User talk:Barliner/archive6

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Simple English Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia


Welcome to my talk page. Just click here to start a new topic.

I prefer to have discussions in one place. If you start a topic here, I will answer here. If I ask something on your page, I will look there for the answer.

Hotcat

It took a little extra code to the commons.js file, but Hotcat seems to work fine. Not certain how to "gadget" it (never actually looked), but calling it from your Monobook.js page works. 

document.write('<script type="text/javascript" src="' 
             + 'http://commons.wikimedia.org/w/index.php?title=MediaWiki:HotCat.js' 
             + '&action=raw&ctype=text/javascript&dontcountme=s"></script>');
//[[MediaWiki talk:HotCat.js]]

Hope this helps -- Creol(talk) 13:10, 16 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

nm, I got it to work as a gadget now. -- Creol(talk) 13:31, 16 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Gnosticism

Thanks! Very good job of simplifying a difficult subject. I tidied up a few typos... adit (talk) 13:52, 16 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I knew there was a reason for staying awake during Church History Lectures :)--Bärliner 14:23, 16 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Needs Proving

I got a question. How do I add a needs proving tag to a statement in an article? Razorflame 15:31, 16 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

You'll have to find out that fact[source?]for yourself :)--Bärliner 15:36, 16 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

P Always with the sly humor :) Thanks. Razorflame 15:40, 16 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Categories

I have a shameless plea for you to check out my new "WikiProject" (although I dislike calling it that because of the recent trend to create them). I've actually been wanting for quite some time now to have a centralized location for people like you, me, and Creol (among others) to discuss categorization issues, ideas for projects, etc. I hope you'll check it out and submit some projects you're working on or have been wanting to work on for a while. Don't worry, I won't take offense if you decide not to partake. Thanks. · Tygrrr... 18:06, 16 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Disambiguation question

I removed a stub template from a disambiguation page thinking that stubs shouldn't be used on disambiguation pages. Was I correct in assuming so? Razorflame 22:45, 16 January 2008 (UTC

Seems a bit pointless asking for expansion, so I see no reason to stub those pages.--Bärliner 22:47, 16 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Alright, I just wanted to make sure. I was fairly certain that disambiguation pages should not get stubbed. Razorflame 22:49, 16 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

George Washington Bridge

Temporary protection for vandalism I think is in order. Razorflame 15:58, 18 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Only one IP, who is now blocked--Bärliner 16:01, 18 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Correction: Two IP's. See the history for more information. Also, would you mind semi-protecting Wikipedia:Requests for deletion? I see no reason for IP addresses to edit that page, as it is against the policy. Razorflame 16:02, 18 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]


Kentwood

Sorry, the page was moved to "Kentwood, Louisiana" and I changed all the links in other Wikipedia pages from "Kentwood" to "Kentwood, Louisiana," so I didn't see the need of having a redirect. Alexhl (talk) 06:40, 19 January 2008 (UTC)Alexhl[reply]

Grantj‎

Sorry. I think I'll stick to articles for a bit. I.Rosary 21:06, 19 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

hi

thanks for the welcoming... but i'm IamAR... this is the rename of my acccount. The reasons are give on User talk:Archer7 I-R 21:11, 19 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you Barliner :) I-R 21:18, 19 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

christian Denominations

Hey, I've just looked at the List of Christian Denominations page, and there is a major mistake.

Mormons have been mentioned under the 'Nontrinitarian Groups' section of the page. Mormons are not Christians because they do not believe in the trinity, therefor, they should be taken off this page all together. I.Rosary 21:20, 19 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Non trinitarians can identify as Christian too. Technically any catholic will deny you are a christian because of that churchs definition of Christian --Bärliner 21:21, 19 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Look at the conflicts between Orthodox and Catholic church over the nature of the trinity. Currently about 1400 years old, and only 40 years ago did the leaders manage to visit each other. Considering that The Sistine Chapel is part of the Orthodox Patriarch of Constantinople's Cathedral it is quite a long running arguement.--Bärliner 21:25, 19 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

ok, I have had this convosation yesterday with my RS teacher, who is a professional and studied philosphy and Ethics and whatever else at some big university in london and he wrote a thesis and other stuff. He said that Mormons arn't christins. I.Rosary 21:25, 19 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I studied under a doctor of canon law, an orthodox priest who is now professor at the seminary in New York and served the Bishop of Portsmouth. Mormons are christians. Maybe not by your definition, or the definition of the World Council of Churches, but they identify as Christian, and follow Christ after their fashion.--Bärliner 21:34, 19 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I'm just repeating what my RS teacher said. He said that mormons believe that they are christians, but no other christian denomination acknowledges them as christians. I.Rosary 21:39, 19 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

The WCC, the World Council of Churches, and most denominations, define a Christian as Trinitarian, but the argument has been running since the heyday of Gnosticism. But the Roman Catholic Church is not a member of the WCC, because it says there is only one Church. Arguments could last forever, turning on a phrase or even a comma. Thus "non-trinitarian" as a category for the unusual groups which claim to follow Christ but not the Trinity. The Unitarian Church is another example. --Bärliner 21:46, 19 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

It seems like I have opened a forever on going argument, sorry. I have few strong feelings about the matter, I just thought that I should alert you, because there may have been a mistake, sorry for the waste of editing time. I.Rosary 21:49, 19 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

This discussion is not a waste of time. Thanks for letting me know, because a mistake may have been made, but when we categorise we must draw wide boundaries or each article ends up in its own category. Actually Eptalon moved them to non-triniatrian I never new they were until we started reorganising the Christian category. Usually my only contact with the local Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-Day Saints is using their family history resources.--Bärliner 21:56, 19 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]
I think the main point here is that they have an additional scripture; the Book Mormon (which is not recognised by other christians). But they definitely see themselves as Christians; Perhaps something to think about: When Marthin Luther split from the Roman Catholic Church, he was excommunicated; in that view he was no longer a Christian; The Oriental Orthodox Church split from the "byzanitine" branch over a question of what god is like - There is no common recognition of followers of that Church and the Eastern Orthodox or Catholic Church (who split over the filioque clause and other things); when they split they again excommunicated each other. Only in 1965 was this excommunication lifted. SO believe it or not, Mormons are probably Christians ;) --Eptalon (talk) 21:56, 19 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Probably unrelated here, but en:Criticism of Mormonism might be worth reading.--Eptalon (talk) 00:06, 20 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Mormons

When you see your LDS Contact, show them the Nicene Creed. If they can subscribe to that; they probably believe in the trinity; I read up on Mormonism, and I think they really believe in three different people, and not in one god with three different aspects; In that they are probably very close to Arians. --Eptalon (talk) 22:09, 19 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

My RfA

Thank you for voting in my recent RfA, but reading the oppose comments, I have decided that I am not experienced enough to be an administrator yet. Thanks again! Razorflame 22:57, 19 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Für Sie

The Original Barnstar
For helping me on the start of a long stairway to becoming a better editor. I almost certainly would not be in such a fortunate position if it were not for you. Thank you. <3 Benniguy talk•changes 23:54, 19 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]


What did that mean? lol :p

Benniguy talk•changes 12:01, 20 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Re: Harassment

While I do not completely agree with your points, I am happy to sit back and watch the situation develop from the sidelines. Though I would query your comment that "Reminders of what happened on ENWP are personal attacks and harassment". If someone was imprisoned for drug dealing in one county, surely it is only right that people in another county are informed of the situation before granting the ex-convinct a licence to run a pub, for example! However, I will now stand clear and I hope that things do run smoothly from here on MindTheGap (talk) 01:55, 20 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you. As you know, we are well aware of his past history.--Bärliner 01:59, 20 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

WP:CHECKUSER#Ionas_or_Ashton_Kimberly.3F

Why was I checkusered to see if I was a sock of those two people?

And then, directly underneath I was checkusered again to see if I was a sock of IuseR?

What is the deal with the constant checkusers on me? I don't see how my edits have been similar to any of those 3 people mentioned above. Oo

Benniguy talk•changes 12:31, 20 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I think people have overreacted against your behaviour when you first arrived. They also picked up on famous names from the past. And as a result saw things that were not there. I know that you cannot be a sock of Ionas for example. KA's editing patterns are different too. So do many admins, but some people do not. They put two and two together and made five. Some people may have been heartily sick of what you were doing and clutching at straws in an attempt to link you with infamous vandals and get an immediate ban.
I do not think this will happen again. I do not care what happened in the past. New name, new start. Most admins will look at this is the same way. But like anyone, you have had a short block, so the next will be longer, but it will be judged on what you do now, not what you did on ENWP and have already been "punished" for. As a courtesy I suggest dropping a line to Tygrrr, and asking if the restrictions have been lifted, that way there can be no possibility of mistakes about were they or weren't they in force.
Happy Editing--Bärliner 13:31, 20 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Shoah sources

I am interesting in Russian spelling for Irina (and so on ) author, you posted by Babi yar page --Penarc (talk) 13:46, 20 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I use magnus to get a book from the ISBN, for the actual Russian alphabet, I ´suggest copying from the Russian or uk.wiki. Notice I have used the {{lang-uk}} template at the beginning of the article

I saw you change the "umlaut" in Schoah word, nevertheless, in my copy stet Schoáh --Penarc (talk) 15:55, 20 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Like me I think you will find it is just a problem of computer code. amazon.de says "Schoah" for the German title, and there is no accent when spelt as an English word either.--Bärliner 16:12, 20 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

that is the case, aha --Penarc (talk) 16:18, 20 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

removal of LGBT category

why did you remove it from robosexuality? robosexuality is an alternative sexuality, which should therefore come under LGBT... Benniguy talk•changes 15:27, 20 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Categories must have boundaries. LGBT defines itself in its name. Extending it to "alternative" widens it so much as to be worthless. Note also that "A robosexual can be heterosexual, homosexual, bisexual, or pansexual" --Bärliner 15:38, 20 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]
LGBT covers only sexualities that are different from what is considered "average". This means that heterosexuality for instance, would obviously not be put in LGBT. Robosexuality is thought of as a 'different' sexuality, which means it should go in an alternative sexuality category. And that category is called LGBT. :) Benniguy talk•changes 15:45, 20 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]
That would mean one category purely for heterosexuality and one for everzthing else. That is an abuse of the category system. LGBT defines itself as Lesbian, Gay, Bi and Transgender. Robosexuality is a broad human sexuality, it cannot be defined as a narrow LGBT sexuality--Bärliner 15:52, 20 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I am kind of confused as to when LGBT changed from being about sexual orientation and became about fetishism? Robosexuality is a sexual fetish not an orientation. -- Creol(talk) 17:04, 20 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Actually, that is disputable Creol. For the moment, I am not going to put it as LGBT because it does not involve alternate genders or gender preferences, but anyway... Robosexuality is not neccessarily a fettish, because a fettish refers to a non-human object, whereas the whole idea of robosexuality is that someone is attracted to a robot who looks human. If they were attracted to a robot which did not look human, then it would be a fettish, and would be called paraphilia. There is a differenct ;) Benniguy talk•changes 17:28, 20 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Actually, that is disputable. For example, people might have a foot fetish, a mole fetish, a neck fetish and all of those are "human objects". --Gwib -(talk)- 17:31, 20 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Well ok, something that looks human. (although some less developed humanoid robots which are still very odd looking could be considered a fettish). A mole fettish ey? lol... well i guess you learn something nu every day XD Benniguy talk•changes 17:40, 20 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]
This certainly doesn't look like an LGBT article to me. The only reference to gay or bi is the sentence that gays and bisexuals also can be attracted to robots. Should we tag the article about socks as KGBT related because many gay people wear socks, too? Where does it end? Jeffpw (talk) 19:39, 20 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]
I am not saying any more that robosexuality should be LGBT categorized. However, I think that it should be something which the LGBT project addresses because it is still an alternative sexuality. Benniguy talk•changes 19:41, 20 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]
The proposed project can address it. The category is different to the project. As you have already acknowledged, thanks for learning and accepting the community's ideas--Bärliner 19:44, 20 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Simple talk

You may want to take a look at what you stated in your last edit on Simple talk. Somehow (most likely an edit conflict), your complete change included a copy/paste of most of the page causing 56K of info to be duplicated. I took the one statement you added about "Why do they need it?", reverted the entire thing, then replaced that statement. If there were any changes other than that one question/statement made, they would have been lost in the revert. -- Creol(talk) 17:04, 20 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Question

Why do you say that I leapt into the discussion without knowing what rollback does? I know what rollback does. Razorflame 17:18, 20 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

He may have been talking about me. I didn't know what rollback was. I.Rosary 17:20, 20 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]
The explanation on simple talk was wrong or imcomplete. What does it do.--Bärliner 17:23, 20 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]
It helps administrators revert changes which would be considered vandalism or changes that are completely wrong or unfactual. Razorflame 17:24, 20 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]
So does "undo", ergo you don't need the rollback tool?--Bärliner 17:34, 20 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]
They also use it to sometimes rollback a bunch of edits at once to an earlier edit. Razorflame 21:06, 20 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Thats not all, it can also be used to rollback edits and not show them in the recent changes. Oysterguitarist 21:15, 20 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]
I don't understand what the point of that would be Oo surely you would want to keep a history of everything? Benniguy talk•changes 21:17, 20 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]
The history is still kept, just not shown in the recent changes, and you would use it for something like a vandal bot. Oysterguitarist 21:26, 20 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Razorflame, the point of the question is that you jumped in on Simple Talk and gave a wrong answer. I asked you what the tool does.

Rollback reverts all consecutive changes by the last editor. There is no chance to personalise the edit summary. That is why you did not know why I had not qd'd cat french musicians. it shows up the recent changes as a minor change as in:- "21:31 Labradoodle‎ (2 changes) . . (0) . . (Page history) [80.142.96.234‎; Barliner‎] m 21:31 (cur; last) . . (-60) . . Barliner (Talk | changes | block) (Reverted changes by 80.142.96.234 (talk) to last version by Alexbot) 21:06 (cur; last) . . (+60) . . 80.142.96.234 (Talk | block)"--Bärliner 21:42, 20 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Username

Hey Barliner... Just so I can get a better understanding of things around here. can I please ask why

a user name like : Fluorine Uranium Carbon Potassium is considered unacceptable, it's not rude, just a tad long.

But then, why would the account creation be disabled, surely, if their account has been banned because of the username, shouldn't they be allowed to create another account with a more appropriate user name? It doesn't exactly seem like somebody who names their username after elements of the perodic table is a trouble maker.

I.Rosary 19:36, 20 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Ask your chemistry teacher, or look up potassium here and find out what its chemical symbol is :)--Bärliner 19:37, 20 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Oh yeah, thats really clever, in a vandalistic way, lol . And I would get in mage trouble if i asked my chemistry teacher that.  : - ) I.Rosary 19:39, 20 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

what is a bot?

p

and how do you make one?

Benniguy talk•changes 20:12, 20 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

You need the bot software and permission from the wiki to run a bot, because of the potential for vandalism.--Bärliner 20:37, 20 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Fashion <3

Hello, I see that you are interested in fashion. I think you may find joining Fashion SimpleWikiProject a fun and exciting nu experience. The project is still in beta currently, and development will not commence until two other editors express a content for joining. I hope that perhaps you will be one of those, as it would be great to welcome such an expert editor on fashion, such as yourself, on board. Thank you. Benniguy talk•changes 22:49, 20 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Damage

You damaged box as follows: http://simple.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Greek_alphabet&oldid=690451 and I repaired it. Please don't destroy constructive edits - thanks. 79.162.31.196 (talk) 11:43, 21 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

It is not true that format is damaged. On my PC all is displayed fine. I have 1280x1024 display. I reedited article in other way to avoid format damage on narrow screens. Please don't consider it vandalism. 79.162.31.196 (talk) 11:49, 21 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I repaired format as you adviced and all is OK. 79.162.31.196 (talk) 11:59, 21 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I will try to create account and make some moves to names with parentheses when certain article is not about letter. 79.162.31.196 (talk) 12:06, 21 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Re: signature

Looking at Wikipedia:Signatures, it appears you are correct that images are not allows. -- Creol(talk) 11:58, 21 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Moving of articles

Most double spaces are only visible the editing pages. They will be changed automatically by someone who use AWB or another automatic editor. While I do not want to stop you editing, I do not want you to waste your time either. --Bärliner 13:33, 21 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I want to move articles Delta to Delta (letter) and Kappa to Kappa (letter), but don't have rights to move. Thus I edited these double spaces and double new lines to count amount of edits that permits me to move these letters to new names. How many edits are required to gain such rights? I want to do it to have ALL letter articles in format Letername (letter) to achieve consistency. CBMIBM (talk) 13:38, 21 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]
If you do not have the option to move a page, it will be because you are a new user. This will automatically change in 4 days. Meanwhile I will move the pages for you--Bärliner 13:43, 21 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Thus please move them. Thanks. CBMIBM (talk) 13:44, 21 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Delete-a-thon

I couldn't let you have all the fun. -- Creol(talk) 15:09, 21 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

.  :-( If only the delete function on AWB worked.--Bärliner 15:14, 21 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

RFCU

I don't believe it. At the exact same time I was posting my RFCU, you go and post the same one I was posting :P. Razorflame 15:42, 21 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

King meat? I don't know if RFCU is needed depending on the results, that IP may need watching.--Bärliner 15:44, 21 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Yeah, I was posting it at the same time you were. You edit conflicted me :P. Anyways, I was just letting you know that I was trying to post the same thing you were. Razorflame 15:46, 21 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Re:

At least I gave categorizing a shot, right? I hope I did it mostly right. Razorflame 16:36, 21 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Article you just deleted

Aw, the article that you just deleted could've been deleted as the rule A5: Pages not in English :) Razorflame 16:45, 21 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

RE: sig

Updated. FYI, I looked for that policy last night, but I couldn't find it, so thanks for pointing it out.--ChristianMan16 19:26, 21 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I'll copy my sig here, User:ChristianMan16/sig/sandbox, so you can work on it and show me what you think would work.--ChristianMan16 19:56, 21 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]
If you want create me a couple versions.--ChristianMan16 19:59, 21 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Template:English Cities

I've noticed a mistake in this template. When you click on Derby, it goes to the page about the horse races instead of the page about the city. Just thought that I would let you know. Razorflame 16:04, 22 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Also, the link to Ely is incorrect as well. Razorflame 16:06, 22 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I assume you can see that I am working my way through the template and will discover this myself, If i do not have to stop to keep reading messages--Bärliner 16:09, 22 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

County categories (England)

As the counties of England are tie by government to their specific regions (much like US counties to US states), shouldn't the categories for the counties be connected the regions?

True we don't have categories for each of the regions currently, but given that each region has multiple counties, there should not be much problem in creating categories for them just including the region article and county subcats. The counties would also be connected to cat:counties of England through either ceremonial counties or metro counties and eventually a counties by region category when needed. -- Creol(talk) 16:07, 22 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Regions are up in the air. They are used by the government as administrative areas but have no other significance. I could create the cats. The northeast region includes Cumbria on the West Coast but the proposed devolved region did not. I think it best not to create cats at the moment. Most ordinary people (ie non politicians) have no idea what a region is or does. The regions are related to GOs, the Government Office (Newcastle used to be GONE, then they decided a better acronym would be GO North East)--Bärliner 16:17, 22 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

82.69.86.46

has been given their last warning and continued to make vandalistic changes. They need to be blocked. IuseRosary (talk) 19:20, 22 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

 Done I agree with your suggestion --Bärliner 19:25, 22 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Urmum201 (talk · contribs) Twathead (talk · contribs) Missbish (talk · contribs) Westwood2 (talk · contribs)

Unacceptable usernames. Razorflame 19:45, 22 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

More usernames. I would suggest blocking the IP address as well. Razorflame 19:48, 22 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

tell me the IP --Bärliner 19:49, 22 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I don't know it. I'll post a RFCU on this, though. Razorflame 19:50, 22 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Why Missbish? (just say if it a US obscenity. Don't want too much detail :). Likewise Westwood2--Bärliner 19:52, 22 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Missbish sounds like "bitch". Razorflame 19:53, 22 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Also, I think that doing a checkuser is the only way to find out the IP address of Urmom201. Razorflame 19:57, 22 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]
IT is. Urmom dubious as unnacceptable but as the creator of u/a names I blocked it.--Bärliner 19:59, 22 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Urmom would probably be found to be offensive to some people, as it was a pretty popular joke fad in the early 2000s here in the United States. Razorflame 20:00, 22 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]
I know it crops up in vandalism but it is blocked anyway --Bärliner 20:03, 22 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

thanks for everything

you were a real help :) and i hope your great efforts here will not go unnoticed... Benniguy talk•changes 20:11, 22 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

That's why I created some Barnstars of National Merit:). I reverted your change because it is not a duplication. One is a section head, the other was the template with the info. --Bärliner 20:45, 22 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Recent Changes

Sorry for the flood of edits from me. I've just been trying to get the asteroid pages all categorized. It seems as though there was a lot of work that needed to be done on them, though. Razorflame 22:51, 22 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Hope you got them right, or you've a lot to undo :) --Bärliner 22:53, 22 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Its also the sort of auto change bots were built for:)--Bärliner 22:54, 22 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Yep, but me and Lights have been tackling them one at a time. I've gotten through 3/4ths of the pages, and there aren't very many more to go through. Razorflame 22:57, 22 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]
And I'm pretty sure that they are all 100% accurate. Razorflame 22:57, 22 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

User:Jack12345

Do you think that it is appropriate to ask of a CU for this user and for Jackjack? Razorflame 17:22, 23 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

why do you want to ban me?

i just requested for my school to be unblocked. you don't understand what i'm going through... Benniguy talk•changes 18:01, 23 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Are you saying that whatever you are going through excuses you from following the rules?--Bärliner 18:04, 23 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Ok firstly, i don't quite think you understand at all what i am going through anyway, so I wouldn't judge me before you know the facts. And secondly, I didn't think that I was breaking the rules... and no-one has said how i was. What exactly on Gwib's talk page did i do wrong? Benniguy talk•changes 18:06, 23 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]
I wouldn't bother replying if I were you, Barliner. He knows why he was blocked. He knows that the 2 of them making multiple comments within a few minutes is disruptive. He knows his behavior is unacceptable. He will continue to ask you quesitons no matter what you say or how logical you are. I should know... · Tygrrr... 18:08, 23 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Well fine... don't reply. But that doesn't help me understand. I may not be the most intelligent person, but I still understand when people are calling me dumb. Benniguy talk•changes 18:11, 23 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

shintoism

why did you revert the move? Benniguy talk•changes 18:29, 23 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

see en:Shintoism ;) --Eptalon (talk) 18:32, 23 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Ok thanks Benniguy talk•changes 18:33, 23 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]
There was no need for the change. Shinto is not an abbreviation for Shintoism. The article the begins Shinto, if you can justify a change rewrite the artickle so it fits the wiki format WP:MOS. If not create a redirect from Shintoism to Shinto.--Bärliner 18:35, 23 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks

Thanks for pointing out that I should include links and references to Wikipedia:Signatures. I owe you one there :P Razorflame 18:47, 23 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I added a section to Help:Making a signature about using it when signing pages. Razorflame 19:12, 23 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

am i going to be banned?

honestly? Benniguy talk•changes 20:28, 23 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

We're still discussing this. Razorflame 20:32, 23 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]
ok. I would just like to say that from now on I will not talk so much on talk pages, as I have realised that this was the main problem with what I was doing before. I am going to focus on articles, especially fashion ones. The trouble is, I havn't found anyone else who wants to join my fashion project. How could I encourage people to join? I cant talk on ST, and i can't talk to the majority of editors... thanks Benniguy talk•changes 20:36, 23 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]
I will ensure that the fashion project is mentioned, that is all any project gets.--Bärliner 20:50, 23 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]
thank you :) Benniguy talk•changes 21:21, 23 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

US state capitals

I don't get the difference between these 2 cats: Category:United States capital cities and Category:US state capitals‎. Are you moving the first to the 2nd? I don't see a problem with the first wording. Also, could you check out my newest comments User talk:Tygrrr/Categories? I'm excited to get some feedback and get started if there's support for my idea. Btw, thanks for the plug on simple talk. :-) · Tygrrr... 22:19, 23 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Okay, I see the difference now. What about creating a new category that can encompass both kinds of capitals instead of a new subcat for just the state capitals (kind of like this). It would probably be less work. Or if we're going to cause ourselves a lot of work anyways, we should at least make the wording of the cats a little more clear so it's more obvious what the difference between the 2 is. The wording on en:wiki isn't bad, if you want to do something like that. · Tygrrr... 22:34, 23 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

being banned

i know that you are considering banning me for the moment... so can you tell me some things I should try and do/change so that i will not be banned? as I really really want to stay. Benniguy talk•changes 22:51, 23 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

  1. Stop asking me and everyone else every few minutes about being banned because that is a waste of article time
  2. Think about what you are writing. "Gucci" is not a designer it is a company.
  3. Try to edit more than two or three words at time. The number of edits to "Gucci" seems excessive surely you could make a lot more changes between saves.--Bärliner 23:05, 23 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  1. Ok, i'm just worried that i'm going to get banned...
  2. Gucci is a designer company.
  3. My internet crashes a lot, so i often have to save things quickly just in case it crashes. But i'll try and use the preview button more.

Benniguy talk•changes 23:08, 23 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I changed Gucci to designer company. I also often copy an article to Star or MS word or some other word processor. Then I can complete most of an article offline. It also means I have a backup-up if anything does fail.--Bärliner 23:12, 23 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you, I will try this.

PS, please read the suggestion I have made at Tygrrr's talk page regarding my behaviour. Benniguy talk•changes 19:31, 24 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Turn Changer

Why did you delete the Turn Changer Page? —This unsigned comment was added by Turnchangers2 (talk • changes) 23:32, 23 January 2008 (UTC)

Blatant advertising, as it says in the log--Bärliner 12:06, 24 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Help:Making a signature

Hey there, Barliner! I was wondering if I could add you to my list of users who would be willing to help new users make their own signatures? Please respond on my talk page. Thanks Razorflame 15:00, 24 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I already did --Bärliner 15:09, 24 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Sandbox

I'd prefer to have it deleted, thanks! adit (talk) 17:42, 24 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

RFD tags

Isn't there something in the policy about removing RFD tags from articles you've created? Razorflame 19:04, 24 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Yes who'se been naughty then?--Bärliner 19:05, 24 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Italy90. He just removed the RfD tag I put on Anarchopedia. By the way, where is that policy? I would like to read it. Razorflame 19:06, 24 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Eh?

Eh? Razorflame 19:21, 24 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Again, Eh? Razorflame 19:28, 24 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

And again, Eh? Razorflame 19:33, 24 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

READ {{rfd}} --Bärliner 19:38, 24 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

What? How does that have anything to do with this? Razorflame 19:39, 24 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]
I posted these links for you to notice something that is definitely not normal. Why would you blank two pages like that? Razorflame 19:44, 24 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Twinkle.js

Do you think that you could get twinkle to work on this site for me by chance? Razorflame 21:14, 24 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Have you

//AzaThoth's twinkle script /* importScript('User:AzaToth/twinkle.js');

TwinkleConfig = { 

  toolboxButtons: ["tw-prod", "tw-csd", "tw-csd-reason", "tw-rpp", "tw-since", "tw-sincemine","tw-lastdiff"],
userTalkPageMode                :       'tab'

};

  • /

--Bärliner 21:18, 24 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Nope. Thanks. Razorflame 21:19, 24 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]
I added that, and nothing happened. Could you look into for me please? Razorflame 21:23, 24 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Hmmm huji LOVES code. Try asking him :) --Bärliner 21:33, 24 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]
I remembered that, and have asked him on his talk page. Thanks for your help in the meantime. Razorflame 23:18, 24 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]
I've decided that Twinkle isn't worth it yet here. Razorflame 23:19, 24 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Copied from User talk:Huji#Question about images

I think I go around it. Check it out.--ChristianMan16 23:25, 24 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]
A photo of a crowd, the logo in the background. Are you Hornetman16 who uploaded it to commons?--Bärliner 23:44, 24 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

right

lets get a few things straight. It was indicated to me by 3 users (Razorflame, Gwib, and Eptalon) that I was allowed to continue editing as long as I followed those proposals that I had set myself. Which I did. Unlike what Razorflame commented on his talk page just now, i did not break those rules I set myself, as I was working very much so on some very important fashion articles. I turned over a new leaf today, and was trying to get on with my editing (without making a single comment to anyone), and then you go block me! I am sorry but that is just not on. I feel very annoyed by this. I really do. 89.242.221.124 (talk) 23:35, 24 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

If you continue to evade blocks, then you will not be unblocked. Razorflame 23:36, 24 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Questionable edit?

Hey Barliner. I need some help deciding if a certain edit is vandalism or not. Here is the link: here. Thanks. Razorflame 15:14, 25 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

What seems to be wrong? Is it untrue?--Bärliner 15:19, 25 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Placement is the main issue for me. Bah. I was stupid of asking you about if this was vandalism...I should've said, I need some help decided if a certain edit is grammatically correct instead of if it is vandalism. My mistake. Razorflame 15:20, 25 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]
It's badly spelled and a summary is in the middle of the article, but I would just correct the spelling and leave it as is --Bärliner 15:22, 25 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks for the help Barliner. I decided to ask you first before doing anything about it, like this next one:

(unindenting)This one looks to be advertising, but I'm not sure. Razorflame 15:24, 25 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

fixed--Bärliner 15:26, 25 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I do not understand what 'poland' means...

but anyway, no I have not been editing anything else other than my requests to be unblocked. In my oppinion, I was unfairly blocked, which is why I am still following the restrictions laid down by Tygrrr not to edit non-admin's talk pages, which is why I am not replying on Razorflame's page, because I actually respect the rules, which it is apparent that you may not, since you blocked me on the basis that there was a 'consensus' even though the AN showed clearly a mixed oppinion.

you either keep me as a constructive editor, or turn me into a 'problem', and I know which one I would rather be looked at as. I will wait until the block is lifted until I actually go and start editing articles again, but I will not stop discussing this until a proper conclusion from all the community has been drawn. I turned over a new leaf then, and then you decide to block me. In my oppinion your ideologies are unnacceptable. 89.242.34.93 (talk) 16:52, 25 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Barliner, are we blocking this IP since it's obviously Benniguy? Or are we leaving it open because of the request to be unblocked? I thought that because it was denied we're blocking any further appearance of him... · Tygrrr... 17:38, 25 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]
I will block this now. As Razorflame had asked for a CU I waited, but as you say, it is obviously him so no need to wait. --Bärliner 17:41, 25 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]
No, ignoring me is not going to help. You will start a disscussion thank you very much. You are not going to block me at the one point where I actually understood the error of my previous ways. 89.243.15.106 (talk) 18:03, 25 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Email

I sent you an important email a few minutes ago. I think it definitely needs to be taken into consideration. Razorflame 18:07, 25 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I replied, but creol has already acted. --Bärliner 18:10, 25 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]
No, it is not a threat, it is simply telling you i want this to be discussed. I am not a threat to you unless you turn me into one. The choice is entirely yours. Leave me as a constructive editor, or keep me entwined in this state of affairs. 84.13.45.32 (talk) 18:23, 25 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

68.67.96.38

Going to reconsider your judgment on this one now? Razorflame 20:01, 25 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

What RfD?

What RfD did you have to delete Template:Wrestling-Stub?--ChristianMan16 23:36, 25 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

The community decided long ago to use only the one stub template. All others are to be deleted. I have also RfD'd other tempplates to confirm the community decision. --Bärliner 23:41, 25 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]
You mean you nominated it for speedy deletion, not RfD.--ChristianMan16 23:42, 25 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

User/barliner/sandbox/copypaste2 and User/barliner/sandbox/copypaste

Did you mean to create those pages in mainspace? Lights § talk 01:05, 26 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Just as well they were only test pages anyway :) Thanks --Bärliner 01:08, 26 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Re:sig

I have sized it down but I'll do more.--ChristianMan16 20:20, 26 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Is this better?--ChristianMan16 20:22, 26 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

picture uploading

i noticed you can't upload picture....but how do i upload them and have them on here? —This unsigned comment was added by Runningblader (talk • changes) 21:56, 26 January 2008 (UTC)

Images must be uploaded to commons.wikipedia first.--Bärliner 21:58, 26 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Shakespeare

Please do not revert my revertions to Shakespeare. I have studies his plays and sonnets for about 5 years and I have not hearn more rubbish in my life. enWiki has nothing on it either. IuseRosary (talk) 20:05, 27 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I will ask you again. What is incorrect about what was said? Nothing. Authorshipn was questioned, as the article says--Bärliner 20:08, 27 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I have never heard more rubish in my entire life! IuseRosary (talk) 20:09, 27 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

All views are informed about on wikipedia. We are neutral but we need to go over each possible hypothesis --Gwib -(talk)- 20:09, 27 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

it's not even a hypothesis at all! It is made up by someone jelous. ,SWo what if Shakespeare never left the county, neither did bram Stoker, and he wrote Dracula set in Transilvania without being accused of not actually writing it himself! IuseRosary (talk) 20:15, 27 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Much of Dracula was actually set in London, and a thouroughly boring novel it was too. Check your facts before you revert. The debate about authorshipo is real. That is what the piece in the article says. It then says that Most people think that WS is the author after all. Calm down, slow down and think before you act.--Bärliner 20:18, 27 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Can we at least pit a neutrality tag on the article? IuseRosary (talk) 20:20, 27 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

The only person not being neutral is you. All that piece said was that there has been a debate. Shakespeareonline.com says exactely the same thing (actually it says there has been a debate for centuries. Neither the article nor the website say shakespeare was not the author --Bärliner 20:34, 27 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Sorry! IuseRosary (talk) 20:35, 27 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

64.38.10.111

...is an open proxy and cross-wiki spambot. Please consider a longer block and also joining #wikimedia-admin to coordinate cross-wiki. – Mike.lifeguard | @en.wb 21:11, 27 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

blocked.--Werdan7T @ 21:15, 27 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Shemale

Hello, Barliner. Thank you for adding some links in article Shemale. I am new contributor in this wiki. I am not quite sure if I'll move forward with my contribution, because I am afraid deep down inside of my heart as my English has no longer needed in this wiki!! (to be honest I am not trusting my self). But I'll try it if we are staying closer per each step I move!! Don't you think?--Muddyb Blast Producer (talk) 12:28, 28 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

A lot of editors here do not speak perfect english. Editors will help with your articles too, so please stay and contribute. --Bärliner 12:37, 28 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you for makes me hopefully.. Stay bless..--Muddyb Blast Producer (talk) 13:31, 28 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Mrs Michael Douglas

For the time being I know absolutely nothing about category, so you can go and make category for Catherine Zeta-Jones. I am so sorry for disturbing you, I know that if this is quite inconvinience for you but you have to understand me!!--Muddyb Blast Producer (talk) 14:18, 28 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you...--Muddyb Blast Producer (talk) 15:39, 28 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

88.108.124.251

Only 24 hours? Razorflame 18:09, 28 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Blocks are not punishment, they are to prevent users from breaking the rules. Oysterguitarist 04:43, 29 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]
And as I have said several times, a 24 hour block is often more then enough. An IP address is not always the same user. Blocking for a short time stops the opportunist vandal, and merely counting the number of old warnings is not useful.--Bärliner 11:04, 29 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Re:Linkin park

Thanks. By the way, which one do you think is better? So I delete the other and work only on one... Katiusha (tell me) 20:52, 28 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I think the english version is better, especially as I helped :)--Bärliner 20:58, 28 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Good. I'll try to make all links become blue (hard work!!) Katiusha (tell me) 21:02, 28 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Bah!

Vandal needs blocking: 131.123.181.109. Thank you Razorflame 17:51, 29 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Context introduced

I provided context to both PIE articles such as Schleicher's fable and The king and the god about reconstructed PIE texts. Please withdraw nomination for deletion. Thanks. CBMIBM (talk) 12:36, 30 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I cannot, people have voted. If my judgement is wrong then the article will be kept, only if the community agree it will be deleted --Bärliner 12:49, 30 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Please modify your vote in accord to current changes to "keep" status, because I already removed all causes of your objections from both PIE articles nominated to deletion. For proof look here: Schleicher's fable, The king and the god. CBMIBM (talk) 10:50, 1 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Deletion of Talk:Stalagmite

I don't think the page was nonsense. The first sentence on Stalagmite was wrong, as it indicated that they are on the ceilings of caves when actually they are on the ground. I think they were trying to say that they were confused by the page, and their comment led me to fix the problem. I am going to restore the page and I think you might want to consider removing your warning to the user who posted it. It was an honest mistake, I almost deleted it myself until I looked into it a little further. · Tygrrr... 22:03, 31 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for this. I have deleted the IP page as mine was the only message.--Bärliner 22:10, 31 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Retrieved from "https://simple.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk:Barliner/archive6&oldid=9028233"