User talk:Binksternet

Binksternet	Articles created	Significant contributor	Images	Did you know	Awards

Page protection

Hello Binksternet. You asked for semiprotection of Frenchie (rapper) but noted that a rangeblock might be an alternative. The problem is to make a wide enough block. What would you think of Special:Contributions/2A02:C7D::/32 as well as Special:Contributions/2A02:C7F::/32? These two together would cover a lot of the IPs listed in Wikipedia:Long-term abuse/Frenchie vandal though both of these ranges are very wide. A block might still be considered if we could assess the relative fraction of good and bad edits in those ranges. Recently I did a /32 block of an IPv6 range for 24 hours and nobody complained. Thanks for any opinion. EdJohnston (talk) 20:35, 5 August 2018 (UTC)

Your proposed range 2A02:C7F::/32 has a great many contributions that appear to be from good faith users. Same with 2A02:C7D::/32. I think there would be too much collateral damage if the /32 ranges were blocked. Binksternet (talk) 21:56, 5 August 2018 (UTC)

AIV

Why did you call the IP editor a LTA for this edit??? I played it safe and reported another IP who made same edit to AIV (since i assume it's a duck and the same LTA'er). Feel free to remove my AIV report if you have doubts. JC7V-constructive zone 18:04, 6 August 2018 (UTC)

Take a look at my ANI report here: Wikipedia:Administrators'_noticeboard/IncidentArchive987#Julian_Williams_from_Lake_Charles. The disruption has been happening for five years. Binksternet (talk) 18:27, 6 August 2018 (UTC)

The active range of IPs is Special:Contributions/2605:6001:EA8E:9400:0:0:0:0/64. This range should be blocked. Binksternet (talk) 18:31, 6 August 2018 (UTC)

re:Rachel MacNair

Whoa whoa whoa... I simply forgot to change the edit summary message as I switched from doing one set of edits re: accessdates to doing another set re: Religion in the infobox while using AWB. The actual edits are good. Have you taken a look at the actual edits and the errors that occur by undoing them? Gene Wilson (talk) 21:32, 6 August 2018 (UTC)
No Problem. Don't worry about the undo's, I'll take care of it. Requesting a little feedback, I clearly made a mistake in not changing the edit summary. Is it worth it to go back and change them?

I took care of the problem I created – I don't like leaving a mess for others. Again, sorry for jumping all over you! The no-religion-in-the-infobox thing took me completely by surprise. Binksternet (talk) 22:09, 6 August 2018 (UTC)

Red links in list of electronic music genres

Hey Binksternet, sorry for the inconvenience but mind cleaning the red links in the List of electronic music genres, I've noticed random users have been adding a bunch of words with no Wikipedia articles. Hope you can help, Thanks. 101.165.2.11 (talk) 10:00, 7 August 2018 (UTC)

 Done. Thanks for the note! Binksternet (talk) 13:16, 7 August 2018 (UTC)

false-positive for troll and forum nixes

Hi. Your recent deletion of material showing a referenced source (concerning criminal record of conviction and subsequent appeal) from the talkpage of George Soros, which had been contributed to the article in November 2012, shouldn`t have occurred based on alleged "trolling" or "forum" objections. Kindly refrain from making frivolous use of wikipedia or encouraging unneeded reverts. The matter for discussion was mention of the public-record of the article subject. I shall be re-upping the matter of discussion. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 126.209.22.124 (talk • contribs)

Your proposal of slapping the "ex-con" label on Soros is goes against the way he is described in reliable sources. If it's not trolling, it's a violation of WP:BLP. Binksternet (talk) 15:58, 8 August 2018 (UTC)

Silkk the Shocker

Hello there Blinksternet. I have seen that my edits on this rapper have been deleted, and that I have been told to cite my sources. I am new to wikipedia editing, and do not know how to. The information that i added to this rapper is 100% true, and i found this info by searching it up on google. Once again, I am new to wikipedia editing and do not know how to cite my sources. If it is OK with you, can I send you the links I used to show you that the info that I added is 100% true? 96.48.78.147 (talk) 08:19, 8 August 2018 (UTC)

There is a guideline about what can be listed in the "associated acts" line of the infobox, and the guideline sets a high bar. Please read Template:Infobox musical artist#associated acts to see what I'm talking about. Binksternet (talk) 16:01, 8 August 2018 (UTC)

Hello again, Blinksternet. After reading this, a lot of the people i listed in associated acts should be off it. But there are still some that should be there as it folows the criteria entered in the guideline. 96.48.78.147 (talk) 06:19, 9 August 2018 (UTC)

Deleting political information from towns

I'm curious why you are removing political tables from so many towns (e.g. Walnut Creek, California, Madison County, Missouri). I get WP:NOTSTATS and the need for references, but was this specific application to political data a collective decision or just being WP:BOLD? I'm not really on one side or the other but I noticed one of your edits and then I saw that there is a pattern. Also many of the people who put the tables back seem to be not logged in. This is interesting to me and I'm learning a lot about politics just by looking at these edits. I wonder if you are able to say more about it without violating WP:AGF. A5 (talk) 12:08, 8 August 2018 (UTC)

I started removing the information after seeing that Special:Contributions/64.132.42.50 was adding the politically charged term "stronghold" to articles based on raw statistics rather than WP:SECONDARY sources. IP 64.132.42.50 is registered to Hanover Research, a marketing strategy firm in Arlington, Virginia. IP 64.132.42.50 got blocked for this stuff, and so did other Arlington IPs.[1][2][3]

All I'm looking for from this guy is to stop adding his own summary of raw stats, and to cite instead the political analysis of reliable secondary sources. If a suitable summary of analysis is present then the chart stats are properly placed in context. Binksternet (talk) 16:12, 8 August 2018 (UTC)

Wow, that's interesting, thank you. Now I'm glad that I asked! A5 (talk) 19:49, 8 August 2018 (UTC)

The Bugle: Issue CXLVIII, August 2018

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 review: Nick-D looks at a classic US official history Op-ed: TomStar81 on belated declarations of war in 1916–18 Timeline: This month in World War I

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) 08:35, 12 August 2018 (UTC)

Orphaned non-free image File:Babywise 2007.jpg

⚠

Thanks for uploading File:Babywise 2007.jpg. The image description page currently specifies that the image is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, the image is currently not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the image was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that images for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).

Note that any non-free images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described in section F5 of the criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. --B-bot (talk) 17:06, 12 August 2018 (UTC)

Peer review newsletter #1

Introduction

Hello to all! I do not intend to write a regular peer review newsletter but there does occasionally come a time when those interested in contributing to peer review should be contacted, and now is one. I've mailed this out to everyone on the peer review volunteers list, and some editors that have contributed to past discussions. Apologies if I've left you off or contacted you and you didn't want it. Next time there is a newsletter / mass message it will be opt in (here), I'll talk about this below - but first:

• THANK YOU! I want to thank you for your contributions and for volunteering on the list to help out at peer review. Thank you!
• Peer review is useful! It's good to have an active peer review process. This is often the way that we help new or developing editors understand our ways, and improve the quality of their editing - so it fills an important and necessary gap between the teahouse (kindly introduction to our Wikiways) and GA and FA reviews (specific standards uphelp according to a set of quality criteria). And we should try and improve this process where possible (automate, simplify) so it can be used and maintained easily.

Updates

It can get quite lonely tinkering with peer review...

With a bit of effort we can renovate the place to look like this!

Update #1: the peer review volunteers list is changing

The list is here in case you've forgotten: WP:PRV. Kadane has kindly offered to create a bot that will ping editors on the volunteers list with unanswered reviews in their chosen subject areas every so often. You can choose the time interval by changing the "contact" parameter. Options are "never", "monthly", "quarterly", "halfyearly", and "annually". For example:

• {{PRV|JohnSmith|History of engineering|contact=monthly}} - if placed in the "History" section, JohnSmith will receive an automatic update every month about unanswered peer reviews relating to history.
• {{PRV|JaneSmith|Mesopotamian geography, Norwegian fjords|contact=annually}} - if placed in the "Geography" section, JaneSmith will receive an automatic update every yearly about unanswered peer reviews in the geography area.

We can at this stage only use the broad peer review section titles to guide what reviews you'd like, but that's better than nothing! You can also set an interest in multiple separate subject areas that will be updated at different times.

Update #2: a (lean) WikiProject Peer review

I don't think we need a WikiProject with a giant bureaucracy nor all sorts of whiz-bang features. However over the last few years I've found there are times when it would have been useful to have a list of editors that would like to contribute to discussions about the peer review process (e.g. instructions, layout, automation, simplification etc.). Also, it can get kind of lonely on the talk page as I am (correct me if I'm wrong) the only regular contributor, with most editors moving on after 6 - 12 months.

So, I've decided to create "WikiProject Peer review". If you'd like to contribute to the WikiProject, or make yourself available for future newsletters or contact, please add yourself to the list of members.

Update #3: advertising

We plan to do some advertising of peer review, to let editors know about it and how to volunteer to help, at a couple of different venues (Signpost, Village pump, Teahouse etc.) - but have been waiting until we get this bot + WikiProject set up so we have a way to help interested editors make more enduring contributions. So consider yourself forewarned!

And... that's it!

I wish you all well on your Wikivoyages, Tom (LT) (talk) 00:31, 11 August 2018 (UTC)

Red Pill Blues

Hello,

I've noticed you removed the restoration of "Cold" and "Don't Wanna Know" to the infobox and article as singles citing "not true singles". I'm not sure what this statement is based on. There are lots of examples where songs are released independently of the album and then only included on one version e.g "Super Bass" by Nicki Minaj being a classic example. WP:DUCK applies too as both songs were released independently of the album, have artwork covers, have music videos etc and were ultimately included on a version of the album.

Do you have a specific reason for excluding them? Is there a source or reference which specifically denotes them as "not true singles"? If so I'd be willing to explore this further otherwise it does seem to me like this is an referenced opinion/revision. I appreciate that the lines have become very blurry with the advent of streaming and multiple versions of albums being released but I can't see an obvious reason for omitting the singles. → Lil-℧niquԐ 1 - { Talk } - 11:15, 14 August 2018 (UTC)

on a side note, rolling back is not for edits like this where you actually removed lots of useful information like the additional categories aside from the issue above. Please see the guidance for when to use rollback here if you were unsure. → Lil-℧niquԐ 1 - { Talk } - 12:07, 14 August 2018 (UTC)

DUCK has nothing to do with this case; nothing at all. And I don't have rollback, I used Twinkle, which asks that I use an edit summary and take responsibility for my actions.

As for the claim that two songs on a special edition of the album are "singles" released from that album, I should think it would be you who needs to show source or reference. The songs are not on the main or standard edition, so they are not album singles. Instead, they are independent singles that were later tacked on to the deluxe edition. Binksternet (talk) 13:56, 14 August 2018 (UTC)

Please remain WP:CIVIL and polite. WP:DUCK applies - the songs were released in promotion of the album and included on a version of the album (deluxe version) released simultaneously with the standard version. If it behaves like a single it probably is a single per the principles of WP:DUCK. Therefore I don't think a source is required which explicitly they're singles when the very nature of their release proves it. It is far more controversial to say that a standard version of the album is the main version or that deluxe version songs can't be singles. There is a longstanding norm that if an artist releases an album with new songs (that are released as singles) they're still singles from that album. I even provided examples. Some of the language used across the articles is also questionable "removed from the standard edition" is not factually correct. If you're not convinced I do think we should open a formal discussion to establish a consensus (even though I personally believe there is already a long standing consensus for this). → Lil-℧niquԐ 1 - { Talk } - 20:51, 14 August 2018 (UTC)

Lil-unique1, I don't know how on Earth Binksternet was uncivil or impolite in any way in his last reply here. That's about as polite as it gets. It seems to just be your go-to thing to say, no matter what the user has actually said. Also, you need to actually read WP:DUCK. It says, clear as day: "The duck test does not apply to article content" (emphasis original), so your using it is invalid. You're meaning to say something is "obvious". Well, clearly it's not and there is disagreement. What other articles have done in regards to singles is not really a precedent (WP:OTHERSTUFFEXISTS not being a valid reason) and there is no policy or guideline regarding it. Start a discussion on the article talk page if you feel so strongly about it. There seemed to be an agreement around the time Red Pill Blues came out for most editors editing the article that "Don't Wanna Know" and "Cold" were released too far in advance of the album to be in promotion of it, and were only later tacked onto the deluxe edition of the album so fans could have them on an album/for completion purposes/similar reasons. Complaining at Binksternet or any one user about that "not being actual consensus" and going around and around about what is and is not a single from which edition and in what circumstances is not going to help yours, or anyone's case. Get consensus at Talk:Red Pill Blues. Oh, and regarding the genre categories you readded: they're already on Category:Maroon 5 albums. When genres already appear in an artist's category, they are considered redundant to put on any albums they put out as the artist category is a subcategory of them. Ss112 21:07, 14 August 2018 (UTC)

Thanks for the comments, Ss112. It appears that Lil-uniquie1 is confusing WP:DUCK with WP:BLUE, an informative guideline which puts forward the idea that obvious facts don't need references. BLUE would only apply to "Cold" and "Don't Wanna Know" if they were tracks on the standard album. They are not; they are tracks on the deluxe version.

Lil-unique1, if you think I have not been civil and polite to you then you are free to file a complaint about it. I'm surprised anyone would jump to that conclusion. To me it looks like your intention is to lay down a chilling effect with such an unfounded accusation. Binksternet (talk) 21:16, 14 August 2018 (UTC)

@Binksternet: apologies, uncivil was probably the wrong term, it was probably more acerbic. I feel like it's a tad unfair / bad faith to assume I'm laying down a chilling effect. More what I meant was that I was more taken aback by the directness of your response. Anyway I've opened a discussion to try and get a wider consensus. We've all got off on the wrong foot I fear even though we're all doing our own thing to improve various articles. I'd appreciate it if we could try and restart on a more positive footing (including me apologising for being a bit sensitive). → Lil-℧niquԐ 1 - { Talk } - 21:24, 14 August 2018 (UTC)

I've opened a discussion at Talk:Red_Pill_Blues#Singles_on_Standard_vs_Deluxe_Edition. Please (both) feel free to add to discussion. As for "were released too far in advance of the album to be in promotion of it, and were only later tacked onto the deluxe edition of the album so fans could have them on an album/for completion purposes/similar reasons" - these are opinions and are not fact-based reasons for excluding singles. As editors, it is not for us to analyse a band's release strategy or their choice of what to include as singles/part of their promotion campaign. I am aware that other stuff exists isn't a valid reason however things should be treated consistently IMO. → Lil-℧niquԐ 1 - { Talk } - 21:12, 14 August 2018 (UTC)

Nina Paley

You are openly, blatantly trying to reframe Paley's views on transgender people to be some sort of "rise against men" when it is simply she does not recognize transgender people as women. That she is man hating is verified but her views on transgender people are entirely separate. You need to stop sanitizing articles that speak for themselves. Paley was not removed form her art shows and had speaking engagements canceled because she was "man hating", it was because she was transphobic. 104.34.202.79 (talk) 16:43, 14 August 2018 (UTC)

She was removed from some scheduled appearances because a few people wrote terrible things about her.

You are heading into a violation of WP:BLP with your "man-hating" assertion. Get over it or get blocked. Binksternet (talk) 17:09, 14 August 2018 (UTC)

She was removed for what she wrote. Are you really so gullible to believe that multiple venues would cancel programs based on what trolls wrote? She was banned from facebook , from art shows, from speaking engagements because of her own words. You are either ignorant of events or willfully ignorant Mr Knowles. 104.34.202.79 (talk) 17:20, 14 August 2018 (UTC)

I have filed a dispute over edit warring. You are informed. 104.34.202.79 (talk) 19:55, 14 August 2018 (UTC)

Streisand lead image

Hello Binksternet, I'm wondering if you can review a strange edit made last month by a newbie, who only made that one change to Barbra Streisand.

The long-standing lead image was this one, which is IMO of much higher quality. It's also closer to what most of her book bios use, such as this one, another, and one more.

Hopefully you can revert it back, since a good lead image is needed. Thanks. --Light show (talk) 04:23, 16 August 2018 (UTC)

 Done. Got it. Thanks for the note! Binksternet (talk) 04:31, 16 August 2018 (UTC)

Iron Maiden home studio albums

These albums were recorded in a studio on Steve Harris's property in Essex, so you may have edited it by mistake, and that category Albums recorded in a home studio refer to albums recorded in a private residence, not a commercial studio. 27.32.57.113 (talk) 06:02, 17 August 2018 (UTC)

Not exactly. The category applies to albums that are referred to in our WP:Reliable sources as having been recorded in a home studio. See WP:CATDEF which says that the category must reflect a defining characteristic of the topic or it should be removed. If nobody calls the album a home studio album, then the category cannot be listed. It doesn't matter if the studio was in or near someone's residence. And you're confusing professional level studios that have been installed at great expense in someone's very large home with tiny little setups that are shoehorned into someone's apartment. The former are never called "home studios". Binksternet (talk) 06:37, 17 August 2018 (UTC)

YoungJuvenile... is BushidoBrown Back?

Hey there! If you didn't notice, I started an SPI and added a little behavioral evidence at Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/BushidoBrown as the CU was declined. Understand if you don't want to involve yourself, I know how tiring these repeat vandals/ducks can be. Cheers, JesseRafe (talk) 14:31, 17 August 2018 (UTC)

Yes, I'm working on a comment for the SPI. Binksternet (talk) 14:34, 17 August 2018 (UTC)

Chuck Connors

Ha ha ha, "vandalism"??? How about correcting 100% WRONG information??? Don't threaten me. Let's escalate this asap and see who prevails. Thank you. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 172.254.120.214 (talk) 16:13, 17 August 2018 (UTC)

Possible block evasion by Giubbotto non ortodosso

An editor added genres in the X (Chris Brown album) article here, I wonder if this Giubbotto non ortodosso using another account. TheAmazingPeanuts (talk) 05:35, 18 August 2018 (UTC)

I think that's MariaJaydHicky doing her usual genre warring and block evasion. Binksternet (talk) 13:54, 18 August 2018 (UTC)

Big L

How did I disrupt Big L wiki page? EVERY TIME I ADD A SOURCE SOMEBODY DELETES IT. YOU KNOW THIS IS NOT RIGHT. - YoungJuvenile — Preceding unsigned comment added by YoungJuvenile (talk • contribs) 15:35, 18 August 2018 (UTC)

In popular culture

Your personal judgement as to whether pop culture references are "important" is itself not important here on Wikipedia. What is is that they are well-sourced, and relevant to the content of the article. Once again, I ask you to read WP:IPC (and also follow WP:BRD instead of reverting again). Modernponderer (talk) 20:19, 20 August 2018 (UTC)

Actually, IPC says that pop culture references should be significant to the topic, that the cited source must establish significance. We as Wikipedia editors, all of us working together, decide on whether a source has established significance. It's not a binary affair, in which the presence of a citation automatically means the requirement has been met. These references don't show the material to be significant (important to the topic.) The first one describes an otherwise unremarkable game level and the others are simply youtube videos. Binksternet (talk) 20:28, 20 August 2018 (UTC)

(talk page watcher) Completely agree with your revert, this is nothing but non-notable trivia. - FlightTime (open channel) 20:33, 20 August 2018 (UTC)

Scientology and Governing magazine

I'm not a fan of Scientology, but do you have any proof/evidence that their ownership of the magazine produces bias in reporting? This could be said to be the case of many news media outlets.

This story from the NYT points out better what their "ties to Scientology" are, and I was thinking of adding the quote: " California media company whose top management are Scientologists" to the article to better state the relations to the e.Republic page: https://www.nytimes.com/2009/11/23/business/media/23govern.html

Avatar317 (talk) 04:59, 22 August 2018 (UTC)Avatar317

Additional comment: I am rather unfamiliar with their beliefs/goals, and what political positions they espouse/support. Do you know this or can you link to where these are stated? That would at least give a direction of their bias, if such exists. ----Avatar317 (talk) 05:07, 22 August 2018 (UTC)Avatar317

I don't see the need. Why go out of your way to validate a not-very-expert source that has editorial biases? We should be using better sources. Binksternet (talk) 06:40, 22 August 2018 (UTC)

August 2018

Please remember to assume good faith when dealing with other editors. Thank you. Conservatrix (talk) 04:35, 23 August 2018 (UTC)

Yes, I will.

Just in case you were wondering, I have a warm place in my heart for old styles of English, for instance I argued at the Amelia Earhart biography that we should include the word "aviatrix" exactly one time, as a representation of the historical record. Some others were arguing to remove it completely as diminutive, or wholly inappropriate for such a dynamic woman. And I cannot but notice your username is Conservatrix, containing the same nod to archaicism. But "authoress" applied to a modern university historian was very wrong, so wrong that intent was laid bare. I assume good faith but I don't ignore the evidence in front of me. Binksternet (talk) 04:42, 23 August 2018 (UTC)

As noted on the UDC talk, the original title was author. I ask that you remove the warning from my talk page. – Conservatrix (talk) 04:59, 23 August 2018 (UTC)

You are always welcome to remove any messages from me from your talk page. Binksternet (talk) 05:11, 23 August 2018 (UTC)

Special:Contributions/199.16.220.18

The IP is continued with genre warring again. That rollbacker accused me as a wrong IP. 183.171.120.219 (talk) 13:26, 24 August 2018 (UTC) Never mind. Would you keep an eye for the IP in this case. 183.171.120.219 (talk) 13:32, 24 August 2018 (UTC)

Pictures of recording albums

Greetings. I would like to get guidance on the use of recording album images on related articles in Wikipedia. I have posted many in the past and there are several more that I was planning on including on additional articles in the near future, but would like to clarify the policy before adding any more. You had mentioned that the two reasons for removing them were due to (1.) copyright issues of the image and (2.) lack of value to the article. Item #1 is something I researched via Commons and have determined that the images are within the public domain due to the lack of original artwork on the album. Regarding point #2, I understand that the value they offer compared to an image of the actual artist. In cases where certain articles lack images from a certain era of an artist, I have made a case in past revisions that the inclusion of a 'lowered-value image' outweighs the absence of an image altogether. Because this issue was discussed and debated on in the past and Wikipedia contributors agreed to keep them, I would request if you can you kindly begin a thread to get other Wikipedia users/contributors to provide their feedback on whether or not the images should be used? Thank you. --Djrun (talk) 15:32, 24 August 2018 (UTC)

If the image you want to add is in the public domain, and if the image shows a significant version of the album, then you can add it. The images I have seen you add have not been in the public domain. Binksternet (talk) 15:47, 24 August 2018 (UTC)

Hi there. Thank you for the quick response. When you open the link to the image in Wikimedia Commons you can see that all the images have a public domain license. This was something that I also clarified with contributors on Wikimedia Commons before uploading. I can provide for you the feedback I got if you don't feel comfortable seeing them on articles. In regards to whether the image is "a significant version of the album", that I believe is up to interpretation as currently the only versions are thumbnails of album covers. If you still have concerns on this item as well I can start some discussion points again on the affected talk pages and Wikiprojects. Below is the public domain license that those images are using. Djrun (talk) 19:35, 24 August 2018 (UTC)

• "The depicted text is ineligible for copyright and therefore in the public domain, because it is not a “literary work” or other protected type in sense of the local copyright law. Facts, data, and unoriginal information which is common property without sufficiently creative authorship in a general typeface or basic handwriting, and simple geometric shapes are not protected by copyright. This tag does not generally apply to all images of texts. Particular countries can have different legal definition of the “literary work” as the subject of copyright and different court's interpretation practices. Some countries protect almost every written work, while other countries protect distinctively artistic or scientific texts and databases only. Extent of creativeness, function and length of the text can be relevant. The copyright protection can be limited to the literary form – the included information itself can be excluded from protection."

I don't think a photo of a CD adds anything to articles about musicians, albums or songs. It's just trivia which takes away from the reader's focus on what's important. That's my stance. Binksternet (talk) 20:26, 24 August 2018 (UTC)

Participation in a Robert Palmer hoax??

Hi Binksternet,

So, I recently made an edit to Robert Palmer's page mentioning his first marriage to Shelly Putman and their children. Apparently, I had (unbeknownst to me) participated in a "hoax" perpetuated on Wikipedia; a link you left on my talk page referred me to a "Geraldine Edwards" hoax, and I am assuming that was the hoax in which you had claimed I was participating. Please note that in my edits, I did not touch anything related to Palmer's girlfriend at the time of his death; I was only concerned with adding back in information about his first wife and their children, and the part about "Geraldine Edwards" had been added in by somebody else before I made this edit. If the information I did add was somehow inaccurate, then I apologize for that, but I certainly had no intention of voluntarily participating in any hoax; rather, I was simply making what I thought was a "good faith" edit. Thank you. RockNWrite82 (talk) 15:48, 26 August 2018 (UTC)

Thanks for the note. I'm sorry that I lumped you in with the hoaxing IP after you came in and tweaked the text. However, you really did remove a good source and replace it with a bad one, which is why I responded so strongly. I'm glad you are now seeing the hoax for what it is. Binksternet (talk) 15:58, 26 August 2018 (UTC)

Fair enough. Thanks for the quick response. Yeah, I actually spent longer than I should have last night looking for a better source than the questionable link I posted when I added that information about his first wife. Since there really wasn't anything more reliable out there, I'm now wondering whether the whole idea that he had a previous wife and children is itself a "hoax" as well! But I guess, that's a whole 'nother issue... Anyway, didn't mean to remove the good source originally there; I'll be more careful about that in the future. RockNWrite82 (talk) 01:49, 27 August 2018 (UTC)

Quiet storm edits

Binksternet,

I'm confused as to why you've gone through every single song and album that's labeled as quiet storm, especially the works of artists who were pioneers of the genre. Yes, it's a radio format but it is also a genre. Like smooth jazz. I don't mind talking about making changes, but what you did was so abrupt and not all of the edits were accurate. --Rmcrae2015 (talk) 01:41, 27 August 2018 (UTC)

(Forgot to include the title on the first message). Read above. --Rmcrae2015 (talk) 01:45, 27 August 2018 (UTC)

My understanding is that quiet storm is first and foremost a radio format. It's only a music genre in the sense that, after the radio format became famous, musicians began producing music to fit the format. So the genre, such as it is, is totally dependent on the radio format, which came first anyway.

Furthermore, the radio format of quiet storm includes many genres of music, including pop, R&B, smooth jazz, neo-soul, etc. So that makes it particuarly difficult to talk about it being a music genre of its own.

I went around to a ton of articles containing the phrase "quiet storm" and I removed stuff that wasn't referenced. I also tweaked the referenced stuff to emphasize that quiet storm is a musical style more than a well-defined musical genre. If you have a problem with this then you will want to find some references that directly say a song, album or artist is classified as the quiet storm genre rather than the quiet storm style or the quiet storm radio format.

It's still valid to have songs categorized as quiet storm but they should be referenced as such. Ideally, they should be songs that have been played many times on quiet storm radio programs. If you want to categorize an album or an artist as quiet storm then your job is a lot harder. Was every song on the album played on quiet storm radio? Was every famous song by the artist played on quiet storm radio?

It's a messy topic, with a lot of confusion in the literature, so I'm focusing on the clearest and best sources. Binksternet (talk) 01:53, 27 August 2018 (UTC)

I see. Thanks. --Rmcrae2015 (talk) 02:59, 27 August 2018 (UTC)

The Grand Budapest Hotel.

Well, I guess I'm out of this site. Seriously, all I did had good intentions. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 8000 Saiyan (talk • contribs)

It's not the end – if you read the guideline at Wikipedia:Close paraphrasing and follow the instructions there, you'll be set. Binksternet (talk) 08:54, 27 August 2018 (UTC)

I personally apologize for everything wrong that I've done for this site. I should really pay more close attention and not do random things like adding categories without adding any sources.

Wikipedia:Long-term abuse/Caribbean music vandal

I'm currently going through LTA and archiving old cases; As you seem to have encountered this guy before, is he still active? I'm not able to tell based off of the LTA page itself.💵Money💵emoji💵^💸 04:07, 28 August 2018 (UTC)

I don't think the person is still active. I checked the frequent targets and they have other people, with different styles, editing them. Binksternet (talk) 04:40, 28 August 2018 (UTC)

Plot summary of D-Tox

I know you're trying to trim down the plot summary of D-Tox, but that removal edit on the plot summary was too drastic and you should find a way to get it down to the 700 word limit while maintaining the summary on it. BattleshipMan (talk) 22:48, 29 August 2018 (UTC)

I don't agree. I think the guideline sets the proper standard, and if a plot section is expanded too much, then the plot ought to be reverted back to before the too-large expansion. Binksternet (talk) 06:10, 30 August 2018 (UTC)

Not that way. There are people who shortened the plot summary to the 700 word limit if the plot summary is too large. Your revert edit on D-Tox made it way too short and is not the answer. BattleshipMan (talk) 07:42, 30 August 2018 (UTC)

DYK nomination of Seder-Masochism

Hello! Your submission of Seder-Masochism at the Did You Know nominations page has been reviewed, and some issues with it may need to be clarified. Please review the comment(s) underneath your nomination's entry and respond there as soon as possible. Thank you for contributing to Did You Know! Johnbod (talk) 00:28, 30 August 2018 (UTC)

Fireman Sam

Hi, I am just letting you know that the IP editor who was persistently vandalising the Fireman Sam page is continuing to do so even after the temporary protection on it. If you have any thoughts on this (such as re-protection) can you please add it to the discussion on the talk page. I am asking you as you have previously been involved in helping tackle this issue. Voello (talk) 10:46, 31 August 2018 (UTC)

(talk page watcher) Voello - I've applied pending changes protection to the article. It won't stop editors from adding disruption, but at least it won't be visible to the public :-). ~Oshwah~^{(talk) (contribs)} 10:49, 31 August 2018 (UTC)

IP-hopping vandal

• 76.231.64.214 (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · filter log · WHOIS · RDNS · RBLs · http · block user · block log)
• 2600:1702:3310:6c30:dc4d:388a:9702:74f (talk · contribs · (/64) · deleted contribs · filter log · WHOIS · RBLs · http · block user · block log)
• 2600:1702:3310:6c30:75eb:ac50:9b05:ac6c (talk · contribs · (/64) · deleted contribs · filter log · WHOIS · RBLs · http · block user · block log)
• 2600:1702:3310:6c30:1490:5849:11f6:11da (talk · contribs · (/64) · deleted contribs · filter log · WHOIS · RBLs · http · block user · block log)
• 2600:1702:3310:6c30:75eb:ac50:9b05:ac6c (talk · contribs · (/64) · deleted contribs · filter log · WHOIS · RBLs · http · block user · block log)

You've been around the block, maybe you (or one of your watchers) can suggest something. You may have noticed there is an IP-hopping vandal who likes to add random track lists to random articles. The most recent example is [4] but you can find plenty of others if you look through the history of CD player or the contributions of some of the IPs I've listed above.

Given the multiple articles and multiple IPs I'm not sure of what kind of block might be effective, and I don't even know what noticeboard might be appropriate to discuss this. Any ideas? Kendall-K1 (talk) 12:35, 31 August 2018 (UTC)

Thanks for the heads up.

Looks like all of these IPs you listed are from Richton Park, Illinois, which is south of Chicago. The disruption runs throughout the IP range Special:Contributions/2600:1702:3310:6C30:0:0:0:0/64. Previous disruption of the same sort can be seen in the history of Special:Contributions/50.201.7.46, blocked three times, geolocating to nearby Forest Park, which is also the location of the range Special:Contributions/2602:304:CE74:D60:0:0:0:0/64, doing the same bad stuff. Perhaps the same person used Special:Contributions/64.150.5.14 from Chicago, blocked for five years, and the Chicago range Special:Contributions/2601:241:8302:41EA:0:0:0:0/64 which goes back to 2016 and 2015 doing the same bad stuff.

The thing to do is to report this character at WP:ANI and ask for a rangeblock on any IP6 addresses (the long hexadecimal ones) or a direct block on any IP4 address you see. Binksternet (talk) 16:06, 31 August 2018 (UTC)

Man, you're good. Thanks. Will ask at ANI. Kendall-K1 (talk) 18:45, 31 August 2018 (UTC)

Wikiproject Military history coordinator election nominations open

Nominations for the upcoming project coordinator election are now open. A team of up to ten coordinators will be elected for the next year. The project coordinators are the designated points of contact for issues concerning the project, and are responsible for maintaining our internal structure and processes. They do not, however, have any authority over article content or editor conduct, or any other special powers. More information on being a coordinator is available here. If you are interested in running, please sign up here by 23:59 UTC on 14 September! Voting doesn't commence until 15 September. If you have any questions, you can contact any member of the coord team. Cheers, MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 00:53, 1 September 2018 (UTC)

Reddit and Toaster

Well, Reddit is a source, even if it may not be a reliable one.

You do realize that the Reddit thread was already linked, right? I just linked to a specific reply in it. It's right at the end. Why didn't you remove that too?

Also why did you remove the quotes from the actual movie? The movie itself is a reliable source as to how the characters refer to each other. 70.51.193.44 (talk) 06:34, 7 September 2018 (UTC)

Please Please Me - No pleasing some people

The thing about your change is, is that it has been consistently at 32:45 for over 10 years. I know people got things wrong at times, but >10 years?

I didn't even know track/album times differed.

UK 22 Mar 1963 says 31:15

UK 1964 says 32:39

Is this subtopic some kinda variation on genre warring? If there are so many possible truths... arrgh! I think I treasure my ignorance on certain subjects. :)

BTW: What drew my attention days ago was somebody changing the time. And somebody has done so again. Too many truths... Shenme (talk) 05:05, 8 September 2018 (UTC)

What we need are reliable sources. So many different ways to count the duration... Are silences included? Binksternet (talk) 05:25, 8 September 2018 (UTC)

Comment for RfC involving the lead section of Swimming (Mac Miller album)

Can you please vote or comment at this RfC involving the lead section of Swimming? TheAmazingPeanuts (talk) 01:18, 9 September 2018 (UTC)

DYK for Seder-Masochism

On 10 September 2018, Did you know was updated with a fact from the article Seder-Masochism, which you recently created, substantially expanded, or brought to good article status. The fact was ... that the 2018 animated film Seder-Masochism was said to turn parts of the Exodus (God figure pictured) "into Busby Berkeley-style song-and-dance numbers"? The nomination discussion and review may be seen at Template:Did you know nominations/Seder-Masochism. You are welcome to check how many page hits the article got while on the front page (here's how, Seder-Masochism), and it may be added to the statistics page if the total is over 5,000. Finally, if you know of an interesting fact from another recently created article, then please feel free to suggest it on the Did you know talk page.

Alex Shih (talk) 00:01, 10 September 2018 (UTC)

Rhythm and Stealth

Hi, Binksternet. Could you please provide the reason why you reverted my edits at Rhythm and Stealth? I believe my edits are constructive. The current revision seems to include unsourced, trivial content. 153.137.127.9 (talk) 05:33, 10 September 2018 (UTC)

You took away too many reviews. Binksternet (talk) 05:44, 10 September 2018 (UTC)

www.leftfield-online.co.uk is not Leftfield's official website. According to FAQ page, it is "an UNOFFICIAL site and unfortunately I have no connection with Leftfield whatsoever." A self-published source such as this one should not be used as a professional review. 153.137.127.9 (talk) 05:47, 10 September 2018 (UTC)

If you are okay with my edits, I will restore my edits. However, I will leave print-only reviews, which I removed in the previous edits. 153.137.127.9 (talk) 06:23, 10 September 2018 (UTC)

The Bugle: Issue CXLIX, September 2018

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 review: Indy Beetle and Nick-D on the Katangese Gendarmes and India during World War II Op-ed: TomStar81 looks at two important treaties of World War I Timeline: This month in World War I

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) 22:19, 10 September 2018 (UTC)

Milhist coordinator election voting has commenced

G'day everyone, voting for the 2018 Wikiproject Military history coordinator tranche is now open. This is a simple approval vote; only "support" votes should be made. Project members should vote for any candidates they support by 23:59 (UTC) on 28 September 2018. Thanks, MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 06:22, 15 September 2018 (UTC) Note: the previous version omitted a link to the election page, therefore you are receiving this follow up message with a link to the election page to correct the previous version. We apologies for any inconvenience that this may have caused.

Sockpuppet investigation, September 2018

Hello. I noticed that you warned Special:Contributions/86.183.32.254 for disruptive editing recently. After your warning, he genre-vandalized Paradise Lost (band). Therefore, considering his behavior is consistent with other accounts and IPs, I started a sockpuppet investigation, linked in the subject heading. Feel free to contribute to the discussion. Thank you. Mungo Kitsch (talk) 19:20, 15 September 2018 (UTC)

 Done. A single IP in a sockpuppet case will not be identified as belonging to the sockmaster, but it can be blocked without comment. Binksternet (talk) 19:41, 15 September 2018 (UTC)

Moon River and Other Great Movie Themes

Your edit reversion description says, "MOS NUMERAL says don't mix text numbers with numerals in the same sentence. Choose one or the other." I don't see this information there. I do see, in the Notes and exceptions section, that they say, "Adjacent quantities not comparable should usually be in different formats: twelve 90-minute volumes or 12 ninety-minute volumes, not 12 90-minute volumes or twelve ninety-minute volumes." I feel this situation of 176 weeks with a chart position of three falls into this category. I'm wanting to learn this correctly, so if you can direct me to what you're talking about, I would really appreciate the guidance. Thanks! Danaphile (talk) 20:05, 15 September 2018 (UTC)

Danaphile, a little further down in MOS:NUMNOTES it says the following:

 • Comparable quantities should be all spelled out or all in figures, even if one of the numbers would normally be written differently: five cats and thirty-two dogs, or 5 cats and 32 dogs, not five cats and 32 dogs

That's the guideline I meant to link to, but I was wrong in pointing you there. it doesn't explain why I made this change of "number three" to "number 3".

The guideline at MOS:NUMBERSIGN says don't use the number sign (hash sign, pound sign) for chart results, for instance, write No. 1 but don't write #1. For some years, it gave the alternate example number 1, but as of this change by Jdcrutch in April 2016, it gives the example number one, with the number expressed as a word. I'm surprised to see, and I disagree with, Jdcrutch's change. I believe that a Top 40 or Top 200 chart result should be represented by a numeral, not a word. MOS:NUMERAL says "Sometimes figures and words carry different meanings" which I think applies here. The chart position is not a quantity, it's a rank. I am about to call for a change to the style guide, to reverse Jdcrutch's edit.

Hope that helps explain my stance. Binksternet (talk) 21:05, 15 September 2018 (UTC)

It does. Thanks! I appreciate your attention to the issue. Danaphile (talk) 03:18, 16 September 2018 (UTC)

Moon River 75th Anniversary

Your talk page is on my watchlist, so I just read the previous conversation on Moon River and Other Great Movie Themes. I'd never heard of the album, so I looked it up, and subsequently ended up on the Moon River article. While reading it,I came across this sentence: In 2002, a 74-year-old Williams sang the song to a standing ovation at the conclusion of the live NBC special telecast celebrating the song's 75th anniversary. Something didn't seem right, but it took my mind (and a calculator) a few seconds to figure out the problem: Moon River was only 41 years old in 2002. Fully expecting it to be an IP user's error, I tracked down the mistake to this edit. The original wording was Williams sang the song at the conclusion of the live NBC special telecast celebrating its 75th anniversary, which could easily be taken as meaning the song instead of the network. I've made much worse mistakes in my editing history, so I'm not being critical. I'm only mentioning it because I would never have even been reading the article except for the previous post. Somehow, although I've heard of the song most of my life, I never really listened to it until it was sung on a The Flash (2014 TV series) crossover episode by Supergirl (TV series)'s Melissa Benoist. Strange how life works sometimes. Cheers. - BilCat (talk) 23:32, 15 September 2018 (UTC)

Ha! Thanks for fixing my mistake. That was a doozy. Binksternet (talk) 23:40, 15 September 2018 (UTC)

No worries. - BilCat (talk) 23:51, 15 September 2018 (UTC)

(They Long to Be) Close to You, September 2018

HI, sorry i had no idea that an Encyclopedia couldn't be cited. It wasn't hard finding a source.One should be more helpful in these matters and try to find the facts(as you did not). Im just to to fill in the gaps that people have missed. Thank you. Ayaz2001 (talk) —Preceding undated comment added 03:11, 16 September 2018 (UTC)

Battle of Albrolhos

Hi, Binksternet. I have make some little changes in the page of this spanish-Nederland sea battle, but you have erase it. You have deleted my changes accusing me of not citing a reliable source. But my changes included a quote from a recent Spanish book of naval military history (You have erase it too). I even indicated the page with the specific data that I cited. The information about five spanis ships keeping apart of the rest of the spanish-portugese fleet (because they not receive the orders) is true and reliable information. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 85.87.177.6 (talk) 14:41, 19 September 2018 (UTC)

 Done. Thanks for the note! Binksternet (talk) 17:29, 19 September 2018 (UTC)

Rudebox

Hello, you recently undid my edit on Rudebox page, but the source that you removed says "Within a year, he had recorded and released Rudebox, a dance album recorded with half-a-dozen outside producers"[5] Ikcir (talk) 14:55, 21 September 2018 (UTC)

You took that too far in your edit which placed the album in the EDM genre. Dance music is not automatically Electronic dance music (EDM). Binksternet (talk) 15:09, 21 September 2018 (UTC)

(talk page stalker) (edit conflict) @Ikcir: Your reference is about Williams and not about Rudebox. An album's genre does not have to reflect the artist's genre, example: A punk rock band can release a heavy metal song or album, but that doesn't mean the band is now heavy metal" or the album or song "punk rock". - FlightTime (open channel) 15:17, 21 September 2018 (UTC)

I wouldn't bang on Ikcir so hard, since AllMusic puts the album Rudebox into the dance genre. Binksternet (talk) 15:28, 21 September 2018 (UTC)

Ok, I should have put the wikilink to Dance music. However, I know that I used Robbie Williams biography as a source, but that biography says: "Within a year, he had recorded and released Rudebox, a dance album recorded with half-a-dozen outside producers". It isn't refering to the artist.Ikcir (talk) 15:45, 21 September 2018 (UTC)

Edit War Warning

Hello Binsternet,

I received a message that you were warning me against edit warring in September 2018. i would like to take this opportunity to explain what I was doing and state for the record that I did use the talk pages about this issue.

The edits in question involve changing Walter Parazaider from a current to a former member of the band. Back on August 10, 2018, user Curious405 added information (and a link) to the Chicago article indicating that Walter Parazaider's name had been removed from the list of members page on the group's official website. They had moved his name to a page entitled "Tribute to Founding Members" that included Parazaider along with former members Peter Cetera, Terry Kath, and Danny Seraphine. It has been previously documented (with other sources) that Parazaider had retired from touring due to health reasons in 2016 and Ray Herrmann became a band member. Myself and other editors such as SportsFan007 have made edits to the Chicago article at that time to reflect Parazaider's retirement such as putting an end date in the member timeline for Parazaider and moving his name from the current to the previous members list.

Starting on September 8th (by user 2606:6000:6602:ad00:209e:2e8d:ba10:6821), and continuing until now, there have been a serious of edits from an anonymous user or users who keep changing the article to list Parazaider as a current member. The person or persons have edited the timeline, re-added his name to the line-ups, changed a sentence to indicate that there are still four original members remaining in the band, and moved Parazaider's name in both the article and the Chicago template from a former member to an active one. All of these edits were done without explanation, and in some cases the same edit was done and undone several times by the same user.

I have changed the article back more than once to list Parazaider as a former member in line with the sources and the band's own official website. Each time when I made those changes, I did attempt to explain in the edit comments why I made the change. On September 9, when I reverted this change to the Chicago article and moved Parazaider's name back to the list of former members, I also added a new section on the Chicago (band) Talk Page, "Walter Parazaider as a former band member" where I explained why Parazaider's name has been moved from the current to the former members. I made the same change to the Chicago band Template where the edits were done by the same user and also placed a similar new section on the Chicago template talk page with the same information on Parazaider.

On September 13, user 2606:6000:6602:ad00:879:f9c0:6bd5:c27e reverted my changes to list Parazaider as a current member without explanation or comments on the talk page. I reverted the changes on September 15th but with the comments to reference the Chicago talk page as to why I was reverting it. On September 20th, User 2606:6000:6602:ad00:a8a6:a795:5643:d778 changed the article to list Parazaider as a current member. I reverted them on September 21st, but placed this note as a comment for the change, "Please see talk page about why Parazaider has been moved to the former members list. The source (Tribute to Former Members) you are adding, which is already referenced elsewhere in the article. even states that Walter has retired. Please discuss on the talk page why you are making this change rather than just re-doing the same edit without explanation." I referenced my entry on the Chicago talk page again as to why I made this change, in the hopes that the party or parties reverting this change will explain their edits there before simply changing them back. I did not add a new note on the Chicago talk page, since I assumed my September 9th note would suffice.

I wanted to give you an explanation of my actions, to see if I did anything wrong, and to find out how I should proceed on this matter. Thank you for your time, and my apologies if you find this a long-winded explanation.209.212.21.197 (talk) 18:30, 22 September 2018 (UTC)

Wikipedia is built on WP:SECONDARY sources. The band's website is a primary source, which is interesting to note but not definitive. Parazaider is described by several secondary sources as still being in the band, despite his retiring from regular gigs. He plays special gigs only, and does not tour. The sources are listed below. Binksternet (talk) 19:07, 22 September 2018 (UTC)

• Kelowna Capital New, September 3, 2018. "The original four founding members, Walter Parazaider, Danny Seraphine, James Pankow, Lee Loughnane played their signature orchestral rock..."
• TribLive, July 25, 2018. "Original saxophonist Walt Parazaider remains a member of Chicago, but no longer tours on a regular basis with the group."
• The Virginian-Pilot, July 27, 2017. "Parazaider is still a band member and performs with the group for certain events."

Hello Binsternet, I want to clarify on those secondary sources. The Virginian Pilot one was already used in the article in four other places in the Chicago article to document Parazaider retiring and Ray Herrmann being added as a full time member. That article was written in 2017. These statements are correct for the time from October 2016 (when Herrmann was promoted to band member) and July 2018 while Parazaider was still listed as a band member on their website. This changed after July 4th 2018. Attached is a Wayback Machine capture of the bands website on July 4, 2018 (https://web.archive.org/web/20180704103844/https://chicagotheband.com/) showing Parazaider still listed as a member and a similar capture on July 13, 2018 (https://web.archive.org/web/20180713210237/https://chicagotheband.com/) showing his name has been removed and now listed on the Tribute to founding members page. The Trib Live Article was written by the same author (Alan Sculley) and it might contain some old information. The date of the article is July 25, 2018 but it contains the line "In addition to touring, 2018 will see a pair of releases from Chicago. Loughnane said the band has filmed a performance of “Chicago II” that airs this spring on PBS and then will be released on DVD." That album came out on June 29, 2018 and it used the word airs instead of aired for something in the spring of 2018. With regards to the Kelowna Capital News article, there is a mistake in the article and I think it needs to be removed as a source from the Chicago article. It claims "The original four founding members, Walter Parazaider, Danny Seraphine, James Pankow, Lee Loughnane" were on hand to perform. Danny Seraphine left the band in 1990, and not counting the reunion at the HOF induction in 2016, has not performed with them since that time. If he did return that would have received far more coverage in numerous sources, and not just this one source. One of the images from the show in the article has Wally Reyes on drums instead of Danny Seraphine and Ray Herrmann playing saxophone instead of Walter Parazaider. I suspect the part about Parazaider playing this show is an error much the same as the part about Seraphine is. Even the comments listed at the bottom of the page by users indicate there are numerous errors in the article about who was there. i think this source should be discarded as a way to prove Parazaider is still performing with the band. There is a further statement from band member James Pankow in this source (http://toledocitypaper.com/music/50-years-on-tour-chicagos-james-pankow-reveals-how-the-band-stays-relevant/) about performing being a health risk to Parazaider, which is why it is not likely he would have been at the september show in Kelowna. Since the band has now moved Parazaider off the active members roster as of July 2018, shouldn't the article do the same? 209.212.21.197 (talk) 18:29, 23 September 2018 (UTC)

The Kelowna article may well have errors, but my main problem with your assertions about Parazaider is that you are giving too much weight to the band's website. Again, Wikipedia is built on WP:SECONDARY sources. Primary sources are interesting but secondary sources are definitive. Binksternet (talk) 18:48, 23 September 2018 (UTC)

Block warning

I would very much like you to stop confusing me for someone else. You seem to think that I'm a blocked user called "Danieleb82" and bases that on the fact that my IP is from Sweden. I have nothing to do with him (I haven't even seen his username before) and that is why I logged into my actual account instead, one which I've had for over ten years. I also need to point out the fact that the edits I've done recently have correct sources and capitalization so I see no need to change them back all the time. Thank you. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Blacknuz (talk • contribs) 04:48, 23 September 2018 (UTC)

Okay, if you're not that other guy, then stop making edits like this where you change two direct quotes to be something not found in the quotes. Binksternet (talk) 05:04, 23 September 2018 (UTC)

I just changed into correct capitalization, I didn't realize that they were from quotes that you couldn't change.

Which IP of yours is from Sweden? Special:Contributions/158.174.5.52? Curious. Binksternet (talk) 05:19, 23 September 2018 (UTC)

Currently it is 85.24.216.217. I did get a warning there too.

Genre warring

I think I'm done reporting genre warring (Genre warring 2). reports to AIV are being denied (by these two Admin's) so I started posting at ANI, I was thanked for the first report and now with the second the same two Admin's denying reports at AIV are denying them at ANI. I'll continue reverting genre changes but reporting the user is a waste of time. - FlightTime (open channel) 15:37, 23 September 2018 (UTC)

I responded there. We have a wide range of admin attitudes here. When the decisive ones see your reports, they take action, so please don't stop reporting. Binksternet (talk) 16:27, 23 September 2018 (UTC)

Ok, I'll keep reporting to ANI (more visible) - FlightTime (open channel) 00:38, 24 September 2018 (UTC)

Another possible strategem would be to aim for AIV when Ritchie333 is less likely to be contributing, which is after 22:00 and before 10:00 UTC. TonyBallioni's time on the wiki is shifted with respect to Ritchie333, so your window is reduced to between 6 and 10 UTC which for us in California is 10 pm to 2 am. Huh. Right when you want to get away from the computer for the night. Binksternet (talk) 01:00, 24 September 2018 (UTC)

LOL, you're good. Yeah those are late hours, how about if R333 or TB respond to the report, I'll just see who's active on my watchlist and ping them to the report for a second opinion, that might raise some neck hairs :P Anyway we'll see how it goes. I still think it would be net positive to create Wikipedia:Administrator intervention against disruptive editing, but I relize it would never get consensus. Cheers, - FlightTime (open channel) 01:08, 24 September 2018 (UTC)

Binkersnet

I dunno, it has a certain ring to it. General Ization ^Talk 00:34, 24 September 2018 (UTC)

Yeah, I've seen that one before, and worse. ¯\_(ツ)_/¯

Binksternet (talk) 00:42, 24 September 2018 (UTC)

White Genocide

I assume you'll be discussing your concerns on the talk page Talk:White genocide conspiracy theory. I'm invoking WP:BLP to revert your edits until you do so. power~enwiki (π, ν) 04:07, 24 September 2018 (UTC)

Apologies for my ignorance

Dear Binkersnet,

Please accept my sincere apology for creating an unwitting edit war (Yikes!) by undoing your edit/deletion of my addition on the page "Mel Blanc" regarding Mel Blanc's production company, Blanc Communications Corporation. I confess -- I'm a complete neophyte to Wikipedia. As such, I mistakenly assumed that I was expected to provide citations specifically validating the existence of Mel's radio and television production company, Blanc Communications Corporation. In hindsight, YES I can see how my selected citations appeared to be promotional instead of informational. I wish to assure you and all concerned editors that this was not my intention.

During the Mel Blanc Associates/Blanc Communications years, Mel and his son Noel produced over 5000 public service announcements and commercials featuring major stars like Kirk Douglas, Lucille Ball, Vincent Price, Phyllis Diller, Liberace, the rock band The Who, and of course Mel himself. It is for the above reason that I wanted to include Blanc Communications as a colorful part of Mel Blanc's work history.

Below I have pasted links to three historically-focused, outside Web references that are NOT controlled by myself or Blanc Communications Corporation. Is there any way for you to evaluate the three listed below and see if they represent unbiased references? Here they are: https://www.discogs.com/label/930149-Blanc-Communications-Corporation, https://www.encyclopedia.com/media/encyclopedias-almanacs-transcripts-and-maps/blanc-mel-1908-1989, https://archive.org/stream/ThatsNotAllFolksByMelBlancAndPhilipBasheStarbrite/Thats_Not_All_Folks_by_Mel_Blanc_and_Philip_Bashe_%28Starbrite%29_djvu.txt

I hope these are sufficient replacement citations for the previous ones I ignorantly placed after my edit to the Mel Blanc page. Please let me know if these references would allow my edit to be restored.

Kindest Regards, wordsandpicturesWordsandpictures (talk) 15:48, 25 September 2018 (UTC)

Discogs.com is not considered reliable because they allow readers to change the facts. The reference Encyclopedia.com is good. I've already seen that one, and I quoted from the archive.org text file of That's Not All, Folks. Certainly these last two can be used to expand the Mel Blanc biography on Wikipedia. If you like, you can suggest changes at Talk:Mel Blanc so that others can implement those changes. If nobody else works on the article, I will when I get the time. Right now, I'm headed out to work. Binksternet (talk) 16:12, 25 September 2018 (UTC)

I am going to edit the page tonight after I finish doing some boring real-life stuff. I didn't know about the the archive.org text file; reading it now. See my comment on User talk:Wordsandpictures. --Guy Macon (talk) 19:10, 25 September 2018 (UTC)

Whoops, I meant Binksternet, not Binkersnet...

...See what a novice I am?

Best, wordsandpicturesWordsandpictures (talk) 15:58, 25 September 2018 (UTC)

Ah, but we love you, and that's what really counts... (smile) --Guy Macon (talk) 19:11, 25 September 2018 (UTC)

Have your say!

Hi everyone, just a quick reminder that voting for the WikiProject Military history coordinator election closes soon. You only have a day or so left to have your say about who should make up the coordination team for the next year. If you have already voted, thanks for participating! If you haven't and would like to, vote here before 23:59 UTC on 28 September. Thanks, MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 03:29, 26 September 2018 (UTC)

Fear Factory genre

Fear Factory Wall has broken by this user false edit And No Gerne Edit Deathsix (talk) 15:36, 26 September 2018 (UTC)

I reverted your edit because it was unreferenced and very poorly written. The article needs a lot more references to support what is there. Binksternet (talk) 23:21, 26 September 2018 (UTC)

List of one-hit wonders in the United States edit...

I simply forgot to add the reference, not sure what you'd like, but a simple check of the Climax and Mouth And MacNeal Wikipedia page will show you their validity.... Or a search on www.umdmusic.com But making the page incorrect by deleting them is kinda dickish== — Preceding unsigned comment added by 8.41.68.15 (talk) 15:39, 27 September 2018 (UTC)

Each entry needs two references, according to the most recent discussion about inclusion. No longer is it based on pure statistics.

I looked for but could not find two sources for Mouth & MacNeal. There are some low quality ones I found for Climax, but nothing good. I don't worry about being "dickish", I worry about keeping the article from getting inaccurate stuff tacked on. Binksternet (talk) 17:59, 27 September 2018 (UTC)

Continued unsourced edits by IP address: 76.206.13.138

This user continues to post multiple unsourced edits to many sites. This includes one page that I watch and contribute to: Buffy Sainte-Marie. Nothing that has been posted by this user on this page is verifiable, and appears to just be random promotion of favorite artists. I don;t want to start any sort of aggressive removal of the posts, but I don't know what I can do to stop it. Thanks for your help and comments. Yaquifox (talk) 23:41, 27 September 2018 (UTC)

Alchemist

Hello, I'm the main editor/contributor of the Alchemist page. I saw your trim of the discography part. I brought it part, it's not a regular "other discography" case. In his case, he's a producer, all these albums and instrumental projects are his and are equal in relevance. Trust me, I follow Alchemist closely since 2010 when he had 4 albums, and I've been building this page ever since, please don't delete/dismiss my work here. --Orr971 (talk) 17:44, 28 September 2018 (UTC)

Orr971, the thing about my edit is that I tried to trim the The Alchemist (musician) biography to show just the important parts. The information I removed should be hosted at The Alchemist production discography, not duplicated in two places. The real question is, what is Alchemist known for, known by the general public? What are the biggest sellers? Everything else should not be duplicated. Binksternet (talk) 18:03, 28 September 2018 (UTC)

Actually I was going for a detailed biography of everything he's done. New fans can come here and see his entire album discography. Production discography is another thing, and he has a big one. --Orr971 (talk) 15:24, 29 September 2018 (UTC)

List of viral videos

Hello. I have been adding a normally sourced entry into the List of viral videos article. You keep reverting it even though it meets all the criteria of the page. Can you please stop. YeezySeasonApproaching (talk) 19:04, 28 September 2018 (UTC)

(talk page stalker) You mean besides your block evading ? One thing neither of your sources use the word viral. - FlightTime (open channel) 19:10, 28 September 2018 (UTC)

First of all I have not been block evading and second here is a source that mentions the word viral https://www.billboard.com/articles/news/lyrics/8476952/kanye-west-lil-pump-i-love-it-lyricsYeezySeasonApproaching (talk) 19:13, 28 September 2018 (UTC)

Yes, I think you made a mistake

For the 60th anniversary of the Hot 100 (a few weeks ago), Billboard updated their list of all time top songs.

Since the previous list, the Queen song "Another One Bites the Dust" (which was previously ranked as the 40th all time song) has been overtaken by "Uptown Funk!" (now number 3), "Shape of You" (now number 9), and "Despacito (Remix)" (now number 33), so that "Another One Bites the Dust" falls to number 43. I noted that, and updated the reference to the current list of all time top songs.

I was merely trying to correct outdated information, and I don't really have any desire to press for this change - if there is some reason you want the wrong information there, I will simply forget about it. However, I really take offense at your calling this (properly sourced) edit "not constructive," (did you consider checking the reference?), and pointing me to the policies and guidelines. I have been making (ad hoc) edits longer than you have had a Wikipedia account (though I concede that the magnitude of your contributions is many times greater than my sporadic updates and fixes).

172.92.248.207 (talk) 11:46, 2 October 2018 (UTC)

Sorry about that. You changed the URL to something wrong here, which I clicked on and found nothing to support your changes. You used the correct URL here, after your post above. Binksternet (talk) 14:17, 2 October 2018 (UTC)

Oops. I need to apologize then, too. I made an error (it seems I forgot to delete an "s" which somehow ended up on the end) when updating the URL. The URL of the full top 600 (the top 100 of which are the same as the top 100 in the URL I used for the subsequent edit) should have been:

https://www.billboard.com/charts/hot-100-60th-anniversary

Of course, I should have tested the link after I made the change.

Will lean toward using the "Top 100" URL in the future (am not going to update all of them systematically, but will be looking through many of the Top 100 All-Time over the next few days), because it has a date associated with it.

Thanks for the reply. I didn't realize that I actually did make a mistake.

172.92.248.207 (talk) 14:48, 2 October 2018 (UTC)

Meryl Streep, Political views

Hello, You reverted an edit to the "Political views" section of Meryl Streep's page, which stated that Trump had allegedly mocked a reporter's disability. What the section currently says about the matter, "He mocked a disabled reporter," can easily be misconstrued as a conclusion that he mocked the reporter's disability, which is a yet unresolved and highly politicized controversy. In order to make the page as clear and objective as possible, it would be best to keep the edit in question. 74.88.22.174 (talk) 19:13, 3 October 2018 (UTC)

References

There's no doubt that Trump mocked the man's disability. Ridiculous to even question it. What nonsense. Binksternet (talk) 19:28, 3 October 2018 (UTC)

Mr. Knowles, I just posted five sources showing that the matter is debatable and why it is not ridiculous to question it. The conclusion that he certainly mocked the reporter's disability is not established or definite enough to consider truth and certainly not enough to put into this Wikipedia page. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 74.88.22.174 (talk) 01:42, 4 October 2018 (UTC)

Malarkey. The sources you posted describe Trump as certainly mocking the reporter, except for the opinion piece ("and other lies from the left") in investors.com, and the ridiculous video compilation created by Catholics 4 Trump. The opinion piece is not strong enough to contradict the WP:SECONDARY news sources such as LA Times and WaPo, and the video thing is a big zero, failing as it does to prove its point. Trump is clearly shown to be using very different gestures in the other videos, different from the bent wrist mocking of Kovaleski.

Basically, you are pushing a fringe viewpoint, which is completely unsuitable for the Streep biography. Binksternet (talk) 01:54, 4 October 2018 (UTC)

All the sources that I provided—except for the LA Times source, which is simply a clip and a description of the incident—have compelling reasoning defending their own positions, and there is such an abundance of online information about this very issue that it would be, frankly, ludicrous not to accept that there is a sufficient controversy so as to edit Streep's page. You cannot discount the value of the reasoning within some of these sources simply because of their right-leaning perspectives, and your personal and debatable opinions on the sources should not be the deciding factor of what is ultimately written in the Wikipedia article as truth. Additionally, whether a viewpoint is fringe or not should be irrelevant, because that is unrelated to the validity of the reasoning behind the controversy.

The fact of the matter is that there has been no conclusive proof for either side of the debate, so to explicitly say "He mocked a disabled reporter" on an issue as political, opinionated, and controversial as this not only is against Wikipedia's principle of neutrality and incongruous with other Wikipedia pages relating to other issues—including issues less controversial than this one and including Serge F. Kovaleski's page (which nowhere states that Trump did in fact mock Kovaleski's disability)—but it is also factually incorrect. 74.88.22.174 (talk) 04:08, 4 October 2018 (UTC)

WP:FRINGE viewpoints about Trump are not appropriate for Streep's biography. Binksternet (talk) 04:38, 4 October 2018 (UTC)

I understand. Then I recant my incidental statement about fringe viewpoints, and I press my case. 74.88.22.174 (talk) 05:13, 4 October 2018 (UTC)

It has been a little over twenty-four hours since my last message to you. Since you have not responded, this is a notice that I will assume that you have no further resistance to my edit and I will reinstate it into the article in several hours unless you reply otherwise. 74.88.22.174 (talk) 05:39, 5 October 2018 (UTC)

No. Fringe. Binksternet (talk) 14:41, 5 October 2018 (UTC)

Nothing but the Beat

Can you keep an eye of the page to persistent block evasion by User:MariaJaydHicky. 183.171.112.164 (talk) 17:38, 5 October 2018 (UTC)

Yes, already on my watchlist. Binksternet (talk) 18:23, 5 October 2018 (UTC)

Abimbola Fernandez Edits

Hi Binksternet,

I work for the Fernandez family personally and some of what you've written is disinformation & inflammatory information based off gossip websites that were paid to write what they did by Halima. If you can provide your email address I would be happy to provide you with the facts, which I assume is what wikipedia wants. I would also like to explain my edits.

President Dos Santos was asked by her father to be her Godfather upon her birth. This was talked about in a Portuguese article printed in 2014.

The Chateau is spelled Chateau de Bois Feuillette not Des and the wiki page attached were the actual photos of the property which she now owns with her sister Atinuke. The Chateau sits on 24 Acres. . The armani sweater etc not factual. Please also see article written by Nylon magazine on her collection -

You must make it clear that no real drugs were used or made in ANY video by Abimbola. Abimbola does not do drugs. The video was a social experiment created by the record label SMH for shock value - to show the world the extremes new artist have to go through for attention if they aren't not practically naked. Insinuating the use and creation of real drugs is defamatory.

The voice over of Jonathan Hay disses Kim Kardashian at the end of Lipstick. Not Abimbola. This voiceover was added, after the song and video were made, without Abimbolas permission which prompted her immediate departure from the label.

Abimbola's Genre of music is not hip hop it is Pop

Halima is not legally married to Ambassador Fernandez. The family, 7 our of 8 of Ambassador Fernandez Children, is in a court battle against her in Belgium for estate property she illegally sold. The courts have ruled she is not the wife, is not entitled to anything from Fernandez Estate, and can no longer use the last name of Fernandez. Public information through the Belgian court system.

If you would like to verify any information please provide your email & I will be in touch.

Caiman323 (talk) 22:46, 5 October 2018 (UTC)Caiman323

References

I'm interested in using the best sources, and I'm also interested in telling the reader the important points that are from published sources. It sounds like some of your above requests involve information that has not been published. Binksternet (talk) 23:38, 5 October 2018 (UTC)

Binksternet

- Is there a better source then from Abimbola Fernandez herself? Some of the information you are posting such as "she grew up not knowing mundane chores like making her bed" is unverifiable by your "sources". Abimbola would like to speak with you herself to correct what you have written & address her leaving the label due to her not being aware of the Kim K diss, which if not clarified by you on wikipedia, can be detrimental to her career. Another example, on her fathers page you state her mother passed in Scotland. That is a flat out lie she passed away in New York. We would like readers to have the truth about Abimbola and her late well respected parents. Abimbola can be reached through her webpage www.AbimbolaFernandez.com or her assistant can be reached at info@AbimbolaFernandez.com if you will be so kind, please send an email in order to make the effort to correct what you've written. If not, we will have to have her PR reach out to wikipedia, make sure that everything written is factual, protect her page as well as report that you have deliberately refused to provide correct information when given the opportunity to.

Caiman323 (talk) 08:16, 6 October 2018 (UTC)Caiman323

You don't have to threaten me to get a response. There's a link to email at the left column.

If we use Abimbola herself as a source to insert facts that have never been published then we are violating the WP:No original research policy.

Where has it been published describing the reason that she left SMH Records?

The bit about mundane chores is from an interview published somewhere online... I will try to find it. I had a lot of tabs open with a lot of sources in front of me, so some of the information I saw may be accidentally blended with other information.

Do you have a reliable published source saying that a court determined Halima never married Deinde Fernandez? That would be useful. Binksternet (talk) 14:35, 6 October 2018 (UTC)

The New York Post article has the Armani sweater in it. So it's from a published source. But it's not critically important, and can easily be removed.

Regarding Dos Santos as godfather, I would want to see something written about that this relationship was important, describing something that Dos Santos did for Abimbola in his role as godfather. Otherwise it seems like trivia. Binksternet (talk) 15:20, 6 October 2018 (UTC)

Again I must say to you Binksternet

You must make it clear that no real narcotics were used or made during the video for Lets take it naked. You deliberately edited the page to delete any indication that those are not real.

Per the wiki guidelines Im presenting you with a publication regarding President Dos Santos and his relationship with Abimbola. I referenced this in my first message to you. http://www.cmjornal.pt/mais-cm/domingo/detalhe/a-estrela-pop-afilhada-de-eduardo-dos-santos?v=cb. You deciding what publication is "trivial" or not shows obvious biased to this page. Please see the article I just linked above. This is not trivial this is by wiki community guidelines a published article.

Caiman323 (talk) 01:37, 7 October 2018 (UTC)Caiman323

I have never seen a published source saying that Abimbola Fernandez does or does not use drugs. I'm sure we're both on the same side here, in wanting the reader to get the impression that the scene in the video is not representative of what she does for fun.

The wording I used said that the video scenes were fictional. That means everything depicted in them is fictional, including the pregnant belly and the drugs and Russian Roulette game. So it's already clear that the drugs are fake. Your insertion was poor English, with too much emphasis on that part.

Regarding Santos, the question is still on the table: what did Santos do for Abimbola Fernandez by way of being her godfather? Or was it just an honorary connection, with no real ramifications? Binksternet (talk) 01:43, 7 October 2018 (UTC)

The Bugle: Issue CL, October 2018

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 review: Nick-D looks at the use of so-called "substandard" manpower in armies Interview: On the Bugle turning 150 (issues that is!) Op-ed: TomStar81 on the collapse of empires at the close of World War I Timeline: This month in World War I

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) 07:00, 7 October 2018 (UTC)

File:Pink Grenade logo.jpg

Hi, I'm RonBot, a script that checks new non-free file uploads. I have found that the subject image that you recently uploaded was more than 5% in excess of the Non-free content guideline size of 100,000 pixels. I have tagged the image for a standard reduction, which (for jpg/gif/png/svg files) normally happens within a day. Please check the reduced image, and make sure that the image is not excessively corrupted. Other files will be added to Category:Wikipedia non-free file size reduction requests for manual processing. There is a full seven-day period before the original oversized image will be hidden; during that time you might want to consider editing the original image yourself (perhaps an initial crop to allow a smaller reduction or none at all). A formula for calculation the desired size can be found at WP:Image resolution, along with instructions on how to tag the image in the rare cases that it requires an oversized image (typically about 0.2% of non-free uploads are tagged as necessarily oversized). Please contact the bot owner if you have any questions, or you can ask them at Wikipedia talk:Non-free content. RonBot (talk) 17:42, 8 October 2018 (UTC)

Hey

I do know what you mean by block evasion, but would you please stop being a robot, and stop reverting such changes [6] [7], no matter the excuses? Thanks. Materialscientist (talk) 00:31, 12 October 2018 (UTC)

Okay, thanks for your good advice. Binksternet (talk) 14:04, 12 October 2018 (UTC)

Basic principles

Inline links to articles in foreign languages are not useful and should not be used. And every single other item in the page has a relevant English language encyclopedia article to link to. What exactly is your thinking in adding items with no English language article? Did you even realise that you were adding links to German pages? 51.7.23.71 (talk) 15:18, 13 October 2018 (UTC)