User talk:Barras/Archive 4
 | This is an archive of past discussions. Do not edit the contents of this page. If you wish to start a new discussion or revive an old one, please do so on the current talk page. |
Simple News Issue 10
|
| ||||||||||||||||
|
| |||||||||||||||
| Song of the Fortnight |
|
|
My RfB
 | I promise to do my best and justify the trust the community has placed in me! fr33kman talk 20:55, 21 July 2009 (UTC) |
Could you add that to the block log? Currently, the user is indefinitely blocked for incivility, not for sockpuppetry. Griffinofwales (talk) 22:23, 24 July 2009 (UTC)
- Done, thanks for the notice. Barras (talk) 08:20, 25 July 2009 (UTC)
Titleblacklist
I made that #note so that I can keep track of my additions... that way if there is a mistake on my part, I will know. Please consider re adding my comment, it harms nothing. Best, NonvocalScream (talk) 21:15, 26 July 2009 (UTC)
- No-one has his own section on this page and this is clearly not needed. And all admins can edit this page, if there is an mistake it doesn't matter who made it. Barras (talk) 21:17, 26 July 2009 (UTC)
- Or do you user this also on articles? Barras (talk) 21:18, 26 July 2009 (UTC)
- I don't understand why I can't have my own section. The #comments are ignored by the software, and I want to keep better track of my actions. I don't use this on articles, only special pages that affect critical pieces of the software. NonvocalScream (talk) 21:18, 26 July 2009 (UTC)
- Actually, it can stay gone, it is not a big deal. The removal is ok. BEst, NonvocalScream (talk) 21:20, 26 July 2009 (UTC)
- (change conflict) But it would be the same in articles. I would also edit your section there if there would be a mistake. No-one uses his own section, because it is useless. The page isn't to make a comparison like Admin:xyz has added x Users to this list. Barras (talk) 21:22, 26 July 2009 (UTC)
talkback (yeah, you're probably watching my talk page, but just in case...)
You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.
- No I don't watch your page, but I monitor the RCs :) So I'll see all. Barras (talk) 19:42, 27 July 2009 (UTC)
Did you mean to remove the number of RfDs? Griffinofwales (talk) 18:08, 28 July 2009 (UTC)
- WP:RB redirects to Wikipedia:Registered bots. I don't get what you want. Barras (talk) 18:10, 28 July 2009 (UTC)
- Sorry, I was thinking about recent changes and I abbreviated it to RC and then I typed it in wrong. I have corrected the link. Griffinofwales (talk) 18:14, 28 July 2009 (UTC)
Yes, I removed the RfD-number, because all RfDs are close. Barras (talk) 18:17, 28 July 2009 (UTC)
- I think it would make more sense to change the number to 0, because users might think that we have removed the number and they will click on the link instead of already knowing that there are no open RfDs. Griffinofwales (talk) 18:23, 28 July 2009 (UTC)
- Feel free to re-add the number as zero. I've no objections. It doesn't matter for me. --Barras (talk) 18:25, 28 July 2009 (UTC)
OS heads up
I spun out all the candidate sections into individual subpages; make sure to add Wikipedia:Oversight candidates/Barras to your watchlist. EVula // talk // ☯ // 02:26, 29 July 2009 (UTC)
edits
hello! I am pretty sure I have 100 edits, are you sure? Bubblycanuck (talk) 16:30, 30 July 2009 (UTC)
how many do I have? I thought I counted more than 100, maybe I am not reading this right...
Bubblycanuck (talk) 16:34, 30 July 2009 (UTC)
I appreciate this, must need my coffee..any advice to being an admin?
Bubblycanuck (talk) 16:39, 30 July 2009 (UTC)
- Become active, and don't request adminship now. It's pretty useless. Barras (talk) 16:41, 30 July 2009 (UTC)
but I was told that there are not many admins on wiki Eng.. Bubblycanuck (talk) 16:41, 30 July 2009 (UTC)
- We have no emergency need atm. We have currently enough admins. Barras (talk) 16:42, 30 July 2009 (UTC)
no I was away for a brief stretch of time, had a family illness, but trying to keep busy now... Bubblycanuck (talk) 16:56, 30 July 2009 (UTC)
Cookies from me :)
|
Bubblycanuck has given you some cookies! Now enjoy them! |
- Have a nice day! Bubblycanuck talk — Preceding unsigned comment added by 216.240.7.14 (talk • contribs) 19:56, 30 July 2009 216.240.7.14 (UTC)
Thanks :D --Barras (talk) 17:58, 30 July 2009 (UTC)
haha no problem, Im the Martha Stuart of Wikipedia, ..working on a recipe for Wikipedia cookies though...
Revert
I don't know what I was thinking of. I thought that it was Q4 which I was about to clear. Epic fail. :( Pmlineditor 10:13, 2 August 2009 (UTC)
- Please be very careful on DYK, because it is transcluded on main page. The main page showed the clear DYK template. Barras || talk 10:28, 2 August 2009 (UTC)
- I know, and I'll be careful next time. Also, on another note, we updated the DYK after 8 instead of 5 days this time. I'm compelled to blame this on the "keep noms for 3 days" proposal. This debars the 5 day update of DYK. Regards, Pmlineditor 10:31, 2 August 2009 (UTC).
- I know, we schould update DYK all 7 days, imo. Once a week schould be enough. An other problem is, that we had not enough hooks last friday. It's summer and some users aren't available. Barras || talk 10:33, 2 August 2009 (UTC)
- Agree that we didn't get that many hooks. Users are on semi-wikibreaks at this time of the year. Pmlineditor 10:35, 2 August 2009 (UTC)
- But, anyway, this page isn't the right page to discuss such a change. Barras || talk 10:40, 2 August 2009 (UTC)
- Agree that we didn't get that many hooks. Users are on semi-wikibreaks at this time of the year. Pmlineditor 10:35, 2 August 2009 (UTC)
- I know, we schould update DYK all 7 days, imo. Once a week schould be enough. An other problem is, that we had not enough hooks last friday. It's summer and some users aren't available. Barras || talk 10:33, 2 August 2009 (UTC)
- I know, and I'll be careful next time. Also, on another note, we updated the DYK after 8 instead of 5 days this time. I'm compelled to blame this on the "keep noms for 3 days" proposal. This debars the 5 day update of DYK. Regards, Pmlineditor 10:31, 2 August 2009 (UTC).
Simple News: Issue Eleven
|
| ||||||||||||||||
|
| |||||||||||||||
Woops.
Sorry about that. I assume voting starts in two weeks? I am not on simple very often at the moment and was eager to get in my two cents . Thanks!--Gordonrox24 (talk) 22:17, 4 August 2009 (UTC)
- I'll fix it now, you can voice your opinion in 10 minutes. Barras || talk 22:19, 4 August 2009 (UTC)
- Fixed, you can voice your opinion there. Barras || talk 22:23, 4 August 2009 (UTC)
Hello
Hello and thank you for you welcome. --Abisch (talk) 20:16, 5 August 2009 (UTC)
Oversight start
Please go ahead and add your candidacy. I set no end date. We need at least two elected. Good luck and thanks, NonvocalScream (talk) 01:05, 8 August 2009 (UTC)
;)
Hi, could my talk page be fully protected for 36 hours? I think you know why.. ;) Shappy talk 19:42, 8 August 2009 (UTC)
Done best Barras || talk 19:43, 8 August 2009 (UTC)
banned from editing
It is really unbelievable how people in wikipedia can be so rude and managing the site as they wish. RavensFists and Whpq, are totally taken over people that opposes them. I am new to Wikipedia, and I was trying to" help" and feel "free to edit" as wikipedia invites for, but immediately I found that the invitation is not realistic. Those two people came and blocked me from editing accusing me of I do not know what, just because I didn't agree with them in to link Rodolfo Valentin article with Sofia's hair for health. There should be more control over what these people that have more experience in wikipedia, preventing abuse over the others. Also I was trying to correct some grammatical mistakes like the word "organisation" , which truly is "organization", and RavensFists immediately reversed to its wrong version. I am assuming that these are very young people that have not respect for others, AT ALL!, and they are doing it with all the freedom in wikipedia. Susy Parker — This unsigned comment was added by Susy parker (talk • changes).
- You are blocked indefinitely at the English Wikipedia because you are a sockpuppet of another user there. You get one chance here. If you mess up, you get banned. Do not vandalize, sock, edit with a POV, or violate any policies. Other than that, welcome! Griffinofwales (talk) 03:11, 12 August 2009 (UTC)
- There is a standard that folks should not continuously change the British and US spelling of words, only that the spelling should be consistent throughout the article. NonvocalScream (talk) 03:21, 12 August 2009 (UTC)
- Erm, I don't get, why this is on my user talk page. I didn't blocked on enwp, because I'm not an enwiki admin. Furthermore, I see this names now the first time. Did I blocked here? Dunno. Perhabs the wrong page? Barras || talk 05:03, 12 August 2009 (UTC)
Why did you delete the article without me knowing for no reason? ENWP has its own article, w:Millionaires. —§ Snake311 (I'm Not Okay!) 19:45, 12 August 2009 (UTC)
- The content of the page was *cough* small. QD A4: The page does not show notability.: not notable members. "They are very popular on MySpace" isn't a reason for notability. Was the deletion reason. Furthermore, it is not only my thought, User:Microchip08 tagged the article with the QD#A4 tag. I agreed (but thought first about it). If you want to expand it and want to bring notability in the article, I'm willing to restore it. Barras || talk 19:49, 12 August 2009 (UTC)
- Okay I will admit that asides from performing one show on MTV, currently on Warped Tour, getting insane amounts of MySpace gossip and music playbacks, released two EPs, and the overwhelming hate "mail" across the internet, no the Millionaires are not really notable. Most of the sources on Google aren't that helpful either so there's nothing I can do much, unless Melissa shows up at the VMA awards uninvinted and sturs up chaos across the media. lol —§ Snake311 (I'm Not Okay!) 20:02, 12 August 2009 (UTC)
- Well, as I said, if you're willing to exand the 2 sentences, I'm willing to restore the article. Otherwise it is pretty useless to keep an article with such a little meaning. Barras || talk 20:05, 12 August 2009 (UTC)
- If something notable like an event involving the Millionaires occurs in the future, then I may request undeletion. For now, I'm just bored. —§ Snake311 (I'm Not Okay!) 23:17, 12 August 2009 (UTC)
- I restored the article. Please take care of the article and expand it, that it shows notablity. Please do this in the next 48h. Otherwise, the article will be deleted again. Barras || talk 09:12, 13 August 2009 (UTC)
- If something notable like an event involving the Millionaires occurs in the future, then I may request undeletion. For now, I'm just bored. —§ Snake311 (I'm Not Okay!) 23:17, 12 August 2009 (UTC)
- I expanded the article and left a note on the article's talk page explaining why the article is notable. —§ Snake311 (I'm Not Okay!) 19:12, 13 August 2009 (UTC)
- Alreight, I saw it. Good work. Now it is much better then before. Barras || talk 19:14, 13 August 2009 (UTC)
Lincoln for GA
I fixed your concerns. He now has five references and a suggested reading section. I would really like Abraham Lincoln to be a GA, since he's one of the key figures in the history of the country with the most Simple English speakers on the planet (He's also one of the marquee names on the Famous Americans project I just started). Purplebackpack89 (talk) 21:25, 13 August 2009 (UTC)
- I'll have a look at this later this day. Barras || talk 06:26, 14 August 2009 (UTC)
- Seems good...except the quote thingy looks weird. He'll make it, won't he? Purplebackpack89 (talk) sure hopes so
- There was an template change somewhere. I'll complete my review soon and post some things on the article's telk page. Barras || talk 18:16, 14 August 2009 (UTC)
- Done --Barras || talk 18:28, 14 August 2009 (UTC)
- Saw review--made minor changes--hope GA goes through Purplebackpack89 (talk) 19:22, 14 August 2009 (UTC)
- I'll have a look soon, but there are some other review requests (see below). --Barras || talk 19:25, 14 August 2009 (UTC)
Peer review for Tropical Depression One (2009)
Hello. Someone thinks that this article may not be in simple english to understand. I have addressed to that person's concerns, however he still thinks it is unsimple enough. Can you review the article and list any problems you find on the article's talk page? Thank you. —§ Snake311 (I'm Not Okay!) 07:38, 14 August 2009 (UTC)
VL
Per IRC :).
Goblin 14:35, 14 August 2009 (UTC) I ♥ Chenzw!
- Done --Barras || talk 21:22, 14 August 2009 (UTC)
Oversight
I have closed your request as successful. Please remember the oversight policy and good luck. Respectfully, NonvocalScream (talk) 23:02, 14 August 2009 (UTC)
- Furthers my point that these inappropriate - they should all be closed on the end date. I won't be dropping this. Goblin 23:20, 14 August 2009 (UTC) I ♥ Kennedy!
- Bluegoblin7: You are welcome to discuss on simple.
But a caution, if consensus does not side with you, and you don't drop it, then youwillcan be blocked if you turn this wiki into a battleground in reference to your "not dropping this". NonvocalScream (talk) 23:24, 14 August 2009 (UTC)
- Bluegoblin7: You are welcome to discuss on simple.
- I will begin discussion tomorrow. Furthermore, you are a) not a crat and b) have a COI to the elections. The result should not be acted until number one at least is resolved. Goblin 23:30, 14 August 2009 (UTC) I ♥ Juliancolton!
- Remember, I closed Majorly's RFCheckuser. Also, keep in mind that for OS and CU, we are in fact counting votes, there is no consensus gauging, per the relevant meta policy. NonvocalScream (talk) 23:35, 14 August 2009 (UTC)
- Threatening people with being blocked while questioning these unusual circumstances seems a bit odd to me. Closing out other bits and pieces is all very well but threatening other editors seems a little over the top. The Rambling Man (talk) 23:42, 14 August 2009 (UTC)
- Based on the history of this editor, I wanted to be very clear. And I told him he is welcome to discuss. Yes... I did caution him about battlegrounds, due to his history. NonvocalScream (talk) 23:43, 14 August 2009 (UTC)
- I don't think it really matters since CU/OS close as soon as someone hits the required numbers if I recall meta policy on it correctly. Cause someone got upset once before when we did this and it was pointed out to them that it was completely appropriate via policy. -DJSasso (talk) 00:19, 15 August 2009 (UTC)
- Based on the history of this editor, I wanted to be very clear. And I told him he is welcome to discuss. Yes... I did caution him about battlegrounds, due to his history. NonvocalScream (talk) 23:43, 14 August 2009 (UTC)
- Threatening people with being blocked while questioning these unusual circumstances seems a bit odd to me. Closing out other bits and pieces is all very well but threatening other editors seems a little over the top. The Rambling Man (talk) 23:42, 14 August 2009 (UTC)
- Remember, I closed Majorly's RFCheckuser. Also, keep in mind that for OS and CU, we are in fact counting votes, there is no consensus gauging, per the relevant meta policy. NonvocalScream (talk) 23:35, 14 August 2009 (UTC)
- I will begin discussion tomorrow. Furthermore, you are a) not a crat and b) have a COI to the elections. The result should not be acted until number one at least is resolved. Goblin 23:30, 14 August 2009 (UTC) I ♥ Juliancolton!
*On second thought, I won't be the one executing a block if ... I closed the RFO, so there is a conflict if BG7 is nonsupportive of my action here I think. But the caution remains. NonvocalScream (talk) 23:52, 14 August 2009 (UTC)
Well Done on getting it Barras! Yotcmdr =talk to the commander= 23:40, 14 August 2009 (UTC)
OS
When you're using the tool, could it be possible to use the flood flag. It really is flooding RC. Thanks, Yotcmdr =talk to the commander= 09:15, 16 August 2009 (UTC)
- Oh, sorry. I will do this. I just forgot this, because I don't need to hide this normally. There were to many this night which needs to be doen. Thanks for telling me. Barras || talk 09:16, 16 August 2009 (UTC)
- No problem. Thanks for doing it quickly! Yotcmdr =talk to the commander= 09:22, 16 August 2009 (UTC)
OS mailing list
Wikipedia talk:Oversight#Mailing list. If you could sign that so we have definitive on-wiki evidence of consensus for a mailing list, that'd be grand. Thanks. EVula // talk // ☯ // 15:05, 21 August 2009 (UTC)
Administrative mailing list...
Hello. Just a reminder, there is a Simple English admin mailing list, located here. The mailing list is also listed on certain block templates, as a means for unblock reviews when talk pages are disabled. If you would like to help out, please I encourage you to subscribe. Very best, NonvocalScream (talk) 16:12, 22 August 2009 (UTC)
- Already signed in there today :) --Barras || talk 16:14, 22 August 2009 (UTC)
Hermann Göring
I've closed the PVGA of Hermann Göring as successful per WP:SNOW and have also created the VGA stub (which you can improve). Congratulations! We hope to get more such articles from you in the future. Pmlineditor Talk 09:05, 30 August 2009 (UTC)
- Thanks. Barras || talk 09:06, 30 August 2009 (UTC)