User talk:Binksternet

Binksternet	Articles created	Significant contributor	Images	Did you know	Awards

A barnstar for you!

	The Defender of the Wiki Barnstar
	This star is worth $525,000 at your local S&L. Go cash it in, with my gratitude, and tell 'em I sent you. Drmies (talk) 04:28, 3 April 2013 (UTC)

Hahaha! Thank you very much. I will let my bank know about this windfall so they can properly adjust my account. Binksternet (talk) 04:34, 3 April 2013 (UTC)

Non-Custodial Parents Party (Equal Parenting)

I hereby request the complete removal of this item from the Wikipedia web-site.

It has been significantly edited by foreign editors with no idea about what they are writing about.

Regards

John Flanagan Australia. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Jef04 (talk • contribs) 05:06, 3 April 2013 (UTC)

You can nominate the article for deletion yourself. Copy the following template and put it at the top of the article: {{Template:Proposed deletion}}

I don't agree with the proposed deletion so I will not do it for you. I don't think the deletion discussion will conclude as "delete". Binksternet (talk) 14:41, 3 April 2013 (UTC)

He's announced his intention to leave. Unfortunately it looks like a case of WP:PRAM. --Drm310 (talk) 16:08, 3 April 2013 (UTC)

I think he was upset by two things: the continual resistance various experienced editors gave him regarding his political activism on-wiki, and the appearance in 'his' article of accurate but very low voting results from elections. Binksternet (talk) 16:13, 3 April 2013 (UTC)

Doubt

Hi, Binksternet. Some time ago I wrote a FA titled Joaquim José Inácio, Viscount of Inhaúma. I was never very happy with the "Legacy" section. It's too short. There is series of books called "Os nossos almirantes" (Our Admirals) written by Henrique Boiteux. If I'm not mistaken, volume 5 (published in 1932)[1] has a chapter about Inhaúma. You'll find it under the name "Joaquim José Ignacio" (notice the extra "g" in Ignacio) or "Visconde de Inhaúma". I believe it begins on page 67[2]. There is also a following chapter that begins on page 135 titled "Centenário do Almirante Visconde de Inhaúma" (Centenary of Admiral Viscount of Inhaúma).[3] I wonder if you could take a look if the university library also has a copy of that book? I know I'm asking too much and I would be really grateful for your help. Regards, --Lecen (talk) 11:48, 3 April 2013 (UTC)

I will look. Binksternet (talk) 14:41, 3 April 2013 (UTC)

I have good news: the Historical and Geographical Institute of Rio Grande do Sul sent me digital copies of the journal I was looking for. You don't have to bother yourself with it any longer. However, I'd be glad if you could find the book I mentioned above. --Lecen (talk) 18:58, 11 April 2013 (UTC)

Fantastic! I will look for the book. Binksternet (talk) 19:04, 11 April 2013 (UTC)

Going against consensus

Binksternet, I greatly appreciate the passion and dedication that you demonstrate in your editing. You clearly are a veteran Wikipedian and are constantly making useful contributions. That being said, your most recent edit at Maafa 21 clearly went against consensus, as I demonstrated in my most recent edits at the Maafa 21 talk page. I have no doubt that you desire consensus, and of course, you are well aware of the challenges we have faced at this article in trying to achieve it. (I've had my own struggles, as you have pointed out.) In turn, please be more careful in the future not to go against consensus in your edits as well. Thanks for your understanding. God bless! -- Beleg Strongbow (talk) 13:07, 4 April 2013 (UTC)

No, your change to the article went beyond consensus. Binksternet (talk) 13:51, 4 April 2013 (UTC)

No, my edit was precisely what I had suggested and what Badmintonhist and Rosetta had supported. Even Roscelese seemed to be fine with the suggestion; she certainly didn't argue against it, which she is happy to do when she does disagree. (All this has been demonstrated on the Talk page.) You were given days to express disagreement but did not until after I had made the edit and you had reverted it. -- Beleg Strongbow (talk) 13:19, 5 April 2013 (UTC)

Opinion Sought

Hi - You and I have edited many of the same pages, and so I ask for your opinion. Yesterday's featured article on Thomas Kinkaid gives Kinkaid the credit for the victory at Surigao Strait, as the commander. My thought is that, of course, the credit goes to Oldendorf, and Kinkaid was one level removed. I made a small edit that got reverted by Hawkeye7, an esteemed author. If you have an interest, would you add to the discussion on my talk page? Thank you. JMOprof (talk) 14:08, 4 April 2013 (UTC)

Got it! Binksternet (talk) 14:53, 4 April 2013 (UTC)

Thank you. ...best JMOprof (talk) 23:44, 5 April 2013 (UTC)

Common sense

Thanks for this edit. I tried to make the point that that line was completely unnecessary, but only you understood it. 50.193.171.69 (talk) 17:12, 5 April 2013 (UTC)

Great minds and all that! :-)

Binksternet (talk) 17:38, 5 April 2013 (UTC)

Please undo your revert

I restored longstanding sourced and verifiable content deleted by COI editor David Starr of the Adi Da cult.[4] You reverted my restoration. Someone undid my restoration of longstanding sourced and verifiable content yesterday, on the erroneous claim that all sources must be on the internet. I replied and gave that editor a chance to respond over night if he had a response. He did not. So I restored the longstanding content. (Additionally, BLP only applies to living persons.) Could you please undo your revert? 64.134.235.59 (talk) 15:11, 6 April 2013 (UTC)

You used primary source documents to make sweeping statements describing terribly unethical behavior of Lesser's son. Lesser is still alive and so his dead son should not be described as unethical without very good WP:Secondary sources. Do not use real estate deeds, death certificates, or court documents to paint the guy black. Binksternet (talk) 15:28, 6 April 2013 (UTC)

Lifting the Gibraltar DYK restrictions

A couple of months ago, you opposed a proposal to lift the restrictions on Gibraltar-related DYKs, which were imposed in September 2012. Could you possibly clarify (1) under what conditions you would support a lifting of the restrictions, and (2) when you think it would be appropriate to lift the restrictions? Prioryman (talk) 20:07, 7 April 2013 (UTC)

Both of those questions have the same answer: I think 2014 would be the right time to freely allow Gibraltar DYKs. I think the wiki suffered a PR setback and that time will need to pass before we can ramp back up, or we will suffer further negative PR. Binksternet (talk) 20:25, 7 April 2013 (UTC)

OK, thanks for your feedback. Prioryman (talk) 22:40, 8 April 2013 (UTC)

could you please send me my edits back

sorry I thought it was important — Preceding unsigned comment added by Matthewunthird (talk • contribs) 20:34, 7 April 2013 (UTC)

No, this is an encyclopedia. It is not your scratch pad for free association. Binksternet (talk) 20:44, 7 April 2013 (UTC)

Talk:Madonna (entertainer)

Inviting your opinion regarding Aicchik's continuous reversion and addition of a content which other users have vehemently opposed and Aichik him/herself has failed to provide relevancy and justification, except "its 4 years and she has to date" and calling you "ageist". —Indian:BIO · ^{[ ChitChat ]} 06:01, 9 April 2013 (UTC)

Don't focus on the insults; they are unimportant and peripheral. The Madonna boyfriend bit has no traction on the Madonna talk page (consensus firmly against it) and thus cannot be repeatedly inserted into the article. Binksternet (talk) 06:04, 9 April 2013 (UTC)

I appreciate

your defense of the word "perceived" in the Men's rights movement article, I believe that this particular word was originally mine. However since my month's ban from the article has not expired I need to count on editors such as yourself to be there. Thanks, Einar aka Carptrash (talk) 18:38, 9 April 2013 (UTC)

You are welcome. I don't like it when a writer begs the question, though I have occasionally found this flaw in my own writing. Binksternet (talk) 18:53, 9 April 2013 (UTC)

Just got back, thanks for your attention. Regards, Chrishonduras (talk) 19:52, 9 April 2013 (UTC)

World Trade Center

World Trade Center, an article that you or your project may be interested in, has been nominated for a community good article reassessment. If you are interested in the discussion, please participate by adding your comments to the reassessment page. If concerns are not addressed during the review period, the good article status will be removed from the article. AIRcorn (talk) 06:52, 11 April 2013 (UTC)

Secular Islam Summit

Hey, I saw that you got involved on the talk page today (thanks). As far as I understand, the edit war was not over the inclusion of Haddad's center for understanding, but over the relative amount of weight given to the positive and negative reactions to the summit. (Notice how one version has a paragraph of positive reaction followed by a paragraph of negative, while the other version has two paragraphs of negative reaction followed by a single paragraph of positive.) The mention of the center was probably an issue, but not the core issue that prompted the edit war, as far as I can tell. ~Adjwilley (talk) 17:08, 11 April 2013 (UTC)

Yes, I saw that the order of paragraphs was changed, but I thought that was a trivial matter. Someone could argue that their preferred stance should be presented first for primacy, or last for lasting effect on the reader. To me the order is a superficial issue since the information is still presented in full. Binksternet (talk) 17:15, 11 April 2013 (UTC)

My tone on Madonna edits

Thanks for trying to help. You know how to diffuse a situation, some guys still don't;)--Aichik (talk) 17:22, 11 April 2013 (UTC)

Even this comment of yours is an attack on "some guys" who are understood to be those who oppose your suggested changes. Your attitude on Wikipedia must rise to a higher level if you expect success in editing. Binksternet (talk) 17:50, 11 April 2013 (UTC)

Every unpleasant situation in which you have been involved till date has always been diffused. So please, don't act. Jivesh1205 (Talk) 17:39, 11 April 2013 (UTC)

This is not needed. Start a discussion at WP:RFCU. The intended word was probably "defused", anyway. Binksternet (talk) 17:50, 11 April 2013 (UTC)

[Response to your first response] Well, if you read it literally, yes. But "some guys" can also be read as a saying. But I know what you're saying. I also want to restart the conversation on the boyfriend. Where do you suggest I do this? Here? Per Wikipedia rules, I could, I guess. Would appreciate your feedback.--Aichik (talk) 18:46, 12 April 2013 (UTC)

I oppose trivial information such as about the boyfriend dancer who is not himself notable. Binksternet (talk) 18:56, 12 April 2013 (UTC)

BLP/N discussions - 3 clear examples to start, more if needed

[5] on Anderson Cooper 3 Feb 2007 [6] Little Boots Jun 2009 [7] Luje Evans Aug 2011 ... [8] Elena Kagan

Need more examples? Unless the discussion of a person's sexuality is key per secondary sources regarding the person's notability per se, or is self-attributed, it does not belong per WP:BLP. Cheers. Collect (talk) 17:40, 11 April 2013 (UTC)

The Anderson Cooper bio now hosts his announcement that he is gay. So does the Luke Evans (actor) bio. In none of the four linked discussions did anybody refer to the part of BLP called WP:WELLKNOWN, so those discussions are not relevant to the one about Shep. Binksternet (talk) 18:22, 11 April 2013 (UTC)

Anderson Cooper made a specific self-identification - but unless a person does such, WP:BLP tells us not to assign a sexual identification to the living person. Cheers -- ask at BLP/N if this is in any way unclear. Collect (talk) 19:29, 11 April 2013 (UTC)

Unclear? The BLP page discusses self-identification only in relation to categories, not well-cited prose. The WP:BLPCAT section cannot be stretched to cover prose when it does not make any such distinction. Binksternet (talk) 19:38, 11 April 2013 (UTC)

Notice of WP:AN discussion

Hello Binksternet, this is notification of a WP:AN discussion regarding an editor you have dealt with. The thread is: WP:AN#Community ban for BLP-violating, sock-hopping conspiracy theorist from Hyogo, Japan. Appreciate your input, thanks! Zad68 18:10, 11 April 2013 (UTC)

Notice

Hello. There is currently a discussion at Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents regarding an issue with which you may have been involved. Thank you.  — Statυs (talk, contribs) 03:11, 14 April 2013 (UTC)

[9]  — Statυs (talk, contribs) 03:14, 14 April 2013 (UTC)

Files missing description details

Dear uploader: The media files you uploaded as:

• File:TuskegeeP40.jpg
• File:Electrovoice-constant-directivity-horn-1975.jpg
• File:Jazzschool logo.jpg

are missing a description and/or other details on their image description pages. If possible, please add this information. This will help other editors make better use of the images, and they will be more informative to readers.

If the information is not provided, the images may eventually be proposed for deletion, a situation which is not desirable, and which can easily be avoided.

If you have any questions, please see Help:Image page. Thank you. Theo's Little Bot (error?) 08:51, 14 April 2013 (UTC)

Regarding the Tzvi Erez page Edits - I am close to the matter and have come across court docs showing charges were dropped. I also think, that Erez is an incredibly talented classical pianist, and many users are interested in his discography which you have elected to remove. Discography of artists is not a marketing / promo tool. It tells the world what albums an artist recorded and released over time. Please consider and reinstate. Thank you. LaurenIpsum (talk) 01:23, 15 April 2013 (UTC)

La Jolla Woman's Club

Hello - I was going to notify you about my creation of La Jolla Woman's Club, but I see that you (and Melanie) have already been in it! Let me know what you think. Dohn joe (talk) 05:46, 17 April 2013 (UTC)

Two instances of the word "current" in one sentence, the first from the group's original name. Another word choice would be good for the second "current" to fix the clunkiness, or the phrasing can be juggled as a workaround.

Good start! Perhaps I will get a chance to add some content some day. Binksternet (talk) 05:53, 17 April 2013 (UTC)

Glad you like it. And a good style point as well - I'll get in there and take care of it. Dohn joe (talk) 05:58, 17 April 2013 (UTC)

Turntablist

Hello , my name is Grandmaster Disk ,, better know to the world as DJ.DISK ,, i'am the original creator of the word Turntablist. I tried to edit my own word but you took it down ,, i'de like ot know why ? I created this word when i was 11 years old , i'am 42 now and all of sudden people want to take credit for my hard work ! Please i want to make this correct , how can i do this ? , Disk — Preceding unsigned comment added by Djdisk (talk • contribs) 00:12, 18 April 2013 (UTC)

Get your story published in a book or magazine article or newspaper story. Wikipedia cannot be used to publish a never-before-published story, true or not.

Even then, the going will be uphill. Your Invisibl Skratch Piklz colleague Qbert is credited with inventing the word, according to All music guide to electronica page 262, the section written by Sean Cooper, the book edited by Vladimir Bogdanov. Professor Tara Brabazon writes about turntablism in the book Popular Music: Topics, Trends & Trajectories, and she says that Grand Wizard Theodore invented scratching which was then popularized by Grandmaster Flash. She says the breakbeat was invented by Kool Herc. She says Qbert invented the crab and that you invented the orbit, so she knows who you are and how fundamental was your influence. But then she says that the term 'turntablism' was coined by DJ Babu of the Break Junkies. See pages 114 and 115. The book Hip-Hop Turntablism, Creativity and Collaboration by Sophy Smith agrees that DJ Babu invented the term. Every book that says someone else invented the term makes it that much harder for you to establish your own version of history. Binksternet (talk) 00:55, 18 April 2013 (UTC)

Possibly unfree File:CalebVHaynes-Amarillo1951.jpg

A file that you uploaded or altered, File:CalebVHaynes-Amarillo1951.jpg, has been listed at Wikipedia:Possibly unfree files because its copyright status is unclear or disputed. If the file's copyright status cannot be verified, it may be deleted. You may find more information on the file description page. You are welcome to add comments to its entry at the discussion if you are interested in it not being deleted. Thank you. Kelly ^hi! 15:44, 18 April 2013 (UTC)

Notability of deaths and dead people who become notable after death

Hello! After seeing your comments on Talk:Chandra Levy#Requested move, I would like to let you know that there is a discussion going on at WP:VPP#Notability of deaths and dead people who become notable after death that I think you may be interested in. Happy editing! Technical 13 (talk) 11:30, 19 April 2013 (UTC)

My opinion about Chandra Levy was unique to her case, not indicative of any wish to change our current naming guidelines. Binksternet (talk) 15:22, 19 April 2013 (UTC)

I thank you for taking a moment to read my suggestion of an interesting topic and respect your wishes to not get involved. Happy editing! Technical 13 (talk) 00:50, 20 April 2013 (UTC)

Energy Tower and Midland Texas

Actually this is yours and your vandalistic friends last warning. Nothing that I have posted violates Wikipedia's policies. The only thing different in what I have done and what you and your vandals have done is that I have exposed the truth about a corrupt city government. Everything that I have posted is absolute verifiable fact. If you continue to harass me while speaking up for an entire community then you will be the one that will lose your editing priviledges. I've done nothing different than your and the people that you defend except to expose your corrupt tendencies. If you take away my priviledges for the reasons that you have stated then you must also take away your own priviledges and those of Uncle Milty, Atx1016, AV3553, Nuclear warfare.

If your predatory harassment continues you will be reported and banned from WikipediaPerrys Conscience (talk) 00:39, 20 April 2013 (UTC)

Please read WP:No original research and WP:Neutral point of view. I sympathize with your cause (I'm a member of my own city's historic buildings preservation association) but you will have to abide by Wikipedia policies in order to put forward your viewpoint. Try quoting some of the Wall Street Journal piece called "Energy Boom Sparks Building Spree in West Texas: As Many Companies Prosper, Opinions Diverge on a Proposed Office Tower That Would Dominate Midland's Skyline". This is where you'll find some diverging opinions including some from those who wish to keep the historic courthouse. Binksternet (talk) 01:06, 20 April 2013 (UTC)

I will read that information, but there is nothing that I am doing any differently than you or anyone else who has been deleting the FACTS that I continue to add. My information is presented with a neutral point of view. Your buddies just don't like the fact that I am bringing to light the corruption that they are perpetrating on this city. Why don't you and your buddies have to abide by the same Wikipedia policies? I have done absolutely nothing that violates Wikipedia's policies of original research or neutral point of view. Just because you all keep wasting my time having to re-edit before I can learn how to site my references doesn't mean that my information is opinion and unreferenced. It simply means that Wikipedia's referencing technology is not easily figured out. I've noticed that you certainly haven't taken the time to call them on all of their unreferenced information. Why don't you do that? Why aren't you bullying and intimidating them for not siting and referencing their information like you've done to me? Why aren't you deleting their unreferenced information as you have done mine? Why aren't you bullying them and intimidating them for posting their "opinions" like you have done to me even though I haven't posted opinion? What I'd like to know is how much money have they paid you to agree with their lies and to disagree with my facts. I frankly don't care who you and all these other bullies think you are. I will not cower to your intimidation and harassment. Your actions are not supported by Wikipedia and do not follow Wikipedia's mission statement and intent. In fact your squashing of the facts and refusing to allow the community's voice to be heard is in complete conflict with Wikipedia's intent to honor truth and reality. You have been completely unfair and I will not let this go. Perrys Conscience (talk) 04:39, 20 April 2013 (UTC)

As soon as you read WP:No original research you will understand why it is that you cannot tell the reader what is your personal analysis, such that "the Energy Tower Project is a lose-lose-lose for Midland City and County" and "Energy Tower will not rejuvenate downtown. It will kill Midland." The WP:Neutral point of view guideline is being trampled with non-neutral tone such as "the taxpaying citizens of Midland County were swindled"] and "the City Council is ...cheating Midland City taxpayers". Binksternet (talk) 04:52, 20 April 2013 (UTC)

Your welcome note

Thank you for your welcome note on my page and pointing out a so-called edit war. Perhaps you can assist. Several editors have tried to create pages related to a US battle called the Doolitle Raid from WWII. However there are 2 administrators who don't like the pages and have unilaterally deleted every page created without any opportunity to 'reach a so-called consensus' on a talk page. We are creating pages to honor the contribution of war heros who risked heir lives in a landmark mission. Wikipedia is litttered with pages of people who are of dubious notability yet these pages survive. The Doolittle arcades are notable people and deserve to be discussed in this forum. Please warn these administrators that their opinions are not shared by others, and that these page will be recreated by those who recognize the notability of the Doolittle Raiders. Thank you. Doolittlefan (talk) 01:52, 20 April 2013 (UTC)

(talk page stalker) These articles were deleted after discussion at Articles for Deletion due to failing the relevant notability standards - restoring them against consensus is disruptive editing, and vowing to continue to recreate them is disrupting Wikipedia to make a point. Articles on Wikipedia do not exist because you like the subject, and the existiance (or not) of other articles is entirely irrelevant. If you believe that these articles should be recreated, you need to request undeletion at deletion review - continued edit-warring to restore against consensus will result in your being blocked for disruptive editing. Also please note that describing edits that are not vandalism as vandalism, as you did here, can be considered a personal attack. - The Bushranger _{One ping only} 01:56, 20 April 2013 (UTC)

File source problem with File:TuskegeeP40.jpg

Thank you for uploading File:TuskegeeP40.jpg. I noticed that the file's description page currently doesn't specify who created the content, so the copyright status is unclear. If you did not create this file yourself, you will need to specify the owner of the copyright. If you obtained it from a website, please add a link to the page from which it was taken, together with a brief restatement of the website's terms of use of its content. If the original copyright holder is a party unaffiliated with the website, that author should also be credited. Please add this information by editing the image description page.

If the necessary information is not added within the next days, the image will be deleted. If the file is already gone, you can still make a request for undeletion and ask for a chance to fix the problem.

Please refer to the image use policy to learn what images you can or cannot upload on Wikipedia. Please also check any other files you have uploaded to make sure they are correctly tagged. Here is a list of your uploads. If you have any questions or are in need of assistance please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you. Sfan00 IMG (talk) 20:50, 21 April 2013 (UTC)

TPN wiki changes

Please clarify why the roll back. Changes were based on referenced TPN web-site and SPLC web-site. Original entry was out of date and/or inaccurate or unsusbtantiated. Cited text was inaccurate or incorrect. Please clarify specific changes that you considered "viewpoint". Kmita (talk) 02:59, 22 April 2013 (UTC)

You have been reverted three times: twice by me and once by another. The burden is on you to explain at the article talk page what you wish to change. See you at Talk: Tea Party Nation. Binksternet (talk) 03:03, 22 April 2013 (UTC)

Ok, I have entered each change one by one and specified in detail the reason for the change. I have also fixed or removed some of the broken references. Please review and advise if there are still issues with any of the changes. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Kmita (talk • contribs) 03:29, 22 April 2013 (UTC)

Making your disputed edits one by one is not a replacement for discussing them to create a consensus. Binksternet (talk) 12:37, 23 April 2013 (UTC)

The Bugle: Issue LXXXV, April 2013

Your Military History Newsletter Project news: From the editors; awards and honours; contest results Articles: Last month's new Featured and A-Class content Book reviews: Sturmvogel 66 and Hawkeye7 look at aspects of the Pacific War Op-ed: ErrantX considers the rabbit hole of research

The Bugle is published by the Military history WikiProject. To receive it on your talk page, please join the project or sign up here.
If you are a project member who does not want delivery, please remove your name from this page. Your editors, Ian Rose (talk) and Nick-D (talk) 15:20, 23 April 2013 (UTC)

Your accuse me of edit war

Accusing me of an edit war after revering first time changes to restore un-cited claims is rich. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 178.208.204.151 (talk) 20:04, 23 April 2013 (UTC)

Binksternet, thanks for catching the rest of those changes. Not sure the IP has seen the reply in Talk:Melissa Farley. Location (talk) 20:22, 23 April 2013 (UTC)

You're welcome. It looks like IP person is following a personal grudge. Binksternet (talk) 20:36, 23 April 2013 (UTC)

Just a question

Hi Binksternet,

Wondering if you know anything about the logistics of opening an investigation (that's probably not the proper word) re tendentious editing?01:10, 26 April 2013 (UTC) petrarchan47tc 02:12, 26 April 2013 (UTC)

Sort of, yes. First, you should think like a prosecutor and build an ironclad case, with diffs of behavior. Binksternet (talk) 03:30, 26 April 2013 (UTC)

Done. petrarchan47tc 19:16, 26 April 2013 (UTC)

On another note... We are chipping away at beginning a conversation about policy change. I was thinking... only you, me and Gandydancer are able to offer an objective view of the BP talk page dynamics over a longer term. The recent brou - haha brought in a couple new editors who, being indies, can't be there everyday and being new, don't have the advantage of a bigger picture. That page is a fantastic case study for the problem we are attempting to address. It's one we three are quite familiar with, and i wondered if you might begin to think of summarizing your experience or take on things as a part of that case study? You can leave it anywhere that feels right - my talk page, here or here. The latter is probably best. I understand the vortex there and the desire to be doing almost anything else ;) so I thought a summary like this will take less time on your part but would really serve to advance the page itself, in the long run. petrarchan47tc 00:17, 27 April 2013 (UTC)

Let me think about the problem for a bit longer. To treat it properly I need a stretch of uninterrupted time, but my work schedule is such that my wiki contributions are forced to be staccato. My little audio engineering world is like short-attention-span theater until I get a few days off in a row. I'm in the middle of flurry of busy-ness right now. But hey, I got to mix sound for Peter Buffett, Meklit Hadero, Angélique Kidjo and Charlie Mars at recent gigs, so at least the work is rewarding... Binksternet (talk) 17:53, 27 April 2013 (UTC)

Peter Buffett! Wow!! (I'm sure the others are great too, my music knowledge is lacking). I totally understand, I just happen to have time off right now but will soon disappear to my paying job... This is actually the point we're trying to convey: to depend on independent editors to counteract PR teams on Wiki is futile. But it's the policy Wikipedia has embraced, possibly to its demise. Enjoy petrarchan47tc 20:10, 27 April 2013 (UTC)

Not like you ...

Binksternet, you definitely know better than to make accusations like this. I'm sure that I can rely on your ethics to retract what was surely just a one-of-a-kind, heated moment (✉→BWilkins←✎) 10:54, 26 April 2013 (UTC)

Here it is a day later and whatever heat was with me yesterday is still present. The BP article is incredibly frustrating for a long-time volunteer editor like me who wishes to make daily rounds of several thousand articles on the watchlist for maximum value to the encyclopedia. The BP article is an unwanted time-suck; it has its own vortex, something of a tar baby effect where the more you try to move the more stuck you are. From the volume and tenor of the interactions I continue to think that several of the editors there are paid, not just Arturo who is declared. It baffles me to consider how to pursue this problem; Wikipedia guidelines do not point to a clear solution. Binksternet (talk) 14:43, 26 April 2013 (UTC)

The support system behind editors who seem to favor big biz is absolutely incredible. I'm a bit jealous. Binksternet, I meant to invite you to share your two cents here. We are looking to come up with a formal proposal to deal with this situation. petrarchan47tc 19:43, 26 April 2013 (UTC)

The passions exhibited by some editors on that page are such that I think his suspicions of some kind of undisclosed COI are well warranted. Coretheapple (talk) 16:52, 27 April 2013 (UTC)

The repetitive support of every pro-BP edit on ANY topic is so pervasive it is grueling to deal with. The article is being strangled by $$$$. We will never know who besides Arturo is going to the pay window. Or what the manner of renumeration is. But, the steadfast support of everything BP is too strong to just be a gaggle of editors that favor corporations over people. Is it possible to get a BP credit card with Wikipedia's logo and the saying, "I edit Wikipedia" across the front? If so, once I get my "I edit Wikipedia" T-shirt I could get a card and then I would be a collector of "I edit WP" stuff.```Buster Seven Talk 03:15, 30 April 2013 (UTC)

Improper RfC closure at Talk:Ugg boots trademark disputes

Hello. There is currently a discussion at Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents regarding an issue with which you may have been involved. Thank you. Wayne (talk) 12:53, 29 April 2013 (UTC)

Thanks much

Thank you for your helpful comments at Talk:No worries/GA2, much appreciated, — Cirt (talk) 19:56, 29 April 2013 (UTC)

I saw it as a case of "I don't like it so let's hit the GAR button and see what happens". The system rightly emphasizes the value of keeping GA articles rather than delisting. Binksternet (talk) 22:12, 3 May 2013 (UTC)

Notice of Neutral point of view noticeboard discussion

Hello, Binksternet. This message is being sent to inform you that there currently is a discussion at Wikipedia:Neutral point of view/Noticeboard regarding an issue with which you may have been involved. Thank you. — Preceding unsigned comment added by CSDarrow (talk • contribs) 03:24, 30 April 2013 (UTC)

DYK for Eliel Saarinen's Tribune Tower design

The DYK project (nominate) 08:03, 1 May 2013 (UTC)

Just want to say how I enjoyed finding this article. Now I know why I'm always thinking, "haven't I seen that ziggurat somewhere else?" Mangoe (talk) 19:30, 6 May 2013 (UTC)

Thank you! My favorite part of contributing to Wikipedia is the writing of a new article. It's even better when someone notices.    :)

Binksternet (talk) 19:35, 6 May 2013 (UTC)

Tango

I started a list of tango dance companies which you just removed from both Tango and Tango Argentino. I am trying to gather information for the tango community about contemporary personalities and companies. I thought that creating the list was a good start so others would feel compeled to start adding information for it.

You seem to be a very experienced 'Wikipedian', and probably you could be so kind to suggest how I should proceed to get these articles and this information on the encyclopedia? Best D — Preceding unsigned comment added by DavidTrichard (talk • contribs) 17:36, 1 May 2013 (UTC)

In general, the practice at Wikipedia is to make lists only of topics/groups/people that have articles written about them on Wikipedia. To get an article written about them, the dance group must pass a notability test such as the one at WP:GNG which says "If a topic has received significant coverage in reliable sources that are independent of the subject, it is presumed to satisfy the inclusion criteria for a stand-alone article or stand-alone list.". Listing non-notable groups, choreographers and dancers is more like promotion than a proper encyclopedia. Binksternet (talk) 18:13, 1 May 2013 (UTC)

Odd

[10]. It's almost as if someone was trying to head off a legitimate edit warring complaint, such as you filed, by creating a sock for that purpose that would discredit it. Perhaps I'm being too suspicious, but I don't see any other possibility. Coretheapple (talk) 14:34, 2 May 2013 (UTC)

Yeah, it's quite suspicious. It makes working on the BP article that much more distasteful. A lot is at stake for BP... Binksternet (talk) 15:59, 2 May 2013 (UTC)

Wiknic 2013

Wiknic 2013
Sunday, June 23rd · 12:34pm · Lake Merritt, Oakland
Theme: Hyperlocal list-making

Lake Merritt Wild Duck Refuge (Oakland, CA)

This year's 2013 SF Wiknik will be held at Lake Merritt, next to Children's Fairyland in Oakland. This event will be co-attended by people from the hyperlocal Oakland Wiki. May crosspollination of ideas and merriment abound!

Location and Directions

• Location: The grassy area due south of Children's Fairyland (here) (Oakland Wiki)
  • Nearest BART: 19th Street
  • Nearest bus lines: NL/12/72
  • Street parking abounds

EdwardsBot (talk) 04:42, 3 May 2013 (UTC)

Just a note

I didn't want any newcomers to the RfC to be intimidated by the enormous wall of words that the article Talk page has become. I had the impression that admins wanted this new RfC to start fresh. But if you want newcomers to fully review all of the misconduct that occurred previously, I suppose that everyone should defer to your judgment in this matter. Phoenix and Winslow (talk) 21:40, 3 May 2013 (UTC)

Earlier discussion should always be easily available at an RfC. This RfC is not so earth-shattering that it needs its own page. If it stay on the talk page (as it should) then the future archives will read more coherently. Binksternet (talk) 22:07, 3 May 2013 (UTC)

Your PROD tag

Hi Binksternet. I saw the PROD tag you put on Homecoming Queen (Georgia Holt Song). Actually, that article was speedy-deleted a couple days ago by Orangemike right after I wrote him about it because it's clearly not notable and the editor, User:Robiyacher, is using their account solely to promote Holt and other Cher-related topics. In fact, Mike speedy deleted a couple other non-notable articles that Robiyacher created about Holt and Cher's sister. See this thread on Mike's talk page. Feel free to comment there. I'm not sure if it would be better to just remove your tag and let Mike delete it again, or if he can still delete it even with your tag there. Mike hasn't been on since Friday. In any case, thanks for your good eye on this. --76.189.109.155 (talk) 15:05, 5 May 2013 (UTC)

Bloodhouse

Hello! I'm from Russia. What is bloodhouse? I didn't see this word earlier. Senior Strateg (talk) 09:25, 7 May 2013 (UTC)

I have never seen that word before. After looking around online, it appears to be 1) the name of a musical band, or 2) a group/clan/tribe of warriors in a game. Binksternet (talk) 13:05, 7 May 2013 (UTC)

What does Bloodhouse translate in the context of this sentence: Vila’s original hotel, long gone, was an absolute bloodhouse in the 1920s. (see the source). Does it means a musical band was playing in this hotel? Senior Strateg (talk) 17:10, 7 May 2013 (UTC)

I see this sentence in a Lonely Planet guide discussing Port Vila. The context is a dangerous place, with wild amusements such as heavy drinking, fighting, gambling, etc. The word "bloodhouse" is dropped into the story with no particular precision; it is more in the form of emphasis on the danger. Binksternet (talk) 22:05, 7 May 2013 (UTC)

Does it means in this hotel these events (gambling, fighting, etc.) did by people? Is it right? Senior Strateg (talk) 08:21, 8 May 2013 (UTC)

The Lonely Planet author says that these events actually happened. Binksternet (talk) 09:48, 8 May 2013 (UTC)

Thank you! Senior Strateg (talk) 11:55, 8 May 2013 (UTC)

Re: edits without summary

I did, in fact, leave an edit summary. It's available to read right there in the edit log. The section I removed is original research, far from NPOV, uncyclopedic, and in some ways downright inaccurate. Hence, removing it. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 75.64.184.152 (talk) 15:46, 8 May 2013 (UTC)

I put a warning template on your user talk page about deleting a whole section of midwifery, not about signing your name. The midwifery edit you performed was disruptive: it removed text cited to various studies. The citation style is parenthetical, which is one of the approved versions, though rare. Binksternet (talk) 15:52, 8 May 2013 (UTC)

Perhaps you didn't use the one you meant to, but actually, no -- it was about not giving a reason for the edit, which I did. It's completely uncyclopedic, as others have noted, not to mention full of grammar errors and NPOV issues, but whatever. Keep the bar low; nobody will notice anyways. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 75.64.184.152 (talk) 17:42, 8 May 2013 (UTC)

Can the section's prose be improved? Sure. Should it be deleted? Not at all. Binksternet (talk) 17:57, 8 May 2013 (UTC)

How persuasive. Doesn't change the fact that encyclopedias aren't really meant to make persuasive arguments and have a clear agenda/POV that's something other than providing objective information. Again, I understand that you do not understand that. Hence, not bothering with the article. You just happen to be incorrect, and Wikipedia continues to be just a little more embarrassing as a result. It's your territory to own -- my time goes towards more worthwhile pursuits. Have fun. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 75.64.184.152 (talk) 19:50, 8 May 2013 (UTC)

Mea culpa

Regarding this, after closer investigation, you were 100% right. The new content stinks, I'll work with Jyt to fix it. Zad68 03:29, 10 May 2013 (UTC)

Thanks for keeping an eye on it. Cheers! Binksternet (talk) 03:31, 10 May 2013 (UTC)

DYK for Scientific pitch

The DYK project (nominate) 16:03, 10 May 2013 (UTC)

Chowkatsun and the uncreatively named sockpuppets

I started an SPI for his/her/its Hahababy Zhang account here, just FYI. Evanh2008 ^{(talk|contribs)} 05:57, 12 May 2013 (UTC)

Thanks! I was busy expanding Aleksei Losev. Binksternet (talk) 11:44, 12 May 2013 (UTC)

RFC/U on User:Arzel

You took part in a discussion that dealt with user:Arzel, which took place here. There was a clear community consensus for a topic ban for user:Arzel. Many of the issue fell outside of discussion on TPM. With such a large community consensus and with arbitration committee only dealing with issues directly related to the TPM, I went ahead and started a WP:RFC/U, here. You are invited to endorse this and to take part in the WP:RFC/U.Casprings (talk) 18:10, 12 May 2013 (UTC)

I will take a look at the page tomorrow. Thanks for the notice. Binksternet (talk) 18:24, 12 May 2013 (UTC)

You're invited...

to two upcoming Bay Area events:

• Maker Faire 2013, Sat/Sun May 18-19, San Mateo -- there will have a booth about Wikimedia, and we need volunteers to talk to the public and ideas for the booth -- see the wiki page to sign up!
• Edit-a-Thon 5, Sat May 25, 10-2pm, WMF offices in San Francisco -- this will be a casual edit-a-thon open to both experienced and new editors alike! Please sign up if on the wiki page if you can make it so we know how much food to get.

I hope you can join us at one or both! -- phoebe / (talk to me) 18:51, 12 May 2013 (UTC)

Jewish anti-BP editors

Why is it there is a group of Jewish Wikipedia editors who are putting so much energy into attempting to turn the BP Wikipedia article into an attack piece? It is raising questions in various places.2.101.0.131 (talk) 20:22, 12 May 2013 (UTC)