User talk:BarryTheUnicorn

AfD nomination of Brian Jossie

An editor has nominated one or more articles which you have created or worked on, for deletion. The nominated article is Brian Jossie. We appreciate your contributions, but the nominator doesn't believe that the article satisfies Wikipedia's criteria for inclusion and has explained why in his/her nomination (see also Wikipedia:Notability and "What Wikipedia is not").

Your opinions on whether the article meets inclusion criteria and what should be done with the article are welcome; please participate in the discussion(s) by adding your comments to Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Brian Jossie. Please be sure to sign your comments with four tildes (~~~~).

You may also edit the article during the discussion to improve it but should not remove the articles for deletion template from the top of the article; such removal will not end the deletion debate.

Please note: This is an automatic notification by a bot. I have nothing to do with this article or the deletion nomination, and can't do anything about it. --Erwin85Bot (talk) 01:11, 26 October 2009 (UTC)

Joe Cada

Although his family members are not notable mentioning them in his personal section is required for WP:GA. Trust me. I am experienced in this.

DYK for Joe Cada

On November 18, 2009, Did you know? was updated with a fact from the article Joe Cada, which you created or substantially expanded. You are welcome to check how many hits your article got while on the front page (here's how) and add it to DYKSTATS if it got over 5,000. If you know of another interesting fact from a recently created article, then please suggest it on the Did you know? talk page.

Materialscientist (talk) 00:49, 18 November 2009 (UTC)

Unreferenced BLPs

Hello ECWAGuru! Thank you for your contributions. I am a bot alerting you that 1 of the articles that you created is tagged as an Unreferenced Biography of a Living Person. The biographies of living persons policy requires that all personal or potentially controversial information be sourced. In addition, to insure verifiability, all biographies should be based on reliable sources. if you were to bring this article up to standards, it would greatly help us with the current 1,096 article backlog. Once the article is adequately referenced, please remove the {{unreferencedBLP}} tag. Here is the article:

1. Ace Darling - Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL

Thanks!--DASHBot (talk) 21:53, 8 January 2010 (UTC)

AfD nomination of Knowledge Generation Bureau

An editor has nominated one or more articles which you have created or worked on, for deletion. The nominated article is Knowledge Generation Bureau. We appreciate your contributions, but the nominator doesn't believe that the article satisfies Wikipedia's criteria for inclusion and has explained why in his/her nomination (see also Wikipedia:Notability and "What Wikipedia is not").

Your opinions on whether the article meets inclusion criteria and what should be done with the article are welcome; please participate in the discussion(s) by adding your comments to Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Knowledge Generation Bureau. Please be sure to sign your comments with four tildes (~~~~).

You may also edit the article during the discussion to improve it but should not remove the articles for deletion template from the top of the article; such removal will not end the deletion debate.

Please note: This is an automatic notification by a bot. I have nothing to do with this article or the deletion nomination, and can't do anything about it. --Erwin85Bot (talk) 01:09, 25 January 2010 (UTC)

Thanks

Thanks for helping us improve WP.

This user helped promote Joe Cada to good article status.

--TonyTheTiger (T/C/BIO/WP:CHICAGO/WP:FOUR) 17:29, 9 April 2010 (UTC)

Proposed deletion of Andrew Ryker

The article Andrew Ryker has been proposed for deletion because of the following concern:

Non-notable wrestler. Fails WP:ATHLETE and WP:BIO. Refs are weak/non-existent. Was previously proodded to deletion but recently recreated.

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. Christopher Connor (talk) 02:03, 15 July 2010 (UTC)

Articles for deletion nomination of Andrew Ryker

I have nominated Andrew Ryker, an article that you created, for deletion. I do not think that this article satisfies Wikipedia's criteria for inclusion, and have explained why at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Andrew Ryker. Your opinions on the matter are welcome at that same discussion page; also, you are welcome to edit the article to address these concerns. Thank you for your time.

Please contact me if you're unsure why you received this message. Christopher Connor (talk) 02:55, 18 July 2010 (UTC)

WSOP Bracelet Winners TFD

Given your editorial involvement in World Series of Poker, I thought you might want to comment at Wikipedia:Templates_for_discussion#Template:2000s_WSOP_Bracelet_Winners.--TonyTheTiger (T/C/BIO/WP:CHICAGO/WP:FOUR) 18:31, 23 December 2010 (UTC)

Nomination of List of Wrestling Observer Newsletter awards for deletion

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article List of Wrestling Observer Newsletter awards is suitable for inclusion in Wikipedia according to Wikipedia's policies and guidelines or whether it should be deleted.

The article will be discussed at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/List of Wrestling Observer Newsletter awards (3rd nomination) until a consensus is reached, and anyone is welcome to contribute to the discussion. The nomination will explain the policies and guidelines which are of concern. The discussion focuses on good quality evidence, and our policies and guidelines.

Users may edit the article during the discussion, including to improve the article to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the article-for-deletion template from the top of the article. Agent Vodello^{OK, Let's Party, Darling!} 00:09, 30 September 2011 (UTC)

Pius Heinz

Hey Barry, Thanks for you help with Pius... BUT... if you delete a reference from an article that is named, take a look to see if it is used elsewhere. If it is used elsewhere, don't delete the other item saying that the reference doesn't exist. Thanks.---Balloonman ^{Poppa Balloon} 14:57, 10 November 2011 (UTC)

Again, totally an honest mistake on my part. I'll be much more careful in ensuring I don't accidentally delete a ref.BarryTheUnicorn (talk)

No prob, like I said, I appreciate having another person actively editing the poker articles... we don't always see eye-to-eye on what should/shouldn't be there, but I think that is a benefit to the project not a detriment ;-)---Balloonman ^{Poppa Balloon} 15:27, 10 November 2011 (UTC)

Agreed 100%. :) We clearly want to see quality poker articles on Wiki. So even if we don't agree all the time, it's because we share the same desire to raise the level of quality.BarryTheUnicorn (talk)

Joe Cada

Regarding Joe Cada, citations are not necessary in the WP:LEAD if the content is cited in the main body. If you have any questions in this regard, ping me.--TonyTheTiger (T/C/BIO/WP:CHICAGO/WP:FOUR) 03:48, 11 November 2011 (UTC)

World Wrestling Entertainment

I did not vandalize any page World Wrestling Entertainment is the companys legal name the only simplified it to WWE check they DVDS,opening intro,annoncers table hell even check there wikipedia page it's there name. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Acer723 (talk • contribs) 19:16, 14 December 2011 (UTC)

No, it's not. But thanks for playing. --BarryTheUnicorn (talk) 13:37, 15 December 2011 (UTC)

Excuse me?

Please explain this. There's a delayed broadcast of SmackDown in America, but in Australia, it airs on Friday here (Thursday in America), and I saw Teddy Long announce it himself. I'll use a different reference, but I advise you don't revert it. Steven Zhang ^{DR goes to Wikimania!} 00:46, 3 March 2012 (UTC)

Here's the match announced on WWE.com. So you can see it wasn't made up. Nice going there assuming good faith, keep it up. Steven Zhang ^{DR goes to Wikimania!} 05:05, 3 March 2012 (UTC)

It was not on WWE.com at the time you posted it. No other sources are valid, and this has been the case for an incredibly long time. Yes, I'm fully aware that SmackDown airs earlier in other parts of the world; but until WWE.com formally announces it, it cannot be posted. Thank you.--BarryTheUnicorn (talk) 06:48, 3 March 2012 (UTC)

Sorry, but in what policy does it say that? You should read WP:V, because secondary sources are preferred over primary sources (like WWE.com). You're very free to go to WT:V and ask for the policy to be changed, but saying that WWE.com is the only source allowed is contrary to Wikipedia policy. If that's what the wikiproject says otherwise, then they too need to reread policy. Steven Zhang ^{DR goes to Wikimania!} 08:10, 3 March 2012 (UTC)

The key word is reliable. The two sites you used (Bleacher Report and WrestlingNewsInc.com) are not considered to be reliable sources. Even on the talk page, you admitted you were unaware that Bleacher Report is largely a self-reporting "news" site. There are certainly reliable secondary sources out there, such as Wrestling Observer or PWInsider, as there is proven history of both of those sites having established sources within the company. So while I'll admit that limiting sources to WWE.com may seem pretty strict and unfair on the surface, it's one of the few ways editors can ensure that 100% accurate and verifiable information is being written on these pages. You admitted that you don't edit wrestling pages often. If you did, you would see the daily problem we have of having to undo edits from either unsourced material or wrestling "newz" sites...neither of which are (again) reliable. --BarryTheUnicorn (talk) 14:25, 3 March 2012 (UTC)

ivellise

i don´t agree on your last change the union with Britani knight should be mentioned as they now are the Anti diva army tag team don´t you think? --Nakurio (talk) 16:50, 30 March 2012 (UTC)

This says nothing about them becoming an anti-diva tag team. It's simply a recap that she "ganged up" (which is inappropriate Wiki verbiage anyway) against other females. We are not supposed to add week-by-week recaps of what happens on television. If someone can fully explain (and source) the significance of the incident, fine. Other than that, it's just a glorified recap.--BarryTheUnicorn (talk) 17:03, 30 March 2012 (UTC)

• I agree that it was not made right, i look if i find enough sure for the anti diva army and add it then. --Nakurio (talk) 17:05, 30 March 2012 (UTC)

Just please source it properly (from a valid source, such as FCW.com, PWInsider, Wrestling Observer, or PWTorch) and explain its significance. Chances are that if it's from an unreliable source, it'll simply be reverted again.--BarryTheUnicorn (talk) 17:07, 30 March 2012 (UTC)

• you could give me some minutes before just reverting it again, I'm just looking for sources and see you reverted everything again whats the problem? --Nakurio (talk) 17:27, 30 March 2012 (UTC)

Read my comments. The source your provided says, "Paige has made an impact by forming a loose allegiance with Sofia Cortez in an "Anti-Diva" army of sorts." That is not an official team name, nor does it state they are an official team. It's a "loose allegiance." Simply put, make sure the source is fully supportive of your statement before you add it, or it will get reverted. I'm not saying this to be a jerk -- it's simply how Wikipedia maintains verifiability.--BarryTheUnicorn (talk) 17:29, 30 March 2012 (UTC)

• i did i am searching more sources to add and you just revert it i was distracted by this damn thing you put everywhere citation needed, i gave you one. --Nakurio (talk) 17:32, 30 March 2012 (UTC)

First of all, do not come to my page and swear. That warrants a warning from Wikipedia. Secondly, don't add the source until it's for sure. It's that simple.--BarryTheUnicorn (talk) 17:33, 30 March 2012 (UTC)

• i used two sources the one says its a alliance the other says the alliance is called Anti diva army. Are you now saying this isn´t legit?--Nakurio (talk) 18:06, 30 March 2012 (UTC)

Read it again. It is the same statement I said before: "Paige has made an impact by forming a loose allegiance with Sofia Cortez in an "Anti-Diva" army of sorts." That is NOT the name of their tag team -- it is simply a description of the "loose allegiance" they have formed. So to answer your question -- no, it is not legit.--BarryTheUnicorn (talk) 18:08, 30 March 2012 (UTC)

• then i got another question how come you don´t delete the finisher and signatures that are not sourced? --Nakurio (talk) 18:12, 30 March 2012 (UTC)

Problem solved.--BarryTheUnicorn (talk) 18:13, 30 March 2012 (UTC)

• i guess the page will be discussed to delete soon as there are not many reliable sources about here time in puerto rico. anyway you do a great job, wrestling pages in wiki are not easy to keep up especially when there are so less sources like in this case. And as far as the diva army goes you will see them refer to each other as it then we just add it, might take some more weeks.--Nakurio (talk) 18:46, 30 March 2012 (UTC)

Once FCW officially refers to them as the "Anti-Diva Army" (or whatever name they may choose), I'll be more than happy to add it with the appropriate sources.--BarryTheUnicorn (talk) 18:47, 30 March 2012 (UTC)

• the cage match source says she is in a relationship with hammett but it is on german shall we add it or isn´t it reliable?--Nakurio (talk) 18:51, 30 March 2012 (UTC)

Not really important, to be honest.--BarryTheUnicorn (talk) 19:06, 30 March 2012 (UTC)

wrestlemania 28

The chart you did was pretty cool but it messed up with the look of the rest could you fix that and put it on again as it is noticeable?--Nakurio (talk) 19:19, 2 April 2012 (UTC)

I didn't do the chart. I simply made one spelling edit.--BarryTheUnicorn (talk) 20:34, 2 April 2012 (UTC)

• oh ok then i just saw you we´re the last editor before it as removed--Nakurio (talk) 16:58, 3 April 2012 (UTC)

Extreme rules

At wwe.com its mentioned as a stipulation of the match if he wins monday night raw will be renamed look http://www.wwe.com/shows/raw/2012-04-23/wwe-raw-supershow-results/page-12 --Nakurio (talk) 13:49, 24 April 2012 (UTC)

Talkback

Hello, BarryTheUnicorn. You have new messages at Richard BB's talk page.
Message added 16:59, 26 June 2012 (UTC). You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.

– Richard BB 16:59, 26 June 2012 (UTC)

GA Reassessment

World Series of Poker Europe, an article that you may be interested in, has been nominated for a good article reassessment. If you are interested in the discussion, please participate by adding your comments to the good article reassessment page. If concerns are not addressed during the review period, the good article status will be removed from the article. -- KTC (talk) 23:46, 5 November 2012 (UTC)

PWI/WON HoF

The "Hall of Fame" link on the PWI website (see here) leads to a listing of the WON HoF. Any issue of PWI which discusses their HoF explicitly states that the WON HoF is PWI's HoF. Or am I right in assuming that you're leaving it up to someone else to do the actual legwork? RadioKAOS  – Talk to me, Billy 01:11, 9 November 2012 (UTC)

All someone needs to do is source it. If something is on a page unsourced, it's more likely to either be tagged for removal or removed altogether.--BarryTheUnicorn (talk) 14:04, 9 November 2012 (UTC)

I don't remember whether or not I still have copies of any PWI issues in which they explicitly state this. They certainly don't hide this fact. Therefore, it's about as much a no-brainer as "Barack Obama is the president of the United States." Employing your logic, I'll be looking forward to viewing the deletion of any unsourced instances of that statement (*snort*, *chortle*). RadioKAOS  – Talk to me, Billy 05:19, 10 November 2012 (UTC)

Thank you for your constructive witticism.--BarryTheUnicorn (talk) 02:05, 11 November 2012 (UTC)

GA Thanks

This user helped promote Extreme Rules (2012) to good article status.

On behalf of WP:CHICAGO, I would like to thank you for your editorial contributions to Extreme Rules (2012), which has recently become a GA. --TonyTheTiger (T/C/BIO/WP:CHICAGO/WP:FOUR) 01:02, 22 January 2013 (UTC)

April 2014 GA Thanks

On behalf of WP:CHICAGO, I would like to thank you for your editorial contributions to Money in the Bank (2011).

This user helped promote Money in the Bank (2011) to good article status.

.--TonyTheTiger (T / C / WP:FOUR / WP:CHICAGO / WP:WAWARD) 19:52, 6 April 2014 (UTC)

March 2015

Please refrain from making unconstructive edits to Wikipedia, as you did at Plessy v. Ferguson. Your edits appear to constitute vandalism and have been reverted or removed. If you would like to experiment, please use the sandbox. Administrators have the ability to block users from editing if they repeatedly engage in vandalism. Thank you. DMacks (talk) 20:01, 15 March 2015 (UTC)

ArbCom elections are now open!

Hi,
You appear to be eligible to vote in the current Arbitration Committee election. The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to enact binding solutions for disputes between editors, primarily related to serious behavioural issues that the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the ability to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail. If you wish to participate, you are welcome to review the candidates' statements and submit your choices on the voting page. For the Election committee, MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 13:36, 23 November 2015 (UTC)

Work of Art listed at Redirects for discussion

An editor has asked for a discussion to address the redirect Work of Art. Since you had some involvement with the Work of Art redirect, you might want to participate in the redirect discussion if you have not already done so. Si Trew (talk) 18:22, 11 April 2016 (UTC)

ArbCom Elections 2016: Voting now open!

Hello, BarryTheUnicorn. Voting in the 2016 Arbitration Committee elections is open from Monday, 00:00, 21 November through Sunday, 23:59, 4 December to all unblocked users who have registered an account before Wednesday, 00:00, 28 October 2016 and have made at least 150 mainspace edits before Sunday, 00:00, 1 November 2016.

The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail.

If you wish to participate in the 2016 election, please review the candidates' statements and submit your choices on the voting page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 22:08, 21 November 2016 (UTC)