User talk:Barliner/archive7

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


  1. 29 February 2008}}
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.

Barnstars

The da Vinci Barnstar
For going above and beyond the call of a normal sysop. I hereby award you this Barnstar! Razorflame 16:01, 1 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]
The Minor Barnstar
For all your work with AWB and adding infoboxes to pages. I hereby award you this barnstar! Razorflame 16:01, 1 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]
The Minor Barnstar
For your categorization work. I hereby award you this barnstar! Razorflame 16:13, 1 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]
The Anti-Vandalism Barnstar
For many reversions that you've done. I hereby award you this barnstar! Razorflame 16:26, 1 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Hey!!!! It shrank!!!!!!!!!!! --Bärliner 16:07, 1 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Will 2 minors suffice where one major does? Razorflame 16:13, 1 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]
:):) Apart from cats work I am going to be concentrating on Germany. Now that all towns have an infor box, even Chemnitz, I can start creating those towns and cities in Germany that have no article. I created the {{Barnstar German}}, I may as well earn one :)
RickK .

216.56.2.62

Hey Barliner. I know that this is my school's IP address. I added that notice because I knew that it was my school's IP address. Even though I use computers at school to edit here, I always log in, and never edit from the IP address as long as I am on here. I also always remember to log out. I also want to let you know that I am not the cause of the vandalism. Someone else in my school is vandalizing, as I would never vandalize this wikipedia. Razorflame 17:13, 1 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I know you are not the vandal, but the IP is not "registered to a school" but to a company, so it is the wrong template.--Bärliner 17:16, 1 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]
I just wanted to make sure that I made my point clear. Also, I thought that it was registered to my school, but after doing a WHOIS, found that it is registered to a company as well. If this address were to be blocked, would I still be able to log in through this IP address? Razorflame 17:17, 1 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

The chances of it being blocked are minimal, but you should be able to log in no problem. You suggested a week hardblock on ViP recently. I Gave them one one soft block as it was a skool and that is what usually happens. Some schools have their own IP, others use the university or State/County Board or Education (as in Indiana). One company in England provides access to several schools so that is regarded as an education provider rather than an ISP.--Bärliner 17:23, 1 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Alright. I just wanted to make sure that I would still be able to log into this page from here as I would be horrified if I couldn't log in from my school.  :) Razorflame 17:26, 1 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Just a note, but my school just got done being softblocked for 2 years over on the English Wikipedia. Razorflame 17:35, 1 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Wow! you were misbehavin weren't you :) --Bärliner 17:37, 1 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

German cities

According to Eptalon and several resourses on the topic (mainly looking for local laws from country to country to define municipalities by type), German cities and towns are essencially identical The same word is used when translating city or town into German. The only apparent difference would be between the terms for city and very large city. -- Creol(talk) 17:42, 1 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Moulin Rouge!

Hey Barliner, Can you please take a look at the "Plot Summery" section on the Moulin Rouge! page please and see if it needs further simplification. And if it does can you please help me simplify it + check spelling and format, please. I'm a bit messy :-) IuseRosary (talk) 22:01, 1 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I will, but I am busy at the moment, so it will not be for a couple of hours--Bärliner 22:17, 1 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Ok, Thank-You :-) I'd maybe like to nominate it for a VGA soon IuseRosary (talk) 22:19, 1 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Did you look at the Moulin Rouge! page? IuseRosary (talk) 10:28, 2 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]



Has a concensus been reached for Moulin Rouge! on the WP:PGA Yet? When Will it officiallly become a GA? IuseRosary (talk) 18:40, 12 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Why not read the the voting. It tells you there. --Bärliner 18:47, 12 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Harry Potter and the Deathly Hallows

This may seem unreasonable of me, but I do not want my summary of the book, which is very carefully written in order NOT to give away any significant action, or my description of the "Themes" of the books associated with a ridiculous spoiler that lists "The characters who die". That list is the Ultimate in spoilers. Since you returned what I had written, I have deleted the list of deaths. Please decide which you would prefer to include, and count my work out if you want the list in.

Amandajm (talk) 14:04, 2 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Please remember that you do not own this article or any other. Nor do you own any part of it. Both sections seem relevant to the book.--Bärliner 14:06, 2 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]
The surrender of ones intellectual property is rather unfortunate.
As for the relevance of a list of deaths, it is simply the ultimate spoiler, and the sort of thing that only a kid who can read fast but has no common sense and little care for others would do. If the same info was/is put up on the IMDb site, then the heading has a spoiler warning, and no-one needs to open it. But because the list of Dead People is so prominent on the Wiki page, anyone who goes to the page cann hhardly avoid seeing the list.
I realise that this encyclopedia is the production of amateurs, but even so, the aim is to produce the best possible quality. That list went up very soon after the book came out, at which point there were still many people around who hadn't finished it.
Ultimately, some quality control is needed.

Amandajm (talk) 05:34, 3 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Moreover

The editor that inserted that list of deaths was an anonymouus editor who number does not show up on any other edits, useful or otherwise. THAT is the sole contribution to Simple Wiki, and it is a fairly shameful sort of a contribution, because putting the list there was a sort of betrayal to every other kid who loves the Harry Potter books. Amandajm (talk) 05:41, 3 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

In Wikipedia it is generally expected that the subjects of our articles will be covered in detail. Therefore, Wikipedia carries no spoiler warnings except for the content disclaimer.
It is not acceptable to delete information from an article about a work of fiction because you think it spoils the plot. Such concerns must not interfere with neutral point of view, encyclopedic tone, completeness, or any other element of article quality . Any deletion would be considered as removal of reliable information and could be proceeded by a warning or even a temporary ban. --Gwib -(talk)- 10:39, 3 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]
The information with regards the list of people who die in the book, is in one sense very significant to anyone who is really interested in the books (and many kids are quite passionately interested in them). But in a literary sense, it is an extremely abitrary piece of information, because for someone who is not currently reading the series and who does not love Fred Weasley and little Colin and Old Mad Eye, then the information, by itself is simply a meaningless list of names, and adds nothing to the article. It does not inform in a meaningful way. It is, to the unitiated, about as uninformative as a word count on the number of times Ron Weasley says "bloody hell!"
One of the points that I have tried to make is that this un-named and otherwise silent editor was not coming at it from a neutral point of view. This list went up at a time whenn many kids hadn't finished the book and were begging friends not to tell them. Placing this list here was not a neutral action. It was an act of one-upmanship.
But if you think that a list of people who die is a significant and meaningful addition, then I could add a list of characters who don't die, which would be equally factual. We could also add a list of Horcruxes, a list of Deathly Hallows, a list of characters in which they appear in the book, a list of creatures in which the appear in the book, a list of things that Hermione has in her bag, a list of people who attend the wedding, a list of Death Eaters, etc etc etc. It's the sort of stuff that belongs on a fan site, to help kids answer trivia quizzes, not in an encyclopedic article. You are either trying to produce something of an encyclopedic nature, or you are not.Amandajm (talk) 13:40, 3 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]
A list of people who die in the book is relevant and useful information for anyone who wants to know the general story of the book. Removing any information for fear of spoiling the surprise is both biased and childish. As long as the information is relevant and reliable, then one can put anything he wants into an article, including the lists you gave above. --Gwib -(talk)- 15:28, 3 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Gwib, the message that you aren't getting is that this is an encyclopedia, and as such demands a certain level of quality. Putting in a whole lot of ridiculous lists,, just because they contain real information is not appropriate. The place for the List of Deaths is on a page that is specifically dedicated to lists. How about you create a Harry Potter lists page and encourage others to add lists to it. As it is, it totally fails to do as you suggest, give "relevant and useful information for anyone who wants to know the general story of the book". This is something that it really doesn't achieve at all. Amandajm (talk) 13:14, 4 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]
When did we begin censoring for "quality". Whose standards do we use? Amandajm obviously considers she has a better standards than gwib. --Bärliner 13:21, 4 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]
I have been considering for some time whether or not I ought to respond to this. And perhaps I should.
As you can see from the brief self-intro on my page, I have practical experience working in the field of migrant education. Designing and writing educational programs for people of all sorts, and teaching teachers how to deliver them has been part of what I have done professionally. Those are my credentials.
And the answer is, yes, I believe quality counts. And as for whether or not I have "better standards" (I would say "higher standards" because that is the correct and widely used English idiom) of quality than a high school student...then I suggest you consider the possibility that perhaps I have been in the habit of assessing quality in the work of students.
Most days, I write on Wikipedia. Every now and then, I come over here and write an informative article. It worries me that every time I use the ""Show any page" option, I get a stub. If this site is going to be in any way useful, then someone needs to write real articles, don't they?
My general advice to all the serious editors who care about this site is:
  • perfect your English Grammar.
  • borrow a few books that are written for older kids and teenagers with reading disability. Learn how to write simple English in properly composed and expressive sentences. (NOTE:Rowling's later books are not simple. Try Emily Rodda, C.S.Lewis) Amandajm (talk) 07:27, 18 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Dear Amanda, "better standards" makes no comparison as to the quality or level merely that you consider your writing "superior"

  • I suggest you consider the possibility that perhaps I have been in the habit of assessing quality in the work of students
Consider the possibility that you are not alone.

You question to me here

No, since it says nothing about that on WP:SIG.-- ChristianMan16 02:02, 3 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I find it strange that you quote a policy when asking a user to change his sig but refuse to make the change yourself, on the grounds that policy says nothing about the matter.
I find it sad that the vast majority of your edits here have not been to articles. Articles are the purpose of this wikipedia. Bärliner 10:37, 3 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]
:p-- ChristianMan16 13:53, 3 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]
What does that "reply" mean? Does it mean you are proud to have wasted everybody's time at ENWP, Commons and here? --Bärliner 14:04, 3 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]
I don't see why you are proud of that. Oysterguitarist 14:08, 3 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]
I think that you owe the community an apology. on the simple talk should be fine if you can admit to your wrong doings. IuseRosary (talk) 14:12, 3 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]
What wrong doings? I swear people on Wikipedia have something against me.-- ChristianMan16 15:40, 3 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]
And no I have nothing to be proud of except for Template:Infobox championship on the English Wikipedia.-- ChristianMan16 15:42, 3 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]
What about all the disruption you caused with your signatures and the fact that your contributions here are minimal and mostly pointless? --Gwib -(talk)- 15:48, 3 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]
If you look at my contrbutions you see that everytime y'all reported my sig to me I apologized and change it as for the contributions I'm a busy boy and I'm not apologizing for that.-- ChristianMan16 16:14, 3 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]
is that okay?-- ChristianMan16 21:45, 3 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

German Barnstar

The Barnstar of German National Merit
For all your work in the german towns. Terry (talk) - (changes)- 19:12, 3 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Signature

Is it just my computer or is your signature invisible. --Gwib -(talk)- 19:12, 4 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Blue and red, direct into prefs, not via a subpage. --Bärliner 19:13, 4 February 2008 (UTC) I can see me --Bärliner 19:13, 4 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Even if I did have to resign that warning!!!--Bärliner 19:16, 4 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]
I've also noticed lately that your sig's missing on some of your warnings like here, here, here and here (just as a few examples). · Tygrrr... 19:20, 4 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I know ~~~ will give a sig without the time, but I have never known a time without a sig. --Bärliner 19:25, 4 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

It's ~~~~~ (five tildes in a row). That gives it without the sig. Razorflame 19:28, 4 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]
In which case it is a bug, because I don't use the tilde key, but the edit bar, sometimes I get a sig, sometimes not. I wonder if is related to the new preprocessor wiki have just written?--Bärliner 19:32, 4 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]
I think mine works, and I use the edit bar. --Gwib -(talk)- 19:36, 4 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Mine too, that is why it is so strange --Bärliner 19:37, 4 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]
It's probably a conspiracy. The government thinks that Jimbo Wales is a militant Muslim and they're bringing down Wikipedia from the inside. --Gwib -(talk)- 19:39, 4 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Corina Casanova conspires to take over the world. Interesting.--Bärliner 20:21, 4 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Claz2201

I highly suspect this user as an advertiser. Just read his userpage. I am nearly 100% positive that this is an advertiser. Please check? Razorflame 20:48, 4 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Cat

Thanks, I knew I should have left the category change to either you, Tygrr, or Creol, I am just out of my league. -  BrownE34  talk  contribs  21:48, 4 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Naming conventions - German locations

I am curious as to why you are using the German terminology for naming rather than English for several of the place names. Checking the IW's for several articles, outside of de: and da: most of the naming is fairly consistent with the en: version. The main issues would be along the lines of Regierungsbezirk Dresden instead of Dresden (region) and Landkreis Meißen‎ in place of Meißen (district). For someone with difficulty with English, unless they happen to be German speaking, the use of German words would make it even more confusing to understand. ‎-- Creol(talk) 14:28, 6 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I am still thinking about a better system than either the official German name or the ambiguous en: term. Maybe Dresden Government District (better than region, and a better translation, and shows its purely artificial nature). Meißen (district) implies an unofficial area. Perhaps Meißen Rural District.
My main reason for concentrating on Saxony is the local reorganisation later this year, as well as one of the few states to have Regierungsbezirke. I concentrated on finishing the places due to change and all of the Districts in one Regierungsbezirke: I have discovered a problem with the templates. I will need to change the forced categories.
One problem you did not mention with the German convention. I prefer the place name first, it makes the English search easier too.
I will make the changes during today. --Bärliner 14:49, 6 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Template:Infobox German Location already had a "no category" option in place although it was worded differently from our standard, so I had to relabel it. German district and German (german word for government region) have had the option added to them as well. To turn off the built in category, just pass the value nocategory = 1 through the template tag. Actually, If nocategory is anything but a null value, it will activate, so 1, yes, no, why not and Great Gobbledy Gook!!! would all work to turn it on. -- Creol(talk) 15:20, 6 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Hello

Hello, I am from the English Wikipedia and decided to get involved in the Simple English Wikipedia, could you tell me some things that are different here, besides being in Simple English, and what is currently the policy on user boxes? Thanks. Cheers. Earthbendingmaster (talk) 17:53, 6 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Fixing time, sorry. Earthbendingmaster (talk) 17:53, 6 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Thank you very much. Would it be ok for me to create a userbox? Earthbendingmaster (talk) 18:05, 6 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Ok, thanks again. Cheers. Earthbendingmaster (talk) 18:08, 6 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Hello again, could you tell me what scripts are available here? I suppose that twinkle is not on the Simple English Wikipedia? Earthbendingmaster (talk) 23:24, 6 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]
We are a twinkle free zone. Most vandal chasers either memorise all of the templates, like razorflame, or use a script like the one on user:huji/monobook.js --Bärliner 15:35, 7 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

WP:AN

I replied and answered at WP:AN...please check it out.-- ChristianMan16 04:09, 7 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Re: My talk page

Looks like more hassles on my talk page... the attacks appear to be on contributions made by ionas. Aaaaaa-nnoying. Please look into this. Zephyrad (talk) 15:26, 7 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Not saying ionas is doing the attacks, but the recent ones to my page appear to be on his posts to it. Not otherwise sure how they keep landing on mine; it's not like it's my talk page made the Selected Articles list or something. Thanks for looking into it. Zephyrad (talk) 15:35, 7 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]
I was the one who did most of the reverting to the person who was removing content from it. Razorflame 15:51, 7 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]


Sharth

Hi there, Barliner. Sharth is a friend of mine in real life, so I was wondering if you would pardon his spelling. He doesn't like spelling much. I will try to guide him on the way to becoming a good Wikipedian. Please give him time to adjust to the social setting here. Thanks Razorflame 16:54, 7 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

???I don't bother warning about spelling, but it needs to be right in mainspace. --Bärliner 16:58, 7 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Yes. I'll make sure that he understands it :) Razorflame 17:00, 7 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]
I didn't mean he had to get it right. He doesn't have too. If he tries and gets it wrong there are plenty of people around to fix mistakes --Bärliner 17:03, 7 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]
I know what you meant. I was just going to let him know that people here can fix it for him, and for him to understand that he doesn't have to make perfect edits. That was what I meant when I said, Yes, I'll make sure that he understands it. Razorflame 17:04, 7 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Template:uw-otherweb

I know that the last time I made this template, it sounded more like a warning. Can you please look at this version of it that I just made and tell me if I softened the tone enough to make it a notice? Thanks, Razorflame 17:08, 7 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

How about
Everybody forgets sometimes, but here we use "Other websites" instead of the "External links" header that English Wikipedia uses. Can you please remember to use Other websites in the articles that you create instead of External links? Thanks for your help! --Bärliner 17:15, 7 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Yes, that sounds even softer than what I wrote. I'll put it into the template now. Thanks for the help! Razorflame 17:16, 7 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]
I guess this one isnt a good idea then:

Please use "Other websites" instead of the "External links" header. If you do not, people may attack you with pointy sticks. Thank you for not bleeding on the carpet! (Wikipedia:Carpet cleaners does not exist) -- Creol(talk) 17:32, 7 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Oh my god! Nice one! Razorflame 17:33, 7 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Why say please? Creol, you are getting way too attached to pointy sticks....--Bärliner 17:35, 7 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]


Other websites not External links or a checkuser will come round with pointy sticks. Have a Nice Day. --Bärliner 17:42, 7 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Re:User talk:ScribeOfTheNile

It does not meet criteria for quick deletion, it says that user pages can be deleted by request, it does not say anything about user talk pages. If the user is exercising their right to vanish then they can have their talk page deleted. Feel free to bring this up at AN. Oysterguitarist 00:34, 8 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

212.85.6.26

Please block this IP as he is vandalising Wikipedia. Chenzw (talk ▪ changes) 12:09, 8 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

 Done24 hour block. vandalism reverted/deleted. Thanks chenzw. --Bärliner 12:15, 8 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Zürich (canton)

For the categories for this page, I'm thinking about making the categories the English version of this canton. They would be, for example, like instead of Category:Zürich, Category:Zurich and so on. Do you agree that this is what should be done? Razorflame 16:30, 8 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I have just recatted Saxony, and used the German versions. If the infobox automatically puts things into the canton category anyway there is little chance of error. If the article is spelled Zürich, then so should the category. Otherwise it would be confusing. --Bärliner 16:37, 8 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

It would make it harder to put the category onto the 171 municipality pages for it. I will go do this now, then. Razorflame 16:39, 8 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]
What would make it harder. I will do it the easy way if you want--Bärliner 16:40, 8 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]
It has an umlaut. The computers that I use don't allow me to type in an umlaut. That's why it would be hard. Razorflame 16:44, 8 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Tell me a couple of municipalities in the canton, and I will see if I can help--Bärliner 16:51, 8 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Here's what I'll do: I'll make all of the municipality pages without categories, and you can use AWB to insert the categories into the pages. Will this work? Razorflame 16:53, 8 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]
yes --Bärliner 16:55, 8 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]
All right. That's exactly what I'll do then. Razorflame 16:58, 8 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

64.4.104.2

I would like to ask a blocking for this user. Constant vandalism has been committed from this user. Razorflame 16:46, 8 February 2008 (UTC)  Done 24hr --Bärliner 16:50, 8 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]


Users to check

These two users are being very disruptive. I would suggest you block both of them. Razorflame 19:29, 8 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Moulin Rouge

Hey Barliner, It is the 8th Today... Can I put Moulin Rouge! up for VGA now? IuseRosary (talk) 20:07, 8 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]


How about Now? Can I put Moulin Rouge! up for VGA now? IuseRosary (talk) 11:45, 9 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]
OK, but I think there will still be a few changes to be made. Especially the summary bit with the plotspoilers, that should go nearer the end. WHo wants a spoiler right at the start?--Bärliner 11:47, 9 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Yay... I shall change the format and then propse it :-) IuseRosary (talk) 11:49, 9 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Ok, I've changed the format and put it up for GA after Eplaton adviused me to. IuseRosary (talk) 12:06, 9 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

The king and the god

I would think that this RfD can be closed now. It's been more than 1 week, and with a vote of 2/5/1, I think it can be deleted now. Razorflame 20:31, 8 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

As I put the article up for RfD I would prefer someone else to do the honours--Bärliner 21:09, 8 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]
I'll ask Lights to do this then. Razorflame 21:13, 8 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Gravitation

Can you take a look over the article that I've been simplifying? I've just moved it to the mainspace, and I want to make sure that it is simplified enough. Thanks, Razorflame 21:14, 8 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I worked really hard on the simplification of this article to make it appropriate for this website. It was hard! I spent about 40 minutes working on it. Razorflame 21:22, 8 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I have nearly done Citizenship of the European Union, and will take a closer look, but it is not my field--Bärliner 22:25, 8 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Inuse Help

is there a mark I can put on an article if I am giving it an extremely extensive editing and it will look bad until finished? —This unsigned comment was added by Factmon (talk • changes) 01:38, 9 February 2008 (UTC)

{{inuse}} marks an article as having a major edit. Just cut and paste {{inuse}} to the top of the page. It is the template I put on Major General John Murray while you were simplifying it earlier.

Hi!

Hi! I am new here! Do you know why SE Wikipedia has chosen not to have userboxes? From LB22 (talk) 17:28, 9 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

There is nothing to stop them being made in your user space or borrowed from other users, but the community was never large enough to allow the proliferation of boxes on ENWP, many of which were designed to show how a person id´s different, when we here are building a community. My page shows I am a European, so people have an idea of my time zone, but not the many "political" boxes I use on enwp and de:wp.--Bärliner 17:33, 9 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Why?

I thought it would be a success for this Wikipedia, since it was for EN Wikipedia.:(( Fair enough. I will just go to the other Wikipedia to develop it further.LB22 (talk) 18:22, 9 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

NSDAP: Machtübernahme vs. Machtergreifung

Hello Barliner, you say that you have a decent level of German, so please see Machtergreifung in the German Wikipedia. For what I learnt at school, it is more like "Machtübernahme" (being given power). At the time of the election, the NSDAP had many supporters in the population. Unlike what some sources want to make you believe, their ideas were not seen as extremist; there were other parties with similar ideas. As to historians, I think they now use both terms. As you stated correctly, Machtergreifung is a bit more active, thats why the NSDAP propagande used it. Would be interesting to see what they say in Mein Kampf. I dont have my copy ready, so I cannot look. --Eptalon (talk) 13:37, 10 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Even though machtergreifung is used as describe the lengthy process of taking power I think it safe to say use as in the article. Especially with the timeline, the article could be useful. Especially as I think there are only brief references to any sort of collaboration. An article on the machtergreifung process would rectify this--Bärliner 14:28, 10 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]
As I said, both terms are used by historians; perhaps mention both the first time, and then (consistently) use only one of them. --Eptalon (talk) 14:44, 10 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

adoption

Please can I have a link to the voting of the deletion of my article? And it was not a test, it was an idea.LB22 (talk) 14:02, 10 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Your article on adoption was not deleted I moved it into your userspace. If you want to propose it as a wikiproject, which I personally think could be a good idea, then you should advertise its presence on Wikipedia:WikiProject. However Wikipedia:Simple_talk/Archive_20#Adoption_Program is one very recent rejection of the idea. --Bärliner 14:42, 10 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Collapsible boxes

Looks like you started a real craze with these collapsible archive boxes! I think almost every active user here has some, and Creol even re-built one to make an awards box. --Gwib -(talk)- 17:50, 10 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]


--Bärliner 11:32, 11 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

template fix

I fixed the problems in {{Infobox Swiss town}}. It should have been an #ifeq: (if X equals Y) instead of #if: (if X is not null). There was also a small formating error in there.

I also set up the nocategory option and took care of a problem with Berne (category is for Bern, so a switch was used to change the name for the category). If there are any other issues with canton name vs category name that also need to be done, let me know. -- Creol(talk) 01:21, 11 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

School IP

If the whois says that it belongs to say: Broward County Public Schools for example, then it is alright to put the {{SchoolIP}} notice on their talk page, right? Razorflame 16:49, 11 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I would--Bärliner 16:51, 11 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]
I put it on 2 seperate IP addresses, both because they said that they were public school IP's. I will look at these in the future and put them on their pages again if I get any that come up. Razorflame 17:13, 11 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

AWB

Can you use AWB to do this to all of the municipality pages of Schaffhausen please? Razorflame 17:13, 11 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I could, but it would make no grammatical sense. It is fine in German, but not English.--Bärliner 18:20, 11 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Ok, never mind then. Razorflame 19:29, 11 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

WikiProject Adoption

I would find this a good alternative to it on the Wikipedia namespace, to mine. You have sparked a new flame for me, and hopefully, the rest of Wikipedia. We will start up immediately!LB22 (talk) 17:50, 11 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Langston Hughes

Thanks for fixing the cats. Amandajm (talk) 12:10, 12 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Glad to help :)--Bärliner 12:12, 12 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Good articles

Hey there Barliner! I just want to ask if you would like to vote on any of the proposed good articles at this page: WP:PGA. The good article program is in need of voters, so I think it would be appreciated if you would visit that page and place your votes on any of the pages that are up for voting at this time. Also, it might be a good idea for you to visit the proposed article demotion page as well and vote on those, because we are still deeply in need of voters on this topic. Thanks, Razorflame 15:18, 12 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

move page

Hello! How can i move a page? Please move Swelm to Schwelm. Martinvoll (talk) 19:47, 12 February 2008 (UTC)  Done Thanks for spotting the spelling mistake --Bärliner 19:51, 12 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Sorry!

Oh! Sorry! I didn't know about the upload problems. I am new to Wikipedia so I don't know! --Jasper (talk) 10:48, 13 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Signature

Hey! I was wondering how you did that signature of yours? Can you please tell me! That would be great. Thanks! --Jasper (talk) 11:02, 13 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

What colours? I design fancy sigs, but some people do. They will be on-line later today --Bärliner 11:08, 13 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Berlin

These are my concerns about the article Berlin not being able to make it to good article status:

  • It is more of a list than an article. The only real part of the article is the first paragraph. If this article is to become a good article, then there needs to be some major revisions to make it more appropriate for the title. I would suggest fleshing out the article to make it more like an article than a list.
  • It isn't very referenced. I would suggest finding more references for this article and adding them. This would be best done after you finish the first part that I mentioned up above. I would suggest about 5 references to make it have a good chance of becoming a good article.
  • Even though it probably already meets the size requirements, it wouldn't hurt to expand it a bit. Add some information to the article. There are some parts of the article that make me want to scream out in agony: "Why isn't there more information about this part?" More specifically, information about the economy, tourism, and other such information would be good to add to this article.

This is just the basic list of things that I would like to see happen to this article. Since I'm not an expert on this topic, I will leave the fixing up of these three points to you, because you seem to be pretty knowledgable about Germany and Germanic issues.

Good luck on making this article fit to become a good article, and I wish you luck when you are trying to fix the points that I mentioned above! Let me know how it turns out when you've finished these points, because I would really like to know! Razorflame 15:06, 13 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks. It must have been a long and good article that was pared down. Now I need to add good info, rather than just leave the basics with links to main articles. Some of the info I can use is in the subarticles I have made.  :) --Bärliner 15:11, 13 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Yep, I just wanted to give you the heads-up on what things needed to be worked on in order for it to make it in the GA process. Razorflame 19:36, 13 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

My Sig

Is this better?--  C h r i s t i a n M a n 1 6 17:47, 13 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

151.49.6.93

This guy needs to be blocked for removing content in Wikipedia talk:Sandbox. Razorflame 16:59, 15 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Never mind. Seems to have stopped. I'll let you know if this IP vandalizes again. Razorflame 17:01, 15 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Just vandalized again. Sorry for posting these three messages in quick succession. I don't want to post this to ViP because it isn't a serious enough of a problem to need to be put onto there. Razorflame 17:02, 15 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Range block

Based upon the number of times that these users have edited, would it be appropriate to do a range block of 151.49.0.0/16? This IP range has been vandalizing the page Wikipedia:Sandbox an awful lot lately, and I think that it could use a bit of a break. What do you think? Razorflame 17:17, 15 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I think that I need to stress a range block over this range of IP's now because of the amount of vandalism that we have been receiving from these users. Razorflame 17:33, 15 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

1 stress all you like. I can only block them once
2 if the range block has been worked out wrongly I am going to blame you :P --Bärliner 17:36, 15 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]
I see no reason why it would be worked out wrongly. There was a good amount of evidence that has pointed to a blanket block of the whole range. You only blocked the range for 24 hours, so I don't think that there can be any way that the range block will be worked out badly. I know that that was the correct range because I checked it on the range block calculator before I suggested it to you. If you hadn't blocked that range, I doubt that they would've stopped vandalizing on their own. I will gladly take the blame if it works out badly for you, as I am nearly 100% positive that that was the correct thing to do at the time.

As to the answer to your first point, I actually posted this before I knew that you had gone through with the range block because I was still writing that post at the same time that you were making the range block; that is why I was stressing the point that the range block was needed.

On a separate note: I have left a message on the Administrators' Noticeboard about this range, and have asked people on the AN to watch out for this range of IP's. That was the next step that I was going to take after the range block, post a message on the AN so that other administrators know about the IP range so that they can be prepared for the next time that it strikes.

And finally, the last note I would like to add is that that range normally only vandalized the Wikipedia:Sandbox page, but on the last IP address that was editing, it actually blanked both my userpage and user talk page. I seriously doubt that they would've stopped, instead, it looked like they were expanding their targets of vandalism to even more targets than was being vandalized originally.

Thank you for reading this long message, and I hope you the best of luck in the future! Razorflame 19:17, 15 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Creol left a message and said that the range was a bit wide. 151.49.0.0/18 would've been sufficient, Creol said on the AN, but you only blocked the range for 24 hours, so that shouldn't be that big of a deal. Razorflame 01:50, 16 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Barnstar

Barnstar Congratulations: You have been given a Blocking Barnstar!

For blocking many vandals on the Simple English Wikipedia. I hereby award you this barnstar! Razorflame 17:22, 15 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Just a question, but is this an actual warning for my posting of the barnstar, or is it just a warning in response to the warning-like barnstar I gave you? Razorflame 19:38, 15 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Maybe

Maybe I was right with what the joke said...you deleted it...Why?--  C h r i s t i a n M a n 1 6 19:19, 15 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

  1. You aren't
  2. I did
  3. Because I can, and because it might get you to concentrate on articles instead of wasting everybody's time. --Bärliner 19:24, 15 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]
I honestly thought you might have a sense of humor like most peole do...but...you don't sorry for the bother...I do think you need to lighten up.--  C h r i s t i a n M a n 1 6 19:33, 15 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

3 Because I can, and because it might get you to concentrate on articles instead of wasting everybody's time--Bärliner 01:25, 16 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

That's not wasting time...that's having fun with life.--  † ChristianMan16  02:53, 29 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Louisville

Why did you remove the sentence about residents from the Louisville article? BirdsArmy Talk 02:59, 16 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

  1. Should not have been in bold
  2. Louisvillan or Louisvillian. I went with the ENWP FA. --Bärliner 11:04, 16 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

National Gallery

Barliner, I've just changed this again, because the change created inaccuracy, and was unnecessarily wordy and repetitive: "The new part of the gallery is on the left. It is in a new building called The Sainsbury Wing."

The "new part" of the gallery is not in the Sainbury Wing.

As it just happens, the "oldest part" of the gallery's collection is in the Sainsbury Wing. If you write "The new part of the gallery is on the left. It is in a new building called The Sainsbury Wing." it reads very much as if the newest part of the collection is in the Sainsbury Wing. The word in is inappropriate in this context.

The Gallery has a new building (extension) called the Sainsbury Wing.

The problem that you were having with the sentence was that it used the word "it" to refer to the subject "the gallery". The way to solve this problem is not to make multiple small sentences but simply to repeat the subject. The sentence now reads:

"To the left, the gallery has a new building called the Sainsbury Wing."Amandajm (talk) 07:00, 18 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

It nay read like that to you but not to me. Smaller sentences have always been better and easier to understand. You seem to have assumed that I was using gallery to mean collection. That is not an assumption which I think many would make.

Template:Nobelprize

I noticed that this template is leaving a Category:Nobel Prize

winners behind after it is put onto an article. I just tried to fix it by making it still add it automatically while not appearing in the main article, but I was unable to. Just thought I would let you know about this. Razorflame 15:26, 18 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Deleted revisions

Regarding Carolyn Doran: You don't have to restore an article to see its deleted revisions. Just click on the revision date and time, and it will be shown, then you can also preview it to see the output of that revision. Anyways, if you restored a deleted article, please provide a reason. Cheers, - Huji reply 22:14, 18 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I appreciate your note. I deleted the article for the very same reasons you gave on the RfU and what I replied on PathWrote's talk page. -  BrownE34  talk  contribs  22:25, 18 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Good?

Hey Barliner This Morning, I have put Across The Universe up for GA status. Can you please have a look at it for me please? ThanksIuseRosary (talk) 10:51, 19 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

:-)

"Tygrrrr agrrree" <-- cute. Made me smile :-) · Tygrrr... 19:11, 19 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you. So grrracious of you to rrrespond.--Bärrrlinerrrr 15:16, 20 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Vandal

Barliner,

Is this and this candidates for giving this user a block? The user has vandalised twice after a final warning. Every atom... The Wolf ...and I divide it 18:41, 22 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Nevermind, I've just discovered the ARV page. Every atom... The Wolf ...and I divide it

Signature

What do you think of my glossy new signature?? LB22 (talk to me!)Email me! 14:37, 24 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

My Changes

Barliner, you are undoing my work. are you even reading it. you undid good edits on the JW page, you redirected Jehovah to YHWH. I don't see any logic here. I thought we were trying to grow an encyclopedia, not shrink it. Jesse James squeeze the trigger 16:08, 24 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I redirected because "growing the encyclopaedia" does not mean duplicating pages, YHWH already says that Jehovah is a way of saying YHWH, so there is no need for another page not in simple english, saying exactly the same thing. --Bärliner 16:14, 24 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Hi!

Er, roughly how many regular contributer are there here? LB22 (talk to me!)Email me! 20:07, 25 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

We normally say 20-30, but there has been a recent influx of users, esp from ENWP and DEWP, so that number is higher.--Bärliner 20:17, 25 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Upload

How do I upload an image? LB22 (talk to me!)Email me! 20:22, 25 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Please respond on my user talk page LB22 (talk to me!)Email me! 20:22, 25 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

You cannot upload images here. We have the same rules about copyright as commons.wikipedia.org, but we do not have the same number of legal experts or checkers, so you can only use images that are already on commons. You can, of course, upload images to commons. If commons delete an image it will be lost here too - see NATO and the recently missing flag. I will fix that later today :) --Bärliner 20:34, 25 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]
 --Bärliner 20:25, 25 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Just letting you know that I've already responded to this on the users' talk page, but I always welcome second opinions to my answers :) Razorflame 20:27, 25 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you for the welcome!

Hi Barliner - thank you for your warm welcome! Littleteddy (talk) 11:53, 26 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

re

A minor TV reference, regarding a comment posted to me. TheWolf 16:41, 28 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Cybermen eccentric??? People did not hide behind the sofa because they were "eccentric"!! --Bärliner 18:03, 28 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]
No, I was referring to the Daleks as eccentric. Unique, eccentric, and more than a little homicidal. TheWolf 18:05, 28 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks

Thanks much. I appreciate it. I am looking for some things I can do here as well as at the English Wikipedia :) PseudoOne (talk) 22:41, 28 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Barnstar!

The Working Man's Barnstar
For all your hard work here.-- Lights  talk  13:02, 29 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Many thanks kind sir! --Bärliner 14:55, 29 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Template:Welcomeq

Hey there, Barliner! I fixed the grammar in the template you've been using. Just thought that I would let you know about this! Thanks, Razorflame 16:04, 29 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

64.4.102.2

This user has just asked to be unblocked in a disruptive way. I cannot deal with it because I can't do unblock requests yet, so I have decided to bring it to your attention. Cheers, Razorflame 16:27, 29 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

They have said no such thing ... --Bärliner 16:37, 29 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Sorry, I meant to say in an abusive way :) Razorflame 16:40, 29 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Actually, you meant to say "64.4.104.2‎" :P --Bärliner 16:42, 29 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Yeah, lol :) Razorflame 16:44, 29 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Broken monobook.jss

I think I broke my monobook.js page. Can you please take a look at it and please get it to work for me again? Thanks, Razorflame 16:57, 29 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

K but there have been some changes to the underlying software which may have messed stuff up. Have you lost the sidebar or what. I have lost hotcat.--Bärliner 17:00, 29 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Oh! Never mind! I just got it back :) Razorflame 17:01, 29 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]
And it's back again... Razorflame 17:04, 29 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Sorry for the massive amount of replies I've been leaving. To answer your earlier question, I have lost both the sidebar and the welcome tab up top of the screen. However, whenever I edit your talk page, after I edit it, the tools seem to come back. Then, when I go to use it on another person's user talk page, they disappear again. I, too, am missing hotcat.js as well. Razorflame 17:08, 29 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Ask Creol nicely what is up. I have been pestering him about infoboxes and am worried about him getting the pointy sticks out:) --Bärliner 17:11, 29 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]
PS

This user likes pointy sticks!

Razorflame 17:14, 29 February 2008 (UTC) :)[reply]

I asked Creol nicely about this, and he couldn't fix it. Razorflame 17:32, 29 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Retrieved from "https://simple.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk:Barliner/archive7&oldid=8915471"