User talk:EricBarbour

You want to fix this "encyclopedia"? I posted some of the requirements on Wikipedia Review many months ago. For reference, I will repost and expand them here.

1. Jimbo Wales has to leave. He should turn over the server admin passwords to a professional, responsible IT person who is salaried by the WMF.

2. Said IT professional has to make some major changes to the MediaWiki system currently hosting WP. Changes would include but not be limited to:

  a. BLPs must be heavily restricted and protected, or better yet, removed entirely.

  b. A proper set of guidelines for editing and administration should be enacted AND ADHERED TO. 
     This would include limitations on the powers of all administrators, and requirements for editors to be
     personally responsible for whatever they do on the wiki. No more IP-address editing. Anyone seeking
     to write for WP must apply and be approved. NO PERSONS UNDER THE AGE OF 18. "Assume good faith" my ass.

  c. ALL administrators must be elected by OPEN BALLOT, by the editors whose work they oversee.

3. Most critical to the project's success: certain untrustworthy administrators MUST BE REMOVED and banned from WP PERMANENTLY. This would include but not be limited to:

   FT2
   Durova
   David Gerard
   JzG
   MONGO
   Jayjg
   Elonka
   Jaakobou
   Raul654
   SV  — Preceding unsigned comment added by 86.177.147.45 (talk) 07:12, 22 July 2011 (UTC) 

Either make drastic changes, or Wikipedia will continue to decline.

Eric Barbour (talk) 10:28, 5 December 2008 (UTC)

---

Block

Lar has asked I leave a note explaining my block, which I didn't do originally as I presumed you wouldn't be checking your talk page. You have made your intentions to no longer edit constructively very clear on your talk page and your account has only been used to post links to WR. I feel this constitutes Disruptive editing as it is not forwarding the goal of the project to create an encyclopedia. In the future if you wish to resume constructively editing I will gladly unblock you. BJ^Talk 20:36, 11 March 2009 (UTC)

{{unblock|I would like to be unblocked. My intention is, and has always been, not to vandalize or cause problems. The only reason I would post to a user's talk page is to inform them that they were being discussed at Wikipedia Review. WP users deserve to know that a discussion is taking place focused on their on-wiki activities, and because there is no mechanism for automatic notification, someone has to do it manually.}}

++Lar: t/c 03:45, 19 March 2009 (UTC)

FYI

You may find this about Wikipedia Review interesting. If not, sorry to bother you. -- Noroton (talk) 17:40, 8 May 2009 (UTC)

Your offsite attack

Regarding this [1]:

I've already been de-adminned. That happened four months ago. What the hell else do you expect to happen to me?

Are you expecting me to be permanently banned from Wikipedia because I made so many fuckups as an admin back in January? Are you expecting my ISP to block me for all of that mess?

For your information, I haven't even been editing all that much in the last two months. I figure someone else can write the articles. Why in the hell should I waste my time editing Wikipedia at this point?

I don't exactly know what the hell you're getting at here, except maybe you're having fun repeatedly bashing me on Wikipedia Review.

Oh, and by the way, if I'm only 13 years old, you should come up with an explanation of how I've been able to drive all over Minnesota to take pictures of worthless things like sunken ships and old houses. Oh, wait, you could care less about the articles.

--Elkman ^(Elkspeak) 20:51, 1 June 2009 (UTC)

   I did not bash you---you bashed yourself. Eric Barbour (talk) 21:16, 9 June 2009 (UTC)

You have been nominated for membership of the Established Editors Association

The Established editors association will be a kind of union of who have made substantial and enduring contributions to the encyclopedia for a period of time (say, two years or more). The proposed articles of association are here - suggestions welcome.

If you wish to be elected, please notify me here. If you know of someone else who may be eligible, please nominate them here

Please put all discussion here.Peter Damian (talk) 10:21, 13 June 2009 (UTC)

SlimVirgin was not banned

In a recent post you have said that SlimVirgin was banned for six months.[2] She was temporarily desysoped for six months by an arbcom motion, and edited during that six months. Could you please correct yourself? Cheers, John Vandenberg ^(chat) 11:26, 15 July 2009 (UTC)

Your statement

I have restored it; I took the liberty of rephrasing "SV is trying to sabotage" to "SV appears to be trying to sabotage". I cannot see that anyone could possibly be so anal as to think this is a personal attack now. If it is removed, please let me know. KillerChihuahua^?!?Advice 14:54, 21 July 2009 (UTC)

Oversight and Checkuser Election 2009 votes

I just wanted to let you know that I have had to remove your votes from the elections as you did not have the required number of votes. These requirements are that and editor has to have 150 mainspace edits before June 15. You only had 134 edits on this date so unfortunately you are not eligible to vote. I have however left your comments there. I hope youll return for whenever the next elections are. Seddσn ^talk|^WikimediaUK 20:12, 29 July 2009 (UTC)

Community ban discussion

A proposal to reinstate your community ban has been proposed here Raul654 (talk) 22:30, 29 July 2009 (UTC)

Very funny, Mark. I'm laughing. Eric Barbour (talk) 22:33, 12 August 2009 (UTC)

Unacceptable edit

You have been blocked from editing for violating Wikipedia policy. If you believe this block is unjustified you may contest this block by replying here on your talk page by adding the text {{unblock|your reason here}}. You may also email the blocking administrator or any administrator from this list instead, or mail unblock-en-l@mail.wikimedia.org.

This edit [3] (subsequently revision deleted but administrators can view it) is unacceptable. The English Wikipedia has a very strict policy against outing. I've asked you via email to elaborate. When you were unblocked it was the proviso that it was to allow you to notify folk that might not be aware of things going on at WR. You've made some good article space contributions since then but there hasn't been a lot of notification. I agree with the substance of much of your commentary, even when I think perhaps it could have been worded differently, but I'm afraid that this outing leaves me no choice but to reapply the block. Absent some strong guarantee that such outing behavior (or behavior that might be perceived by others as outing, even if you yourself don't see it as such) will not be repeated, the block will remain in place. I am sorry. ++Lar: t/c 16:01, 15 August 2009 (UTC)

File permission problem with File:RABBunny.jpg

Thanks for uploading File:RABBunny.jpg. I noticed that while you provided a valid copyright licensing tag, there is no proof that the creator of the file agreed to license it under the given license.

If you created this media entirely yourself but have previously published it elsewhere (especially online), please either

• make a note permitting reuse under the CC-BY-SA or another acceptable free license (see this list) at the site of the original publication; or
• Send an email from an address associated with the original publication to permissions-enwikimedia.org, stating your ownership of the material and your intention to publish it under a free license. You can find a sample permission letter here.

If you did not create it entirely yourself, please ask the person who created the file to take one of the two steps listed above, or if the owner of the file has already given their permission to you via email, please forward that email to permissions-enwikimedia.org.

If you believe the media meets the criteria at Wikipedia:Non-free content, use a tag such as {{non-free fair use in|article name}} or one of the other tags listed at Wikipedia:Image copyright tags#Fair use, and add a rationale justifying the file's use on the article or articles where it is included. See Wikipedia:Image copyright tags for the full list of copyright tags that you can use.

If you have uploaded other files, consider checking that you have provided evidence that their copyright owners have agreed to license their works under the tags you supplied, too. You can find a list of files you have uploaded by following this link. Files lacking evidence of permission may be deleted one week after they have been tagged, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you. Skier Dude (talk) 07:47, 7 December 2009 (UTC)

File permission problem with File:RABCat.jpg

Thanks for uploading File:RABCat.jpg. I noticed that while you provided a valid copyright licensing tag, there is no proof that the creator of the file agreed to license it under the given license.

If you created this media entirely yourself but have previously published it elsewhere (especially online), please either

• make a note permitting reuse under the CC-BY-SA or another acceptable free license (see this list) at the site of the original publication; or
• Send an email from an address associated with the original publication to permissions-enwikimedia.org, stating your ownership of the material and your intention to publish it under a free license. You can find a sample permission letter here.

If you did not create it entirely yourself, please ask the person who created the file to take one of the two steps listed above, or if the owner of the file has already given their permission to you via email, please forward that email to permissions-enwikimedia.org.

If you believe the media meets the criteria at Wikipedia:Non-free content, use a tag such as {{non-free fair use in|article name}} or one of the other tags listed at Wikipedia:Image copyright tags#Fair use, and add a rationale justifying the file's use on the article or articles where it is included. See Wikipedia:Image copyright tags for the full list of copyright tags that you can use.

If you have uploaded other files, consider checking that you have provided evidence that their copyright owners have agreed to license their works under the tags you supplied, too. You can find a list of files you have uploaded by following this link. Files lacking evidence of permission may be deleted one week after they have been tagged, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you. Skier Dude (talk) 07:48, 7 December 2009 (UTC)

File permission problem with File:RABDonkey.jpg

Thanks for uploading File:RABDonkey.jpg. I noticed that while you provided a valid copyright licensing tag, there is no proof that the creator of the file agreed to license it under the given license.

If you created this media entirely yourself but have previously published it elsewhere (especially online), please either

• make a note permitting reuse under the CC-BY-SA or another acceptable free license (see this list) at the site of the original publication; or
• Send an email from an address associated with the original publication to permissions-enwikimedia.org, stating your ownership of the material and your intention to publish it under a free license. You can find a sample permission letter here.

If you did not create it entirely yourself, please ask the person who created the file to take one of the two steps listed above, or if the owner of the file has already given their permission to you via email, please forward that email to permissions-enwikimedia.org.

If you believe the media meets the criteria at Wikipedia:Non-free content, use a tag such as {{non-free fair use in|article name}} or one of the other tags listed at Wikipedia:Image copyright tags#Fair use, and add a rationale justifying the file's use on the article or articles where it is included. See Wikipedia:Image copyright tags for the full list of copyright tags that you can use.

If you have uploaded other files, consider checking that you have provided evidence that their copyright owners have agreed to license their works under the tags you supplied, too. You can find a list of files you have uploaded by following this link. Files lacking evidence of permission may be deleted one week after they have been tagged, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you. Skier Dude (talk) 07:48, 7 December 2009 (UTC)

File permission problem with File:RABHamster.jpg

Thanks for uploading File:RABHamster.jpg. I noticed that while you provided a valid copyright licensing tag, there is no proof that the creator of the file agreed to license it under the given license.

If you created this media entirely yourself but have previously published it elsewhere (especially online), please either

• make a note permitting reuse under the CC-BY-SA or another acceptable free license (see this list) at the site of the original publication; or
• Send an email from an address associated with the original publication to permissions-enwikimedia.org, stating your ownership of the material and your intention to publish it under a free license. You can find a sample permission letter here.

If you did not create it entirely yourself, please ask the person who created the file to take one of the two steps listed above, or if the owner of the file has already given their permission to you via email, please forward that email to permissions-enwikimedia.org.

If you believe the media meets the criteria at Wikipedia:Non-free content, use a tag such as {{non-free fair use in|article name}} or one of the other tags listed at Wikipedia:Image copyright tags#Fair use, and add a rationale justifying the file's use on the article or articles where it is included. See Wikipedia:Image copyright tags for the full list of copyright tags that you can use.

If you have uploaded other files, consider checking that you have provided evidence that their copyright owners have agreed to license their works under the tags you supplied, too. You can find a list of files you have uploaded by following this link. Files lacking evidence of permission may be deleted one week after they have been tagged, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you. Skier Dude (talk) 07:48, 7 December 2009 (UTC)

File permission problem with File:RABPuppy.jpg

Thanks for uploading File:RABPuppy.jpg. I noticed that while you provided a valid copyright licensing tag, there is no proof that the creator of the file agreed to license it under the given license.

If you created this media entirely yourself but have previously published it elsewhere (especially online), please either

• make a note permitting reuse under the CC-BY-SA or another acceptable free license (see this list) at the site of the original publication; or
• Send an email from an address associated with the original publication to permissions-enwikimedia.org, stating your ownership of the material and your intention to publish it under a free license. You can find a sample permission letter here.

If you did not create it entirely yourself, please ask the person who created the file to take one of the two steps listed above, or if the owner of the file has already given their permission to you via email, please forward that email to permissions-enwikimedia.org.

If you believe the media meets the criteria at Wikipedia:Non-free content, use a tag such as {{non-free fair use in|article name}} or one of the other tags listed at Wikipedia:Image copyright tags#Fair use, and add a rationale justifying the file's use on the article or articles where it is included. See Wikipedia:Image copyright tags for the full list of copyright tags that you can use.

If you have uploaded other files, consider checking that you have provided evidence that their copyright owners have agreed to license their works under the tags you supplied, too. You can find a list of files you have uploaded by following this link. Files lacking evidence of permission may be deleted one week after they have been tagged, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you. Skier Dude (talk) 07:48, 7 December 2009 (UTC)

Ha

Mmm, now who's a "little boy" who should just have his computer taken away from him eh? Just proof that the blocked losers end up whining on WR!! Dr. Blofeld ^{White cat} 12:00, 29 July 2010 (UTC)

Speedy deletion nomination of David Lovelace

You may want to consider using the Article Wizard to help you create articles.

If this is the first article that you have created, you may want to read the guide to writing your first article.

A tag has been placed on David Lovelace requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done because the article, which appears to be about a real person, individual animal(s), an organization (band, club, company, etc.), or web content, does not indicate how or why the subject of the article is important or significant: that is, why an article about that subject should be included in an encyclopedia. Under the criteria for speedy deletion, articles that do not indicate the subject's importance or significance may be deleted at any time. Please see the guidelines for what is generally accepted as notable.

If you think that you can assert the notability of the subject, you may contest the deletion by adding {{hang on}} at the top of the article, immediately below the speedy deletion ({{db-...}}) tag (if no such tag exists, the page is no longer a speedy delete candidate), and providing your reasons for contesting on the article's talk page, but be aware that once tagged for speedy deletion, if the article meets the criterion, it may be deleted without delay. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag yourself. You may freely add information to the article that would confirm the subject's notability under Wikipedia guidelines.

You may want to read the guidelines for specific types of articles: biographies, websites, bands, or companies. --Souvalou (talk) 20:24, 13 October 2010 (UTC)

Re: Wikipedia Review

Yup I read many things on WR. Though I personally find the atmosphere toxic to collaborative editing. The Resident Anthropologist (talk)•(contribs) 00:48, 15 June 2011 (UTC)

Speedy deletion nomination of File:AnimalBabies.jpg

A tag has been placed on File:AnimalBabies.jpg requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section F9 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because the image appears to be a blatant copyright infringement. For legal reasons, we cannot accept copyrighted images or text borrowed from other web sites or printed material, and as a consequence, your addition will most likely be deleted.

If you think that this notice was placed here in error, contest the deletion by clicking on the button labelled "Click here to contest this speedy deletion". Doing so will take you to the talk page where you will find a pre-formatted place for you to explain why you believe the page should not be deleted. You can also visit the the page's talk page directly to give your reasons, but be aware that once tagged for speedy deletion, if the page meets the criterion, it may be deleted without delay. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag yourself, but don't hesitate to add information to the page that would render it more in conformance with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. Russavia ^{Let's dialogue} 14:03, 26 August 2011 (UTC)

File permission problem with File:AnimalBabies.jpg

Thanks for uploading File:AnimalBabies.jpg, which you've sourced to David Lovelace. I noticed that while you provided a valid copyright licensing tag, there is no proof that the creator of the file agreed to license it under the given license.

If you created this media entirely yourself but have previously published it elsewhere (especially online), please either

• make a note permitting reuse under the CC-BY-SA or another acceptable free license (see this list) at the site of the original publication; or
• Send an email from an address associated with the original publication to permissions-enwikimedia.org, stating your ownership of the material and your intention to publish it under a free license. You can find a sample permission letter here. If you take this step, add {{OTRS pending}} to the file description page to prevent premature deletion.

If you did not create it entirely yourself, please ask the person who created the file to take one of the two steps listed above, or if the owner of the file has already given their permission to you via email, please forward that email to permissions-enwikimedia.org.

If you believe the media meets the criteria at Wikipedia:Non-free content, use a tag such as {{non-free fair use in|article name}} or one of the other tags listed at Wikipedia:File copyright tags#Fair use, and add a rationale justifying the file's use on the article or articles where it is included. See Wikipedia:File copyright tags for the full list of copyright tags that you can use.

If you have uploaded other files, consider checking that you have provided evidence that their copyright owners have agreed to license their works under the tags you supplied, too. You can find a list of files you have created in your upload log. Files lacking evidence of permission may be deleted one week after they have been tagged, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. You may wish to read the Wikipedia's image use policy. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you.  Ronhjones  ^(Talk) 18:26, 26 August 2011 (UTC)