User talk:Bdemenil

Welcome!

Hello, Bdemenil, and welcome to Wikipedia! Thank you for your contributions. I hope you like the place and decide to stay. Here are a few good links for newcomers:

I hope you enjoy editing here and being a Wikipedian! Please sign your name on talk pages using four tildes (~~~~); this will automatically produce your name and the date. If you need help, check out Wikipedia:Where to ask a question, ask me on my talk page, or place {{helpme}} on your talk page and someone will show up shortly to answer your questions. Again, welcome! Flcelloguy | A note? | Desk | W_S 19:53, 24 September 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Anthony Santos[edit]

The Anthony Santos article contains copyrighted material.

I'm new to this, so I apologize if I'm submitting this information incorrectly... I administer the rights to the copyrighted material in question: the first paragraph of an article on Anthony Santos written by David Wayne. I hereby grant Wikipedia the right to publish the first paragraph of this article. Benjamin de Menil IASO Records Inc www.iasorecords.com Bdemenil 17:54, 24 September 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Added to User:Flcelloguy/Desk Bdemenil 17:54, 24 September 2005 (UTC)[reply]

If you own the copyright to the article, what you need to do is to create a separate page at [www.iasorecords] (it doesn't even need to be linked to), or just place a little notice somewhere, stating that you release the text using the GFDL license. Afterwards, make a link to that page on the Anthony Santos talk page. That's the only way we can accept the text. Once you have created a page or small notice, let me know, and I can take care of it. Thanks for your understanding! Flcelloguy | A note? | Desk | W_S 19:55, 24 September 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Permission is granted at here. Case closed. Flcelloguy | A note? | Desk | W_S 22:17, 26 September 2005 (UTC)[reply]

The correct spelling of the artist's name is Antony Santos - this article should be merged with the other one

AfD nomination of Antony Santos Gallery[edit]

An editor has nominated Antony Santos Gallery, an article on which you have worked or that you created, for deletion. We appreciate your contributions, but the nominator doesn't believe that the article satisfies Wikipedia's criteria for inclusion and has explained why in his/her nomination (see also "What Wikipedia is not").

Your opinions on whether the article meets inclusion criteria and what should be done with the article are welcome; please participate in the discussion by adding your comments at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Antony Santos Gallery and please be sure to sign your comments with four tildes (~~~~).

You may also edit the article during the discussion to improve it but should not remove the articles for deletion template from the top of the article; such removal will not end the deletion debate. Thank you. BJBot (talk) 04:31, 1 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Fair use rationale for Image:Super-Uba-bachata.jpg[edit]

Thanks for uploading or contributing to Image:Super-Uba-bachata.jpg. I notice the image page specifies that the image is being used under fair use but there is no explanation or rationale as to why its use in Wikipedia articles constitutes fair use. In addition to the boilerplate fair use template, you must also write out on the image description page a specific explanation or rationale for why using this image in each article is consistent with fair use. Suggestions on how to do so can be found here.

Please go to the image description page and edit it to include a fair use rationale. Using one of the templates at Wikipedia:Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to ensure that your image is in compliance with Wikipedia policy, but remember that you must complete the template. Do not simply insert a blank template on an image page.

If you have uploaded other fair use media, consider checking that you have specified the fair use rationale on those pages too. You can find a list of 'image' pages you have edited by clicking on the "my contributions" link (it is located at the very top of any Wikipedia page when you are logged in), and then selecting "Image" from the dropdown box. Note that any non-free media lacking such an explanation will be deleted one week after they have been uploaded, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you. Do you want to opt out of receiving this notice? Rettetast (talk) 17:43, 2 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Bachata, Salsa: external links[edit]

Thank you for your interest in improving wikipedia. Please keep in mind that wikipedia is not a web directory. You may potentially add thousands of weblinks to each article. What articles actually need are citations which confirm the article text. Please see WP:CITE for rules and style. `'Míkka >t 22:51, 15 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Relevent external links may be included according to Wikipedia standards. Please see: WP:External_links -- Bdemenil 17 August 2008 (EDT)

Disambiguation link notification[edit]

Hi. In your recent article edits, you've added some links pointing to disambiguation pages. Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.

Bachata (dance) (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver)

added links pointing to Tango, Salsa, Cha-cha and Bachata

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 10:41, 14 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Speedy deletion nomination of Joan soriano[edit]

If this is the first article that you have created, you may want to read the guide to writing your first article.
You may want to consider using the Article Wizard to help you create articles.

A tag has been placed on Joan soriano requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section A7 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because the article appears to be about a person, organization (band, club, company, etc.) or web content, but it does not indicate how or why the subject is important or significant: that is, why an article about that subject should be included in an encyclopedia. Under the criteria for speedy deletion, such articles may be deleted at any time. Please see the guidelines for what is generally accepted as notable.

If you think that this notice was placed here in error, contest the deletion by clicking on the button labelled "Click here to contest this speedy deletion". Doing so will take you to the talk page where you will find a pre-formatted place for you to explain why you believe the page should not be deleted. You can also visit the page's talk page directly to give your reasons, but be aware that once tagged for speedy deletion, if the page meets the criterion, it may be deleted without delay. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag yourself, but don't hesitate to add information to the page that would render it more in conformance with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. If the page is deleted, you can contact one of these administrators to request that the administrator userfy the page or email a copy to you. Tbhotch.^™ Grammatically incorrect? Correct it! See terms and conditions. 20:17, 27 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Proposed deletion of Joan soriano[edit]

The article Joan soriano has been proposed for deletion because, under Wikipedia policy, all newly created biographies of living persons must have at least one reference to a reliable source that directly supports material in the article. The nominator also raised the following concern:

All biographies of living people created after March 18, 2010, must have references.

If you created the article, please don't be offended. Instead, consider improving the article. For help on inserting references, see Referencing for beginners, or ask at the help desk. Once you have provided at least one reliable source, you may remove the {{prod blp}} tag. Please do not remove the tag unless the article is sourced. If you cannot provide such a source within ten days, the article may be deleted, but you can request that it be undeleted when you are ready to add one. Tbhotch.^™ Grammatically incorrect? Correct it! See terms and conditions. 04:05, 28 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Disambiguation link notification[edit]

Hi. When you recently edited Joan soriano, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Bachata (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver). Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article 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) 10:51, 28 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Disambiguation link notification for September 8[edit]

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Benjamin de Menil, you added links pointing to the disambiguation pages Puerto Plata and The Orchard (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver). Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article 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) 17:41, 8 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]

WikiProject Latin music invitation[edit]

You are invited to join invite to join the WikiProject Latin music, a WikiProject dedicated to improving articles related to music performed in Spanish, Portuguese and languages of Ibero-America. Simply click here to accept! Or, if you're interested in reading more on Latin music, you may want to check out the Latin music portal.

Erick (talk) 05:19, 5 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

April 2015[edit]

This account has been blocked indefinitely as a sock puppet that was created to violate Wikipedia policy. Note that multiple accounts are allowed, but using them for illegitimate reasons is not, and that all edits made while evading a block or ban may be reverted or deleted. If this account is not a sock puppet, and you would like to be unblocked, you may appeal this block by adding the text {{unblock|Your reason here ~~~~}} below. However, you should read the guide to appealing blocks first. Bbb23 (talk) 14:38, 25 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]

unblock|I have been contributing to wikipedia, albeit not on a massive scale, with this account since 2005. It is the only account I have used. Occasionally I forget to login, and make anonymous contributions - but I have never opened another account. The account name, Bdemenil, is the first initial of my first name: Benjamin, and my last name de Menil. I have never made the slightest attempt to hide my identity, hence this account is certainly not a sock puppet. From Wikipedia "A sockpuppet is an online identity used for purposes of deception" I am happy to provide proof that I am in fact Benjamin de Menil. How many other wiki users use their real name?!

The checkuser at the SSI based on the block on the conclusion that you were socking as User:Vwikiv and User:Khmer15. Do you have any comment on that finding? Thank you. Newyorkbrad (talk) 20:19, 26 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Vwikiv is my sister Victoria. I had no involvement in the Lois and Georges de Menil (my parents) pages until she asked me to take a look a few days ago. I made some short comments in the discussion disagreeing with Biruitorul's evaluation of sources, and also with his tendency to attack people's credibility rather than address their points. I also made a very minor edit to the page to add a reference and re-word a sentence to more accurately reflect the content of the references. I realize that my relation to the subjects calls my objectivity into question, but my participation was extremely limited, I did not hide my relationship (my username makes it obvious), and I believe my points were valid ones. In any case I am accused of Sockpuppetry - not of participating as an interested party. I also made a minor edit to an entry my sister made on Groupmuse. My sister's account is new. Probably the combination of those things were enough for checkuser. I don't know who Khmer15 is. Judging by the name, I'd guess it's a Cambodian who is familiar with my mother's work with the Center for Khmer Studies. Why does checkuser see a link between us other than that we both participated in the Lois de Menil articles for deletion talk page?

Thanks for your response. It is late here and I will follow up tomorrow. Newyorkbrad (talk) 03:19, 27 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]

I've asked the blocking admin/checkuser to review this and comment. Newyorkbrad (talk) 15:06, 27 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you

On April 25 I requested review of the block on my account. On April 27 Newyorkbrad also requested the blocking admin to review the block. To date there has been only silence from the blocking admin. I again request a review of this block, and an explanation for why it has not been remedied.

A summary of the facts:

1 The user, Thunderlagoon, who launched the sockpuppet investigation against me has himself/herself been identified as a sockpuppet.
2 On the Sockpuppet investigation log of my account, Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/Bdemenil/Archive, the checkuser states that "#Bdemenil ..., who appears (see deleted contribs) to be Benjamin dM, primarily interested in Dominican music and a deleted article about himself. Bdemenil appears to be interested only secondarily in the articles on the rest of the de Menil family."
3 I have provided an explanation of my relationship to Vwikiv (my sister) and why we both shared an interest in the discussion of the deletion of Lois de Menil and Georges de Menil wikipedia entries.
4 My username is my real name, and so I did not hide my relationship to the subjects of the articles. When Biruitorul brought up my relationship to Lois de Menil, my response was "I do not list myself as a source. Nor is it necessary for my opinion to have weight. But a factually based argument should be addressed."
5 My participation in those discussions was brief, the points I made different from those made by other users, and in the case of Georges de Menil, the information I provided contributed to the admin's conclusion that the page should be preserved. Please refer to my contributions to Lois de Menil deletion discussion: Lois de Menil Articles for deletion discussion, and judge for yourself if my contribution was inappropriate,
6 The sole basis of the accusation against me is that I participated in two related discussions in articles for deletion, and that a bunch of new users also participated in those discussions. Blocking a 10 year old user account should not be taken lightly. My account has been erroneously blocked without thorough investigation of the facts, and now apparently admin does not have time to review his/her mistake.

Almost everyone who disagreed with the deletion of Lois de Menil wiki entry was accused of being a sockpuppet by Thunderlagoon, who it turns is a sock of Sanjoy, a user with a history of sockpuppetry and abusive behavior. Furthermore, Thunderlagoon / Sanjoy is probably associated with one of the other accounts that argued for deletion of Lois de Menil. It seems unlikely the user would file sockpuppetry investigations to silence the opposition without having actually taken part in the discussion. I hope that admin will investigate.

In any case, it is time for my name to be cleared. Thank you

Hello, on April 25 I requested review of the block on my account. On April 27 Newyorkbrad also requested the blocking admin to review the block. To date there has been only silence from the blocking admin. I again request a review of this block, and an explanation for why it has not been remedied. A summary of the facts:

1 The user, Thunderlagoon, who launched the sockpuppet investigation against me has himself/herself been identified as a sockpuppet.
2 On the Sockpuppet investigation log of my account, Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/Bdemenil/Archive, the checkuser states that "#Bdemenil ..., who appears (see deleted contribs) to be Benjamin dM, primarily interested in Dominican music and a deleted article about himself. Bdemenil appears to be interested only secondarily in the articles on the rest of the de Menil family."
3 I have provided an explanation of my relationship to Vwikiv (my sister) and why we both shared an interest in the discussion of the deletion of Lois de Menil and Georges de Menil wikipedia entries.
4 My username is my real name, and so I did not hide my relationship to the subjects of the articles. When Biruitorul brought up my relationship to Lois de Menil, my response was "I do not list myself as a source. Nor is it necessary for my opinion to have weight. But a factually based argument should be addressed."
5 My participation in those discussions was brief, the points I made different from those made by other users, and in the case of Georges de Menil, the information I provided contributed to the admin's conclusion that the page should be preserved. Please refer to my contributions to Lois de Menil deletion discussion: Lois de Menil Articles for deletion discussion, and judge for yourself if my contribution was inappropriate,
6 The sole basis of the accusation against me is that I participated in two related discussions in articles for deletion, and that a bunch of new users also participated in those discussions. Blocking a 10 year old user account should not be taken lightly. My account has been erroneously blocked without thorough investigation of the facts, and now apparently admin does not have time to review his/her mistake.

Almost everyone who disagreed with the deletion of Lois de Menil wiki entry was accused of being a sockpuppet by Thunderlagoon, who it turns is a sock of Sanjoy, a user with a history of sockpuppetry and abusive behavior. Furthermore, Thunderlagoon / Sanjoy is probably associated with one of the other accounts that argued for deletion of Lois de Menil. It seems unlikely the user would file sockpuppetry investigations to silence the opposition without having actually taken part in the discussion. I hope that admin will investigate.

In any case, it is time for my name to be cleared.

Thank you

Edit after communication with wiki help admin on chat: Apparently there is some kind of IP evidence linking my account to that of user Vwikiv. She is my sister. Although we live in different cities, we are family, and we sometimes stay together in the same location. I'd rather not go into details publicly regarding times and locations where we've intersected. I'd appreciate being given the opportunity to field any specific questions regarding IP overlap in a more private venue.

@Newyorkbrad, are you still investigating this? Max Semenik (talk) 07:49, 2 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]

I've been dealing with a real-world issue and apologize for being called away, but yes, I will be addressing this. Thanks for your patience. Newyorkbrad (talk) 14:01, 2 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Unblocked[edit]

My apologies for my delay in responding to this unblock request. As indicated above, I initially had to discuss this issue with the checkuser who made the block as well as with another checkuser who offered to review it.

The checkusers remain concerned that it is impossible to technically distinguish this account from one or more of the others that were editing the same article at the same time. Despite this fact, after consultation in which the blocking administrator has consented to a cautious unblock, I will credit your explanation and unblock this account. However, please use your best efforts to ensure that this problem does not recur, such as by not having more than one person in your house editing the same article from the same computer around the same time.

If you have any questions about this, please let me know. Otherwise, happy editing, and sorry again about the delay. Newyorkbrad (talk) 20:45, 6 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]

@Newyorkbrad Thank you for unblocking

Disambiguation link notification for April 1[edit]

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Traditional Bachata, you added links pointing to the disambiguation pages Merengue, Bongo and Guira. Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article 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) 15:11, 1 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Disambiguation link notification for June 18[edit]

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Bachata (music), you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Aventura. Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article 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) 09:42, 18 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]

ArbCom 2017 election voter message[edit]

Hello, Bdemenil. Voting in the 2017 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23.59 on Sunday, 10 December. All users who registered an account before Saturday, 28 October 2017, made at least 150 mainspace edits before Wednesday, 1 November 2017 and are not currently blocked are eligible to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once.

The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority 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 in the 2017 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 18:42, 3 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]

ArbCom 2018 election voter message[edit]

Hello, Bdemenil. Voting in the 2018 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23.59 on Sunday, 3 December. All users who registered an account before Sunday, 28 October 2018, made at least 150 mainspace edits before Thursday, 1 November 2018 and are not currently blocked are eligible to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once.

The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority 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 in the 2018 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 18:42, 19 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]

This user's unblock request has been reviewed by an administrator, who declined the request. Other administrators may also review this block, but should not override the decision without good reason (see the blocking policy).

Bdemenil (block log • active blocks • global blocks • contribs • deleted contribs • filter log • creation log • change block settings • unblock • checkuser (log))

Request reason:

my account was ruled 'unblocked' on May 6 2015. However it seems that the block was never removed. My account page still says that it is blocked

Decline reason:

Procedural decline only. This account is not directly blocked. If you are unable to edit, please exactly follow the instructions which appear when you attempt to do so. Yamla (talk) 15:46, 24 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]

If you want to make any further unblock requests, please read the guide to appealing blocks first, then use the {{unblock}} template again. If you make too many unconvincing or disruptive unblock requests, you may be prevented from editing this page until your block has expired. Do not remove this unblock review while you are blocked.

Bongos[edit]

There are no sources in this earth (believe me I have searched) connecting the bongó to the tbilat, the tantan, the tabla, or any similar-looking twin drum. So please do not reinsert this text in the article, since it constitutes WP:SYNTHESIS. The sources given do not talk about the origins of the bongo at all. Neodop (talk) 17:01, 24 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]

The only sources on earth connecting the instrument to West Africa refer to the word bongo and not to the actual structure or mode of playing. That source: Ned Sublet clearly states that no drum resembling a bongo has been found to have existed in West Africa. Bdemenil (talk) 14:27, 4 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Sublette is referring to the fact that the bongo was created by the Bantu peoples living in eastern Cuba sometime in the 19th century, meaning it was not "imported". Same story with the conga. Evidently, there are no sources indicating any interaction with Tuareg or Arab peoples whatsoever, and the sources you have given do not support your thesis, which consitutes poor WP:SYNTHESIS on your part. Neodop (talk) 20:08, 5 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, I am responding here to your recent reversal of my edit to to the bongos Wikipage relating to the origin of the bongos. The reference I used on this most recent edit is from a different page of the same book I had used to support and earlier edit. Page 450 of Percussion Instruments and Their History does specifically state the Naker [Naqareh] as a possible origin of the bongo. Here is a quote: "Antique origins are also evident in the bongos and timbales: the first a pair of small single - headed drums (of flesh or plastic) reminiscent of the naker, the second - a pair of larger open-ended drums evocative of many..." . Is this sufficient to support the edit? If not, how can I change the edit to make it valid? Bdemenil (talk) 16:12, 16 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Disambiguation link notification for June 30[edit]

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. An automated process has detected that when you recently edited Bolero, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Bachata (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver). 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) 06:10, 30 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]

ArbCom 2020 Elections voter message[edit]

Hello! Voting in the 2020 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23:59 (UTC) on Monday, 7 December 2020. All eligible users are allowed to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once.

The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority 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 in the 2020 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. If you no longer wish to receive these messages, you may add {{NoACEMM}} to your user talk page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 01:19, 24 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Proposed deletion of Super Uba[edit]

The article Super Uba has been proposed for deletion because of the following concern:

A one-sentence musician biography created 16 years ago, has one good cite but lacks additional coverage (WP:SIGCOV) to establish notability. This article is not suitable as written to remain published.

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.

This bot DID NOT nominate any of your contributions for deletion; please refer to the history of each individual page for details. Thanks, FastilyBot (talk) 09:00, 27 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]