User talk:Phoenix79

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Jump to: navigation, search
Crystal Clear app xclock.svg This user is busy in real life and may not respond swiftly to queries.


  • If you don't know what to call me just call me Phoenix
  • I'm always willing to help others. So if you need some assistance please let me know and I will do my best.
  • If I have offended you in any way please believe me it was not my intent and let me know of the situation so that we can get it sorted out.
  • I prefer complete conversations:
    • I will reply to comments/questions on this page. After you leave a message, you may wish to watch this page for a reply.
    • If you would rather that I reply on your talk page please let me know.
    • If I left a personal message on your talk page, Unless I specifically state otherwise, I will be watching it for a while so feel free to reply there or here.

  1. /Archive 1 (2005 June 29) to (2006 July 16)
  2. /Archive 2 (2006 July 16)  to (2006 Oct. 16)
  3. /Archive 3 (2006 Oct. 28) to (2007 Nov. 06)
  4. /Archive 4 (2007 Nov. 05) to (2008 July 19)
  5. /Archive 5 (2008 July 19) to (2010 July 07)

Wikipedia User Page[edit]


If I go to the bother of creating something and specifically state that I intend to use it on an article elswehere, I'd appreciate it if you would do me the courtesy of not changing the template to the extent that its intended use becomes impossible; without going to the bother of undoing all your edits. You seem quite capable of playing in the sandbox to create designs of your own to discuss elsewhere, therefore please refrain from altering, (and then saving without changing the name), other people's creations intended for use elsewhere merely to offer them up as one of a number of choices of design on a discussion page.Endrick Shellycoat 16:06, 7 July 2010 (UTC)

Sorry I thought that you changed an official one, I didnt realize that that you created that page yourself. It is not a usual custom to create a full template to demonstrate a point in a talk page. I don't know if you noticed but I created 4 subpages of the official template to demonstrate suggestions. Maybe this would be a better idea? Hope I didnt upset you too much. -- Phoenix (talk) 21:26, 7 July 2010 (UTC)
No, you didn't upset me more than anyone else does on these pages. You obviously didn't note the sentence preceding the insertion of the template: "Having concluded that the way to proceed here is to create an article specific to the Scottish variant, I shall place the following there, which I trust most will not find in any way confusing". "There" being the article which I intend to create once I've received the Flag Research Center Bulletin #188 which discusses the Scottish Union Flag. The template was not created in order to "demonstrate a point in a talk page" as you put it, therefore there was no need to create a subpage.Endrick Shellycoat 22:52, 7 July 2010 (UTC)
Interesting response. Sorry that you have found people upsetting. While we may disagree I assure you that is it not my intention to get you upset and I hope that we can work together to make this a better encyclopaedia :-) -- Phoenix (talk) 05:05, 8 July 2010 (UTC)


The Bose edit you removed was not vandalism, and calling it as such just reveals your bias. One of the major complaints about Bose cube systems is that they neglect 1/3 of audible frequencies. This is fact, and should be a part of the criticism section. —Preceding unsigned comment added by (talk) 07:33, 17 July 2010 (UTC)

No Bias, this link violates two official policies of the English Wikipedia: WP:Verifiability and WP:Reliable source. And was warned as such on the article just above your insertion, hence the comment about vandalism. If it was in good faith please except my apology. This has been discussed ad nauseum on the talk page for many years now. The fact is this is a personal blog and does not belong on wikipedia. -- Phoenix (talk) 10:23, 17 July 2010 (UTC)

Ok, then how do you justify this statement being allowed?

"Audio forums tend to talk about the non-linear frequency response of certain Bose systems."

How is the verifiable and from a reliable source? —Preceding unsigned comment added by (talk) 17:57, 19 July 2010 (UTC)

Good point I guess it should be removed. I would love for you to find any wp:reliable sources though. So if you do please add them or if you are unsure just bring it to the talk page. -- Phoenix (talk) 04:00, 20 July 2010 (UTC)

Apparently, the August 1999 issue of Sound and Vision magazine has the measured frequency response (showing both the non-linear nature as well as the frequency gaps), but unfortunately what's available online only seems to go back as far as 2002. Can you use a reference that isn't available online? What if I find the issue in a local library?

Also, I'm a bit confused as to why you need a reliable source when the statements in question are just talking about comments on forums. Should references to forum postings be enough to support the statement? —Preceding unsigned comment added by (talk) 05:24, 20 July 2010 (UTC)

Have you checked google books? They usually have scanned images of books and magazines. Well if I remember correctly it used to be referenced by actual examples on forums but they got removed because it is against official wiki policy to link to such sites. -- Phoenix (talk) 06:05, 20 July 2010 (UTC)

I just looked at Google Books and didn't see any old issues of Sound and Vision. There's somebody on ebay that has the issue that's willing to scan/email me the article. If I make a scanned copy of the article available online is that sufficient? —Preceding unsigned comment added by (talk) 16:14, 20 July 2010 (UTC)

Huh, I honestly don't know. My assumption would be yes. It would also assume that they or some other scientific lab were the origins of the data and that the image has not been tampered with. Why don't you join Wikipedia? Or if you are already a member log in ;-) -- Phoenix (talk) 22:11, 20 July 2010 (UTC)

Speaking of references, one thing that would be great is if you could include reference templates. It adds a lot of value when people are checking a source rather than have to jump to another cite. Some good finds there by the way.Mattnad (talk) 22:54, 27 July 2010 (UTC)

You are correct. I am sorry if that has made things more cluttered. I have just been searching for refs and inserting them quickly before people revert them... as has been happening. But could you check the sources I have provided and notice that the statement you are inputting is no longer precise instead of reverting? -- Phoenix (talk) 23:03, 27 July 2010 (UTC)
I see a case for "high end audio". What I'd like to also add, based on the sources provided, what they are referring to. So Bose does not do "high-end" separates which is norm for the industy, but usually integrated things like lifestyle systems, cd radios, satellite speakers, and ipod speakers, as well as automotive speaker systems. The 901 Speakers are somewhat of an outlier in that they are more of a separates but even those include some additional outboard electronics to shape the sound and those speakers, according to the only reliable source, are decidedly not high-end in performance. Mattnad (talk) 18:38, 28 July 2010 (UTC)
As I have said from the get go I dont think Bose is High End. But I do believe that the lay person on the street thinks that Bose is, and the sources provided originally, and conversations that I have personally had with people have proven that. I believe that it is clumsily worded listing out essentially all of Boses products when one word does the same thing. I could probably find references for other stereo speakers like the 301's or 701's, but cant we agree that enough sources are provided to show what the general public thinks? -- Phoenix (talk) 20:57, 28 July 2010 (UTC)
I think there's a definitely a perception that Bose makes big sound in small packages and that their products are expensive and technologically innovative. But I haven't seen a study that people think Bose makes "high end audio", in part because most of the general public don't use those terms. It's really used more by people who care about audio. Hence the ongoing disconnects between what we see in print and common vernacular (can a desktop radio be in the same class as a krell amp mated to Pro-Ac speakers?) "High-end audio" may be more of a term of art - meaning it has specific definitions. I will grant that now that I've read the aweful High-end audio article, that allows for pretty much anything provided it's expensive.
An indirect parallel is the misunderstanding of the meaning of the term "Theory of Evolution" by creationists who claim that "Evolution is a theory and not a proven fact". The word "theory' means something very different in science vs. common parlance.Mattnad (talk) 22:25, 28 July 2010 (UTC)
That is a different argument than saying that the public sees bose as a maker of high end audio. Just because people "in the know" have a better understanding what that means does not preclude the public from their belief. -- Phoenix (talk) 22:51, 28 July 2010 (UTC)

Great Power[edit]

The EU has recently been confirmed as a great power here: It's as academic as you can get. I have added it to the article, however the world map showing current governments regarded as Great Powers, and the list of Great Powers by date need updating to include the EU. Recon.Army (talk) 20:45, 28 July 2010 (UTC)

I dont believe that the conclusion is a clear cut as you thought
"So, can we reach any judgements about whether the EU qualifies as a 'great power'? I think we can, but in a nuanced way. As we have seen from the above, the EU comes out rather well even using the conventional comparators... Overall in today's world we should perhaps regard the EU as a ‘modern’ power, but one that gets results. And the question whether the European Union is a ‘great power’ is one I feel I can safely leave in the hands of the audience."
The author backtracks in the end and says that it is almost a great power. Not only that I dont believe that a politicians speech is considered academic, even if it was at a school ;-) -- Phoenix (talk) 21:10, 28 July 2010 (UTC)

Template:Paralympic Games[edit]

Hi, I have a comment to the Template:Paralympic Games. The reason I had for adding the 2018 and 2022 Winter Games years, and the 2020, 2024 and 2028 SG years to the template, was that they have been added to the Template:Olympic Games. If it is the standard for the Olympic Games template, could it be the standard for the Paralympic Games template too? Maybe create redirects to the Olympic articles, since the text in those articles is mostly about the bidding, which includes the Paralympic Games, or create stubs. And then about the color of the wikilinks, I changed the color to the same old blue, because of reading this Wikipedia:WikiProject Usability/Color. The red link can look like it has no article, and the black link can look like it is text, not a link. Bib (talk) 23:44, 27 March 2011 (UTC)


Hey Pheonix! I would like to request your assistance in a newly created article recently linked to the Potential superpowers-page - India as a rising superpower. In my opinion, the article should be deleted on the grounds that we already have an article on India's superpower-status and that the article, India as a rising superpower, is full of SYN and OR, but all I ask is that you take a look and give your two cents about it. Also check the discussion page for more.Swedish pirate (talk) 17:26, 1 May 2011 (UTC)

Poll on ArbCom resolution - Ireland article names[edit]

There is a poll taking place here on whether or not to extend the ArbCombinding resolution, which says there may be no page move discussions for Ireland, Republic of Ireland or Ireland (disambiguation), for a further two years. Fmph (talk) 20:34, 18 September 2011 (UTC)

Your invitation to participate in a Wikimedia-approved survey in online behavior.[edit]

Hello, my name is Michael Tsikerdekis[1][2], currently involved as a student in full time academic research at Masaryk University. I am writing to you to kindly invite you to participate in an online survey about interface and online collaboration on Wikipedia. The survey has been reviewed and approved by the Wikimedia Foundation Research Committee.

I am contacting you because you were randomly selected from a list of active editors. The survey should take about 7 to 10 minutes to complete, and it is very straightforward.

Wikipedia is an open project by nature. Let’s create new knowledge for everyone! :-)

To take part in the survey please follow the link: (HTTPS).

Best Regards, Michael Tsikerdekis (talk) 09:15, 5 February 2012 (UTC)

PS: The results from the research will become available online for everyone and will be published in an open access journal.

UPDATE: This is the second and final notification for participating in this study. Your help is essential for having concrete results and knowledge that we all can share. I would like to thank you for your time and as always for any questions, comments or ideas do not hesitate to contact me. PS: As a thank you for your efforts and participation in Wikipedia Research you will receive a Research Participation Barnstar after the end of the study. --Michael Tsikerdekis (talk) 08:22, 16 February 2012 (UTC)

Science2.png Research Participation Barnstar
For your participation in the survey for Anonymity and conformity on the internet. Michael Tsikerdekis (talk) 13:42, 16 March 2012 (UTC)

Waste of time[edit]

You really don't mind exposing youself to ridicule, do you? Greglocock (talk) 22:47, 26 March 2012 (UTC)

“Believe none of what you hear and half of what you see.” Benjamin Franklin
"Stand up for what you believe in, even if it means standing alone." - Unknown
If you understand those you will understand me. If you wish to talk to me like a person I will respectfully respond in kind and put the past where it belongs as I have always done with you. If not, good day to you sir. -- Phoenix (talk) 07:51, 27 March 2012 (UTC)

Actually it is not respectful to waste people's time, as you do, persistently. Greglocock (talk) 00:21, 28 March 2012 (UTC)

Great power article needs protecting[edit]

I'm afraid the Great power article is once again open to attack and lo and behold it is, this time by an annon IP editor (or two). It's the same edits as were made before the page was protected a while ago. The article needs protecting once again I'm afraid. David (talk) 14:01, 3 April 2012 (UTC)

attack from what ? your original synth or what , Dpaajones is not civil please see the great power talkpage and his other edits (talk) 14:38, 3 April 2012 (UTC)
Yes, please do see my other (7/8 years' worth of) edits. You're not fooling anyone. We know who you are. David (talk) 16:13, 3 April 2012 (UTC)


A Barnstar!
A smile for you

You’ve just received a random act of kindness! (talk) 13:52, 5 April 2012 (UTC)

dirty games, very dissapointing[edit]

Congratulations finding a loophole to get a user with a differing opinion to yours (ndazza) silenced (sarcasm). It is incorrect that it is a sock of mine, so your actions have caused a legitimate user to be indefinitely banned. 1292simon (talk) 01:20, 15 April 2012 (UTC)

File:Daniel Shays.gif missing description details[edit]

Dear uploader: The media file you uploaded as:

is missing a description and/or other details on its image description page. If possible, please add this information. This will help other editors make better use of the image, and it will be more informative to readers.

If you have any questions, please see Help:Image page. Thank you. Message delivered by Theo's Little Bot (opt-out) 19:13, 18 June 2013 (UTC)

Orphaned non-free image File:Teargarden by Kaleidyscope.jpg[edit]


Thanks for uploading File:Teargarden by Kaleidyscope.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 the criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. Sfan00 IMG (talk) 17:05, 25 September 2013 (UTC)


A file you have been previously involved with is under discussion at Wikipedia:Non-free_content_review#File:Carlos-Smith.jpg Trackinfo (talk) 07:08, 14 October 2013 (UTC)

An RfC that you may be interested in...[edit]

As one of the previous contributors to {{Infobox film}} or as one of the commenters on it's talk page, I would like to inform you that there has been a RfC started on the talk page as to implementation of previously deprecated parameters. Your comments and thoughts on the matter would be welcomed. Happy editing!

This message was sent by MediaWiki message delivery (talk) on behalf of {{U|Technical 13}} (tec) 18:26, 8 March 2014 (UTC)

Happy Birthday Phoenix79[edit]

Anniv.svg Hey, Phoenix79. Just stopping by to wish you a Happy Birthday from the Wikipedia Birthday Committee!
Have a great day!
Vatsan34 (talk) 02:48, 7 June 2014 (UTC)

Happy First Edit Day[edit]

Nuvola apps cookie.svg Happy First Edit Day, Phoenix79, from the Wikipedia Birthday Committee! Have a great day! Vatsan34 (talk) 14:14, 28 June 2014 (UTC)

MfD nomination of User:Phoenix79/2006 World Cup[edit]

Ambox warning orange.svg User:Phoenix79/2006 World Cup, a page you substantially contributed to, has been nominated for deletion. Your opinions on the matter are welcome; please participate in the discussion by adding your comments at Wikipedia:Miscellany for deletion/User:Phoenix79/2006 World Cup and please be sure to sign your comments with four tildes (~~~~). You are free to edit the content of User:Phoenix79/2006 World Cup during the discussion but should not remove the miscellany for deletion template from the top of the page; such a removal will not end the deletion discussion. Thank you. Binksternet (talk) 00:49, 6 June 2015 (UTC)

MfD nomination of User:Phoenix79/2010 World Cup[edit]

Ambox warning orange.svg User:Phoenix79/2010 World Cup, a page you substantially contributed to, has been nominated for deletion. Your opinions on the matter are welcome; please participate in the discussion by adding your comments at Wikipedia:Miscellany for deletion/User:Phoenix79/2010 World Cup and please be sure to sign your comments with four tildes (~~~~). You are free to edit the content of User:Phoenix79/2010 World Cup during the discussion but should not remove the miscellany for deletion template from the top of the page; such a removal will not end the deletion discussion. Thank you. Binksternet (talk) 00:50, 6 June 2015 (UTC)

MfD nomination of User:Phoenix79/sandbox[edit]

Ambox warning orange.svg User:Phoenix79/sandbox, a page you substantially contributed to, has been nominated for deletion. Your opinions on the matter are welcome; please participate in the discussion by adding your comments at Wikipedia:Miscellany for deletion/User:Phoenix79/sandbox and please be sure to sign your comments with four tildes (~~~~). You are free to edit the content of User:Phoenix79/sandbox during the discussion but should not remove the miscellany for deletion template from the top of the page; such a removal will not end the deletion discussion. Thank you. Binksternet (talk) 00:52, 6 June 2015 (UTC)

Disputed non-free use rationale for File:Ghost Goal World Cup 2010.jpg[edit]

Thank you for uploading File:Ghost Goal World Cup 2010.jpg. However, there is a concern that the rationale provided for using this file on Wikipedia may not meet the criteria required by Wikipedia:Non-free content. This can be corrected by going to the file description page and adding or clarifying the reason why the file qualifies under this policy. Adding and completing one of the templates available from Wikipedia:Non-free use rationale guideline is an easy way to ensure that your file is in compliance with Wikipedia policy. Please be aware that a non-free use rationale is not the same as an image copyright tag; descriptions for files used under the non-free content policy require both a copyright tag and a non-free use rationale.

If it is determined that the file does not qualify under the non-free content policy, it might be deleted by an administrator within a few days in accordance with our criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions, please ask them at the media copyright questions page. Thank you. (talk) 07:59, 16 July 2015 (UTC)

ArbCom elections are now open![edit]

You appear to be eligible to vote in the current Arbitration Committee election. The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to enact binding solutions for disputes between editors, primarily related to serious behavioural issues that the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the ability to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail. If you wish to participate, you are welcome to review the candidates' statements and submit your choices on the voting page. For the Election committee, MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 13:07, 23 November 2015 (UTC)