Jump to content

User talk:Barek

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

This is an old revision of this page, as edited by Built1905 (talk | contribs) at 23:37, 8 August 2012. The present address (URL) is a permanent link to this revision, which may differ significantly from the current revision.

35px}} Barek is tired of wikidrama, and has chosen to spend more time in the real world; but may still wander back online occasionally. During this time, replies to queries may be greatly delayed.
Please click here to start a new message at the bottom of this page.
Notice
  • If you post a message to me here, I will usually reply here - if you want a {{talkback}} notice, please request it.
  • If I left a message for you on your talk page, I have it on my watchlist and will see replies made on your talk page.
  • Please sign and date your posts using four tildes (~~~~).
  • I reserve the right at my discretion to remove uncivil comments from this page, as well as threads which are perceived by me to be disruptive.
  • My alternate talkpage can be used to contact me if Wikipedia indicates that this page is protected due to vandalism.
Please note:
This talk page is known to be monitored by talk page watchers. This means that someone other than me might reply to your query. Their input is welcome and their help with messages that I cannot respond to quickly is appreciated.
Server time (update):
August 23, 2024 07:57 (UTC)

purge cache


My talk page archives
 • 2007  • 2008  • 2009
 • 2010  • 2011  • 2012
 • 2013  • 2014  • 2015
 • 2016  • 2017  • 2018
 • 2019  • 2020  • 2021
 • 2022  • 2023  • 2024

Deleting all my culture.

Instead of deleting the culture I've added and more, why not relocate my information to an Arts and Culture section? I see you haven't removed that from the Pittsburgh page even though you were doing edits on the Pittsburgh page. It actually made me think I was crazy to refresh the page and see everything I added removed immediately. Sorry for feeling defensive, but I just felt the page was lacking that information for people looking for it. — Preceding unsigned comment added by ChateauOfADoubt (talkcontribs) 21:12, 25 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Please see WP:EL, WP:NOT#REPOSITORY, and WP:USCITY#External links - those links simply didn't belong on Wikipedia. The fact that Wikipedia is a big place and other pages are yet to be cleaned up doesn't automatically allow for the right to ignore site policies. --- Barek (talkcontribs) - 21:27, 25 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]

How do you determine that an event is notable? ChateauOfADoubt (talk) 15:29, 26 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Wikipedia's guideline on notability can be found at WP:N. Several of the annual events also appear to fail that criteria and should be removed as well. --- Barek (talkcontribs) - 15:32, 26 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]

I see you understand my point. I feel targeted by you for this. It is as though you are just undoing my contributions, rather than "cleaning up" the problems you explain them as. ChateauOfADoubt (talk) 15:37, 26 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]

(talk page stalker)Hi Chateau. I understand that you may be hurt and angry by what is happening, but I assure you that Barek is one of Wikipedia's finest editors. If he deletes something, it is because the language was really and truly in violation of clear Wikipedia policy. I encourage you to read the information at the links he posted for you so you can understand what is expected of Wikipedia editors in these areas. I would be happy to help you if you have any questions that you would like to ask a third party. Chin up, and happy editing, Ebikeguy (talk) 15:50, 26 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Ebikeguy, It's not that I believe that what Barek deleted wasn't in violation with policy, it's that Barek has been deleting my contributions stating "violation" and leaving things in the same section that I had not added that are also of the same quality and notability. Had Barek cleaned up all the events that Barek understands to be "not notable," I would have felt frustrated at having my contribution deleted, but I would not have felt targeted. You say "happy editing" but I've found that it's impossible to edit without having my edits removed immediately. It is incredibly discouraging, and I've found that this is an experience common among non-admin trying to edit entries on wikipedia. I spent a lot of time trying to clean up those contributions and remove them of "external links" which I hadn't previously realized were so discouraged. I whittled them down until they seemed agreeable. Again, I would have been frustrated if my edits were removed along with other offending material, but when just my edits are removed when there still exists other offending material in the very same section, that is when I feel I am being targeted, rather than someone is truly cleaning up a section based on policy. ChateauOfADoubt (talk) 16:19, 26 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Chateau, I continued this discussion on your talk page. Cheers, Ebikeguy (talk) 16:41, 26 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Barek, can you please explain or perhaps direct me to a more pointed section on determining notability? I have tried to understand, have waited to see which other events you remove (have you removed others? it doesn't seem to have changed) and the events section of the Notability page seems to refer only to one time occurrences, such as news stories. ChateauOfADoubt (talk) 18:00, 26 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Sorry, my wife and I had gone out of town for a few days, and just got back home. Still haven't unpacked, so will be a while before I can comment more. I see that Ebikeguy was assisting you, hopefully he was able to clarify the notability and city article questions you were asking. --- Barek (talkcontribs) - 23:10, 28 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Ebikeguy was unable to help me, so I came back and asked that question: "can you please explain or perhaps direct me to a more pointed section on determining notability? I have tried to understand, have waited to see which other events you remove (have you removed others? it doesn't seem to have changed) and the events section of the Notability page seems to refer only to one time occurrences, such as news stories." You seem to have a clear understanding of this, so I was hoping you could point me to the section that I must be missing. ChateauOfADoubt (talk) 21:46, 31 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]

The notability guideline on events has a pretty high bar set at WP:INDEPTH; it's better to use the simpler summary listed at WP:USCITIES#Arts and culture. The main goal is to avoid trivial or promotional listings by avoiding unsourced original research. This can best be resolved if an event is sourced to significant coverage in reliable sources that are independent of the subject, that are worded with a neutral point of view. --- Barek (talkcontribs) - 01:27, 1 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you very much. That was the amount of explanation I was hoping for. ChateauOfADoubt (talk) 02:14, 1 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]

unsourced material

You could just let me post stuff that is true and that is sourced instead of playing an all knowing genius that you are not. I will keep posting. And you can keep deleting them all you want, but they are true so I don't know what your problem is and why you sit and your computer all day and try to verify boring stuff like this, but whatever — Preceding unsigned comment added by Superawesomeamazingdude (talkcontribs) 03:56, 30 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Your edits here and here were completely unsourced and are at best dubious and in need of sources. --- Barek (talkcontribs) - 01:30, 1 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Amphibions

Hi Barek!

An editor continues to add the identical content from the charade on the Reptile article, however, this time onto the Skink article. I believe that this editor is the same editor, as the previous ones that have been blocked for this disruption. What should be done next? Thank you, -- MSTR (Chat Me!) 06:20, 31 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]

I can see you've fixed the issue. Thank you, -- MSTR (Chat Me!) 06:26, 31 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Blocked as an obvious sockpuppet account. If these continue, should probably bring it up at WP:ANI so that additional admins can be aware of the sock/vandal. --- Barek (talkcontribs) - 06:27, 31 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Wikipedia has a page for everything, it seems.

Even a page to express how I had felt. Handy! http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Please_do_not_bite_the_newcomers :) ChateauOfADoubt (talk) 04:37, 1 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]

(talk page stalker) Indeed- and several Wikipedians were more than patient with you, based on the discussion above. I bet you are thankful for that! I'm glad the Teahouse was also a helpful resource for you; it's amazing how much unpaid time people like Barek put into maintaining hundreds or thousands of pages. Some additions are helpful, some are absurd and/or vandalism, some are from new users who don't understand why Wikipedia has high standards- yet it remains the only noncommercial entry in the top 100 websites. Your help is certainly appreciated to continue balancing quality and quantity. tedder (talk) 04:50, 1 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]

All-Inclusive Resort Page

Hi Barek,

I greatly appreciate your reply. It was certainly not my intention to break any guidelines or rules. I thought that my point made a contribution to the subject of All-Inclusive resorts. I note that the first reference leads to an All Inclusive specialist website (something similar to myself). I was wondering why this source is deemed credible but my post is not?

I hope to hear from you and to see how I can make a contribution without breaking any rules.

PeteWarsop (talk) 16:27, 3 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]

I hadn't noticed the other problematic source that was already in there. I've updated it to use a site that would meet Wikipedia's guideline of beeing a reliable source. Thank you for pointing it out. --- Barek (talkcontribs) - 02:48, 4 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you...

... for reverting the vandalism on my talk page. That was a first for me... I feel like a real Wikipedian now! Cheers,MsFionnuala (talk) 16:55, 6 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Hi, with regard to this edit - it occurs to me that it probably is a fictional medicine or drug, so out of all the places it was spammed, that's probably the best one for it - although I doubt the OP would appreciate the irony... Chaheel Riens (talk) 16:49, 7 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Fortunately, it failed WP:EL regardless ... I say fortunately because I wouldn't want to get dragged into a debate on if it's fictional or not ... those discussions can get ugly. --- Barek (talkcontribs) - 16:52, 7 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Janeane Garofalo page

Hi Barek, I saw you had removed my addition to the Television section, saying this was already on the Television list at the bottom of the page. But all the comments on the Television section are listed at the bottom too. Which is the concept for listing shows on the Television section and/or in the Television list?

Regards. German — Preceding unsigned comment added by German AC (talkcontribs) 02:40, 8 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]

The "Entertainment career" career section should primarily contain notable career achievements, there's no need to mention every part played in that section - especially non-recurring guest appearances. The more detailed trivia of all appearances then appears in the "Television" section near the bottom of the page. --- Barek (talkcontribs) - 02:46, 8 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Chaminade High School (Mineola, NY) - Only John Culinane is not a significant alumnus of Chaminade High School; Geoff Biosi and Robert Flanders are.