User talk:Barek

 ! NOTE:  Please start new messages at the bottom of the page.

---

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

M/V Walla Walla

Hey, thanks for jumping on that so fast! Murderbike (talk) 19:03, 5 February 2008 (UTC)

No problem - I had that one on my watch list, and have been intending to add ref tags to it for a while now. --- Barek (talk • contribs) - 19:11, 5 February 2008 (UTC)

Ship infobox

I stole the format from somebody else on the ship navbox, I think it was here: Moyie (sternwheeler). Someday I'm hoping to get the company flags or logos instead.Mtsmallwood (talk) 00:51, 8 February 2008 (UTC)

Ferryboat Santa Rosa

Could you actually write something here? Basketball110 _{the pages I've messed up completely} 19:20, 9 February 2008 (UTC)

In the process ... I have a couple paragraphs I'll be posting in a few minutes. --- Barek (talk • contribs) - 19:31, 9 February 2008 (UTC)

re:MV v M/V

Hello. Yes, I'm planning on moving the rest of the WSF fleet, but not tonight. It's a little after midnight here, and I'm getting rather tired. I'll likely start working through them in the morning. Yeah, I had noticed the problem when I created a pair of articles earlier today about a couple of M/Vs, and then stumbled upon the Rhododendron when I was looking through the unassessed importance backlog. Regards, Parsecboy (talk) 05:13, 12 February 2008 (UTC)

Yeah, I had noticed some of them had been moved. There's a handful of them left on the WSF template that still need to be moved; I'm in the process of finishing them. I've been taking care of redirects as I've been going as well. Before long, we'll have them all done. Parsecboy (talk) 18:47, 12 February 2008 (UTC)

As far as I can tell, the articles related to the WSF have all been moved. If you're interested in fixing more of these articles, not just those affiliated with the WSF, there are quite a few of them, which you can see here, here, and here. I'll start working on them later today. Regards, Parsecboy (talk) 17:44, 13 February 2008 (UTC)

I had no idea there were more like that; I had hoped it was just the WSF vessel articles. I'll start working on some of the ones in the categories you linked as time permits. --- Barek (talk • contribs) - 18:43, 13 February 2008 (UTC)

More M/V

Thanks for letting me know about those others. I don't have much time to get to it now, but perhaps later on in the evening I'll start working through them. How far have you gotten through the list? I might just start at the end, and work my way forwards, and we'll meet in the middle I suppose. Parsecboy (talk) 20:39, 15 February 2008 (UTC)

I've tagged all the M/V articles as part of WP:SHIPS. I've barely touched the M/S articles, and need to stop for a real-world break for a while now.

From the M/V articles, I noticed that M/V New Flame is flagged as a "GA" class article by multiple projects. So when that one is moved (or maybe even before it is done) a notice should be left on the article's talk page. Members of the other projects may want to discuss it. --- Barek (talk • contribs) - 21:08, 15 February 2008 (UTC)

I left a notice on the New Flame article; I won't move it until tomorrow probably, to let the editors involved there a chance for comment. I'll start working through the M/S articles in a little while. Parsecboy (talk) 00:23, 16 February 2008 (UTC)

Ship articles without infoboxes

I noticed that you are tagging some of these articles with {{newinfobox}}. The proper tag is {{Ship infobox request}}. There are two seperate categories that correspond to these templates: Category:Ship articles without infoboxes, and Category:Ship articles needing infobox conversion. -MBK₀₀₄ 22:47, 15 February 2008 (UTC)

Thanks - I knew there was a better template, but I couldn't recall the correct one, so I went with the one I know. Sorry about the added work to correct it. --- Barek (talk • contribs) - 22:48, 15 February 2008 (UTC)

No problem, that explanation is what I was thinking was going on as well. -MBK₀₀₄ 22:56, 15 February 2008 (UTC)

Asia (band)‎

Thanks for your work on this -- I know it's frustrating. I just checked my watchlist and saw I'd missed your firefight.

I went ahead and blacklisted the new variant of the asiafanclub link --that may calm things down a bit, I hope:

• MediaWiki talk:Spam-blacklist‎#More asiafanclub spam

This one has a lot of disruptive history:

• Wikipedia:Suspected sock puppets/Mondrago
• Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/IncidentArchive362
• Wikipedia:Requests for checkuser/Case/Mondrago
• Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/IncidentArchive366
• Talk:Asia (band)

Thanks again, --A. B. ^(talk) 05:30, 16 February 2008 (UTC)

blacklist of asiafanclub.com

Can you please remove asiafanclub.com from the blacklist, no one has respponded to the reasons put forth why it should not be reinstated! Thank you so much! Asia Pres —Preceding unsigned comment added by 4.238.124.219 (talk) 04:50, 19 February 2008 (UTC)

I'm not a sysop on this wiki (I have been on other, lesser wikis, but not this one) - so I don't have the authority or access to remove blacklisted sites. I'm merely an additional voice of support for re-adding it. Per WP:SBL, the page can only be edited by admins, based on requests submitted to WP:SBL#Proposed_removals. There's an existing posting on in that space. --- Barek (talk • contribs) - 17:06, 19 February 2008 (UTC)

Note, while I support re-adding the one link (I haven't looked at the others being discussed), I must say that past behavior will likely make it impossible. Between the violations of WP:3RR, WP:COI, the use of multiple IPs, and the use of WP:POINTy edits to try to bypass the block with alternate URLs, the issue has grown far beyond just the merits of the link itself. If that behavior makes it impossible to re-add the link directly, then the only options will be to ask the official site to link from them to the fan site; or to create a {{dmoz}} directory and link to that. However, at this point, even dmoz may be viewed by some as an attempt to undermine prior blocks.

As I said when I first landed at that article, I have no strong opinions on it. I only edited originally to deal with the 3RR, COI, and lacking consensus issues. As a result, I likely won't be contributing further on the discussion - it's simply not an area where I wish to focus my editing efforts. --- Barek (talk • contribs) - 16:02, 20 February 2008 (UTC)

Given your past involvement, you may be interested in contributing to the new discussion at Talk:Asia (band)#Proposal to re-insert certain external links. Bondegezou (talk) 17:03, 22 February 2008 (UTC)

I just looked, and I don't see a discussion taking place - but what I do see appears to me to be a violation of WP:NOT#DEMOCRACY. --- Barek (talk • contribs) - 17:09, 22 February 2008 (UTC)

Defender of the Wiki Barnstar

		The Defender of the Wiki Barnstar
		To Barek. Many thanks for your tireless efforts in keeping articles clear of spam/COI and other nonsense Hu12 (talk) 00:20, 2 March 2008 (UTC)

Wikipedia is a better quality project because of hardworking and conscientious editors like you!--Hu12 (talk) 00:20, 2 March 2008 (UTC)