Jump to content

User talk:Binksternet

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

This is an old revision of this page, as edited by Cmi80 (talk | contribs) at 21:26, 27 January 2016. The present address (URL) is a permanent link to this revision, which may differ significantly from the current revision.

Binksternet Articles created Significant contributor Images Did you know Awards

Happy New Year


Savvyjack23 (talk) — is wishing you a Happy New Year! This greeting (and season) promotes WikiLove and hopefully this note has made your day a little better. Spread the WikiLove by wishing another user a Happy New Year, whether it be someone you have had disagreements with in the past, a good friend, or just some random person. Happy New Year!

Spread the New Year cheer by adding {{subst:New Year 1}} to their talk page with a friendly message.

Savvyjack23 (talk) 07:36, 1 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Happy New Year

I heard what happened to your fireworks last night.
I wish you better luck this New Year. Caballero//Historiador ☊ 15:23, 1 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Comeback

I always felt I could count on what you said to be accurate. I hope you decide to come back. 123.136.112.57 (talk) 15:14, 3 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Advice again please

Hey Binksternet. Sorry to keep making you my go-to guy but I need some advice. I was patrolling my watchlist and came across some edits by a new registered user adding genre's and recording dates which I reverted and left a message on the users page explaining they need to be sourced. When I got back to my P.C. a while later all my edits relating to this editor had been reverted by user : Mlpearc. He reinstated the unsourced information and left me 3 rather ugly warnings in very quick succession on my talk page, which is in no way assuming good faith. To date the information remains unsourced and while I have asked for an explanation on my and his talk page the only response I have been able to get out of him is "don't feed". I was looking at his talk page and I see this has happened before. Anyone can see I only edit constructively and while my edits are barely passed 7000, my track record is good. Please could you look at these edits and advise me as to what can be done about this. Much appreciated man! Robvanvee 16:34, 5 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]

FWIW, I also asked MusikAnimal what he thinks (being an admin and all) but would still value your input. Robvanvee 16:41, 5 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]
The IP is from Campo Grosso, Brazil. That place has given us other many other IP addresses, all doing the same unsourced musical genre stuff. I applaud your removal of this person's changes. Binksternet (talk) 02:11, 6 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Thank you Binksternet, I appreciate your support! Robvanvee 05:35, 6 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Sub section

I wasn't trying to imply that any single commercially available driver was claiming to be the biggest "subwoofer [system]" there is, only that it relies on the overall build, and not a driver itself. If there were good references, I would word it better and add more to suggest that it comes down to mostly basic math and science, not how shiny the cone is or that there is a skull insignia on the amp or something. B137 (talk) 17:48, 6 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Going on, the article overall is written in fairly commonspeak compared to other articles, especially in this subject. There are few equations, and it even mentions specific brand name drivers. I think it should make a few more connections to music, as long as it is written so easy to understand (i.e. ~41Hz=E1 bass note, 30Hz=Low B0, organ (double pedal C, officially?) is 16Hz which is C0, considered the bottom of the "lowest" "musical" octave, and handily given as an arbitrary tonal pitch limit). B137 (talk) 17:52, 6 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]

I don't comprehend the points you are trying to make. Your words here don't seem to connect to this removal of the section you added. Binksternet (talk) 23:00, 6 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Bitch I'm Madonna

Hi Binksternet, can you please help me with the above article? A bunch of IPs are tag-teaming to remove the sourced genres from the article, really causing disruption. I have requested for protection to no avail. I have a feeling all of these are socks of same master can you help me in finding the truth and filing a report? —Indian:BIO [ ChitChat ] 16:34, 7 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]

The source is not strong enough to say this song is vaporwave. The source only says "it sounds a little like vaporwave." There are no other sources calling this song vaporwave, except ones that quote Wikipedia, so I don't see vaporwave as the song's genre. Binksternet (talk) 20:12, 7 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]

another musician

Greetings! We found Mahdar from someone's uploading of copyvio pictures of him. His bio doesn't seem to have any references! Thanks for your help! Ellin Beltz (talk) 17:06, 13 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]

See below. The record company publicist has been working on the articles. Binksternet (talk) 07:31, 15 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]

KozAz Records

Greetings! This Company is working at the moment and I created wiki page for them at 2014 I guess. All references are real and orginal and Also I work in this Company as PR. I will improve the Article during this Year in Russian Langauge and Persian Langauge and I believe it should be deleted form deletion! Persian Great (talk) 14:06, 14 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]

The record company must be discussed in published sources which are not connected to the record company. A major newspaper, an established magazine; those are the kinds of sources you need. If none of these things exist, then the article will be deleted. Binksternet (talk) 07:30, 15 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]

My Heart Will Go On

Could you please keep an eye on the page? 115.164.181.134 (talk) 23:05, 17 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]

50 Big Ones

If you still think I'm wrong, by all means change it back, I'll leave it alone, but I'd a better undo explanation than just wrong, especially when evidence points to the contrary. 2602:30A:C02F:5C50:19C8:A20E:8C29:2C2B (talk) 05:25, 20 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]

You say 114 mins. AllMusic says 2 hours and 14 mins. I'm going with AllMusic. Binksternet (talk) 06:40, 20 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Well, looks like I'm the fool here. My apologies. 2602:30A:C02F:5C50:19C8:A20E:8C29:2C2B (talk) 04:03, 21 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Street musicians

Greetings: Could you look at A Hopeless Motive for notability? Thanks! Ellin Beltz (talk) 17:29, 21 January 2016 (UTC) PS if you ever want to see all the hopeful bands in North America, a simple visit to Commons https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/Category:Album_covers is an eyeopener. There must be thousands of these.[reply]

Wow. Looks like they are taking advantage of WMF's free web hosting service. Wait, what? Binksternet (talk) 19:22, 22 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Please stop reverting my edit.

There is no reason to do so. — Preceding unsigned comment added by ‎Jubilantballoons (talk • contribs) 22:23, 25 January 2016‎

I left some advice on your talk page. Willondon (talk) 01:53, 26 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]

January 2016

You currently appear to be engaged in an edit war; according to the reverts you have made on Epoch Times. Users are expected to collaborate with others, to avoid editing disruptively, and to try to reach a consensus rather than repeatedly undoing other users' edits once it is known that there is a disagreement.

Please be particularly aware that Wikipedia's policy on edit warring states:

  1. Edit warring is disruptive regardless of how many reverts you have made.
  2. Do not edit war even if you believe you are right.

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 engage in an edit war, you may be blocked from editing. Marvin 2009 (talk) 01:57, 26 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]

The Bugle: Issue CXVIII, January 2016

Full front page of The Bugle
Your Military History Newsletter

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) 11:23, 26 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Smart solution!

Smart solution!: [1] Cyphoidbomb (talk) 04:04, 27 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks! Binksternet (talk) 16:14, 27 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Bauhaus is a Goth band primarily, not a Post-punk band

The talk page already has consensus that Bauhaus is a Goth band, it is Mezigue who constantly changes the page without giving proper references. Reference #29 on the Bauhaus page refers to Rolling Stone Magazine's assertion that Bauhaus is a Goth band. You made an improper reverting of my changes. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 67.83.143.151 (talk) 05:48, 27 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]

January 2016

Hello, Binksternet. You recently undid my edits on sound level meter and microphone. Let me assure you that the intention of the edits were not to promote any particular brand.

The sound level meter page is significantly lacking a description of the fundamentals of how a sound level meter works, and rather disjointedly jumps quickly into technical jargon. While these basics will certainly seem trivial to a expert such as you, we must not lose sight of the point of Wikipedia; to inform, and even the layman. You will notice that the text is free of any reference to brands. In order to demonstrate the concept of the conversion of air pressure to electrical signal through the diaphragm, I included a diagram. I might add that the diagram took a lot of time, thought and effort on my part. I used the only sound level meter I have at my disposal in the image.

On the microphone page there is a comparison of the frequency response of a Shure SM58 and one other mic. Directly below is the section on measurement microphones. It is certainly of interest to all to see the difference in the frequency response of a measurement microphone to a performance mic. Again I put a lot of effort in making the graph to the same scale as the existing graphs, and again I used the only data I have at my disposal. Side Note: I have five SM58 microphones of varying ages between 30 and 5 years old and the frequency response on all of them is remarkably comparable despite a few of the diaphragm sponges being almost completely disintegrated from use.

I have redone the edits and removed branding. If you have any suggestion how I can achieve the above without using pictures of branded instruments, please talk to me. Acousticator (talk) 08:25, 27 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]

I agree that your text is useful at the sound level meter article, however unreferenced it may be. The image, though, is promotional in that it places an NTi meter at the top. Binksternet (talk) 16:11, 27 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]

SCORPIONS: Tokyo Tapes

Hello Binksternet!

Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk:Binksternet&oldid=702004548"