User talk:Mike Sorensen

Welcome!

Hello,, and welcome to Wikipedia! Thank you for your contributions. I hope you like the place and decide to stay. Here are some pages that you might find helpful: I hope you enjoy editing here and being a Wikipedian! Please sign your name on talk pages using four tildes ( ~ ); this will automatically produce your name and the date. If you need help, check out Questions, ask me on my talk page, or place  on your talk page and someone will show up shortly to answer your questions. Again, welcome! -Quiddity 01:14, 20 November 2006 (UTC)
 * The five pillars of Wikipedia
 * How to edit a page
 * Help pages
 * Tutorial
 * How to write a great article
 * Manual of Style

Binaural recording
It might not have been your intention, but your recent edit removed content from. Please be careful not to remove content from Wikipedia without a valid reason, which you should specify in the edit summary or on the article's talk page. Take a look at our welcome page to learn more about contributing to this encyclopedia. Thank you. -Quiddity 19:28, 19 November 2006 (UTC)


 * While I was writing on the talk page, to justifiy my edit, you rushed to conclusion and placed your comment. Please allow people some time to finish their edits. The comment is posted on the talk page.--Mike Sorensen 19:40, 19 November 2006 (UTC)


 * Ah, ok. I was just going through my watchlist and saw the removed section.
 * If you add a couple of words to the "edit summary" section (just above the "save page" button), that helps fellow editors determine what actions were intended. Eg for that edit, a summary like "removing POV content, see talk" would be perfect.
 * Here's a welcome template, containing an abundance of useful links and reading :) --Quiddity 01:14, 20 November 2006 (UTC)

Edit summaries
Hi, could you please use edit summaries, especially if it is a nontrivial edit such as deleting sentences, adding a lot of content, or tagging an article for deletion? I'm referring to: proposed for deletion, nominated for deletion, but it actually holds for almost all your other edits as well. Han-Kwang 13:49, 21 November 2006 (UTC)

Audio mastering
This article needs some work. It is a very popular subject for audio enthusiasts but the support for the information contained in this article is rather sketchy. Some info in the article is a common knowledge but many things cited there are just taken for granted and I frankly question the accuracy of this article but for the lack of resources I'm refraining from rewriting it. Since its creation almost 4 years ago this article doesn't have any references. So it is about time to take some initiative on this subject and from the lack of other volunteers it looks like it will be me. Real editors generally avoid adding references to this article because they end up being assaulted by spammers, but I think I can fend-off a few punches.

My contributions
No Problem Fang Aili, as you see from the date of this post I also took a break. My contributions are always open for discussion and always have at least one reference (unless the subject-matter is widely known). In case of "artmastering" I also provided a reference and I will provide more if and when they become available. I hate this kind of bickering so I will keep my posts to minimum. --Mike Sorensen 12:00, 19 March 2007 (UTC)
 * Mike, please keep contributing. Your edits are encyclopedic, and well, some people editing the pages are not up to that standard. Your recent edit to Audio mastering is a great example. John Cardinal 12:21, 19 March 2007 (UTC)


 * Thank you John, I occasionally visit music related pages that you edit and I see the great work that you are doing so your comment is very valuable to me.--Mike Sorensen 14:02, 28 March 2007 (UTC)

Discussion on sources for Audio Mastering article
Since the Audio mastering article has no sources to support it, I opened a discussion on potentially acceptable sources for this article. I'm beginning to regret it a little since now I'm being bombarded with spam and personal attacks but hopefully we will get something done and at the end it will be worth it. Please contribute, here is a link --Mike Sorensen 00:36, 22 March 2007 (UTC)

List of languages of Nigeria
I created this new page to serve as a home for all the 521 languages of Nigeria and I moved the existing list of Nigerian languages from the main article Languages of Nigeria to this new page. Hopefully, at some point, we will get all the 521 languages listed with links to their own respective pages for each language. --Mike Sorensen 22:13, 21 March 2007 (UTC)

Added dynamic sorting to theList of languages of Nigeria
This is my biggest edit to date. I just implemented dynamic sorting features, and filled the table with human population data pertinent to each language. This was a big job but it works great and it added a whole new dynamic functionality to a previously static table.--Mike Sorensen 10:09, 26 March 2007 (UTC)

No Fault Found (NFF)
I learned about this thing when I was researching the problem with my car. It stopped working 4 times and every time I took it the the dealer they said that they can't find any problem. Finally after a 6 months of hassle turned out that there was some corrosion in the computer circuits. If someone has any pictures of NFF problems it would be a very cool addition to this article.--Mike Sorensen 06:43, 22 March 2007 (UTC)

Section about Pro-audio headphone amplifiers
I created a separate section about pro-audio headphone amplifiers. It will need some work but it is a good start. In the whole article about Headphone amplifier there was absolutely no mention about pro-audio headphone amps. It still needs references. I'll work on it when I find some more time.--Mike Sorensen 15:00, 26 March 2007 (UTC)

Added images to Video pointer article
It still needs references, it's a project in progress.

License tagging for Image:Komodo py.jpg
Thanks for uploading Image:Komodo py.jpg. Wikipedia gets thousands of images uploaded every day, and in order to verify that the images can be legally used on Wikipedia, the source and copyright status must be indicated. Images need to have an image tag applied to the image description page indicating the copyright status of the image. This uniform and easy-to-understand method of indicating the license status allows potential re-users of the images to know what they are allowed to do with the images.

For more information on using images, see the following pages:
 * Image use policy
 * Image copyright tags

This is an automated notice by OrphanBot. If you need help on selecting a tag to use, or in adding the tag to the image description, feel free to post a message at Media copyright questions. 16:10, 29 March 2007 (UTC)


 * I just updated the licensing tag. There should be no problem anymore. I have released it to public domain.--Mike Sorensen 16:24, 29 March 2007 (UTC)

Please, do not edit my comments/arguments at the mastering talk page
Please, do not condense the text as it makes it unreadable. It might also be perceived as an attempt from you to discourage people from reading it. Jrod2 20:57, 3 April 2007 (UTC)


 * The content of your comments is unchanged, so it may not be perceived as an attempt to discourage the reading. It is commonly acceptable to compact comments that take excessive space. But no problem I will leave them alone.--Mike Sorensen 22:41, 3 April 2007 (UTC)

Again, I apologize if I offended you with with my comments. You must realize though, that I did put a reference link to most everything I've said.

So, you must admit that I didn't make this whole thing up. There were people opposed to "Artmastering" way before me, and you got mad at me for questioning about your sources.

All I asked was, can I see more interviews about artmastering, other than the ones Scott The G-Man conducted?

Is there a possibility that you made the wrong judgment in choosing that particular article?

You are a young and passionate musician/artist, and I can understand your disappointment when you read that I was in opposition to your article. But, please don't take it personal.

On my spare time, I've doing both, a bit of reflecting and a bit of research, and I am sure that soon, I will come up with something that both of us will find acceptable.

Until then, have a nice evening. Jrod2 03:15, 11 April 2007 (UTC)


 * It is not about the article. Whether it was acceptable or not it really doesn't matter. That is why we have discussions on talk pages to figure that out. Editors sometimes submit articles with hope that others will find additional resources to support their point of view and not in hope that they will get assaulted. It is OK to disagree and reject the subject or references, but it is NOT ok to slur people that you have never met with accusations. If "artmastering" really is a new trend then it will survive by itself, without you and me, and there is no need to fight over it. I actually respect people that can bring a good argument, and at one point you have had one, but I do not respect people who assault others  with personal accusations as this is just plain wrong. I'm not the only one who is judging your actions here, if you really want to start again then you need to clean the mess that you have left behind. Withdraw your comments, clean the sock puppet mess, and contribute in a meaningful way, and in time people will notice. Your apology is a great start, thank you.--Mike Sorensen 08:04, 11 April 2007 (UTC)


 * One more thing. Any article can be re-included in wikipedia and re-submitted for discussion at any time, even if it was previously deleted, and despite the fact that some editors may have disagreed with it in the past. This is one of the great principles of this organization that makes us all excited and allows us to dynamically change and continuously re-examine everything in the world, including the wikipedia itself. --Mike Sorensen 10:41, 11 April 2007 (UTC)

Created new article on Wolfgang Palm
There isn't much info available on the Internet about Wolfgang Palm but then again I didn't dig deep enough. Several other wikipedia articles reference Palm so I finally created a bio page for him.--Mike Sorensen 03:47, 8 April 2007 (UTC)

Stem mixing and mastering
Thanks to input and suggestion of Wamnet I created article on Stem mixing and mastering. I'm a little surprised that in all the discussions and bickering on audio ralated pages there was no mention about stem mixing. But better late then not at all. Glory to Wayne Mitzen. --Mike Sorensen 22:49, 11 April 2007 (UTC)


 * aw man, no props needed but thanks anyway. I just love music and recording. What I find facinating is in all the controversial subjects out there, the audio one's always seem to generate the passion. I really hope we all can get the listener, the artists, and the rest of the industry to channel that passion in a positive, creative way. Wamnet 14:10, 13 April 2007 (UTC)

Naming of synthesizer articles
Hi Mike- when creating synthesizer articles, please use the manufacturer name in the article title. For example, make sure your article is "Roland JD-990" not "JD-990". There may be other devices that have that model name. The manufacturer name helps reduce ambiguity. Thanks. --Mperry 21:05, 16 April 2007 (UTC)


 * Good point Mperry, I used the names in the articles in a casual manner as some artists use them but I agree that it would have been more accurate to precede the model number with the manufacturer name. I will definitely keep that in mind. --Mike Sorensen 21:47, 16 April 2007 (UTC)

Synthesizer
Although the intentions may have been good, your creation of synthesizer (musical instrument) was little more than vandalism. Did you consider that: In future, a) think before an action like this and b) use the move command to change the names. Did you not notice this edit? -- RHaworth 11:14, 20 April 2007 (UTC)
 * Synthesizer had received 750 edits. By copy and pasting you destroyed the evidence of those edits and destroyed the credit due to the editors
 * Over 2000 articles link to synthesizer. Were you going to go through and change those links?
 * There already existed synthesizer (disambiguation), though I will admit that it did not seem to be linked to from synthesizer.

Please note: do not dismiss synthesiser as a typo - consider it a British spelling. -- RHaworth 11:24, 20 April 2007 (UTC)


 * You can forgo the drama, nothing got destroyed. The evidence have NOT been destroyed as you dramatically claim, but it simply exists at a different location. Please feel free to move the content back where it was and revert my edit if you believe that this is a problem. I was not aware of the "move" command but I will use it the future. --Mike Sorensen 12:28, 20 April 2007 (UTC)


 * The links will now lead to a disambiguation page and users can easily find the correct topic and edit those links if needed. I don't know a way to automatically redirect those links but if there is a way to do that then please let me know. --Mike Sorensen 12:28, 20 April 2007 (UTC)


 * A disambiguation page that points to itself is useless as you alreay noted. There is a large number of articles with word "synthesizer" in them and they are in need of disambiguation. So a proper disambiguation page was needed and it was created. --Mike Sorensen 12:28, 20 April 2007 (UTC)


 * I believe that the consensus on English wikipedia is to go with American spelling for American inventions and as I understand the synthesizer is an American invention, and wikipedia is an American website. I would prefer that the Canadian English be the standard here :) but I respect US territory. But even if we go by British spelling then the word "synthesizer" is also used in UK even though it is less common while "synthesiser" is generally considered to be a spelling error in American English. --Mike Sorensen 15:04, 20 April 2007 (UTC)

In the future please use polite tone of voice when posting on my talk page. If you believe that I have made a mistake, feel free to educate me and show me the correct way or let me know in a polite tone of voice and I will correct it myself. Rude and offensive remarks are not welcome here. Do not equate an easily correctable mistake with vandalism, read civility before posting on my user page ever again. --Mike Sorensen 12:28, 20 April 2007 (UTC)

No Fault Found
I have added a "" template to the article No Fault Found, suggesting that it be deleted according to the proposed deletion process. All contributions are appreciated, but I don't believe it satisfies Wikipedia's criteria for inclusion, and I've explained why in the deletion notice (see also "What Wikipedia is not" and Wikipedia's deletion policy). You may contest the proposed deletion by removing the  notice, but please explain why you disagree with the proposed deletion in your edit summary or on its talk page. Also, please consider improving the article to address the issues raised. Even though removing the deletion notice will prevent deletion through the proposed deletion process, the article may still be deleted if it matches any of the speedy deletion criteria or it can be sent to Articles for Deletion, where it may be deleted if consensus to delete is reached. -- Y not? 22:06, 6 May 2007 (UTC)


 * You have several valid points and I agree that the article could use some work, though the subject is valid and I think I can produce some references. I will address some of your concerns on the proper page. --Mike Sorensen 04:46, 8 May 2007 (UTC)


 * I just added references to the terminology and subject matter of No_Fault_Found article. --Mike Sorensen 06:27, 8 May 2007 (UTC)

?
What happened here? Could you at least leave an edit summary? Grand master  ka  06:03, 8 May 2007 (UTC)


 * The archive bot took the page away before I could finish my edit. I'm working on it.--Mike Sorensen 06:05, 8 May 2007 (UTC)

NFF
I did. I am not sure, to tell the truth. The 1st ref is rubbish, but the second is ok, tho definitely tl;dr for 2:25 AM EST. Ultimately, is it a standalone concept? Wouldn't it be better as a little paragraph in a another article? Maybe Failure analysis? I dunno... I might nominate it for deletion eventually... not today. Good night. -- Y not? 06:26, 8 May 2007 (UTC)


 * I have no major problem moving it to Failure Analysis though maybe we should give the article a little time to grow. This is a whole new science that is developing on the subject of NFF with its own testing methods, equipment and rationale. I think I can produce more references and better enhance this article. --Mike Sorensen 06:36, 8 May 2007 (UTC)

Refrain from using Mr. Vinatea's name
I have stepped up to the plate like a man. If you are one, you will respect me and address me as Joe Rodriguez. I hope I am making myself crystal clear .Jrod2 09:09, 8 May 2007 (UTC)

Blocked
Per Requests for checkuser/Case/Biggy P, I have blocked all your accounts for egregious violation of our sockpuppetry policy. The inescapable conclusion from your contribs under the various accounts is that you were attemptingh to give the illusion of greater support for your position than actually exists. Please choose one account, and appeal the block for that one account. If you can find an admin who will unblock it then you may ocntinue to use that account. Guy (Help!) 15:02, 8 May 2007 (UTC)


 * I think Guy that you are misconstruing the facts, my edit history speaks for itself. The support existed before I even joined wikipedia. This highlights the fundamental defect of wikipedia process where the acceptance of topics is based on consensus rather then the facts and merit of the case. Silencing the opposition is rarely a solution. --Mike Sorensen 19:29, 8 May 2007 (UTC)


 * No, outcomes can easily be based on the facts of the case. I'm not looking at that, what I'm looking at is rampant sockpuppetry, and you really should know better. The way to settle differences is to attract more eyes, not to pretend to be multiple people.  Guy (Help!) 21:44, 8 May 2007 (UTC)

NFF Merged
No Fault Found was incorporated into another article. I think that at some point the subject will grow by itself to the point that it will need its own article but at this point is actually may be served better if it placed in the context. --Mike Sorensen 19:33, 8 May 2007 (UTC)

Disputed fair use rationale for Image:Komodo py.jpg
Thanks for uploading Image:Komodo py.jpg. However, there is a concern that the rationale you have provided for using this image under "fair use" may be invalid. Please read the instructions at Non-free content carefully, then go to the image description page and clarify why you think the image qualifies for fair use. Using one of the templates at Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to ensure that your image is in compliance with Wikipedia policy, but remember that you must complete the template. Do not simply insert a blank template on an image page.

If it is determined that the image does not qualify under fair use, it will be deleted within a couple of days according to our criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the media copyright questions page. Thank you.BetacommandBot 20:40, 23 September 2007 (UTC)

Thinking recently about you
In a few days it will be the 6th month of the end our great war which I won. That's because Truth always wins. You chose to use the forces of darkness Mike, that's why you lost. You chose to hate and play games with people's lives. I've been thinking lately about you. A new user came into WP and posted a link to his own website. Sounds familiar? He is for sure a misinformed user, not a spammer. Remember how you treated me? Remember your reaction to my explanations? I was telling you the truth man, I just didn't know. So simple. Other users saw that. You didn't, and you embarked on a campaign of treacherous lies, accusations and evil games. You tried to make my very first experience at WP a living hell. Why Mike?, why? Was that Artmastering article that important to you?

To be honest I didn't even think that I was going to be around very long after my first contribution. I owe my staying to you. I stayed to confront you and to prove a point. Thanks! Also, your identity is safe with me. Yes, I know who you are now.

Anyway, going back to that misinformed user. YOU SHOULD HAVE SEEN HOW I HANDLED HIS SITUATION. If only you had taken the time to be kind, patient with me and most importantly, and assumed good faith, today we would be friends and probably I would have been the one that tilted the balance on your favor to include that article that meant so much to you, Mike.

I don't miss you, man. But, I was thinking about you these last couple of days. Also I would never come and visit Biggy, your alter ego. He was the nastiest character (sock) of yours. I'll come back to your grave for our first anniversary, "Dude". Later. Jrod2 06:13, 8 November 2007 (UTC)

Unreferenced BLPs
Hello Mike Sorensen! Thank you for your contributions. I am a bot alerting you that 1 of the articles that you created  is tagged as an Unreferenced Biography of a Living Person. The biographies of living persons policy requires that all personal or potentially controversial information be sourced. In addition, to ensure verifiability, all biographies should be based on reliable sources. If you were to bring this article up to standards, it would greatly help us with the current Category:All_unreferenced_BLPs article backlog. Once the article is adequately referenced, please remove the unreferencedBLP tag. Here is the article:

Thanks!--DASHBot (talk) 10:52, 25 January 2010 (UTC)
 * 1) Wolfgang Palm -

Proposed deletion of CherryTemplate


The article CherryTemplate has been proposed for deletion&#32;because of the following concern:
 * The coverage (references, external links, etc.) does not seem sufficient to justify this article passing General notability guideline and the more detailed Notability (software) requirement. If you disagree and deprod this, please explain how it meets them on the talk page here in the form of "This article meets criteria A and B because..." and ping me back through WP:ECHO or by leaving a note at User talk:Piotrus. Thank you.

While all constructive contributions to Wikipedia are appreciated, content or articles may be deleted for any of several reasons.

You may prevent the proposed deletion by removing the notice, but please explain why in your edit summary or on the article's talk page.

Please consider improving the article to address the issues raised. Removing will stop the proposed deletion process, but other deletion processes exist. In particular, the speedy deletion process can result in deletion without discussion, and articles for deletion allows discussion to reach consensus for deletion. Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus&#124; reply here 05:21, 7 November 2016 (UTC)