User talk:ProperFraction

Led Bib
The article Led Bib has been speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This was done because the article seemed to be about a real person, organization (band, club, company, etc.), or web content, but it did not indicate how or why the subject is notable, that is, why an article about that subject should be included in Wikipedia. Under the criteria for speedy deletion, articles that do not indicate the notability of the subject may be deleted at any time. If you can indicate why the subject is really notable, you are free to re-create the article, making sure to cite any verifiable sources.

Please see the guidelines for what is generally accepted as notable, and for specific types of articles, you may want to check out our criteria for biographies, for web sites, for musicians, or for companies. Feel free to leave a note on my talk page if you have any questions about this. NawlinWiki (talk) 03:57, 15 May 2008 (UTC)


 * If you have reliable independent sources showing that this band meets the notability standards of WP:MUSIC, feel free to repost (but be sure to include the sources). NawlinWiki (talk) 12:19, 15 May 2008 (UTC)

Danny Moss

 * Article now exists, for your interest. tomasz.  15:13, 8 June 2008 (UTC)

changes to Tube sound article
Hi ProperFraction! I saw the changes you made to the Tube sound article, and overall I think they are improvements. I did see something you changed where you significantly changed the meaning:
 * Tube-amplifiers have been going through a revival since the opening up of Chinese and Russian markets where the production of tubes has never stopped.

became:
 * ... have been going through a revival since the Chinese and Russians started production of tubes.

My take on the original wording was that in Russia (Soviet Union) and China, the older tube technology stayed in production longer than it did in the west. Sixty or seventy years ago, all audio electronics was tube based, and the Russians and Chinese were no different. The west moved over to transistor-based electronics in the 1960's, but the Russians and Chinese still made predominately tube-based electronics. If this is the case, your new wording reads as saying that the revival started sixty or seventy years ago. I started to change this one section back, but as none of this is cited, and I am performing guesswork about which version is more accurate, I thought I would ask you about it and see if this is what you intended. As a separate issue, having nothing to do with your edits, I think the article needs more citations to back up this alleged "revival". (The article makes it sound like a mass movement, but I don't see any hard numbers.) Again, I like most of the changes you made. Best wishes, CosineKitty (talk) 01:10, 2 July 2008 (UTC)

Oh yes, I forgot: I am watching this page, so feel free to reply here if you wish. CosineKitty (talk) 01:10, 2 July 2008 (UTC)

How about: ... have been going through a revival whilst the Chinese and Russians have continued their production of tubes. --ProperFraction (talk)


 * Not that I have any opinion one way or the other, but that still changes the meaning. This is curiosity, not complaint, mind you.  I have no idea which meaning is closer to the truth, and there are no references there to help.  I gather something motivated you to change the wording and I was just curious what you didn't like about the way it was.  CosineKitty (talk) 12:46, 3 July 2008 (UTC)

"Well I think 'Front Page' would be a lot better that main page. its mor descriptive"
Well, then you're an idiot. --211.31.104.180 (talk) 07:35, 2 July 2008 (UTC)


 * Thank you for that enlightened comment!--ProperFraction (talk) 01:32, 3 July 2008 (UTC)

Speedy deletion of Dragon's crawl
A tag has been placed on Dragon's crawl requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section A1 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because it is a very short article providing little or no context to the reader. Please see Wikipedia:Stub for our minimum information standards for short articles. Also please note that articles must be on notable subjects and should provide references to reliable sources that verify their content.

If you think that this notice was placed here in error, you may contest the deletion by adding  to the top of the page that has been nominated for deletion (just below the existing speedy deletion or "db" tag), coupled with adding a note on the talk page explaining your position, but be aware that once tagged for speedy deletion, if the article meets the criterion it may be deleted without delay. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag yourself, but don't hesitate to add information to the article that would would render it more in conformance with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. Lastly, please note that if the article does get deleted, you can contact one of these admins to request that a copy be emailed to you. TheBressman (talk) 00:44, 10 July 2008 (UTC)

Hi, I made a change to the Neuro-linguistic programming lead after you changed it. Can you take a look. I think it needs to reflect the various definitions within the field. Action potential t c 02:50, 13 August 2008 (UTC)

Why blocked?
I have just logged on to do some editing and I find my user account has been terminated. Can any one say why this is? Or do I have to get another name now?

I just cant understand this, I mean i have been contributing to Wikipedia for a few months and not had any real complaints about my editing. whats happening/


 * Please see this request for checkuser. If you have further enquiries, please reply here, and I will respond. Steve Crossin Contact/24 12:49, 19 August 2008 (UTC)


 * Good grief, i see your problem but im not any of these other people who seem to have been causing trouble. I use a shared computer at work and log in and out when I have a few minutes. could someone be using my machine to do these other edits? imean would they come thro as if it was me?--ProperFraction (talk) 13:03, 19 August 2008 (UTC)


 * I'll talk with a checkuser and point them in your direction. If you do indeed use a shared computer, checkuser should be able to pick up on it. I'll have a look over your contributions and compare them with the other users that were in the report, but checkusers have the final say, so it will be their decision whether to overturn the block or not. Bear with me. Steve Crossin Contact/24 13:10, 19 August 2008 (UTC)


 * Thanks for your help Steve. I would like to keep this username if poss as I have built up a few good(?) contributions. But if i need to change it or do anything else, i will be only too happy to oblige :)--ProperFraction (talk) 13:13, 19 August 2008 (UTC)


 * You were probably blocked and connected to based on this edit. That user has a history of asking disruptive questions at the reference desk, and "As a spectrum analysist, I'm wondering what different foods I should eat to give the broadest range of odors from my gaseous emissions. Any help appreciated!" does seem to be somewhat disruptive. Perhaps an explanation would help?.  Steve Crossin  Contact/24 13:18, 19 August 2008 (UTC)
 * After a look at your contributions, I remain unconvinced that you are not the blocked user. I would have blocked you on the basis of your edit to the reference desk edit, the technical evidence is therefore damning. You can appeal this block to the arbitration committee. -- lucasbfr  talk 13:23, 19 August 2008 (UTC)