Jbening

Thanks for your moderation

I know rivalries are supposed to be kept out of wiki, still there is no reason to have That number includes Bowden's non-Division I-A wins when he was coaching at Howard College (today known as Samford) which is in the Division I-AA on the Bobby Bowden Page, i know things could have been handled differently however it is still a statement that has no relevance in the article. have a good night Nolephin 02:15, 18 September 2007 (UTC)

As I said over there, I'm inclined to agree. That said, I also think that judicious wording of the Bowden page as I recommended in the discussion could keep the PSU fans from adding it back. Jbening 02:20, 18 September 2007 (UTC)

Bowden’s 368 wins put him in first place in the NCAA football record books for most wins by a Div I-FBS coach. is a great beginning and would be an acceptable compromise to have the Comment about where the wins come from taken out.Nolephin 03:15, 18 September 2007 (UTC)

there is no compromise on the joe pa site. cant everyone see that UkrNole 485 21:12, 18 September 2007 (UTC)

I would like to thank you for your work in trying to reach a compromise on the Paterno/Bowden issue. I recently posted my opinion on the Bowden talk page as requested. I think that I will have to find some sort of Barnstar for you. Dincher 21:26, 20 September 2007 (UTC)

		The Defender of the Wiki Barnstar
		This barnstar is awarded to Jbening for providing an unbiased POV in the Paterno/Bowden edit war Dincher 21:31, 20 September 2007 (UTC)

You are most welcome. I just learned about the Sneetches, thank you, it was one of the few Dr. Seuss books that I am not familiar with. Dincher 22:11, 20 September 2007 (UTC)

farkle

I regard to the edits on the farkle page, I see your point that it isn't "appropriate" to an encyclopedia. However, in my experience in playing Farkle the name is a very important aspect of the game, and any Wikipedia article on Farkle should mention it. In a desire to prevent an edit war, do you see any way to include it that would be appropriate to an encyclopedia? Darkage7 21:28, 18 September 2007 (UTC)

Hey, thanks for starting a conversation! I'm not sure I fully understand what you mean. Essentially the same rules are played under the names Greed, 10000, etc. Of the different names, Farkle is the only one I know of that also serves as a verb to describe having lost all ones points by not scoring any dice. But that aspect is already included in the sentence under "Play": If none of the dice score in any given throw, the player has farkled and all points for that turn are lost. I could imagine claiming in casual conversation that this makes the name superior to any other names for the same dice game, but I'm not sure what one could say in a Wikipedia article on the subject without violating WP:OR. Jbening 21:37, 18 September 2007 (UTC)

Hmm... you pose a very good argument. I think I'd be happy with "farkled" in quotes. If none of the dice score in any given throw, the player has "farkled" and all points for that turn are lost. That sounds pretty good to me. Darkage7 20:50, 25 September 2007 (UTC)

Cronquistianthus

Nice catch on the lack of a link to Cronquist's page (I've been too steeped in this material; I forget there are people who don't know who Cronquist is). As for the category, some day it will probably attract the wrath of some of the WP:OC types, but no point in worrying about that until/unless it happens. Kingdon (talk) 04:45, 11 March 2008 (UTC)

you removed tags

you removed tags from the article about secular, and said if anyone wanted to put them back they had to comment your input explaining why. someone put the tag back and your comment noone has added to. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 71.48.185.142 (talk) 18:49, 6 April 2008 (UTC)

What county is Charlottesville in?

I replied at User talk:Colfer2#What_county_is_Charlottesville_in.3F -Colfer2 (talk) 12:06, 12 May 2008 (UTC)

CfD nomination of Category:Plants named after people

Category:Plants named after people, which you created, has been nominated for deletion, merging, or renaming. If you would like to participate in the discussion, you are invited to add your comments at the category's entry on the Categories for discussion page. Thank you. Cgingold (talk) 00:24, 6 March 2009 (UTC)

At the same time you were leaving your note on my talk page, User:Guettarda was posting the following note in the CFD discussion: "Listify genera. Species would be unworkable." So I would suggest that you ask if Guettarda would like to work with you on listification. Good luck - sounds like a pretty big project! Cgingold (talk) 04:54, 6 March 2009 (UTC)

SBU

Hey, have you ever heard of SBU being called the "Notre Dame of the east"? Personally, I find that offensive. If anything I thought there was a general disdain for Notre Dame among Bona alums. Also, being an alum, I'd never heard of that myself either. Just checking with you before I remove that line. Therainman58 (talk) 15:03, 19 May 2009 (UTC)

Removed it. Just another footnote in an article that is so poorly written it's an embarrassment.Therainman58 (talk) 18:17, 22 May 2009 (UTC)

No, I absolutely agree that Allegany is a gem, as is Olean in its own way. I have only an interest in speaking in terms of what is possible to know. So when speaking of the necessity of anything (in this case a religious institution) I just thought it was important to establish that Devereaux thought it was necessary, rather than it being necessary inandof itself. Although I believe it is necessary, I don't know it to be, and so, given that this is an encyclopedia, I was trying to neutralize all language if possible. I do greatly support the area, its natural beauty, and the Franciscan Institute. And no hard feelings from me either. As an alum of Bonas I appreciate all the work you and the other contributors have made to making SBU better known.Merbeliumph (talk) 21:56, 16 February 2010 (UTC)

Weather radar

I must say that I'm not sure of the way they do this distinction but it is likely a mix of surface observations (METAR) and numerical models output. NWS is already providing precipitation types as an output from numerical models like the NAM. This can be fitted on the radar output at the corresponding forecast time as a first guess of what should be observed on the ground. They can then refine the boundaries with surface observations. This is the easiest way.

Scanning radars like NEXRAD cannot get vertical fall speed because they use relatively low angles. The only way to get the falling speed of the precipitation is to use wind profiler data, relatively sparse across the US, or the instrument in automatic weather stations (see AWOS). In the latter case, this information is used for the type of precipitation in the METAR of that weather station which bring us back to my original statement.

Thanks for the qestion and the suggestion. I will add a section on this subject in the article if I can find a reference on the process.

Pierre cb (talk) 11:10, 14 December 2009 (UTC)

ANI

Hello. This message is being sent to inform you that there is currently a discussion at Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard regarding an issue with which you may have been involved. Thank you. Erikeltic ^(Talk) 02:19, 18 July 2012 (UTC)

Have fun! Jbening (talk) 02:26, 18 July 2012 (UTC)

Notice of Dispute resolution discussion

Hello. This message is being sent to inform you that there is currently a discussion at Wikipedia:Dispute resolution noticeboard regarding an issue with which you may have been involved. The thread is "List of countries by beer consumption per capita". Thank you. --Erikeltic ^(Talk) 01:22, 19 July 2012 (UTC)

Less than 26 hours after the fact. Thanks! Jbening (talk) 01:35, 19 July 2012 (UTC)

Talk Page

Your continued comments on my talk page are unwanted and unnecessary. I'm not interested in debating you, nor do I care to perpetuate whatever you think is happening here from edits (above) that are nearly two years old. As for the content of what you wrote, Wikipedia is not compulsory nor are you in the position to make demands of anyone here. At any rate, good luck to you. Thanks and take care. Erikeltic ^(Talk) 00:59, 1 June 2014 (UTC)

For anyone who's interested, the context behind this message can be found in my now-erased messages on Erikeltic's talk page, here and here.Jbening (talk) 04:05, 1 August 2014 (UTC)

Hi Jbening and how are you going. I believe that there isn’t anything wrong with my edit on thedevereux. Because the cricketers name is Steven Peter Devereux Smith I am going to place my edit up again. Thank you 2001:8003:213C:2E00:6C51:922C:D947:1248 (talk) 08:11, 27 November 2019 (UTC)

Hi Mate you can do what you want i’m NOT👍 Here to argue. I’m here to provide information to people. Thanks 😀😃😄😁😆 2001:8003:213C:2E00:6C51:922C:D947:1248 (talk) 04:28, 28 November 2019 (UTC)

Lakes by County etc.

Hi Jbening, will you withdraw your nomination for Lakes of Waldo County and initiate a discussion at Wikipedia talk:Categorization? I would also like to point you to Category:Rivers of the United States by county, a category created 3 years ago by User:Hmains himself. The discussion is really about whether sorting landforms by county is useful or not. I believe it is, but it'd be better to discuss it with other categorization experts before heading to AfD, IMO.--TM 10:46, 6 September 2014 (UTC)

Thank you! That is in fact just the venue I'm looking for. I'll try to do something later today, and I'll add a note with a link to that discussion in the CfD section on Lakes of Waldo County, Maine. Jbening (talk) 12:06, 6 September 2014 (UTC)

I finally did it, but I put it here: Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Categories#Landform categories, large and small. Jbening (talk) 22:11, 9 September 2014 (UTC)

References

Remember that when adding content about health, please only use high-quality reliable sources as references. We typically use review articles, major textbooks and position statements of national or international organizations (There are several kinds of sources that discuss health: here is how the community classifies them and uses them). WP:MEDHOW walks you through editing step by step. A list of resources to help edit health content can be found here. The edit box has a built-in citation tool to easily format references based on the PMID or ISBN. We also provide style advice about the structure and content of medicine-related encyclopedia articles. The welcome page is another good place to learn about editing the encyclopedia. If you have any questions, please feel free to drop me a note. Jytdog (talk) 20:27, 28 February 2017 (UTC)

Disney

Stop edit warring, do not leave ridiculous WP:POINTy edit summaries, and read Wikipedia:Wall of text before posting again. - SchroCat (talk) 16:09, 13 September 2017 (UTC)

Very funny, SchroCat--thanks! No edit warring or disruption on my part, of course. Thanks for rejoining the discussion on the Disney talk page, and please see my response there, if you haven't already. Cheers! Jbening (talk) 22:19, 13 September 2017 (UTC)

Not at all funny. I'm fucking furious with the idiotic shit you've written. "Lost the moral authority to influence the article text". Utter bollocks, and you're lucky you haven't been dropped kicked into ANI for such a personal attack as that. Despicable behaviour. - SchroCat (talk) 22:32, 13 September 2017 (UTC)

I'm sorry to hear you're taking this so hard, SchroCat. I don't really expect you to hear me at this point, but my point was that WP articles should result from consensus achieved through a reasoned exchange of views. When one disdains even to read a fellow Wikipedian's views, one has in effect abdicated from that reasoned exchange. If such a person continues to attempt to influence the article's text, they are doing so independently and dictatorially, rather than as a member of a functioning community.

Your defense of your approach has been repeatedly to invoke WP:TLDR and WP:WALLOFTEXT, but I wonder how recently you've given those articles a careful read. Both of them make distinctions between overly digressive and repetitive posts/articles--to the point of disruptiveness in the Wall of Text article--versus text that is long but carefully and efficiently reasoned. First, none of my posts were remarkably long. Second, they were neither digressive nor repetitive, and one would be hard-pressed to make the points I was making much more efficiently than I did.

On the other hand, both articles caution about the misuse of invoking those articles. "However, an equal-but-opposite questionable strategy is dismissal of legitimate evidence and valid rationales with a claim of "text-walling" or "TL;DR". Not every matter can be addressed with a one-liner, and validity does not correspond to length, especially the more complex the matter is." "Pointing out to someone that they're text-walling only shows that you don't care for their opinion, or that you're averse to nuance." "Being too quick to pointedly mention this essay may come across as dismissive and rude." "Substituting a flippant "tl;dr" for reasoned response and cordiality stoops to ridicule and amounts to thought-terminating cliché." Those sentences aptly describe how your invocations of those articles struck me.

If you want to report me to WT:ANB to see if you get any traction, please feel free to do so. I think you're massively overstating the extent of personal attack, while I feel pretty soundly attacked by you. But if I'm wrong in this, and I and not you am roundly rebuked, it will be a useful learning experience for me. Jbening (talk) 01:12, 14 September 2017 (UTC)

TL;DR - SchroCat (talk) 07:27, 14 September 2017 (UTC)

:) Jbening (talk) 18:09, 14 September 2017 (UTC)

Ruby Keeler

Please do not change Keeler's year of birth unilaterally. A discussion was initiated already on the talk page (see here), to which you are free to contribute and seek other editors' opinions. Quis separabit? 03:49, 16 January 2018 (UTC)

Apologies. I checked the diffs and somehow thought you had made the change. I apologize. You did make this diff but I understand why. Yours, Quis separabit? 22:58, 16 January 2018 (UTC)

List of countries by beer consumption per capita

Is there something wrong? I have updated the map according to the source given in List of countries by beer consumption per capita (this one).--Carnby (talk) 10:51, 29 September 2018 (UTC)

Sorry! I hadn't realized you'd updated it. Thanks for doing that! I've changed the label back to 2016. Jbening (talk) 13:40, 29 September 2018 (UTC)

The scope of citation needed tags

Hi, I see there's been a slight misunderstanding. I put a tag at the end of a paragraph, as the whole thing was uncited. I compared the state before and after your edit, and the tag had indeed disappeared, so I let you know summat was wrong.

Now you say you've used Ghiselin to cite the last sentence. I suspect the citation is good for the whole paragraph, which is how other editors will read the citation's placement, in which case all is well. If you believe the citation applies only to the last sentence, then you must move the citation needed tag to the end of the previous sentence, indicating that the whole paragraph barring the last one remains uncited. Hope this is clear. Chiswick Chap (talk) 06:54, 24 October 2018 (UTC)

Thanks for the clarification, chap. The main reason I interpreted your citation-needed as applying to the last sentence only is that was the only new sentence I added, while the rest of the paragraph had been in the article for several years without anyone calling for a citation. Also, my new last sentence was actually kind of lame in the absence of a citation. In fact, I deleted it because it turned out to be unnecessary and even dubious upon re-reading the relevant sections of Ghiselin. And the sentence before it is really more explanation than claim, so not the thing I would ordinarily view as requiring a citation. That may, however, be because I had read Ghiselin and knew that the statement for which it was cited at the end of the previous paragraph really justified the next two paragraphs in toto, but I could see that not being clear to a casual reader, so no harm in citing it for each of the subsequent paragraphs. And yes--that citation does apply to the whole paragraph. Jbening (talk) 23:53, 24 October 2018 (UTC)

THC

See List of psychedelic drugs. It is cited as a psychedelic there. It is not a "classic" serotonin-based psychedelic, but it is a psychedelic all the same. --IWI (talk) 08:07, 24 October 2022 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for August 23

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. An automated process has detected that when you recently edited Park West (music venue), you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Feist. Such links are usually incorrect, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of unrelated topics with similar titles. (Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.)

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 06:04, 23 August 2023 (UTC)