User talk:Barneca/Archive 10

If you do check your talk page..
here I am again with yet another non-communicative editor, and this one seems prone to tendenitious (sp?) editing: User talk:Britneysaints. You'll have to look at the page history to see the comments that have been left for him, since he removes them with dismissive remarks in the edit summaries, but has yet to discuss anything, either on his talk page or on the article talk pages he's active on. If you have a chance, and you think it's appropriate, could you put the Barneca Please Talk template on his talk page? Many thanks. Ed Fitzgerald t / c 02:55, 30 October 2008 (UTC)
 * Looks like someone who was actually around last night has already helped you out. Hope things turn around with them. By the way, fwiw, I agree with him on the image issue; I'm pretty sure we don't specify image size unless there's a really good reason, because we don't know what size screen people are using to read the articles.  But that's after 30 seconds of reading a discussion, so take it with a grain of salt, it may or may not apply to your article. --barneca (talk) 12:11, 30 October 2008 (UTC)
 * Thanks for checking in on it -- we'll see what happens when this block is over. Ed Fitzgerald t / c 22:16, 30 October 2008 (UTC)
 * If you get a chance, look in on the user's talk page again, if you would. Still editing without discussion, still doesn't seem to understand the modus vivendi of the place. Ed Fitzgerald t / c 22:24, 31 October 2008 (UTC)
 * I'll take a look. I haven't looked at their edits since the last time, but I will note this isn't a slam-dunk decision like the last few; they're communicating via edit summary, which is suboptimal, but better than nothing.  Anyway, if it isn't too stale by now, I'll look. --barneca (talk) 14:22, 3 November 2008 (UTC)
 * It looks to me like he's a difficult editor to work with, and has been skirting the edge of edit warring, but hasn't done something worth blocking, and edits since their 3RR warning look (to me, on a cursory review) to be non-controversial. Many, if not most, of his edits seem OK, and although it's highly annoying to have a conversation the way he does (thru deleting your responses and answering in edit summaries), it is communication.  Perhaps shifting the conversations to the talk pages of articles, where your response can't be deleted?  Unless I've missed something more foreboding, this seems like an abrasive editor, but the world isn't perfact, and I don't think I can sanction him for being abrasive, and I strongly suspect my mentioning this to him will not help the situation.
 * My advice is focus on his contributions, not his personality, focus discussion on article talk pages rather than his talk page, and notify someone (me if I'm around, but more likely AN/ANI/3RR/etc) if he resumes. --barneca (talk) 14:43, 3 November 2008 (UTC)

More Omegacommand socks
Hi, Barneca. I see that you've been dealing with Omegacommand and his socks. I think that and  are him too. Both are blocked at the moment: BarackBlows indefinitely, the IP for one week. If you agree with my assessment that this is the same individual, we can block both 76.110.175.48 and 76.110.167.164 (which you blocked earlier) for a longer duration. —Josiah Rowe (talk • contribs) 06:30, 1 November 2008 (UTC)
 * Seems quite obvious they're all socks of the same person. However, I doubt we should increase the duration on the IP blocks; I think it's a dynamic IP, and he has already moved on to the other IP, and can do so again.  Better to just RBI any new ones that pop up, and hope they lose interest. --barneca (talk) 14:22, 3 November 2008 (UTC)

Courage
Thank you for stepping up to help someone who was having a problem. This was very nice to see.(BaldKojak (talk) 04:37, 2 November 2008 (UTC))
 * If you're talking about Paulmcdonald, that wasn't courageous (I'm a card carrying coward), it was just being nice. If you're talking about something else, then it's still pretty unlikely I've done anything courageous (although it's possible I did so by accident somewhere), but thanks for the kind words. --barneca (talk) 14:22, 3 November 2008 (UTC)
 * It takes courage to admit one is a coward. :) MastCell Talk 17:18, 3 November 2008 (UTC)


 * :). When I first saw this thread title, I panicked.  Much like Jim Hacker, my first reaction to being told I've been courageous is to go pale, feel faint, and ask "Good God, I have?  Where?" --barneca (talk) 17:29, 3 November 2008 (UTC)
 * Yup, Jim Hacker is definitely one of the top 5 invented British political personae. Right up there with Winston Churchill... :) MastCell Talk 18:04, 3 November 2008 (UTC)

ArbCom rulings
Apropos of a recent WP:AN/I thread, perhaps you weren't aware that admins may not leave the computer for more than 15 minutes at a time. We lost our cigarette breaks in the last contract renegotiation. You have to eat lunch at your computer and raise your hand for ArbCom's permission to use the bathroom. It's all an obvious interpretation of this finding.

Interestingly, ArbCom also "ruled" that you shouldn't criticize someone if you don't know what the fuck you're talking about. Strangely, despite the applicability of this ruling to >90% of WP:AN/I threads, I have yet to see anyone cite it.

Hmmm. I appear to have gotten up on the wrong side of the bed today. MastCell Talk 17:25, 3 November 2008 (UTC)
 * Solution: Go back to sleep! (although that violates ArbCom cite #1, above). --barneca (talk) 17:29, 3 November 2008 (UTC)

Re: Final notice
You just don't understand. I'm new to Wikipedia and I'm really a six year old. Simulation12 (talk) 23:29, 4 November 2008 (UTC)
 * That doesn't matter. If you are not capable of acting mature here, then Wikipedia is not right for you yet.  My final warning stands. --barneca (talk) 23:34, 4 November 2008 (UTC)
 * No i don't mind Simulation12 being banned from my talk page, i actually glad, she was annoying. She would fill up the page with questions about my personal life like she was a stalker, and would demand i treat her special becuase she was "a kid". Plus i think she's not really a kid, just someone pretendig to be one so he/she could vandalize articles and not be blocked for it. Elbutler (talk) 00:08, 5 November 2008 (UTC)

Barneca--again, THANK YOU. (I never realized that it could be physically difficult NOT to type something; I really had to sit on my hands to keep myself from responding on her talk page with "Little girl, put your mommy on the computer RIGHT NOW.")Gladys J Cortez 01:19, 5 November 2008 (UTC)
 * You're welcome, both of you. I'm impressed with the patience you and Elbutler showed.  But yes, I very strongly suspect we're being trolled, and I did consider an immediate block before settling on a final warning.  I've been wrong before, once. Let me know if she disrupts article space; she appears to edit in your general areas of interest, so you will likely notice before I do. --barneca (talk) 01:37, 5 November 2008 (UTC)
 * I've got another hunch, a while ago there was a user called "Simulation123simulation123", odd that the user names are almost the same, i think that she might be a sock-puppet of "Simulation123simulation123". Elbutler (talk) 18:48, 8 November 2008 (UTC)
 * I don't think so; the names are similar, but the articles of interest are different, and the issues that brought admin attention to them are different. Again, let me know if they come back to bug you. --barneca (talk) 17:41, 9 November 2008 (UTC)
 * Simulation12 is at it again, she's re-added categories to her sub-page and inserted in them "Elbutler, please don't touch my sub-pages" Elbutler (talk) 13:55, 10 November 2008 (UTC)
 * Commented there. --barneca (talk) 14:59, 10 November 2008 (UTC)

Redirect
Do you think you can delete this redirect that Simulation12 made to my sub-page? Elbutler (talk) 12:06, 6 November 2008 (UTC)
 * Sure thing. Done. --barneca (talk) 13:04, 6 November 2008 (UTC)

Question
Would you mind if you copy the stuff I wrote in Elbutler's talkpage back into my own talk page? Simulation12 (talk) 22:13, 6 November 2008 (UTC)
 * Replied on your talk page. --barneca (talk) 22:37, 6 November 2008 (UTC)

Maybe I should take up editing Homeopathy.
Barneca, since you were so helpful in dealing with my last child editor, perchance you could take a look at this one too? Either I'm not as good an explainer of "tone" and "encyclopedic" as I ought to be, or someone isn't getting it. Either way, I could use a hand on this one. Thanks! Gladys J Cortez 07:31, 5 November 2008 (UTC)
 * I left a slightly customized version of User:Barneca/temps/discuss. I'd say all avenues have been exhausted, and a week long block (seems to be a static IP) to get their attention would be warranted the very next time they make a disruptive edit.  Personally, I don't think there would be anything wrong with you making the block yourself, but if you feel you're "involved", and want to avoid any possibility of a "zOMG abuse of admin powers by User:Gladys j cortez" thread at ANI, I suspect a quick trip to my talk page, or ANI, or maybe (if you catch the right admin on duty) to AIV would result in a pretty quick block. Hope this helps. --barneca (talk) 13:08, 5 November 2008 (UTC)

Man, these KIDS! Here's another one. "Don't block when you're involved" is getting to be REALLY difficult. So is "preventative not punitive"--though I could make a very convincing argument that if I blocked this little charmer all the way to Hell, it would prevent a)more bad edits; b)my head asploding. I'm sitting here muttering "ignore...DNFT...ignore...bitchsla..(oh, wait)...DNFT..." Man, self control just sucks sometimes. :) Gladys J Cortez 01:20, 6 November 2008 (UTC)
 * When you are reverting edits that are obviously inappropriate: like adding blatantly false info, or even adding info with no sources after repeatedly being warned not to, or that type of thing, I really don't think it counts as being "involved". If I were in your shoes, and ran across this latest one, I'd have no hesitation at all to block if they do it again.  I'll assume you can take being called a "big meanie", and usually don't block if they whine about life on their user talk page after a final warning, but if they screw around with article space again, feel free to block them yourself; if you really feel uncomfortable doing that, ping me or go to AIV.
 * If it gets too much, of course, you could avoid the nightmare of children's TV show articles, and edit something calm and relaxing like Palestinian people or Zionism or Israel. --barneca (talk) 01:48, 6 November 2008 (UTC)

Thanks
I didn't say he didn't have any friends he did, i was just saying sure thing as in talk about yourself all you want to, but yeah thanks anyway, Hairy  Perry  16:39, 7 November 2008 (UTC)
 * Oops, sorry, I misread that. --barneca (talk) 16:50, 7 November 2008 (UTC)

Oh its fine, but i really do appreciate it though, hey would ou mind if I put you on my User Page under People I'm Cool With? Hairy Perry  17:01, 7 November 2008 (UTC)
 * I'm cool with that. Also, FYI, Apawk was just blocked by someone slightly less forgiving than me. --barneca (talk) 17:03, 7 November 2008 (UTC)

Ok, well sometimes you get what you ask for/deserve. Yeah, I'll put you on there. Thanks, Hairy  Perry  17:24, 7 November 2008 (UTC)

Wisdoms RFA
LOL - thanks for that - I needed a bit of cheering up and that was tops! Pedro : Chat  23:41, 7 November 2008 (UTC)
 * Actually, in all seriousness, I thought the nom was really quite well done. And it's a little early to get too disappointed; let's see how it plays out. --barneca (talk) 23:44, 7 November 2008 (UTC)
 * Yeah, we'll see.... :(. But I have mis-givings on where this is going. As long as we can avoid the drama I guess it may be okay, and I'm hoping I'll log back in tomorrow and see it all good. Anyway, again thanks and best regards and fond wishes to you and family. Pedro : Chat  23:50, 7 November 2008 (UTC)
 * You too, Pedro. Good night. --barneca (talk) 23:51, 7 November 2008 (UTC)

The Daily Telegraph (Australia)
Hi, I have been in an edit dispute on the [[The Daily Telegraph (Australia)] page. However, the editor in question, Michellecrisp, refuses to discuss the issue on the principle that I am an anonymous i.p.. This user has a prolific edit history, and does loads of good stuff, so she obviously is not just trolling. So I am just wondering what I can do, apart from just walking away. It just does not feel right to claim that no consensus was reached when she refuses to discuss at all. I am at a loss really, and I am only messaging you to be an impartial judge. Cheers if you are interested. --[[Special:Contributions/58.172.251.46|58.172.251.46]] (talk) 06:07, 8 November 2008 (UTC)


 * Thanks :) --58.172.251.46 (talk) 17:36, 9 November 2008 (UTC)
 * Sure thing. --barneca (talk) 17:41, 9 November 2008 (UTC)

What is up with Apawk
Why is he doing this, doesn't he know he is just going to keep getting blocked? Hairy Perry  15:09, 10 November 2008 (UTC)
 * People who sock are not known for highly rational behavior; some think it's fun, some think the've somehow "won", some a 8 years old, some are convinced they've been irrepairably wronged by Wikipedia and that this will somehow even things out. Ultimately, it doesn't really matter; I suggest reading WP:RBI as I find that the best way to handle people like this. In any case, I've blocked User:ApawkA thru User:ApawkE.  If he doesn't go away soon, we can try a checkuser or Sock Report, that might identify an underlying IP range we can block, or it might not.  If not, just revert, block, ignore. --barneca (talk) 15:15, 10 November 2008 (UTC)

I've already filed a checkuser on Apawk...if you have anything to add to it, i created a subpage for it if you have extra info I don't know about it would be greatly appreciated. Thank you, Hairy  Perry  15:42, 10 November 2008 (UTC)

Checkuser for Apawk Hairy Perry  15:47, 10 November 2008 (UTC)

Yes go ahead and do your thing, thats the first time I have done one of those so I didn't know how to do that, but yeah go right ahead. Just want to get this dude down and out! No problem, Hairy  Perry  16:04, 10 November 2008 (UTC)


 * Fixed and submitted as Requests for checkuser/Case/UnrealSpiritX. We usually file the request under the oldest account name, although this is more for bookkeeping reasons than for technicaly important ones.  Also, there's something a little messed up with the system for creating new reports right now, which may explain why the formatting for your report got a bit weird.  Anyway, we'll see what happens. --barneca (talk) 16:25, 10 November 2008 (UTC)

Good work. That is a great report, that would explain why mine looked so bad even though I followed all the instructions it told me to, but oh well as long as we can get him some how some way...I'll be happy. Thanks for throwing my name in there as soon, I don't know when, but soon I will be trying for an RFA it probably won't work but it will show me what I need to work on to get to be an admin. Thanks, Hairy  Perry  16:31, 10 November 2008 (UTC)

In case you haven't seen it but i'm sure you have, the IP for UnrealSpiritX or Apawk...whatever his name is, has been blocked and it was confirmed of course as I knew it would be and I'm sure you did. Thanks for your great work with me on this, Hairy  Perry  18:31, 10 November 2008 (UTC)


 * Glad to hear it, and you're welcome. --barneca (talk) 19:21, 10 November 2008 (UTC)

Kang
On Keeper's page you reference the Sununu/Shaheen race in NH and say you voted for Kang... Kang? Who is that? I try to keep up at least a little with politics in NH, but that isn't a name I'm familiar with... Avruch  T 19:33, 10 November 2008 (UTC)
 * Aw, crap, I screwed it up, it should have been "I voted for Kodos". It's a "literary reference": Treehouse of Horror VII. MastCell peppers his comments with literary references all the time, I thought I'd try it too, but (a) I screwed it up, and (b) he reads, I watch TV. --barneca (talk) 19:43, 10 November 2008 (UTC)


 * Ah, gotcha. Simpson references are usually lost on me, but I can sometimes get them if they're said in the right voice. In print, I'm hopeless. Avruch  T 19:51, 10 November 2008 (UTC)


 * Yeah, I'm the opposite; I usually get the Simpsons references, but if it's anything else I have to quickly and quietly google it so I can pretend to be literate. Before the internet, it would have been much easier for everyone to know I was stupid. --barneca (talk) 19:58, 10 November 2008 (UTC)

"But this is Wikipedia, not Utopiapedia"
Hey Barneca, I love what you just said. "But this is Wikipedia, not Utopiapedia..". :-) AdjustShift (talk) 15:12, 11 November 2008 (UTC)
 * Thanks, I'm glad you liked my turn of phrase. I just wish it was more persuasive... :)  We'll  agree to disagree. Cheers, --barneca (talk) 15:22, 11 November 2008 (UTC)

Sorry
I guess I should be more careful when reverting edits, sorry! I didn't realize it was an interwiki link. Hairy Perry  16:19, 11 November 2008 (UTC)
 * No worries. --barneca (talk) 16:22, 11 November 2008 (UTC)
 * Well, actually, some worries. Please be a little more careful, in your next edit you just broke a reference.  If you aren't quite sure what someone is doing, don't revert them. --barneca (talk) 16:34, 11 November 2008 (UTC)

On my computer it referenced it fine so it wasn't my fault, so don't take the blame on me, ever heard of technical difficulties? Hairy Perry  16:35, 11 November 2008 (UTC)

Plus, or — Preceding unsigned comment added by hairyPerry (talk • contribs)
 * If your computer is screwed up, to the extent that it, unlike all other computers on planet earth, doesn't require a cite tag to be closed, don't edit until your computer is fixed; it breaks it for everyone else. How can you look at this diff and say it was wrong? A reference starts with a tag. Indeed, look at the wikimarkup of your edit above; I had to add a tag for my edit to be visible, and your ref tag messed up your signature. --barneca (talk) 16:48, 11 November 2008 (UTC)

Dude, who are you to tell me not to edit anymore? Your not God and/or Jimbo Wales. I'm still learning so why not try being civil on a sort of-new comer. I'm just trying to learn and its people like you who make me not want to. I thought today was gonna be a good day on wiki cause i'm nearing 1,000 contribs but somebody has to mess that up I guess. I'm calm in all this by the way, but apparently new comers or sort of are not welcome here. Hairy Perry  16:54, 11 November 2008 (UTC)


 * Look, I corrected two errors you made, and provided advice on what you did wrong, and an explanation why it was wrong, so you could avoid doing it again. I've been completely civil, and I'm disheartened that you fall back on that old chestnut "I guess newcomers aren't welcome here", and immediately become aggressively defensive when someone tells you you've made a mistake. Newcomers are welcome if they can take constructive criticism and learn from their mistakes; it's going to be a long row to hoe if you're going to take offense every time someone corrects a mistake. --barneca (talk) 17:02, 11 November 2008 (UTC)

No, I got upset cause you said "fixed your link that proves my point" and you said "C'mon HP" like I was retarded for not knowing that was the format. I've taken critxism before and I can take it again. But when somebody gets all on my case for not knowing something that makes me upset. Hairy Perry  17:21, 11 November 2008 (UTC)


 * To clarify, I said "C'mon, HP" because that was the second time in the span of about 5 minutes that you dismissively reverted other editors who were making good, helpful edits because you didn't understand what they were doing. I don't care that you don't know something, we all have to learn, and we all make mistakes; I do care that you reverted someone when you didn't understand what they were doing, and then a few minutes later, did it again. --barneca (talk) 17:29, 11 November 2008 (UTC)

Dude, ok i'm not gonna argue with you anymore this has gone on long enough. Just be civil when people don't know stuff. I try to be as constructive as possible and i'm not a vandal or anything matter of fact i'm the exact opposite, I patrol and revert vandals. Please lets start over and be friends, Hi I'm HairyPerry, sorry for my mistakes, please forgive. Thank you, Hairy  Perry  17:33, 11 November 2008 (UTC)
 * Hello HairyPerry, nice to meet you. --barneca (talk) 17:38, 11 November 2008 (UTC)

Nice to meet you to, now can you give me something to read on the ref tagging, please. Thank you, Hairy  Perry  17:41, 11 November 2008 (UTC)


 * WP:References gives probably more info than you want, but it's a good... well, reference. Or, what I did (and still do) is look at an article with good-looking references (an FA or GA is an especially good thing to model), and copy the style from there.  goes at the end.  If you leave off the tag, then all the text until the tag for the next reference will disappear and not be visible. --barneca (talk) 17:47, 11 November 2008 (UTC)

Ok, thanks. Oh and by the way I just got my 1,000th contribution like 8 minutes ago, this is so cool, I am excited!!! Well yeah thanks, Hairy  Perry  17:49, 11 November 2008 (UTC)

please consider customer service
You are threatening blocking.

I ask that you consider what is good customer service and apply it to Wikipedia. Good customer service is trying to understand all viewpoints.

There is clearly concern about removing article talk page discussion. I am not the only one who says it. However, some practice a different approach. They criticize the person who is bringing it up. It is like if you bought spoiled milk at the store. The store clerk then says "you waited too long to return it" or, worse yet, you are a SPA (single item purchaser or single purpose account).

I say that the best way is for administrators to look at the problem and try to practice good customer service.

I am saying this for your personal benefit. Wikipedia is only a small part of life but personal skills that you learn here can help you in life. I hope you will not block me with the excuse "blocking because of a personal attack on me here". I am not attacking you but just giving you friendly advice on life. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 74.174.46.42 (talk • contribs) actually, it was signed, but formatting error in previous section screwed up the signatures for a little bit. --barneca (talk) 16:51, 11 November 2008 (UTC)


 * Yes, I am "threatening" blocking, because you are refusing to accept that many others do not have a problem with that thread on Talk:Barack Obama being archived, and re-hashing the same discussion over and over. Please see the guideline I linked to on ANI; WP:IDIDNTHEARTHAT. --barneca (talk) 16:55, 11 November 2008 (UTC)

Troll vandalism
Do we have a WP:Guide to dealing with troll vandalism page lurking around somewhere? In particular, I caught this user earlier and blocked for three days...is there more to be done? Thanks! Frank |  talk  17:41, 11 November 2008 (UTC)
 * Sorry, I had a little flurry of activity on my talk page and didn't notice this.
 * Blocking the IP for 3 days seems reasonable. I don't know if this a returning serial troll, or a one-off.  If it resumes, after they edit one or two more times, a checkuser might be handy to see if there's an IP range that can be rangeblocked.  I haven't heard of the Zodiac Troll before, so AFAIK it isn't a long term recurring problem, but I could very easily be wrong. --barneca (talk) 18:14, 11 November 2008 (UTC)


 * OK, thanks. It doesn't seem we have an SOP for these cases - serial or not. Thanks for the input. Frank  |  talk  19:12, 11 November 2008 (UTC)
 * FYI, AFAIK SOP is RBI --barneca (talk) 19:21, 11 November 2008 (UTC)

Please help
There is some I.P. adress (24.111.205.163) who keeps adding real world info to a article that's about fictional characters: List of Balto characters. Elbutler (talk) 00:59, 12 November 2008 (UTC)
 * Left a message on their talk page; they seem to have stopped. If they resume, this is probably more of a content dispute than vandalism, but if they simply reinsert the material again with no discussion, let me know and I'll have harsher words, followed by a block if it just keeps up. --barneca (talk) 01:21, 12 November 2008 (UTC)

User:IHeartOscar
I don't know if it was the best idea, IMHO, to block the user in this situation. It seemed like you were reneging on the "deal" made with the user. I'm saying that as having the (rather unfortunate) experience being a sport referee for many years. The only worse thing in making a questionable judgment call (in which I am not questioning in regards to AIV; I agreed on not blocking until the next offense) is reneging such a call as it makes people further question your judgment.

I mean, I'm glad the vandal is blocked, but I didn't feel it was the best call to renege on it. That's my take on it.

(P.S. It's probably not that big a deal; I am sure this vandal, IMHO, would have persisted and would have warranted a block anyways.) MuZemike  ( talk ) 08:13, 12 November 2008 (UTC)


 * Completely agree that I handled that clumsily; I shouldn't have given another warning to begin with. I knew he'd continued to make attacks after a final warning, but wanted to cut him some slack because it wasn't due to vandalism but to anger at the article being at AFD.  But once I'd looked thru all of his contribs (unfortunately, after my final final warning), there was just too much there to let go; some vile stuff directed at one user in particular, rather than the general "you all suck" stuff I'd seen before.  So yeah, I knew it wasn't ideal, but thought it was the best way to fix my original mistake.  Your point that it probably wasn't is taken.


 * I've made 2 other mistakes in my life, so hopefully third time's the charm. :)


 * Thanks for the feedback. --barneca (talk) 13:05, 12 November 2008 (UTC)


 * Now I believe he is evading block by editing the article Generation rx (as well as removing the AFD template) through 71.232.77.79. I would think that an extension of his block is now warranted. MuZemike  ( talk ) 01:28, 13 November 2008 (UTC)
 * I think all three (IHeartOscar, Sspring213, and 71.232.77.79) are the same person, but it could conceivably be 2-3 people working in tandem. It isn't worth it to me to file a WP:SSP.  I've warned all three accounts to stop disruption, and blocking is the next logical step if the AFD tag is removed again, or more personal attacks materialize, or the AFD is disrupted further.  But I don't care too much if all three are editing the article.
 * If something comes up that needs faster action, I suggest WP:AIV (for removing the tag again), or WP:ANI (for personal attacks/disruption). I probably won't be around at any given time. --barneca (talk) 13:28, 13 November 2008 (UTC)

IP:124.187.34.108
Hey Barneca. Sorry for another random question... but you're like the only admin I have any relationship with in any way on Wikipedia. So - I hope you don't mind being the guy I turn to for advice?

I noticed this ip when they made a - in my opinion - clearly vandalous edit on Helicopter. Though whoever reverted it was pretty tame on their webpage, I checked out their contribs, and they've got 3, and they're all vandalism spread over 2 articles. I've noticed it - now what? Is there a "next step"? They've only made 3 edits, but they've all been - apparently deliberately - unhelpful. Or should I just watch this ip until they've made - say - 15 bad edits? Thanks Petemyers (talk) 19:16, 15 November 2008 (UTC)
 * Replying on your talk page. --barneca (talk) 01:16, 17 November 2008 (UTC)
 * Thanks barneca. Slightly off topic, I finally found that published source I was looking for, for the Sawston article (it's a book the Ely diocese produce that lists all the Licensed Anglican vicars in the diocese).  I do NOT want to inflame the situation over at Sawston, but since the discussion basically wound up being about the reliability of sources, I wondered if I left the text exactly the same, and just added this reference alongside the others?  For your info the ref is: . Petemyers (talk) 11:50, 18 November 2008 (UTC)


 * Perhaps best if I do it? I'll look at the ref tonight and insert if I think it will do more good than harm. --barneca (talk) 13:12, 18 November 2008 (UTC)

Thanks for the support!
Thanks for supporting my successful Rfa! Hope to work with you more in the future!--Aervanath lives in the Orphanage 19:25, 15 November 2008 (UTC)
 * It was touch and go for a while; glad you pulled it off. --barneca (talk) 01:31, 17 November 2008 (UTC)

Simulation12
Simulation12 has started again her disruptive edits, she removed the picture from seasickness again. I have reverted this edit. If she does it again, she's all yours for taking. Elbutler (talk) 19:41, 15 November 2008 (UTC)
 * At least she gave a reason (well, sort of) this time. I agree, doing it again would be a serious mistake on their part. I'll go have a word. --barneca (talk) 01:37, 17 November 2008 (UTC)

Thanks message
Dear Barnaca Many thanks for protecting my entry from vandals. I deeply appreciate it. I am just learning my way around Wikipedia, but thoroughly enjoying it. thanks. (how do I award you one of those star things?) Michaelrosenblum (talk) 23:57, 15 November 2008 (UTC)Michael Rosenblum
 * You're welcome. I see the talk page is getting hit too, but we usually don't protect talk pages unless absolutely necessary; it looks like a few people have it on their watchlist and are reverting, so hopefully it will die down.
 * To answer your question, I think you can see how "star things" work at WP:Barnstars, but there's no need; glad I could help. --barneca (talk) 02:16, 17 November 2008 (UTC)

We need an image..
I'm picturing a speed limit sign with a big giant number 2 or 3 on it that says "Speed Limit Only 3 Active Drama Threads". It could be part of the AN/I edit message;)--Crossmr (talk) 09:37, 19 November 2008 (UTC)
 * Eh, I've already tried creating what I considered an appropriate AN and ANI edit message, but it got shot down: . I do like the idea of an icon, however. --barneca (talk) 17:32, 19 November 2008 (UTC)

Archiving AN/I
Good idea. Only I can't find a Giano thread. I can find the Tony1 thread - hours of fun, btw - but not a Giano thread. I want a Giano thread. If I don't get a Giano thread, I may be forced to un-archive. Or de-archive, one of the two. -- Relata refero (disp.) 17:21, 19 November 2008 (UTC)
 * It's on AN (and RFAR), not ANI. This Giano thread is winding down, but I expect a fresh one in six days (assuming they're weekly). --barneca (talk) 17:28, 19 November 2008 (UTC)
 * Oh. My. God.
 * I've sent for pizza. I think that makes me a bad person. -- Relata refero (disp.) 17:41, 19 November 2008 (UTC)
 * Nah, don't too feel bad, threads like that are like crack. Impossible to resist once you get addicted, even if you know it's ruining your life. --barneca (talk) 17:52, 19 November 2008 (UTC)


 * Oooh, pretty. Thank you!  To be honest, I really expected it to be angrily unarchived by someone demanding their chance to bay at the fox too; I was pretty surprised when it stuck. Thanks again. --barneca (talk) 17:42, 19 November 2008 (UTC)

HW
He might not be an outright vandal, but he's "actively disruptive" rather than someone making n00b mistakes; (,, in the last couple of days alone), and someone with a "what does this button do" suck-it-and-see mentality is IMO far more of a threat as an admin than anyone other than an outright vandal-only account. Feel free to remove this once read…  – iride  scent  20:51, 20 November 2008 (UTC) 
 * Don't misunderstand, I certainly don't think he should be an admin. I just think he's someone who, as you say, is a "what-does-this-button-do" kind of guy, but who's not trying to disrupt, and some of the opposes seem too harsh.  For example, the db-spam template on Talk:death ray was, Im pretty sure, actually an attempt to put a db tag on his own article, Death ray/raygun virus, which he eventually, after some false starts, he realized wasn't going to work out.  That kind of thing; disruptive, yeah, but I think good faith disruptive, and can be tutored rather than hassled.  --barneca (talk) 20:55, 20 November 2008 (UTC)
 * Oh, I agree – and TPH in particular seems very petty (for all I know, it's his surname).  – iride  scent  21:02, 20 November 2008 (UTC) 

Gene Simmons
On the talk page, some say he's American (they're wrong, but it's a shame we have to be civil about ignorance), some say he's Israeli, some say he's Israeli-American, and some say we should omit the nationality status altogether.

Well, thanks to ignorant users instigating an edit war (the ones you really should be talking to, by the way), I guess we'll have to make a comprimise. A shame, as it will technically be wrong, but a comprimise must do I suppose.

Well, that leaves us with two options then, doesn't it. Taking into account the discussion on the discussion page, and the fact that without a comprimise, I will not be stopping the edit reverts, we must either list him as Israeli-American or omit it altogether. So, as a moderator, what would you suggest? Those are the only two reasonable solutions to this, and before I do one or the other, I would like to hear your opinion.

Leaving it in its current state, with Simmons being listed as American, is simply wrong. This will not be its permanent state, and before I edit the article again - which I will, at some point - I would like to hear from you. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Suicidal Lemming (talk • contribs) 22:55, 20 November 2008 (UTC)
 * Will reply on your talk page. --barneca (talk) 22:57, 20 November 2008 (UTC)

Thanks for the swift answer.

Although there are several who disagree with him being Israeli, there are some who agree that that would be most accurate. You are right however - I cannot "win" this, so I will indeed settle for a compromise. Most of those who opposed my thoughts on the matter agreed that it would be perhaps be best to list him as both. I will try to convince others that this is the correct path, and I will indeed try to be civil; however, I am not going anywhere. Listing his as Israeli-American would be perfectly reasonable for both sides, and if people don't agree, then I'm certainly not going to budge. The best alternative would be to drop the mention of his nationality althogether, but move on and leave him being listed as American? I personally find the notion a little offensive. Suicidal Lemming (talk) 23:43, 20 November 2008 (UTC)
 * Good luck with your discussion. --barneca (talk) 02:53, 21 November 2008 (UTC)

Thanks
Thanks and sorry. (For legal blocking thing.) NoKindOfName (talk) 18:12, 21 November 2008 (UTC)
 * Water under the bridge. --barneca (talk) 18:13, 21 November 2008 (UTC)

elbutler
Hey Barneca, how can I contact ElButler when Im Banned from Her Talk page? Simulation12 talk) 22:24, 24 November 2008 (UTC)
 * Sarah solved this problem, it looks like. --barneca (talk) 01:32, 29 November 2008 (UTC)

Thanksgiving
Hi! Since you weren't here on Thanksgiving, here's a belated Happy Thanksgiving! I hope you enjoyed yours as well as mine. Elbutler (talk) 02:16, 29 November 2008 (UTC)
 * Why thank you, happy even-more-belated Thanksgiving to you too. --barneca (talk) 11:28, 1 December 2008 (UTC)

The Return of the Barbaro hoaxer
They’ve got a new nick and a new variable IP. See the latest additions at Edward321 (talk) 05:46, 4 December 2008 (UTC)
 * replying on User talk:Edward321. --barneca (talk) 16:56, 4 December 2008 (UTC)

6 months
Usually I do school blocks that last the duration of a semester, usually students go right for vandalizing as soon as they know the block is lifted, so I just have the block set until summer vacation for them to make it easier on us in the long run. -- w L &lt;speak&middot;check&gt; 18:57, 12 December 2008 (UTC)
 * At the same time, there was a few edit-conflict like blocks. I was just too lazy to revert them back.-- w L &lt;speak&middot;check&gt; 19:06, 12 December 2008 (UTC)

Ogress
That other Ogress has a third s. User:Ogresss is not me. I'm Ogress. It's a vandal harassing me.  Ogress  smash!  18:58, 12 December 2008 (UTC)
 * I've been successfully trolled. Ogresss is now blocked, sorry for the mixup. Hey, at least I was capable of realizing you aren't a vandal! --barneca (talk) 19:05, 12 December 2008 (UTC)

Curly brackets in section headers that break the pointers
Thank you for this revert of the header at ANI, which will allow section pointers to work again. Brief research indicates that Mediawiki can't easily fix this limitation, since the curlies are expanded in the wrong phase, or something. I wonder if the software could issue a warning when people try to save an edit that contains curlies in the header? :) EdJohnston (talk) 19:32, 12 December 2008 (UTC)
 * Hi Ed, I fix it whenever I see it. I'm no techie, but my guess is that it would be tricky to change the software to warn you based on your planned section title (and half the time people create new sections by tacking them on to the end of the previous section anyway), but you could try at Bugzilla and see; maybe I'm wrong. --barneca (talk) 19:36, 12 December 2008 (UTC)

User:Mzmadmike
Actually it's been more than 24 hours since he last edited, so I think he gave up his fight about "President-elect". At least if we have to go through this in 2012, we'll know how to explain the situation better. Baseball Bugs What's up, Doc? 20:10, 12 December 2008 (UTC)
 * Oh, crap! You mean it isn't the 11th today?  I'm late for a meeting!!
 * I was actually responding to an AIV report, and didn't notice the date. Thanks for the comment, I'll adjust my message on his talk page accordingly. --barneca (talk) 20:14, 12 December 2008 (UTC)
 * It's on AIV??? That's odd. Anyway, my thought was to let sleeping dogs lie, and by Monday hopefully all this misinformed pedantry, from him and many others, will become moot. Baseball Bugs What's up, Doc? 20:16, 12 December 2008 (UTC)

Fru23
You just accused me of being some editor that has NO common pages with me. Please retract your previous statement. Thanks Fru23 (talk) 01:25, 13 December 2008 (UTC)

I started a Checkuser case here--feel free to list any other evidence you have; I just offered a summary. Blueboy96 01:55, 13 December 2008 (UTC)

I love your work on wikipedia...
I have been admiring your edits from afar and I truly believe you have made a significant positive impact on wikipedia. Thank you. 24.63.39.127 (talk) 08:40, 15 December 2008 (UTC)
 * Thank you, whoever you are! --barneca (talk) 15:00, 15 December 2008 (UTC)

MeredithW
I've apologized and said there are no hard feelings at all. Sorry about that, using huggle too fast! Won't happen again. :) Andy (talk) 20:24, 15 December 2008 (UTC)

Smile for you too, hope that helps!



Andy (talk) has smiled at you! Smiles promote WikiLove and hopefully this one has made your day better. Spread the WikiLove by smiling at someone else, whether it be someone you have had disagreements with in the past or a good friend, Go on smile! Cheers, and Happy editing!=) Smile at others by adding {{subst:Smile}} to their talk page with a friendly message.
 * NO worries. --barneca (talk) 21:45, 15 December 2008 (UTC)

Assistance?
Hi, can I ask your assistance if and when you gat a free moment? An editor and I are at loggerheads about some edits on The Palm Beach Story. I've posted my reasons for deleting the editor's changes on the article talk page, and have asked him or her to comment there ( and in a number of edit summaries, but have been unsuccessful so far. Do you think you can ask User:Britneysaints to participate in discussion rather than edit warring?  I'd appreciate it. Ed Fitzgerald t / c 03:08, 16 December 2008 (UTC)
 * My user talk request for the editor to comment has just been removed with the edit summary: "Apparently, crazy classic film fan."
 * And repeated the comment more publicly here. Can you speak to this person about incivility as well? Ed Fitzgerald t / c 03:35, 16 December 2008 (UTC)
 * Ed, it's been a while since you posted this, and I see the user has started discussing on the talk page, and other editors have chimed in as well. I also see that several of them have asked him to stop the name calling.  I admit to being pessimistic about the odds of changing their editing behavior significantly without a long block at some point (actually, the odds of them changing their behavior even after a long block don't seem really good), but I'd like to give the other editors' comments a chance to sink in.  Right now I think any further word from me would only inflame something that seems to have calmed down.  However, if they resume edit warring as soon as they start editing again (it is now clear that they would be editing against consensus on the talk page), or if they continue with the name calling, I think there have been enough warnings, and a 1 week block would be in order.  I probably won't be around, but you could try the WP:EWN (it's evidently not just for 3RR anymore) or WP:ANI, and if you think it will help anything, you can link to my comment here in your report.  Hope things improve. --barneca (talk) 16:15, 16 December 2008 (UTC)
 * Thanks, your reasoning is sound. Let's see what happens. Ed Fitzgerald t / c 02:31, 17 December 2008 (UTC)

Merry Christmas!


E L Butler  is wishing you a Merry Christmas! This greeting (and season) promotes WikiLove and hopefully this note has made your day a little better. Spread the WikiLove by wishing another user a Merry Christmas, whether it be someone you have had disagreements with in the past, a good friend, or just some random person. Don't eat yellow snow!

Spread the holiday cheer by adding to their talk page with a friendly message. Happy holidays! I hope you enjoy that speacial time of year! And don't forget to leave milk and cookies to Santa! E L Butler  19:45, 14 December 2008 (UTC)
 * Thanks, Erma. Merry Christmas to you as well, and a Prosperous New Year too. --barneca (talk) 22:53, 16 December 2008 (UTC)

Manhattan Samurai
I'd already dropped it with my suggestion to him to drop it. // roux    23:08, 16 December 2008 (UTC)
 * Hi Roux. Yes, but the tricky part, I've found, is still dropping it even when he doesn't.  Hope you find it within you to do so. --barneca (talk) 23:10, 16 December 2008 (UTC)
 * Er... I guess I typed too quickly. What I meant was that suggesting he drop it was my final word on the matter. My purpose in responding to him was to double-check whether the comment that brought him to ANI was merely off-the-cuff silliness or something he's relatively committed to. Further investigation through his contribs shows that he's not really much interested in playing by the rules; his continued insistence on creating his 'edit war army' seems to be perfectly good grounds for an indef block to me. // roux  <span style="border:1px solid #6D351A;-moz-border-radius-topright:10px;-moz-border-radius-bottomleft:10px;padding:0px 7px;font-size:30%;color:#6D351A;">  23:18, 16 December 2008 (UTC)
 * Ummm, can I report this? This seems to be a plan to indefinitely block me from Wikipedia in a secret fashion without my knowledge? Isn't this grounds for some kind of disciplinary action? I have a feeling it is.Manhattan Samurai (talk) 23:28, 16 December 2008 (UTC)
 * Consider it reported. I will give it all the consideration it deserves. --barneca (talk) 23:30, 16 December 2008 (UTC)
 * Thanks. I may call upon you at a future date when the time is right. I hope you will be ready and willing to serve Wikipedia's best interests.Manhattan Samurai (talk) 00:28, 17 December 2008 (UTC)
 * OK then, sleeper admin account signing off. Goodnight, master. --barneca (talk) 00:30, 17 December 2008 (UTC)

Thank you.
Regardless of my expectation that we have a major disagreement, I appreciate your action in stopping that useless back and forth. DepartedUser (talk) 02:50, 17 December 2008 (UTC)
 * Actually, I sense an outraged "how dare you" unarchiving coming up any moment now by someone involved, but I thought I'd try. As far as any major disagreements you and I might have (I assume you mean about ArbCom), you might be surprised. I probably sympathize with your overall sentiment, but disagree that the discussion at the village pump, especially in its current form, is likely to acheive anything productive. Still, that's the place for it, not WP:AN. --barneca (talk) 02:56, 17 December 2008 (UTC)
 * I think I had our disagreement pegged exactly right. You think the page is a shittay idea. I remain unconvinced. As usual, its conflicts with no real world effect that get people REALLY angry. What was that phrase? It was something about how because they didn't matter at all, conflicts in academic get the most visceral? Anyways, you get a hero point in my book. Have a nice (evening?) DepartedUser (talk) 03:00, 17 December 2008 (UTC)
 * Yes, evening, and you have reminded me I really need to log off and get to sleep. Good [insert time of day here] to you too. --barneca (talk) 03:03, 17 December 2008 (UTC)

As expected
Barneca, as expected Rtr10 does not see that he has done anything out of line or improper. In fact, he continues to accuse me of only making "nagging edits" and harming "hundreds of articles all while contributing nothing". He justifies his hostility and insults by demeaning my efforts as worse than worthless, in fact damaging the project. I am deserving of his behavior towards me, from his view. I'm not here to be the kid running up to you in class saying "See Mr. Barneca? He did it again!", but giving you a heads up that Rtr10 is likely to continue his behavior despite warnings (as before). He feels he can violate policy if he feels the person bearing the brunt of his transgressions deserves it. --Hammersoft (talk) 15:01, 17 December 2008 (UTC)
 * OK, thanks for the heads up. Tony replied again, I'll wait and see if it takes.  I had a little paragraph of my own all set to dump onto his talk page, but I'd rather wait and see if Tony's followup has any affect. I know his response did contain an attack on you, I respect your ability to not respond in kind. --barneca (talk) 01:11, 18 December 2008 (UTC)
 * And on it goes. "Hammersoft's trend of making up Wikipedia policy that does not exist". By itself, nothing. But it does show a continuing trend of bad mouthing another editor to gain advantage in a debate. But, I'm quite confident that bad mouthing other editors is perfectly in line with best practices here. :) --Hammersoft (talk) 17:02, 19 December 2008 (UTC)


 * And now we've got another one. It's ok to call me a "zealot" because, well, that's how it is and the editor is free to speak his mind in saying so. We're witnessing the death of WP:NPA. I think we should re-word it. It should read "This page in a nutshell: Comment on content, not on the contributor unless the contributor deserves it." See User_talk:Wiggy!. --Hammersoft (talk) 18:20, 19 December 2008 (UTC)
 * And on the way you may wish to point out your own petulant responses to others. If you want other folks to behave in a civil manner towards you, you may wish to behave in a civil manner towards them. Respect begats respect. And get it straight - I did not call you a zealot. I indicated that I felt there was a group of editors who overdo it when it comes to deleting images (i.e. they're overzealous). Just leave off and don't take it so personally. Wiggy! (talk) 16:34, 20 December 2008 (UTC)
 * Replying momentarily on all three of your talk pages. --barneca (talk) 17:15, 20 December 2008 (UTC)

Voooooom (or whatever)
Nah, that's fine. I almost blocked him myself, to be honest. <b style="color:black;">Black Kite</b> 00:36, 18 December 2008 (UTC)

RMHED
Is there a reason he's being allowed to get away with blatant personal attacks? // roux  <span style="border:1px solid #082567;-moz-border-radius-topright:10px;-moz-border-radius-bottomleft:10px;padding:0px 7px;font-size:30%;color:#082567;">  02:36, 18 December 2008 (UTC)
 * Yes. Because over-reacting to every occurance of someone being a rude git damages the encyclopedia more than ignoring it does, through unproductive drama.    RMHED does good work here sometimes, but he also likes to troll.  Same for Manhattan Samuri, last night.  How do you expect RMHED will react to a very serious announcement from an extemely important admin?  He's gleefully continue to troll, drama will ensue, nothing good happens.  The proper reaction is to ignore the trolling.  Then they have no reason to continue it.  Now, I admit, I almost blocked him indefinitely for calling me Barnacle; there's only so far you can take this tolerance thing... --barneca (talk) 03:00, 18 December 2008 (UTC)
 * I would expect him to stop telling people to fuck off, refactor his ridiculous statements, and if he didn't, I would expect him to be blocked for gross incivility. I would certainly have been severely warned and then blocked had I done what he did. Ignoring them, letting them get away with trolling, just emboldens them to do it more and more often because they know they can get away with it. // roux  <span style="border:1px solid #00009C;-moz-border-radius-topright:10px;-moz-border-radius-bottomleft:10px;padding:0px 7px;font-size:30%;color:#00009C;">  04:37, 18 December 2008 (UTC)
 * Wowsers, could you ask a more loaded question? That sounds a lot like "Have you stopped beating your wife."   Keeper  <span title="Representation in the International Phonetic Alphabet (IPA)" class="IPA">&#448;  76  02:44, 18 December 2008 (UTC)
 * That wasn't how it was meant. // roux  <span style="border:1px solid #00009C;-moz-border-radius-topright:10px;-moz-border-radius-bottomleft:10px;padding:0px 7px;font-size:30%;color:#00009C;">  04:37, 18 December 2008 (UTC)
 * Keeper! What's a semi-retired admin doing on another semi-retired admin's talk page, anyway?  Aren't we both supposed to have more important things to do? Hope all is going well with you. --barneca (talk) 03:00, 18 December 2008 (UTC)
 * You didn't see anything.....I wasn't here....back to sleep, barnacle....back to sleep.... Keeper <span title="Representation in the International Phonetic Alphabet (IPA)" class="IPA">&#448;  76  03:12, 18 December 2008 (UTC)
 * Have a good night, Barnacle and Keepsake!  Enigma  message 04:45, 18 December 2008 (UTC)
 * Guys stop it!! Do you have any idea what you're doing?! You're talking about someone behind their back on someone else's talk page, then insulting each-other. What's next? Blocking each-other? I'm ending this right now. Ruox, you should stp being such a tattle-tale, Barneca is right, if you ignore a troll he/she'll go away. Talking about them behind their back and trying to get them blocked won't help. If you trully want someone's opinion go to admin's intervention against vandalism, there it'll be up to them to decide wether or not he/she's block worthy going to admin saying "block him!" won't do any good, Gladys taught me that. And the rest of you, stop calling Barneca "Barncle", i hate it when people misspell my username, and probally so does Barneca. No one likes arguements, so break it up already! Elbutler (talk) 13:36, 18 December 2008 (UTC)
 * Whoa, dude. // roux  <span style="border:1px solid #082567;-moz-border-radius-topright:10px;-moz-border-radius-bottomleft:10px;padding:0px 7px;font-size:30%;color:#082567;">  17:14, 18 December 2008 (UTC)


 * Relax Erma, all is well. Keeper, Enigmaman and I all know each other, everyone here knows where to go if they need admin review, Roux's question is a legitimate one, and I'm quite confident RMHED can take care of himself.  Quite confident.
 * Plus, you spelled "Barnacle" wrong! :)
 * <gentle voice, hopefully not patronizing in tone> It's often best to avoid wading into a conversation when you aren't entirely clear what's going on; everyone involved here is going to be cool with it, but in some places (WP:ANI springs to mind), it would re-ignite a fire. --barneca (talk) 16:21, 18 December 2008 (UTC)

Good call
You were absolutely right; well said. You know how you can tell you've said something incisive, sensible, and fundamentally correct on WP:AN/I? Everyone ignores it. Score! :) MastCell Talk 05:23, 20 December 2008 (UTC)
 * Hmmm. Isn't it a violation of the terms of your wikibreak to be even looking at ANI?  I feel like John the Baptist; a lonely voice crying in the wilderness, speaking truth to people who always ignore me.  I don't want to take that analogy too far, I don't like how it ends.  Anyway, speaking of people who are violating the terms of their wikibreak, I should go now.  Thanks, as usual, for the kind words. --barneca (talk) 17:40, 20 December 2008 (UTC)
 * Dear God, it's at ArbCom. What a silly, petty community we've developed here.  I wonder how many people I could tempt to come with me if I made an en.Grownupedia.org fork (the Free Encyclopedia only Grownups can editTM)?  Wonder if I could attract any current big-bucks Wikipedia donors? (I must say, jetting around the world all the time accepting praise from other people sounds like a not-bad thing. And I've always wanted to be a Founder of something.) --barneca (talk) 21:16, 20 December 2008 (UTC)
 * Grownupedia would be no fun. People would always be creating useful content and complimenting and encouraging each other. Booooo-rrring. MastCell Talk 05:07, 21 December 2008 (UTC)
 * Also, now that I think about it, Grownupedia would leave me nothing to do. No threads to make snide comments about at ANI, no disputes to try to break up, no vandalism to revert, no vanityspam pages to delete, no accounts to block?  The horror! --barneca (talk) 12:52, 22 December 2008 (UTC)

Thank you
Just wanted to say thank you for the kind email in the wake of the 'Barbarian' hoax. I was feeling pretty dumb, but you made me feel not quite so silly. Just wanted to wish you and yours the happiest of holidays. Take care and regards,MarmadukePercy (talk) 05:40, 21 December 2008 (UTC)
 * You're quite welcome, MP. Trying to make people feel slightly less silly is part of my job. :) You have a great holiday eason as well. --barneca (talk) 12:54, 22 December 2008 (UTC)

Help!
You were right Barneca, getting involved in stuff you're not involved in can get you in trouble. Now the crazy sock-puppet farm is wiki-hounding me, engaging in my discussion, leaving angry messages on my talk page insulting me and the whole nation of the US, please help. He's probally going to leave some note insulting me below in a few minutes. Elbutler (talk) 16:18, 23 December 2008 (UTC)
 * It looks like another andmin protected your talk page a minute or two ago, hopefully that will be sufficient. --barneca (talk) 16:21, 23 December 2008 (UTC)

Your request
I did see your post on my talkpage and had hoped to get to it within the next couple of days, but I just noticed it was missing. Enjoy your break, and I hope to see you around here again sometime soon. Regards, Newyorkbrad (talk) 01:01, 24 December 2008 (UTC)
 * Replied on your talk page. --barneca (talk) 18:48, 29 December 2008 (UTC)

Seasons Greetings
Barneca, my very best wishes for the festive season stay safe and talk to you in 2009 (hoping you find time and inclination to return on a more full-time basis).-- VS  talk 12:09, 24 December 2008 (UTC)
 * Thanks! Replied on your talk page. --barneca (talk) 18:48, 29 December 2008 (UTC)