User talk:Binksternet

Binksternet	Articles created	Significant contributor	Images	Did you know	Awards

Vitamin K

If you are willing to tackle the Vitamin K GA, please do. I am still working on weak points, but may be close enough to start. If you do not think so, leave a note to that effect on my Talk page. I see you have a goodly number of GAs to your credit and a sprinkling of FAs. David notMD (talk) 18:06, 24 September 2020 (UTC)

David notMD, I can hold off until the "weak points" are addressed. Unless you have a time pressure... Binksternet (talk) 22:06, 24 September 2020 (UTC)

I've a book (local history) on the clock, but that should be wrapped by end of month. David notMD (talk) 22:10, 24 September 2020 (UTC)

I completed the food sources table for the vitamin K article, and think that it is now good enough to start the GA review. FYI: Within exercise, there are meta-analyses for weight loss, cardiovascular disease, osteoporosis, cancer, all-cause mortality, etc. (Example PMID: 31685526) David notMD (talk) 01:49, 4 October 2020 (UTC)

User:Tom (LT) has stepped in as the reviewer of the GA nomination for vitamin K. From Tom's User page, lots of experience in GA reviews, so appears I am in good hands. David notMD (talk) 09:11, 4 October 2020 (UTC)

Hi Binksternet, David notMD, I'm very flexible - I can co review or act as second reviewer if you planned to review Binksternet :). --Tom (LT) (talk) 09:15, 4 October 2020 (UTC)

I am comfortable with either/both of you taking this on. In my opinion, majority of article is review-ready. Chemistry and Research section need work. David notMD (talk) 09:23, 4 October 2020 (UTC)

DYK for Jane Fonda's Workout

On 25 September 2020, Did you know was updated with a fact from the article Jane Fonda's Workout, which you recently created, substantially expanded, or brought to good article status. The fact was ... that Jane Fonda paid for her political activism from the profits of her Workout videos? The nomination discussion and review may be seen at Template:Did you know nominations/Jane Fonda's Workout. You are welcome to check how many page hits the article got while on the front page (here's how, Jane Fonda's Workout), 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.

Cwmhiraeth (talk) 00:02, 25 September 2020 (UTC)

Don't Fear The Reaper warring

Hi. Look, i don't know what to tell you. I have the album. The cover is on the album. It's available on YouTube here. But, you know, let's not let facts get in the way of some pedantry about the rules. Well done, you win, i'll not bother trying any more. Julianhall (talk) 01:28, 25 September 2020 (UTC)

I'm not disputing whether the cover version exists. Binksternet (talk) 02:38, 25 September 2020 (UTC)

So why did you revert my edit?Julianhall (talk) 23:30, 2 October 2020 (UTC)

In my revert I cited WP:SONGCOVER, which sets a high bar for inclusion. It's not enough that a song cover exists; it must perform well in some manner, become notable somehow. If a music critic said that the Bridewell Taxis' version of "(Don't Fear) The Reaper" was remarkable because of x, y and z, you could cite the music critic. Or if it hit a music sales chart in some country, you could cite that. Binksternet (talk) 23:42, 2 October 2020 (UTC)

Electronic Music

Why did you undo my edits to the Electronic music template and the freestyle page? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2601:C7:C201:C640:D0C8:AD72:FA79:665F (talk) 21:55, 27 September 2020 (UTC)

Because you were not citing your sources. Binksternet (talk) 22:04, 27 September 2020 (UTC)

DYK for Campaign for Economic Democracy

On 28 September 2020, Did you know was updated with a fact from the article Campaign for Economic Democracy, which you recently created, substantially expanded, or brought to good article status. The fact was ... that Tom Hayden used his Campaign for Economic Democracy to help pass a rent-control measure in Santa Monica, California? The nomination discussion and review may be seen at Template:Did you know nominations/Campaign for Economic Democracy. You are welcome to check how many page hits the article got while on the front page (here's how, Campaign for Economic Democracy), 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.

 — Amakuru (talk) 00:02, 28 September 2020 (UTC)

New American Gospel

Hey, I just saw that my edit was reverted. But 'groove metal' was really mentioned in that source (https://www.decademag.com/decade/2019/11/29/new-american-gospel-lamb-of-god-album-review). What is wrong with that?

The song "Terror And Hubris In The House Of Frank Pollard" was described as groove metal, not the whole album. Binksternet (talk) 14:27, 29 September 2020 (UTC)

Templates

Excuse me, but I'm trying to clear things up between genres. Could you please stop hindering me? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 73.54.195.214 (talk) 14:51, 29 September 2020 (UTC)

Vision China Times

Hi, I noted you have added in specific names and personal details in relation to people's religious beliefs (especially a persecuted religion) and family relationships. This was only mentioned once in just 1 publicly available secondary source. Out of courtesy for the safety of those involved, these names and familial relationship have been removed. The specific religious beliefs of founders in a media company who are not directly involved in editorial work does not add weight to the editorial stance, and therefore does not add to the value of this article. This article already holds too much weight and direct citation from the ABC article. Your additions are less than neutral Wikipedia:Neutral point of view EmilyzhangAU (talk) 15:16, 29 September 2020 (UTC)

Those names are the names of the business founder and manager. This is normal corporate information. Nobody has safety problems because it has already been published.

You are obviously trying to remove the names because they help to connect the publication to Falun Gong; a connection which you are trying to diminish. The supposed safety issue is nonsense. Binksternet (talk) 15:19, 29 September 2020 (UTC)

That's very easy for you to say, since you are a non-Chinese sitting outside of China. There is also no other source that supports this ABC claim. This is personal information and hence the names need to be removed. No one releases corporation information AND their religious beliefs. What evidence is there to show that this person is still Falun Gong or not? Or even that they were Falun Gong at the time? And what if they were? Do you not care about the safety issues brought upon this person's other family members? It does not add weight to the article at all. This is Wikipedia, not a news gossip page. You are obviously biased in your editing. The connection to Falun Gong has already been strengthened to great proportions by the overly cited ABC article. You do not need this specific detail to strengthen it further. Please remove or I will undo your edit. EmilyzhangAU (talk) 15:29, 29 September 2020 (UTC)

Ma Zhendong founded Decoding China and was funded by the US State Department until they figured out how they were being fooled by Falun Gong. Decoding China and Vision China Times have the same business address. Maree Ma served as secretary of Decoding China. It's all connected, and extremely relevant to the topic, showing that the media platform Vision China Times is one of many media outlets of the Falun Gong. The article about Vision China Times should tell the reader more about the connection, not less. Binksternet (talk) 15:47, 29 September 2020 (UTC)

Maree Ma is a member of the Falun Gong think tank ASPI, spouting garbage about the CCP using Facebook to their advantage, when in fact it was Falun Gong caught using Facebook that way. Binksternet (talk) 15:51, 29 September 2020 (UTC)

Ma Zhendong, his wife and daughter founded Minghui Education in 2006, the same year as Vision China Times. Minghui is a Falun Gong group. Binksternet (talk) 16:02, 29 September 2020 (UTC)

You are obviously way out of your depth here. Decode China list of directors do not have Ma's name. The company is not connected to him at all (check ASIC records). ASPI is not a Falun Gong think tank. They are mostly funded by the Australian government. You need to double check your facts. ASPI recently did a report about some groups linked to Falun Gong supposedly misusing Facebook. Maree Ma is not a "member" of ASPI. She was a guest speaker at one of their forums. If the head of ABC is Falun Gong, do you think ABC is also a Falun Gong affiliated media? What does the founder's personal beliefs have anything to do with their media? Media is run by editors, and their editorial guidelines, not the founder. And do we even know if he is still actively involved in the operations of the company? You need to take off the names and personal familial relationship out of courtesy to these people of a persecuted minority group. With due respect, your comments towards Falun Gong are less than neutral. This article is no longer neutral and filled with heavy citing from just one source. You already have the source in there, you don't need to reprint the entire ABC article EmilyzhangAU (talk) 16:05, 29 September 2020 (UTC)

Minghui is NOT JUST a Falun gong name. It is an auspicious name in Chinese used by millions of people out there. This one is a Childcare centre, accredited by the Australian government and currently owned by other people per ASIC records. Still called Minghui. No big deal. EmilyzhangAU (talk) 16:09, 29 September 2020 (UTC)

You are a scholar of knowledge. Your purpose is to improve the storehouse of human knowledge. Then why are you defending Falun Gong which is anti-science? If anybody on Wikipedia is promoting Falun Gong, that is the non-neutral position.

The Ma family in Sydney are not trying to hide from the public. Maree Ma has written papers and spoken in public. But you apparently think she's a persecuted minority who should be protected from some unspecified danger. Ridiculous. Binksternet (talk) 16:18, 29 September 2020 (UTC)

Wikipedia does not take a position on whether Falun Gong is anti-science or not. How am I defending Falun Gong? I am talking about human rights protection of persecuted minorities. I am not objecting to Maree Ma the General manager being mentioned, but to specifically name a person and their wife as Falun Gong practitioners with their FULL name listed on an encyclopedia is simply not ethical; this person is not a public figure either. What if there are other members of the Ma family who may come to danger with this information? There are reasons this information has never been in the public arena. The religion of a founder does not add weight to the nature of a media company. EmilyzhangAU (talk) 16:31, 29 September 2020 (UTC)

Stop trying to hide the connection. People trying to hide the connection is a huge part of the problem we have been dealing with. I'm not changing my stance on this. I am a neutral Wikipedia editor with very long record of writing high quality articles about a wide array of topics while you are a Falun Gong supporter newly arrived to defend Falun Gong. One of us has an axe to grind, one of us is not here to improve the encyclopedia. Which one? Binksternet (talk) 16:37, 29 September 2020 (UTC)

Avoid loaded language

"White males", "working class" in the context presented in the article which is about a musical genre were an example of charged language which isn't cyclopedic. By removing it I brought in more balanced tone. It's not enough to supply links to sources that expose certain bias of their own without providing alternative discussion points by other authors: until this is done the corresponding sections must be removed. Also, cyclopedia is not about "an opinion". The consensus isn't a definite solution either because in regard with Wikipedia it's unknown who reached consensus with who, how unbiased were these individuals and how the subject of the article became more credible. For this reason I contend my changes would be restored. Thank you. Scrutinizer798 (talk) 19:17, 29 September 2020 (UTC)

Professor Theo Catefori, musicologist at Syracuse, is cited and attributed. Scholars are Wikipedia's best sources; they define the topic. If you can find a scholar with a different opinion, or one that directly challenges Catefori, by all means bring that material into the article about new wave music. But don't remove scholarly analysis from a topic expert. Binksternet (talk) 19:38, 29 September 2020 (UTC)

The connection between "whiteness", class and musical ideas is out of the scope of the history of music. The fact that he's cited and attributed doesn't make him credible in the field of study belonging to psychology. You should've asked yourself:

1. How often is he cited, by who and when?
2. What exactly is the source of references to his research? Is that this connection or his musicological input (form analysis, comparison etc.)?
3. Since the connection is the subject of psychological studies, are you willing to include the topic in this article or make a separate discussion thread about it?
4. If there's any psychological debate about influence one's socio-econimic background exerts on one's creativity is there consensus about the nature of such influence?
5. In any case, how crucial this connection is for the subject of this debate? How does the article benefit from this knowledge? Is it redundant to the subject? Is this argument a pivotal point to substantiate it and elevate to much more than a thesis?
7. How many authors writing about "new wave music" have you read?
8. Do these authors discuss the aforementioned phenomena? if yes then:
9. what is the consensus? Does it exist?
10. If you read several authors on the subject why did you choose only one?
11. If only one of the authors writes about this connection why do you think it's legit without this statement being peer-reviewed?

Please, present a clear and unambiguous answer to my questions in the bullet-point list form.

I reiterate that the source which isn't competent in another field of studies isn't credible to make assessments about what is the subject of that field of studies.Scrutinizer798 (talk) 20:13, 29 September 2020 (UTC)

You might want to take a dose of the same medicine you recommend to me. Whiteness in music has been discussed before with regard to heavy metal,[1] indie rock,[2][3] and new wave. Not just whiteness but white supremacism or very often just racism has been discussed with regard to punk music. The racial aspects of music are well within the realm of musicologists, and many have written about it. As early as 1979 Village Voice talked about whiteness in new wave, a piece by Lester Bangs titled "The White Noise Supremacists". Cateforis is cited by a couple of hundred other authors according to Google Scholar. He has written several papers touching upon the topic, starting I think in 2004. Professor Bernard Gendron of the University of Wisconsin-Milwaukee talked about the whiteness of new wave in his 2002 book Between Montmartre and the Mudd Club: Popular Music and the Avant-Garde. Philosophy Professor Zachary Hoskins at the University of Nottingham wrote about how new wave was predominantly white in his piece about Prince as an unusual instance of Blackness in new wave.[4] There's a ton of this stuff out there. Catefori is not an outlier. Binksternet (talk) 20:55, 29 September 2020 (UTC)

Use of words based on "Marx"

I think it useful to include a references to Marx in the article on Patrisse Cullors. Please note that I have not tried to label Cullors as a "marxist". Based on what I know, we do not have the evidence to label her as a marxist. But it is clear that her background, and some of those she has learned from, have a marxist identity. For somebody who claims such an eclectic background and is engaged in a wide variety of activism, it seems only appropiate to include a reference to marxism, one specifically labeled stream of input. Please note that I have not tried to make this a prominent point in her background or present. You apparently think I am "interested in the word used as a dismissive label." I do not use the word as "dismissive". Some editors work hard to exclude any use of "marxist" or "marxism". But it is a legitimate word; it can and should be used, but carefully, in this article. I will also point out that I did not use the word to describe Cullors, but only cited her usage of the word in describing Angela Davis. It is quoted from a proper source, not open to criticism that it is taken out of context from a video. My edit did not violate any discussion on the Talk page since I was in no way describing Cullors. I am actually trying to be gentle editor, so I will not be part of a war regarding this particular word. Pete unseth (talk) 02:12, 30 September 2020 (UTC)

Thanks for your note. Binksternet (talk) 02:13, 30 September 2020 (UTC)

Brown Meggs

Hi, please remember to format your clippings at Newspapers.com so other readers can view the articles. I did that for you on this article. Thanks, Yoninah (talk) 23:38, 1 October 2020 (UTC)

Good info! I had no idea. Binksternet (talk) 04:11, 2 October 2020 (UTC)

...and again on this article: "Welcome to the LBJ Ranch!". Yoninah (talk) 20:50, 11 October 2020 (UTC)

I tried to figure out how to do this but failed. Is there a tutorial? Binksternet (talk) 20:55, 11 October 2020 (UTC)

How is this effort? Apparently, I need to create a clipping myself, which sucks because it gives people a link to me. Binksternet (talk) 21:50, 11 October 2020 (UTC)

DYK for Step aerobics

On 3 October 2020, Did you know was updated with a fact from the article Step aerobics, which you recently created, substantially expanded, or brought to good article status. The fact was ... that step aerobics attracted 11.4 million people in 1995? The nomination discussion and review may be seen at Template:Did you know nominations/Step aerobics. You are welcome to check how many page hits the article got while on the front page (here's how, Step aerobics), 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.

 — Amakuru (talk) 00:02, 3 October 2020 (UTC)

DYK for Jacki Sorensen

On 5 October 2020, Did you know was updated with a fact from the article Jacki Sorensen, which you recently created, substantially expanded, or brought to good article status. The fact was ... that aerobics pioneer Jacki Sorensen was voted the best dancer in the 1962 Miss California pageant? The nomination discussion and review may be seen at Template:Did you know nominations/Jacki Sorensen. You are welcome to check how many page hits the article got while on the front page (here's how, Jacki Sorensen), 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.

— Maile (talk) 00:02, 5 October 2020 (UTC)

Drive by restorations

Please understand that drive by restorations of large sections of disputed content is very bad form. You didn't just revert a single edit but several different edits are restored material that is part of an active RfC. Additionally, you violated NOCON when restoring this material. Please consider joining the discussion rather than just blindly reverting. Springee (talk) 10:27, 5 October 2020 (UTC)

You accuse me of thing you are doing. You yourself recently rolled back a string of contructive edits, so I was undoing that and improving the article. There was no "blind" reverting; I judged each part of the revert I made, and I also removed a silly link to all the senators of Texas, which has no bearing on the bio. Binksternet (talk) 10:35, 5 October 2020 (UTC)

I accused you of things you did. I reverted changes that had been disputed and didn't have consensus. I have been a participant in the rested talk page discussion. When you revert a number of changes with not even a complete sentence as the justification, with no specific details, yes, that is a disruptive, drive by revert. Springee (talk) 12:17, 5 October 2020 (UTC)

I would pay more attention to your concerns if they were purely about WP:BLP and improvement of Wikipedia, but your defense of Ngo goes beyond that to the ideological realm. You use wikilawyer arguments to defend your obstructionist behavior. It's hard for me to understand why someone would want to whitewash the biography of a person clearly involved with sowing hatred, racism and division. Binksternet (talk) 12:48, 5 October 2020 (UTC)

I'm doing nothing of a sort and your comment suggests your motives are RGW rather than creating an impartial article. Clearly this is going nowhere. Springee (talk) 12:57, 5 October 2020 (UTC)

What an outrageous sentiment. Let me state this in very clear, non-lawyer terms to you, Binksternet. You just restored content for which there appears to be no consensus and indeed active consensus against. It is also a BLP violatoin to restore a contentious WP:LABEL, and a violation of DS to do so without consensus. It is absolutely unacceptable for you to accuse other editors of "whitewashing bigotry" for pointing out your conduct. I suggest you retract these accusations and self-revert. Wikieditor19920 (talk) 19:05, 5 October 2020 (UTC)

Certainly there is a content dispute at the Talk:Andy Ngo page. There usually is, because the guy is so annoyingly divisive. But your assertion that there is a violation of BLP is stretching the point: one of the contentious terms is "provocateur", which is used to describe Ngo in Rolling Stone, Jewish Currents, Atlantic and Jacobin magazines. Because of these reliable sources using it, it's impossible for the word to have BLP consequences. Binksternet (talk) 19:26, 5 October 2020 (UTC)

It’s wonderful that you have opinions and are capable of expressing them without attacking another editors, but there is currently a developing consensus against “provocateur,” and you restored it before adding your opinion to the talk page. And by the way, you shouldn’t even be editing this page based on your strongly expressed views about the subject, but I’ll leave that for another time. In the meantime, as I already stated, revert your change while the discussion is ongoing and retract your statements about Springee. Wikieditor19920 (talk) 19:43, 5 October 2020 (UTC)

I shouldn't be editing because of strong opinions? That's rich. I don't accept your viewpoint or your assumed authority over my actions. Binksternet (talk) 19:58, 5 October 2020 (UTC)

Yes, that actually formalized in a policy. It's called WP:COI. And while I admire on some level that you abandon any pretext of neutrality and just call the subject annoyingly divisive, I think you should consider whether these sentiments fall within text of that page. And I'm not "assuming authority" over you, I am reminding you of community norms re: editing against consensus and conduct towards other edits. It'd be nice if you would follow them, because your accusations, which are really directed not just at Springee, but anyone who disagrees with you, are insulting. Wikieditor19920 (talk) 20:07, 5 October 2020 (UTC)

I'm glad you're having fun with this line of investigation, but you have no leverage with an accusation of COI against me. None whatsoever. So keep talking about it if it amuses you, but do it somewhere else. Binksternet (talk) 20:15, 5 October 2020 (UTC)

Investigation? Yeah, I don't think so. You are cluelessly putting out in the open your sharply negative opinions about the subject of a BLP, and you think it's a big mystery what the WP:COI is? Edit whatever page you want, but the next time you accuse another editor of "whitewashing racism" over an editorial disagreement I'll take it to WP:AE. And by the way, this is also a blatant BLP violation. You have no evidence of the subject "sowing racism" and I have not seen that said in any reliable source. Frankly you already deserve to be taken to AE for what you've laid out here. Wikieditor19920 (talk) 23:21, 5 October 2020 (UTC)

Ngo is a public figure. I can say much worse things about him before violating BLP. And of course he is sowing hatred as hard as he can. It's his coin.

Have you been to AE? Beware the boomerang. Regarding my notional terrible, horrible, no-good behavior, you are barking up the wrong tree. Binksternet (talk) 23:36, 5 October 2020 (UTC)

WP:COI doesn't disallow editors from having an opinion, either positive or negative. If so, many Wikipedia articles would not have been written. Of course, many editors have an opinion over political figures, they just have to work to make sure articles represent a NPOV. Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 23:39, 5 October 2020 (UTC)

Here's why AE is a pointless endeavor and, despite clearly violating policy, this user confidently threatens "boomerang" while engaging in exactly the kind of behavior proscribed by WP:CIVIL and WP:BLP. @Liz:, this editor just suggested an article subject "sows racism" on a talk page, which is indistinguishable from putting it into an article since WP:BLP applies to all pages, and accused another editor of "whitewashing" racism over a disagreement on the phrasing of the opening sentence. And your only comment is to rush to their defense? WP:COI suggests avoiding pages where you have strongly held views that impact neutrality. Passion is a great thing, but this user is ranting about the subject in a way that suggests neutrality is out the window. I don't think it's right that a blind eye is turned to this kind of stuff, but it is what it is. Best of luck to you, @Binksternet:, I disagree with what you've said here but I'm not going to concern myself with it much more. Wikieditor19920 (talk) 23:47, 5 October 2020 (UTC)

You won't find anybody of authority here who will agree with your viewpoint about BLP that it's the exact same if I say on my talk page or write in his biography article that Andy Ngo "sows hatred". Virtually all the administrators are clever enough to distinguish between heated/biased discussion on talk pages, and careful, measured phrasing inside the biography articles in mainspace. Our admin corps would largely agree that if I put "sows hatred" into the Andy Ngo biography page without a salvo of rock-solid referencing it would be a big problem, but if I assert it unreferenced on my talk page it is much less of a problem, perhaps even nil. That's because it is my opinion, not a life-threatening instance of outing or doxing. My voiced opinion can sit there in virtual talk space for-virtual-ever, and not hurt Ngo.

By the way, I wasn't "threatening" a boomerang at AE, I was warning you neutrally that boomerangs are a regular occurrence, that they happen quite frequently to people who file AE reports. The person filing the report hopes that the spotlight of investigation shines on the other person, but the people who respond to AE reports have their own agendas, and they shine light everywhere.

I like to exercise my WP:CIVIL rights with people who are likewise civil to me. Those who attack my morals with their first hallo are not the ones that get the highest degree of courtesy. And anybody who is trying to whitewash the egregious behavior of Andy Ngo is at the lowest level of civility. Binksternet (talk) 02:52, 6 October 2020 (UTC)

Alone (Heart song)

I Have Been Contributing To The Page, Not Vandalizing. It Is A Cover and I'm adding more facts. I'm letting the reader know that it's a cover. I politely ask you to please stop removing my edits. Thanks. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2600:1700:9250:e280:b0b9:340d:76b0:a999 (talk • contribs)

Three infoboxes is two too many. There are other ways to say the song is a cover. Please don't add infoboxes for unremarkable original versions of a song. The song version should be a hit before it gets an infobox. Binksternet (talk) 21:36, 5 October 2020 (UTC)

Thanks, Binksternet, But, There Are Over-covered songs like Dancing in the Street and Summertime Blues, But, Those Songs Have Been Covered By Lots Of Artists and They Have Multiple Infoboxes. But there are more facts for an original version and where it was recorded. Thanks. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2600:1700:9250:E280:FC71:EBF2:7B40:96C4 (talk) 19:57, 9 October 2020 (UTC)

Please put the facts into the article body text, using prose descriptions. The infobox should not be used for introducing new facts. Ideally, the article would still contain every fact if the infobox was removed. So put the facts into prose first. Binksternet (talk) 20:16, 9 October 2020 (UTC)

DYK for Andy Spahn

On 6 October 2020, Did you know was updated with a fact from the article Andy Spahn, which you recently created, substantially expanded, or brought to good article status. The fact was ... that political consultant Andy Spahn said that Cuba is "nothing like" how it has been portrayed by U.S. politicians? The nomination discussion and review may be seen at Template:Did you know nominations/Andy Spahn. You are welcome to check how many page hits the article got while on the front page (here's how, Andy Spahn), 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.

— Maile (talk) 00:03, 6 October 2020 (UTC)

Orphaned non-free image File:Jacki Sorensen 1981.jpg

⚠

Thanks for uploading File:Jacki Sorensen 1981.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) 17:54, 6 October 2020 (UTC)

Slow motion edit wars

Please remember that slow motion edit war, such as those that happened on Andy Ngo are still edit wars and can still result in sanctions even if you are respecting the 1RR --Guerillero | Parlez Moi 02:13, 7 October 2020 (UTC)

Explanation needed for your reversion

Hi Bink, you reverted my edit here which had attempted to neutralize the description of accusations made by the NBC and several other media against The Epoch Times. I was having some troubles comprehending your edit summary: Rv nonsense. The Chinese government has been saying this all along. This edit summary does not justify presenting the accusations as facts. Please explain on the talk page. Thanks. Thomas Meng (talk) 16:37, 7 October 2020 (UTC)

You were leading the reader to assume that before 2019, nobody connected Li with Shen Yun, New Tang Dynasty Television and Epoch Times, which is false. Li has been described by the Chinese media as being involved with these divisions of Falun Gong almost as soon as they are formed. Binksternet (talk) 17:29, 7 October 2020 (UTC)

You are welcome to add the Chinese communist regimes's claims. But I was concerned with the representation of the sources' accusations (accusing The Epoch Times of "promoting unfounded conspiracy theories", etc.). Could you explain why you represented the accusations as facts? Or if it was simply a mistake, please self-revert. Thomas Meng (talk) 22:25, 7 October 2020 (UTC)

They are facts, per NBC. Binksternet (talk) 23:23, 7 October 2020 (UTC)

They are claims of facts (allegations) made by the NBC against a competitor. So we need to use in-text attribution and present both sides of the dispute, per WP:NPOV. Thomas Meng (talk) 14:06, 12 October 2020 (UTC)

It doesn't help when you repeat yourself. NBC is hu-u-uge, with a respected reputation, while Falun Gong media are tiny, with a reputation soiled by bias and falsehood. There is no sense of competition in the comparison. No chance. Binksternet (talk) 14:09, 12 October 2020 (UTC)

"with a reputation soiled by bias and falsehood", those are again allegations made against The Epoch Times. Actually, objective raters such as Allsides says that "The Epoch Times Reporting Absent Many Types of Bias". Thomas Meng (talk) 14:50, 12 October 2020 (UTC)

I don't know what they were looking at. The Allsides people somehow missed the gigantic disinformation campaign about COVID hoax stuff.[5][6][7][8][9] Epoch Times is reviled for that, and dismissed for its anti-CCP shouting. Binksternet (talk) 15:02, 12 October 2020 (UTC)

Again, those are attacks made by biased media against a competitor. There have also been defense for The Epoch Times's coverage of Covid published by other media in response to those attacks. (e.g. [10][11][12][13].) So, we can't judge The Epoch Times based on other biased media's views, but rather on neutral third-parties' such as those of the Allsides.

Allsides did look at The Epoch Times's Covid coverage, and quoted significantly from The ET's op-ed on Covid in order to explain its anti-CCP bias.

Let's come back to my main point on WP:NPOV: When other media made attacks on The Epoch Times's reputation, it is required under WP:NPOV to also present their self-defense and to present those attacks with in-text attribution rather than given-facts. Thomas Meng (talk) 18:25, 13 October 2020 (UTC)

In no sense does Falun Gong organ Epoch Times "compete with" mainstream NBC News. Falun Gong does not get a rebuttal. Binksternet (talk) 18:36, 13 October 2020 (UTC)

Hey

You OK? - FlightTime (open channel) 23:43, 7 October 2020 (UTC)

Thanks for asking! Yes, I'm okay. How are you doing? Binksternet (talk) 00:04, 8 October 2020 (UTC)

DYK nomination of Alice Kahn

Hello! Your submission of Alice Kahn 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) at your nomination's entry and respond there as soon as possible. Thank you for contributing to Did You Know! SL93 (talk) 23:49, 9 October 2020 (UTC)

DYK for Brown Meggs

On 10 October 2020, Did you know was updated with a fact from the article Brown Meggs, which you recently created, substantially expanded, or brought to good article status. The fact was ... that Paul McCartney named a puppy after Brown Meggs, who signed the Beatles to Capitol Records? The nomination discussion and review may be seen at Template:Did you know nominations/Brown Meggs. You are welcome to check how many page hits the article got while on the front page (here's how, Brown Meggs), 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.

Cas Liber (talk · contribs) 00:02, 10 October 2020 (UTC)

DYK nomination of "Welcome to the LBJ Ranch!"

Hello! Your submission of "Welcome to the LBJ Ranch!" 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) at your nomination's entry and respond there as soon as possible. Thank you for contributing to Did You Know! Yoninah (talk) 19:03, 10 October 2020 (UTC)

Chaos A.D.

Hey. Can you explain your reverts please? Because the source (https://www.decibelmagazine.com/2015/08/13/they-did-it-all-for-the-nookie-decibel-explores-the-rise-and-fall-of-nu-metal/) says: "This was a massive blow to metal purists, some of whom had already been disappointed by Sepultura moving away from thrash on their previous album, Chaos A.D." By that logic, we can also add the "nu-metal" label to the Slipknot's "All Hope is Gone", despite some sources said about departure from the "nu-metal" sound. Thanks. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 5.251.199.253 (talk) 08:08, 11 October 2020 (UTC)

Second "Alone (Heart song)" Incident

You considered the Dreams infobox a conflict? No offense but what is wrong with you? Talk to you later. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2600:1700:9250:E280:F0E3:31AD:C9CB:C2E2 (talk) 14:38, 11 October 2020 (UTC)

You are the person who used multiple IPs to engage in an edit war to list McBusted members as ex-McFly members. How did that turn out for you? Binksternet (talk) 14:50, 11 October 2020 (UTC)

Didn't Feel Good. I Was About To Apologize For The Edit Warring. But anyways, I eventually forgot about that. Plus I try to keep the Dreams infobox in its page to make room for their heart infobox. The McBusted Edit Warring Situation Isn't even a hot topic anymore. But I am trying to contribute to pages. I'm sorry if edit warred on some pages. Thanks. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2600:1700:9250:E280:F0E3:31AD:C9CB:C2E2 (talk) 14:58, 11 October 2020 (UTC)

Andy Spahn

The banner I added indicated that the artice READS like an advertisement. Very little bio info and still no photo of Andy himself. Why not? It looks like a collection of names he would drop to promote his business, not a page in an encyclopedia.

Your defense using first person is rather odd for an encyclopedia, as if you are the author or gatekeeper of the page. If you're really that interested in presenting his BIO, add more info about him! Martindo (talk) 22:13, 13 October 2020 (UTC)

I write articles for Wikipedia. Lots of them. I use the first person when I talk about me. The articles I write come from my own ideas about what I find interesting.

If anybody is the author and gatekeeper of the article, it would certainly be me, since I started it and wrote 95% of it. I'm not ashamed to say that I want the article to look good, as I want Wikipedia to look good.

The only reason I wrote Spahn's bio was because I was researching for the articles Hollywood Women's Political Committee and Campaign for Economic Democracy, both of which I started, and I kept seeing Spahn's name crop up as someone reporters regularly ask for an opinion. When I searched for his name alone, I got so many hits I knew that WP:GNG would be satisfied if I wrote the biography. Articles like this feature strongly establish his notability.

What I wrote for Spahn's bio is light on biographical details because that is what is available in published sources. And it has no photos of him because none are in the public domain.

The advertisement tag was unfair because the biography as I wrote it described things from Spahn's early career that he does not list in his current promotional materials.[14] In other words, I dredged up stuff he would probably prefer to keep in the past. And if the article was an advertisement for Spahn, the reader would expect to see an elegant portrait at the very least. But no, nothing like that is present, because it's not public domain. The tag was also unfair because I tried to accurately summarize the published sources as best as possible, without trying to promote, defend or denigrate the subject. I didn't write an advertisement, I wrote a summary of published information. Binksternet (talk) 23:12, 13 October 2020 (UTC)

RECOG

BTW, changes like this or this are fairly pointless, given the bot will overwrite them with its next run (see the notice at the top of that page). And for those entries, they did indeed have pictures. Headbomb {t · c · p · b} 04:51, 14 October 2020 (UTC)

Good to know! Saves me time and trouble. Binksternet (talk) 16:05, 14 October 2020 (UTC)

Genres for Savage Mode II

What the genres for the album Savage Mode II? I find some sources [15] [16] [17] [18] [19] but can't tell what these sources called the album's genres is. TheAmazingPeanuts (talk) 05:16, 14 October 2020 (UTC)

TAP, there are a few WP:BLUESKY genres such as Christmas music and children's music, for which you don't have to cite a source because it's so obvious. I often include hip hop music in that collection, such that music made by rappers can be considered hip hop unless otherwise stated. NME said "rap album", so you're already there. Rolling Stone says it is a perfect sequel to their "trap classic", making it a trap music album. They also say it has Southern hip hop influences, but you would have to decide whether that is too small of a factor to list in the infobox. Slant mentions some of the songs contain gangsta rap sections, so that's another possible influence. So I would put hip hop and trap in the infobox, and talk in the article about Southern rap and gangsta influences. Binksternet (talk) 16:22, 14 October 2020 (UTC)

Thanks for the reply, this really helps. TheAmazingPeanuts (talk) 20:11, 14 October 2020 (UTC)

Your GA nomination of Jacki Sorensen

Hi there, I'm pleased to inform you that I've begun reviewing the article Jacki Sorensen you nominated for GA-status according to the criteria. This process may take up to 7 days. Feel free to contact me with any questions or comments you might have during this period. Message delivered by Legobot, on behalf of Epicgenius -- Epicgenius (talk) 19:42, 14 October 2020 (UTC)

Awesome! I have some real life stuff to tend to, then I'll get crackin' on Morse and this. Binksternet (talk) 19:43, 14 October 2020 (UTC)

Your GA nomination of Jacki Sorensen

The article Jacki Sorensen you nominated as a good article has been placed on hold . The article is close to meeting the good article criteria, but there are some minor changes or clarifications needing to be addressed. If these are fixed within 7 days, the article will pass; otherwise it may fail. See Talk:Jacki Sorensen for issues which need to be addressed. Message delivered by Legobot, on behalf of Epicgenius -- Epicgenius (talk) 20:02, 14 October 2020 (UTC)

Philadelphia punk scene

I think you're making a mistake in deleting the accompanying list of artists. This isn't a music genre article; it's an article about a geographic scene. There are many examples of lists of musicians from [insert locality here] on Wikipedia. Also, on a personal level, the flippancy of yr reply is not appreciated for edits being made in good faith.RobertGHofmann (talk) 22:57, 14 October 2020 (UTC)