User talk:DJBarney24

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Jump to: navigation, search
EditDJBarney24 UserPages Navigation bar. Thanks to User:Compwhizii :)
Nuvola filesystems folder home.png
Home
Nuvola apps personal.png
About me
Nuvola filesystems folder home.png
Tools
Gnome-searchtool.svg
Interesting Pages
Crystal kthememgr.png
Userboxes
Nuvola apps edu languages.png
My Talk
Nuvola apps edu miscellaneous.png
My Sandboxes
Information icon.svg
Editor Index
Crystal Clear app browser.png
email me
Kepler-equation-derivation.png
My Web Page


Welcome!

Hello, DJBarney24, and welcome to Wikipedia! Thank you for your contributions. I hope you like the place and decide to stay. Here are some pages that you might find helpful:

I hope you enjoy editing here and being a Wikipedian! Please sign your name on talk pages using four tildes (~~~~); this will automatically produce your name and the date. If you need help, check out Wikipedia:Questions, ask me on my talk page, or ask your question and then place {{helpme}} after the question on your talk page. Again, welcome!  JACOPLANE • 2007-04-27 21:23

Thankyou ! :-D I found a new word on your userpage ... "Wikicide"...LOL! Is this when someone deletes their account to avoid facing any criticism? Well, Jacoplane. I'm getting into editing the Video game entries as I think there are often some very good games out there that get "lost" because there's just so little info about them or just plain wrong info. Take the "Breed" entry I'm editing. It had obviously been fallen upon by Halo fans and, basically, ripped to shreds. "Halo is better", "my game is better than yours". I think many people still think Wikipedia is some kind of discussion forum ! Anyway, Breed is interesting because it fits into the Tactical / Squad based genre of games. I could'nt find a list of these though ... any ideas ? DJ Barney 12:33, 28 April 2007 (UTC)

Image:Akiross.jpg[edit]

Hello, DJBarney24. An automated process has found and removed an image or media file tagged as nonfree media, and thus is being used under fair use that was in your userspace. The image (Image:Akiross.jpg) was found at the following location: User:DJBarney24. This image or media was attempted to be removed per criterion number 9 of our non-free content policy. The image or media was replaced with Image:NonFreeImageRemoved.svg , so your formatting of your userpage should be fine. Please find a free image or media to replace it with, and or remove the image from your userspace. User:Gnome (Bot)-talk 00:44, 14 May 2007 (UTC)

Edits to Cydonia (Mars)[edit]

Hey, I'm trying to understand why you have removed text from this talk page. Generally speaking it's not a good idea to ever remove text from a talk page, unless there is a very good reason why, and you should mention the reason why you are doing so in the Edit summary. If you could post your response here, I'll get back to you. Tuvas 23:21, 22 May 2007 (UTC)

Never mind, I see that you removed your own edit... Next time I should take a more careful look before I revert. Sorry about that... Tuvas 23:23, 22 May 2007 (UTC)
It's OK. I just got a bit confused, so you might have seen a few strange things happening! Does it look OK now ? DJ Barney 23:27, 22 May 2007 (UTC)
It's alright now. We've all made that edit before that we didn't want to on a talk page, and removed it. I was wrong to revert it though, because it was your own edit. Let me just leave you with a quick lesson, using the Edit Summaries can be invaluable to making everyone's life alot easier, even often times your own. I wish you much success and good editing with your time at Wikipedia, and thank you for joining this adventure! If you should need anything, feel free to post on my talk page, I'll do the best I can to help. Tuvas 23:30, 22 May 2007 (UTC)
 :) I am not educated in the use of edit summaries on talk pages. I always carefully put something in for the main article. But I should for talk as well ? Well, I'll try and remember.
It's one of the signed of a newer editor, not always leaving Edit summaries. I doubt anyone had it perfect right from the beginning. You'll get the hang of things pretty soon. Of course, you don't always have to leave something more than normal, for instance, this reply that I am making won't have anything more than the automatic response. But if you do anything different, ie, forget to sign a post, delete something, create a new post, etc, you should mention it. Tuvas 03:30, 23 May 2007 (UTC)

Fair use disputed for Image:Farcry Sandbox Logo.png[edit]

Nuvola apps important.svg

Thanks for uploading Image:Farcry Sandbox Logo.png. However, there is a concern that the rationale you have provided for using this image under "fair use" may be invalid. Please read the instructions at Wikipedia:Non-free content carefully, then go to the image description page and clarify why you think the image qualifies for fair use. Using one of the templates at Wikipedia:Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to ensure that your image is in compliance with Wikipedia policy, but remember that you must complete the template. Do not simply insert a blank template on an image page.

If it is determined that the image does not qualify under fair use, it will be deleted within a couple of days according to our Criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you.BetacommandBot 05:17, 16 September 2007 (UTC)

Disputed fair use rationale for Image:Cryengine FarCry Sandbox Editor.png[edit]

Thanks for uploading Image:Cryengine FarCry Sandbox Editor.png. However, there is a concern that the rationale you have provided for using this image under "fair use" may be invalid. Please read the instructions at Wikipedia:Non-free content carefully, then go to the image description page and clarify why you think the image qualifies for fair use. Using one of the templates at Wikipedia:Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to ensure that your image is in compliance with Wikipedia policy, but remember that you must complete the template. Do not simply insert a blank template on an image page.

If it is determined that the image does not qualify under fair use, it will be deleted within a couple of days according to our criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the media copyright questions page. Thank you.BetacommandBot 18:25, 29 October 2007 (UTC)

Disputed fair use rationale for Image:Breed landing.JPG[edit]

Thanks for uploading Image:Breed landing.JPG. However, there is a concern that the rationale you have provided for using this image under "fair use" may be invalid. Please read the instructions at Wikipedia:Non-free content carefully, then go to the image description page and clarify why you think the image qualifies for fair use. Using one of the templates at Wikipedia:Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to ensure that your image is in compliance with Wikipedia policy, but remember that you must complete the template. Do not simply insert a blank template on an image page.

If it is determined that the image does not qualify under fair use, it will be deleted within a couple of days according to our criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the media copyright questions page. Thank you.BetacommandBot 20:57, 29 October 2007 (UTC)

Disputed fair use rationale for Image:Breed training tank.JPG[edit]

Thanks for uploading Image:Breed training tank.JPG. However, there is a concern that the rationale you have provided for using this image under "fair use" may be invalid. Please read the instructions at Wikipedia:Non-free content carefully, then go to the image description page and clarify why you think the image qualifies for fair use. Using one of the templates at Wikipedia:Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to ensure that your image is in compliance with Wikipedia policy, but remember that you must complete the template. Do not simply insert a blank template on an image page.

If it is determined that the image does not qualify under fair use, it will be deleted within a couple of days according to our criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the media copyright questions page. Thank you.BetacommandBot 20:58, 29 October 2007 (UTC)

Naming of Cydonia[edit]

Hi DJ Barney. Just to say that I've put a response about the naming of Cydonia on Cydonia Mensae's talkpage. I'm not sure that Athena is the most direct connection, but see what you think. I've poked around the web a bit, but can't seem to find anything definitive on the subject. And much of what appears at first to be interesting is actually derived from Wikipedia anyway!  ;-) Cheers, --Plumbago (talk) 12:16, 4 July 2008 (UTC)

Violation of talk page guidelines[edit]

Hello, DJBarney24, and thank you for your contributions to the discussion at Matthias Rath. Per WP:TALK, the talk page is reserved for discussions of improvements to the article itself. Accordingly, your response to Matthias Rath's off-Wikipedia criticism of Wikipedia does not belong on the article's talk page, and I have removed it. Thank you, Keepcalmandcarryon (talk) 20:17, 17 September 2008 (UTC)

Thanks for the comment. I think you may have overreacted. I see the mistake I made. I mentioned "So why has Rath not taken up the appropriate litigation ?" in my last comment in that section. I should have said "the internal WP litigation process". My intention was not to discuss actual LEGAL litigation. I admit you may have a point that my last comment on that thread was conversational and probably innappropriate for a talk page. But to remove the entire thread is an overreaction in my opinion. My comment directed at Rath in light of his article on his website has a direct bearing on the editing of the article, especially in the light of Wikipedia:BLP. Please consider restoring these comments, minus the last one. Especially in the light of this...

"Do not strike out the comments of other editors without their permission." Wikipedia:TALK#Editing_comments

Thankyou DJ Barney (talk) 21:51, 17 September 2008 (UTC)

The talk page guidelines indicate that article talk pages are for discussing specific improvements to article content. If you have suggestions for Matthias Rath, you may want to contact him or his organization directly, since he does not appear to be active on Wikipedia as best I can tell. Furthermore, as the target of an attack/"outing", I would appreciate you not constantly restoring a link to the Rath organization's page which contains what I consider a fairly lame attempt at intimidation unless it serves some obvious encyclopedic purpose. MastCell Talk 22:26, 17 September 2008 (UTC)
Right. OK! It took a while for the penny to drop ... lol. You are the Mastcell in Rath's page ! Well, I apologise for my inappropriate use of the talk page on that article. Studying the guidelines closely I have learnt that maybe here (this talk page) is more appropriate for that kind of discussion. Well, I don't know everything. Also I cannot find where I was restoring the link you mention. I think I fixed my own faulty code a couple of times and mistook some else's edit for my own and fixed that but I cannot find where I reverted yours. Mastcell, the very reason I started the discussion was because I was shocked by Rath's article, and your inclusion in it. It's a complete misunderstanding of WP. Rath (or whoever wrote the article) seems to think that WP is a Jimmy Wales "mission" or something. A concept entirely idiotic to any WP editor. The article is sort of insulting to all WP editors and users as it sort of bypasses any possibility of using that edit button (yes, that!) or being able to use any of WP's processes for the subject of biographies ( Wikipedia:BLP#Dealing_with_articles_about_yourself ). I still think there needs to be a wider discussion of the issues surrounding an article such as this. It's a highly contentious area. Some believe that Pharmaceutical Drugs are "life savers", while people like me believe they are killers. I have seen my family ripped apart by drugs both legal and illegal, so I think editors should know about the underlying extreme emotions that lurk around this issue otherwise how do we hope to write a neutral article ? DJ Barney (talk) 14:30, 18 September 2008 (UTC)
DJBarney24, thank you for your response. "Strike out" means to place lines through text as if the author has withdrawn the comment, and I agree that this should not be done without permission. Instead, I deleted your comments per Wikipedia:TALK#Editing_comments, where "Deleting material not relevant to improving the article" is specifically sanctioned, and does not require permission. Please remember that talk pages should not be used as a personal networking site in attempts to contact, advise, or offer help to off-Wikipedia entities. Thank you, Keepcalmandcarryon (talk) 13:52, 18 September 2008 (UTC)
I don't think either of you are actually discussing this with me. Waving WP policies in my face will not get an neutral article written. We actually have to DISCUSS it ! Although my actions breach some policies, in LIGHT OF other policies like the living biography one's, can you not see what my actions represent ? What happened to "assume good faith" ? Especially the rule about deleting content that cannot be backed up. Dr Rath is having accusations of causing patients to die levelled against him and I think you should take that into account in this discussion HERE. He has won a court case against the British Medical Journal paying him a large amount of damages. It is highly likely that he'll take on WP if necessary so any discussion of legalities is not "threats of sueing", I am simply trying to bring this up. Why don't you both "edit for the enemy" for change ? You might try editing my comments (with permission maybe) to bring them into the scope of the policies but instead you take this approach of delete, delete, delete ! This is not what WP is about. It is not supposed to be a clash of ideologies as we see to some extend on the Rath page (Pharma vs Natural). Come on guys, why don't you switch "sides" and edit in some things about Natural supplements, properly sourced ? I might do the same. The Scientific studies are out there. Search any med database. Come on guys. DJ Barney (talk) 14:04, 21 September 2008 (UTC)
As far as I can tell, I am editing articles on natural supplements using high-quality reliable sources. I'm aware of Matthias Rath's litigation history. As far as I am aware, all of the material in the Rath article is properly attributed to reliable sources with reputations for fact-checking and accuracy. If you are aware of any improperly sourced material, please bring it up on the article talk page, as I don't wish for Wikipedia to repeat any unsubstantiated rumors or insinuation. At the same time, it would be inappropriate (and, in fact, a violation of WP:NPOV) to insert "positive" material solely to artificially "balance" the predominantly critical coverage that Rath has attracted from reliable sources. "Neutral", as Wikipedia defines it, does not mean balancing every "negative" point with a "positive" point; it means accurately and proportionately capturing what reliable sources have to say about a subject. If you're aware of reliably-sourced coverage of Matthias Rath which we have neglected, and which presents a different light, then please raise it on the article talk page. MastCell Talk 04:30, 22 September 2008 (UTC)
I just read your recentcomment at Matthias Rath, and I encourage you, as MastCell did above, to insert additional reliable sources that support Rath's claims. I will welcome any and all edits from you that provide new information from reliable sources about Rath or the efficacy of supplements.
"Writing for the enemy" is a fine concept, but we do need good sources. For example, sources stating that Rath's trials in SA saved lives and sources to support Rath's claims re: effects of green tea extract, ascorbate, etc. on immunodeficiency in vivo. Currently, the Rath article references a non-peer-reviewed three-page article in a book given to participants at a Commonwealth Health conference and a nearly unreadable (that's my opinion) report in Veterinaria Italiana for the immunodeficiency supplement claims. In other words, sources that don't seem to be the most reliable or high-quality. If you ask me, the Rath debate here is about more- and less-reliable sources and not about "pharma versus natural". When what you call "pharma" has solid, peer-reviewed evidence in Lancet and NEJM and Science and Nature, and "Natural" has non-peer-reviewed or barely-edited publications in obscure journals and books, many of them self-published, there's not much to do except perhaps to claim conspiracy. And you will find that doesn't fly on Wikipedia without firm support. Thanks, Keepcalmandcarryon (talk) 14:10, 22 September 2008 (UTC)

Help[edit]

{{helpme}}

What does "Deleted because expired WP:PROD; Reason given: Fails to meet TW" mean ? I'm trying to get http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/InfiltrationMod undeleted. It's a long standing and well known mod. DJ Barney (talk) 13:53, 21 September 2008 (UTC)

Hello. The edit summary is a bit unclear but I see that the article was proposed for deletion in July with the rationale of "Fails to meet Wikipedia's General Notability Guideline. No reliable sources to assert notability within the article, or were found via web search or news archive." Does that help? Kind regards. --Malcolmxl5 (talk) 14:36, 21 September 2008 (UTC)
Thanks, it does. Where are you getting the info from. Is that admin only info ? DJ Barney (talk) 14:39, 21 September 2008 (UTC)

STS-126 Flyaround[edit]

Dear DJBarney24, while I completely understand that it took time, and effort to make the animations, such images, even low quality, are very large and cause long load times for readers, especially those on dial-up or slow connections. (I am on DSL and those two images took over 3 minutes to load for me.) It is generally not suggested to use that type of animations in articles, per the Wikipedia:Image use policy: "Inline animations should be used sparingly; a static image with a link to the animation is preferred unless the animation has a very small file size. Keep in mind the problems with print compatibility mentioned above." It is for this reason that I removed the animations, as they did not give detail sufficient to warrant adding them to the article. The article is about the mission, remember, and not about the one event, the flyaround. I'm quite sure that today there will be a high resolution version of what the station looked like during the flyaround, which can be added once it is out, but also, keep in mind that "Images must be relevant to the article they appear in and be significantly relative to the article's topic." It is for these reasons that I moved them to a link in the External links section, and instead, a high quality photo can be added once it is available. Please understand that this was not personal towards you, but simply following the guidelines of the encyclopedia. I hope this helps you understand the image policies a bit more. If you have any further questions, please do not hesitate to ask. ArielGold 16:33, 30 November 2008 (UTC)

A static image (if you can select a clear one) until a high resolution is available would be alright, and regarding the pertinence to the mission, nearly every shuttle mission has performed a flyaround, it is as common as docking and undocking, and not specifically relevant to STS-126's mission, especially since the mission did not expand the outside of the station, i.e. no new modules were installed. Hope that clears up what I meant! :) ArielGold 18:34, 30 November 2008 (UTC)


Proposed deletion of Hurrican (video game)[edit]

Ambox warning yellow.svg

The article Hurrican (video game) has been proposed for deletion because of the following concern:

Arriving 2nd place in a contest, by itself, is not enough to assert notability. A lack of reliable sources and significant coverage.

While all contributions to Wikipedia are appreciated, content or articles may be deleted for any of several reasons.

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

Please consider improving the article to address the issues raised. Removing {{dated prod}} will stop the Proposed Deletion process, but other deletion processes exist. The Speedy Deletion process can result in deletion without discussion, and Articles for Deletion allows discussion to reach consensus for deletion. Marasmusine (talk) 14:54, 12 September 2009 (UTC)

Conceding Cydonia[edit]

Hi again DJBarney24. I've put a question on the talkpage of the Cydonia article regarding your recent edit. Cheers, --PLUMBAGO 08:56, 10 February 2010 (UTC)

Hi. I have examined your question and you have some valid concerns. I will put a response in the next few days. Thanks. DJ Barney (talk) 18:34, 11 February 2010 (UTC)
No rush. Catch you later. --PLUMBAGO 21:49, 11 February 2010 (UTC)

Proposal to shut down WP Geographic Coordinates & ban coordinates on wikipedia articles[edit]

This means you. --Tagishsimon (talk) 11:55, 17 January 2012 (UTC)

Pseudoscience[edit]

I've explained my edit at Talk:Pseudoscience. -- Scjessey (talk) 13:53, 23 April 2012 (UTC)

I've left one more comment there for you. -- Scjessey (talk) 17:31, 24 April 2012 (UTC)

ANI discussion[edit]

There is a discussion regarding User:DJBarney24/WikiProject Plasma Cosmology at Wikipedia:Administrators'_noticeboard/Incidents#Off_wiki_fringe_group. User:Fred Bauder Talk 18:35, 27 September 2012 (UTC)

File:Farcry Sandbox Logo.png missing description details[edit]

Dear uploader: The media file you uploaded as:

is missing a description and/or other details on its image description page. If possible, please add this information. This will help other editors make better use of the image, and it will be more informative to readers.

If the information is not provided, the image may eventually be proposed for deletion, a situation which is not desirable, and which can easily be avoided.

If you have any questions, please see Help:Image page. Thank you. Theo's Little Bot (error?) 01:09, 13 April 2013 (UTC)

I could use your input![edit]

Hello, I am a new editor on Wikipedia. I noticed the Burzynski Clinic article was in need of changes, so I tried to add a couple of pieces of information to it.I tried to change the first paragraph, but everything I changed was deleted several times, even though I sourced it. The first paragraph now has no sourcing and their definition of an "antineoplaston", is incorrect, so I tried to find the source for it, but couldn't. So, I added the American Cancer Society's definition.(please see the article)I was told first that the American Cancer Society couldn't be used because it would make people think that the treatment was endorsed ( even though the American Cancer society is already listed as a source). I can't remember the other reason I was given. I also tried to add that Burzynski was a private practice physician in Houston and a member of the Texas Medical society ( with sources) but those were removed also.I tried to post on Dispute Resolution, but it was closed because two of the editors wanted to continue on Talk. We are not getting anywhere and there are about 5 editors that are of the same mindset. Is there anything I can do about this? Thank you!!Docia49 (talk) 17:46, 19 July 2013 (UTC) — Preceding unsigned comment added by Docia49 (talkcontribs)

Assume good faith. Get involved in the culture of Wikipedia. Edit articles in areas you would normally have no interest in. Edit articles in a way that supports the point off view that you disagree with ("editing for the enemy"). Wikipedia can't be used to tell the truth or to make the world a better place. Yet somehow it has changed everything for the better anyway even if edits that "should" be in there get "unfairly" removed (wink). DJ Barney (talk) 10:27, 20 July 2013 (UTC)
Thank you!Docia49 (talk) 03:57, 20 July 2013 (UTC)
No problem :) DJ Barney (talk) 10:27, 20 July 2013 (UTC)

File:Farcry Sandbox Logo.png listed for deletion[edit]

A file that you uploaded or altered, File:Farcry Sandbox Logo.png, has been listed at Wikipedia:Files for deletion. Please see the discussion to see why it has been listed (you may have to search for the title of the image to find its entry). Feel free to add your opinion on the matter below the nomination. Thank you. Kelly hi! 03:06, 22 November 2013 (UTC)