User talk:Radiojon/2009

Previous comments are at user talk: radiojon/2007~2008, user talk: radiojon/2006, and user talk: radiojon/archive.

Also, I don't bite, so there's no need to be hostile — assume good faith in my edits.

Rename of List of national monuments of the United States

I left a comment for you on the talk page there. dm (talk) 22:36, 7 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Renaming of various National Monument articles

Hey, i noticed u renamed Marianas Marine National Monument to Mariana Trench Marine National Monument. Can you provide a cite that shows use of your preferred name? I started the article using the name that i found in some announcement, although I am embarrassed to find that announcement is not one of the two references i put into the article. Anyhow, you need to support your rename. Also, similar for your rename of Rose Atoll National Monument(?) Please let me know. doncram (talk) 00:21, 8 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

The hyphen and the move

Hello. Per your user boxes, I like Halloween and love Christmastime, too. Holidays aside, I'm less than thrilled that you moved Dolby noise reduction system to Dolby noise-reduction system with neither prior discussion nor explanation on the talk page. Whether or not it ought to be hyphenated is a good question but sort of beside the point, I fear; in fact, it typically isn't hyphenated. In many years of working in radio and home audio, I'm not sure I ever saw it hyphenated. Here's a link to a PDF document on the Dolby website that may be considered reliable. And here's a search-results page on the Dolby website with further hyphenless instances. (Britannica gets it wrong, too, I see, but we're better than them, right?) Rivertorch (talk) 06:13, 8 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Undid your move of "Rain and snow mixed" to "Mixed precipitation"

Hi, I undid your move of "rain and snow mixed" to "mixed precipitation". The article's primary intention was to describe what British speakers refer to as "sleet", which is literally a mixture of rain drops and snowflakes. American speakers usually refer to "mixed precipitation" when there is a mixture of rain drops (which may or may not freeze upon impact), ice pellets, and snowflakes. This sort of mix is quite rare in Britain, where ice pellets and freezing rain drops are not nearly as common as they are in the eastern and central United States and Canada. Famartin (talk) 16:56, 13 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Had to revert many many unnecessary radio and TV station page moves.

There is no need to move a station page to a (FM), (AM) or (TV) suffix just for the sake of doing so or to create unnecessary dab pages, some of which have already been deleted once by an administrator and documented on the talk page for discussion (see:Talk:WAEC_(AM)). I have reverted many of these moves, feel free to revert similar unnecessary page moves you have done in the past. Thanks. RobDe68 (talk) 21:29, 20 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Please join the WP:WPRS project and chime in on the subject of disambiguation pages.

I feel I may have gotten off on the wrong foot here. So, since you seem to be a radio fan and contribute to many articles on the subject, I invite you to join the radio project. I especially would like it if you would chime in on this discussion to at least see where I'm coming from regarding some of these page moves and contested disambiguation pages. I'm just trying to keep with the current standard here and since you don't say much in the edit summaries for said moves, would kind of like to see where you're coming from. Thanks. RobDe68 (talk) 00:58, 21 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Wears Valley, Tennessee

Hello, you moved Wears Valley, Tennessee to Wears Valley with the edit summary "landforms do not get the state name after them". But Wears Valley is a town, or a "census county division" according to the US Census Bureau. The article has demographic info from the Census, like other towns. And it noted that the valley is called Wears Cove, as opposed to Wears Valley, the town. Perhaps the page ought to remain at Wears Valley, Tennessee? Pfly (talk) 03:27, 25 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

This is getting to be repetitive, as I previously moved the article back to the Wears Valley, Tennessee form and explained my reasoning on the talk page. As Pfly notes, this article is about a settlement, not a landform. (I didn't mention that point on the talk page because I did not guess the reason for the page move.) --Orlady (talk) 03:59, 25 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

The latest move (from Wears Valley to Wear Cove) has taken this from bad to worse. The article is about Wears Valley, which is a burgeoning community. It happens to be associated with a geographic feature called Wear Cove, but Wear Cove is decidedly not the subject of the article. Seeing that efforts to communicate have failed, I am moving it back to its original name of Wears Valley, Tennessee. --Orlady (talk) 04:46, 25 February 2009 (UTC) PS - If you want to have an article about Wear Cove, please create it as a separate article. --Orlady (talk) 04:47, 25 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for splitting the article, that works for me! You are quick. Pfly (talk) 05:36, 25 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

AfD nomination of Christmas light sculpture

I have nominated Christmas light sculpture, an article that you created, for deletion. I do not think that this article satisfies Wikipedia's criteria for inclusion, and have explained why at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Christmas light sculpture. Your opinions on the matter are welcome at that same discussion page; also, you are welcome to edit the article to address these concerns. Thank you for your time.

Please contact me if you're unsure why you received this message. Lithoderm 06:49, 28 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Note on ordinal suffixes

Hello, I'm not sure if you've noticed any of my recent edits, so I'd like to let you know that according to the Manual of Style, dates do not have ordinal suffixes and ordinal suffixes are not superscripted. Thanks. —LOL ^T/_C 00:46, 7 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Undid your move of "automated airport weather station" to "automated weather station"

You should stop moving pages randomly. This is the second time you have done this (the first being the mixed precip thing). I've undone it, and now I have to find an old copy of the original automated weather station page to replace the one you wiped out. The subject matter in the automated airport weather station page is VERY SPECIFIC to airport stations. Non-airport stations have much less in the way of sophisticated features. The fact that one of them happens to be at Central Park is an anomaly, NOT the norm, and in fact was (and still is) mentioned on the page. Famartin (talk) 01:59, 13 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

You aren't listening. STOP IT! There is already a page about other non-aviation related automated weather stations, Automatic weather station. Please make use of it to add other kinds of systems. This page is specific for aviation stations, which have a very specific suite of sensors and purposes. Famartin (talk) 06:56, 13 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

File source problem with File:Ø-1.png

File Copyright problem

Thanks for uploading File:Ø-1.png. I noticed that the file's description page currently doesn't specify who created the content, so the copyright status is unclear. If you did not create this file yourself, you will need to specify the owner of the copyright. If you obtained it from a website, then a link to the website from which it was taken, together with a restatement of that website's terms of use of its content, is usually sufficient information. However, if the copyright holder is different from the website's publisher, their copyright should also be acknowledged.

If you have uploaded other files, consider checking that you have specified their source and tagged them, too. You can find a list of files you have uploaded by following this link. Unsourced and untagged images may be deleted one week after they have been tagged, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If the image is copyrighted under a non-free license (per Wikipedia:Fair use) then the image will be deleted 48 hours after 01:14, 21 March 2009 (UTC). If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you. MBisanz ^talk 01:14, 21 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Double redirect fixing

I don't know what you exactly mean, but my bot only fixes redirects whose target is another redirect. Also, there are other bots that are fixing double redirects (see the list: it is empty right now). Muro de Aguas (write me) 16:08, 30 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Metropolitan Atlanta Rapid Transit Authority

I noticed this edit you made to MARTA's article on the 6th and I was wondering if you have a source for this. I don't doubt the information you added because I live in Atlanta and I was even at the meeting concerning this mess at MARTA headquarters last week so I tagged it with {{fact}} instead of removing it. However, without a reliable source it may be removed by somebody else. --Ron Ritzman (talk) 02:19, 10 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Explosively formed penetrator

I reverted your move of this article to the version with the hyphen. A hyphen is not needed with adverbs ending in -ly, since there is no cause for confusion as to what it is modifying (it has to be modifying the following adjective/participle and can't be modifying the noun). See here.--BillFlis (talk) 14:44, 16 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Your HD Radio edits.

Hi Radio, I just want to thank you first off for expanding the HD Radio article, and adding more information that will help clarify the transmission method. I also want to warn you ahead of time that your edits might be sabotaged by other editors who feel there is no criticism of the system allowed at all. I would caution you too, to add some sources to your recent edits, although from my perspective, they already are sound. Anyway, this is just a heads up. Keep up the good work, and thanks for editing. Keep a close eye on that article, and I'll do the same. --milonica (talk) 06:45, 22 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Broadcast call sign?

Could you please explain why you moved North American call sign to Broadcast call sign? Information about non-broadcast callsign usage is given throughout the article; and its scope is clearly North America. It's even in the intro: the second sentence of the article mentions AA–AL and N, which are non-broadcasting prefixes. Its context is limited to North America and is not limited to broadcasting, so I don't understand this move at all. --Closeapple (talk) 08:48, 24 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Deletion discussion

If you wish to comment on a file that is up for deletion, then do so at the discussion (Wikipedia:Possibly unfree files/2009 April 28). Do not continue to remove the discussion altogether. That is rude, against procedure, and simply wrong. Freedom of panorama does not apply to statues in the US, only buildings. I'd respond at the discussion if there were a comment to respond to. ▫ JohnnyMrNinja 20:35, 6 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Undid your move of Montage sequence

Please take any concerns to Talk:Montage sequence. Your move simply doesn't make sense. Thanks. Viriditas (talk) 12:31, 9 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Hi. I politely asked you take your concerns to the talk page. I did not ask you to continue repeating your concerns in the edit summary. Your rationale appears to be based on a misunderstanding of Wikipedia:Search engine test, which is why I asked you to discuss it on the talk page. Looking at your history of page moves, many of them have been reverted. Since you have refused to discuss this ongoing problem, I am going to take this to the next level per WP:DR. Thanks. Viriditas (talk) 02:05, 16 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Callsign vs. brand name

This message is regarding your page move back to 99X (Atlanta). In what special situation should American radio station articles be titled at their brand names as opposed to their callsigns?? Georgia guy (talk) 13:19, 12 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I don't like it either, but its temporary until the issue is resolved. As I noted in the description, no consensus (or even a majority on any of the options) was reached. WWWQ is also wrong since that is not its legal parent station, WNNX is. (In addition, HD is never part of the callsign. If used it should be separated with parentheses like other disambiguations, or at least not connected with a hyphen.) –radiojon (talk) 14:35, 12 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]
- I gotta disagree with you here. Since the station originates from WWWQ and has the callsign WWWQ-HD2, it should be at WWWQ-HD2. I have requested a page move from 99X (Atlanta) to WWWQ-HD2. - NeutralHomer • Talk • 15:29, 12 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

ANI

Hello, Radiojon. This message is being sent to inform you that there currently is a discussion at Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents regarding your repeated page moves made without consensus since 2005. The thread is Radiojon. Thank you. Viriditas (talk) 02:24, 16 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

File:Ø-1.png missing description details

Dear uploader: The media file you uploaded as File:Ø-1.png is missing a description and/or other details on its image description page. If possible, please add this information. This will help other editors to make better use of the image, and it will be more informative for readers. If you have any questions please see Help:Image page. Thank you. Sfan00 IMG (talk) 14:16, 17 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

WPBA - FCC regs on Comcast??

This is for my own info, (rather than a wiki criticism / comment). Do you have anything to back up your claim that Comcast owes basic subscribers 2 DTA's due to the removal of WPBA from the analog channel lineup? I called comcast, and they denied my request (of course, the CSA didn't really understand what I was saying). Qexter (talk) 19:29, 16 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Page moves

Hi. When you move pages, as you did with Sherman's March (film) to Sherman's March (1986 film), please do make sure to do the necessary tidying up afterwards as well.

I assume you know that your move was only appropriate because there happen to be two films by the same title (a 2007 version was also made). It therefore becomes important to make sure that the correct links go to the correct pages. For example, I have turn your "Sherman's March (film)" redirect into a disambiguation page. GDallimore (Talk) 09:54, 3 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Redistricting

I really appreciate the section on School redistricting, but we could really use some references for that section. Despite the general lack of quality in the article, that does not mean we need to add additional unreferenced material. Thanks much, SADADS (talk) 22:53, 4 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Articles for deletion nomination of Exit 0

I have nominated Exit 0, an article that you created, for deletion. I do not think that this article satisfies Wikipedia's criteria for inclusion, and have explained why at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Exit 0. Your opinions on the matter are welcome at that same discussion page; also, you are welcome to edit the article to address these concerns. Thank you for your time.

Please contact me if you're unsure why you received this message. Ten Pound Hammer, his otters and a clue-bat • ^{(Many otters • One bat • One hammer)} 23:44, 11 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Coupon-eligible converter box

I had a problem with a paragraph you added to the article. It doens't relate to the converter box program, and fortunately, there is a separate article called digital television adapter. That article needs more information. Perhaps you can expand on your ideas there, and please provide sources.Vchimpanzee · talk · contributions · 19:31, 14 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Okay, most of what you added to the CECB article looks good. Since the transition has already happened, I had to reword it accordingly.

Good additions to digital television adapter so far, but we do need sources for whatever we add.

I'll leave it to someone else to handle European versions, but I'm glad you thought of that.Vchimpanzee · talk · contributions · 15:49, 15 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Yeah, I should have just changed the verb tense. This looks better.

I was researching the analog passthrough situation to better understand a recent statement by the CBA. I was not aware a court case attempted to shut down the CECB program. That was important enough to put in the CECB article and it gave me a better place to put the other LPTV details. Between you and Algocu, that's a pretty big addition.Vchimpanzee · talk · contributions · 18:37, 17 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Rename of Shared lane marking

I do not see the rationale or justification for renaming the article "Shared lane marking" to "Shared-lane marking". This device is consistently referred to in a non-hyphenated manner in the draft US MUTCD, numerous studies and documentation, and other official reports and resources. RCMoeur (talk) 05:07, 21 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I see that you changed the name on the Shared lane marking article again. The term "shared lane marking" without the hyphenation has entered standard accepted terminology for traffic control devices. Your insistence on moving & renaming the article due to some arcane minor rule of English makes the page title and the article inconsistent with this large body of existing terminology. While this term may not conform with your interpretation of "standard English", it has become established, and it is inappropriate for you to move the article and change the title without first consulting with experts in traffic engineering and traffic control devices to confirm that it is indeed the correct and commonly used term. RCMoeur (talk) 04:32, 22 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Your road article edits

Please read WP:USSH and WP:USRD/STDS; we have specific conventions for US road articles that you need to follow. You broke link text in the GA article and naming conventions with your page move of I-635. --Rschen7754 (T C) 03:53, 9 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Not really sure where you get your misguided interpretation of WP:USSH. As USSH is ArbCom-mandated, continued reverting to a version that does not follow WP:USSH will get you blocked. --Rschen7754 (T C) 23:00, 9 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

This is your final warning; fix your version to comply with WP:USSH or it will be continuously reverted and you will be blocked. --Rschen7754 (T C) 23:23, 9 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Also, several other issues wrong with your edits: We don't use the major cities box anymore, and it is pointless to add in old exit numbers that haven't been used for 9 years. Please stop reverting and fix your mistakes. If you continue to revert to your version that violates WP:USSH you will be blocked; if you continue edit warring and break WP:3RR you may also be blocked. --Rschen7754 (T C) 23:27, 9 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Guys, let's stop here. The major cities chart was removed, as that is correct, but some of what you put in is fair game. As for the 9 year old exits - no standards. So let's end this please.Mitch32^{(The Password is... See here!)} 23:32, 9 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

WP:USSH cannot be broken. (This was put in place after the first arbitration case.) --Rschen7754 (T C) 23:34, 9 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Youch, this got ugly fast. If I may offer an outside view. I wouldn't threaten a block. The changes to Interstate 575 were mostly positive, and I think some credit should be given, for cleaning up the article. Rschen, This clearly is not another User:Freewayguy in the making, and I think you may have overreacted.

However, Radiojon, in that shouting there were some legitimate points. U.S. Route 50 is an interstate highway, but not an Interstate Highway. Interstate 19 is an Interstate Highway, but not an interstate highway. If you are going to edit road articles, you should learn that difference and fast. Also, per the Manual of style the endash is what should be used for article titles. Admittedly the article title was incorrect to start with, this was a fairly recent change to the style guide and many articles have not yet been updated. Also, I STRONGLY doubt someone in Georgia goes around saying, "Yeah I'm driving on Georgia 15". Somebody might say that in a conversation where multiple state highways are involved, but that would be the exception, not the norm. The more likely thing a local would say is "I'm driving on highway 15" or maybe "route 15". Rschen is correct that there was a major war fought over the title of the articles, that eventually reached The Arbitration Committee. Rschen is correct that the proper term is "State Route 15" or SR 15 for short, and that should be the primary term used in the article. However, there is no prohibition of mixing up terms in the prose for variety (Highway 15, Route 15, etc.) This was an ugly battle, and you would be well advised not to re-ignite it. A fragile peace has held for about 2 or 3 years now, but the battle scars remain. Petty, yes, but welcome to Wikipedia.

Anyways, I hope that this experience can serve as a learning experience, and I hope this did not scare you from working on road articles. We need the help. Dave (talk) 08:07, 10 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Also, I do agree that there is no value in publishing exit numbers that have not been used in 9 years. This would be appropriate for a roadgeek website, but not an encyclopedia article. This would have been appropriate during the transition era. But if the signs truly were changed over in 2000, I'm sure the new numbers are in common use now. However this is my opinion. WP:ELG would be the governing standard, it only states that both old and new exit numbers should be listed if both are in use (i.e. recent transition). While that's not the case here, there is no mention on what to do after the new exit numbers are now in full usage.Dave (talk) 08:25, 10 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Middlesborough, etc

Hi. The Middlesborough (etc) redirect and disambiguation situation is quite delicate and messy - could you please propose changes for discussion on the Talk pages before you make any change so that we can see what other editors think? I have no problem at all with Middlesboro, Kentucky and Middlesborough, Kentucky, but the others are fraught with difficulty and I thought/hoped that we had something set up that worked OK. Thanks and best wishes, DBaK (talk) 09:02, 21 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Sorry, to clarify: the problem is as I see it that the easy bit is Middlesborough, Kentucky and Middlesboro, Kentucky are straightforwardly the US one, and likewise Middlesbrough is equally obviously the UK one. (Note that the UK doesn't, as a general rule, usually say things like "Atlanta, Georgia" unless we need to disambiguate, which we often don't!) The problem comes when you look at Middlesboro and Middlesborough which are incredibly common misspellings for Middlesbrough. (That's right, we can't spell our own place name.) It's partly because the moderately-famous football (soccer!) team is very widely known as Boro (because you can't really chant "Brough" alone, without just sounding like you have a bad cold) and the extra "o" seems to flood back into people's perception of the placename. I've been watching this situation and correcting the spellings and links for years and it seems very clear to me that that's what happens. So, while I certainly wouldn't want to claim precedence for the English town (though it would be possible to argue this on historical grounds) I feel it's better also not to claim it for the US city, when its name is given without the state, because I don't think that's safe either especially given the US tendency to say "City, State". Hence my belief that keeping those ones pointed at the disambiguation page, which aims to wrap it all up and give as much choice as possible, is probably right. I hope this makes some kind of sense to you and that my ramblings are not giving you a headache! Cheers, DBaK (talk) 14:40, 21 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Undiscussed/unexplained moves

Please stop moving the TV channel articles en masse without discussion. These are not networks. Please see the television network article for an explanation of what a network is. As indicated at the top of the article, this is not to be confused with a television channel. —David Levy 00:07, 2 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I just noticed that when you redid your disputed (and incorrect) move of Calle 13 (TV channel) to Calle 13 (TV network), you then performed a dummy edit to the resultant redirect to prevent others from again undoing your move. This was highly inappropriate, and if you do it again, you probably will be blocked. —David Levy 01:01, 2 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Articles for deletion nomination of List of dogwood festivals

I have nominated List of dogwood festivals, an article that you created, for deletion. I do not think that this article satisfies Wikipedia's criteria for inclusion, and have explained why at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/List of dogwood festivals. Your opinions on the matter are welcome at that same discussion page; also, you are welcome to edit the article to address these concerns. Thank you for your time.

Please contact me if you're unsure why you received this message. Tavix | Talk 00:20, 24 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]

What a big bite you have taken

You have megre-in "Wedge pattern" to my article "Wedge Formations" which I started writing on 02, July 2009 and finsihed on 13, July 2009. Later a lot of vandalism took place and finally you stepped into complete it successfully as on 16, November 2009. My name has been completely vanished form the history on the page to which I protect. Please undo your revision as well as revisions made by others to create external links.Altafqadir (talk) —Preceding undated comment added 19:39, 2 December 2009 (UTC).[reply]

Public/private partnership

You recently renamed the Public/private partnership article. I'm interested in hearing why this change is helpful. ✤ JonHarder ^talk 21:08, 24 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I will return the article to "Public–private partnership" on the basis of MOS:ENDASH and MOS:SLASH. ✤ JonHarder ^talk 17:26, 29 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Chidren's Christmas Parade merge to Children's Christmas Parade

Um, I don;t know how to do that. LOL. I'll list it on the admin board. Bearian (talk) 19:05, 30 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]