm of encyclopedic content in my opinion. __ Just plain Bill (talk) 01:45, 12 July 2011 (UTC)

Please review the discussion page on correlograms
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Talk:Correlogram

I've explained my reasoning there.

I am reverting your edit and removing the link. If you think I am wrong, please let me know.

Best, Talgalili (talk) 21:40, 12 July 2011 (UTC)

Interested in your opinion
What kind of strings do you like for Old Time? How much do you actually flatten your bridge? Do play a lot of shuffles? Well, I tried the same kind that Sammy uses but I broke the A on like the second day so quit using them but I am playing more Old Timey now and we have an OT festival coming up so I want to switch strings. You seem to know a lot about these things, I am quite interested to hear your view on strings. Geo Bard Rap 01:42, 18 July 2011 (UTC)

Fact
Bill, the additional link to "Reality" I feel serves a legitimate purpose (and in fact brings the entry back to a state analogous to what it once was.) From the OED:

Fact: "Something that has really occurred or is actually the case; something certainly known to be of this character; hence, a particular truth known by actual observation or authentic testimony, as opposed to what is merely inferred, or to a conjecture or fiction; a datum of experience, as distinguished from the conclusions that may be based upon it."

Really: "In reality; in a real manner. Also: in fact, actually."

Something's "reality" is foundational to its being a fact. If there is a well thought out entry for "Reality" it only makes sense to follow though to it. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Xefer (talk • contribs) 16:45, 30 August 2011 (UTC)
 * Talk:Fact is a better place to address this. __ Just plain Bill (talk) 11:08, 31 August 2011 (UTC)

Non-free files in your user space
Hey there Just plain Bill, thank you for your contributions! I am a bot, alerting you that non-free files are not allowed in user or talk space. I removed some files I found on User:Just plain Bill/Sandbox.


 * See a log of files removed today here.
 * Shut off the bot here.
 * Report errors here.
 * If you have any questions, place a template, along with your question, beneath this message.

Thank you, -- DASHBot (talk) 05:02, 2 September 2011 (UTC)

Very important definition of tourism
Very important definition

In 2001 Mr. David Martin Rendón of the Private University of Tacna - Peru, tourism is defined to science "The turismología"as: "Social Science of fact, given by an orderly process that includes different actions motivation, movement and use of space tourism, the plant that supports it, its structure and super structure of the homos turísticus " — Preceding unsigned comment added by Turismologotcq (talk • contribs) 23:41, 4 September 2011 (UTC)
 * Response at Talk:Tourism. __ Just plain Bill (talk) 01:04, 5 September 2011 (UTC)

IP
The 46. IP is the banned user that was POV-pushing a few months ago on Bouzouki and other instruments.-- — ZjarriRrethues — talk 21:31, 22 November 2011 (UTC)
 * Not surprising. Thanks! __ Just plain Bill (talk) 23:45, 22 November 2011 (UTC)

Bağlama
In previous edits in article the users quite rightly spotted parenthetically a timeline of Baglama lute but not in the right section. So, I can explain your reason of reverting. I restore the sentence now, but in the right section. --Grsalmonerous (talk) 14:56, 23 November 2011 (UTC)
 * The Grsalmonerous account and this IP are also socks.-- — ZjarriRrethues — talk 18:44, 3 December 2011 (UTC)
 * My Ip is ending in 08 somehow...however I dont have special experience on music, I assure that it isnt me.  --Grsalmonerous (talk) 22:16, 3 December 2011 (UTC)

A barnstar for you!
Thanks! I have sometimes printed things with an ink-jet printer on heavy paper or card stock, for my own use. A local print shop or copy center may be able to help you. I suppose one could laminate the picture for more durability. I hope I am understanding you correctly, that you are looking for a sturdier copy of this... you may find other images here. This talk page is the best place to contact me. __ Just plain Bill (talk) 18:41, 8 December 2011 (UTC)

Feedback Request
In the past you have provided great insight on the Design elements and principles page and since then some more progress has been made. Currently I am editing this page for a Wiki Ambassador Program at Clemson University and would really appreciate any feedback you could give. There will be more information and example images of each coming soon! Andybolin (talk) 06:24, 30 March 2012 (UTC)
 * OK, I am watching; putting a more elaborate reply at Talk:Design elements and principles. __ Just plain Bill (talk) 14:00, 30 March 2012 (UTC)

Flying_Spaghetti_Monster
Well, we didn't get any response from the good folks at WP:NPOVN either, so I've asked for a third opinion to see if that helps. Regards, Celestra (talk) 00:01, 1 April 2012 (UTC)
 * I threw my two cents in at Parody Religion; follow the sources. -- JeffreyBillings (talk) 13:04, 14 June 2012 (UTC)
 * Ramen... __ Just plain Bill (talk) 17:05, 14 June 2012 (UTC)

Talkback (Ks0stm)
Ks0stm (T•C•G•E) 21:21, 8 April 2012 (UTC)

Miscellaneous Violin purchase
Hi Bill. I saw your posts here and thought you could help me by responding to my post at Miscellaneous Violin purchase. I also asked Antandrus for help as well. And, I took your idea for a user page photo and posted File:Pomegranate03 edit.jpg to my user page. Thanks! -- JeffreyBillings (talk) 15:54, 9 June 2012 (UTC)
 * Thank you for your reply. I didn't know that 4/4 meant full size or that there were fractional violins to account for my son's size. I also didn't consider that mail-order violins would need setup (adding to the cost) or that getting a head start might lead to bad habits. Lots to think about! Maybe renting from the school district might be the best option. -- JeffreyBillings (talk) 13:30, 13 June 2012 (UTC)

(reply to this post) Our kids don't play any instruments and we listen to music in the car sometimes, but mostly that is Disney/Childen tunes. We don't have a stero at home. Our kids do like it when we have classical music on in the car, which isn't often. We're concerned that our son will become frustrated quickly when the violin class starts in September 2012. Listening to fiddle/violin music to get ahead on this sounds like a good idea. Any suggestions from Amazon? I personally like Vivaldi the four seasons. I'm also going to find out what music they will learn in school and get that as well. -- JeffreyBillings (talk) 12:59, 14 June 2012 (UTC)

Talk:Truth
I have responded at the talk page. -Stevertigo (t | c) 08:00, 11 June 2012 (UTC)
 * Its been three days and you have still not responded to my query on the truth talk page. -Stevertigo (t | c) 10:25, 14 June 2012 (UTC)
 * In the meantime, I see someone else has been working on that. __ Just plain Bill (talk) 09:41, 15 June 2012 (UTC)