User talk:Jbusenitz

Welcome!

Hello, Jbusenitz, and welcome to Wikipedia! Thank you for your contributions. I hope you like the place and decide to stay. Here are some pages that you might find helpful:

I hope you enjoy editing here and being a Wikipedian! Please sign your messages on discussion pages using four tildes (~~~~); this will automatically insert your username and the date. If you need help, check out Wikipedia:Questions, ask me on my talk page, or ask your question on this page and then place {{helpme}} before the question. Again, welcome! Wizard191 (talk) 23:11, 19 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Resonance

The point is, you are supposed to go and make your case on the talk page when reverted, not edit war your favourite version back into the article. SpinningSpark 23:24, 6 February 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Done as requested; there didn't seem to be a consensus either way, so I reverted. I thought an edit war is when that *doesn't* happen... At any rate, what is the impediment with changing to what seems to be correct terminology? There doesn't seem to be any reason for using "resonant frequency", popularity notwithstanding? Jbusenitz (talk) 15:48, 9 February 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Of course it's edit warring. You tried to force in your favourite version against opposition rather than discussing first. That's edit warring by definiton. I shan't discuss the merits of your edit here, that is best done on the article talk page. SpinningSpark 16:18, 9 February 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Not so; it already had been discussed, and there was opposition on either side. I made a correction; you reverted the edit without further discussion. How is that any different? Jbusenitz (talk) 02:37, 10 February 2015 (UTC)[reply]

See WP:BRD. SpinningSpark 10:40, 10 February 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Finally got a change to read this. Funny, it mentions that reverting should only be done when necessary, and "be specific about your reasons". So it would seem that you didn't follow this guide from the get-go. And note that in the resulting discussion that there hasn't been any justification for the use of the questioned term, especially in the greater context of Wikipedia (example after example of technically correct terminology used over vulgar vernacular). Jbusenitz (talk) 21:25, 23 February 2015 (UTC)[reply]

ArbCom elections are now open!

Hi,
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) 13:44, 23 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Proposed deletion of Association of Loudspeaker Manufacturing & Acoustics International

The article Association of Loudspeaker Manufacturing & Acoustics International has been proposed for deletion because of the following concern:

Fails WP:NORG. My WP:BEFORE search did not yield significant coverage of this association in independent reliable sources.

While all constructive contributions to Wikipedia are appreciated, pages may be deleted for any of several reasons.

You may prevent the proposed deletion by removing the {{proposed deletion/dated}} notice, but please explain why in your edit summary or on the article's talk page.

Please consider improving the page to address the issues raised. Removing {{proposed deletion/dated}} will stop the proposed deletion process, but other deletion processes exist. In particular, the speedy deletion process can result in deletion without discussion, and articles for deletion allows discussion to reach consensus for deletion. Extraordinary Writ (talk) 06:33, 23 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]