User talk:Barney the barney barney/Archive

Speedy deletion nomination of George Murray Smith the Younger


A tag has been placed on George Murray Smith the Younger requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section A7 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because the article appears to be about a person or group of people, but it does not indicate how or why the subject is important or significant: that is, why an article about that subject should be included in an encyclopedia. Under the criteria for speedy deletion, such articles may be deleted at any time. Please see the guidelines for what is generally accepted as notable.

If you think that this notice was placed here in error, contest the deletion by clicking on the button labelled "Click here to contest this speedy deletion". Doing so will take you to the talk page where you will find a pre-formatted place for you to explain why you believe the page should not be deleted. You can also visit the page's talk page directly to give your reasons, but be aware that once tagged for speedy deletion, if the page meets the criterion, it may be deleted without delay. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag yourself, but don't hesitate to add information to the page that would render it more in conformance with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. If the page is deleted, you can contact one of these administrators to request that the administrator userfy the page or email a copy to you. Andrew Kurish (talk) 23:03, 20 January 2012 (UTC)

Status and Advice
As reviewing administrator, of course did not delete it: he's included in the ODNB, and that is proof of notability. Please note that we do not really trust any of the Who's who series as a proof of notability.  DGG ( talk ) 01:51, 21 January 2012 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification
Hi. In your recent article edits, you've added some links pointing to disambiguation pages. Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ* Join us at the DPL WikiProject.


 * Royal Watercolour Society (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver)
 * added links pointing to Sir John Gilbert, John Doyle, John Glover and Charles Bartlett


 * George Murray Smith the Younger (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver)
 * added links pointing to DL and JP


 * Philip Trevelyan (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver)
 * added links pointing to Director and Pest


 * Francis Pryor (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver)
 * added a link pointing to William Pryor


 * James Fawcett (QC) (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver)
 * added a link pointing to DSC

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 11:06, 21 January 2012 (UTC)

Category sorting
Just a reminder that  is not a template, it's a magic word, and it uses a colon, not a pipe. For instance, it's, not. — Paul A (talk) 01:34, 23 January 2012 (UTC)

Another reminder: you made the same error again on Percy Nunn. — Paul A (talk) 01:52, 27 January 2012 (UTC)

You're still doing it. Please make an effort to get the code right, otherwise you're just making work for whoever has to clean up after you. — Paul A (talk) 01:28, 30 January 2012 (UTC)

Speedy tagging
Hi. Please don't use speedy tags like - you should not WP:BITE the newbies, and for that reason we try not to use the V word. In any case, you should try to use one of the official tags listed at WP:CSD - the right one here was db-person. If you can't find one to fit, probably the page is not speediable. Regards, JohnCD (talk) 19:18, 25 January 2012 (UTC)


 * I see thanks. not  Barney the barney barney (talk) 23:04, 25 January 2012 (UTC)


 * Note - I deactivated the templates so that it wouldn't look like this page was up for deletion.   Will Beback    talk    23:33, 25 January 2012 (UTC)

Speedy deletion nomination of Jane Heal


A tag has been placed on Jane Heal requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section A7 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because the article appears to be about a person or group of people, but it does not indicate how or why the subject is important or significant: that is, why an article about that subject should be included in an encyclopedia. Under the criteria for speedy deletion, such articles may be deleted at any time. Please see the guidelines for what is generally accepted as notable.

If you think that this notice was placed here in error, contest the deletion by clicking on the button labelled "Click here to contest this speedy deletion". Doing so will take you to the talk page where you will find a pre-formatted place for you to explain why you believe the page should not be deleted. You can also visit the page's talk page directly to give your reasons, but be aware that once tagged for speedy deletion, if the page meets the criterion, it may be deleted without delay. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag yourself, but don't hesitate to add information to the page that would render it more in conformance with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. If the page is deleted, you can contact one of these administrators to request that the administrator userfy the page or email a copy to you. Osarius : T : C : Been CSD'd? 23:17, 25 January 2012 (UTC)

Speedy deletion nomination of Renford Bambrough


A tag has been placed on Renford Bambrough requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section A7 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because the article appears to be about a person or group of people, but it does not indicate how or why the subject is important or significant: that is, why an article about that subject should be included in an encyclopedia. Under the criteria for speedy deletion, such articles may be deleted at any time. Please see the guidelines for what is generally accepted as notable.

If you think that this notice was placed here in error, contest the deletion by clicking on the button labelled "Click here to contest this speedy deletion". Doing so will take you to the talk page where you will find a pre-formatted place for you to explain why you believe the page should not be deleted. You can also visit the page's talk page directly to give your reasons, but be aware that once tagged for speedy deletion, if the page meets the criterion, it may be deleted without delay. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag yourself, but don't hesitate to add information to the page that would render it more in conformance with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. If the page is deleted, you can contact one of these administrators to request that the administrator userfy the page or email a copy to you. Gsingh (talk) 23:42, 25 January 2012 (UTC)

Admitting Mistake
I am sorry. I have removed the tag. Didn't realize it earlier. I was trying to get that deletion tag on another page but accidentally placed it on yours. I have just added the correct reference tags so that if any other user has any information or any user wants to contribute more towards the article he can. Once again sorry. Inlandmamba (talk) 18:58, 26 January 2012 (UTC)

Articles for deletion/Karl-Adolf Deubler
You seem to have made this edit to the wrong discussion. I've removed your comment, but you may want to to insert it into the correct discussion. Phil Bridger (talk) 18:48, 27 January 2012 (UTC)

BPS Presidents
Gosh, that is ambitious. Someone will have to be very busy? Martinevans123 (talk) 23:30, 27 January 2012 (UTC)
 * 66 stubs won't take long (?) They're mostly men, you know. haha Make sure you get Vicki's done, though! Martinevans123 (talk) 23:53, 27 January 2012 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification
Hi. In your recent article edits, you've added some links pointing to disambiguation pages. Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ* Join us at the DPL WikiProject.


 * Dawes Hicks (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver)
 * added a link pointing to FBA


 * Dorothy Edgington (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver)
 * added a link pointing to FBA


 * The Moon and the Sledgehammer (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver)
 * added a link pointing to Paul Simpson

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 10:51, 28 January 2012 (UTC)

Peter Venables
Can you please add references to prove notability? Independent of the department web page.Chemical Engineer (talk) 22:04, 28 January 2012 (UTC)

January 2012
Please stop. Continuing to remove maintenance templates from pages on Wikipedia, as you did to Charles Wilfred Valentine, without resolving the problem that the template refers to, may be considered disruptive editing. Further edits of this type may result in your account being blocked from editing. MikeWazowski (talk) 20:04, 30 January 2012 (UTC)


 * Mike, that is just plain rude. Barney the barney barney (talk) 20:05, 30 January 2012 (UTC)

This is your last warning. You may be blocked from editing without further warning the next time you vandalize a page, as you did with this edit to Charles Wilfred Valentine.  Captain n00dle \ Talk 20:11, 30 January 2012 (UTC)
 * The ignorance being displayed here is breathtaking. Phil Bridger (talk) 21:21, 30 January 2012 (UTC)

Category sorting
A reminder that  is a magic word, not a template, and uses a colon, not a pipe. For example,, not. — Paul A (talk) 02:44, 3 February 2012 (UTC)

Speedy Deletion
Please keep in mind that to nominate pages for speedy deletion, you must be able to point to a specific wp:csd. "Advert, too short," may be based on good reasoning but the page was newly posted so "too short" is irrelevant and "advert" wasn't backed up by the actual content. Thanks for understanding, -- Non-Dropframe   talk   21:39, 3 February 2012 (UTC)

Speedy deletion nomination of Encyclopedia of Australian Science


A tag has been placed on Encyclopedia of Australian Science requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section A7 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because the article appears to be about web content, but it does not indicate how or why the subject is important or significant: that is, why an article about that subject should be included in an encyclopedia. Under the criteria for speedy deletion, such articles may be deleted at any time. Please see the guidelines for what is generally accepted as notable.

If you think that this notice was placed here in error, contest the deletion by clicking on the button labelled "Click here to contest this speedy deletion". Doing so will take you to the talk page where you will find a pre-formatted place for you to explain why you believe the page should not be deleted. You can also visit the page's talk page directly to give your reasons, but be aware that once tagged for speedy deletion, if the page meets the criterion, it may be deleted without delay. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag yourself, but don't hesitate to add information to the page that would render it more in conformance with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. If the page is deleted, you can contact one of these administrators to request that the administrator userfy the page or email a copy to you. MikeWazowski (talk) 21:55, 3 February 2012 (UTC)

Speedy deletion nomination of Encyclopedia of Australian Science


A tag has been placed on Encyclopedia of Australian Science requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section A7 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because the article appears to be about web content, but it does not indicate how or why the subject is important or significant: that is, why an article about that subject should be included in an encyclopedia. Under the criteria for speedy deletion, such articles may be deleted at any time. Please see the guidelines for what is generally accepted as notable.

If you think that this notice was placed here in error, contest the deletion by clicking on the button labelled "Click here to contest this speedy deletion". Doing so will take you to the talk page where you will find a pre-formatted place for you to explain why you believe the page should not be deleted. You can also visit the page's talk page directly to give your reasons, but be aware that once tagged for speedy deletion, if the page meets the criterion, it may be deleted without delay. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag yourself, but don't hesitate to add information to the page that would render it more in conformance with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. If the page is deleted, you can contact one of these administrators to request that the administrator userfy the page or email a copy to you. MikeWazowski (talk) 00:40, 4 February 2012 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification
Hi. In your recent article edits, you've added some links pointing to disambiguation pages. Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ* Join us at the DPL WikiProject.


 * British Psychological Society (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver)
 * added a link pointing to William McDougall


 * David M. Clark (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver)
 * added a link pointing to FBA


 * Felix Krueger (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver)
 * added a link pointing to German


 * George Humphrey (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver)
 * added a link pointing to FRSC


 * Max Beloff, Baron Beloff (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver)
 * added a link pointing to FBA

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 10:21, 4 February 2012 (UTC)

Proposed deletion of Encyclopedia of Australian Science


The article Encyclopedia of Australian Science has been proposed for deletion&#32; because of the following concern:
 * Unremarkable website. Google search on "Encyclopedia of Australian Science" shows only 24 results - no significant coverage from reliable sources.

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 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 will stop the proposed deletion process, but other deletion processes exist. In particular, the speedy deletion process can result in deletion without discussion, and articles for deletion allows discussion to reach consensus for deletion. MikeWazowski (talk) 16:44, 4 February 2012 (UTC)

Hey
You seem to be having a lot of trouble here. Is there anything I can help you with? I dream of horses If you reply here, please leave me a message on my talk page. @ 20:59, 9 February 2012 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification
Hi. In your recent article edits, you've added some links pointing to disambiguation pages. Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ* Join us at the DPL WikiProject.


 * Thomas Philip LeFanu (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver)
 * added links pointing to Irish, CB and Irish independence


 * Royal Historical Society (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver)
 * added links pointing to Peter Marshall and William Cunningham


 * William LeFanu (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver)
 * added links pointing to Irish and FSA

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 10:33, 11 February 2012 (UTC)

Speedy deletion tags
Please be careful when tagging articles for speedy deletion. The criteria are very limited. For example, WP:A7 only applies to a limited number of subjects. It does not apply to cocktails, such as Toxic fairy. Instead, consider a different type of deletion procedure. Singularity42 (talk) 22:44, 14 February 2012 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification
Hi. In your recent article edits, you've added some links pointing to disambiguation pages. Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ* Join us at the DPL WikiProject.


 * Herbert James Paton (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver)
 * added links pointing to Scottish and FBA


 * G.C. Field (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver)
 * added a link pointing to FBA


 * W.H. Walsh (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver)
 * added a link pointing to FBA

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 19:27, 18 February 2012 (UTC)

Speedy deletion nomination of Sidney Maynard Smith


A tag has been placed on Sidney Maynard Smith requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section A7 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because the article appears to be about a person or group of people, but it does not indicate how or why the subject is important or significant: that is, why an article about that subject should be included in an encyclopedia. Under the criteria for speedy deletion, such articles may be deleted at any time. Please see the guidelines for what is generally accepted as notable.

If you think that this notice was placed here in error, contest the deletion by clicking on the button labelled "Click here to contest this speedy deletion". Doing so will take you to the talk page where you will find a pre-formatted place for you to explain why you believe the page should not be deleted. You can also visit the page's talk page directly to give your reasons, but be aware that once tagged for speedy deletion, if the page meets the criterion, it may be deleted without delay. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag yourself, but don't hesitate to add information to the page that would render it more in conformance with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. If the page is deleted, you can contact one of these administrators to request that the administrator userfy the page or email a copy to you. noq (talk) 19:33, 18 February 2012 (UTC)

John Lilleyman Status and Advice
As reviewing administrator,   I think this indicates at least some importance, so not appropriate for speedy deletion. But more is needed. FRCP is not by itself notable, and inclusion in Who's Who is not considered here as notability either, nor are they considered a Reliable Source. What is considered notable is given in WP:PROF, he needs to be shown an authority in his subject. What positions did he hold, what did he publish? I advise you to fix the problem, and do this very quickly, before the article gets nominated for deletion by a regular deletion process. Unless more is written, it wont hold.  DGG ( talk ) 02:39, 23 February 2012 (UTC)


 * Thanks, but Knight Bachelor is. Barney the barney barney (talk) 19:35, 28 December 2012 (UTC)

Nomination of Sidney Maynard Smith for deletion
A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Sidney Maynard Smith 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 Articles for deletion/Sidney Maynard Smith 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. noq (talk) 01:58, 19 February 2012 (UTC)

Speedy deletion nomination of User:Barney the barney barney


Hello, and welcome to Wikipedia. This is a notice that the page that you created was tagged as a test page and has been or soon may be deleted. Please use the sandbox for any other tests you want to do. Take a look at the welcome page if you would like to learn more about contributing to our encyclopedia.

If you think that the page was nominated in error, contest the nomination by clicking on the button labelled "Click here to contest this speedy deletion" in the speedy deletion tag. Doing so will take you to the talk page where you can explain why you believe the page should not be deleted. You can also visit the page's talk page directly to give your reasons, but be aware that once a page is tagged for speedy deletion, it may be removed without delay. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag yourself, but do not hesitate to add information that is consistent with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. If the page is deleted, you can contact one of these administrators to request that the administrator userfy the page or email a copy to you. ArglebargleIV (talk) 20:59, 22 February 2012 (UTC)

General advice
We're very glad to have additional articles on notable scientists and physicians. I've been working primarily to achieve this for years now, and you help is greatly appreciated. But you might help even more if you wrote more substantial articles. An article should not just list the name and the subject, and some supporting references. It should explain why the person is notable. A reasonable length for a stub is not one sentence, but one paragraph. When you have a bio notice or the obit in front of you is the time to do it; it will be easier for you then than it will be for you or anybody at any later time. Add at least the degrees--including the university--we need this information to add to the lists of notable alumni--, and the key positions, If they wrote book, list them; if articles, the 3 or 4 most widely known or cited. If they were editors of a journal, say so. This way, it won;lt be necessary for you to keep defending the articles, and for others to fix them.  DGG ( talk ) 02:51, 23 February 2012 (UTC)

Speedy deletion nomination of William de Burgh (philosopher)


A tag has been placed on William de Burgh (philosopher) requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section A3 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because it is an article with no content whatsoever, or whose contents consist only of external links, a "See also" section, book references, category tags, template tags, interwiki links, a rephrasing of the title, or an attempt to contact the subject of the article. Please see Wikipedia:Stub for our minimum information standards for short articles. Also please note that articles must be on notable subjects and should provide references to reliable sources that verify their content.

If you think that the page was nominated in error, contest the nomination by clicking on the button labelled "Click here to contest this speedy deletion" in the speedy deletion tag. Doing so will take you to the talk page where you can explain why you believe the page should not be deleted. You can also visit the page's talk page directly to give your reasons, but be aware that once a page is tagged for speedy deletion, it may be removed without delay. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag yourself, but do not hesitate to add information that is consistent with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. If the page is deleted, you can contact one of these administrators to request that the administrator userfy the page or email a copy to you. NTox · talk 06:36, 24 February 2012 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification
Hi. In your recent article edits, you've added some links pointing to disambiguation pages. Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ* Join us at the DPL WikiProject.


 * Royal College of Pathologists (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver)
 * added links pointing to John Anderson, Sir Robert Williams and Robert Curran


 * John Peel (gynaecologist) (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver)
 * added a link pointing to KCVO

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 10:19, 26 February 2012 (UTC)

Ronald Adam
Hi - Thanks for your recent addition to the article on Ronald Adam. Please can you provide a reference as required by WP:SOURCE. Thanks in anticipation. Dormskirk (talk) 12:04, 28 December 2012 (UTC)


 * Burke's Baronetage, Oxford DNB, Who's Who, how many do you need?
 * As per WP:SOURCE just one will be required. Thanks. Dormskirk (talk) 14:37, 28 December 2012 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for December 29
Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that you've added some links pointing to disambiguation pages. Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ* Join us at the DPL WikiProject.


 * Eric Forbes Adam (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver)
 * added links pointing to Paris Peace Conference, CMG and Lausanne Conference


 * Colin Forbes Adam (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver)
 * added links pointing to DL and CSI


 * Philip Dennis Proctor (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver)
 * added links pointing to KCB and Harrow


 * Sir Frank Forbes Adam, 1st Baronet (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver)
 * added links pointing to CIE and CB


 * William de Burgh (philosopher) (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver)
 * added a link pointing to FBA

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 11:17, 29 December 2012 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for January 5
Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that you've added some links pointing to disambiguation pages. Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ* Join us at the DPL WikiProject.


 * Dave Brailsford (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver)
 * added a link pointing to Caernarvon


 * Samuel Armstrong Lane (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver)
 * added a link pointing to St Mary's Hospital

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 11:02, 5 January 2013 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for January 12
Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Katherine Ralls, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Conservationist (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver). Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ* Join us at the DPL WikiProject.

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 11:33, 12 January 2013 (UTC)

Nomination of Preston King (academic) for deletion
A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Preston King (academic) 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 Articles for deletion/Preston King (academic) 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 high-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. Grammarxxx (What'd I do this time?) 05:13, 14 January 2013 (UTC)

Disambiguation pages
Hello, Barney the barney barney. When you moved Preston King to a new title and then changed the old title into a disambiguation page, you may have overlooked WP:FIXDABLINKS, which says:
 * A code of honor for creating disambiguation pages is to fix all resulting mis-directed links.
 * Before moving an article to a qualified name (in order to create a disambiguation page at the base name, to move an existing disambiguation page to that name, or to redirect that name to a disambiguation page), click on What links here to find all of the incoming links. Repair all of those incoming links to use the new article name.

It would be a great help if you would check the other Wikipedia articles that contain links to "Preston King" and fix them to take readers to the correct article. Thanks. R'n'B (call me Russ) 11:51, 14 January 2013 (UTC)

Deletion discussion about Archibald Auldjo Jamieson
Hello, Barney the barney barney,

I wanted to let you know that there's a discussion about whether Archibald Auldjo Jamieson should be deleted. Your comments are welcome at Articles for deletion/Archibald Auldjo Jamieson.

If you're new to the process, articles for deletion is a group discussion (not a vote!) that usually lasts seven days. If you need it, there is a guide on how to contribute. Last but not least, you are highly encouraged to continue improving the article; just be sure not to remove the tag about the deletion nomination from the top.

Thanks, Gbawden (talk) 14:15, 17 January 2013 (UTC)

Deletion discussion about Anke Ehlers
Hello, Barney the barney barney,

I wanted to let you know that there's a discussion about whether Anke Ehlers should be deleted. Your comments are welcome at Articles for deletion/Anke Ehlers.

If you're new to the process, articles for deletion is a group discussion (not a vote!) that usually lasts seven days. If you need it, there is a guide on how to contribute. Last but not least, you are highly encouraged to continue improving the article; just be sure not to remove the tag about the deletion nomination from the top.

Thanks, Gbawden (talk) 14:21, 17 January 2013 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for January 29
Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited T.A. Robertson, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Scottish (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver). Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ* Join us at the DPL WikiProject.

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 11:12, 29 January 2013 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for February 5
Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Robert Carter (RAF Officer), you added links pointing to the disambiguation pages CB, DSO and DFC (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver). Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ* Join us at the DPL WikiProject.

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 11:23, 5 February 2013 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for February 12
Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that you've added some links pointing to disambiguation pages. Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ* Join us at the DPL WikiProject.


 * Dayrolles Blakeney Eveleigh-de-Moleyns, 4th Baron Ventry (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver)
 * added links pointing to Irish, DL and JP


 * John Gretton, 3rd Baron Gretton (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver)
 * added links pointing to Peer and DL

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 10:54, 12 February 2013 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for February 19
Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that you've added some links pointing to disambiguation pages. Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ* Join us at the DPL WikiProject.


 * William Boyd McCleary (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver)
 * added links pointing to CMG and CVO


 * Rudyard Lake Steam Railway (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver)
 * added a link pointing to 4-4-2


 * Stapleford Miniature Railway (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver)
 * added a link pointing to 4-4-2

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 10:56, 19 February 2013 (UTC)

Talkback
 Ron h jones  (Talk) 22:45, 24 February 2013 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for February 28
Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited George Darwin, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page KCB (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver). Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ* Join us at the DPL WikiProject.

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 11:28, 28 February 2013 (UTC)

Speedy deletion nomination of Hugh Newall


A tag has been placed on Hugh Newall requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section A7 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because the article appears to be about a person or group of people, but it does not indicate how or why the subject is important or significant: that is, why an article about that subject should be included in an encyclopedia. Under the criteria for speedy deletion, such articles may be deleted at any time. Please see the guidelines for what is generally accepted as notable.

If you think that your page should not be deleted for this reason, you may contest the nomination by visiting the page and clicking the button labelled "Click here to contest this speedy deletion". This will give you the opportunity to explain why you believe the page should not be deleted. However, be aware that once a page is tagged for speedy deletion, it may be removed without delay. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag from the page yourself, but do not hesitate to add information in line with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. If the page is deleted, and you wish to retrieve the deleted material for future reference or improvement, you can place a request here. Grammarxxx (What'd I do this time?) 19:21, 28 February 2013 (UTC)

Hugh Newall is now work-in-progress and should not be deleted; he was a famous astronomer!

2.27.132.39 (talk) 08:40, 5 March 2013 (UTC)

Category sorting
This is your annual reminder that  isn't a template. — Paul A (talk) 03:01, 6 March 2013 (UTC)

MORE candidates for article please
&
 * Arthur Hutchinson, Mineralogist FRS (1922)
 * Alexander MacAlister FRS (1881)
 * Robert Burn, Fellow of Trinity College, Cambridge
 * John Burnaby, Dean of Trinity College, Cambridge, Regius Professor of Divinity
 * John Walton Capstick Bursar and Fellow of Trinity College, Cambridge
 * Basil Hammond Fellow of Trinity College, Cambridge
 * Jeremy Maule Fellow of Trinity College, Cambridge and Lecturer in English
 * Vincent Henry Stanton Fellow of Trinity College, Cambridge
 * Augustus Arthur Vansittart, Fellow of Trinity College, Cambridge

please?


 * Difficult to find obvious sources on most of the above. And due to lack of sources/coverage, I also remain to be convinced of their notability.  Vansittart's father George Henry Vansittart is notable (General officer, DNB) and needs doing first, and he's seemingly quite well connected into the peerage.


 * Meanwhile As I noted earlier:


 * You are aware that you can Special:UserLogin and also search Alumni Cantabrigienses online, and get access to Who's Who and Oxford Dictionary of National Biography through your library? Barney the barney barney (talk) 17:37, 7 March 2013 (UTC)


 * The page on the Ascension Burial Ground is a bit of a mess too, btw. Barney the barney barney (talk) 20:24, 8 March 2013 (UTC)

Barney, many thanks for your recent assistance - much appreciated my friend, Martin Packer2.30.189.219 (talk) 09:55, 9 March 2013 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for March 7
Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that you've added some links pointing to disambiguation pages. Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ* Join us at the DPL WikiProject.


 * Arthur Hutchinson (mineralogist) (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver)
 * added a link pointing to FRS


 * Charles Brink (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver)
 * added a link pointing to FBA


 * Charles Sargant (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver)
 * added a link pointing to PC


 * Hugh Newall (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver)
 * added a link pointing to FRS


 * Richard Appleton, Master (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver)
 * added a link pointing to MA

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 11:41, 7 March 2013 (UTC)

Speedy deletion nomination of Robert Burn


A tag has been placed on Robert Burn requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section A7 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because the article appears to be about a person, organization (band, club, company, etc.), web content or organised event, but it does not indicate how or why the subject is important or significant: that is, why an article about that subject should be included in an encyclopedia. Under the criteria for speedy deletion, such articles may be deleted at any time. Please see the guidelines for what is generally accepted as notable.

If you think that your page should not be deleted for this reason, you may contest the nomination by visiting the page and clicking the button labelled "Click here to contest this speedy deletion". This will give you the opportunity to explain why you believe the page should not be deleted. However, be aware that once a page is tagged for speedy deletion, it may be removed without delay. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag from the page yourself, but do not hesitate to add information in line with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. If the page is deleted, and you wish to retrieve the deleted material for future reference or improvement, you can place a request here. smileguy91talk 23:08, 8 March 2013 (UTC)

Re: Tiresomness
Reply is on User talk:smileguy91. smileguy91talk 23:16, 8 March 2013 (UTC)

Another reply on User talk:smileguy91. smileguy91talk 23:25, 8 March 2013 (UTC)

George Henry Vansittart
This is an automated message from MadmanBot. I have performed a web search with the contents of George Henry Vansittart, and it appears to include material copied directly from http://www.berkshirehistory.com/bios/ghvansittart.html.

It is possible that the bot is confused and found similarity where none actually exists. If that is the case, you can remove the tag from the article. The article will be reviewed to determine if there are any copyright issues.

If substantial content is duplicated and it is not public domain or available under a compatible license, it will be deleted. For legal reasons, we cannot accept copyrighted text or images borrowed from other web sites or printed material. You may use such publications as a source of information, but not as a source of sentences. See our copyright policy for further details. (If you own the copyright to the previously published content and wish to donate it, see Donating copyrighted materials for the procedure.) MadmanBot (talk) 10:03, 9 March 2013 (UTC)


 * Thanks. The text is mostly taken from a copyright expired public domain copy of the Dictionary of National Biography, with some changes to suit WP:MOS.  It appears that http://www.berkshirehistory.com/bios/ghvansittart.html has taken the same public domain source, edited it a wee bit, and now claims copyright over it.  However, I didn't copy it from him, I got it from Wikisource. Barney the barney barney (talk) 10:07, 9 March 2013 (UTC)

Ascension
Many thanks for your kind work on the above article; it looks a lot tidier now. I have re-instated the people without articles (some of whom do need articles) following your example in alphabetical sequence. I see you have added a few cross references to Find-A-Grave (below) but are you aware that ALL of these people have Find-A-Grave entries, and that the links are already in their articles? Will you be completing "References" from A-Z, or otherwise? Martin.

^ John Couch Adams at Find a Grave ^ Sir Hgugh Kerr Anderson at Find a Grave ^ Elizabeth Anscombe at Find a Grave ^ Richard Appleton at Find a Grave ^ Arthur John Arberry at Find a Grave ^ Sir Robert Stawell Ball at Find a Grave

2.27.132.181 (talk) 22:32, 9 March 2013 (UTC)

References:

^ Jon Burnaby at Find a Grave

^ Sir Hgugh Kerr Anderson at Find a Grave

Please correct these typos.?

^ Richard Appleton at Find a Grave

This link does not work - can you disambiguate 'Richard Appleton' please?

You can copy and paste the references to Find-A-Grave from the individual articles, of course?

2.30.195.115 (talk) 09:12, 10 March 2013 (UTC)

Deletion discussion about Arthur Gordon Matthew
Hello, Barney the barney barney,

I wanted to let you know that there's a discussion about whether Arthur Gordon Matthew should be deleted. Your comments are welcome at Articles for deletion/Arthur Gordon Matthew.

If you're new to the process, articles for deletion is a group discussion (not a vote!) that usually lasts seven days. If you need it, there is a guide on how to contribute. Last but not least, you are highly encouraged to continue improving the article; just be sure not to remove the tag about the deletion nomination from the top.

Thanks, Gbawden (talk) 07:26, 12 March 2013 (UTC)


 * Thanks Gwarben! That's really helpful. Barney the barney barney (talk) 18:08, 12 March 2013 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for March 14
Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that you've added some links pointing to disambiguation pages. Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ* Join us at the DPL WikiProject.


 * Alexander Macalister (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver)
 * added links pointing to FSA and FRS


 * Sir Harold Boulton, 2nd Baronet (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver)
 * added links pointing to JP and CVO


 * Ascension Parish Burial Ground (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver)
 * added a link pointing to Robert Heath Lock


 * George Henry Vansittart (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver)
 * added a link pointing to Robert Vansittart


 * Mike Besser (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver)
 * added a link pointing to FRCP


 * Svenska Dagbladet Literature Prize (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver)
 * added a link pointing to Li Li


 * Vincent Henry Stanton (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver)
 * added a link pointing to DD

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 13:50, 14 March 2013 (UTC)

Speedy deletion nomination of Arthur Beer


A tag has been placed on Arthur Beer requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section A7 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because the article appears to be about a person, organization (band, club, company, etc.), web content or organised event, but it does not indicate how or why the subject is important or significant: that is, why an article about that subject should be included in an encyclopedia. Under the criteria for speedy deletion, such articles may be deleted at any time. Please read more about what is generally accepted as notable.

If you think this page should not be deleted for this reason, you may contest the nomination by visiting the page and clicking the button labelled "Click here to contest this speedy deletion". This will give you the opportunity to explain why you believe the page should not be deleted. However, be aware that once a page is tagged for speedy deletion, it may be removed without delay. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag from the page yourself, but do not hesitate to add information in line with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. If the page is deleted, and you wish to retrieve the deleted material for future reference or improvement, you can place a request here. Uberaccount (talk) 21:24, 16 March 2013 (UTC)


 * Thanks for your help Uberaccount! That's really helpful!  It might be more helpful though if you could please try not to nominate notable people for speedy deletion?   Barney the barney barney (talk) 22:54, 16 March 2013 (UTC)

Speedy deletion nomination of Margaret Heitland


A tag has been placed on Margaret Heitland requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section A7 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because the article appears to be about a person, organization (band, club, company, etc.), web content or organised event, but it does not indicate how or why the subject is important or significant: that is, why an article about that subject should be included in an encyclopedia. Under the criteria for speedy deletion, such articles may be deleted at any time. Please read more about what is generally accepted as notable.

If you think this page should not be deleted for this reason, you may contest the nomination by visiting the page and clicking the button labelled "Click here to contest this speedy deletion". This will give you the opportunity to explain why you believe the page should not be deleted. However, be aware that once a page is tagged for speedy deletion, it may be removed without delay. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag from the page yourself, but do not hesitate to add information in line with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. If the page is deleted, and you wish to retrieve the deleted material for future reference or improvement, you can place a request here. Uberaccount (talk) 21:25, 16 March 2013 (UTC)

List of Articles created by Anonymous users
Hi Barney, I created this article in order to get help, hoping that other editors will fill in the article. I originally wanted to submit a request for this article to be created and I couldn't figure out how to do it. Thanks Vibhabamba (talk) 04:23, 25 March 2013 (UTC)

Daisy, Daisy...
Sorry, but I've declined your speedy. It may fall under BLP1E, but there's too much coverage for an A7 IMO. Peridon (talk) 20:22, 25 March 2013 (UTC)

Edward E. Fitzgerald article
Just wanted to say thanks for looking over this new article.Jacqke (talk) 05:20, 26 March 2013 (UTC)

Alexander Macalister Article please
Born Apr. 9, 1844, Dublin]; died 1919, Cambridge. He was educated at Trinity College. He qualified at the Irish Royal Colleges in 1861, became M.B. at Trinity College ten years later and M.D. in 1876. After acting as demonstrator of anatomy at the Royal College of Surgeons in Ireland, he was appointed professor of zoology, and eight years later professor of anatomy and chirurgery, at Dublin. In 1883 he succeeded Sir George Murray Humphry in the chair of anatomy at Cambridge, and held this post for thirty-six years. He was a prolific writer. Besides his "Text-book of Human Anatomy"(1889) for which he is best known, he was the author of "Introduction to Animal Morphology"(1876) and "Morphology of Vertebrate Animals" (1878) as well as of numerous papers on animal, morphology, human anatomy and small text-books for students. He was a man of remarkable versatility, being an able mathematician as well as versed in archæology, Egyptology and draughtsmanship. Like his cousin, Sir Donald Macalister, he was a proficient linguist, having knowledge of fourteen languages. He received many honours. In 1881 he was elected, a fellow of the Royal Society. He was made hon. LL.D. of the Universities of Edinburgh, Glasgow and McGill and hon. D.Sc. and senator of the University of Dublin. His name has been attached to the fovea gastrica and the annulus femoralis s. cruralis

On November 4, 1910 the body of King Henry VI in its brick vault in St. George's Chapel, Windsor (since August 12, 1484) was "investigated", with King George V's consent, by William St. John Hope and Canon J.N. Dalton, in the presence of the Dean and Canons, and various other people such as M.R. James, Provost of King's College, Cambridge (and later of Eton College, both founded by Henry VI), and Dr. A. Macalister, Professor of Anatomy at Cambridge. The vault was emptied of rubble, and at the centre was found a small lead chest containing the fragmented bones of "a fairly strong man, aged between 45 and 55", according to Macalister's report, published in The Times on November 12, 1910. [The bones had previously been buried in Chertsey Abbey in 1471 until their removal in 1484.]

2.30.189.109 (talk) 08:04, 26 March 2013 (UTC)

John Joseph Scoles
Yes, its just a slightly modifired version of the [|wikisource page]. Victorianweb got their text from the same place. Is it OK to remove the MadmanBot template myself or should I leave it to somene else?Ruskinmonkey (talk) 20:03, 26 March 2013 (UTC)


 * I've done it. Barney the barney barney (talk) 20:00, 26 March 2013 (UTC)

Thanks. Actually I should hace copied it a bit more exactly. He was Joseph John Scoles....Ruskinmonkey (talk) 20:03, 26 March 2013 (UTC)

Katherine Low Settlement
I've added a lead section to Katherine Low Settlement. Thank you.

Rwickham (talk) 21:35, 26 March 2013 (UTC)Rwickham

The Noun Project
Hi Barney, The article was encyclopedia worthy. I wish you had done some research before just adding the deletion tag.

Its the largest open source Library of icons. Its disappointing that sometimes our research before deleting articles is very cursory

http://www.good.is/posts/using-the-noun-project-s-iconic-design-tools-for-social-change http://thenounproject.com/using-symbols/ — Preceding unsigned comment added by Vibhabamba (talk • contribs) 17:42, 27 March 2013 (UTC)

A2B Internet
On second thoughts, I think you're right: please delete this article. -- Arthur Frayn (talk) 18:43, 27 March 2013 (UTC)

You can go ahead and move Astonish Design to my user space. Thanks for understanding!

-- Brian Boyko (talk) 19:17, 27 March 2013 (UTC)

Vampire Weekend
Yes forked it right away. For the best i think.


 * Regards:The Mad Hatter (talk) 21:42, 27 March 2013 (UTC)

RAF Kalyan
Thanks for Reviewing. ( and for the compliment) Trinidade 13:07, 29 March 2013 (UTC)

Dear Barney

Hello I'm afraid you left me a note Do not delete or speedy delete as you did to Italian Club if you want to delete Please remove short articles

Yours sincearly

Greg Davidson — Preceding unsigned comment added by Greg Davidson (talk • contribs) 16:03, 29 March 2013 (UTC)

Parasol (horse)
Thanks for the review, glad you like it. Edwarddutton (talk) 19:58, 29 March 2013 (UTC)

Speedy deletion declined: Cream Delight
Hello Barney the barney barney, and thanks for patrolling new pages! I am just letting you know that I declined the speedy deletion of Cream Delight, a page you tagged for speedy deletion, because of the following concern: "very famous" is an assetion of importance. You may wish to review the Criteria for Speedy Deletion before tagging further pages. Thank you.  Ϣere Spiel  Chequers  21:39, 29 March 2013 (UTC)

Boom Pictures
How can Boom Pictures be a promotion? Its a well established company run by the former controller of BBC 1. So does that mean that the page for Tesco and Morrisons is also a promotion?

Rhyshuw1 (talk) 21:42, 29 March 2013 (UTC)

Declined speedy for Boom Pictures
I declined the speedy for Boom Pictures because it wasn't an overly blatant attempt at promotion. I do have some serious doubts about notability, but I think that it falls short of G11. I think that WP:AfD is probably the best arena for this. Tokyogirl79 (｡◕‿◕｡) 


 * 1) Thanks tokyogirl. They are the biggest producer of childrens television in the UK. I'm nothing to do with the company- just want to increase the amount of articles about Welsh companies in general. Have a look at http://www.fflic.com/ it's full of programming. p.s They don't need promotion- especially on sites like this. Rhyshuw1 (talk) 18:24, 30 March 2013 (UTC)

Ascension Parish Burial Ground
Barney, you have done a remarkable job on the article - which I will be brining to the collective attention of the Friends of Ascension Parish Burial Ground very shortly; thanks on their behalf! I am particularly impressed with the sheer number of new articles you have created and the wealth of detail in them. My next priority is Find-A-Grave images once all the snow has cleared! Martin 2.27.113.198 (talk) 11:36, 30 March 2013 (UTC)

Talkback
Hi Barney the barney barney I'm Greg I wanted to let you know that after school club Italian starts on 17th April 2013 — Preceding unsigned comment added by Greg Davidson (talk • contribs) 14:03, 30 March 2013 (UTC)

== Barney the barney barney has a new message from another user ==

Hi Barney the barney barney You had a message from an unknown user Although it is deleted because your message was idle for more than 30 minutes

If you want do disable deleting Please go to their website

Unknown User from Wikipedia 14:11 30/03/13 — Preceding unsigned comment added by Greg Davidson (talk • contribs) 14:11, 30 March 2013 (UTC)

RE: Yasmin Bevan
I am well aware of the significance of a damehood. See List_of_Dames_Commander_of_the_Order_of_the_British_Empire and you'll notice that not all Dames have an article about themselves. Now compare the articles of other Dames to the one about Yasmin Bevan and you'll notice that the difference in quality is immediately apparent. In it's current state, the article serves as nothing less than an shameless unsourced/unreferenced list of awards and "affiliations". You might even say that the article fits the criteria "G11. Unambiguous advertising or promotion." for speedy deletion. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 92.9.50.16 (talk) 18:35, 30 March 2013 (UTC)

Again, I am well aware of Who's Who. Unfortunately, Who's Who does not verify that long list of awards and affiliations and I still believe the article currently fits criteria G11. 92.9.50.16 (talk) 18:59, 30 March 2013 (UTC)

Yeah that's fair enough, looks like this is one of those let's agree to disagree situations. Also, I'm just being curious here but what exactly do you mean by "it will not be deleted". Are you an admin? Do you know Yasmin Bevan & will keep recreating the page? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 92.9.50.16 (talk) 21:38, 30 March 2013 (UTC)

CORRECTIONS TO 'ASCENSION' REFERENCES

 * Lady Darwin at Find a Grave SHE NEEDS A FIRST NAME? Lady Florence Darwin
 * Roberto Gerhards at Find a Grave HIS CORRECT SURNAME = GERHARD
 * Sir Donald MacAlister at Find a Grave CORRECT SURNAME SPELLING = Macalister
 * Stubbs at Find a Grave HE NEEDS HIS FIRST NAME? Stanley Stubbs

2.30.187.182 (talk) 22:02, 30 March 2013 (UTC)

Hi Barney, Thanks for your note. I appreciate it. I'm learning Wikipedia now and will absolutely edit the Frederator Books entry—however, I do think it's very relevant. At this point in history, the business and consumption model for ebooks are completely changing, with more content coming from small start-up publishers originating in other industries than from major publishing houses. I will work that into the entry if you pull the tag and give me another stab at it. Thanks! — Preceding unsigned comment added by Sarahcfu (talk • contribs) 15:39, 31 March 2013 (UTC)

Potty Training: learning with the animals
Please, use AfD instead to have a discussion. Regards, †@πωεεṝ  ♥  @ me   22:36, 31 March 2013 (UTC)

Talkback
†@πωεεṝ ♥  @ me   22:52, 31 March 2013 (UTC)

Healthy Paws Pet Insurance
Why did you mark Healthy Paws Pet Insurance as unambiguously advertising? It isn't at ALL. I removed the speedy deletion template, by the way. All it says is it won some award. Revolution1221 (talk) 23:03, 31 March 2013 (UTC

Hello, Barney. I just saw the Speedy Deletion alert and I responded to it as you requested. I came here to share the info with you as well. This is what I wrote. Healthy Paws Pet Insurance is a notable company. I provided several links to Pet Insurance sites that acknowledge that it is one of the best insurance companies in the United States. There are similar companies on Wikipedia, for example Petplan USA.

My goal was to create a company page. I dealt very lightly with the services they offer just because I did not want it to be a promotional page, but rather an informational page.

Please reconsider this speedy deletion. The Librarian at Terminus (talk) 23:08, 31 March 2013 (UTC)

Speedy deletion declined: Union Hand - Roasted Coffee
Hello Barney the barney barney. I am just letting you know that I declined the speedy deletion of Union Hand - Roasted Coffee, a page you tagged for speedy deletion, because of the following concern: Improvements have been made and it is no longer too spammy. Thank you. SmartSE (talk) 23:11, 2 April 2013 (UTC)

Your nomination for speedy deletion of Interlink Publishing
Hello Barney,

Welcome to Wikipedia! I am puzzled by your nomination for deletion of a book publisher. I have commented here: I would appreciate if you could respond to my comments on that page. It would appear that you spend a great part of your time on Wikipedia nominating pages for deletion. While this is a necessary process in a collaborative project like Wikipedia to remove spurious, abusive and nonsense pages; I would, however, respectfully suggest that it would be more productive to the project overall if you were to invest a larger part of your time improving and enhancing articles, rather than nominating other editors contributions for deletion. This is a community project and constantly taking pot-shots at other editors contributions is not helpful to your own standing within the community. Enquire (talk) 17:29, 4 April 2013 (UTC)
 * Talk:Interlink_Publishing

ASCENSION PARISH BURIAL GROUND
I have brought the much revised article to the attention of the 40-odd Friends; we look forward to your new articles on:


 * Collier
 * Farrell
 * Huddleston
 * Lock
 * Lubbock
 * Pattick
 * Peck
 * Roberts
 * Spufford


 * Lady Darwin at Find a Grave SHE NEEDS A FIRST NAME? Lady Florence Darwin
 * Roberto Gerhards at Find a Grave HIS CORRECT SURNAME = GERHARD
 * Sir Donald MacAlister at Find a Grave CORRECT SURNAME SPELLING = Macalister
 * Stubbs at Find a Grave HE NEEDS HIS FIRST NAME? Stanley Stubbs

2.30.187.153 (talk) 07:43, 2 April 2013 (UTC)

MATTHEW : a message
"Message Received: Apr 02 2013, 11:38 AM From: "Judy Wilson" To: "Martin Packer" Cc: Subject: Re: Wikipedia article

Thanks Martin and Barney. I'll pass this on to other members of the family. Judy Wilson*, (*nee Matthew.)

ps What about the 'other' Arthur Matthew? From his Find-A-Grave entry =

Birth: 	Sep. 24, 1850 Cambridge Cambridgeshire, England Death: 	Jun. 16, 1917 Cambridge Cambridgeshire, England Businessman, local politician and community stalwart; Governing Director of Matthew & Son, founded 1832, highclass grocer and wine merchant of 19-21 Trinity St Cambridge 1889-1917. Founder of Matthew's Oriental Cafe at 14 Trinity St 1896 Councillor and Alderman of Cambridge Town Council Secretary of the Cambridge Horticultural Society committee and active in the Cambridge Bicycle Club and other local charities and churches; Built The Garden House, Mount Pleasant, Cambridge 1897, now Ben'et House.

2.27.112.153 (talk) 19:03, 2 April 2013 (UTC)


 * Mostly lacking sources: No obituary in The Times, not in Who's Who. Not in Alumni Cantabrigienses, (which covers all Cam graduates of this period).   I would need an at least an obituary from a local newspaper, but that will involve some serious library work.  Maybe your local history library group can help? Barney the barney barney (talk) 19:21, 2 April 2013 (UTC)

Barney, I will contact Judy Wilson and see what she can provide to us; you have done a truly remarkable job on the 'Ascension' article - apart from typos. in References! Best, Martin. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2.30.188.138 (talk) 06:56, 5 April 2013 (UTC)

Will forward you a copy of the local paper obituary 1917 next week!

2.30.195.235 (talk) 17:17, 5 April 2013 (UTC)

Your nomination for speedy deletion of Rich Froning Jr.
Hey Barney, I would like to assure you that the article I have posted is still a work in progress, but as you can see if you visit the article (Rich Froning Jr.) it is now much more complete--Luc.bouchard1 (talk) 23:31, 5 April 2013 (UTC)

A cup of tea for you!
Hi Barney,

Thanks for your note. I just started the article on Xenion Legal. Could you advise how to improve it?

Cheers, EU Lawyer — Preceding unsigned comment added by EUlawyer (talk • contribs) 21:00, 6 April 2013 (UTC)


 * User:Nthep deleted it. He can undelete and userfy if you want, but you may need to look at WP:COI. Barney the barney barney (talk) 20:32, 7 April 2013 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for April 7
Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that you've added some links pointing to disambiguation pages. Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ* Join us at the DPL WikiProject.


 * Trinity College Chapel, Cambridge (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver)
 * added links pointing to Thomas Jones, Henry Jackson, John Davies, Michael Foster, Robert Smith, John Cooper, John Wilson, Thomas Smith, James Stuart, Isaac Hawkins Browne, John Beaumont, William Cunningham, Frederick Field, John North and James Ward


 * John Kipling (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver)
 * added links pointing to Wellington College, NCO and My Boy Jack


 * Erasmus Darwin IV (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver)
 * added links pointing to St Julien and Cotton House


 * John Scott (botanist) (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver)
 * added links pointing to Scottish and FLS


 * Edward Cresy (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver)
 * added a link pointing to Society of Antiquaries


 * John Edward Stead (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver)
 * added a link pointing to FRS


 * John Reid (physician) (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver)
 * added a link pointing to Bedford College


 * Once More into the Bleach (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver)
 * added a link pointing to Bastardization


 * Thomas Mellard Reade (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver)
 * added a link pointing to FGS

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 09:40, 7 April 2013 (UTC)

Nomination of Vernon Stewart Laurie for deletion
A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Vernon Stewart Laurie 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 Articles for deletion/Vernon Stewart Laurie 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 high-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 notice from the top of the article. Boleyn (talk) 16:25, 11 April 2013 (UTC)

Final Article
Hi Barney Can you write 1 article about not my mum but about 8th February — Preceding unsigned comment added by Greg Davidson (talk • contribs) 18:50, 11 April 2013 (UTC)

Katie my friend
If you write an article Do'nt write about your cats

Greg Davidson — Preceding unsigned comment added by Greg Davidson (talk • contribs) 18:55, 11 April 2013 (UTC)

Your reports
Do not send me pictures If you want to send pictures please do it in your sandbox

Greg Davidspn

I do not have a tabby — Preceding unsigned comment added by Greg Davidson (talk • contribs) 19:07, 11 April 2013 (UTC)

A kitten for you!
I like two our cats

G Davidson 19:13, 11 April 2013 (UTC) 



Sorry I have got two cats from Stirling

half white
See the equivalent italian page to understatement what is that : http://it.wikipedia.org/wiki/Semestre_bianco — Preceding unsigned comment added by Glbuganz (talk • contribs) 19:03, 31 March 2013 (UTC)

Hi Barney I am gathering more references that as you requested, i will get back to you as soon as i can

tb
HI Barney the Barney Barney, i have received your email I am now updating the rest of information to the article, is there away i can upload a picture or pictures. And i can not figure out why my article is out of the margins when i saved it. Also i have a cover page that includes pictures and a a small paragraph how can i go about to upload that? Thank You for your time and help. CropsInc (talk) 18:02, 28 March 2013 (UTC)

Barney I'm not sure what els i need to do, so if you can be more specific and tell me what to do, I'd really appreciate it. Thank you. CropsInc (talk) 18:17, 28 March 2013 (UTC)

Hi Barney, Mother Kinney past away in Lake View Terrace California. CropsInc (talk) 18:31, 28 March 2013 (UTC)

Barney i Have edited as best as i can, could you let me know if i need to do anything els please. Thank you CropsInc (talk) 19:03, 28 March 2013 (UTC)

Im so confused none of edits seem to be working... what exactly do i need to do. i have read the articles you sent me but im just not understanding. CropsInc (talk) 19:23, 28 March 2013 (UTC)

"It does help somewhat if the reasons you nominate for deletion are valid"
That wasn't very nice, nor was it accurate, as I've demonstrated at Articles_for_deletion/Mozart_(train). — Preceding unsigned comment added by I'm Tony Ahn (talk • contribs) 16:06, 13 April 2013 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for April 14
Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that you've added some links pointing to disambiguation pages. Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ* Join us at the DPL WikiProject.


 * Can't Buy Me Like (book) (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver)
 * added a link pointing to Bedfellows


 * Ernest Parsons (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver)
 * added a link pointing to DFC

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 19:26, 14 April 2013 (UTC)

Hi Barney - My page "The Sticking Point Solution" was tagged for deletion. But as I stated previously I was not finished with the article and I thought I was working within my sandbox and thought I was simply saving the article not publishing it. Can you move what I started to my sandbox without deleting it? -Thanks MP — Preceding unsigned comment added by Mellyp7 (talk • contribs) 19:58, 16 April 2013 (UTC)

Try reasoning based on WP policies and not groups
While you nominate for deletion of Sajad H Hamdani at Articles for deletion/Sajad H Hamdani, instead of solely focusing on Wikipedia policies, you stated "although typical of the vanity gumpf that seems to be written by Indians in Wikipedia". The statement seems to have too much of a racial overtone and POV. I request you to kindly be polite and instead of pointing to a particular racial group, discuss based on Wikipedia policies. You can read the guidelines Arguments to avoid in deletion discussions and List of policies and guidelines to cite in deletion debates. Amartyabag  TALK2ME  15:09, 18 April 2013 (UTC)


 * Actually I did. There are no racial overtones, just an observation of certain waffly, archaic style of writing. Barney the barney barney (talk) 18:58, 18 April 2013 (UTC)

Wilkinsons...the Opticians
How dare you delete my Wilkinsons...the Opticians page. What is wrong with a page on a UK optician chain?? I am so angry. Please restore my page which I spend much time working on. Please also give my your reason for deletion.--Dippoldtheoptician (talk) 15:50, 20 April 2013 (UTC)

Wilkinsons...the Opticians 2
I do not work in Wilkinsons...the Opticians or have anything to do with Wilkinsons...the Opticians. I am an 'indpendent source' so you are incorrect in your assumption so I want the page re-instated.Get your facts right and don't jump to conclusions.--Dippoldtheoptician (talk) 08:25, 21 April 2013 (UTC)

Re: Speedy tag
You have tagged List of Freemasons/Lede paragraphs for speedy deletion... please note that this is NOT a test. We are in the process of dividing the list into several sub lists (A-D and E-F for the moment... with the strong likelihood that the second grouping will be split into further articles as we add more people). The page has been created so we can transclude the same lede paragraphs into all of these article). Blueboar (talk) 12:47, 21 April 2013 (UTC)
 * Am I doing something wrong? Blueboar (talk) 12:53, 21 April 2013 (UTC)


 * The article has a very silly name. You can have list of freemasons as a central starting point with list of freemasons - A, etc, but the present title is very silly. Barney the barney barney (talk) 16:56, 21 April 2013 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for April 21
Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Elizabeth Hill (linguist), you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page British (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver). Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ* Join us at the DPL WikiProject.

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 17:14, 21 April 2013 (UTC)

A kitten for you!
I must not have this cat

G Davidson 06:17, 23 April 2013 (UTC) 

Roger Pope & Partners
"The company became successful" is pure puffery, if not necessarily WP:puffery. If you have a reliable third-party source for the statement, it might not be a WP:OR violation, but it's still puffery. — Arthur Rubin (talk) 19:55, 23 April 2013 (UTC)

The address might be in an infobox, but doesn't belong in the body of the article. And I wish you wouldn't revert my cite news templates to the raw URL. The "Director" article may not be reliable because, as an interview, it's only quoting the owner, and we would have to check WP:SELFPUB carefully. I'm heading out to lunch, so you can edit without worrying about edit conflicts, but I'd rather you didn't revert my changes without reason. — Arthur Rubin (talk) 19:58, 23 April 2013 (UTC)

Refortmatting your talk page
You might consider moving comments from the top of the page to the bottom, per WP:TALK. I don't want to try it, because there's such a long comment in the first section, and I can't tell if it's supposed to be only one section. — Arthur Rubin (talk) 19:51, 24 April 2013 (UTC)

List of public art in Israel/subpages
Please stop tagging these pages for speedy deletion. They're not appropriate as articles, but the solution is fixing them (preferably by moving them to better places), not deleting them. Let me also remind you that you really shouldn't tag something for speedy deletion when an admin (or anyone else acting in good faith) has just declined your previous tag of the same page for the same reason. Nyttend (talk) 20:40, 25 April 2013 (UTC)


 * The speedy tags were clearly removed without valid reason. Barney the barney barney (talk) 20:41, 25 April 2013 (UTC)
 * Please read the criteria for speedy deletion if you think that any of your tags were appropriate. This is misplaced coding for a template, and none of your tags had anything to do with this.  You even tagged it as a "real person, individual animal(s), organization, web content or organized event", which it quite clearly isn't.  Nyttend (talk) 20:58, 25 April 2013 (UTC)


 * Thanks for your feedback. Since it isn't an article, quite clearly the two options were (1) to delete it or (2) to move it somewhere else (userfy it).  Instead you do neither and protect the page... Barney the barney barney (talk) 21:02, 25 April 2013 (UTC)

I have unreviewed a page you curated
Hi, I'm Dewritech. I wanted to let you know that I saw the page you reviewed, Community based Crowd-sourcing Translation, and have un-reviewed it again. If you have any questions, please ask them on my talk page. Thank you.  Dewritech (talk)  11:18, 26 April 2013 (UTC)

Speedy deletion declined: Hacking Health
Hello Barney the barney barney. I am just letting you know that I declined the speedy deletion of Hacking Health, a page you tagged for speedy deletion, because of the following concern: '''Not very spammy. Needs some rewriting and wikifying certainly.''' Thank you. Ged UK  11:50, 26 April 2013 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for April 28
Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that you've added some links pointing to disambiguation pages. Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ* Join us at the DPL WikiProject.


 * David Maltby (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver)
 * added links pointing to Pilot, RFC, DSO and DFC


 * Hatchet Job of the Year (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver)
 * added links pointing to Robert Hughes, Craig Brown, Mary Beard and Richard Bradford


 * Camilla Long (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver)
 * added a link pointing to Oxford High School


 * Peter Lasko (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver)
 * added a link pointing to FBA

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 11:32, 28 April 2013 (UTC)

RentAGoat
Thanks. I've been struggling to keep the article about the company. I've just once again removed the material that is about the concept - we already have an article on it in any case at Conservation grazing. And replaced the COI template that was removed with a completely misleading edit summary. There's an SPI on the article creator. Dougweller (talk) 14:13, 28 April 2013 (UTC)

Thanks for your help editing barney. They were undone because dougweller keeps intentionally blanking the content and your edits and efforts are included in that. I've warned dougweller multiple times about intentional blanking but he has persisted. There need not be an SPI on me, as all the content that I created dougweller has blanked twice and is no longer present. For some reason he continues to blank the content and make rash accusations.

do you think all of the pictures are not relevant? two of them I uploaded and are about the service.

75.189.213.7 (talk) 15:40, 28 April 2013 (UTC)mjrichmo


 * Actually, I think you need the warnings. Barney the barney barney (talk) 15:43, 28 April 2013 (UTC)

Can you maturely respond to the questions I posed? Two of the pictures I uploaded and I know are relevant to the concept. Mjrichmo (talk) 16:07, 28 April 2013 (UTC)mjrichmo

Whoa there! I'm in Charge of the TCDSB/TDSB sections.
Calm down dude. Hate to be rude in all but why you tried to delete the pages. I'm in the process of getting photos of the schools over the next few days in all.

Since I got the Secondary schools in charge, there just only elementary schools in the highest scope. Perhaps User:Theo's Little Bot will take the charge. If not kept (nor deleted), some schools will merge into the Toronto neighbourhood pages like Bendale, Woburn, Alderwood, etc... FreshCorp619 (talk) 16:05, 29 April 2013 (UTC)

Thanks!
Barney my man, ALL primary schools must stay in their respective neighbourhood pages (take a look at Mimico for example) Peace. FreshCorp619 (talk) 18:46, 29 April 2013 (UTC)

Choose New Jersey
Hi Barney, It seems that Choose New Jersey's Wiki page was deleted. Can you tell me why this was done in particular? Thanks. Choosenj (talk) 20:31, 30 April 2013 (UTC)

John Bielenberg
Thanks for your note. Whats a good way to get some collaboration help from other editors? Vibhabamba (talk) 22:54, 30 April 2013 (UTC)

Choose New Jersey
Hi Barney, Thanks for your feedback. Choose New Jersey is a notable organization that works closely with NJ's economic development agency. It's the first Wikipedia article I've posted and I'm not actually from Choose NJ but thought the username would be appropriate given the article I was posting, and I was unaware of that specific rule with the usernames. Could you elaborate on the overpromotional language in the article? This will help a lot! Thanks, again. Choosenj (talk) 16:11, 1 May 2013 (UTC)

Hello, My name is Vimmy, I am part of Psychology I/O, Spring, 2013 provided by York College taught by my professor, Dr. Ashton. As a part of our class assignment we are required to make small edit on a Wikipedia article that strikes our interest, as well as things we think needed to be added to the article.VimmyVimmy (talk) 17:59, 2 May 2013 (UTC)

please do not mark my page as deleted it is a real page and there is a real reason for it sonic is dead because sega is looking for a mascot please do not delete it thank you --Robertbobbyhill (talk) 19:40, 2 May 2013 (UTC)

Robert Thomson Leiper
Thank you for reviewing my latest new page, Robert Thomson Leiper, and for your kind words. I was a support trainer on a Wikimedia training day earlier this week for the Malaria Atlas Project, and it has inspired a new interest in parasitologists. Edwardx (talk) 10:38, 4 May 2013 (UTC)

Island Independents
Hi there. Just to let you know, I've added a response to your nomination of this article for speedy deletion on the article's talk page. Thanks. Redverton (talk) 17:31, 4 May 2013 (UTC)
 * Hi again. I see you have prodded the article now for deletion.  Whilst I think it would have been more considerate if you'd allowed me the couple of days I said I intended to get this article more developed, that's your right.  However, I am confused by what you mean by 'which is a possible redirect' - redirect from where to where? Look forward to your reply. Redverton (talk) 17:54, 4 May 2013 (UTC)
 * I saw the additional note you left on my talk page. Sorry if you were intending to say anything else in response to my query above, but in case that note was all of it, just again asking what you're referring to by this redirect - I certainly hope not the county council election, because it's well established every individual county council election is notable in of itself for its own article. Redverton (talk) 17:59, 4 May 2013 (UTC)

I thought that was what you were getting at. Well, at least I do have a couple days whatever else to try and get the article up to scratch. If I can't, I'll delete it myself. Otherwise, well, we'll cross that bridge if we come to it. P.S. Trivia: the election on the IoW was to a unitary authority, not a county council - I say that if only because I just made that mistake above. :P Redverton (talk) 18:09, 4 May 2013 (UTC)

Re: Articles for deletion/Writopia Lab
I don't think closing 8 days after the AfD is premature :) In any case, while only User:czar chimed in on the AfD, his rationale was valid and I have a hard time believing that there would have been other arguments against its notability which trumped the one he made. L Faraone  14:59, 4 May 2013 (UTC)


 * If you think that, then vote, but don't unilaterally close a discussion on that basis, IRWolfie- (talk) 20:29, 4 May 2013 (UTC)
 * That wasn't "advice to you". Yes, I understood your original message, and responded to it with essentially "No, I don't think it was in error". L Faraone  19:43, 5 May 2013 (UTC)

Writopia Lab question
Hi there--Thank you for your time on the Writopia Lab page. I see that you contend that Writopia Lab is not notable in the context of Wikipedia. I am trying to learn and understand everything I can about Wikipedia lately. Are you able to tell me a few details that distinguish a nonprofit as notable in this context? I completely understand if we are not there yet. I thought we were, but... Thank you for your help. --RebeccaWS (I can't log in for some reason) — Preceding unsigned comment added by 207.237.243.166 (talk) 03:07, 5 May 2013 (UTC)

The Broken Oath
The film's believed to be the first one in which an actress received billing. All theatrical movies, however, especially very early ones, possess ample importance regarding Wikipedia by dint of their existence, of course. Cinerama Comment (talk) 15:46, 5 May 2013 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for May 5
Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that you've added some links pointing to disambiguation pages. Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ* Join us at the DPL WikiProject.


 * Michael Rutter (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver)
 * added links pointing to FRS and FRCP


 * APA Distinguished Scientific Award for the Applications of Psychology (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver)
 * added a link pointing to Robert Rosenthal


 * Nick Knilans (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver)
 * added a link pointing to Pilot


 * Ron Martin (geographer) (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver)
 * added a link pointing to FBA

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 16:11, 5 May 2013 (UTC)

In regards to speedy deletion of "List of former Presidential Candidates."
What is the reasoning to this? - Billybob2002 (talk) 22:56, 5 May 2013 (UTC)

More The Broken Oath

 * I believe you, but you basically need to add where this claim is made in a scholarly paper or book. Barney the barney barney (talk) 18:23, 5 May 2013 (UTC)
 * I haven't the foggiest. Saw it in another youtube article, but since it's not germane to keeping the article in Wikipedia as it stands, it's unnecessary, of course. You understand that there's no burden of proof for an article about a film that was exhibited theatrically, just the fact that it was a commercial film is reason enough in itself for there to be an article in Wikipedia.  Cinerama Comment (talk) 02:53, 6 May 2013 (UTC)

Mark Wilkinson (rugby player)‎
That was a pretty damn quick review! I could swear this article used to be here, but it seems to have disappeared... and all mention of him removed from Jonny's article, weird. At least that's fixed now. Luke no 94 (tell Luke off here) 08:58, 6 May 2013 (UTC)

Kinsella family
I reverted the line you wrote in Douglas Kinsella about Dr. Kinsella's family for three reasons. The main one was the use of Mrs. Kinsella's maiden name. That may be a privacy issue for the sons, as in Canada a mother's maiden name is often used as a security question by banks and others with secure web sites. The second reason is that I wasn't sure what the style was for Mrs. Kinsella, as her name seemed scrambled, and the line didn't actually say they were married. Third, the punctuation was a mess. You may want to ask around about the mother's maiden name issue and write the sentence more carefully, with proper punctuation, and if, in fact, Dr. Kinsella and Lorna were married, do say so.Spoonkymonkey (talk) 17:19, 10 May 2013 (UTC)


 * Please don't remove valid material.  The content (and punctuation) was fine.  Barney the barney barney (talk) 17:32, 10 May 2013 (UTC)


 * No it wasn't. You had a woman's name. Is that his wife? Were they married? And you don't know how to use a colon and semicolon. You don't start a list with a semicolon. I've fixed it, assuming Douglas and Lorna Kinsella were married -- a little fact that you didn't bother to address at all.Spoonkymonkey (talk) 17:58, 10 May 2013 (UTC)

Canadian Sponsorship Forum
Hi Barney, I added a reference and was wondering if this is how it is suppose to be? I just don't want the page to be deleted. Thanks — Preceding unsigned comment added by Tamara.alcorn13 (talk • contribs) 22:17, 10 May 2013 (UTC)

ECVO
Category:ECVO This page should not be speedily deleted because... (The site "ECVO" should be deleted or renamed to European College of Veterinary Ophthalmologists (ECVO). These two sites are the same. Furthermore this site is not a promotional site. ECVO is a non-profit-organization college for veterinariens. We in Europe we want the same presence in Wiki like our american colleagues --> American College of Surgeons; Necessary action from my point of view: replace site "ecvo" with the "European College of Veterinary Ophthalmologists (ECVO)"; many thx in advance :) --MarionFlorin (talk) 09:49, 12 May 2013 (UTC)

Harmonic pedal
I added the answer about your request for speed deletion. Talk:Harmonic pedal wku2m5rr (talk) 11:14, 12 May 2013 (UTC)

"Nonsense" tagging
Please be careful about tagging articles as db-nonsense. WP:CSD is quite narrowly defined, more narrowly than the normal English sense of the word "nonsense", and the definition specifically excludes "poor writing, partisan screeds, obscene remarks, implausible theories, vandalism and hoaxes, fictional material, coherent non-English material, and poorly translated material." It is intended only for the likes of "'&qx##!?gi*df%" or "Yaaayyyy LOL!!!!!" Tagging reports of someone's speeches as nonsense is likely to cause unnecessary offence. In fact, material like that is almost always speediable as copyvio, and feeding a sentence or two into Google will find the source. JohnCD (talk) 11:14, 12 May 2013 (UTC)

European_College_of_Veterinary_Ophthalmologists_(ECVO)
This page should not be speedily deleted because...

Hy Barny, sorry but I don`t understand, why you mark this page as a promotional page. ECVO is an veterinary eduacational college in Europe. This article explains how this body works. This is not a promotional site for selling stuff! Please tell me, where I have a Wikipedia:COI?

thx :) — Preceding unsigned comment added by MarionFlorin (talk • contribs) 17:40, 12 May 2013 (UTC)

MarionFlorin Hi Barny, sounds not really serious for me. If someone else creates the page than it seems to be ok. But if I have no chance to do this than it should be so. — Preceding unsigned comment added by MarionFlorin (talk • contribs) 17:57, 12 May 2013 (UTC)

Energetically Modified Cement
The person who nominated the article for deletion withdrew the nomination and therefore the discussion is closed according to wiki policy.

Since then, the page has been awarded a barnstar.

I have removed your sticker from the page and also that of Vladimir Ronin. Please do not take any further steps without discussing first.

Jono2013 (talk) 18:11, 12 May 2013 (UTC)


 * You have stated: "Just to clarify, I nominated it for deletion, and I haven;t withdrawn the nomination. A bot will put any AFD tags you remove back, so you do need to follow instructions. Barney the barney barney (talk) 18:13, 12 May 2013 (UTC)"


 * The article has been accepted - by users much more credible than you. You have no basis for your conduct. Your entries are removed from my talk page. Do not post any more entries on my talk page. I do not want to discuss this with you.

Jono2013 (talk) 18:21, 12 May 2013 (UTC)

The Edwards brothers, Fisher, and Hogben
Hello, Barney the barney barney. There is a response from me, below the message you left in the "The Edwards brothers, Fisher, and Hogben" section of my talk page. --Jerzy•t 03:09, 11 May 2013 (UTC) --Jerzy•t 02:18, 16 May 2013 (UTC)
 * Sorry to delay discussion; i understand better & think we are probably close to agreement. I have a draft response from several days ago, probably stating it well (but waiting for a re-read, now that the week's medical issues are resolved), and probably will vet & send in 24-48 hours. Tnx.

--Jerzy•t 00:23, 18 May 2013 (UTC)
 * Whoops, i seem to have lost my draft in a reboot; sloppy procedure. But a rewrite should still be feasible this evening. I'll drop you a notice.

--Jerzy•t 03:54, 18 May 2013 (UTC)
 * OK, User talk:Jerzy updated for your attn.

Requesting technical moves
Hi Barney, I've carried out the move of Max Jones you requested. In the future, please use the  template at WP:RM/TR to make those requests. It makes the actual move a bit easier. Thanks, BDD (talk) 23:59, 12 May 2013 (UTC)

John Scott (botanist)
Dear user:

I have posted a discussion on the talk page of the page you created, that seems not capable of being justified as an article upon strict interpretation of Wikipedia policy - for the reasons set out there.

As this page demonstrates, you seem very able at nominating articles for deletion - yet whether your effort passes first muster is debatable to say the least. But I am prepared to discuss it with you on the article's talk page with you first, as courtesy is important. I would not dream of rushing to nominate such an insignificant entry for deletion without having the courtesy to discuss with you first. I do believe candor and civility are important and trust you do too.

I trust this meets with your approval.

Jono2013 (talk) 01:38, 13 May 2013 (UTC)

Eric Forbes Adam
Stripping out all of the guff about an inconsequential inter varsity cricket match, the remainder of the content is minimal and at best a stub. Or so it seems.

With the foregoing in mind, I have placed the appropriate comment on the article's talk page. Let's discuss first, before determining your motivation and whether this article is a genuine article - or at best a stub. Even the seemingly most inconsequential articles should be given the opportunity for discussion first, I am sure you will agree.

I know nothing about the subject and have no interest in it, but nevertheless, this seems a very generalist subject which anyone can write and therefore comment about, Im sure you'll agree.

Jono2013 (talk) 01:53, 13 May 2013 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for May 14
Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that you've added some links pointing to disambiguation pages. Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ* Join us at the DPL WikiProject.


 * Charles Kingsley Adams (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver)
 * added links pointing to National Portrait Gallery and FBA


 * Lancelot Baugh Allen (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver)
 * added links pointing to Chancery and Union Hall


 * John Wedgwood (horticulturist) (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver)
 * added a link pointing to Pall Mall


 * Sir David Piper (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver)
 * added a link pointing to National Portrait Gallery

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 15:34, 14 May 2013 (UTC)

Page
Whats wrong with my articlesWeareunited878 (talk) 20:13, 14 May 2013 (UTC)

Barney, the Wycombe Boys AFC is actually not a fake, but as I've now explained to Weareunited878, youth sports teams are considered insignificant and may be speedied as well. De728631 (talk) 21:36, 14 May 2013 (UTC)

Nomination of Kenneth Blaxter for deletion
A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Kenneth Blaxter 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 Articles for deletion/Kenneth Blaxter 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 high-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 notice from the top of the article. Q VVERTYVS (hm?) 17:25, 15 May 2013 (UTC)


 * I believe dab pages with only red links are against policy. If you were going to create both pages, please say so. Q VVERTYVS (hm?) 17:27, 15 May 2013 (UTC)


 * Sorry, never mind, I should have more patience. Q VVERTYVS (hm?) 17:35, 15 May 2013 (UTC)

Sir Biography
A reminder that, per WP:NCPEER, the usual procedure is for "Person Name" (e.g. Austin Bide, Maurice Hodgson) to be the real article title and "Sir Person Name" (e.g. Sir Austin Bide, Sir Maurice Hodgson) to be the redirect. — Paul A (talk) 02:01, 16 May 2013 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for May 21
Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that you've added some links pointing to disambiguation pages. Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ* Join us at the DPL WikiProject.


 * Davies Medal (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver)
 * added links pointing to David Whittaker, David Saunders and Phil Green


 * Alastair Currie (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver)
 * added a link pointing to FRCP


 * Duncan Davies Medal (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver)
 * added a link pointing to Richard Brook


 * Kenneth William Blaxter (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver)
 * added a link pointing to CMG


 * Robert Allan Smith (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver)
 * added a link pointing to FRS


 * Sir Kenneth Blaxter (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver)
 * added a link pointing to FRS

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 11:50, 21 May 2013 (UTC)

Twinkle
Hey, you should consider enabling the WP:TWINKLE tools. I've fixed a couple of your AfDs that were missing templates or hadn't been transcluded. Twinkle does all of that automatically with its XfD function - one-click AfDs. Anyway, thought it might help you out. Cheers, Stalwart 111  13:37, 21 May 2013 (UTC)

Article notability notification
Hello. This message is to inform you that an article that you wrote recently, Aftermath: On Marriage and Separation, has been tagged with a notability notice. This means that it may not meet Wikipedia's notability guidelines. Please note that articles which do not meet these criteria may be merged, redirected, or deleted. Please consider adding reliable, secondary sources to the article in order to establish the topic's notability. You may find the following links useful when searching for sources:. Thank you for editing Wikipedia! VoxelBot 15:22, 24 May 2013 (UTC)


 * Did you actually read the article or its references? Barney the barney barney (talk) 18:19, 24 May 2013 (UTC)

Article notability notification
Hello. This message is to inform you that an article that you wrote, Camilla Long, has been recently tagged with a notability notice. This means that it may not meet Wikipedia's notability guidelines. Please note that articles which do not meet these criteria may be merged, redirected, or deleted. Please consider adding reliable, secondary sources to the article in order to establish the topic's notability. You may find the following links useful when searching for sources:. Thank you for editing Wikipedia! VoxelBot 20:21, 24 May 2013 (UTC)

Flying Donut
The Flying Donut page is a new project management tool that could and should be linked from the scrum page. I think it is important for people searching for such tools that all available info would be provided to them? If we provide a link from a blog that mention Flying Donut are we ok then with the page? I see. It will take a little time to dig up those things. How should we proceed?

Ok I moved the content of the page to the location you specified. You may delete the page. Thanks

— Preceding unsigned comment added by Jtzikas (talk • contribs) 16:27, 31 May 2013 (UTC)

Dolphin Embassy
Dear Barney, I've rote my cases in the Contested deletion about the Dolphin Embassy article and after I found that the article is allready deleted - how it's possible?

Regards Soderjanie Pustoti (talk) 22:21, 14 May 2013 (UTC)

Barney could you give me more time in working on Catholic Academy for Communication Arts Professionals I am in a early stage of research. Cu835 (talk) 12:17, 13 May 2013 (UTC)Cu835

The TrojanOne website is not my own. I got the information from there but I don't own the content at all. I added the website because it is the presenting partner for the CSF. I have added another source that is not a website owned by the company. If you could let me know if this works that would be much appreciated- Tamara.alcorn13

Barney could you let me know if the reference I have posted on the Canadian Sponsorship Forum works as a third party source? I am confused about how to make these. Thanks- Tamara.alcorn13

Barney, I am in the process of trying to create a page for the Canadian Sponsorship Forum that is coming up in May so that people have the ability to know more about it. I was just wondering why this page is being discussed for deletion? Is there something I should change? I am a little confused since I only have a few sentences on the page so far. -Tamara.alcorn13

ust delete it, please! don't answer back. TheProphetTimes — Preceding unsigned comment added by TheProphetTimes (talk • contribs) 01:03, 6 May 2013 (UTC)

Thanks Barney, won't make that mistake again! How would the page go about being removed, as I have not yet discovered a way to remove it! Help please! Anonylad (talk) 12:48, 6 May 2013 (UTC) Also, if you could make that deletion as 'speedy' as possible, the page screwed up when I was proof-reading my edit, and therefore 80% of the information I had included was subsequesntly deleted. Thanks again, Anonylad (talk) 12:52, 6 May 2013 (UTC)

just forget it. — Preceding unsigned comment added by TheProphetTimes (talk • contribs) 22:26, 5 May 2013 (UTC)

You know what? I don't care if you take it down! I tried asking nicely, but you won't budge. You can do whatever you want. Just, WHY?! No thanks, TheProphetTimes — Preceding unsigned comment added by TheProphetTimes (talk • contribs) 21:55, 5 May 2013 (UTC)

Barney, I'd like to know why you're trying to get rid of my page, My Stadium Electric. I put it up so people could edit it in future times, and because it was red Erin McCarley's article, please don't take it down. Leave a message on my talk page. Thanks, TheProphetTimes — Preceding unsigned comment added by TheProphetTimes (talk • contribs) 21:26, 5 May 2013 (UTC)

Barney, please let me know the part which looks like advertising. I am still working on the article and it may require efforts from others also to complete this article. I just found this entity not in Wiki and thought of wriitng about it. It is from a very neutral stand point, covering the things carried in media — Preceding unsigned comment added by Akash.rc (talk • contribs) 14:59, 5 May 2013 (UTC)

Hi Barney, I've worked with +Huon from the wiki forums on IRC to clean up the page. Thanks, Don — Preceding unsigned comment added by Dodilp (talk • contribs) 22:38, 2 May 2013 (UTC)

Hi Barney, I recently added a new page http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gridcentric,_Inc. and would like your suggestions on how I should clean it up to meet the requirements. My understanding is that I have linked to third party resources whenever appropriate. Thanks, Don — Preceding unsigned comment added by Dodilp (talk • contribs) 20:00, 2 May 2013 (UTC)

Hi Barney, in terms of adding a new page for a Church building, does the Church building have to be Grade II listed to warrant a WIKI entry? Surprised by the quick vote for deletion. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Sjdean (talk • contribs) 21:59, 28 April 2013 (UTC)

Hello Barny, I was creating a page for the new VEX Toss Up competition and it said that I had incurred an editing error due to your aditional presence in the editing. I would like to know why it is you are also editing the page and I request that you would please refrain from dammaging the page as I continue to research and edit the page. Thank-you. -- Sordsmin4 — Preceding unsigned comment added by Sordsmin4 (talk • contribs) 19:41, 24 April 2013 (UTC)

Hi again Barney, I didnt know about the spanish references. I add a lot more just now. Please let me know if that is ok now. thanks --Agusotoholt (talk) 18:21, 24 April 2013 (UTC)

Hi Barney At my previous description link about "WhosCall" in Chinese edition, I have already show you the original link have reliable substantive a 3rd party like the below: 

The links above include 2 TV stations ,2 magazines ,opening contest. So, I thought it has the reliable substantive , 3rd party coverage to indicate both notability and accuracy.Hope u understand. Sorry for the yesterday i didn't finished it at all just like the Chinese edition :http://zh.wikipedia.org/wiki/WhosCall If it was appropriate.I will note it on "WhosCall" English edition. Anyway if there have any problem or question, Please remind me.

Thank you Hugo Lin

I think the page I created is important enough because they have so much $wagg. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Staydenchorgetfrimponged (talk • contribs) 20:03, 23 April 2013 (UTC)

Hi Barney: Thank you for u remind me about this thing, but I still working on it. I didn't finish it at all. I AM still typing the remaining. I want translate this original wiki http://zh.wikipedia.org/wiki/WhosCall   to  English part. Beacuse there are some English-language customer want to understand. And the information of this APP had been widely reported in the link.In some kind of sense. It maybe worth to be put in the wikipedia which just like the link It seems that there are something different operating codes between http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Main_Page &  http://zh.wikipedia.org/wiki/Main_Page. i was typing Besides, I meet some question and try to understandd why the format can't show on. Why the icon can't be show?

I wasn't very familiar with the operating here. If something i doing wrong, please tell me then i will fix it ASAP. By the way, I will reply message in the morning in my timezone. Thank you for your help --Hugo Lin —Preceding undated comment added 19:42, 23 April 2013 (UTC)

Hi again Barney, I didnt know about the spanish references. I add a lot more just now. Please let me know if that is ok now.

thanks --Agusotoholt (talk) 17:45, 22 April 2013 (UTC)

Barney, Santiago Vecino is an artist from Uruguay, who recently worked on a hollywood movie (EVIL DEAD 2013) and he is listed and quoted in the Internet Movie Database. So.....dont you think he deserves to be on wikipedia? regards, --Agusotoholt (talk) 17:17, 22 April 2013 (UTC)Agusotoholt

Barney, — Preceding unsigned comment added by Agusotoholt (talk • contribs) 17:12, 22 April 2013 (UTC) I put up my page "The Arcade Addict" because I am popular on YouTube and I want people to know who I am. Please don't tag my page for deletion. I worked hard on it! -ArcadeAddict11 — Preceding unsigned comment added by ArcadeAddict11 (talk • contribs) 19:45, 13 April 2013 (UTC)

Barney, It looks like you are digging into a lot of pages which have been hard worked on by many wikicontributors. Please refrain! Anonylad (talk) 12:40, 6 May 2013 (UTC)

Hi Barney, Could I know as to why you keep removing my page on aluminium granules? I need a little time to copmlete it. Regards Abhay

Hi Barney, — Preceding unsigned comment added by Abhaynarvekar (talk • contribs) 13:43, 13 April 2013 (UTC)

I'm puzzled by your deletion of my article on Xenion Legal. I've tried to explain the reasons why on the contest page but you have deleted nonetheless. I built the article based on another entry on "Lawyers on demand" which is written in a similar tone and style. Can you please explain to me why you regard my entry as promotional, whereas the other one seems to be ok?

Many thanks, EU lawyer — Preceding unsigned comment added by EUlawyer (talk • contribs) 16:27, 7 April 2013 (UTC)

References now added.

Best wishes,

James Trollope

Welcome!

Hello, Barney the barney barney, and welcome to Wikipedia! Thank you for your contributions. I hope you like the place and decide to stay. Here are some pages that you might find helpful: I hope you enjoy editing here and being a Wikipedian! Please sign your messages on discussion pages using four tildes ( ~ ); this will automatically insert your username and the date. If you need help, check out Questions, ask me on my talk page, or ask your question on this page and then place  before the question. Again, welcome!
 * The five pillars of Wikipedia
 * Tutorial
 * How to edit a page and How to develop articles
 * How to create your first article (using the Article Wizard if you wish)
 * Manual of Style

Hey Barney, I need some time to complete the article so I just saved the introductury version. Is there a reason for it being marked for deletion? I wanted to edit the title of my article from ("mithil patel") to (Mithil Patel) without any inverted commas. I will highly appreciate if you can help me with this.

Thanks Mithil Patel — Preceding unsigned comment added by Mithil Patel (talk • contribs) 20:56, 29 May 2013 (UTC)

Warning
Please stop your disruptive editing. If you continue to vandalize Wikipedia, you may be blocked from editing.  F i l m F a n  08:44, 25 May 2013 (UTC)


 * I see you've started discussing this on the talk page, good. Barney the barney barney (talk) 21:46, 25 May 2013 (UTC)


 * Hi Barney. You may be interested in this. Thanks.  Lugnuts  Dick Laurent is dead 10:27, 25 May 2013 (UTC)


 * Thanks. Barney the barney barney (talk) 21:46, 25 May 2013 (UTC)

IBA
A7 was a safe one for that, IMO. I couldn't even get all the teams in one decent ghit. Peridon (talk) 12:31, 26 May 2013 (UTC)

Speedy deletion nomination of Hermann Settegast
Hello Barney the barney barney,

I wanted to let you know that I just tagged Hermann Settegast for deletion, because the article doesn't clearly say why the subject is important enough to be included in an encyclopedia.

If you feel that the article shouldn't be deleted and want more time to work on it, you can contest this deletion, but please don't remove the speedy deletion tag from the top.

You can leave a note on my talk page if you have questions. Sulfurboy (talk) 21:35, 26 May 2013 (UTC)


 * Thanks. That's really helpful. I can't think why he has articles in the Russian Wikipedia (since 2005), German Wikipedia (since 2007), the Swedish Wikipedia (since 2010). Barney the barney barney (talk) 21:42, 26 May 2013 (UTC)

speedydel_wiki.citing
full consent, can be deleted. the page which you have given is somewhat complicated, so i left my stuff in the see-aslo section. the path from main_page to that page is mainpage/communityportal/quickdirectory/editing. One could call it 'hidden'. This one

is all one needs, could someone add it to the main_page ? --Ossip Groth (talk) 14:23, 27 May 2013 (UTC)

Nomination of Nick Knilans for deletion
A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Nick Knilans 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 Articles for deletion/Nick Knilans 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 high-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 notice from the top of the article. Gbawden (talk) 09:50, 28 May 2013 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for May 28
Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that you've added some links pointing to disambiguation pages. Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ* Join us at the DPL WikiProject.


 * Daniel Mackintosh (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver)
 * added a link pointing to FGS


 * Hubert Airy (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver)
 * added a link pointing to National Portrait Gallery


 * Onsager Medal (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver)
 * added a link pointing to Princeton


 * Terence Irwin (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver)
 * added a link pointing to FBA

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 14:31, 28 May 2013 (UTC)

Thank you
for reviewing the page I created, John McNeill (botanist), and correcting my error. Unfortunately, I don't have access to Who's Who or the Canadian version, so that will limit my efforts to write biographical pages. Sminthopsis84 (talk) 03:02, 29 May 2013 (UTC)

Thanks for reviewing and your support for the page about Tommy McHugh. :) Haaaa (talk) 06:33, 30 May 2013 (UTC)

Stahp
Bahney, stahp. You gonna break the innertubes. :)  Ish dar  ian  20:39, 29 May 2013 (UTC)

Fibrosis and related Concepts in Organ Diseases, Tumor Biology and Regenerative Medicine selected bibliography 2013 April
"A Bibliography page presents a list of relevant books, journal or other references for a subject area. Bibliographies are useful for expanding Further Reading topics for Summary style articles."

Source: Manual_of_Style/Lists

Inclusion criteria for wp are met. --Ossip Groth (talk) 11:43, 2 June 2013 (UTC)

Messages to new users
Hallo Barney, I came across Uchhati while stub-sorting. I'm not sure that "STOP THE SHOUTING" is very helpful for a new editor - they may not understand that writing in all capitals is called "Shouting". Your prod message at User talk:R195319691975 is also pretty complicated and difficult for a new user to understand, especially point 2 - I wonder if you could tweak it so that it's easier for them to read. Thanks. Pam D  11:53, 3 June 2013 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for June 4
Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that you've added some links pointing to disambiguation pages. Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ* Join us at the DPL WikiProject.


 * P.A. Buxton (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver)
 * added links pointing to FRS, CMG and FLS


 * Rodney Baxter (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver)
 * added a link pointing to FRS


 * Wilfred Norman Edwards (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver)
 * added a link pointing to FGS

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 13:01, 4 June 2013 (UTC)

Delta Dental of New Jersey
Good morning-

The Delta Dental of New Jersey article that I submitted has been marked for deletion. I'm happy to edit it to ensure it follows the guidelines, but some further insight from you would definitely help, as the reasons cited all reference using reliable third party sources, which I have done throughout the article. Every bit of information included in the article is historically factual so I'm having a hard time figuring out which parts you feel have been presented as an advertisement. This has been a long process and I'm eager to finish it up so any feedback would be much appreciated. Thank you! — Preceding unsigned comment added by Sgwwiki (talk • contribs) 13:49, 4 June 2013 (UTC)

Delville wood OOB
Thanks for doing what you did but would you explain it to me please as I haven't encountered this before.Keith-264 (talk) 17:48, 6 June 2013 (UTC)
 * Correction, I think I noticed.Keith-264 (talk) 18:50, 6 June 2013 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for June 11
Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that you've added some links pointing to disambiguation pages. Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ* Join us at the DPL WikiProject.


 * Alex Kacelnik (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver)
 * added a link pointing to FRS


 * Harry Smith (microbiologist) (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver)
 * added a link pointing to FSB


 * Sir Robert Lock (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver)
 * added a link pointing to CB

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 11:30, 11 June 2013 (UTC)

Re: Max Jones (journalist)
I do agree, but someone working on the page really wanted a chance to fix it up (as you can see above), which I'm willing to extend. If that can't be done within about a week, it's already nominated for PROD deletion, so if it's not in survivable shape I'm willing to call it a lost cause at that point. Or if some other admin wanted to speedily delete it, I wouldn't really be inclined to argue. The extension of a little grace period was really just my own two cents on giving it a chance, but my word is hardly final. - Vianello (Talk) 02:30, 15 June 2013 (UTC)

Nomination of Sir Richard Barrett-Lennard, 5th Baronet for deletion
A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Sir Richard Barrett-Lennard, 5th Baronet 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 Articles for deletion/Sir Richard Barrett-Lennard, 5th Baronet 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 high-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 notice from the top of the article. Crusoe8181 (talk) 11:27, 20 June 2013 (UTC)
 * Thanks for your helpful assistance. Barney the barney barney (talk) 17:01, 20 June 2013 (UTC)

June 2013
Hello, I'm BracketBot. I have automatically detected that [//en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?diff=561390149 your edit] to Alexander Montagu, 13th Duke of Manchester may have broken the syntax by modifying 1 "[]"s. If you have, don't worry, just [ edit the page] again to fix it. If I misunderstood what happened, or if you have any questions, you can leave a message on [//en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?action=edit&preload=User:A930913/BBpreload&editintro=User:A930913/BBeditintro&minor=&title=User_talk:A930913&preloadtitle=BracketBot%20-%20&section=new my operator's talk page].
 * List of unpaired brackets remaining on the page:

Thanks, BracketBot (talk) 17:58, 24 June 2013 (UTC)
 * He was educated at [Geelong Grammar School], Victoria; Bancroft Junior High School, California and [[Kimbolton Grammar

Natural History Museum
If the move is contested, this can be brought up with the closer, at User talk:Tariqabjotu, and at WP:MRV, if necessary. Apteva (talk) 23:33, 29 June 2013 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for June 30
Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Sir Frederick Willis, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page CB (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver). Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ* Join us at the DPL WikiProject.

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 10:55, 30 June 2013 (UTC)

Nomination of Camilla Long for deletion
A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Camilla Long 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 Articles for deletion/Camilla Long 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 high-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 notice from the top of the article. Widefox ; talk 19:57, 2 July 2013 (UTC)

FYI
We both had the same thought here; I just made the redirect more specific.  Theopolisme ( talk )  17:39, 7 July 2013 (UTC)

Trent Valley Way
Hi Thanks for reviewing the Trent Valley Way article, but am not sure what was meant by the enigmatic code on my talk page. My response being  Jokulhlaup (talk) 17:27, 9 July 2013 (UTC)

Talk:The Dam Busters (film)
Your revert was unwarranted, as the IP was making a legitimate point about issues relating to the film, the book it is based upon, and the real events the book is about. Maybe you shouldn't be so quick to label something as "racist nonsense"? Nick Cooper (talk) 21:43, 10 July 2013 (UTC)


 * Because it's (a) factually incorrect and (b) obvious trolling. Barney the barney barney (talk) 21:44, 10 July 2013 (UTC)


 * No, you're simply wrong. The 1952 Ballantine books edition changed the name for the US market. Fact. Nick Cooper (talk) 22:00, 10 July 2013 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for July 12
Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that you've added some links pointing to disambiguation pages. Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ* Join us at the DPL WikiProject.


 * J.S. Kennedy (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver)
 * added a link pointing to FRS


 * P.W. Richards (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver)
 * added a link pointing to Martin Richards

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 10:41, 12 July 2013 (UTC)

Speedy Deletion
Hi Barney,

Thank you so much for your quick response.

I am trying to edit it. However, when I click on edit it doesn't seems like it allows me to do so.

Can you tell me how?

Thank you so much!

John Smith (talk)

Hi Barney,

Can you help me edit the article that I created on LingPerfect Translation to make it not seem promotional? I am a English major and wanted to try writing article on Wikipedia. However, I think I am not very familiar with Wikipedia's policy. Is there a way that I can edit it right now? Or is it taken down already?

Best, John Smith

Hi,

You just messaged me about my page Sorry, I've only just joined Wikipedia, wrote the first line and saved it. I'm still learning about how to correctly format these things. — Preceding unsigned comment added by PhilHumphreys (talk • contribs) 16:24, 12 July 2013 (UTC)

NLR article
I wanted to know if you could help me with some of the citations.

I do have sources for all of my information it is just I am new with the Wiki format and this is the first time I have published an article online.

Would you be able to help, how do I put a source in, and how would I get a page about a legitimate organization published?

Thanks — Preceding unsigned comment added by JackMack67 (talk • contribs) 10:37, 13 July 2013 (UTC)


 * First things first; admit your use of quacking] sockpuppets and apologise. Otherwise there's not much point in talking to you. [[User:Barney the barney barney|Barney the barney barney (talk) 10:40, 13 July 2013 (UTC)

Sorry about the so called sock puppets, it is actually two of my family members who live with me who were eager to help me with my article, I am sorry if you are offended that people other than myself hold a similar view on this topic, I should have just told them to stay out of it. I assume a sock puppet is a fake profile or something (correct me if I am wrong, I have not heard this terminology before). Also I am not Jacqueline Mackenzie, I am not even part of the organization, I had to do an essay at my university to show that I knew about clubs and social networks in the area and I chose this because it was interesting and a bit different. Please help me so I can publish this article, I have spent a great deal of time gathering the information, I just fell down because this is the first time I have ever published anything on Wikipedia. Thanks JackMack67 (talk) 13:51, 13 July 2013 (UTC) — Preceding unsigned comment added by 124.148.186.49 (talk) 11:45, 13 July 2013 (UTC)

Hi Barney I re did all of my citations in the NLR article, could you please tell me if they are adequate, it makes it a bit clearer, any other advice would be useful thank you. JackMack67 (talk) 13:51, 13 July 2013 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for July 19
Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that you've added some links pointing to disambiguation pages. Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ* Join us at the DPL WikiProject.


 * Jack Harley (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver)
 * added a link pointing to FLS


 * Stephen Donovan (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver)
 * added a link pointing to FLS

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 10:53, 19 July 2013 (UTC)

Flying Donut Page
Hi Barney, the page was created with external links to the Flying Donut from OpenCoffee where the Flying Donut was invited to give a speach. OpenCofee is one of the biggest events in greece about tech startups. I think the page should be allowed since Flying Donut has started to get the attention of the agile scrum community and is about a good software product. The article it self is created with a very neutrual tone that does not indicate any kind of preference of the author.

Ok I will provide more links to the product. Before putting them on the page should I contatct you directly asking you to take a look at a page in my namespace to avoid another rejection?

Regards

— Preceding unsigned comment added by Jtzikas (talk • contribs) 11:08, 12 October 2013 (UTC)

German Pellets
Dear Barney, I have created a page for German Pellets that were marked today for speedy deletion by you. I am wondering what I can do to make it suitable for Wikipedia? It is not intended for promotional or advertising and fact based. I can edit the page and try to make it informative, but remove what you feel is promotional and any suggestions are welcome. Thanks :)  MWolli (talk) 11:27, 2 September 2013 (UTC) — Preceding unsigned comment added by MWolli (talk • contribs) 11:22, 2 September 2013 (UTC)

Thanks for the Notification
Dear Barney, Earlier I created a page for MarkMeets that has been marked for speedy deletion. I can assure you it was not intended for promotional and was only to illustare a quick over-view of the UK entertainment site (as I noticed there are sources/links to the site already on WIkipedia).

Please do edit the page to meet wiki's requirements. Thanks IanYoung2013 — Preceding unsigned comment added by IanYoung2013 (talk • contribs) 17:55, 7 August 2013 (UTC)

hi. i will delete my page if you are happy to write an article for ashley purdy of black veil brides.

Thanks for the Notification
Hi, Barney the barney barney. Thank you for the notification about the deletion discussion. I'll be sure to contribute to the conversation soon. Jcmeberhard (talk) 20:25, 6 August 2013 (UTC)


 * I appreciate the thoughts and advice. I'm not a physician, but I study medical sociology and do qualitative research about medical writing and research. Amit Mahipal would be considered a public LP, in that he is well known in the medical community for his articles which have changed standard of care specifically regarding lymph node dissection. I did not do a very good job emphasizing this fact in the article though, and I can see how his notability would be in question. I'm working on gathering better sources to demonstrate the impact his work has had on daily medical practice, etc. I know a lot of doctors and med students, and I'm trying to only include information which that audience would find useful when they do encyclopedic searches on particular topics and people. However, this is of course a skill I will need to continue to hone. Meanwhile, it's good to know that Wikipedia needs more articles on medical notable persons. Maybe that's something I can tackle in the future. Right now, I'm really focusing on Oncology and EBM, since it syncs well with my own work right now, and is helping me organize my research.


 * Again, I really appreciate your criticism and feedback. It's helpful to know where I need to improve my writing for the good of the community. And, it was kind of you contacted me individually. Hopefully we can continue the discussion on the deletion page. 72.184.134.22 (talk) 14:06, 7 August 2013 (UTC) — Preceding unsigned comment added by 72.184.134.22 (talk)


 * Hi Barney. I just added my contribution to the deletion discussion; I hope you will look over the comments and article revisions and respond with your thoughts. Thanks, Jcmeberhard (talk) —Preceding undated comment added 01:14, 12 August 2013 (UTC)

Silver Retreats
Dear Barney, I have created a page for Silver Retreats that were marked today for speedy deletion by you. I am wondering what I can do to make it suitable for Wikipedia. It is not intended for promotional or advertising and fact based. I can edit the page and try to make it informative, but remove what you feel is promotional and any suggestions are welcome. Thanks, — Preceding unsigned comment added by Billschuffenhauer (talk • contribs) 00:57, 6 August 2013 (UTC)

Fryer Brother murder case
My page was very well sourced and truthful. No one was disparaged. I use Wikipedia pages for a class I teach involving local history. This case occurred in my part of the country, and I would like the information available to my students, as well as other readers. The perpetrators are currently serving life sentences, and have been since 1974. Ray Lowry 14:23, 5 August 2013 (UTC) Ray Lowry

Not advertising...
Hello, I'm carlosTHEcreator and I came to let you know that it is not for advertising, I just decided to make it because it has a significant amount of importance on the internet. — Preceding unsigned comment added by CarlosTHEcreator (talk • contribs) 20:02, 21 July 2013 (UTC)

Presidents
Hi Barney, Going through your contribution it seems that you are lately creating articles on the presidents of royal statistical society. You might then want to use the template. Cheers. The Legend  of Zorro  10:29, 25 July 2013 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for July 26
Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that you've added some links pointing to disambiguation pages. Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ* Join us at the DPL WikiProject.


 * Colin Butler (entomologist) (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver)
 * added a link pointing to FRS


 * John Fryer (entomologist) (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver)
 * added a link pointing to FRS


 * Owain Richards (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver)
 * added a link pointing to FRS


 * Patrick Craigie (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver)
 * added a link pointing to CB


 * Peter G. Moore (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver)
 * added a link pointing to TD


 * R. Henry Rew (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver)
 * added a link pointing to KCB


 * Rawson W. Rawson (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver)
 * added a link pointing to CB


 * Reginald Rainey (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver)
 * added a link pointing to FRS


 * Tony Lees (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver)
 * added a link pointing to FRS


 * Wilfrid Hall (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver)
 * added a link pointing to CMG

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 10:43, 26 July 2013 (UTC)

A problem from physicsxuxiao
Hi,Barney.I have different opinions with Dylkon on the article CIE 1931 Color Space,and we changed another one's editing for a few times.Can you find some one to help us?Physicsxuxiao (talk) 15:16, 26 July 2013 (UTC)

Fixing J. Anthony Movshon now. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Jmdevitt (talk • contribs) 17:46, 26 July 2013 (UTC)

List of Fellows of the Royal Society elected in 2001
Why have you included in the Foreign Members section a list of names of people who are all normal Fellows and not "Foreign Members"? Being born abroad does not make you a Foreign Member if the birthplace is within the British Commonwealth (eg Canada). Foreign Members are normally Americans or Europeans.

Conversely, Alexei Alekseyevich Abrikosov IS a Foreign Member but is listed under Fellows. Now I'm totally confused.

Plucas58 (talk) 21:54, 28 July 2013 (UTC)

The Page
You may go ahead and remove that page. I don't want anything to do with it. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Plong26 (talk • contribs) 19:00, 29 July 2013 (UTC)

Speedy deletion declined: OMICS Group Conferences
Hello Barney the barney barney. I am just letting you know that I declined the speedy deletion of OMICS Group Conferences, a page you tagged for speedy deletion, because of the following concern: g4 only applies if the AFD discussion was completed - it ended up being speedily deleted per G11 last time. Thank you. SmartSE (talk) 16:21, 31 July 2013 (UTC)

Reason for nominating OMICS Group Conference Wikipedia page for deletion
Can you let me know the specific reason for nominating the OMICS Group Conference Wikipedia page for deletion. It had genuine and relevant links and supporting information. Jackysea (talk) 18:38, 31 July 2013 (UTC)


 * It was WP:SPAM, and you're about to get blocked for sockpuppetry per WP:QUACK. Barney the barney barney (talk) 18:44, 31 July 2013 (UTC)

July 2013
Hello, I'm BracketBot. I have automatically detected that [//en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?diff=566619165 your edit] to Rupert Sheldrake may have broken the syntax by modifying 2 "{}"s. If you have, don't worry, just [ edit the page] again to fix it. If I misunderstood what happened, or if you have any questions, you can leave a message on [//en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?action=edit&preload=User:A930913/BBpreload&editintro=User:A930913/BBeditintro&minor=&title=User_talk:A930913&preloadtitle=BracketBot%20-%20&section=new my operator's talk page].
 * List of unpaired brackets remaining on the page:

Thanks, BracketBot (talk) 20:07, 31 July 2013 (UTC)
 * quote|Sheldrake's argument is an exercise in pseudo-science. Many readers will be left with the
 *  cite journal|author=A.R. Sheldrake|title=Some Effects of the Physiological State of Pigeonpeas on

NAFOD
Hi Barney, I've opened the talk page on the NAFOD article to discuss it. Thanks.--FergusM1970Let's play Freckles 23:21, 31 July 2013 (UTC)

Why are you attempting to vandalize a page that follows the same protocal as other pages
This page should not be speedily deleted because... (your reason here) --Daviddonihue (talk) 23:54, 31 July 2013 (UTC)

Barney, the page does not promote. It lists off the services in the same way that any other websites information page does as well as site the references. Your vandalism will not be tolerated. What is your issue? Also, I don't appreciate being shown nudity when going to your user page. I should not have to look at nudity just to respond to your malicious attacks.


 * Please provide 3rd party references like anyone else (from Google and Amazon downwards). Meanwhile, it smells strongly of WP:SPAM. Also WP:OTHERCRAPEXISTS is not usually a good argument. Nudity my arse. Barney the barney barney (talk) 23:59, 31 July 2013 (UTC)


 * Sorry my mistake. Promotion is now officially allowed. Barney the barney barney (talk) 17:22, 12 September 2013 (UTC)

I have unreviewed a page you curated
Hi, I'm Forward Unto Dawn. I wanted to let you know that I saw the page you reviewed, Vishnu Raja, and have un-reviewed it again. If you have any questions, please ask them on my talk page. Thank you. -- Forward  Unto   Dawn  13:50, 1 August 2013 (UTC)


 * I've tagged it for CSD A7.-- Forward  Unto   Dawn  13:52, 1 August 2013 (UTC)

category:Original Fellows of the Royal Society
Your nomination of Category:Original Fellows of the Royal Society was not tagged on the category page using the cfr template. As a result nothing can happen as a result of the discussion. Please feel free to correctly renominate for a discussion. Vegaswikian (talk) 01:56, 2 August 2013 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for August 2
Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that you've added some links pointing to disambiguation pages. Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ* Join us at the DPL WikiProject.


 * Institute of Actuaries (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver)
 * added links pointing to Henry Brown, William Hughes, Samuel Brown and William Sutton


 * List of Fellows of the Royal Society elected in 2008 (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver)
 * added links pointing to James Scott, John Duncan, Brian Foster and Ian Parker


 * List of Fellows of the Royal Society elected in 2005 (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver)
 * added links pointing to Robert Evans, Andrew Blake and James Barber


 * List of Fellows of the Royal Society elected in 2002 (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver)
 * added links pointing to David Parker and David Fowler


 * List of Fellows of the Royal Society elected in 2013 (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver)
 * added links pointing to Gareth Roberts and William Richardson


 * John Gilmour (botanist) (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver)
 * added a link pointing to FLS


 * List of Fellows of the Royal Society elected in 2006 (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver)
 * added a link pointing to Michael Lockwood


 * List of Fellows of the Royal Society elected in 2009 (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver)
 * added a link pointing to John Hardy


 * List of Fellows of the Royal Society elected in 2012 (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver)
 * added a link pointing to Steve Jones

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 10:28, 2 August 2013 (UTC)

Too-speedy speedy tagging
Hi. Thanks for patrolling new pages, but don't be too quick off the mark: you tagged Ali asghar with db-a3 in the same minute it was created. Newbies often put in a word or two and press "Save page" to see how it looks: it is discouraging and BITEy if a speedy template immediately pops up. Nothing was lost in this case, as it happens, because the author was not discouraged: he went on to create Ali Asghar (Pakistan) about an A7-worthy student; but in principle, for A1 and A3 you should wait at least 10 - 15 minutes to see if more appears - see uw-hasty. Regards, JohnCD (talk) 18:56, 2 August 2013 (UTC)

Platform No. 1 speedy deletion nomination
FYI, I have declined the speedy deletion you requested for Platform No. 1 and have initiated a discussion at Articles for deletion/Platform No. 1 (2nd nomination) instead. --RL0919 (talk) 18:13, 3 August 2013 (UTC)

NAFOD
Hi Barney, I've added a reference to a US Navy briefing slide on fear of flying that mentions NAFOD. Does that help?--FergusM1970Let's play Freckles 22:13, 3 August 2013 (UTC)
 * Hi Barney the barney barney. :) In regards to NAFOD, I'll probably end up sending it to AfD if someone else doesn't, but I'll give it a bit of time to see if anything solid eventuates. - Bilby (talk) 17:09, 5 August 2013 (UTC)

Dear Barney, I have created a page for Mr. Boris Tatievski that were marked today for speedy deletion by you. I would like to make it suitable for Wikipedia. The content contains the references which were proofed. I am trying to make the page as informative as possible and any suggestions are welcome. Thanks, Suchanek1974 — Preceding unsigned comment added by Suchanek1974 (talk • contribs) 12:36, 5 August 2013 (UTC)

Boris Tatievski
Just a head's up, I have declined your CSD A7 nomination as the subject has some coverage in possibly reliable sources such as this Motor India reference. Ritchie333 (talk)  (cont)   14:54, 5 August 2013 (UTC)

WikiProject Public Art/NYC
Please wait to speedily delete this article. I am in the process of expanding and editing it!! — Preceding unsigned comment added by OR drohowa (talk • contribs) 13:27, 6 August 2013 (UTC)

Rozzi Crane
Hello.

I was given this article by Rozzi Crane herself to add to WIkipedia.

Why are you deleting a page that I created when I mentioned that I worked for her management company?

Please stop the deletion process.

Thanks Barney — Preceding unsigned comment added by 173.196.12.18 (talk) 16:32, 7 August 2013 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for August 9
Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Rupert Sheldrake, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Theodore Roszak (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver). Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ* Join us at the DPL WikiProject.

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 10:43, 9 August 2013 (UTC)

Sheldrake
I agree; the original intro I wrote had "recognized as pseudoscience". The issue is whether the references support it. Maddox and Sharma call it pseudoscience directly; Rose says "characteristics of pseudoscience"; Alcock is calling parapsychology pseudoscience; and I don't have the text to L'Imposture scientifique en dix leçons (no google preview). Vzaak (talk) 06:37, 11 August 2013 (UTC)

FYI. Vzaak (talk) 14:49, 16 August 2013 (UTC)

Flippingbook Publisher
Hello Barney the barney barney,

I've got your message. But I really don't understand why did you flag my article. It's not the first time we try to do it, but each time moderators delete our articles. Meanwhile our competitors have their pages on Wikipedia with the same content and without any restrictions. What is the criteria? We tried to make our page similar to these http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Issuu, http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Uberflip. What is our fault? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Andrey Zhitenev (talk • contribs) 13:02, 15 August 2013 (UTC)

Benjanië
Hello,

I most certainly did not make Benjanië up in my lunchbreak! I do understand the reasons for why it should not be on Wikipedia, though, thanks to your links. Benjanië is real, but I guess Wikipedia is not yet ready for it. Thank you for your advice! — Preceding unsigned comment added by RidderterGeit (talk • contribs) 14:01, 15 August 2013 (UTC)

Barack Obama’s 2013 climate action plan
I have removed the prod tag from Barack Obama’s 2013 climate action plan, which you proposed for deletion. I'm leaving this message here to notify you about it. If you still think the article should be deleted, please don't add the prod template back to the article. Instead, feel free to list it at Articles for deletion. Thanks! Fbryce (talk) 21:22, 15 August 2013 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for August 16
Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Laurence Brock, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page CB (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver). Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ* Join us at the DPL WikiProject.

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 10:53, 16 August 2013 (UTC)

August 2013
Hello, I'm BracketBot. I have automatically detected that [//en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?diff=568962080 your edit] to Distinguished Service Order and Bar may have broken the syntax by modifying 1 ""s. If you have, don't worry, just [ edit the page] again to fix it. If I misunderstood what happened, or if you have any questions, you can leave a message on [//en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?action=edit&preload=User:A930913/BBpreload&editintro=User:A930913/BBeditintro&minor=&title=User_talk:A930913&preloadtitle=BracketBot%20-%20&section=new my operator's talk page].
 * List of unpaired brackets remaining on the page:

Thanks, BracketBot (talk) 18:01, 17 August 2013 (UTC)
 * duplicates Distinguished Service OrderBarney the barney barney

Speedy deletion nomination of DePaul Catholic High School Field
Hello NYCWikiKid,

I wanted to let you know that I just tagged DePaul Catholic High School Field for deletion, because the article doesn't clearly say why the subject is important enough to be included in an encyclopedia.

If you feel that the article shouldn't be deleted and want more time to work on it, you can contest this deletion, but please don't remove the speedy deletion tag from the top.

You can leave a note on my talk page if you have questions. Barney the barney barney (talk) 19:25, 17 August 2013 (UTC)


 * Hi Barney! Thanks for contacting me.  I appreciate that.  I was reading through the tag, and responded to the matter there.  Basically, the article is of importance because it acknowledges a venue that has clear association with a professional team that plays in the second division league of Women's US Soccer.  The facility has held important conference matches for the league, and has been in use by the team for more than four years.  This in itself is an account and merit for awareness. Also, with view towards the term "encyclopedia", a conventional, tangible twenty to fifty book collection is selective with information due to the limitation it can provide.  Wikipedia surpasses all molds of what an encyclopedia was constrained to - space.  Wiki is the World's encyclopedia, and in it the range of human knowledge that can be written is boundless, as long as the information is presented in a descriptive and substantiated form.  I totally am on board to help out.  If you feel that we can work on some pages together, let me know.  Cheers NYCWikiKid (talk) 20:54, 17 August 2013 (UTC)

stupid.
you deleting my page was so stupid and telling me it was vandalism? it was not vandalism CLEARLY. it was so stuipd so if you could like leave my stuff alone that'd be great. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Joodiixo (talk • contribs) 12:31, 18 August 2013 (UTC)


 * Yes, clearly not vandalism. Barney the barney barney (talk) 17:20, 12 September 2013 (UTC)

Witherby Memorial Lecture
Hello,, and thank you for your contributions!

An article you worked on Witherby Memorial Lecture, appears to be directly copied from http://www.bto.org/about-bto/accounts/witherby-memorial-lectures. Please take a minute to make sure that the text is freely licensed and properly attributed as a reference, otherwise the article may be deleted.

It's entirely possible that this bot made a mistake, so please feel free to remove this notice and the tag it placed on Witherby Memorial Lecture if necessary. MadmanBot (talk) 16:54, 18 August 2013 (UTC)

John S Harrison
Hi Barney, You want to delete John S Harrison for there being no reference. In Wiki's Leith Athletic fc history there is a picture of the 1936 Leith Athletic fc team. The picture shows my Dad John S Harrison (standing at the goalkeeper's left) who was Captain of the team as well as Chris Duffy of Charlton Athletic fame for scoring the winning goal in overtime in the 1947 FA Cup Final. Andrew Miekelham, Dave Barker, and Andy Fortune. Just what kind of reference do you need. I was 6 yrs old at that time and I personally met these people (Footballers).Cec Harrison (talk) 18:13, 7 September 2013 (UTC)

Please stop adding BLPPRODs to this article, it is not eligible as it does not concern a living person. GiantSnowman 15:17, 21 August 2013 (UTC)
 * It is not a BLP; you did check that before editing, right, per WP:BEFORE? If you continue to mis-use the page curation tools and re-add BLPPRODs to articles which are not eligible then that right will be taken away from you. GiantSnowman 15:37, 21 August 2013 (UTC)


 * Thank you for your information. However, I believe I am implemeting policy directly. It is a potential BLP and has been listed as such at WP:BLP/N. Barney the barney barney (talk) 19:12, 21 August 2013 (UTC)

Nomination of Andrew Meikleham for deletion
A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Andrew Meikleham 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 Articles for deletion/Andrew Meikleham 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 high-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 notice from the top of the article. GiantSnowman 19:09, 21 August 2013 (UTC)


 * Not my article. Barney the barney barney (talk) 17:20, 12 September 2013 (UTC)

Nomination of John S Harrison for deletion
A discussion is taking place as to whether the article John S Harrison 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 Articles for deletion/John S Harrison 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 high-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 notice from the top of the article. GiantSnowman 19:38, 21 August 2013 (UTC)


 * Not my article. Barney the barney barney (talk) 17:19, 12 September 2013 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for August 23
Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that you've added some links pointing to disambiguation pages. Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ* Join us at the DPL WikiProject.


 * New Naturalist (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver)
 * added a link pointing to Ian Moore


 * Soekarja Somadikarta (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver)
 * added a link pointing to Indonesian


 * Witherby Memorial Lecture (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver)
 * added a link pointing to Peter Grant

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 10:59, 23 August 2013 (UTC)

Barcelona Rentals Vacation
I am trying to do "barcelona rentals vacation" but you didn't give no even a few minutes to edit and completed. It seems like you was waiting for me to spend hours on the work to then delete it!. This is my first article and I was trying to do my best, but again, you didn't let me do it. You know life is too short to spend hours trying to do something nice and a malicious person came after and remove everything. sorry if it seems like an advertisement I was trying my best and I can still perfect it to wikipedia policies but you didn't give me the chance. god help you! — Preceding unsigned comment added by Frante Camar (talk • contribs) 15:37, 23 August 2013 (UTC)

Talkback
 D u s t i *Let's talk!* 19:01, 23 August 2013 (UTC)

Talkback
 D u s t i *Let's talk!* 19:05, 23 August 2013 (UTC)


 * Yes, alright. I can read your talk page. Barney the barney barney (talk) 19:06, 23 August 2013 (UTC)
 * x3 :)  D u s t i *Let's talk!* 21:24, 23 August 2013 (UTC)

Wikipedia talk:Articles for creation/Amit Naik
Again, your knowledge of how WP:PROD works needs improving - this is not eligible as it is not in article mainspace. Please stop adding PROD tags to articles that are not eligible. GiantSnowman 22:07, 23 August 2013 (UTC)

Thanks for the Notification
Hello Barney, This is not a promotional topic. I am just writing about one of the first ecommerce shop in Manipur. More contents will be added. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Williamgurumayum (talk • contribs) 08:41, 24 August 2013 (UTC)

Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Mokenge P. Malafa (2nd nomination)
I gave the proper reasons. If you had just expanded the rationale when asked, it would have been easier to remove this very dubious article.  DGG ( talk ) 16:52, 25 August 2013 (UTC)

Peer reviewed journal
I'm not an academic, how do I get into that? Have you seen my software to get into scopus...there's nothing like that out there...Luca boscolo (talk) 17:08, 28 August 2013 (UTC)

Klavier Music Productions
Unbelievable. You're not supposed to nominate a page for deletion while it's in production, as the increation notice clearly says. Further, it hardly qualifies for a promotion piece, but we'll leave it for others to decide. -- Unicorn Tapestry  {say}  21:36, 28 August 2013 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for August 30
Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that you've added some links pointing to disambiguation pages. Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ* Join us at the DPL WikiProject.


 * Rupert Sheldrake (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver)
 * added a link pointing to Public understanding of science


 * Steve Field (medical doctor) (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver)
 * added a link pointing to FRCP

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 10:43, 30 August 2013 (UTC)

i have two social networks
i have two social networks and i want to list them in wikipedia with there screen shots and little info about them but unfortunately you put deletion tag on them look "perseen and "raadso" if there is an other way to publish please tell me or if it is not allowed totally i will leave here thanks,,, — Preceding unsigned comment added by Omarteacher (talk • contribs) 20:42, 31 August 2013 (UTC)

AirMenu
Dear Barney, I received your notification for the deletion of my article about AirMenu. Please inform me about the alterations you think I should do to meet the wiki requirements. I don't think it is promotional, since there's no clear praise about the company, just straight information about it's activity and features. I'll wait for your suggestions about how I can improve the article — Preceding unsigned comment added by Miguelalvesc (talk • contribs) 10:04, 2 September 2013 (UTC)

Declined speedy
Just wanted to let you know I declined your speedy deletion tag at Campus Disorientation. This article appeared to more about a neologism than a specifically organized event. I was therefore of the opinion that it did not meet WP:A7. If you still believe the subject is not notable, I suggest making an AfD nomination (as the creator of the article has objected to the deletion on the talk page). Thanks! Singularity42 (talk) 23:00, 2 September 2013 (UTC)

Regarding speedy delete of Onarbor page and Tim R Peterson page
Hi Barney, I created the page, Onarbor, and would like to fix it such that it will be acceptable to be published on Wikipedia. Onarbor.com is my website and company. Can you explain why you deleted it?

thanks, Tim Peterson User:Trpeters1 —Preceding undated comment added 15:01, 3 September 2013 (UTC)

Thanks for your explanation on why you recommended Onarbor for delete. Can this page simply remain idle on Wikipedia until it becomes "notable" enough? Trpeters1 (talk) 15:47, 3 September 2013 (UTC)

who was who
I don;t think we have usually accepted it as a source showing notability I think the physicians you're writing about are probably notable, but it needs more to show it.  DGG ( talk ) 15:52, 3 September 2013 (UTC)
 * I had come here to comment on St Clair Thomson (who I had been planning to write an article on - I noticed a redlink go blue). I will try and help expand that stub at some point, as I know he is notable. I suspect many of the others are as well, but it does help to try and write a bit more when starting articles like that. Barney, while I am here can I ask if you put WikiProject templates on the talk pages? Others will do it eventually, but WPBiography is useful on biographical articles. Carcharoth (talk) 22:52, 3 September 2013 (UTC)

Biographical articles
Hi there. Not sure if you saw the above note, but wanted to drop off another note as I noticed that the article I mentioned above (St Clair Thomson) had been moved (by another editor) from Sir St Clair Thomson to St Clair Thomson. I then noticed that you had recently moved several articles to titles starting 'Sir'. I think putting 'Sir' in article titles is generally avoided, even if the 'Sir' is being used to disambiguate the name. The article naming and guidelines are not terribly clear on this point, so maybe it needs to be discussed somewhere suitable. What do you think? The other thing I wanted to say is that I'd be very happy to help expand some of these stubs that you've started. I wanted to check first if you had plans to expand any of them? Carcharoth (talk) 23:37, 4 September 2013 (UTC)

Re: TED refs
I saw that, too. It's the same article with a different (short) opening paragraph. Vzaak (talk) 11:12, 5 September 2013 (UTC)

Our new friend
has that he's here to do "a little field study", which is exactly what I suspected and brought to his attention earlier. It looks like "trolling 2.0". I suppose waiting is still the most practical option. At least I know not to engage him. Vzaak (talk) 12:50, 5 September 2013 (UTC)


 * I wouldn't presume to tell others what to do, but if you look at the kinds of things he has said and done, I just don't see any value in engaging with him. Vzaak (talk) 18:53, 24 September 2013 (UTC)

Re: Consistency
I completely understand, but I want the opening to be unassailable reference-wise. Blackmore is the only one that actually brings up the point, that I am aware. Her argument focuses on telepathy itself, and she doesn't even mention "morphic resonance". We can't go from "telepathy is inconsistent" to "morphic resonance is inconsistent" due to SYNTH. Were you able to find the text of the Wolpert article "A matter of fact or fancy"?

Re public understanding, it seemed at the time natural to tie that to media appearances. But thinking about this again, I agree it should go in the lead, especially now that there is a "Media Appearances" section with info on TEDx. Vzaak (talk) 13:47, 5 September 2013 (UTC)


 * Sorry, it looked like Wolpert was a stray reference. "Reproducible evidence" has been there a while, and survived your earlier batch of edits. Vzaak (talk) 20:00, 5 September 2013 (UTC)


 * Hi, good to see you back. As you probably noticed, your auto-whatever status has been restored. Considering that at least four people thought WP:CSD was appropriate, and considering other surrounding details, I think a strong case could be made against Snowman if you cared to pursue it.


 * The TEDx thing is a minefield because there's no secondary-source treatment of it. The only secondary source, the Independent (and syndicated copy in the Belfast Telegraph), goes into no detail. Since almost any narrative can be built from this affair by stringing together primary sources, and since the story wasn't otherwise picked up by news, it seemed to me that just stating the facts was the safest approach, without getting into the he-said/she-said of it. Do you disagree? Vzaak (talk) 18:02, 15 September 2013 (UTC)

September 2013
Hello, I'm BracketBot. I have automatically detected that [//en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?diff=571760478 your edit] to Sir Hector MacLennan may have broken the syntax by modifying 1 "[]"s. If you have, don't worry, just [ edit the page] again to fix it. If I misunderstood what happened, or if you have any questions, you can leave a message on [//en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?action=edit&preload=User:A930913/BBpreload&editintro=User:A930913/BBeditintro&minor=&title=User_talk:A930913&preloadtitle=BracketBot%20-%20&section=new my operator's talk page].
 * List of unpaired brackets remaining on the page:

Thanks, BracketBot (talk) 10:23, 6 September 2013 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for September 6
Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that you've added some links pointing to disambiguation pages. Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ* Join us at the DPL WikiProject.


 * New Naturalist (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver)
 * added links pointing to John Mitchell, Ernest Pollard, Brian Davis and Peter Friend


 * Sir Gordon Gordon-Taylor (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver)
 * added links pointing to CB and FACS


 * Sir Christopher Paine (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver)
 * added a link pointing to FRCP


 * Sir James Berry (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver)
 * added a link pointing to FSA


 * Sir Maurice Cassidy (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver)
 * added a link pointing to CB

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 11:17, 6 September 2013 (UTC)

CakeMail
Hi Barney the barney barney,


 * Hello. Barney the barney barney (talk) 17:15, 12 September 2013 (UTC)

Speedy deletion nomination of CakeMail


A tag has been placed on CakeMail, requesting that it be deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under two or more of the criteria for speedy deletion, by which articles can be deleted at any time, without discussion. If the page meets any of these strictly-defined criteria, then it may be soon be deleted by an administrator. The reasons it has been tagged are:
 * It seems to be unambiguous advertising which only promotes a company, product, group, service or person and would need to be fundamentally rewritten in order to become encyclopedic. (See section G11 of the criteria for speedy deletion.) Please read the guidelines on spam and FAQ/Business for more information.
 * It appears to be about a person, organization (band, club, company, etc.), individual animal, or web content, but it does not indicate how or why the subject is important or significant: that is, why an article about that subject should be included in an encyclopedia. (See section A7 of the criteria for speedy deletion.) Such articles may be deleted at any time. Please see the guidelines for what is generally accepted as notable.

If you think this page should not be deleted for this reason, you may contest the nomination by visiting the page and clicking the button labelled "Click here to contest this speedy deletion". This will give you the opportunity to explain why you believe the page should not be deleted. However, be aware that once a page is tagged for speedy deletion, it may be removed without delay. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag from the page yourself, but do not hesitate to add information in line with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. If the page is deleted, and you wish to retrieve the deleted material for future reference or improvement, you can place a request here.

--- I've reviewed the CakeMail article and ensured that all links are properly quoted and that proper chronology is respected in the History section. Please advise if there's anything else I missed in regards to correcting the issues.

Thanks!

MiEhrynn (talk) 13:49, 6 September 2013 (UTC)


 * Yes, more promotion welcome in the encyclopedia. Barney the barney barney (talk) 17:18, 12 September 2013 (UTC)

New Naturalist
I am interested in why you restored 8 links to disambiguation pages instead of solving them. The Banner talk 22:36, 7 September 2013 (UTC)

Notability
This shows a deep and troubling lack of understanding of how notability works.

WP:NFOOTBALL doesn't mean "basically means anyone who's ever played any sort of competitive sport", it refers to players who have competed in a fully-professional league or at senior international level in an official game.

"It doesn't matter if they don't meet WP:GNG" it perhaps the worst kind of advice you can give anyone, as it's simply not the case. NFOOTBALL is reliant upon GNG, and there is significant consensus at AFD that technically meeting NFOOTBALL (i.e. playing in 1 match) but failing GNG does not make you notable, see see Articles for deletion/Oscar Otazu, Articles for deletion/Vyacheslav Seletskiy, Articles for deletion/Aleksandr Salimov, Articles for deletion/Andrei Semenchuk, Articles for deletion/Artyom Dubovsky, Articles for deletion/Cosmos Munegabe, Articles for deletion/Marios Antoniades, Articles for deletion/Scott Sinclair (footballer born 1991) and Articles for deletion/Fredrik Hesselberg-Meyer (2nd nomination) amongst others.

If you need any help or advice with regards to notability please let me know, I'm happy to assist. GiantSnowman 16:23, 8 September 2013 (UTC)


 * you are not allowed to question WP:NSPORTS. I've tried to question it in the past but was informed otherwise.  As long as someone plays some kind of semi-competitive sport, they're in. Barney the barney barney (talk) 17:16, 12 September 2013 (UTC)

Your typo at the request for clarification on pseudoscience
Regarding your statement at Arbitration/Requests/Clarification_and_Amendment, you said " feint-hearted" when I think you meant to say "faint-hearted". JRSpriggs (talk) 18:42, 8 September 2013 (UTC)


 * Thanks. Total confusion there then, eh? Arbcome members must be unable to work out what I meant. Barney the barney barney (talk) 17:17, 12 September 2013 (UTC)

Edit war at New Naturalist
Your recent editing history at New Naturalist shows that you are currently engaged in an edit war. Being involved in an edit war can result in your being blocked from editing&mdash;especially if you violate the three-revert rule, which states that an editor must not perform more than three reverts on a single page within a 24-hour period. Undoing another editor's work—whether in whole or in part, whether involving the same or different material each time—counts as a revert. Also keep in mind that while violating the three-revert rule often leads to a block, you can still be blocked for edit warring&mdash;even if you don't violate the three-revert rule&mdash;should your behavior indicate that you intend to continue reverting repeatedly.

To avoid being blocked, instead of reverting please consider using the article's talk page to work toward making a version that represents consensus among editors. See BRD for how this is done. You can post a request for help at a relevant noticeboard or seek dispute resolution. In some cases, you may wish to request temporary page protection. The Banner talk 22:42, 8 September 2013 (UTC)


 * No, I'm not. You're removing valid links.  I don't know why. Barney the barney barney (talk) 22:43, 8 September 2013 (UTC)
 * You are introducing unsolvable links to disambiguation pages time and time again. See below for the consequences. The Banner talk 22:57, 8 September 2013 (UTC)

Notice of Edit warring noticeboard discussion
Hello. This message is being sent to inform you that there is currently a discussion involving you at Administrators' noticeboard/Edit warring regarding a possible violation of Wikipedia's policy on edit warring. The thread is Administrators' noticeboard/Edit warring. Thank you. <span style="font-family:'Old English Text MT',serif;color:green">The Banner <i style="color:maroon">talk</i> 22:53, 8 September 2013 (UTC)

ANEW
Barney, please comment at the report filed against you at WP:ANEW, if for no other reason than I'd like to understand of why you're doing what you're doing. Thanks.--Bbb23 (talk) 00:23, 9 September 2013 (UTC)

Su iyesi
I am still editing... Thanks your patience Buzancar (talk) 11:18, 10 September 2013 (UTC)

September 2013
Hello, I'm AldezD. I noticed that you made a comment on the page Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/List of QI episodes that didn't seem very civil. Wikipedia needs people like you and me to collaborate, so it's one of our core principles to interact with one another in a polite and respectful manner. If you have any questions, you can leave me a message on [[User_talk:AldezD|my talk page. Thank you.  AldezD (talk) 15:57, 10 September 2013 (UTC)
 * Please do not leave personal attacks questioning my competency in AfD discussions. Reviewing my edit history and contributions clearly show my level of competence. AldezD (talk) 15:58, 10 September 2013 (UTC)


 * Really? Is the 10-0 deletion vote against you really not indicative of this?  Are you really so personally offended by that?  I think WP:COMPETENCE applies here very clearly. Barney the barney barney (talk) 17:15, 12 September 2013 (UTC)

Re: Fantastic Beasts and Where to Find Them (film)
When new page-patrolling you should generally give editors some time to establish a page, especially when it appears to be a current event, before pressing CSD. A quick Google search would have confirmed to you that this has literally just happened. I was trying to gather some references. Regards. —JennKR | ☎ 14:11, 12 September 2013 (UTC)


 * Unreferenced and potential vaporware fancruft is welcome on Wikipedia. Now I learn. Barney the barney barney (talk) 17:13, 12 September 2013 (UTC)

STA Travel
Hi Barney,

I'm really struggling to see how I can make the STA Travel page any less promotional. Many commercial companies have Wikipedia pages and the page I created does not overtly promote a product or a service. Nor does it make grand statements which cannot be backed up by sources and references.

Please can you suggest areas which can be amended rather than tagging it for deletion?

Thanks,

Stephomitchell (talk) 16:27, 12 September 2013 (UTC)


 * No worries. It's a brilliant article. Should be featured on the main page. Barney the barney barney (talk) 17:12, 12 September 2013 (UTC)

From Gate to Wire
This article is not eligible for WP:CSD - it is about a newspaper article, not a "real person, individual animal, organization (band, club, company, etc.), web content or organized event." If you add the tag again your account will be blocked for disruption, you have been warned before. GiantSnowman 16:45, 12 September 2013 (UTC)


 * Thanks for that. It's really helpful explanation.  Try to maintain encyclopedic standards and get blocked for no reason, or not try to maintain encyclopedic standards.  Genius logic. Barney the barney barney (talk) 17:08, 12 September 2013 (UTC)
 * Do you know what's not helpful? Your attitude. It's almost as poor as your editing ability and knowledge here. This is a collaborative project, and your sarcasm and general character are not conducive to that. GiantSnowman 17:28, 12 September 2013 (UTC)


 * Sarcasm? I don't understand.  You mean I help and then I get told off for "helping wrong".  Perhaps I won't try to help then. Barney the barney barney (talk) 17:40, 12 September 2013 (UTC)


 * would have deleted it no problem. Being excessively pedantic is pathetic and knows it. Barney the barney barney (talk) 18:56, 12 September 2013 (UTC)


 * From Gate to Wire appears to be a column in a web - only newspaper. So it is web content, and is eligible for WP:CSD. Cardamon (talk) 08:53, 16 September 2013 (UTC)

Autoconfirmed right removed
Do to your repeated mis-use of page curation tools, I have removed your 'autoconfirmed' status. You are more than welcome to request it back if you wish. GiantSnowman 17:33, 12 September 2013 (UTC)


 * Thanks! That's really helpful that is.  The most helpful thing you've ever done, I reckon.  Words cannot express how helpful that is. What Wikipedia needs is more promotion.  I'll keep that in mind. Do you want to block me as well?  I know you need no actual reason to do it. Barney the barney barney (talk) 17:39, 12 September 2013 (UTC)

WP:AN notice
Hello. This message is being sent to inform you that there is currently a discussion at Administrators' noticeboard regarding an issue with which you may have been involved. The thread is "Competenence/Point making/un-civil behavior from editor with concerning reactions". Thank you. Hasteur (talk) 19:05, 12 September 2013 (UTC)


 * THanks! i bet that's as helpful as 's petty actions against me. Barney the barney barney (talk) 19:10, 12 September 2013 (UTC)

Making my Day
Hi, I just wanted to say thanks for making my day. This talk page is amazing! I'm going to look and see if I can find an appropriate barnstar. Benboy00 (talk) —Preceding undated comment added 19:21, 12 September 2013 (UTC)

Hey
You've spent quite some time helping out here in the past year or two; please don't throw it away because you're pissed. I would imagine it won't be too hard to right whatever wrongs have happened, but step one is probably to take a break, or at the very least don't keep being sarcastic or screwing with people's usernames. Ping me if you want, though I'll not necessarily be online all day, I'll get back to you. Especially, don't be sarcastic on newbies' talk pages; they aren't (or shouldn't be) who you're mad at. --Floquenbeam (talk) 20:02, 12 September 2013 (UTC)


 * I'd concur with Floquenbeam. I'm not sure what has caused this blow up, but from time to time we all get pushed to the edge a bit on wikipedia, whether that be the perceived arbitrariness of certain applications of rules or other editors. At those times it is good to work on something else or walk away for a bit to get perspective. After a week or so, it may be useful to reflect on what was said at the time and what lessons can be learnt. I'd also suggest not being overtly sarcastic on wikipedia at all, IRWolfie- (talk) 23:57, 12 September 2013 (UTC)


 * I concur with Floq and IRWolfie. For what it's worth, I have gone on record agreeing that From Gate to Wire meets the criteria for WP:CSD, and that's not something I generally say lightly. I'll assume good faith that your NPP work is generally correct and up to standard, and the only thing I'll point you to is Hanlon's Razor - people generally don't create articles that meet CSD A7 maliciously, and all you need to do is explain calmly and succinctly why the article meets the criteria, suggesting other options such as userfying or bouncing to AfC. Ritchie333  <sup style="color:#7F007F;">(talk)  <sup style="color:#7F007F;">(cont)   08:59, 13 September 2013 (UTC)


 * There may still be things that need to be talked out, but at least I've restored autopatrolled status to your account.  This had nothing to do with page curation, it's only involved with marking pages you create as autopatrolled. --Floquenbeam (talk) 13:55, 13 September 2013 (UTC)
 * Yes, apologies for that. GiantSnowman 14:04, 13 September 2013 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for September 13
Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that you've added some links pointing to disambiguation pages. Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ* Join us at the DPL WikiProject.


 * Douglas Guthrie (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver)
 * added links pointing to FSA, FRCP, FRSC and FRSM


 * Medical Society of London (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver)
 * added links pointing to John Hunt, John Millar and Raymond Kirk


 * John Richardson, Baron Richardson (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver)
 * added a link pointing to FRCP

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 10:52, 13 September 2013 (UTC)

Your concerns about Rupert Sheldrake
I responded to your concerns regarding Sheldrake on the talkpage for him: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Talk:Rupert_Sheldrake#Concerns_with_article The article, as it stands now, is a violation of the WP:RGW policy, since support for Sheldrake is given by solid sources. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 71.202.210.61 (talk) 19:22, 13 September 2013 (UTC)

Result of clarification request concerning "Psuedoscience principles"
You participated in this recent clarification request. This message is to inform you that the clarification request has been closed and archived. If you would like to read the arbitrators' opinion section, the request has been archived to here. For the Arbitration Committee, AGK  [•] 08:46, 17 September 2013 (UTC)

Rose
Hi, I don't really understand this sentence: Steven Rose, who appeared in the broadcast, criticised it for "as if heresy was...all that mattered" and that "there wasn't much sense of the scientific or metascientific issues at stake".

I don't have the context since I couldn't find the source online. The first quote seems to almost make the opposite point, like, "sure it's heresy; we hate heretics, so what?". The second quote seems to lack some context as well; but I get it, I guess.

In any case the article seems complete-ish now and I don't expect to be meddling as much.

Do you plan to make a case against Snowman? As I mentioned above, I think there's a strong case there. Vzaak (talk) 17:48, 18 September 2013 (UTC)


 * Rose didn't like the way it was presented, i.e. little to no scientific content, versus scientists being nasty to heretics unnecessarily. It's in the Guardian archive if you have access, as is a lot of Sheldrake's columns for the Guardian.  Barney the barney barney (talk) 18:43, 18 September 2013 (UTC)


 * I don't do politics. Barney the barney barney (talk) 18:43, 18 September 2013 (UTC)


 * I don't have such access. Could you tell me if this is an appropriate summation: Biologist Steven Rose, who appeared in the broadcast, criticised it for creating the perception that Maddox's rhetoric in his 1981 Nature editorial was "all that mattered". "There wasn't much sense of the scientific or metascientific issues at stake", Rose said. Vzaak (talk) 22:22, 18 September 2013 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for September 25
Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Sir George Bishop, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page CB (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver). Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ* Join us at the DPL WikiProject.

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 11:30, 25 September 2013 (UTC)

Craig Weiler
Hi Barney. I'm a skeptic and have been following the Rupert Sheldrake stuff on the internet for some various months, I noticed the talkpage and noticed some woo-meisters are trying to add in various fringe theories. One of these users is Craig Weiler a known psi-believer. He's all over the internet stirring this controversy up and he has a lot of nasty comments against wikipedia. Please see here;

and as you can see he's asking other psi-believers to help him out add fringe stuff into Sheldrake's wiki. I believe this is going to end in trouble and suggest this user should be banned. Perhaps you could pass this onto an admin. Thanks. Dan Dan skeptic (talk) 06:14, 2 October 2013 (UTC)


 * thanks for the links. WP:MEAT is not good, but currently, we're managing to deal with it. Barney the barney barney (talk) 10:09, 2 October 2013 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for October 2
Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that you've added some links pointing to disambiguation pages. Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ* Join us at the DPL WikiProject.


 * Robert Williams (physician) (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver)
 * added links pointing to Welsh and FRCP


 * David Price (British academic) (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver)
 * added a link pointing to FGS


 * Robert Curran (physician) (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver)
 * added a link pointing to FRCP


 * Robert G. W. Anderson (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver)
 * added a link pointing to FSA


 * Tony Bradshaw (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver)
 * added a link pointing to FRS

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 13:16, 2 October 2013 (UTC)

Animism
Hello again is there any chance you can look at the animism article regarding the science section at the bottom, it describes Sheldrake as a "biologist" and makes out his stuff is scientific. Do you think that section should be deleted? It is a fringe view. The only thing that might be worth saving is the comment from David Skrbina which could be used on Sheldrake's own article. Thanks. Dan skeptic (talk) 00:54, 5 October 2013 (UTC)

What is thy bidding, my master?
Darth Vzaak (talk) 07:09, 5 October 2013 (UTC)

The Rebels are alerted to our presence. Admiral Ozzel came out of lightspeed too close to the system. Darth Vzaak (talk) 19:12, 5 October 2013 (UTC)
 * I sense a great disturbance in the Force. David in DC (talk) 18:24, 11 October 2013 (UTC)

I found an article you might be interested in
. Best regards, - LuckyLouie (talk) 16:26, 6 October 2013 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for October 9
Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Ben Elliot, you added links pointing to the disambiguation pages Enfield, Country Life and West London (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver). Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ* Join us at the DPL WikiProject.

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 10:50, 9 October 2013 (UTC)

Tom's wrong
on almost everything. deletion of graf. cite tag on vzaak's fine work on note. But give him the NPOV tag, please. Even discounting the many wing-nuts, there are good editors arguing in good faith about NPOV. It costs nothing to acknowledge the ongoing problems with consensus on the talk page. We disagree on the merits. But I ask this not only for the good of the project; also for your standing as one of the sane people in the discussion. I'm only non-controversial on style and prose. and even there, I'm sure the canine who's not Roxy will soon find something wrong there too.

But you, like vzaak, are non-controversial on substance. You ridicule the ridiculous, but extend good faith courtesy to the non-ridiculous. An NPOV tag self-revert could do much good and, in the end, little harm.

Please? David in DC (talk) 18:20, 11 October 2013 (UTC)

Tom Butler spiritualist and Sheldrake supporter
Butler is a well known Sheldrake supporter, pseudoscience promoter and spiritualist here is his blog "etheric studies", see his background. Hilarious stuff. Now read the first link closely, he's now linking to Craig Weiler's blog and supporting Craig's conspiracy theory and see his latest comment yet he pretends to be "neutral" on Wikipedia. Dan skeptic (talk) 22:09, 11 October 2013 (UTC)


 * Yeah, I read 's user page. WP:CIVILITY constrains my first impressions and my assessment of his likely WP:COMPETENCE to contribute effectively. They just keep coming. Barney the barney barney (talk) 22:12, 11 October 2013 (UTC)


 * Threats are not a good way to find consensus.Tom Butler (talk) 22:00, 13 October 2013 (UTC)

Craig Weiler inviting "psychics" to edit the Sheldrake article
Craig Weiler on this paranormal forum has been ecouraging and inviting his friends to join Wikipedia and delete skeptical sources. It's no surprise that has now been editing the John Lorber article (which he says he is going to do in that forum post). He's also been inserting pseudoscience on the Sheldrake article. I mentioned this issue at the Admin board, but no kind of action has been taken (yet). Is Weiler not breaking Wikipedia policies by inviting people to join Wikipedia and delete sources? If he is not breaking Wikipedia policies then I apologize, but I believe he is. Dan skeptic (talk) 13:40, 14 October 2013 (UTC)


 * Don't know whether they're breaking rules or not. I can foresee failing to contribute effectively however. Barney the barney barney (talk) 16:37, 14 October 2013 (UTC)

Edits on you user page
Do you really want these edits on your user page? ? -- TRPoD aka The Red Pen of Doom  22:03, 15 October 2013 (UTC)
 * Two editors were editing your user page. I've reverted their additions which were presumably meant for this talk page, here . IRWolfie- (talk) 15:07, 16 October 2013 (UTC)
 * (i have moved [User:IRWolfie-|IRWolfie-]]'s comments here so there is not a duplicate section name about the same content - hope thats OK) -- TRPoD aka The Red Pen of Doom  15:52, 16 October 2013 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for October 16
Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that you've added some links pointing to disambiguation pages. Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ* Join us at the DPL WikiProject.


 * Claude Farrer (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver)
 * added links pointing to Charles Ross and William Taylor


 * Arthur J. Stanley (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver)
 * added a link pointing to Sportsman


 * Claud Stokes (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver)
 * added a link pointing to DFC

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 11:30, 16 October 2013 (UTC)

Manoj Saxena
Same chap, but article is too different for G4. No objections to trying something else. Peridon (talk) 14:37, 19 October 2013 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for October 23
Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that you've added some links pointing to disambiguation pages. Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ* Join us at the DPL WikiProject.


 * John Herschel the Younger (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver)
 * added links pointing to FRS and FRAS


 * Sir Daniel Brabin (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver)
 * added a link pointing to John Christie

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 11:14, 23 October 2013 (UTC)

AE
Does a user have to be given a sanctions warning before going to WP:AE, or does it apply to generally to ArbCom things like pseudoscience? I created an ANI about a user's behavior but was advised to go to WP:RFC/U, however that has requirements like "at least two editors must have contacted the user". vzaak (talk) 20:10, 23 October 2013 (UTC)

Reviews
Why are there 4 positive reviews and 2 negative? I had considered removing Vernon just for balance (there's no quote from him), but I hadn't imagined adding a positive review. vzaak (talk) 00:12, 24 October 2013 (UTC)


 * Why not? There's no harm in it. Barney the barney barney (talk) 08:51, 24 October 2013 (UTC)

October 2013
Hello, I'm BracketBot. I have automatically detected that [//en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?diff=578529659 your edit] to Rupert Sheldrake may have broken the syntax by modifying 2 "[]"s. If you have, don't worry: just [ edit the page] again to fix it. If I misunderstood what happened, or if you have any questions, you can leave a message on [//en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?action=edit&preload=User:A930913/BBpreload&editintro=User:A930913/BBeditintro&minor=&title=User_talk:A930913&preloadtitle=BracketBot%20–%20&section=new my operator's talk page].
 * List of unpaired brackets remaining on the page:

Thanks, BracketBot (talk) 18:12, 31 October 2013 (UTC)
 * too." although he did note that " a bit too far here and there"

Thanks
Thanks for your note on my talk page. I think I fundamentally agree with your view of Sheldrake, my only difference is trying to say things in a slightly gentler way. Unfortunately, this seems to be taken as a sign of weakness by the Sheldrake fan club, balanced by iron resolve at the other end of the spectrum not to give an inch. I just got frustrated. Dingo1729 (talk) 04:47, 30 October 2013 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for October 30
Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that you've added some links pointing to disambiguation pages. Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ* Join us at the DPL WikiProject.


 * J. Doyle Penrose (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver)
 * added links pointing to Irish, JP and RHA


 * D'Arcy Power (RAF Officer) (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver)
 * added a link pointing to MRCS


 * Karl Leyser (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver)
 * added a link pointing to British

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 14:07, 30 October 2013 (UTC)

Chatt Lecture
This is an automated message from MadmanBot. I have performed a web search with the contents of Chatt Lecture, and it appears to include material copied directly from http://www.jic.ac.uk/corporate/whats-on/named-lectures/chatt.htm.

It is possible that the bot is confused and found similarity where none actually exists. If that is the case, you can remove the tag from the article. The article will be reviewed to determine if there are any copyright issues.

If substantial content is duplicated and it is not public domain or available under a compatible license, it will be deleted. For legal reasons, we cannot accept copyrighted text or images borrowed from other web sites or printed material. You may use such publications as a source of information, but not as a source of sentences. See our copyright policy for further details. (If you own the copyright to the previously published content and wish to donate it, see Donating copyrighted materials for the procedure.) MadmanBot (talk) 11:27, 31 October 2013 (UTC)

Review stubs
I've commented out two of the "X reviewed this" statements with no other info. I think it's pretty unlikely someone will come along and jump into contributing the missing info after seeing them. A mention on the talk page (at least for the archives) and the hidden wikitext in the article should be sufficient effort. Also, showing an incomplete state doesn't send a good message to readers (and the article may be getting too long already). vzaak (talk) 21:36, 31 October 2013 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for November 1
Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that you've added some links pointing to disambiguation pages. Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ* Join us at the DPL WikiProject.


 * Fraser Stoddart (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver)
 * added links pointing to FRS and FRSC


 * Chatt Lecture (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver)
 * added a link pointing to George Whitesides


 * Karl Leyser (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver)
 * added a link pointing to British


 * Rupert Sheldrake (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver)
 * added a link pointing to Theodore Roszak

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 19:52, 1 November 2013 (UTC)

NPOV complaint
You've been named in a complaint here: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Neutral_point_of_view/Noticeboard#Bias_in_the_Rupert_Sheldrake_article Alfonzo Green (talk) 21:15, 4 November 2013 (UTC)


 * Entirely frivolous. Barney the barney barney (talk) 22:27, 4 November 2013 (UTC)

Old links
The user page links to old rulings, but on the user talk there are links to a newer ruling [] -- TRPoD aka The Red Pen of Doom  23:00, 8 November 2013 (UTC)
 * and a follow up shortly thereafter-- TRPoD aka The Red Pen of Doom  23:04, 8 November 2013 (UTC)

old msg from Kukikult moved to own section
Kuki 久喜

Hi, there.

The page itself I thought was quite encyclopedic, there is no mention of the artist being "Good" or "Bad" and the page itself does not contain any references to gigs or shows.

It simply lists works that has been done on a notable source

Just so I can figure it out ? could you please point out what it was that made you go for a speedy deletion  — Preceding unsigned comment added by Kukikult (talk • contribs) 14:53, 4 September 2013 (UTC)

recent msg from Janetwood5 moved to new section
Hi Barney, I just saw your nomination for speedy deletion for my article based on apparently a prior deletion. I have reviewed the prior deletion as you suggested. Please review the new article since the prior deletion issues are no longer present. Thanks for your help! Janetwood5 (talk) 09:45, 8 November 2013 (UTC) Janetwoord5

Disambiguation link notification for November 9
Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that you've added some links pointing to disambiguation pages. Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ* Join us at the DPL WikiProject.


 * Rupert Sheldrake (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver)
 * added links pointing to William McDougall and Mark Edwards


 * Barry Keverne (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver)
 * added a link pointing to FRS


 * Martin Raff (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver)
 * added a link pointing to FRS

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 09:08, 9 November 2013 (UTC)

Sockpuppet
The IP on the Dean Radin is sockpuppet, please see the talk page. If you can help with this please do. Dan skeptic (talk) 16:52, 9 November 2013 (UTC)

Reference Errors on 12 November
Hello, I'm ReferenceBot. I have automatically detected that performed by you may have introduced errors in referencing. as follows: Please check and fix the errors highlighted. If you think this is a false positive, you can [//en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?action=edit&preload=User:A930913/RBpreload&editintro=User:A930913/RBeditintro&minor=&title=User_talk:A930913&preloadtitle=ReferenceBot%20–%20&section=new report it to my operator]. Thanks, ReferenceBot (talk) 01:30, 13 November 2013 (UTC)
 * On the Rupert Sheldrake page, [//en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?diff=581405287 your edit] caused a broken reference name (help) . ([ Fix] | [//en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:Help_desk&action=edit&section=new&preload=User:ReferenceBot/helpform&preloadtitle=Referencing%20errors%20on%20Rupert Sheldrake Ask for help])

Disambiguation link notification for November 16
Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that you've added some links pointing to disambiguation pages. Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ* Join us at the DPL WikiProject.


 * List of Fellows of the Royal Society elected in 1911 (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver)
 * added links pointing to Evelyn Baring and Robert Muir


 * List of Fellows of the Royal Society elected in 1916 (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver)
 * added links pointing to Henry Woods and Alexander McKenzie


 * List of Fellows of the Royal Society elected in 1922 (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver)
 * added links pointing to James Mercer and Arthur Hutchinson


 * List of Fellows of the Royal Society elected in 1923 (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver)
 * added links pointing to William Wilson and Frank Horton


 * List of Fellows of the Royal Society elected in 1930 (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver)
 * added links pointing to John Stephenson and Charles Todd


 * List of Fellows of the Royal Society elected in 1938 (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver)
 * added links pointing to John Jackson and William Brown


 * Charlotte Johnson Wahl (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver)
 * added a link pointing to Leo Johnson


 * Geoffrey Hosking (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver)
 * added a link pointing to FBA


 * List of Fellows of the Royal Society elected in 1912 (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver)
 * added a link pointing to William McDougall


 * List of Fellows of the Royal Society elected in 1918 (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver)
 * added a link pointing to Ernest Gold


 * List of Fellows of the Royal Society elected in 1920 (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver)
 * added a link pointing to Sir Robert Robinson


 * List of Fellows of the Royal Society elected in 1924 (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver)
 * added a link pointing to Alexander Russell


 * List of Fellows of the Royal Society elected in 1932 (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver)
 * added a link pointing to Thomas Smith


 * List of Fellows of the Royal Society elected in 1933 (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver)
 * added a link pointing to Bernard Smith


 * List of Fellows of the Royal Society elected in 1934 (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver)
 * added a link pointing to William Taylor


 * List of Fellows of the Royal Society elected in 1935 (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver)
 * added a link pointing to John Read


 * List of Fellows of the Royal Society elected in 1940 (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver)
 * added a link pointing to Andrew Robertson


 * List of Fellows of the Royal Society elected in 1941 (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver)
 * added a link pointing to Alexander Robertson


 * List of Fellows of the Royal Society elected in 1946 (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver)
 * added a link pointing to Robert Hill


 * Peter Addyman (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver)
 * added a link pointing to FSA


 * Rupert Sheldrake (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver)
 * added a link pointing to Chicks

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 08:56, 16 November 2013 (UTC)

WP:RPP
I shouldn't have accused you of vandalism. To be honest, you might have accidentally duplicated the whole content in WP:RPP. Fortunately, I restored your request. --George Ho (talk) 18:57, 17 November 2013 (UTC)

"Left wing bullshit"
You don't seem to have "Email this user" enabled, so it's hard for me to provide the email address you requested. However, if you google the phrase in this heading, you'll find a moribund blog. The email address you request is in the user info there.

The fact that one kind find me that way is one of the signal achievements of my life. :) David in DC (talk) 21:24, 17 November 2013 (UTC)

Edit warring
A complaint regarding your behavior on the Sheldrake page has been lodged here:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Administrators%27_noticeboard/Edit_warring#User:Barney_the_barney_barney_reported_by_User:Alfonzo_Green_.28Result:_.29

Alfonzo Green (talk) 00:27, 17 November 2013 (UTC)


 * Not edit warring. Please explain the NPOV tag in line with policy, especially WP:FRINGE.  How hard is this for you?  Also note WP:BOOMERANG and in particular WP:ARB/PS which is the funniest case of Boomerang ever, in which  tried to get his bizarre view of mainstream academic thought which he clearly did not understand.  WP:HISTORYREPEATSITSELF. Barney the barney barney (talk) 17:22, 17 November 2013 (UTC)


 * A warning? that's a joke isn't it? --Roxy the dog (resonate) 20:43, 17 November 2013 (UTC)


 * Removing an NPOV template from the Rupert Sheldrake article, although as we're back to a version now that claims he is a "biochemist" - despite not currently doing no biochemistry, I'm not sure.  is trying his best, but is trying to compromise with those who are incapable of contributing effectively.  The thread is closed now anyway.  I have a lovely personal attack warning for not pretending that the AGF ship hadn't sailed weeks ago. Barney the barney barney (talk) 20:49, 17 November 2013 (UTC)
 * Pillar four always applies. At all times.  On all pages.  To all editors, even those that attack you.  Always WP:NICE; stick to the high moral ground.  74.192.84.101 (talk) 17:43, 18 November 2013 (UTC)
 * TRPoD's only edit to "biochemist and botanist" was "biochemist and author". This gives me hope. Please read my final edit summary for the day. Please consider following its suggestion.
 * 24 hours from now, please read this diff and see if you can see your way clear to following those suggestions. David in DC (talk) 20:56, 17 November 2013 (UTC)
 * My preference is for "author on science related issues, [and then into a brief sentence on his background], [and then onto a summary of what morphic resonance is], [and then somehow, onto what the reception of his ideas]. Compromises from this are possible.


 * What I don't think is acceptable is to describe him as a "biochemist" or "botanist" or "plant physiologist" if
 * He's not principally notable for being a "biochemist"/ "botanist"/ "plant physiologist"
 * He's not currently conducting research in these areas
 * or describe him as "scientist" if there is dispute over whether he is conducting science or pseudoscience (or a mixture of both).
 * I really do appreciate what you're trying to do but I think you're off the right path; you have a better understanding than most, and have more patience than I do, and I think we broadly agree.
 * The lead is the key. In the meantime, I'll try to find more reliable pro-Sheldrake sources, it's difficult though.  I've spent literally hours sifting through and sorting sources, and even longer on dealing with those who would be deserving of personal attacks if it were not allowed. Barney the barney barney (talk) 21:10, 17 November 2013 (UTC)
 * The purpose of WP:FRINGE is to not mislead readers. Please look at the forest, not the trees. How stupid would a reader have to be to be misled about who and what RS is with the article in its current state? David in DC (talk) 21:15, 17 November 2013 (UTC)

If your offer is open to me too, I'd appreciate PDFs of the sources you have. My email is ian2[at]knowledge.co.uk and I can handle ZIPs. --Iantresman (talk) 00:51, 18 November 2013 (UTC)

split BLP from FRINGE, without causing POV fork
Hello Barney, I enter your lair with some trepidition. :-)   And apparently at least one spelling-error, but prolly you caught the gist.  Iantresman asked us to not discuss the sheldrake-article-topics on his user-talkpage further, so is it okay to move here temporarily?  If not, we can open Yet Another Section on the article-talkpage... and eventually that ought to be done... but in the meantime, this split-article question might get hammered out faster with just two editors, or if TRPoD is listening, with three.  If you'd rather it be on the article-talkpage, or on my user-talkpage, or just skip it,  that's fine by me.


 * I would support a split only if it can be shown that individuals other than Sheldrake have been working on morphic resonance with reasonable independence from Sheldrake. Until then, MR is simply not notable enough for its own page. Mentions in Doctor Who don't count. Barney the barney barney (talk) 11:02, 11 November 2013 (UTC)

So there are actually four things under discussion here, some of which are Notable enough to get their own article.


 * 1)   RS is a BLP article (mostly maintained by David with luck), which methinks should cover academic credentials, spiritual views, author/lecturer stuff.  Morphic & telepathy mentioned briefly, noted as non-mainstream, reader directed to links covering MG/MGF/MF&MR/PM.
 * 2)   MG is a mainstream-science-theory, around since the 1920s at least.   MGF is a specific subset with mainstream-minority-science-hypothesis status.
 * 3)  RS claims to have generalized MGF into his own Morphic Fields aka MF, where Morphic Resonance aka MR is one specific phenomenon found in the MF-idea.  Suggest MF article, with MR as a section therein.
 * 4)  The fourth thing is Sheldrake's early phytomorphology work aka  PM, published in mainstream places, prior to his turn to The Dark Side.  ;-)

Your stance, correct me if I'm wrong, is that there are not enough reliable sources that significantly discuss MF stuff (to include MR as a subset of MF) in  enough depth? When you say "working-on" you mean publishing-about, correct? 74.192.84.101 (talk) 16:32, 13 November 2013 (UTC)


 * I see no problem here with there being a lair. I do not suffer fools gladly, but if you avoid beeing foolish you'll survive
 * "Working on" basically means sources. This as a start would include serious works referencing "morphic resonance" as a serious research issue, other seriously proposing what MR might or might not be, or indeed practical experiments designed to try to detect MR effects or the MR field.
 * The problem with an article describing the history of "morphic fields" dating back to the 1920s is twofold (1) we are unable to do original research on archives (2) the link between old school MF ideas and Sheldrake's ideas also seems to be WP:OR (although it is fairly obvious OR and we could choose to ignore WP:NOR as impractical). We also need to explain why the idea was quietly dropped from research.  It looks like it's a reasonable topic for a historical research paper, so it may have been written already, if not, it's not yet of academic interest.
 * Finally, assuming the above two presently are negative, there are categorically no BLP problems with the Rupert Sheldrake article. Articles on living people do not have to whitewash well sourced, pointed criticism from senior members of a particular field.  Many of these criticisms are of Sheldrake personally, and therefore I cannot see how you can extract the "philosophising" from the man. Finally note that I am also trying to, but it's really hard to find any sources.  Barney the barney barney (talk) 17:05, 13 November 2013 (UTC)


 * PS - as a bone to you, I have am preparing an article on Jaytee (dog), which I might finish sometime soon-ish. Barney the barney barney (talk) 19:11, 13 November 2013 (UTC)


 * Well, appreciate the bone, I'll toss it to Roxy, they might gnaw it over some. I personally don't think Jaytee is worth a dedicated article, it will be WP:PERMASTUB, and the material belongs in the subsection about Dogs-That-Know.  The question is:  where (in what article) does Dogs-That-Know actually belong?  More on this at the end.  (The lair thing, that was a joke, thanks for taking it well.)  As for being foolish, I'll do my best.  Wait.  As for not being foolish, I'll do my best. :-)    I have no big argument here with your main points, except for one little word.  What is the definition of "serious" research... as opposed to, say, mere journalism?


 * Wikipedia distinguishes between the two types of sources, when it comes to determining what is MainstreamView for some particular field of inquiry (biology / physics / historyOfTextualInterpretationOfTheBible / philosophyOfScience / telepathy). Well-respected-in-their-field-of-inquiry peer-reviewed international-journals get more weight, than just the Bozeman daily, when it comes to determining what the mainstream view is... but *more* does not mean *all* the weight.  Bozeman's fine journalists still qualify for imbuing WP:NOTEWORTHY status, just like Nature.
 * Weight aside, there is zero distinction in terms of capital-letter-Notability.  If some freelance journalist noticed it, and wrote a couple paragraphs about it, and some assistant editor did a quick fact-check to CYA for the newspaper, then the subject of the paragraphs (once a couple-few sources discuss said topic) *is* flat-out wikiNotable.  This is, obviously, different than being true or correct.  Many things that are not even wrong grace the pages of modern churnalism.  Because wikipedia depends on said sources, some of the crap gets into wikipedia, as well.  That's what WP:UNDUE is really for -- to give the objective facts a *shot* at shining through.  We still report what the papers said, however.  Back in the early days of rocketry, somebody in the NYT gave Robert Goddard some crap.
 * The official policy here, barring rare exceptions, is crystal clear: being a Reliable Source has nothing to do with being *true*.  It merely means, peer-reviewed (not counting exceptions like Journal Of Sasquatch Believers), or at least, professional-editorial-board-reviewed (not counting The Onion... finest onionpaper in the world).  By that standard, morphic fields slash morphic resonance qualifies, for a dedicated article, if we editors decide such a thing makes sense.
 * Which is why your insistence on "serious" research as the standard seems mistaken to me. Sure, we can eliminate some sources discussing morphic juices as being unreliable, such as the Noetic Institute perhaps (I don't actually know whether they've been investigated or not but the name sounds a bit odd).  But once they are found unreliable, they stay unreliable.  We cannot say, this BBC report is "unreliable" aka factually wrong, but the rest are fine.  There is a specific jargon-meaning of "Reliable Sources" aka published with some minimal level of fact-checking; we don't pick winners and losers on a sentence by sentence basis, either the BBC is wikiReliable or they ain't, end of story.


 * I think that stuff above is the crux. As for your second point,  we can sometimes cite primary sources like the 1920s papers, even though they are not online necessarily, as long as we do it "with care".  I believe I have a Shedrake interview where he linked his ideas to the older biological stuff; but that's just on Sheldrake's say-so, of course, the 1920s guy is long dead.  But from what I have gleaned, MF is the subquantum juice, MR is how the subquantum juices impact plant-shape, and traditional old 1920s-style  MGF does the rest.  Sheldrake did not change any of the MGF part as far as I know, though maybe his mainstream axion research did somehow; I think he just added MR and MF on top, saying that subquantum juices explain MR&MF, then MGF explains the rest.  I could be wrong here, we'll have to ask Iantresman or Alfonzo.  Anyways, there are two sensible choices methinks, depending on what our decision about Sheldrake-MF versus 1920s-MGF ends up looking like.


 * In one case, we end up with BLP article (including insults aimed *at* Sheldrake personally and directly rather than at specific aspects of his work... e.g. people saying he sensationalizes science and distorts science in the mind of the public for instance... but clearly distinguishing the BLP, from the BLP's ideas, at all times). Elsewhere, we have a morphogenetic field article, covers the 1920s stuff at the top just like now, with a section at the bottom called 'generalization by sheldrake into morphic fields' which covers MF&MR.  And oh, as for why research in spooky "fields" explanation for phytomorphology dried up after WWII... methinks there was this double helix thing, that explained so much it kinda made spooky fields seem, well, pseudo?  :-)
 * Alternatively, case two, we end up with BLP article, MGF article (on "real science"), and MF+MR article (on Sheldrake's... ahem... subquantum juice theory) which links to the BLP and to MGF. I think BLP + MGF + MF&MR is the best scenario, because it separates the bio-page from the science-page from the pseudo-science page.  That is what David's big concern is, same for PhilosophyFellow, same for TheCap'n.  Most of the oxygen of publicity would dissipate, if we can list Sheldrake's highly respectable academic credentials on the BLP-page, with just one paragraph summarizing his pseudo work... and then zip to the MF&MR page for the criticism of his *ideas*.  That in and of itself will stymie the perception that his BLP page is unfairly attacking *him* ... because his ideas deserve attacking, but must be kept distinct from him as a person (he is personally attacked -- as a person -- much less frequently!).  While I agree with you that it is theoretically possible to keep everything proper and neutral in a single huge honking article, I think in practice you have to admit that the current all-crammed-together BLP+Morphic&Maddox+Jaytee&Wiseman+Staring&Randi+Philosophy&TEDx+Gerbic&Coyne article format does not lend itself to productive editing.  :-)


 * Along the same lines, I think the *deep* coverage of Dogs-That-Know should be a section on the page about Telepathy (or animal telepathy perhaps... which would include your Jaytee (dog) work), and that the Staring stuff should be over as a special section of the psychic staring effect page. On his BLP page, we just say, title this, year published that, one journalist said quote "thought-provoking", one scientist said quote "epic unfalsifiable stupidity", see also Animal Telepathy.  That's fair to the BLP, and fair to WP:FRINGE methinks.  Anyways, my wall-of-text alarm has been beeping for some time, so I'll end with a final note, that I *have* seen you doing the heavy lifting with finding sources, both pro and con, totally fair and square, and do appreciate it.  Good stuff, thanks for improving wikipedia. 74.192.84.101 (talk) 20:46, 14 November 2013 (UTC)


 * Your rambling now. We already should have an article on telepathy.  I'm not sure the few Daily Mail articles we have on apparently psychic animals are going to be sufficient reliable sources to enable an article on homo/non-homo psi.  Barney the barney barney (talk) 16:41, 15 November 2013 (UTC)
 * Sorry about the apparent-rambling.  The jaytee-subsection of the telepathy article, sure; that's a minor point.  Again, the fundamental disconnect, is your adjectives.  "Sufficiently reliable".  Wikipedia does not care, and as editors, we cannot care.  "Serious works ... serious research".  Again, wikipedia policy is clear.  We do not get to pick and choose which sources we report.  If the guardian says it, that satisfies WP:NOTEWORTHY, and if some editor, any editor -- whether they suffer from pro-Sheldrake POV or otherwise -- wants the sentence supported by that cite in the article, we cannot elide the sentence nor the cite.  Even when, maybe even especially when, we know the usually-Reliable-Source-newspaper was logically factually scientifically-speaking  wrong.  That's the crux, in a nutshell.  This is not truth-o-pedia.  HTH.  74.192.84.101 (talk) 22:16, 16 November 2013 (UTC)


 * You seem to be under the misconception that Wikipedia reports everything. It doesn't.  In particular, it tends not to report stuff that's clearly WP:BOLLOCKS.  There is an editing process, and the Daily Mail, wonderful institution that it is, is not a serious source. Barney the barney barney (talk) 22:29, 16 November 2013 (UTC)


 * Barney, no, my position is not WP:EVERYTHING, my position is the very first sentence of WP:RS and the very first sentence of WP:NPOV. Look for "all" in both cases.  If a wikiReliable source says something that is logically objectively false, then retracts it later, you can argue against inclusion.  If the tenth issue of the Journal-Of-Sasquatch-Believers publishes some statement, and per WP:FRINGE the *entire* journal and all issues and all sentences therein are no longer seen as wikiReliable, you can exclude.  But that is it.  Finis.  Any other selective-exclusion of Reliably-Sourced-sentences is POV.
 * You are attempting to assert that wikipedia editors are responsible for *deciding* what counts as wikiNotable/ wikiNoteworthy.  You are asserting that wikipedia editors can *decide* which  Reliable Sources to use, and what to  reject.  That is as deep a misunderstanding of wikipedia as one can have; I know, because like you, I also once thought this was  truth-o-pedia.  IT AIN'T.
 * When you/vzaak/trpod/ken eliminate wikiReliable Sources you disagree with, and wikiReliably-Sourced-sentences you disagree with, simply because what they state is untrue, you are engaging in "synthesis of published material that serves to advance a position not advanced by the sources."  See also, lie of omission.  Editor only refers to one-who-uses-a-text-editor; it does not, in any way, refer to one-who-picks-the-sources-they-wish-for-the-reader-to-learn-about.  Wikipedians rely on Reliable Sources for all fact-checking-n-peer-review-purposes; not our own logic, never synthesis, and with luck no WP:IDHT.
 * Wiseman is a serious source... but 'the patterns match' is elided? WP:SkePOV.  Umpteen mainstream-media outlets are serious sources... but 'biologist' is not in the first sentence?  Et cetera, every content-dispute boils down this omission of Reliable (not-necessary-what-they-say-be-actually-True) Sources.   Wikipedians are users of text-editors, not people that decide what is wikiNoteworthy.  The *sources* decide that, and only the sources.  Anything less is POV.  p.s. There is no such thing as WP:ANECDOTE, did you mean something else? 74.192.84.101 (talk) 17:34, 18 November 2013 (UTC)
 * Rambling lectures are not really helpful. Look forward to your WP:ARB/PS sanctions, coming your way soon. Barney the barney barney (talk) 17:47, 18 November 2013 (UTC)
 * Yes, with a heavy heart you will recommend (yet again) that the talkpage be semi-protected, effectively topic-banning me. Are you sure that your constant mention of discretionary sanctions, to all and sundry, is really just a friendly reminder of policy, rather than I-will-ban-you-unless-you-stop-editing?  Alfonzo was wrong to take you to the noticeboard for editwarring when you had done nothing of the sort, sure, but that does not therefore make you exempt from all wrongdoing.  The plain fact is you still do not fully grok pillar four WP:NICE, although you are much improved.
 * As for the main point, the crux of the reason for the battleground: you think that 'editor' means one who decides what sources count as reliable-aka-true.  But as much as we might wish it to be, WP:BOLLOCKS just ain't policy.  It's optional, something to strive for, but not at the expense of core wikipolicy, not if the only way to keep mainspace truthful is to drive away other editors, downplay reliably-sourced materials, and hurt wikipedia by hurting the community-of-editors.  Anyhoo, either you will take my advice, or not.  Appreciate you skimming it; apologies for the lecturing-tone, I'll not bring it up again with you, unless you ask me to specifically.  74.192.84.101 (talk) 14:09, 19 November 2013 (UTC)

Anyways, just to get your position clear on re-splitting the article into BLP + IdeasOfTheBLP. You insist that the pseudophysics-or-at-best-questionable-physics theory of morphic fields, which is a non-mathematical generalization of the mainstream-biology alternative minority theory morphogenetic fields, does not deserve an article. However, in terms of wikiReliable Sources -- as distinct from truly-lowercase-reliable-aka-factual sources -- we have two published books by Sheldrake on the subject, and significant coverage in at least two of his other books, plus serious responses to morphic fields from Sokal, Wiseman, Rose, Shermer, Wolpert, Maddox, Josephson, et cetera. However, you argue against morphic fields having a non-BLP-redirect article, because either the Reliable Sources don't "count" (Sheldrake's non-vanity-press books), or because the responses say morphic-stuff is factually/logically/realistically "wrong". You want serious academic research evidence in favor of morphic fields, before you will agree wikiNotability exists. Is this the case? 74.192.84.101 (talk) 14:09, 19 November 2013 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for November 25
Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Valerie Pearl, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Christopher Hill (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver). Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ* Join us at the DPL WikiProject.

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 08:57, 25 November 2013 (UTC)

Pseudoscience sanctions notice
--Bbb23 (talk) 00:56, 18 November 2013 (UTC)


 * Thanks for this that's really useful. Ban the editor who has always edited in line with procedure and leave the trolls alone. Why should I be placed on notice when the only basic policy I might have broken is the no personal attacks rule, but this is very hard to follow when editors are clearly being either (1) disingenous or (2) stupid or (3) both, and wasting everyone's time.  ?  Barney the barney barney (talk) 10:20, 18 November 2013 (UTC)


 * Bravo. --Roxy the dog (resonate) 10:25, 18 November 2013 (UTC)
 * This is just standardized-template-spam, a form-letter from authoritah. WP:TEMPLAR applies, of course.  But hey, David got the same notice, he's been here forever; anybody named in Alfonzo's complaint did.  You have been heroically avoiding NPA recently, Barney, for which I am deeply appreciative.  :-)    It gets easier to follow pillar four with time, but I'll fully admit it never really feels natural.  And on that point... vague assertions that  Some Editors are "stupid", will get you in hot water nearly as fast as specifically calling somebody that.  Suggest you redact that triplet of accusations.  WP:IMAGINE applies, as does repetitive re-application of WP:AGF to every new day.  Everybody makes mistakes.  But hey, credit where credit is due:  you are no longer assuming malice, right?  That's progress. Pretty soon, you'll no longer be assuming stupidity, and start to follow WP:NOCLUE as standard operating procedure.  In any case, suggest treading lightly around Bbb, they have little patience, and a *very* firm grasp of policy.  In the hope, that this will be helpful, I hereby commit this paragraph to the interwebs.  Sorry if you decide it was a waste of time, after reading it; not as sorry, if you skip it, however.  ;-)    &mdash;74.192.84.101 (talk) 17:54, 18 November 2013 (UTC)
 * Note Barney, this is not a ban, it is just the formal notice that will allow expedited admin processes in the future. And the notices were pretty much to everyone editing the article/talk page as far as I can see. (except for User talk:Veryscarymary who appears got a miss) -- TRPoD aka The Red Pen of Doom  18:00, 18 November 2013 (UTC)
 * I feel small and insignificant now. --Roxy the dog (resonate) 20:48, 18 November 2013 (UTC)
 * TRPoD has it about right. I went back in the history of the article only a few days (lots of edits in those few days). Veryscarymary was a little further back than I went. As for Roxy the dog, they were even further back. And I didn't notify anyone if they were editing only the talk page during that time span.--Bbb23 (talk) 00:11, 19 November 2013 (UTC)
 * I'm working on more AE cases, but given the cumbersome format it's going to take some time to do them all. I haven't followed this at length so if there's someone you think I'm missing, feel free to point them out. Mangoe (talk) 12:35, 19 November 2013 (UTC)
 * ...and at this point I'm rethinking bothering at all. I have a life to live, rather than digging through all this crap trying to pile up enough diffs to make some bureaucrat responsive. Mangoe (talk) 20:09, 19 November 2013 (UTC)
 * You and I don't always see eye to eye, Barney the barney barney, but I don't like the idea of anyone getting arbitrary threats. I'm more than a little uncomfortable with the way banning/blocking warnings are being tossed around.  I received the equivalent of a "we don't like yer kind 'round here" warning about the Sheldrake page myself, so you have my sympathies. The Cap&#39;n (talk) 06:15, 25 November 2013 (UTC)


 * This won't go anywhere, you're one of the few editors on here speaking for reason, science and rationality. Don't worry, only the ones who deserve it are those who will get the boot.  — Preceding unsigned comment added by 134.139.22.141 (talk) 17:35, 25 November 2013 (UTC)

Rose v Sheldrake
With the recent huge edits to this section, the complications surrounding it have now begun. If I may be excused for quoting my earlier comment: I've argued in the past that Wikipedia editors should not be jumping into the middle of a scientific debate for which there are only primary sources. For example one WP user is absolutely convinced that Richard Wiseman is disingenuous via a misinterpretation of primary sources. Wikipedia can report conclusions of scientific papers, i.e. the interpretations of their authors, but shouldn't wade into the muck without the use of secondary sources. The lack of secondary sources also indicates the relative unimportance.

Basically I foresee a never-ending back and forth regarding interpretation in the Rose v Sheldrake section. I realize it's hard to let go of whole sections that you wrote yourself, but given the above reasons and surrounding problems, plus the lengthiness of the article, it seems to me that axing it the easiest thing. vzaak (talk) 22:47, 26 November 2013 (UTC)


 * I disagree. Rose gives a very eloquent and perceptive discussion of Sheldrake's work.  Yes, there is a problem with Rose's ultimate conclusion; he concludes the is hypothesis is disconfirmed but only after saying he doesn't think it is falsifiable.  He should have been clearer and said that in this instance, this particular hypothesis was disconfirmed, but this didn't falsify the whole of Sheldrake's ideas, and that further research would be necessary to confirm any of Sheldrake's ideas, which indicating that further research doesn't look fruitful.   I don't think you can include just half of the story - i.e. Roses's original comments in The Guardian, which clearly allude to Sheldrake not testing his hypothesis, despite the generous offer.  So you've got to include the whole story, not just a bit of it.  And we can't exclude Rose FFS.  He has had a proper academic career - he knows what he's talking about. Barney the barney barney (talk) 10:09, 27 November 2013 (UTC)


 * Yes the Rose material is interesting, as long as Sheldrake supporters don't constantly delete it. My concern is more practical, in that primary sources lend themselves to abuse by predetermined conclusions, like the claim that Wiseman is disingenuous. And another case of interpretation has recently been added about the rats, which needs to be fixed, since the last Agar/Drummond paper concludes,
 * "Statistical analysis of the data indicates that the ‘condition’ of the rat markedly affects its speed of learning, and that progressive changes in learning-rate, over a succession of generations, are in reality correlated with the health of the laboratory colony, which is subject to periods of decline and recovery."


 * vzaak (talk) 10:54, 27 November 2013 (UTC)

Arbitration Request Notification
You are involved in a recently filed request for arbitration. Please review the request at Arbitration/Requests and, if you wish to do so, enter your statement and any other material you wish to submit to the Arbitration Committee. Additionally, the following resources may be of use—
 * Arbitration/Requests;
 * Arbitration guide.

Thanks, — Preceding unsigned comment added by Askahrc (talk • contribs) 20:14, 29 November 2013 (UTC)

November 2013
Hello, I'm BracketBot. I have automatically detected that [//en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?diff=583813795 your edit] to Emma Darwin: A Century of Family Letters may have broken the syntax by modifying 2 "[]"s. If you have, don't worry: just [ edit the page] again to fix it. If I misunderstood what happened, or if you have any questions, you can leave a message on [//en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?action=edit&preload=User:A930913/BBpreload&editintro=User:A930913/BBeditintro&minor=&title=User_talk:A930913&preloadtitle=BracketBot%20–%20&section=new my operator's talk page].
 * List of unpaired brackets remaining on the page:

Thanks, BracketBot (talk) 18:39, 29 November 2013 (UTC)
 * * Catherine Allen (1765-1830) aunt, known as Kitty; second wife of Sir James Mackintosh
 * * John Wedgwood (horticulturalist)| (1766—1844), uncle,  married Jane Allen.

Hello, I'm BracketBot. I have automatically detected that [//en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?diff=583902162 your edit] to George Lort Phillips may have broken the syntax by modifying 1 "[]"s. If you have, don't worry: just [ edit the page] again to fix it. If I misunderstood what happened, or if you have any questions, you can leave a message on [//en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?action=edit&preload=User:A930913/BBpreload&editintro=User:A930913/BBeditintro&minor=&title=User_talk:A930913&preloadtitle=BracketBot%20–%20&section=new my operator's talk page].
 * List of unpaired brackets remaining on the page:

Thanks, BracketBot (talk) 12:40, 30 November 2013 (UTC)
 * University|Cambridge]] . He was [Deputy Lieutenant]  of Pembrokeshire in 1835 From the LONDON GAZETTE, Friday, July 31. War-Office, July 31. (

Disambiguation link notification for December 2
Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that you've added some links pointing to disambiguation pages. Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ* Join us at the DPL WikiProject.


 * Cyril Chantler (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver)
 * added a link pointing to FRCP


 * Emma Darwin: A Century of Family Letters (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver)
 * added a link pointing to John Wedgwood


 * George Lort Phillips (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver)
 * added a link pointing to Nash

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 08:56, 2 December 2013 (UTC)

Request for arbitration rejected
This is a courtesy notice to inform you that a request for arbitration, which named you as a party, has been. The arbitrators felt that the already imposed discretionary sanctions were adequate to deal with current issues. Failure by users to edit constructively or comply with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines should be brought up at the arbitration enforcement noticeboard. Please see for further potential suggestions on moving forward.

For the Arbitration Committee, Callanecc (talk • contribs • logs) 01:53, 5 December 2013 (UTC)


 * Thanks . Barney the barney barney (talk) 12:15, 5 December 2013 (UTC)

Speedy deletion nomination of Charles Hulme


A tag has been placed on Charles Hulme requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section A7 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because the article appears to be about a person or group of people, but it does not indicate how or why the subject is important or significant: that is, why an article about that subject should be included in an encyclopedia. Under the criteria for speedy deletion, such articles may be deleted at any time. Please read more about what is generally accepted as notable.

If you think this page should not be deleted for this reason, you may contest the nomination by visiting the page and clicking the button labelled "Click here to contest this speedy deletion". This will give you the opportunity to explain why you believe the page should not be deleted. However, be aware that once a page is tagged for speedy deletion, it may be removed without delay. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag from the page yourself, but do not hesitate to add information in line with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. If the page is deleted, and you wish to retrieve the deleted material for future reference or improvement, you can place a request here. &mdash;Darkwind (talk) 22:04, 5 December 2013 (UTC)

Thanks. It is, to be fair, a pretty pointless nomination, as he clearly meets WP:PROF, despite the inaccurate assessments of and. Barney the barney barney (talk) 22:08, 5 December 2013 (UTC)


 * Nothing currently in the article indicates that he meets WP:PROF. Which criterion does he meet?  As it stands, this is a crystal clear A7 situation, because nothing in the article indicates why this person is significant compared to any other professor. &mdash;Darkwind (talk) 22:12, 5 December 2013 (UTC)


 * I know. I'm sorry, it's difficult to patrol new pages.  And I'm in a bit of a silly mood and likely to twinkle ostriches.  He's in Who's Who though which is pretty much gold plated. There's also a bit more if you google it.  Note that a professor in the UK is more prestigious than a prof in the US too.  I think I do have a clue. Barney the barney barney (talk) 22:18, 5 December 2013 (UTC)

chair
If he's chair, you should put that and a source for your information in the lead section of the article. You might want to gather sources and use the article wizard to guide you through the creation process. Dloh cierekim  22:21, 5 December 2013 (UTC)


 * More of a sofa really. Barney the barney barney (talk) 22:24, 5 December 2013 (UTC)

Edit warring
A complaint against you has been filed here: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Administrators%27_noticeboard/Edit_warring#User:Barney_the_barney_barney_reported_by_User:Alfonzo_Green_.28Result:_.29. Alfonzo Green (talk) 02:52, 1 December 2013 (UTC)

You have been blocked from editing for a period of 24 hours for your disruption caused by edit warring and violation of the three-revert rule. During a dispute, you should first try to discuss controversial changes and seek consensus. If that proves unsuccessful you are encouraged to seek dispute resolution, and in some cases it may be appropriate to request page protection. If you would like to be unblocked, you may appeal this block by adding the text below this notice, but you should read the guide to appealing blocks first. Mark Arsten (talk) 02:55, 1 December 2013 (UTC)


 * I couldn't believe this and had to check. I've learned that reverting any material, not just the same material, counts towards the 3RR bright line thing.  In my naivete, I didn't know this before.  It's a damn shame though, particularly as the edits concerned were removing woolly thinking.  --Roxy the dog (resonate) 05:16, 1 December 2013 (UTC)


 * Thanks - made a mistake.  Thought I'd only reverted  3 times, but being a sneaky little sod he had reverted earlier attempts to whitewash this article.  Of course if admins had pulled their collective fingers out and enforced WP:ARB/PS on  and his fellow anti-Wikipedia editors, this wouldn't have been a problem would it? Barney the barney barney (talk) 10:08, 1 December 2013 (UTC)


 * Also, thanks to . Barney the barney barney (talk) 10:11, 1 December 2013 (UTC)
 * And not forgetting . Barney the barney barney (talk) 10:20, 1 December 2013 (UTC)


 * And (who's been hounded off by the inability of admins to extract digit as well), and  who also wants them to extract digit and  who having told the pro-Sheldrake SPA editors "don't be so stupid as to try to claim that this isn't fringe"...- and they promptly did just that.  WP:AE is required I'm afraid, starting with the SPAs. Barney the barney barney (talk) 20:28, 1 December 2013 (UTC)

Barney, my attempt to persuade Mark Arsten to unblock you has come to nothing. I have a question for you; do you know if Red Pen is really gone for good? 76.107.171.90 (talk) 21:20, 1 December 2013 (UTC)


 * Thanks 76 (who is not 74). Don't worry about me being blocked.  I have no idea whether  has done an, although I could try to email him.  There is quite a high casualty rate amongst editors trying to enforce WP:FRINGE.  It is very difficult to reach consensus with people who are simply not competent enough to edit.  And the powers that be simply aren't interested in enforcing WP:FRINGE, but rather take the view that there are two sides in every dispute equally wrong, when related to "fringe" issues this simply isn't the case.  Barney the barney barney (talk) 21:36, 1 December 2013 (UTC)
 * FYI, I have not been editing due to a holiday and computer issues. The holiday is over, but the computer issues remain so I will probably not be very active till those get worked out. -- TRPoD aka The Red Pen of Doom  17:40, 2 December 2013 (UTC)
 * I’m 76 damn it! If I was 74 I would have written at least 8000 words of completely incoherent gibberish.


 * Seriously though, I find the current situation quite disconcerting. Historically the pro-Wikipedia editors are supposed to win because the rules favor them.  However if the administrators won’t enforce the rules then the pro-Wikipedia editors might as well not have the rules on their side at all.  Are you really going to take Alfonzo to WP:AE?  And do you need any help?  76.107.171.90 (talk) 21:56, 1 December 2013 (UTC)


 * Not going to discuss strategy publicly as people are watching. Log in and email me. Barney the barney barney (talk) 22:02, 1 December 2013 (UTC)


 * Sorry Barney, but the whole “editing from an IP thing” is a matter of personal philosophy. It’s my own way of saying “consider my words, not my reputation”.  I’ll try to figure out if there’s anything I can do non-collaboratively instead.  76.107.171.90 (talk) 22:49, 1 December 2013 (UTC)
 * You don't need to edit logged in, you just need to drop me an email. Barney the barney barney (talk) 22:51, 1 December 2013 (UTC)


 * It has taken me this long to figure out some of what is happening. I'm changing my thinking from 3RR to 3EE from now on.  I'm going to try to get my email working, so don't do anything drastic like has been going on elsewhere.  Thank you.  --Roxy the dog (resonate) 09:17, 2 December 2013 (UTC)

So, I started compiling a list of diffs to be used against Alfonzo and BlarneyBallocks in a WP:AE when I had second thoughts. In looking over all the incidents associated with Sheldrake I’ve noticed that any effort to improve the article is a fight against fringe pushing retards AND administrators. I’ve also noticed that a number of articles have been converted into pro-fringe propaganda and have stayed that way. If Sheldrake’s merry morons want to pack his article full of bullshit then perhaps we should let them. After all, the internet is full of misinformation, but obvious misinformation is the least dangerous kind. If the Sheldrake article can’t be true, then it’s probably best that it be glaringly false so that it won’t deceive anyone. I think I’m done following the Sheldrake article. 76.107.171.90 (talk) 16:02, 6 December 2013 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for December 9
Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that you've added some links pointing to disambiguation pages. Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ* Join us at the DPL WikiProject.


 * Peter Sleight (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver)
 * added a link pointing to FRCP


 * Sir Charles Price (MP) (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver)
 * added a link pointing to DL


 * Steven Rose (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver)
 * added a link pointing to Hilary Rose

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 08:54, 9 December 2013 (UTC)

Proposed deletion of List of Fellows of the Royal Society elected in 1966


The article List of Fellows of the Royal Society elected in 1966 has been proposed for deletion&#32; because of the following concern:
 * Pure Listcruft

While all constructive 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 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 will stop the proposed deletion process, but other deletion processes exist. In particular, the speedy deletion process can result in deletion without discussion, and articles for deletion allows discussion to reach consensus for deletion. JMHamo (talk) 23:17, 10 December 2013 (UTC)

Nomination of List of Fellows of the Royal Society elected in 1966 for deletion
A discussion is taking place as to whether the article List of Fellows of the Royal Society elected in 1966 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 Articles for deletion/List of Fellows of the Royal Society elected in 1966 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 high-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 notice from the top of the article. JMHamo (talk) 00:30, 11 December 2013 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for December 16
Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that you've added some links pointing to disambiguation pages. Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ* Join us at the DPL WikiProject.


 * Arthur J. Stanley (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver)
 * added links pointing to Charles Ross and William Taylor


 * List of Fellows of the Royal Society elected in 1953 (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver)
 * added links pointing to John Barker and Thomas Wallace


 * List of Fellows of the Royal Society elected in 1959 (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver)
 * added links pointing to Robert Spence and Ann Bishop


 * List of Fellows of the Royal Society elected in 1966 (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver)
 * added links pointing to John Sutton and Harry Harris


 * Anita Gregory (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver)
 * added a link pointing to British


 * Clement Mundle (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver)
 * added a link pointing to Scottish


 * List of Fellows of the Royal Society elected in 1947 (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver)
 * added a link pointing to John Hutchinson


 * List of Fellows of the Royal Society elected in 1952 (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver)
 * added a link pointing to Harry Jones


 * List of Fellows of the Royal Society elected in 1955 (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver)
 * added a link pointing to Dan Lewis


 * List of Fellows of the Royal Society elected in 1956 (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver)
 * added a link pointing to Robert Brown


 * List of Fellows of the Royal Society elected in 1962 (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver)
 * added a link pointing to William Cochran


 * List of Fellows of the Royal Society elected in 1964 (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver)
 * added a link pointing to William Hayes


 * List of Fellows of the Royal Society elected in 1965 (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver)
 * added a link pointing to Hans Kronberger


 * List of Fellows of the Royal Society elected in 1968 (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver)
 * added a link pointing to David Rees

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 08:57, 16 December 2013 (UTC)

Arbitration enforcement warning: Pseudoscience
In particular, please stop casting aspersions of misconduct against others, see my comment in the recent AE thread.  Sandstein  16:30, 17 December 2013 (UTC)


 * Thanks - I'll know not to cast any more dispersions against editors. Barney the barney barney (talk) 16:33, 17 December 2013 (UTC)


 * Aspersions, not dispersions... but thanks for your understanding.  Sandstein   16:42, 17 December 2013 (UTC)

David in DC
Well, what can I say? One who falsely accuses others of being bullies is obviously a bully themselves. I think David owes you and Red Pen an apology, and I’m clearly not afraid to express that sentiment. 76.107.171.90 (talk) 21:48, 17 December 2013 (UTC)

Frederic Carpenter Skey
This is an automated message from MadmanBot. I have performed a web search with the contents of Frederic Carpenter Skey, and it appears to include material copied directly from http://www.oxforddnb.com/templates/article.jsp?articleid=25674&back=.

It is possible that the bot is confused and found similarity where none actually exists. If that is the case, you can remove the tag from the article. The article will be reviewed to determine if there are any copyright issues.

If substantial content is duplicated and it is not public domain or available under a compatible license, it will be deleted. For legal reasons, we cannot accept copyrighted text or images borrowed from other web sites or printed material. You may use such publications as a source of information, but not as a source of sentences. See our copyright policy for further details. (If you own the copyright to the previously published content and wish to donate it, see Donating copyrighted materials for the procedure.) MadmanBot (talk) 11:57, 18 December 2013 (UTC)

December 2013
The Fort Campbell Children's Theatre is as noteworthy as any other children's theatre in Wikipedia. It was part of the Morale Welfare program of the Army at Fort Campbell and cites the history of that organization. It may not be as important as Fort Campbell itself, but is a part of its history. There is no reason to delete it as being not noteworthy. Hairhorse (talk) 22:21, 9 December 2013 (UTC)

Thanks a bunch for deleting Billy St. John for being not noteworthy. I indicated that the article was just a draft and did not have a chance to finish before your nubile fingers deleted it. BSJ has published over 50 plays which have been produced in all 50 states and many other countries. I will finish the project. Knock yourself out. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Hairhorse (talk • contribs) 22:02, 8 December 2013 (UTC) sorry, forgot to sign. Hairhorse (talk) 22:16, 9 December 2013 (UTC)

Hello, I'm BracketBot. I have automatically detected that [//en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?diff=586932875 your edit] to Norfolk Yeomanry may have broken the syntax by modifying 1 ""s. If you have, don't worry: just [ edit the page] again to fix it. If I misunderstood what happened, or if you have any questions, you can leave a message on [//en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?action=edit&preload=User:A930913/BBpreload&editintro=User:A930913/BBeditintro&minor=&title=User_talk:A930913&preloadtitle=BracketBot%20–%20&section=new my operator's talk page].
 * List of unpaired brackets remaining on the page:

Thanks, BracketBot (talk) 10:57, 20 December 2013 (UTC)
 * Barclay]] (1901-1913) -?

gracias for your post to David
"understand that WP:FRINGE should apply to this page"

We agree. It should. For scientific claims. As opposed to, say, claims like "Sheldrake has two kids", which is methinks absolutely *not* subject to WP:FRINGE restrictions.

But does it apply to Sheldrake's brief time with Sufism, a topic which is not highly-respected in the top quintile of serious academic really scientific publications? Or instead, *just* to phytomorphology, quantum physics qua quantum physics, and similar scientific fields of inquiry? The reason that creation science is FRINGE, and that Theories of Muhammad in the Bible is not fringe, is because one is making scientific claims, whereas the other is making theological claims, and attempting to editorialize by dubbing the latter 'pseudoarchaeology' so as to delete otherwise-perfectly-Reliable-Sourced material and keep only *really* lowercase-reliable sources, does not fly.

That is where we disagree methinks. WP:FRINGE does not apply to the man's religion, and WP:MEDRS does not apply to his Reliably-Sourced job title (contrast with lowercase-reliability which is totally unrelated). Anyhoo, methink you may have heard this before ... although these metaphors are new. Main point I dropped by to mention was, thanks for leaving David a nice note. He's very frustrated right now, as most everybody is. I wish arbcom had taken the case, instead of kicking the can down the road, but whatever. David was especially unhappy with TRPoD, and of course TRPoD is especially unhappy with *me* because they value concise edits so highly. But it was not TRPoD's fault that David left, they were just the straw to David's camel, and if you don't mind, please leave TRPoD a nice note in my stead. Or not, WP:REQUIRED applies as usual. :-)  Thanks, talk to you later. 74.192.84.101 (talk) 17:51, 17 December 2013 (UTC)


 * While, we're going rambling off topic, my opinion is that the religion articles should describe accepted objective scholarly work in this area, mainly by sociologists of science, and historians. No doubt that this will upset some people who hold religious beliefs not supported by evidence.  Those who hold such beliefs tend to be remarkably ignorant about their providence (edit:) and remarkably certain of their correctness .  However, this is a biography of a person who claims to be a scientist.  I sense 's frustration, which is entirely understandable when people repeatedly (a) won't listen (b) try to weasel out of policy.  My point to, is the vast uncrossable gulf between Sheldrake's fans, and the consensus formers, is actually his views are broadly within the consensus formers, and then  shouldn't be including them within the anti-WP:FRINGE, anti-Wikipedia editors.  It's those anti-Wikipedia editors which cause so much frustration for good editors when the admins refuse to pull their fingers out of their collective arses and actually deal with it.  The German Wikipedia approach needs considering.  If we were on the German Wikipedia we wouldn't be having this conversation because in true Germanic tradition they shoot first and ask questions later, and kill the anti-Wikipedia editors before they have a chance to breed. Barney the barney barney (talk) 18:59, 17 December 2013 (UTC)
 * I disagree about the religion-thing (the FTN regulars are split 50/50 on the question... but most of wikipedia is against letting serious mainstream academic professional scientists wipe all on-wiki religion except for debunking-thereof). I of course disagree that enWiki should be deWiki, for obvious reasons, and am fighting as hard as I can to keep it from happening.  WP:FLAGGED has gone from 0.01% to 0.02% of mainspace during 2013, and is accelerating, so I better hurry up.  In general though, while I wish you would stop lashing out and calling everybody who annoys you "anti-wikipedia", I agree 100% with your assessment of the cause of the frustration.  It is the sides.  You are extremely good at sourcing, and that is mostly because of your passion for your side.  Iantresman is also good at sourcing, for the same reason (passion for his side).  WP:NICE is supposed to keep you two from frustration... but more importantly, NPOV is *supposed* to mean that you both have your say -- strictly via the WP:RS you can find -- in mainspace.  WP:FRINGE is a huge win for the SkePOV:  it allows elimination of Journal-of-Sasquatch-Believers.
 * Trouble is, you and jps and the other FTN regulars are trying to push too damn far, and use WP:FRINGE as an excuse for deletion of the BBC, and psychologyToday, and so on. If allowed to stand, sooner or later all of wikipedia would be like that.  "Jesus is a totally made-up fictional character, with miraculous powers, almost exactly like Obi Wan Kenobi."  But long before that point ever came, http://wikipedia.org server-farm will have been taken offline.  Gotta draw a line in the sand:   medical &  hard-science claims, only.  This is not the right historical moment for the truimph of rationalism, and wikipedia has to reflect the shoddy state of affairs in the now, it cannot be the vehicle for driving-by-cudgel the world into a new age of enlightenment.  WP:CGTW is something I just found today.  But if that's not black enough, you should try Bishzilla's masterpiece, WP:OGTW, which seems written specially for little ol' moi.  Hope this helps, thanks for improving wikipedia, and find some off-wiki outlet for your frustrations dammit so you can keep improving it.  :-)    Sandstein is a redacted  very strict yet discerning person, but they're usually correct... speaking of which, I have to go apologize over there, for posting my 1800 words screed at AE, which they promptly and correctly deleted... such are the trials of the wikiverse.  Talk to you later. &mdash; 74.192.84.101 (talk) 07:36, 20 December 2013 (UTC)


 * You know what, 74. I can't fix Wikipedia all by myself.  I am not a Biblical scholar, it simply isn't my area of expertise, and although I have some interest in it, and I suggest probably a better general knowledge and understanding than many Christians.  Many of the Biblical scholars of course, if religious, are intelligent enough to have a philosophical-based belief system that doesn't prevent them from objective reasoning.  However, for Wikipedia editing on this subject, I personally have no interest.  Maybe I should get myself a copy of the Oxford Annotated Bible, but WP:YOUCANTDOITALLYOURSELF. What I have tried to do is to fix the Rupert Sheldrake article.  It is but a small part of the big picture.  If every diligent editor fixed a small part, then the Wikipedia world would be a better place.  Yes, I am good at sourcing.  It isn't rocket science though.  You just need access to the right resources, hidden behind paywalls that can be got behind by using a library card, or phone a friend, and by being systematic. Barney the barney barney (talk) 11:41, 20 December 2013 (UTC)

Monica Larner AfD
Well, at least it makes me feel a little better to know I wasn't the only one annoyed by the way it was closed. Warm regards. Msnicki (talk) 00:01, 21 December 2013 (UTC)

Sir Edward Riley
I don't see any reason to include "Sir" in the article title - and can't see anything in WP:NCPEER to justify it - so have moved him to the plain name. Did you have a particular reason? Pam D  23:13, 21 December 2013 (UTC)


 * It is part of his name, it is not a title like "Dr" or "Mr" or "Professor". Barney the barney barney (talk) 23:15, 21 December 2013 (UTC)

Ref yr recent msg: if it is a page with just one line, that was a mistake: I meant Show Preview, but Fat Fingers hit Save instead. Am engaged in writing article now, so delete one-line page as an error, so long as it doesn't compromise 'the real' entry that I'm still in the middle of doing, complete with refs., etc. Protozoon (talk) 00:22, 22 December 2013 (UTC) Sorry, re-read yr. msg.: Do not delete, as I am still actively writing. The save was premature & error: check back in 1 hour and review for me! Protozoon (talk) 00:25, 22 December 2013 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for December 23
Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that you've added some links pointing to disambiguation pages. Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ* Join us at the DPL WikiProject.


 * Anthony Buxton (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver)
 * added links pointing to DL, JP, DSO and Edward North Buxton


 * H.A. Barclay (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver)
 * added links pointing to TD, DL, JP and CVO


 * Edward Ridley (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver)
 * added links pointing to PC, KC and Vanity Fair


 * Humphrey Barclay (reverend) (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver)
 * added links pointing to CVO and Padre


 * St Mary's Church, Downe (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver)
 * added links pointing to Unitarian and St Mary the Virgin


 * Carlos Blacker (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver)
 * added a link pointing to FRCP


 * Frederic Carpenter Skey (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver)
 * added a link pointing to John Abernethy


 * James Allen Harker (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver)
 * added a link pointing to FLS


 * Lizzie Allen Harker (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver)
 * added a link pointing to Lizzie Watson


 * Marlborough Pryor (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver)
 * added a link pointing to Savant


 * Maurice Barclay (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver)
 * added a link pointing to Edward Barclay


 * Royal College of Surgeons of England (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver)
 * added a link pointing to Edward Stanley


 * Sir Charles Tennyson (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver)
 * added a link pointing to CMG

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 08:55, 23 December 2013 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for December 30
Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that you've added some links pointing to disambiguation pages. Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ* Join us at the DPL WikiProject.


 * Francis Hamilton Wedgwood (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver)
 * added links pointing to Euston, DL and JP


 * Horace Roome (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver)
 * added links pointing to DL, CB and KCIE


 * List of Fellows of the Royal Society elected in 1973 (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver)
 * added links pointing to Anthony Kelly, Alan Baker and Neil Bartlett


 * Sir Robert Pigot, 7th Baronet (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver)
 * added links pointing to DL, CB and RM


 * List of Fellows of the Royal Society elected in 1972 (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver)
 * added links pointing to George Bond and Victor Gold


 * Sir Edward Packe (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver)
 * added links pointing to DL and JP


 * Geoffrey Tindal-Carill-Worsley (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver)
 * added a link pointing to CB


 * List of Fellows of the Royal Society elected in 1974 (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver)
 * added a link pointing to Jack Halpern


 * List of Masters of Fitzwilliam College, Cambridge (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver)
 * added a link pointing to Gordon Cameron


 * Robert Pryor (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver)
 * added a link pointing to Samuel Hoare


 * Sir Arthur Huddleston (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver)
 * added a link pointing to CMG


 * Sir Robert Pigot, 6th Baronet (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver)
 * added a link pointing to DSO


 * W.W. Grave (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver)
 * added a link pointing to CMG


 * Walter Marlborough Pryor (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver)
 * added a link pointing to William Pryor

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 08:54, 30 December 2013 (UTC)

Walter Long
I see you made [|an edit] regarding his life span. Do you have a source, so i (or you) can add it into the article? Thanks.Ujkrieger (talk) 20:37, 30 December 2013 (UTC)


 * 1858, St. George Hanover Square, London seems to be the overwhelming favourite. Barney the barney barney (talk) 22:31, 30 December 2013 (UTC)

Disingenuous
Considering your past comments to me, I consider your "Thank you" posts disingenuous. Please find a different way to amuse yourself. Tom Butler (talk) 17:37, 30 December 2013 (UTC)


 * Is there a year-end surge in unpleasantness? It's everywhere!  But who knew that even saying thank you would make anyone angry enough to complain on your talk page.  What's next?  Say thanks again and get templated with a stop sign?  What happens if you barnstar them?  Msnicki (talk) 19:01, 30 December 2013 (UTC)

you have to remember that Tom thinks differently to most of the rest of us. --Roxy the dog (resonate) 19:06, 30 December 2013 (UTC)


 * Barney,the you are misusing the "Thank you" tool to harass me. Now you have followed the unwise advice of editors who have nothing to lose here and did it again. You have already established a pattern of this in the derisive tone you have used with me in the past. If it is your intention to continue to poke at me, I will have no choice but to as for help with your Harassment of me. Tom Butler (talk) 22:39, 30 December 2013 (UTC)


 * Hi - tell you what, ask for harassment and I'll raise you a topic ban on your favourite/only subject. Barney the barney barney (talk) 22:41, 30 December 2013 (UTC)


 * Fair enough. Go for the topic ban if you can. It will give me a good opportunity to seek protection from your childish behavior. Tom Butler (talk) 22:58, 30 December 2013 (UTC)


 * I'd tend to agree - if you're not being disruptive, and you seem to be valiantly self-restraining presently (albeit moaning while doing it), then I shouldn't really have any reason to talk to the best qualified (BEng no less and don't forget to question the credentials of others ), most important aetherologist in the world ( self-appointed ). Barney the barney barney (talk) 23:11, 30 December 2013 (UTC)


 * Okay, let's try to reset this before we waste more time. Every time you use the "Thank you" tool, I have to go and try to figure out why. After a while, it is just irritating. At the same time, I understand you think I am on the wrong side of issues, and evidently that you can neutralize me by exposing my potential conflict of interest. You already know what I think of your side, so perhaps we are even.


 * Let me propose a truce by offering you a year membership in the association I co-direct. We publish a quarterly NewsJournal that you may find entertaining, at least. My idea is that you will learn a little about a different perspective at no risk to you, and at the same time, see that I am just a reporter.


 * If you are interested, either send me an email or contact me via our contact page. All I need is an email address, as the NewsJournal will come to you via PDF file. Tom Butler (talk) 01:16, 31 December 2013 (UTC)

Sheldrake
Not sure if you noticed, but your revert here was only three minutes over 24 hours, so it still counts as a 1RR violation. There is no basis for claiming an exemption there either, so you should self-revert.-- The Devil's Advocate tlk. cntrb. 22:17, 22 December 2013 (UTC)
 * Indeed you should, I was just coming here to say the same thing. Callanecc (talk • contribs • logs) 23:07, 22 December 2013 (UTC)


 * Has the traditional Xmas truce extended into something more? Roxy the dog (resonate) 08:17, 31 December 2013 (UTC)

paywalls, and the math of diligence
(( old talkpage-section got archived before I replied so here's a new one ))  Interlibrary loan is definitely a Good Thing&trade; but I recently heard about WP:RX. Strangely enough, it is not a place to get prescription drugs, but stands for "resource exchange". There are some experienced editors that the WMF pays to give Questia and other paywall access &mdash; you can apply to be one of the recipients of such access, or more importantly, you can just request that somebody who already has access give you an assist. I haven't tried it, so I cannot vouch for whether it beats I.L.L. in terms of speed/convenience, but it definitely beats paying. HTH.

p.s. WP:YOUCANTDOITALLYOURSELF  ;-)    But yes, you are 100% correct.  However, when you say this, I differ:  "If every diligent editor fixed a small part, then the Wikipedia world would be a better place."  That's true, of course.  But what I'd rather see, than our current 30k diligent persistent The Right Stuff editors who can weather nearly any storm, is to have 3M always-lazy sometimes-sloppy editors that are still each individually a net positive in their overall contributions.  Even if they only contribute a couple of net-positive changes to mainspace per weekend, that's 25M improvements per month... aka the equivalent of everybody we have today *each* consistently hitting 800+edits/mo net-positive to mainspace.  There are only 10% of our active editors that manage even 100+edits/mo, and most of that is *reverts* (necessary but definitely not net-positive).

If we want to hit 3M active editors, the key is WP:NICE, and that means changing the wikiculture from battleground, back to strictly sticking to the sources, the old-school WP:NPOV of circa 2003... fully including journalists, from NewRepublic-despite-retraction to the BBC-despite-no-actuated-right-of-reply. (Daily Mail is borderline methinks. ;-) Would that mean the end of WP:MAINSTREAM? Yup, there simply aren't 3M folks that would support it, methinks. But would it mean woo-pushing everywhere? No... as long as we recruit the *right* 3M folks, from the 500M readers wikipedia has every month, life would get a lot easier on FTN, and WP:MEDRS and WP:FRINGE-for-hard-science-only would get vastly stronger, because we would have roughly one editor per article, rather than one editor trying hard to keep up the quality in over 100 articles, all by themselves.

TLDR, my resolution is to investigate human cloning, and send forth a commando army of, David_in_NC, David_in_SC, David_in_KC, David_in_HK, David_in_BC, David_in_OC.... mwuahhahahahaaa! :-)   On that note, happy new gregorian proleptic era, talk to you later.  74.192.84.101 (talk) 05:03, 31 December 2013 (UTC)


 * And there was me thinking this conversation was over and archived... Barney the barney barney (talk) 11:03, 31 December 2013 (UTC)

THE CAMBRIDGE APOSTLES
Barneyx3, can you help with improving this article please as there are only 75 articles out of over 300+ members Barney? There MUST be a lot more articles on Wikipedia that can be linked to this article - I can provide a list of names, if that would help you Sir? Best wishes, Martin.

2.24.32.43 (talk) 19:05, 3 January 2014 (UTC)

BARNEYx3, I HAVE STARTED BUT I WILL NEED YOUR HELP; I AM ADDING THE OTHER 66(?) BACK IN NOW! 2.24.32.43 (talk) 19:31, 3 January 2014 (UTC)

January 2014
Hello, I'm BracketBot. I have automatically detected that [//en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?diff=589025967 your edit] to Cambridge Apostles may have broken the syntax by modifying 1 ""s. If you have, don't worry: just [ edit the page] again to fix it. If I misunderstood what happened, or if you have any questions, you can leave a message on [//en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?action=edit&preload=User:A930913/BBpreload&editintro=User:A930913/BBeditintro&minor=&title=User_talk:A930913&preloadtitle=BracketBot%20–%20&section=new my operator's talk page].
 * List of unpaired brackets remaining on the page:

Thanks, BracketBot (talk) 20:21, 3 January 2014 (UTC)
 * Quentin Skinner - part 2 |publisher=YouTube |date=2008-06-02 |accessdate=2012-05-26}} query

Hello, I'm BracketBot. I have automatically detected that [//en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?diff=589028600 your edit] to Cambridge Apostles may have broken the syntax by modifying 1 ""s. If you have, don't worry: just [ edit the page] again to fix it. If I misunderstood what happened, or if you have any questions, you can leave a message on [//en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?action=edit&preload=User:A930913/BBpreload&editintro=User:A930913/BBeditintro&minor=&title=User_talk:A930913&preloadtitle=BracketBot%20–%20&section=new my operator's talk page].
 * List of unpaired brackets remaining on the page:

Thanks, BracketBot (talk) 20:40, 3 January 2014 (UTC)
 * Quentin Skinner - part 2 |publisher=YouTube |date=2008-06-02 |accessdate=2012-05-26}} query

THE LIST OF FORMER MEMBERS
IT STILL NEEDS A LOT OF WORK DOING ON IT AS THERE ARE ONLY 75 ARTICLES OUT OF 300+ MEMBERS, SO THERE ARE A LOT OF EXISTING ARTICLES THAT CAN BE LINKED; IF ANYONE IS PREPARED TO DO THIS, I CAN SUPPLY LISTS HERE, AND MOST IMPORTANTLY GET THE WHOLE THING CHECKED BY A WORLD-CLASS EXPERT, Martin 2.24.32.43 (talk) 20:39, 3 January 2014 (UTC)

ps BARNEY, I LOVE YOUR WORK ON WIKIPEDIA BUT THE CURRENT LIST* IS 'RUBBISH', TAKE MY WORD FOR IT!

I CAN LITERALLY SUPPLY YOU WITH A SHED-LOAD OF OTHER ARTICLES THAT CAN BE LINKED TO IT? MARTIN 2.24.32.43 (talk) 20:39, 3 January 2014 (UTC)


 * OK, but the grave photos must go, the list should be formatted chronologically without headers, and the list as it stands now should be archived onto the talk page. Barney the barney barney (talk) 20:49, 3 January 2014 (UTC)

Images of graves are now removed; the current list (now in alphabetical order) is incomplete, inaccurate, and out-of-date; I have sent the list to an author of a book of the Apostles who I am going to meet at Wolfson College in April, but I need your help in adding links to other articles. I can send your a list of all 232 other members NOT listed, quite a few of whom have existing articles which are NOT linked to this article but they need to be. Best wishes Barney. Martin 2.24.32.43 (talk)

OK BUT LET'S IMPROVE THE LIST FIRST BY ADDING A LOT MORE LINKS TO EXISTING ARTICLES BARNEY? HOW CAN I BEST PROVIDE IT TO YOU AS YOU ARE THE IDEAL CANDIDATE FOR SUCH AN EXERCISE BARNEY? MARTIN 2.24.32.43 (talk) 22:07, 3 January 2014 (UTC)

The Cambridge Apostles exercise : + 17 FOR A to E

 * Thomas Ainger (1820)
 * Arthur Balfour (186?)
 * Francis Maitland Balfour (1875)
 * Gerald William Balfour (1872)
 * Theodore Beck (1881)
 * Hugh Blackburn (1844)
 * Joseph Blakesley (1827)
 * John Butcher, 1st Baron Danesfort (1873)
 * Samuel Henry Butcher (1871)
 * Arthur John Butler(1865)
 * Henry Montagu Butler (1853)
 * William Dougal Christie (1836)
 * William K. Clifford (1866)
 * Arthur Clough (1883)
 * James Hamilton Doggart (1919)
 * James Duff Duff (1884)
 * Sir Howard Elphinstone, 3rd Baronet (1851)

Barney3, can you check and improve these original articles to add 'Apostles membership' please?

Also "Cambridge Apostles" list of former members needs their descriptions added, please? Martin

RSVP! 2.27.132.2 (talk) 11:57, 4 January 2014 (UTC)

ps More to come later on today...

Marian Dawkins
You have recently posted several messages on my talk page trying to ascertain my motivation(s) for either including, or not including, the marriage of Richard Dawkins to Marian Dawkins on the Marian Dawkins page. I find this interest in the motivations of just one editor of a page rather unusual - especially when you could simply make the edits yourself - if that is what you desire. Please would you explain why you are asking these questions of me.__DrChrissy (talk) 02:32, 6 January 2014 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for January 6
Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that you've added some links pointing to disambiguation pages. Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ* Join us at the DPL WikiProject.


 * E.A. Wood (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver)
 * added links pointing to DSO and CMG


 * Bongo Bongo Land (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver)
 * added a link pointing to The Congo


 * Felix Wedgwood (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver)
 * added a link pointing to James Meadows Rendel


 * George Baugh Allen (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver)
 * added a link pointing to Welsh


 * John Romilly Allen (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver)
 * added a link pointing to FSA


 * Richard MacGillivray Dawkins (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver)
 * added a link pointing to FBA


 * Étaples Military Cemetery (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver)
 * added a link pointing to Tank Corps

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 08:57, 6 January 2014 (UTC)

CAMBRIDGE APOSTLES : F TO Z

 * Julian_Fane_(diplomat)
 * George Farish
 * James Farish
 * Frederick W. Farrar
 * Samuel Fennell
 * George C.R. Festing
 * Edmund Henry Fisher
 * Edmund Morgan Forster
 * Hugh_Fortescue,_3rd_Earl_Fortescue
 * John M. Furness
 * James Furnival


 * Francis Garden
 * Sydney Gedge
 * Fred. Gibbs
 * Heather A. Glen
 * Alexander Chisholm Gooden
 * Henry Chester Goodhart
 * Walford Davies Green
 * John A. Gross
 * Benjamin Guest


 * Richard A. Hall
 * Joseph_Hardcastle_(politician)
 * Thomas O. Harding
 * Henry A. Harford
 * Frederick Evelyn Harmer
 * Thomas Wynne Harrison
 * Francis Vaughan Hawkins
 * Ralph Hawtry
 * Douglas Denon Heath
 * Dunbar Isidore Heath
 * John Moore Heath
 * Charles G. Heathcote
 * Arthur Helps
 * Robert A. Henderson
 * Arthur Boyd Hibbert
 * Arthur Lee Hobhouse
 * Bernard Henry Holland
 * Francis James Holland
 * Wentworth S. Holsworthy
 * John Hopkinson
 * George_Howard,_9th_Earl_of_Carlisle


 * Henry Alfred James
 * Harry A. Johnson
 * Henry Robert Johnson
 * William_Ernest_Johnson
 * Edward C. Judge


 * Arnold Kettle


 * Edmund A. Law
 * E.J. Lawrence
 * Walter Leaf
 * Henry Lee-Warner
 * Henry John Bevin Lintott
 * Thomas Shepherd Little
 * Crompton Llewellyn-Davies
 * Richard Llewellyn-Davies
 * Theodore Llewellyn-Davies
 * Geoffrey E.R. Lloyd
 * Charles A. Locock
 * Leo A. Long
 * Donald William Lucas
 * Frank Lawrence Lucas
 * Gordon Hannington Luce
 * John Marlow Luce
 * Edmund Lushington
 * Frankyn Lushington
 * Henry Lushington
 * Vernon Lushington
 * Alfred Lyttleton
 * Charles Lyttleton


 * Kenneth Macaulay
 * W.H. Macauley
 * Malcolm Macnaghten
 * Henry Maine
 * F.W. Maitland
 * J.G. Maitland
 * Frederick Malkin
 * Horatio Mansfield
 * William_Thackeray_Marriott
 * Edward Howard Marsh
 * Maurice Oswald Marshall
 * Arthur Martineau
 * Robin John Grote Mayor
 * John McTaggart Ellis McTaggart
 * Hugh Owen Meredith
 * Charles Merivale
 * Karl Miller
 * Richard Monkton Milnes
 * John Murdoch Milnes
 * Cecil James Munro
 * R.J.I. Monteith
 * Alexander J.W. Morrison
 * Edward J.C. Morton
 * Savile Morton
 * John Fletcher Moulton
 * Arthur Thomas Myers


 * Roden Noel
 * Henry J.T. Norton
 * Cuthbert Wilfred Francis Noyce


 * Edward A. O’Brien
 * Edmond Oldfield
 * Thomas P. Outram


 * George A. Patton
 * John Burwell Payne
 * Alexander P.D. Penrose
 * Lionel Sharples Penrose
 * Pervical Pickering
 * Sir_Frederick_Pollock,_3rd_Baronet
 * William A. Pollock
 * Robert H. Pomeroy
 * Alfred Power
 * John Henry Pratt
 * M.R. Pryor
 * Charles Puller
 * John Punnett


 * Walter Alexander Raleigh
 * William Z. Richardson
 * George A. Rives
 * John A. Roberts
 * Thomas Z. Robinson

=
=================
 * Henry John Roby
 * Lancelot Charles Rolleston
 * Edward Romilly
 * Henry Romilly
 * Richard C. Rowe
 * Walter Runciman


 * Charles Sanger
 * George Shaw
 * Arthur Sidgwick
 * George Simpson
 * John Simpson
 * Arthur H. Smith
 * Henry Babbington Smith
 * James Parker Smith
 * Townsend Smith
 * A.E.A.W. Smyth
 * James Spedding
 * S.E. Spring Rice
 * Stephen Spring Rice
 * T.C.W. Spring Rice
 * W.J.H. Sprott
 * Edward_Stanley,_15th_Earl_of_Derby
 * John Stanning
 * James Fitzjames Stephen
 * John S. Stock
 * Charles Samuel Stokes
 * Arthur Strachey
 * James Stuart
 * Thomas Sunderland
 * J.E. Symes


 * James Talbot
 * H.F.W. Tatham]
 * Charles Henry Tawney
 * Alfred Taylor
 * Cecil Francis Taylor
 * Thomas Taylor
 * R.J. Tennant
 * George Derwent Thompson
 * Henry Thompson
 * W.H. Thompson
 * Stephen Edelston Toulmin
 * Duncan Tovey
 * George Otto Trevelyn
 * Herbert H. Turner


 * Edward T. Vaughan
 * Alfred Veasey
 * George Stovin Venables


 * Walter Wallich
 * Spencer Walpole
 * James Ward
 * Francis Ward-Cornish
 * Arthur Ronald Dare Watkins
 * Alister Watson
 * Henry William Watson
 * Nathaniel Wedd
 * Ralph Wedgwood 1st_Baronet
 * C.S. Whimore
 * W.C. Wilkier
 * John Daniel Williams
 * George St. Vincent Wilson
 * Henry Francis Wilson
 * Charles Wiseman
 * David Wootton
 * George W. Wrangham
 * Wiliiam Wyse

Good luck! 2.27.132.2 (talk) 21:55, 6 January 2014 (UTC)
 * G.V. Yool
 * Edward M. Young

Still fighting the fringe?
Hey Barney, I have a question and you seem like the man to ask. I was over at Princeton Engineering Anomalies Research Lab and I noticed that the article was nothing but a puff-piece for PEAR. I searched through its history but there does not appear to be any legitimate version of the article to revert to. The current version of the article contains no encyclopedic content, and I’m probably never going to find the time to give the article the intense editing it would need to bring it in line with WP:FRINGE guidelines. Frankly, there’s nothing in the article that’s worth saving. I was going to change the page into a redirect to Parapsychology, but it occurred to me that that might be considered excessively bold. In your experience as a Wikipedia editor do you think it would be appropriate of me to change an un-encyclopedic puff-piece into a redirect or am I likely to run afoul of some obscure policy about the use of redirects? Thanks. 76.107.171.90 (talk) 22:22, 9 January 2014 (UTC)


 * Take is to WP:FRINGE/N first then see what their views are. Presently no independent references so AFD might be appropriate. Barney the barney barney (talk) 22:25, 9 January 2014 (UTC)


 * Thanks Barney. 76.107.171.90 (talk) 22:30, 9 January 2014 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for January 13
Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that you've added some links pointing to disambiguation pages. Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ* Join us at the DPL WikiProject.


 * Philip Mack (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver)
 * added links pointing to Bar and DSO


 * Waddington Medal (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver)
 * added links pointing to Peter Lawrence and Jeff Williams

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 09:30, 13 January 2014 (UTC)

A kitten for you!
Why did you remove my edit after asking me to add information about importance?

WesterlyRider (talk) 17:55, 14 January 2014 (UTC) <br style="clear: both;"/>


 * If you think the LIFX article is crap why not just tell me? I created it as my first article and would appreciate you convincing me to delete it myself rather than having you argue (wrongly) about how it isn't in agreement with WP:NCORP, which it totally is. I don't get it.WesterlyRider (talk) 18:11, 14 January 2014 (UTC)

Robert McLean
Just a courtesy note that I will revert your edits to this redirect. If you've written another article of a person who has the same name, you can choose to sort this out via a WP:Hatnote, or you can convert the redirect to a WP:Disambiguation page. But to simply redirect it to your new article is not the thing to do. If you are lost and need a hand, just say so.  Schwede 66  21:34, 16 January 2014 (UTC)


 * There isn't another person with the same name. Barney the barney barney (talk) 22:01, 16 January 2014 (UTC)

Ezbob
Hello Barney (I am not sure this is the right place to answer your contact, but couldn't find a better place)

I created a new page titled 'Ezbob' today which you tagged for deletion. I am sure this is an oversight on my part, but thought the page was not unambiguously promotional, because it lists an important developer of online e-commerce and focuses on their contribution in developing an online financing system, rather than promoting their brand. It is identical to other existing Wikipedia pages, which is why I thought it fit for publication: Kabbage, iwoca

Please advise if you still think it is inappropriate, and how I can correct it.

Thank you, Asaf — Preceding unsigned comment added by Asafbraverman (talk • contribs) 23:07, 19 January 2014 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for January 20
Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that you've added some links pointing to disambiguation pages. Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ* Join us at the DPL WikiProject.


 * Tony Lovell (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver)
 * added links pointing to DSO and DFC


 * Belle de Jour (writer) (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver)
 * added a link pointing to British


 * David Bowen (pathologist) (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver)
 * added a link pointing to Welsh


 * Sir Robert McLean (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver)
 * added a link pointing to Scottish

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 08:52, 20 January 2014 (UTC)

A page you started (List of women in Female Biography) has been reviewed!
thanks b-b-barney. this is my first big project. i know it needs more links! but i wanted to get the page up in advance of the [|Art and Feminism meet-up] on Feb. 1st. lots more work to do. K.Grey (talk) 22:47, 20 January 2014 (UTC)

(presumably) Julian Merghart
Hi,

I have a right to create my own wikipedia page, because I am a human being. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 75.93.28.217 (talk) 22:06, 25 January 2014 (UTC)


 * No you don't, per WP:AUTOBIOGRAPHY. Don't worry though - if you're notable enough a fan will create an article. Barney the barney barney (talk) 22:11, 25 January 2014 (UTC)

Speedy deletion declined: Derek McGee
Hello Barney the barney barney. I am just letting you know that I declined the speedy deletion of Derek McGee, a page you tagged for speedy deletion, because of the following concern: There is sufficient context to identify the subject of the article. Thank you. — Malik Shabazz Talk/Stalk 00:01, 26 January 2014 (UTC)

Proposed Deletion of Sewanee Elementary School - Disagree
You proposed that Sewanee Elementary School be deleted without giving any meaningful reasons. I disagree as the School played a significant role in the history of desegregation in Tennessee during the 1960's. A Tennessee Historical Commission marker has been placed at the school to that affect. This is explained in the article.

Also, it would be helpful you could explain exactly who you are and why you are taking such unilateral decisions.

Bryan MacKinnon (talk) 02:09, 26 January 2014 (UTC)

Kurt Wegener
thanks for your comments.

I was trying to fuigure out how to make an English page from de.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kurt_Wegener‎

Do you have any suggestions?

Phenss (talk) 02:17, 26 January 2014 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for January 27
Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that you've added some links pointing to disambiguation pages. Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ* Join us at the DPL WikiProject.


 * Alan Woodruff (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver)
 * added a link pointing to CMG


 * David Haslam (physician) (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver)
 * added a link pointing to FRCP

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 09:06, 27 January 2014 (UTC)

Move reverted.
Hello, and thank you for your contributions to Wikipedia. Your bold move of Clifford Rose has been reverted because an editor has found it to be controversial. Per Requested moves, a move request must be placed on the article's talk page, and the request be open for discussion for seven days, "if there is any reason to believe a move would be contested". If you believe that this move is appropriate, please initiate such a discussion. Please note that moving a page with a longstanding title and/or a large number of incoming links is more likely to be considered controversial, and may be contested. Please note that per WP:TWODABS, a separate disambiguation page is not necessary where only two uses of a term exist, and one is primary over the other. In that case, the disambiguation function is accomplished in a hatnote. bd2412 T 22:42, 28 January 2014 (UTC)

Sheldrake
You might have missed on the RfD I did actually !vote to delete it. I agree that it is nonsense and all the sources point back to his one article in New Scientist, and you are right to assume good faith and thank you for that, I did check all the references I could find, which were not many, but you can't say "He's a fraud and a liar" on Wikipedia. He is, but you can't say it. Oops I just did. Si Trew (talk) 00:00, 30 January 2014 (UTC)

LADY CAROLINE JEBB
In her will, Lady Jebb left directions that her body should be cremated and the ashes sent to Cambridge, to be buried under Sir Richard's tombstone.

2.30.207.107 (talk) 20:46, 30 January 2014 (UTC)


 * She may well have done, but it wasn't executed. Her grave is in Pennsylvania, and is even on one of the US genealogy sites.  Also, this isn't in the Guardian/Observer.  I know this because I've checked the Guardian archives, which is clearly more than you have done.  Barney the barney barney (talk) 22:05, 30 January 2014 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for February 3
Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that you've added some links pointing to disambiguation pages. Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ* Join us at the DPL WikiProject.


 * ASAB Medal (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver)
 * added links pointing to John Alcock and Geoffrey Parker


 * Beamish brothers (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver)
 * added links pointing to Irish and Harlequins


 * Cecil Beamish (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver)
 * added links pointing to Irish and CB


 * Gerard Baerends (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver)
 * added a link pointing to Dutch

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 08:54, 3 February 2014 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for February 10
Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that you've added some links pointing to disambiguation pages. Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ* Join us at the DPL WikiProject.


 * C. K. Rhodes (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver)
 * added links pointing to CIE and ICS


 * Sir Walter Stirling, 1st Baronet (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver)
 * added a link pointing to MP

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 08:55, 10 February 2014 (UTC)

Rupert Sheldrake Talk Page
I don't want to get into non-topical issues on the article's talk page, so I'm posting here. I felt your input was not constructive to the discussion and misrepresented my argument.

I didn't say anything about Sheldrake's intelligence, the perception of his intelligence, the indication quotes might give about his intelligence or anything remotely connected to what you call transparent stupidity. In fact the replacement quote I sought out to build consensus said almost the same thing, the only difference being the context warranted it. I was discussing the context of the quote indicating a different meaning than the way it was used in the article, a normal and appropriate concern for any sourcing, as well as the fact that the very same quote was used in its entirety further down the page.

I don't know what you were referencing in your comment, I'm not sure if it's a case of not reading my arguments or if you're trying a to apply a canned response to a situation it doesn't fit, but please try to keep talk page comments respectful and pertinent. The Cap&#39;n (talk) 18:34, 14 February 2014 (UTC)

ANI Notification
There is currently a discussion at Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents regarding an issue with which you may have been involved. Thank you.

Thanks, The Cap&#39;n (talk) 09:36, 15 February 2014 (UTC)

Check
email. vzaak 15:02, 16 February 2014 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for February 18
Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Hatchet Job of the Year, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Peter Kemp (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver). Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ* Join us at the DPL WikiProject.

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 09:03, 18 February 2014 (UTC)

Archaeology, You Say?
This is off-topic from our usual back & forth over WP:FRINGE issues, but I was curious what area of archaeology you're interested in? I'm a historian and have done some work at several of the old presidios, missions and at Painted Rock (San Luis Obispo), though my usual field is medieval and early modern history. Always interested to find someone else who's into old rubbish. The Cap&#39;n (talk) 20:12, 19 February 2014 (UTC)

Software Engineering Society
I am working on this and soon it will contain data. M. Adnan Khadim 11:10, 22 February 2014 (UTC) — Preceding unsigned comment added by Madnank (talk • contribs)

Disambiguation link notification for February 25
Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Vivian Davies, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Centre (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver). Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ* Join us at the DPL WikiProject.

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 08:56, 25 February 2014 (UTC)

What
Why are you adding stuff to an archived ANI thread? Nobody removed your comment from the original thread; they're just removing your addition to the archive, which doesn't belong there. vzaak 20:20, 25 February 2014 (UTC)

Censored, and now blocked for undoing censorship.

 * To clarify - it wasn't 3RR because the edits were vandalism. My comments on the behaviour of others were being removed, they should be reinstated. Barney the barney barney (talk) 20:28, 25 February 2014 (UTC)


 * The censored text was as follows:


 * - you make this sound like it's a bad thing. What's so bad about implementing Wikipedia's policies, and doing research into the subject?  The sanctions were against WP:SPAs who didn't want to comply with policies.  You either need to demonstrate that the article is not compatible with those policies, or reach consensus about changing the policies.  Good luck with either of those. Barney the barney barney (talk) 00:41, 24 February 2014 (UTC)


 * I do not see what the problem is with this. Barney the barney barney (talk) 20:29, 25 February 2014 (UTC)
 * Barney, you know that the issue is edit warring and inserting content into "closed" archive discussion. There is no "censorship". There is "what were you thinking?" -- TRPoD aka The Red Pen of Doom  20:33, 25 February 2014 (UTC)


 * I protected the page at about the same time as the block was applied. BtBB, an archive is a record of a previous conversation. Once it's archived, it's over. If you felt the need to resurrect the thread, you could do that, though I can't imagine what benefit there would be in that.  Anarchy will soon prevail if we keep continuing discussions in archives. How about we all agree to leave the archive alone, as is, you can be unblocked, and I can unprotect the page? --Floquenbeam (talk) 20:35, 25 February 2014 (UTC)


 * So if it's closed, why are and  editing it? Barney the barney barney (talk) 20:36, 25 February 2014 (UTC)


 * Is this a trick question? They're removing your addition to a closed discussion. --Floquenbeam (talk) 20:37, 25 February 2014 (UTC)


 * OK, well, I've got to leave for a while. If BtBB agrees to the suggestion above, I'd recommend an admin undo everything and we go back to Wikipedia's normal background level of dysfunction. --Floquenbeam (talk) 20:45, 25 February 2014 (UTC)
 * I've made the suggestion multiple times to BtBB, that it can be resurrected at ANI. I don't quite understand the need to add information to an archive where people aren't likely to see it anyway unless they're searching for it, as opposed to bringing it to ANI itself where it will be made very public. My suggestion (and warning) was just deleted. I don't know if this is a case of WP:IDHT or an attempt to rile people up, or what. If BtBB wants to follow suggestions to take the matter to ANI I'll be happy to unblock. Or if there's just an acknowledgement that archives aren't supposed to be messed with and a promise that they won't be trying to do it again. Otherwise the block will expire in a couple of days, and hopefully they'll just go back to regular editing. If there's a specific dispute with a particular person, or group of people, I'm happy to try to moderate a solution too. --  At am a  頭 21:26, 25 February 2014 (UTC)
 *  At am a , I think it's simply that Barney wanted to have the last word in that discussion, whether anyone saw his comments or not. But, as far as I know, it's only cool to edit ones own user talk page archives and especially not mess with ones for noticeboards like AN, AN/I or ARBCOM. Liz  <sup style="font-family:Times New Roman;"><b style="color:#006400;">Read!</b> <b style="color:#006400;">Talk!</b> 21:41, 25 February 2014 (UTC)

Askahrc
Hey Barney, I had a long and totally unproductive talk with Askahrc complete with silly insults and vulgar rhymes. He’s worked himself into quite a state and is totally impervious to all my attempts to reason with him. At this point he’s so overcome with fringe furor that he seems ready to embark on an Iantresman-style crusade.

Vzaak’s action against him doesn’t appear to be going anywhere fast, so I suspect that Askahrc may yet trouble you again. I don’t know what his next move will be, but I advise you to be weary. The fight over the Sheldrake page may not be over. 76.107.171.90 (talk) 05:25, 27 February 2014 (UTC)


 * 76.107.171.90, this is a borderline personal attack on Askahrc. It's insulting and dismissive. You should be encouraging cooperation and consensus-building, not battleground behavior. Liz  <sup style="font-family:Times New Roman;"><b style="color:#006400;">Read!</b> <b style="color:#006400;">Talk!</b> 18:13, 27 February 2014 (UTC) (trolling removed). Barney the barney barney (talk) 18:53, 27 February 2014 (UTC)


 * First off, 76, the silly rhymes and insults were all on your end. Secondly, I had nothing to do with Barney's blocking, I tried to warn him about editing the archive, but he chose not to listen.  I didn't weigh in with any admins or anything of the kind, that was their deal. The Cap&#39;n (talk) 18:36, 27 February 2014 (UTC) (this is rubbish). Barney the barney barney (talk) 18:53, 27 February 2014 (UTC)

February 2014
Hello, I'm BracketBot. I have automatically detected that [//en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?diff=597542915 your edit] to Lucian Hudson may have broken the syntax by modifying 1 ""s. If you have, don't worry: just [ edit the page] again to fix it. If I misunderstood what happened, or if you have any questions, you can leave a message on [//en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?action=edit&preload=User:A930913/BBpreload&editintro=User:A930913/BBeditintro&minor=&title=User_talk:A930913&preloadtitle=BracketBot%20–%20&section=new my operator's talk page].
 * List of unpaired brackets remaining on the page:

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, BracketBot (talk) 17:07, 28 February 2014 (UTC)
 * Lucian John Hudson 9born 5 July 1960 ‘HUDSON, Lucian John’, Who's Who 2014, A & C Black, an imprint of Bloomsbury Publishing plc,

Input needed
I have filed a complaint on the Wikipedia admin board on the issue of parapsychology. I would like your input. Thanks Goblin Face (talk) 03:20, 2 March 2014 (UTC)

ELLEN WORDSWORTH DARWIN, nee CROFTS
"Thanks to Barney, The Barney, Barney for finding Ellen Wordsworth Darwin, nee Crofts in GIRTON mate!" Can you now create an article for her please? See Find-A-Grave for her whereabouts. Martin — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2.30.198.4 (talk) 22:21, 2 March 2014 (UTC)


 * Did you find her grave or just the church? Barney the barney barney (talk) 22:32, 2 March 2014 (UTC)

Tom Butler
Tom Butler is being discussed at WP:AE. 76.107.171.90 (talk) 00:03, 3 March 2014 (UTC)

Possible sock
I have a bad feeling 159.118.158.122 is a sock, look at his edits he's only posting on talk-pages to cause controversies and his style of writing shows he is familiar with Wikipedia editing. Goblin Face (talk) 16:06, 5 March 2014 (UTC)


 * Probably, but he's not being especially disruptive, yet. Barney the barney barney (talk) 16:27, 5 March 2014 (UTC)


 * He is now inserting the claim of "pseudoskepticism" in articles. Goblin Face (talk) 17:18, 5 March 2014 (UTC)

You will like this
Look who Fenwick is with :) Goblin Face (talk) 16:51, 7 March 2014 (UTC)


 * Why is that a problem? PhiChiPsiOmega (talk) 20:23, 8 March 2014 (UTC)

Oh, my God! He's on my page now!!!
Barney, I have told you several times that I do not intend to cause trouble. Please stop putting me in categories of "WP:NOTGETTINGIT" or saying that I'm causing trouble on your page. I do get it. I just think you're wrong, and I have evidence as to why. I don't have conspiracy theories. I would appreciate it if we had better discussions than the ones we've been having for a while, thank you. PhiChiPsiOmega (talk) 20:25, 8 March 2014 (UTC)


 * PhiChiPsiOmega can you stop disrupting the parapsychology talk-page. You said you want to make a case then take it to the Arbitration Committee. Goblin Face (talk) 20:30, 8 March 2014 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for March 12
Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Sir Alfred Watson, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page KCB (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver). Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ* Join us at the DPL WikiProject.

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 08:55, 12 March 2014 (UTC)

March 2014
Hello, I'm BracketBot. I have automatically detected that [//en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?diff=599322277 your edit] to Mary Celeste may have broken the syntax by modifying 1 ""s. If you have, don't worry: just [ edit the page] again to fix it. If I misunderstood what happened, or if you have any questions, you can leave a message on [//en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?action=edit&preload=User:A930913/BBpreload&editintro=User:A930913/BBeditintro&minor=&title=User_talk:A930913&preloadtitle=BracketBot%20–%20&section=new my operator's talk page].
 * List of unpaired brackets remaining on the page:

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, BracketBot (talk) 18:46, 12 March 2014 (UTC)
 * Hypotheses include alcohol fumes, underwater earthquakes, waterspouts to human actions (piracy, mutiny, errors of judgement).

Disambiguation link notification for March 19
Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited James Charteris, 13th Earl of Wemyss, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page DL (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver). Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ* Join us at the DPL WikiProject.

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 08:48, 19 March 2014 (UTC)

Thanks for the likes; your take?
Hi, I was amused to see your series of likes; please have a go, then, re Requests for comment/QuackGuru2. You endorsed jps' outside view, which said, among other things, that Wikipedia "would be better off if the two editors endorsing the RfC were banned from these topics" (said topics, I assume, being the areas where QG's conduct is indicted in the RfC; it's unclear). AFAIK, I've had virtually no interaction with you, but assume you must have reviewed my edits (and block log etc.), and those of (the other RfC endorser), or you wouldn't have endorsed such a strong statement. Apart from whatever objections you have to the RfC itself, can you explain why you believe Mallexikon and myself deserve to be topic-banned, and from which topics particularly? What have we done that's that bad? Maybe you can show me a couple diffs that are representative of whatever ongoing problems there are. I'd appreciate the feedback; I'm pretty sure Mallexikon would too! Thanks. --Middle 8 (leave me alone • talk to me • COI?) 17:30, 15 March 2014 (UTC)


 * I see no clearer case of WP:BOOMERANG. Also, please remember to sign your posts with four tildes like this: ~ Barney the barney barney (talk)#
 * The problems have been continuing for a number of months now. The latest problems are being discussed at the talk page. There is push-back when I try to improve the article. QuackGuru  ( talk ) 07:25, 25 March 2014 (UTC)

Is Editing a Policy Violation?
Hi Barney. You deleted my posting to the Parapsychology page as vandalism and then wrote to me and said that I should review the WP:Fringe policy. I have reviewed that policy, and I don't understand how it applies to my edit.

I changed the article text to reflect the quotes that were already referenced in the article, and I provided the specific quotes that were referenced. I added additional references to clarify the information provided in the article. I changed a small amount of text to make it more generic and representative of the references that were provided. This is standard editing and was not meant to represent a point of view.

Is standard editing practice considered a policy violation? --Tunsa (talk) 14:54, 25 March 2014 (UTC)


 * You mischaracterise your own edits, probably deliberately. Barney the barney barney (talk) 15:04, 25 March 2014 (UTC)


 * Please be specific. I was very specific in my editing submission.  --Tunsa (talk) 16:57, 25 March 2014 (UTC)


 * You are also quite specific in mischaracterising it. Barney the barney barney (talk) 17:12, 25 March 2014 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for March 26
Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that you've added some links pointing to disambiguation pages. Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ* Join us at the DPL WikiProject.


 * S.J. Fraser MacLeod (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver)
 * added links pointing to KC, LLD, William MacLeod and Board of Control


 * Waddington Medal (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver)
 * added a link pointing to Jim Smith

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 08:48, 26 March 2014 (UTC)

GERAC
You haven't been active on this article, but we had a long and very careful discussion about two sources (Birch and He), both on Talk and at Talk:MEDRS. We determined they were FRINGE and got rid of them. ("we" - alexbrn, second quantization, and jps, and me, and 2 acupuncturists too!)  they were tendentiously reinserted by quackguru, because they make points that he likes and cannot find elsewhere. Please undo your reversion and more importantly, please review the discussion and join us on Talk. Thanks. Jytdog (talk) 20:22, 29 March 2014 (UTC)
 * in the meantime, someone reverted your reversion partially, but one of the sources remains in the article. I cannot do more due to 3RR.  thanks.  Jytdog (talk) 22:38, 29 March 2014 (UTC)
 * You claim someone reverted Barney the barney barney reversion partially, but one of the sources remains in the article. This edit was a full revert. One of the other sources remains in the article? The other sources in the article are not relevant to this content dispute. If you read the talk page there are editors who agree the journal is reliable for non-medical claims that are not in the fringe space. QuackGuru  ( talk ) 06:30, 30 March 2014 (UTC)
 * they are both gone now, yes. Birch and He are now both back out.   Sorry to have bothered you, barney the barney barney. Jytdog (talk) 11:03, 30 March 2014 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for April 2
Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that you've added some links pointing to disambiguation pages. Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ* Join us at the DPL WikiProject.


 * Florence Bell (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver)
 * added a link pointing to Chelsea


 * Freddie Emery-Wallis (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver)
 * added a link pointing to Conservative Party


 * Operation Foxley (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver)
 * added a link pointing to Tunny

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 08:48, 2 April 2014 (UTC)

Your comments on Arbitration/Requests/Enforcement
I have left you a message on the page (in the uninvolved admins section) please read it. Also given the level of incivility and casting aspersions in your statement I am going to log a warning on the Pseudoscience case page. I don't know what you were thinking, but given the level I believe I would be justified in blocking you per this discussion however I'll do this instead with the understanding that you will refactor and provide evidence. Callanecc (talk • contribs • logs) 22:59, 2 April 2014 (UTC)


 * Thanks - I was unaware of Wikipedia_talk:A/R.  However, I firmly stand by everything that I've said, including the redacted comments about, who's so far managed to appear at the WP:AE of , , etc, etc, with supporting comments.  It's quite clear she's anti-WP:FRINGE and anti-Wikipedia.  This has been a clear long-term pattern of behaviour.  Barney the barney barney (talk) 23:05, 2 April 2014 (UTC)


 * That's all very well for you to believe that, but you are still casting aspersions on an editor who isn't either the initiator or subject of the AE request. If you have evidence submit file an AE request regarding Liz. In any case you might want to have a look through your statement and get refactor some of your comments and provide a link to the community TBAN you referred to. Callanecc (talk • contribs • logs) 23:10, 2 April 2014 (UTC)

Article naming
I notice that you recently moved several articles to titles which include the honorific "Sir" (for example, Sir John Stallworthy) with the edit summary "undo petty and pointless move based on a profound misunderstanding of policy". I'm not the editor who moved these articles in the first place, but I also thought the convention was to exclude "Sir" in the titles of articles. The relevant guideline I've used is Naming conventions (people), although that does not specifically mention "Sir". I may well be misinformed on this, and would welcome any pointer to a discussion or guideline which covers it more clearly.- gadfium 02:03, 3 April 2014 (UTC)
 * I've been pointed to Naming conventions (royalty and nobility), where point 4 says
 * "Titles of knighthood such as Sir and Dame are not normally included in the article title: e.g. Arthur Conan Doyle, not "Sir Arthur Conan Doyle" (which is a redirect). However, Sir may be used in article titles as a disambiguator when a name is ambiguous and one of those who used it was knighted, e.g. Sir Arthur Dean."
 * I assume therefore your point applies only to articles which would otherwise need a disambiguation term.- gadfium 20:42, 3 April 2014 (UTC)

Please watch your tone, and review an editor's history before making such comments
Generally speaking a cited article with RS does not fall under the criteria of speedy deletion, you would use the PROD tag or AfD. Secondly do not use such tone when making a comment on my talk page. I was making a contest of the speedy. I understand plenty about Wikipedia and have been editing vastly longer than you have. Please read WP:Good faith. Thank you. Valoem  talk   contrib  23:01, 6 April 2014 (UTC)


 * What a plonker. Roxy the dog (resonate) 23:19, 6 April 2014 (UTC)


 * Please assume WP:GOODFAITH and do not attack other editors or make disparaging remarks about them! Tokyogirl79 (｡◕‿◕｡)   06:54, 9 April 2014 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for April 9
Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that you've added some links pointing to disambiguation pages. Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ* Join us at the DPL WikiProject.


 * James Petrie (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver)
 * added a link pointing to FRCP


 * John Anderson Strong (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver)
 * added a link pointing to FRCP

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 08:50, 9 April 2014 (UTC)

"John Quelch" : Watch your tone, pls
Your remarks are appreciated but their tone is not. It is not appropriate to debate with other editors here like this. Wikipedia is not a forum for trash talk. Kindly, please mind your manners. Cheers. -The Gnome (talk) 01:35, 9 April 2014 (UTC)


 * Looks like classic begrudged and ill-informed WP:DRIVEBYTAGGING. That is hardly ever constructive at all. Barney the barney barney (talk) 08:46, 9 April 2014 (UTC)
 * Irrespective of what it "looks like" to you, your tone is inappropriate. And, judging by other comments above, "it looks like" that tone is following a pattern. I reject the nonsensical accusation of having a "grudge" against the subject of the article, an accusation which, please note, I take very seriously. The rest of your "commentary" is groundless.
 * As to your remark on the relevant page, "[how] can you advertise a person?", the issue is already covered in the relevant rule. For an example of an article whose subject is a living person getting deleted for "advertising or promotion", see here. For an example of a User page getting deleted on the same grounds, see here. -The Gnome (talk) 10:06, 9 April 2014 (UTC)

April 2014
Hello, I'm BracketBot. I have automatically detected that [//en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?diff=603493916 your edit] to Elsie Duncan-Jones may have broken the syntax by modifying 1 ""s. If you have, don't worry: just [ edit the page] again to fix it. If I misunderstood what happened, or if you have any questions, you can leave a message on [//en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?action=edit&preload=User:A930913/BBpreload&editintro=User:A930913/BBeditintro&minor=&title=User_talk:A930913&preloadtitle=BracketBot%20–%20&section=new my operator's talk page].
 * List of unpaired brackets remaining on the page:

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, BracketBot (talk) 19:54, 9 April 2014 (UTC)
 * Elsie Elizabeth Duncan-Jones' née Phare; (2 July 1908 - 7 April 2003) was a British literary scholar and authority on the

AR Notification
You are involved in a recently filed request for arbitration. Please review the request at Arbitration/Requests/Case and, if you wish to do so, enter your statement and any other material you wish to submit to the Arbitration Committee. Additionally, the following resources may be of use—
 * Arbitration/Requests;
 * Arbitration guide.

Thanks, The Cap&#39;n (talk) 18:44, 11 April 2014 (UTC)

Arbreq
Askahrc isn't topic-banned; you should correct your statement. vzaak 19:31, 11 April 2014 (UTC)

Askahrc
Do you have a link to the topic ban? It's wanted on WP:AN. Guy (Help!) 23:34, 11 April 2014 (UTC)

Arbitration
Hey Barney, since I cannot apparently edit Arbitration/Requests/Case (despite being named as a party) would you mind posting my statement for me? It can be found here. Thanks. 76.107.171.90 (talk) 00:42, 12 April 2014 (UTC)

Arbitration request declined
The arbitration request involving you (Rupert Sheldrake) has been declined by the Arbitration Committee

The comments made by arbitrators may be helpful in proceeding further. In particular, several arbitrators noted that the article is subject to Discretionary sanctions, so issues should be handled at WP:AE For the Arbitration Committee,-- S Philbrick  (Talk)  19:38, 14 April 2014 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for April 16
Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that you've added some links pointing to disambiguation pages. Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ* Join us at the DPL WikiProject.


 * J.T. Wedgwood (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver)
 * added links pointing to Princess Charlotte, Prince Leopold, John Thurston and George Shepherd


 * John Quelch (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver)
 * added links pointing to Norwich School and Cherwell


 * F.D. Frost (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver)
 * added a link pointing to North-West Frontier

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 08:51, 16 April 2014 (UTC)

Thanks for a great suggestion!
Your suggestion that I use "History of Parliament" online as a source for cites for the article Sir David Roche, 1st Baronet was very helpful. It's a great resource, and one I had never heard of. I'm sure I'll get great use out of it for future articles, too. Thanks very much! Rinne na dTrosc (talk) 03:00, 20 April 2014 (UTC)

ANI for your behavior
There is currently a discussion at Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents regarding an issue with which you may have been involved. Thank you. Valoem  talk   contrib  16:26, 21 April 2014 (UTC)


 * I look forward to the whistling WP:BOOMERANG hitting you in the face. Barney the barney barney (talk) 16:35, 21 April 2014 (UTC)

Seeking collaboration - Chopra article and Fringe
Hello BBB - I get that your not a fan of Dr. Chopra and you probably have very passionate opinions about him and what he represents. I'm want to find what kind of productive conversation you and I can have about this issue. I'm assuming we have one thing in common, that is to find an uncompromising neutrality to what is obviously a very controversial article. If I'm not working towards the betterment of the encyclopedia, I'm not doing my job. So its very important to me to get this right.

You've mentioned a few times that I am not WP HEARING you or I am failing to misunderstanding something. Currently, I am seeking consensus on the opening sentence in a BLP. If you want me to understand you - please explain how the WP Fringe guideline influences the lead sentence in the article in a manner not already covered in BLP. I genuinely want to understand your thinking.

What are you concerns with listing Dr Chopra as an endocrinologist and a champion of integrative medicine and where are you willing to work towards a compromise with me? SAS81 (talk) 19:02, 21 April 2014 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for April 26
Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited J.S.S. Martin, you added links pointing to the disambiguation pages Glendale and CSI (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver). Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ* Join us at the DPL WikiProject.

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 08:50, 26 April 2014 (UTC)

L-Field
Can you help me redirect (not merge because there's nothing worth merging) the L-Field to the Harold Saxton Burr article. Do we need a consensus for this? Or should there be an afd for the L-field article? Either way it needs to go because the sourcing is terrible. I have expanded the Burr article. Goblin Face (talk) 22:39, 1 May 2014 (UTC)

...
Nobody can get an article about themselves deleted via OTRS. People can file a DMCA, but that's only if someone's using your copyrighted material. If that were actually the case, then people like Anders Behring Breivik could get their articles deleted if they felt that they didn't like the article about them. Not like any of that is relevant to the article at hand, though. Finally, I've said it before, if you feel that a deletion is warranted, nominate it again. Stop beating the dead horse on the talk page whilst everyone else is trying to be productive. -- benlisquare T•C•E 16:31, 3 May 2014 (UTC)


 * Also, if you want to make the same suggestion again, do it in your own new section. Let people who want to be productive, be productive in the photograph section, okay? -- benlisquare T•C•E 16:37, 3 May 2014 (UTC)

In summary: If you want the article deleted, nominate it for deletion. I have told you time and time again that you are free to nominate the page. If you can't muster up the courage to do that, don't trash up the talk page with complaint after complaint. It's irritating. It's annoying. It's not constructive. It's disruptive. It's beating a dead horse. -- benlisquare T•C•E 16:44, 3 May 2014 (UTC)


 * I was being productive. It is a perfectly valid point.  Please don't vandalise my comments because you disagree with them. Barney the barney barney (talk) 18:54, 3 May 2014 (UTC)


 * Nominate the article for deletion. Don't show up every two days moaning on the talk page, moaning about how much you wish the article was deleted. If you want to be productive, nominate the article for deletion. -- benlisquare T•C•E 01:42, 4 May 2014 (UTC)

AE Notification
There is an AE request concerning you. Thanks, The Cap&#39;n (talk) 06:57, 7 May 2014 (UTC)


 * WP:BOOMERANG. Barney the barney barney (talk) 11:24, 7 May 2014 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for May 8
Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Peter Maxwell Daniel, you added links pointing to the disambiguation pages FLS and FRCP (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver). Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ* Join us at the DPL WikiProject.

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 08:48, 8 May 2014 (UTC)

Stephen de Vere
hi, nice adding the viaf number. hope you don't mind if I switched to the authority control template. I think a bot fills the other fields. 198.24.31.120 (talk) 16:04, 8 May 2014 (UTC)

Messy moves
Hi BBB I moved the page "Union Medal" to the page "Union Medal of the British Ornithological Union". Article moves always create a mess so I cleaned up after me. Cleaning up the mess I created took me 26 minutes, including the time taken to check that all wikilinks and redirects worked correctly. Then you came along and moved the new page "Union Medal" to the page "Union Medal of the South African military". This created a mess. I cleaned up after mine, please do the same. -- André Kritzinger (talk) 20:11, 8 May 2014 (UTC) ‎
 * I created the page "Union Medal (disambiguation)".
 * I searched for articles that linked to the page "Union Medal". There were only two that had nothing to do with the South African military medal, and I edited both to disambiguate their wikilinks to the page "Union Medal". They are:
 * The page "British Ornithologists' Union"
 * The page "Ian Newton‎".
 * I created a new "Union Medal" article about the South African military medal.

Template:Did you know nominations/Natalia Poklonskaya
Hello Barney, a moment of your time please. You said we shouldn't run this on the front page. It is claimed that, since you added your opinion, the article is seriously improved. I would like to ask you to revisit the discussion and, at the bottom, (briefly) state if you are still opposed. It is a matter of some contention, to put it mildly. Thanks in advance, Drmies (talk) 22:14, 9 May 2014 (UTC)

User Talk:Torgownik
Would you care to refactor your comment on this talk page to repair the template? here, diff. I would suggest, Russell Targ. - - MrBill3 (talk) 12:14, 13 May 2014 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for May 15
Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Reginald Harrison, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page St Peter's Hospital (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver). Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ* Join us at the DPL WikiProject.

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 08:48, 15 May 2014 (UTC)

Removal of comments identified as vandalism
Hi Barney. Please note that I removed your comment on the Village Pump as it appeared to be pure vandalism. If I was in error then I apologise, but I request that in future you post comments that are more relevant to the topic under discussion, or that you at least make the relevance of your comment clear. &mdash;gorgan_almighty (talk) 22:10, 19 May 2014 (UTC)

Religion-baiting vs. Religion-pushing
To make a totally unnecessary and inflammatory statement regarding the existence of God in an attempt to nay-say a DYK nomination, on the grounds that WP:IDONTLIKEIT, seems founded only on religious hatred. I don't see how you can say that to simply nominate a newly created biographical article about a theologian is "religion-pushing". I have opened up a thread on ANI for further review of your editing behavior. Ἀλήθεια 11:44, 20 May 2014 (UTC)

ð== ANI notice ==

I don't see a comment yet here saying this really clearly, and think that you might have missed the comment at the end of the previous thread, but Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents is something you might want to comment about. And, FWIW, although I can and do acknowledge that several Christians, including some Christian editors here, seem to consistently have trouble with words of four letters or more, it probably isn't the brightest thing you could do to call all of us idiots or the like. Believe it or not, there actually are at least a few of us aren't really certifiably "impaired". Believe me, I know, as someone who works with a lot of the religion content, such editors can sometimes seem to be a small minority of the people who do edit here, but they do exist. Some of them might take serious offence at being labeled as bozos, which would, God help us, probably leave the religion content in the even more witless hands of some of the real fanatics. John Carter (talk) 18:40, 20 May 2014 (UTC)
 * FWIW, having seen some of your recent comments, in which you clearly indicate that you believe God is "something that doesn't exist," of course, if you have clear evidence of that, please produce it. Unfortuntely, pretty much by definition, without such evidence, all your comments really indicate is that you yourself have reached what others might call, well, "religious opinions," which honestly can reasonably be seen to fail the same standards of evidence that the "Jesus was an ET" argument fails. Honestly, a rational person would probably know that, particularly at DYK, if you can't really address the matter of the article or the hook rationally, you're probably better off not addressing it at all. Yes, I know that there are truly ridiculous ideas out there. The people who believe the ark of the covenant is buried under the Temple Mount in Jerusalem based on the eyewitness testimony of a dabbler in archaeology whose passport shows no evidence of his ever having been in Israel comes to mind. Otherwise, I think it would be in your own best interests to read WP:CIVILITY and other user conduct guidelines which verifiably do exist, and maybe make a bit more visible effort to indicate that you are aware of them. John Carter (talk) 19:21, 20 May 2014 (UTC)


 * @ - there is clear evidence that God doesn't exist. Barney the barney barney (talk) 19:37, 20 May 2014 (UTC)
 * Really? Here's something to think about, which, honestly, indicates that the only thing there is "clear evidence" of is your inability to adhere to basic guidelines regarding conduct and, in the comment above, proof. (1) Such "clear evidence" would have to address any and all interpretations of the concept, and given the wide number of variant ideas of god, that would be itself all but logically impossible. (2) "Evidence" is not the same thing as "proof", and no one with any familiarity with basic logic would equate them. There is "clear evidence" for a lot of things, including, in some cases, that something beyond what is accepted by science does exist. Evidence does not equal proof. (3) Where is that evidence? You have produced none. On that basis, the only thing there is clear evidence of is your own engaging in statements by personal fiat, or, basically, violating in a sense WP:OR regarding these categorical statements of yours. If you have such evidence, like I said above, show it. Alternately, all you really show is that you as an individual are incapable of providing the evidence you seek recourse to. (4) Lastly, your personal opinion, which, again, is made categorically without any attempt at providing any sort of evidence to back it up, is completely irrelevant to the matter at hand, specifically, DYK. Yeah, there could reasonably be seen to be "clear evidence" that Rupert Sheldrake's genitormorphic field doesn't exist too, but if someone wrote a good DYK hook on it, I think it should be considered. This is something I say as someone who has gotten about 50 DYK hooks so far. Superman doesn't exist either, but I wouldn't think that would disqualify a hook. So, (6) about the only thing you have provided "clear evidence" for in all the links I've looked at is a rather remarkable lack of awareness of basic conduct guidelines, and, dare I say, transparent bias. May I suggest, in all generosity, that you review the clear evidence regarding what is and is not acceptable conduct here. Otherwise, there is a very real chance that some more formal action regarding your conduct might be undertaken in the future, and there is a very real chance that you would not appreciate the outcome of such actions. John Carter (talk) 19:53, 20 May 2014 (UTC)


 * No, superman doesn't exist either.  There is evidence for this too. Barney the barney barney (talk) 19:57, 20 May 2014 (UTC)
 * Barney, thank you for providing clear evidence in the above comment of your own inability to read. I said, and I quote "Superman doesn't exist either..." There is now getting to be ever greater, accumulating evidence that your ability to engage in rational conversation is the thing which may not exist, based on the evidence of your comments. I once again urge you to read the conduct guidelines of this project, as the evidence of your conduct makes it rather clear you have little if any previous acquaintaince with them, and maybe do a bit more to indicate that the clear evidence of your own inability to read guidelines, or apparently much else, should not be taken into account and perhaps held against you. Now, I realize that this situation is basically one in which you, who seem to have a rather common, if obnoxious, predeliction to engage in off-topic insults when you are basically caught in a serious mistake, have to stonewall to avoid facing the reality of the unacceptability of your own conduct. Once again, if you were to acquaint yourself with the clear evidence of what is and is not acceptable conduct, you might be able to avoid facing some sort of problems in the future. Should you continue to provide further evidence of your own inability to read, of course, the likelihood of some sort of outside corrective action in the future is just likely to increase. John Carter (talk) 20:11, 20 May 2014 (UTC)

Speaking of the above.... I'm putting together a little essay, presently on my userpage. I welcome your thoughts!! DeistCosmos (talk) 21:02, 20 May 2014 (UTC)


 * What an astonishing fuss about nothing for FSMs sake. -Roxy the dog (resonate) 21:56, 20 May 2014 (UTC)}


 * Thanks for your concern - yes I can indeed read, but it's a slight pity that what your brain tells you fingers to waggle doesn't make any sense, whatsoever.  Your suggestion that I've been personally attacking anyone is a barefaced lie, and I suggest you withdraw it. Barney the barney barney (talk) 09:35, 21 May 2014 (UTC)


 * Hello all sorry for being nosey, but I recommend this book. God: The Failed Hypothesis. Good day. Goblin Face (talk) 21:48, 21 May 2014 (UTC)


 * Thanks for the suggestion. I haven't read it.  I think people should also look at the theory of bicameralism as well.  I think a lot of the atheist critics have done a great disservice by dismissing it. Viriditas (talk) 03:50, 22 May 2014 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for May 22
Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Jim Speechley, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Conservative Party (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver). Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ* Join us at the DPL WikiProject.

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 08:52, 22 May 2014 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for May 29
Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited George Henry Morley, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page CB (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver). Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ* Join us at the DPL WikiProject.

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 08:47, 29 May 2014 (UTC)

"One swallow doesn't make a summer"
For fuck's sake, man, don't say "swallow". Won't somebody please think of the children! Sławomir Biały (talk) 16:03, 30 June 2014 (UTC)

Unlisted AfDs
FYI, the creator of the Julie Homi‎ article piped up on WT:AFD wondering why the AfD on that article was never closed--turns out it was never listed on a daily log page. Another user relisted that debate, but I discovered (via this list) that another of your AfD pages, Articles for deletion/Geoff Perlman (2nd nomination)‎ also wasn't listed. I've fixed that one and relisted it as well. Have a good day. -- Finngall  talk  06:05, 1 July 2014 (UTC)
 * Correct. Barney, please follow WP:AFDHOWTO, or else nobody will see your nominations. Ansh666 10:50, 1 July 2014 (UTC)

1998
Hi. You are reverting a link which I restored. The link is to a biographical article. I realize that your personal POV is that article is "unimportant cruft", but, as you know, following a long debate, admin decided not to delete that article. Therefore the link should be restored unless or until the article is deleted in the future. Viewfinder (talk) 19:55, 4 July 2014 (UTC)

Robert H. Lock
Can you please re-instate his deleted Wikipedia article, as previously requested? He is having a new ODNB biography written by a Cambridge Professor!

Robert Heath Lock, Assistant Director of the Peradeniya Botanical Gardens, in Sri Lanka, around 1910

195.194.238.103 (talk) 14:22, 12 July 2014 (UTC)


 * Can't find an article that was deleted (no Articles for deletion/Robert Heath Lock). I can't find the ODNB entry - perhaps it hasn't been published yet?  If or when you have sufficient sources you can make one from the existing redirect here.  Barney the barney barney (talk) 15:19, 12 July 2014 (UTC)

Disruptive editing warning
Please refrain from making unconstructive edits to Wikipedia. Your edits appear to be disruptive and have been reverted or removed. Please ensure you are familiar with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines, and please do not continue to make edits that appear disruptive, until the dispute is resolved through consensus. Continuing to edit disruptively could result in loss of editing privileges. Thank you. --Holdek (talk) 09:17, 30 July 2014 (UTC)
 * If you are engaged in an article content dispute with another editor then please discuss the matter with the editor at their talk page, or the article's talk page. Alternatively you can read Wikipedia's dispute resolution page, and ask for independent help at one of the relevant notice boards.
 * If you are engaged in any other form of dispute that is not covered on the dispute resolution page, please seek assistance at Wikipedia's Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents.


 * I was going to remove this, but then I thought no, it isn't my Talk page, and perhaps BBB wants to keep it as a badge of honour, and it is considered bad form to mess with somebody's talk page unless there is pure vandalism going on. This is just ignorance, so I left it. (sigh) -Roxy the dog (resonate) 13:30, 30 July 2014 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for August 9
Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that you've added some links pointing to disambiguation pages. Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ* Join us at the DPL WikiProject.


 * Leonard "Nipper" Read
 * added links pointing to British, The Met, QPM and James Norton

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 09:07, 9 August 2014 (UTC)

Jacob Barnett
Re this. Even on the assumption that you are not making an indirect suggestion that I am motivated by inappropriate attraction to a minor, I would rather not be patronized and gagged by users who edit like this. I have as much right to edit an article and its talk page as anyone else. The article was upheld per WP:GNG. Nobody cited WP:PROF in its support. Viewfinder (talk) 05:40, 7 August 2014 (UTC)
 * Retract that comment immediately.
 * Do not vandalise people's comments, especially those on your own behaviour.
 * You do not have a "right to edit an article"; it is a privilege reserved for those who are at least marginally competent. Barney the barney barney (talk) 09:13, 7 August 2014 (UTC)


 * OK, if you insist that you were not making an indirect comment about inappropriate attraction, then I am willing to accept that, even though that is how your comment came across to me. But the material that I deleted belongs not at the Barnett talk page, but on my talk page. Unless or until you can get your claim that I am incompetent upheld by admin, I am no less entitled to edit or comment on an article than you are. Given that I have made 4 edits to the article compared to User:Slawekb's 45, I am astonished by your allegation at ANI that I am trying to own it. Viewfinder (talk) 16:05, 7 August 2014 (UTC)

With this edit you called several editors "obsessed fanboys". Given that the subject of the article is a minor, that was a direct and extremely offensive comment about inappropriate attraction, and I take a very grave view of it. For personal reasons which I am not willing to disclose on this public website, I am not going to pursue the matter myself, but don't expect me to forget it. Viewfinder (talk) 02:46, 9 August 2014 (UTC)


 * Fanboys is an entirely appropriate term for individuals who are undeniably entirely obsessed with unnotable minors. I could have deleted your absurd rant but that would be extremely infantile. I *never* withdraw valid comments as a matter of principal.  But to clarify, I repeat my previous point that I have never accused anyone of paedophilia. Barney the barney barney (talk) 09:12, 9 August 2014 (UTC)

Edit warring on my talk page
Please be aware that I am entitled to remove material from my talk page and that WP:3RR does not apply to me in my own user space. It does, however, apply to other users. If you revert me in my own user space again I will report you. Viewfinder (talk) 10:03, 9 August 2014 (UTC)


 * Actually - this wouldn't be the first time you've handed out a false warnings about 3RR in a passive-aggressive way would it?
 * I find your actions are extremely infantile and childish, but if you want to stick your fingers in your ears and go "na-na-na-na-na", that's your prerogative. Just don't pretend it's civil.
 * This is of course completely based on your unwillingness to acknowledge that the problem here is entirely down to your poor behaviour arising from your unhealthy obsession with a biography of a minor of no encyclopedic importance whatsoever and attempting to include in that biography puffery that is both bizarre and obviously false. Barney the barney barney (talk) 10:15, 9 August 2014 (UTC)


 * ViewFinder is correct that in general, users are allowed to remove material from their own talk pages. It doesn't matter why you think they removed it, the action is assumed to be proof that the user has read the material. Quoting from WP:TPO:


 * "On your own user talk page, you may archive threads at your discretion. Simply deleting others' comments on your talk page is permitted, but most editors prefer archiving. Many new users believe they can hide critical comments by deleting them. This is not true: Such comments can always be retrieved from the page history. Removal of a comment is taken as proof that the user has read it." - WP:TPO


 * Also reverting on one's own talk page is not considered edit warring per WP:NOT3RR, but repeated reverts on other user's talk pages is. -- Racer X11 Talk to me Stalk me  12:36, 9 August 2014 (UTC)

Who's Who AFD argument
Barney, do you know how many people are included in Who's Who, who would not be classed as notable by wikipedia criteria? The figure is probably somewhere around 30-40%. For instance District judges in the UK. District judges are group 7 judges according to the judicial pay scale subordinate to the 600 Circuit Judges, 107 High Court judges, yet are all listed in Who's Who. For example (Frances) Jane McIvor: ''District Judge (Magistrates’ Courts), London, since 2001; Called to the Bar, Inner Temple, 1983; in practice on S Eastern Circuit; Actg Metropolitan Stipendiary Magistrate, 1998–2001. Chm., Connexional Discipline Cttee, Methodist Church, 2005–''. Does anyone think (Frances) Jane McIvor is notable solely because she has been "independently assessed by notability experts at Oxford University Press as being notable"? I don't. Flaming Ferrari (talk) 17:09, 15 August 2014 (UTC)


 * Thanks for the message. Barney the barney barney (talk) 17:21, 15 August 2014 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for August 16
Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Edwin Charles Cox, you added links pointing to the disambiguation pages TD, Southern Railway and CVO. Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ* Join us at the DPL WikiProject.

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 09:24, 16 August 2014 (UTC)

August 2014
Hello, I'm BracketBot. I have automatically detected that [//en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?diff=621647535 your edit] to Sir Joseph Thackwell may have broken the syntax by modifying 2 "[]"s. If you have, don't worry: just [ edit the page] again to fix it. If I misunderstood what happened, or if you have any questions, you can leave a message on [//en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?action=edit&preload=User:A930913/BBpreload&editintro=User:A930913/BBeditintro&minor=&title=User_talk:A930913&preloadtitle=BracketBot%20–%20&section=new my operator's talk page].
 * List of unpaired brackets remaining on the page:

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, BracketBot (talk) 17:06, 17 August 2014 (UTC)
 * back to the Peninsula in 1813. It formed part of the hussar brigade attached to Graham's corps see Graham, Thomas, Lord Lynedoch, and at the passage of the Esla, on 31 May, Thackwell
 * Cotton]]. He served with the 15th in the campaign of 1815. It belonged to Grant's brigade see Sir Colquhoun Grant, which was on the right of the line at Waterloo. Its share in the

Nomination of Joseph Thackwell for deletion
A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Joseph Thackwell 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 Articles for deletion/Joseph Thackwell 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 high-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 notice from the top of the article. Cheers, Thanks,  L235 - Talk Ping when replying 14:09, 18 August 2014 (UTC)

Proposed deletion of Sir Joseph Thackwell


The article Sir Joseph Thackwell has been proposed for deletion because it appears to have no references. Under Wikipedia policy, this newly created biography of a living person will be deleted unless it has at least one reference to a reliable source that directly supports material in the article.

If you created the article, please don't be offended. Instead, consider improving the article. For help on inserting references, see Referencing for beginners, or ask at the help desk. Once you have provided at least one reliable source, you may remove the prod blp tag. Please do not remove the tag unless the article is sourced. If you cannot provide such a source within seven days, the article may be deleted, but you can when you are ready to add one. Cheers, Thanks,  L235 - Talk Ping when replying 13:43, 18 August 2014 (UTC)


 * Thanks - perhaps you missed that he's been dead a short while, trifling really - I can see how you were confused.  He's been dead for now merely twice the time now that he was alive (78 years) - so that's only 155 years (OK, I know 78*2 isn't 155, but my maths is still more accurate than your basic reading. WP:TROUT. Barney the barney barney (talk) 14:08, 18 August 2014 (UTC)
 * But still, AfDd. Sorry. Cheers, Thanks,  L235 - Talk Ping when replying 14:10, 18 August 2014 (UTC)

Speedy deletion nomination of Sir Joseph Thackwell


A tag has been placed on Sir Joseph Thackwell requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section G12 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because the article or image appears to be a clear copyright infringement. This article or image appears to be a direct copy from http://books.google.com/books?id=ECgJAAAAIAAJ&pg=PA106&lpg=PA106&dq=was+fourth+son+of+John+Thackwell,+J.P.,+of+Rye+Court+and+Moreton+Court,+Worcestershire,+by+Judith,+daughter+of+J.+Duffy.&source=bl&ots=B8LlUu8Oto&sig=oTv6lqkG8whmOxGvx26-C_1DaMQ&hl=en&sa=X&ei=AAPyU6-xBaTgsATVoILYDg&ved=0CCMQ6AEwAQ#v=onepage&q=was%20fourth%20son%20of%20John%20Thackwell%2C%20J.P.%2C%20of%20Rye%20Court%20and%20Moreton%20Court%2C%20Worcestershire%2C%20by%20Judith%2C%20daughter%20of%20J.%20Duffy.&f=false. For legal reasons, we cannot accept copyrighted text or images borrowed from other web sites or printed material, and as a consequence, your addition will most likely be deleted. You may use external websites as a source of information, but not as a source of sentences. This part is crucial: say it in your own words. Wikipedia takes copyright violations very seriously and persistent violators will be blocked from editing.

If the external website or image belongs to you, and you want to allow Wikipedia to use the text or image — which means allowing other people to modify it — then you must verify that externally by one of the processes explained at Donating copyrighted materials. If you are not the owner of the external website or image but have permission from that owner, see Requesting copyright permission. You might want to look at Wikipedia's policies and guidelines for more details, or ask a question here.

If you think this page should not be deleted for this reason, you may contest the nomination by visiting the page and clicking the button labelled "Click here to contest this speedy deletion". This will give you the opportunity to explain why you believe the page should not be deleted. However, be aware that once a page is tagged for speedy deletion, it may be removed without delay. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag from the page yourself, but do not hesitate to add information in line with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines.  TLSuda  (talk) 13:44, 18 August 2014 (UTC)


 * The source is public domain. Thanks for checking that WP:BEFORE. Barney the barney barney (talk) 14:09, 18 August 2014 (UTC)
 * We all make mistakes sometimes Barney. I immediately restored it. Though, it will probably be re-deleted anyways due to the lack of sources and poor quality. Cheers,  TLSuda  (talk) 14:20, 18 August 2014 (UTC)
 * I think that assessment is about as intelligent as your initial assessment (which is to say, not exceedingly so). Barney the barney barney (talk) 14:25, 18 August 2014 (UTC)

Civility?
Can you explain your edit summary in your revert of Special:Diff/621774029 please? If you want, I can get other diffs as well. Cheers, Thanks,  L235 - Talk Ping when replying 14:15, 18 August 2014 (UTC)


 * Hi - please learn to civilly engage your brain as a safety mechanism to prevent you doing silly things. Barney the barney barney (talk) 14:26, 18 August 2014 (UTC)


 * That is not an answer to my question. Could you please explain your edit summary in that revert? Thank you. Cheers, Thanks,  L235 - Talk Ping when replying 14:34, 18 August 2014 (UTC)


 * Dear - sorry for not asnwering your question.  An "edit summary" is a summary of the edit.  That is a summary is a short bit of text describing the changes made.  It is entered in the box marked "Summary".  I believe there is a summary of this atWP:EDITSUMMARY.  If you have any other questions, please let me know.  Thank you for your understanding, it is greatly appreciated. Barney the barney barney (talk) 12:19, 19 August 2014 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for August 23
Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that you've added some links pointing to disambiguation pages. Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ* Join us at the DPL WikiProject.


 * Chesney Gold Medal
 * added a link pointing to Sir John Hackett


 * Parapsychological Association Outstanding Career Award
 * added a link pointing to Richard Broughton

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 09:15, 23 August 2014 (UTC)

ANI thread
There is currently a discussion at Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents regarding an issue with which you may have been involved. Thank you. The thread is Administrators'_noticeboard/Incidents. 50.0.205.237 (talk) 15:37, 23 August 2014 (UTC)

User lies to AN/I, gets me blocked
You have been blocked from editing for a period of 96 hours for disrupting an AFD, and personal attacks. Once the block has expired, you are welcome to make useful contributions. If you think there are good reasons why you should be unblocked, you may appeal this block by adding the following text below this notice:. However, you should read the guide to appealing blocks first. the panda ₯’ 21:25, 23 August 2014 (UTC)


 * Thanks - that's extremely useful.  Can you please identify what exactly were the "personal attacks"?  And which AFD was "disrupted"?  In general I follow a policy of apologising for things that I've done wrong so I'd like to know. Barney the barney barney (talk) 23:28, 23 August 2014 (UTC)


 * Oh hang on, I've found it. To clarify,  has now added to his lies by making false allegations at WP:ANI.  To clarify what happened, he wrote an AFD nomination that misrepresented the subject as only being a minor, and specifically mentioned the role of mayor.  He made innuendo that the role of mayor was unimportant (which is technically true), but failed to mention that the gentleman was a long-time leader of the majority party on the council, and used inneundo to conflate the two unrelated.  He also apparently omitted to conduct a WP:BEFORE search for sources because when such a search is performed a plethora of sources are to be found.  When I politely pointed out this to him and gave him the opportunity to correct himself, he refused to do this, asserting things that are clearly not true to anyone with at least half a brain (that a leader of a party group is equally as important as a non-leader) and started to make personal allegations against me.  He has now compounded his lies by writing further lies at WP:AN/I which have led a productive and editor of good character being blocked.  WP:BOOMERANG should have applied to the petty vindictive request of a liar and a troll.


 * I stated it was my policy to apologise for things that I have done wrong. However, as I have done nothing wrong in this case, no apology will be forthcoming.  Barney the barney barney (talk) 23:44, 23 August 2014 (UTC)


 * If any editor believes that the subject of an article does not indeed warrant an article, they are very welcome to raise an AFD. If their investigation shows the subject to be "minor", then that's their educated opinion.  That does NOT make them a liar, and troublemaker, or anything else...it's their reading of the citations.  Referring to "anyone with half a brain", and referring further to lies (wholly unfounded), and changing this section header to what you have is an obvious continuation of your personal attacks, and I'll be extending your current block accordingly.  the panda ₯’  23:59, 23 August 2014 (UTC)

You have been blocked from editing your talkpage due to abuse of the unblock process, continuing to attack editors, or other disruptive reasons. You may still contest any current block by using the unblock ticket request system, but you should read our guide to appealing blocks first. the panda ₯’ 00:01, 24 August 2014 (UTC)
 * Nope, I'm sorry, you're the one who's misrepresenting the matter. As I pointed out, repeatedly, in response to your comments, WP:NPOL does not give greater weight to the "leader of a political party" at the city council level than it does to other city councillors — "garden-variety councillor" or "party leader", the person still has to pass WP:GNG by virtue of the quality of sourcing that has actually been provided. Whatever you think about whether the position is more notable in principle or not than a "garden-variety city councillor", Wikipedia's inclusion criteria for politicians do not grant the party leader a greater presumption of notability than the garden-variety councillor, if the quality of sourcing is not there to get him past GNG. I did not assert anything about the level of power that the leader does or doesn't have within the council's internal structure — I provided a completely accurate assessment of Wikipedia's inclusion standards for local politicians (no matter what role they held, they still have to pass GNG for it) which wasn't even remotely the same thing as what you're claiming that I said.
 * Secondly, I said nothing in the entire discussion that was in any way an allegation or personal attack against you. The worst thing I said about you at any point was that you were arguing with a strawman instead of with what I was actually saying, which is not an actionable comment (and you threw the word "strawman" at me too, so if it were an actionable comment you'd still be blocked right alongside me anyway.) You, on the other hand, called me an outright liar, which you're simply not allowed to do. And if you're allowed to characterize yourself as a productive editor of good character, then I'm allowed to point out that I most certainly have a reputation as a productive editor of good character as well — I've been around here since 2003, and do not have any sort of reputation as being a liar or a troll or a dishonest editor. (I've never once, for example, accumulated a single behavioral block in that entire time, not even a ten-minute timeout. If I were half as bad an editor as you seem to think, I'd have been banned years ago — but in reality, I'm actually a pretty well-respected contributor who's never once in an entire decade had to be formally sanctioned or disciplined with anything more than a minor "hey, you screwed up here, so be more careful about this next time, okay?")
 * Thirdly, I most certainly did do enough WP:BEFORE to be aware that the volume of available sourcing out there is not as strong as you're claiming; there are a fair number of reliable sources which mention his name in passing, but I did not a find a lot of sources which were about him in a substantive way. And at least one other commenter in the AFD discussion has also pointed out that they didn't find much substantive sourcing on a Google search either. And as I also pointed out, I am Canadian, and do not have access to the resources necessary to do a really comprehensive database search of past British media coverage — I can only go by what comes up on Google, and what I saw on Google was a lot of sources that just namechecked him in passing as a former councillor, and not a lot that actually constituted substantive coverage of his career while he was in office. If you think there are enough sources out there to get him over GNG, you're certainly more than welcome to find them and add them to the article — I said, right from the start, that the article could be kept if the sourcing were improved — but you're not entitled to just namecall and insult anybody who happens to disagree with you about the current state of the article.
 * And finally, just for the record, I asked for nothing in the ANI post except for somebody to review the situation and make their own decision about who was or wasn't at fault. I'm sure I would have been blocked or at least warned if Panda had read the discussion and decided that I was the one at fault, but that's not what happened. Bearcat (talk) 00:44, 24 August 2014 (UTC)


 * Thanks - thanks to your efforst I've been lbocked from editnig for the past 4 days.  Bet you feel proud of yourself.
 * However, no, piling lies on top of further lies won't help your cause. You are clearly quite delusional, a calculating liar and should not be allowed to edit Wikipedia.
 * A leader of a council is more important than a non-leader. This is an indisuptable fact that you choose to ignore mostly because you're a complete idiot. Barney the barney barney (talk) 10:24, 28 August 2014 (UTC)
 * Obviously I'm going to have to try this again: I said nothing at any point about whether a leader of a council was or wasn't more important than a non-leader in principle — I said that Wikipedia's inclusion rules for city councillors don't give the leader a greater entitlement to automatic inclusion in Wikipedia than the non-leader gets, and that regardless of whether the person is a leader or a non-leader of the council their entitlement to a Wikipedia article depends entirely on your ability to demonstrate that they have passed WP:GNG as an individual. Which is absolutely, unequivocally true as far as Wikipedia's inclusion policies go.
 * I never said anything about whether a leader of a council is more important than a non-leader is in principle — but Wikipedia's inclusion rules do not grant the leader a greater presumption of notability, in the absence of any substantive sourcing about him, than the non-leader gets. Leader or non-leader, a city councillor still has to pass GNG as an individual to qualify for an article on Wikipedia — and your point about the leader being more important in principle has no bearing on my entirely correct point, which was that Wikipedia's inclusion standards for politicians do not grant the leader of a city council a greater entitlement than any other city councillor gets to keep a poorly sourced article. My point began and ended with a completely accurate statement of what Wikipedia's inclusion standards for politicians do and do not accept as sufficient notability to warrant a Wikipedia article — I never, not even once, said anything even approaching what you're claiming that I said. And the fact that you repeatedly refuse to see the huge difference between those two things suggests far more about you than it does about me. You're absolutely free to believe that our inclusion standards should be different than they are, on the basis that the leader of the council is more important than a regular councillor, and you're absolutely free to try to pursue a consensus to add that to the notability guidelines as an NPOL-satisfying claim of notability — but you're not entitled to claim that someone is "lying" about whether a politician passes NPOL or not, if their argument is based on NPOL in its actual current form instead of some alternate version that exists only on your own personal wish list.
 * And also, again, I did not ask for anything from ANI except for an uninvolved admin to review the situation and decide for themselves how to handle it. I did not ask for you to be blocked; Panda made that decision on their own after looking at the situation with their own eyes and deciding for themselves what the appropriate response was to the matter. So as unfortunate as this may be for you, it's not my fault either. Bearcat (talk) 01:12, 30 August 2014 (UTC)
 * I've told you before, - piling new lies on top of old lies doesn't make the old lies less false.  I hate to have to repeat this remarably simple fact to you .  No, your "nomination" did not contain *any* coherent arguments to delete, just lies and innunendo.  Anyone with half a brain (which excludes you and  should realise; you can't argue that x+y=x, where y>0, as you have tried to do.  Repeatedly.  And finally, yes, you did ask for me to get blocked merely by whinging about it to AN/I (and no doubt getting your pet admin to do the job for you).  I predict that this will be sorted soon however.

Use of Sir prefix in article title
Hi Barney, jsut a polite request, in future could you refrain from using the title Sir (or Dame for that matter) in the title of new article creations. I have moved some of the articles you created previously such as Sir Robert McLean to Robert McLean (engineer). The only exception to the rule is Baronets, where it is generally correct to include their knighthood in the article title, as you correcly did with Sir Robert Pigot, 6th Baronet. Thanks Flaming Ferrari (talk) 14:41, 18 August 2014 (UTC)


 * - thanks for your message. I commit to using the correct name, (i.e. only the full name) in future. Barney the barney barney (talk) 12:21, 19 August 2014 (UTC)

In case it becomes relevant in future, I feel I should note that 's advice is not consistent with the guidelines described at Naming conventions (royalty and nobility). Articles about knights and baronets should in most cases be titled simply with the subject's name, without "Sir" (or "Dame") at the beginning or "Nth Baronet" at the end. The exception is when that would be ambiguous with somebody else who has the same name but is not a knight/baronet, in which case the prefix (and suffix, for a baronet) may be added for disambiguation. (I have paraphrased and abridged the guidelines somewhat, so I recommend you to read them yourself and don't just take my word for it.) — Paul A (talk) 02:28, 25 August 2014 (UTC)


 * Thanks - I would continue to only create pages with the correct title, but I've been infinetely clocked.  Barney the barney barney (talk) 17:51, 31 August 2014 (UTC)

Message
-Roxy the dog™ (resonate) 11:15, 28 August 2014 (UTC)
 * Thanks. Barney the barney barney (talk) 17:51, 31 August 2014 (UTC)

Winston S. Churchill
This is NOT repeat NOT just a variant of Churchill's name.

It is very specifically his pen name - he adopted it to distinguish his books from those of the then much more famous (!) American novelist of the same name!!!!!

--Soundofmusicals (talk) 20:41, 19 August 2014 (UTC)


 * I do not dispute that. Unfortunately for you however, it is entirely irrelevant. Barney the barney barney (talk) 20:45, 19 August 2014 (UTC)


 * See Winston Churchill (novelist). The "S." occurs ONLY as a pen name - and is therefore only relevant at all in the context of the specific article dealing with Sir Winston as a writer. It is not entirely irrelevant to the "main" article, but it is clear where the primary relevance lies. Sorry about the tiny mind remark - uncalled for, of course. --Soundofmusicals (talk) 21:06, 19 August 2014 (UTC)


 * Getting angry above about it doesn't change the undeniable fact that it needs to go to the main subject. You've also broken WP:3RR.  And I hate musicals, especially the one with the singing nuns.  Barney the barney barney (talk) 21:21, 19 August 2014 (UTC)


 * Your love (or otherwise) of musicals has, of course, precisely the same relevance to this argument as your (or even my) anger, or even which one of us broke WP:3RR first. Winston Churchill as writer is in this instance the "main article" - since the redirect can only refer to that subject and has nothing whatever to do with the "main subject" of the other article, which is (very properly) primarily about his political career. Is this worth asking for arbitration? --Soundofmusicals (talk) 21:44, 19 August 2014 (UTC)


 * Probably be better for you just to drop it. Barney the barney barney (talk) 21:54, 19 August 2014 (UTC)


 * Reluctant to leave an error that reflects so badly on its perpetrator in place - so out of the purest kindness I am constrained to insist that the correct redirection remain when all the dust has settled. Unless an independent arbitrator deems otherwise, of course ... Actually, it would be better to have no redirect from Sir Winston's pen name at all (just delete the redirect altogether) than have it direct to an article (mostly) about his political career (a rather comprehensively unrelated subject). --Soundofmusicals (talk)

I have formally asked for arbitration on this one. --Soundofmusicals (talk) 00:20, 23 August 2014 (UTC)


 * Oops - I don't dispute much, and I put my request for arbitration on the wrong page! On advice - I have redone this one to WP:3O. I don't think this one had anything to do with your blocking - hope not, anyway. In this instance I am being at least as sarcastic as you - this (for me at least) is good-natured banter - my only dispute with you is the question of where this redirect page should point! --Soundofmusicals (talk) 23:06, 23 August 2014 (UTC)


 * I have followed the 30 arbitrator's ruling and relocated this redirect to the original place. Sorry - I'm quite often wrong, but not in this case. --Soundofmusicals (talk) 01:18, 28 August 2014 (UTC)


 * Sorry to see you had to grab that brief window of opportunity to continue this edit war. I honestly thought better of you than that. Appreciate you feel passionately about this one, but could we have just ONE constructive argument on your side. He is simply NOT CALLED Winston S. Churchill anywhere but on the covers of his books. The "S" is not in fact a "middle initial" but part of his full surname (Spencer-Churchill), which again he never used in any other context. All you have said in reply is that this is not relevant - in what way is a pen name of an author not relevant to a discussion of his writings? Much MORE relevant - surely, than to a general discussion of his life, especially when certain aspects of that life are so very much more important. Anyway - if our "third opinion" had come out in YOUR support I'm sure that you would have been most indignant if I hadn't "accepted the verdict" - fair's fair. --Soundofmusicals (talk) 21:17, 28 August 2014 (UTC)


 * Thanks - it takes a very special level of incompetence to redirect a page away from its obvious target, violate 3RR, personally attack people, post an incoherent moan on the talk page and complain about "ew, lack of arguments" - when the contrasted shambling irrelevancies of your so-called arugment" contrasts with the elegant simplicity and undeniable truthfulness of having the redirect to the main article - yet it seems that you have plumbed these depths of utter stupidity.  Now, since I can't edit at the moment having been infinitely blocked due to the bahaviour of yet more other idiots, I require that you please point the page back to its correct target.  Thanks for your understanding. Barney the barney barney (talk) 17:51, 31 August 2014 (UTC)


 * Sorry mate but do consider that everyone else might just be right here! Forgive me if I find you impossible to take seriously.--Soundofmusicals (talk) 21:30, 31 August 2014 (UTC)


 * - kindly talk to me here as I can't edit other pages. People who fail to take me seriously will suffer the consequences.  You do not seem to understand that I will achieve my aims, and you will not get in the way. Barney the barney barney (talk) 16:48, 3 September 2014 (UTC)

August 2014
You have been blocked indefinitely from editing for continual, unabated violations of the no personal attacks policy you agreed to. If you think there are good reasons why you should be unblocked, you may appeal this block by adding the following text below this notice:. However, you should read the guide to appealing blocks first. the panda ₯’ 10:27, 28 August 2014 (UTC)

- before I ask for unblocked, I ask politely that you undo your unjusitifed actions. Barney the barney barney (talk) 10:38, 28 August 2014 (UTC)


 * By your own admission, you have been consistently violating two key principles of Wikipedia: WP:AGF, and WP:CIVIL. A block is intended to be a last resort when someone refuses to follow the rules as they are laid out.  The first block is supposed to be final part of the learning curve.  Unfortunately, while blocked, and now AFTER your previous block, you continued down the same path of insults and ABF.  As such, it's apparent you either a) cannot learn to act within the behavioural norms you agreed to on this private website, or b) you refuse to abide by those same norms.  This block is for your continued behaviour outside the expected norms, and is unfortunately quite justified.  We cannot allow any editor to continually refer to another as a "liar", "delusional", or any such actions  the panda ₯’  11:00, 28 August 2014 (UTC)


 * Comment. It would be a significant loss to wikipedia if this situation, BBB remaining indefinitely blocked, were to continue, um, indefinitely. His contributions where he and I intersect have always been constructive, sensible, and ultimately of benefit to the project. What should be done to help reverse this situation? Can I do anything? -Roxy the dog™ (resonate) 11:23, 28 August 2014 (UTC)


 * Roxy, I typically agree - content edits are not usually the problem; behaviour towards others is. Behaviour is not something a mentor can handle.  Indef blocks are not infinite - they are "until the community is convinced the behaviour will not recur".  At this point, this block is for continual recurrence of a set of behaviours.  How does one move forward if every word typed is basically an insult to someone?  the panda ₯’  11:34, 28 August 2014 (UTC)
 * I agree totally to the rules. I have always abided by the reules. Barney the barney barney (talk) 17:51, 31 August 2014 (UTC)

Really Barney?, over a city councilor? A wiki break, even if not voluntary, may be a good thing to help you get your perspective back. -- TRPoD aka The Red Pen of Doom  03:18, 30 August 2014 (UTC)


 * - this has never been about me. It has always been about  starting a disruptive AFD with lies, then rather than retracting those lies, adding further lies on top of those original lies, and then craftily getting his pet admin  to back him up.  It is quite clear tat the wfong peron has been infintely blocked here and I resent the dispersions cast against my character.  Barney the barney barney (talk) 17:51, 31 August 2014 (UTC)
 * Bearcat is not the one calling other editors idiots and liars. This is about you and how you are handling this situation- which is turning out to be "in a way that results in you getting blocked and getting your block extended." And it doesnt have to be that way. -- TRPoD aka The Red Pen of Doom  17:56, 31 August 2014 (UTC)
 * Thanks - it's quite clear who started this.  It's quite clear who escaleated ths and it wasn't me.  Now, I could pretend to be sorry however that would be in effect an admission that  didn't lie  and wasn't being disruptive.  However, I have principls, and cannot take this action as it is unprincipled.  I am not sorry, and cannot retract my statements about  because simply they are true. Barney the barney barney (talk) 18:02, 31 August 2014 (UTC)
 * i could tell you that no matter who started it and who escalated it, what happens from here on in depends mostly upon you, but I think you already know that. I hope that you are able to find a way to keep your principles in tact within the Wikipedia framework so that you can return to editing. (And maybe you can add to your principles "I will never call anyone an idiot or liar on Wiki again - i will just have my dog think it at them." )--  TRPoD aka The Red Pen of Doom  18:18, 31 August 2014 (UTC)


 * I don't think you have to say you're sorry or that you apologize. You don't even have to agree that the rules are fair or applied equally.  All you really have to do is say you understand how you broke the rules, that you've read the relevant guidelines and will abide them.  And mean it.  At that point, you bury the hatchet and try to move on and either avoid or play nice with people you don't like.  Some days you eat the bear, some days the beat eats you.  I doubt you really want to leave here or get forced out.  Msnicki (talk) 18:35, 31 August 2014 (UTC)


 * And the upshot to all this is that the AfD was closed with no consensus. I like the bold approach by Tripod to advising BBB - it does appear that you are backed into a corner with no exits except biting the bullet. I don't know you well enough to be less circumspect in my comments. I think the onus is on you now to find a way back. Please try. Best. -Roxy the dog™ (resonate) 00:54, 1 September 2014 (UTC)


 * And yet again. Whether you like it or not, Wikipedia's inclusion guidelines do not offer the leader of a city council an automatic right to keep a Wikipedia article on the basis of a single source which merely namechecks their existence — no matter what role a city councillor holds (plain old councillor, leader of the council, one year in the ceremonial rotation of mayors, head of a council committee, whatever), the only criterion in WP:NPOL that any city councillor can ever satisfy just because of their city council position alone is "major local political figures who have received significant press coverage" (i.e. who have passed WP:GNG as individuals in their own right). So if you cannot explicitly demonstrate that the significant press coverage is there — it cannot simply be assumed to exist, but must actually be shown — then they do not get a Wikipedia article regardless of what role they held on the city council. This is not a "lie"; it's a completely correct and accurate and true assessment of what Wikipedia's inclusion rules for politicians say about city councillors.
 * But you persisted, and still persist now, in ignoring the "Wikipedia's inclusion rules for politicians" part of my comments, and putting words in my mouth which I didn't say. You're claiming that I cast personal aspersions on him as an individual — but I didn't. You're claiming that I'm failing to understand that "a leader is more important than a regular councillor" — but that distinction does not make a difference to Wikipedia's inclusion rules, which whether you like the fact or not do not grant the leader of a city council any greater entitlement to have a Wikipedia article than any other city councillor gets. Any city councillor, leader or not, has to pass GNG to qualify for an article on here. And at no point in the entire discussion did I say even one word about anything beyond the question of Wikipedia's inclusion rules.
 * You're entirely within your right to believe that our inclusion criteria for city councillors should be different than they are, and to pursue a consensus discussion to try to get them changed to your liking. But you're not entitled to call someone a liar for accurately summarizing what the current consensus is for the inclusion or exclusion of city councillors.
 * I said all along that the article could be kept if enough sourcing were added to get him past GNG — but instead of adding sourcing, you simply dismissed the incontrovertibly true fact that NPOL does not confer an automatic presumption of notability on city councillors as "lies", and attacked me instead of the real problem (the quality of sourcing). The discussion's now been closed "no consensus", but the reason that happened is because another editor ponied up with some actual sourcing and content improvements. You were the only person to vote keep before that improvement happened, and your rationale was a personal attack on me in which you failed to engage the fact that the article didn't satisfy any of Wikipedia's inclusion rules in its original form. It got kept because the article got improved, not because anybody (least of all me) was "lying" about anything.
 * And as for this stuff about "my pet admin", I don't know where you're pulling that assumption from either — I don't recall that I've ever interacted with Dangerous Panda before in my entire Wikipedia career, so it's not possible for them to be my "pet" anything. Bearcat (talk) 16:27, 1 September 2014 (UTC)
 * I seem to recall  that *YOUR* refusal to acknowledge indisputable basic facts was teh root cause of teh disruption YOU initiated at the original AFD.  Although I do enjoy watching your squirm in your little hole trying to justify unjustifiable actions, it is gettting slightly tiring now.  You are clearly incapable of understanding and my guess is 50% of both of your braincells are malfunctioning.  You lied.  Then you snuck to the teacher.  Admit these facts now and we can deal with this sordid little affair appropriately.  Barney the barney barney (talk) 16:46, 3 September 2014 (UTC)

You have been blocked from editing your talkpage due to abuse of the unblock process, continuing to attack editors, or other disruptive reasons. You may still contest any current block by using the unblock ticket request system, but you should read our guide to appealing blocks first. the panda ₯’ 20:01, 3 September 2014 (UTC)


 * Respectfully, DangerousPanda, I think this was unhelpful and I hope you will reconsider. You should at least have let another uninvolved admin review the situation before ratcheting the sanctions again.  There's starting to be an appearance you could be too WP:INVOLVED, that it may have become personal to you that, gosh darn it, you are going to make Barney behave.
 * But also, a block shouldn't turn into an announcement that we'll hold him down while anyone who doesn't like him gets to take a free swing. Yes, of course Barney's response is insulting and unhelpful.  But frankly, I'm more appalled by Bearcat's behavior here.  Why is he here picking at a scab on Barney's own talk page?  Why does he get a free pass?  He also needs to learn how to drop the stick and slowly back away from the horse.  The right outcome here is that these two editors, who obviously don't like each other, can learn either to avoid each other or at least play nice.  The right outcome is not that one of them gets to pick fights and the other isn't allowed to respond, not even on his own talk page.  Msnicki (talk) 20:38, 3 September 2014 (UTC)
 * That's the most ridiculous paragraph ever written in the English language. 1) There's no humanly possible way of calling me "involved"; 2) I have no desire to "make" anyone do anything: Barney agreed to the rules, and no personal attacks was one of them, no matter what the situation; 3) I've obviously monitored the discussion, and you cannot honestly be suggesting that Barney is allowed to make snide remarks and insults towards Bearcat, but that Bearcat is not allowed to return to discuss rationally and politely their side of the story?  Give your head a shake if that's what you're really saying.  If Barney had focused on their own behaviour and how it violated community norms, Bearcat wouldn't have had to come near this page...and Barney likely would have been unblocked by now, wouldn't they?  Instead, false accusations and personal attacks were the words of the day ... and thus, protection was necessary.  the panda ₯’  22:48, 3 September 2014 (UTC)


 * When your response is about as insulting and disrespectful -- and in the same way, you telling me to give my head a shake versus Barney questioning how many of Bearcat's braincells are working -- then yes, I do think you're no longer uninvolved and that you should step back.  I've not said anything at all disrespectful that deserves this response, questioning whether my brain is working.  Are admins special that they can get away with this?  If Barney can get blocked for a playground insult, why not you?  And I'll say again, it's completely transparent that Bearcat is not here to discuss anything rationally and politely.  Whatever the original debate was about, that part's over.  Bearcat's here only to gloat over Barney's predicament and he's doing what he can to irritate Barney on Barney's own talk page.   He needs to walk away.  The fact you would defend Bearcat's boorish behavior is, imho, yet more evidence that you are WAY too involved.  Msnicki (talk) 23:41, 3 September 2014 (UTC)


 * Appreciate sticking up for a fellow editor - I have been attempting to do something similar myself, if a little less directly. But read through the thread above this one (Winston S. Churchill) - especially his last post - if you don't think our Barney is skating around the edge of deserving a truly "life-time" ban. I just don't believe that his "disputes" have anything to do with this project at all anymore (if they ever did). As he says himself "nothing will get in the way of his aims". Well, that really sounds very negotiable, doesn't it? If I have any sympathy left for Barney at all - it is as a person with severe problems that I wish I could help - not as a fellow Wikipedia editor (since he has evidently given up on this role himself). --Soundofmusicals (talk) 23:09, 3 September 2014 (UTC)


 * No, I do not think he should be facing a lifetime ban. I think what we have here is a case where the sanctions have been ratcheted too fast and where Bearcat has been allowed to continue to baiting Barney over a fight that Bearcat has already won.  The objective should be good behavior, not a test of wills.  Read my suggestion to Barney above at 18:35 to simply agree to the rules and avoid Bearcat.  Even I would have had trouble following my advice after Bearcat gave him another big poke the very next day.  Msnicki (talk) 23:41, 3 September 2014 (UTC)


 * I initially thought the sanctions were coming down a bit on the heavy side - but then again, I wish you'd have a closer look at his efforts just lately - and all Bearcat (or I) have done really is dare to disagree with what he has taken to calling his "aims". If I have used a teeny bit too much gentle irony, or if Bearcat has repeated himself a little too persistently, don't you think this pales beside his full blown abuse? Whether he is right or wrong (in either case) is totally beside the point, wiki editors simply CAN'T be allowed to run amuck quite like THAT, or no editor with a skin thinner than that of an rhinoceros would survive, and the version of an article that remained stable would be that "aimed" at by the loudest, most abusive mouth. And he has the nerve to complain about abusive language by others! Taking him seriously (I am starting to wonder if perhaps I should after all) his last reply to me even constituted a (not-so-veiled) threat - although what exactly he is threatening me with I am at a loss to imagine... The ball is in his court anyway - let's leave it there!!!--Soundofmusicals (talk) 11:52, 4 September 2014 (UTC)

ANI discussion
There is currently a discussion at Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents regarding an issue with which you may have been involved. The thread is DangerousPanda's latest block of Barney the barney barney. Thank you. —Msnicki (talk) 00:18, 4 September 2014 (UTC)

Some free advice, perhaps worth every penny
I think you should get another chance to clear this up with another admin. But I have no ability to make that happen. Here's what I think you need to know.


 * 1) They have the goods on you.  Our guidelines clearly prohibit personal attacks so when you make one that undeniably fits the definition, they've got you.  You're just not allowed to call people names.  Yes, there's obviously evidence that WP:NPA is only selectively enforced.  And sure, anyone is free to speculate privately about who's more likely to be blocked for transgressions.  The point is, ordinary mortals like you and me should never expect to get away with it.
 * 2) Never give anyone low-hanging fruit they can throw at you.  Never make it easy for anyone to cite you for personal attacks by responding to anyone under any circumstances with anything containing any of the obvious codewords like idiot, liar, stupid, brainless, yada, yada.
 * 3) When you find yourself dealing with a difficult person here on WP, you have basically just 3 choices.  You can walk away, you can find a way to get along, or you can go at it but coloring only inside the lines.  By "inside the lines", what I mean is that if you pursue a fight, you're going to need the arguments, facts, verbal skills and, most important, the composure to pull it off without violating the guidelines.  Your arguments have to be about what someone did or said (represented fairly!), never about what you think that says about the person who did or said it.  Here on WP, the #1 reason I will walk away from a fight is that I've notice I'm getting angry.  If someone's got my goat, I know I'm going to make a stupid mistake sooner or later.  I'm going to give them low-hanging fruit they're going to throw at me.
 * 4) Yes, there are some real WP:DICKs here on WP and there's nothing you can do about it.  There are any number of existence proofs that it's totally possible to be completely annoying but stay inside the lines.  Some people really know how to push buttons without ever crossing the line into a personal attack or other mistake.  Please try not to be one of those people.  But if you find yourself dealing with someone you've decided falls in this category, you should always walk at the first opportunity.  You're not going to win.  They're probably much better at being a WP:DICK than you are.
 * 5) Sometimes people you think are WP:DICKs turn out not to be.  When you're in the midst of a heated argument with someone, it's pretty easy to conclude, what a contentious blockhead.  But I've noticed, not infrequently, that if I walk away and don't happen to encounter them for a few months, that when I see them again and neither of us is angry anymore, it's completely different.  It's often worth walking away before you've poisoned the well by saying something you can't take back (certainly not here, where your edit history remains!) if only just so you can have another chance for a fresh start later on.

Here's what I think you should do.


 * 1) Write the unblock request email they're asking.
 * 2) Own up to your mistakes.  Frankly, the only mistakes I find anyone really remembers are the ones you refuse to admit.  This too shall pass.  So get done with it and concede they have the goods on you, that you called both Bearcat and DangerousPanda names and posted some other silly insults that crossed the line.
 * 3) State that you understand what the guidelines require.  See if you can paraphrase it to explain what you need to do differently in the future to stay within the guidelines if you find yourself in any new disputes.
 * 4) You are not required to apologize or say you're sorry or that you didn't mean what you said.  You're entitled to your opinions, just not to posting every one of them.  Think of this like a speeding ticket.  You're not required to apologize for a minor speeding ticket but it does go on your record and you do have to pay the fine.  Here, the fine they extract is a promise not to do it again.  If you want to give someone a piece of your mind and tell them what you really think, all you're promising is that you'll find a way to do it within the guidelines or not at all.  If you decide to apologize, it should be because that's what you think is the right thing to do, not because you feel like anyone forced you.
 * 5) (If you're willing), state that you intend to avoid any future interaction with either Bearcat or DangerousPanda for, say, 3 months.
 * 6) Do not offer excuses or blame anyone else.  It truly does not matter and will not help your case for you to argue that anyone besides you bears any responsibility whatsoever for your plight.  You crossed the line, you made some mistakes and they have the goods on you.  But you're not going to make this mistake again no matter what the provocation because here's what you've learned from the experience.  Short and sweet – and mean it.
 * 7) Show a little class when you write this.  If anyone might be able to tell you're still angry and not quite ready to move on, it still needs another draft.

If you have additional questions about how to get back in good graces or if you write a proper and earnest unblock request and it's turned down, e.g., because it's not been 6 months as required by WP:STANDARDOFFER and you'd like me to request a public discussion at ANI (okay, like that'll do any good :), feel free to email me. I am not here for offline complaints or discussion of any other editor. I know you're unhappy with both Bearcat and DangerousPanda but I do not want to hear about it. To avoid disclosing your RL identity to me, be sure your account here is set up with a throwaway email account before emailing me.

I hope this is helpful. Realistically, you're just a stranger I felt sorry for, but I do care. Good luck. I hope you make some good choices. Msnicki (talk) 18:26, 6 September 2014 (UTC)


 * What Msnicki says! Very sensible advice indeed - although several of us have said similar things she sums it all up nicely. The only "aim" we should have here is the improvement of Wikipedia - once we start to get "attached" to specific fragments of the text thereof (sez me, who does it all the time) we are lost. There is a difference between "subtle" sarcasm and plain abuse (again, I need to take my own advice here!) and when you go over the line you have to apologise (viz my little "sorry" to you after hinting you had a "tiny mind") and resolve to be more careful in future. Never hit that "submit" button until after you have re-read what you said and edited it if necessary! Some people are just a good deal more sensitive than others - I notice you are pretty sensitive yourself when someone drops a gentle or not so gentle hint about YOUR behaviour, so you really should understand. You know how it hurts to be judged and shoved into "little boxes" - well, how about not judging others? May sound trite, but it works. I have been insulted by experts for VERY many years and am fairly thick-skinned, and you even stirred me a bit, especially with that last post. Regards, and looking forward to seeing you again in happier, more productive contexts. --Soundofmusicals (talk) 01:34, 7 September 2014 (UTC)

Restoring talk page access
Not sure if you plan to come back or not, but just in case, I'd like to assume that everyone is a little less hot under the collar than they were 2 months ago, and restricting talk page access is unnecessary. Restoring talk page access in case an unblock request is forthcoming. --Floquenbeam (talk) 19:44, 8 December 2014 (UTC)

Unblocking
After a further review of everything that went on back then, an indef block appears excessive. If you've moved on from Wikipedia, then an unblock doesn't hurt anything. If you'd like to come back but pride or anger or a sense of being treated unfairly is preventing you from making an unblock request, there's no sense waiting for one side to cave in. I've unblocked this account.

I do think some of your comments, Barney, were excessive and over the top. I hope, with time, that you'd now agree with that, at least. But I'm just not convinced an indef block is the solution. I recognize the apparent baiting, and the suboptimal way the block was handled, but those are mitigating factors to the block extension, not excuses for the actual over-the-top aggression. Personally, I believe most of your comments about Bearcat were untrue, and/or unfair; however, even if they were true, we don't go around saying stuff like that out loud all the time. If we did that in real life, everyone would end up with bloody noses every day.

I guess what I'm saying is that while I don't think the indef block was a great solution to the problem, I do think there was a problem, and you should be aware (even if you don't agree) that you'll need to dial it back a few notches if/when you return, or this whole episode is likely to repeat. Either way, good luck with whatever you decide. --Floquenbeam (talk) 20:49, 10 December 2014 (UTC)

AN/I Notice
There is currently a discussion at Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents regarding an issue with which you may have been involved. Thank you.cnbr15 12:28, 16 April 2015 (UTC)

What's the Haldanes Dilemma tag about ?
I think you tagged Fringe onto the article for Haldane's Dilemma back in April 2014, but cannot tell what/where in the article that was done for, nor what would improve the article and serve to remove it. Can you tell me what you meant by that tag and what would clear it out ? Markbassett (talk) 15:27, 7 May 2015 (UTC)

WP:AN Notice
Your name has been mentioned in a conversation at WP:AN. Italick (talk) 18:11, 10 July 2015 (UTC)

Proposed deletion of John Gretton, 4th Baron Gretton


The article John Gretton, 4th Baron Gretton has been proposed for deletion&#32; because of the following concern:
 * Article is on a non-notable person and contains very little content. Original creator of article has also stopped contributing since creating article two years ago.

While all constructive 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 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 will stop the proposed deletion process, but other deletion processes exist. In particular, the speedy deletion process can result in deletion without discussion, and articles for deletion allows discussion to reach consensus for deletion. KevinLiu (talk) 13:58, 17 July 2015 (UTC)

Orphaned non-free image File:Daily Mirror headline Canoe&#39;s this in Panama, 2007-12-05.jpg
 Thanks for uploading File:Daily Mirror headline Canoe&. The image description page currently specifies that the image is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, the image is currently not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the image was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that images for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).

Note that any non-free images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described in the criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. --B-bot (talk) 02:46, 9 September 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) 16:52, 24 November 2015 (UTC)

Speedy deletion nomination of User talk:Sahugme0


A tag has been placed on User talk:Sahugme0 requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section U5 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because the page appears to consist of writings, information, discussions, and/or activities not closely related to Wikipedia's goals. Please note that Wikipedia is not a free Web hosting service. Under the criteria for speedy deletion, such pages may be deleted at any time.

If you think this page should not be deleted for this reason, you may contest the nomination by visiting the page and clicking the button labelled "Contest this speedy deletion". This will give you the opportunity to explain why you believe the page should not be deleted. However, be aware that once a page is tagged for speedy deletion, it may be removed without delay. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag from the page yourself, but do not hesitate to add information in line with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. If the page is deleted, and you wish to retrieve the deleted material for future reference or improvement, then please contact the deleting administrator, or if you have already done so, you can place a request here. Cahk (talk) 03:01, 12 December 2015 (UTC)

Nomination of Jane McIvor for deletion
A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Jane McIvor 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 Articles for deletion/Jane McIvor 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 high-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 notice from the top of the article. Uhooep (talk) 09:58, 15 February 2016 (UTC)

"DoDAF V2.0 Viewpoints" page you deleted
Hey Barney, I hadn't logged in for a while. I was proud of my contribution to wiki with my posted content on DODAF 2.0. I was "disappointed" that you deleted part of it: 8:44, 27 March 2013 RHaworth (talk | contribs) deleted page DoDAF V2.0 Viewpoints

Architectural descriptions are mandated in the U.S. as part of system development and delivery of products to DoD, but DODAF is also cited by other organizations too. The viewpoints is to explain a significant aspect of the move from DODAF V1.5 to V2. The viewpoints are the way of capturing the architectural artifacts, to fill-out the architectural description. Sigh. Kit Christopher J Lueder — Preceding unsigned comment added by Kitdaddio (talk • contribs) 17:06, 26 April 2017 (UTC)

Orphaned non-free image File:Les Knight Fair dinkum use.jpg
 Thanks for uploading File:Les Knight Fair dinkum use.jpg. The image description page currently specifies that the image is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, the image is currently not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the image was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that images for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).

Note that any non-free images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described in section F5 of the criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. --B-bot (talk) 17:23, 15 May 2017 (UTC)

Speedy deletion nomination of Henry Tasman Lovell


A tag has been placed on Henry Tasman Lovell requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done for the following reason:

"WP:NOTABILITY"

Under the criteria for speedy deletion, pages that meet certain criteria may be deleted at any time.

If you think this page should not be deleted for this reason, you may contest the nomination by visiting the page and clicking the button labelled "Contest this speedy deletion". This will give you the opportunity to explain why you believe the page should not be deleted. However, be aware that once a page is tagged for speedy deletion, it may be removed without delay. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag from the page yourself, but do not hesitate to add information in line with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. If the page is deleted, and you wish to retrieve the deleted material for future reference or improvement, then please contact the, or if you have already done so, you can place a request here. Glaxp (talk) 06:24, 1 July 2017 (UTC)

WikiProject Genealogy - newsletter No.6
{| style="position: relative; margin-left: 2em; margin-right: 2em; padding: 0.5em 1em; background-color:Cornsilk; border: 2px solid #bddff2; border-color: rgba( 109, 193, 240, 0.75 ); border-radius: 8px; box-shadow: 8px 8px 12px rgba( 0, 0, 0, 0.7 );"
 * Newsletter Nr 6, 2018-12-25, for  WikiProject Genealogy (and Wikimedia genealogy project on Meta)

<div style="position: absolute; top: -20px; right: -12px; background-color: white; border: 3px solid black; padding:10px;"> <hr style="border-bottom: 1px solid rgba( 109, 193, 240, 0.75 );" /> Participation:

This is the sixth newsletter sent by mass mail to members in WikiProject Genealogy, to everyone who voted a support for establishing a potential Wikimedia genealogy project on meta, and anyone who during the years showed an interest in genealogy on talk pages and likewise.

(To discontinue receiving Project Genealogy newsletters, please see below)

Now 100 supporters
At 3 December 2018, the list of users who support the potential Wikimedia genealogy project, reached 100!

A demo wiki is up and running!
You can already now try out the demo for a genealogy wiki at https://tools.wmflabs.org/genealogy/wiki/Main_Page and try out the functions. You will find parts of the 18th Pharao dynasty and other records submitted by the 7 first users, and it would be great if you would add some records.

And with those great news we want to wish you a creative New Year 2019!

'''Don't want newsletters? If you wish to opt-out of future mailings, please remove yourself from the mailing list or alternatively to opt-out of all massmessage mailings, you may add Category:Opted-out of message delivery to your user talk page.'''

Cheers from your WikiProject Genealogy coordinator. To discontinue receiving Project Genealogy newsletters, please remove your name from our mailing list. Newsletter delivered by MediaWiki message delivery
 * }

Nomination of Kenneth Fisher (educationalist) for deletion
A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Kenneth Fisher (educationalist) 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 Articles for deletion/Kenneth Fisher (educationalist) until a consensus is reached, and anyone, including you, is welcome to contribute to the discussion. The nomination will explain the policies and guidelines which are of concern. The discussion focuses on high-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 notice from the top of the article. — JFG talk 14:14, 11 September 2019 (UTC)

"Wikipedia:LUNATICS" listed at Redirects for discussion
A discussion is taking place to address the redirect Wikipedia:LUNATICS. The discussion will occur at Redirects for discussion/Log/2021 September 28 until a consensus is reached, and anyone, including you, is welcome to contribute to the discussion. Bangalamania (talk) 20:50, 28 September 2021 (UTC)

Nomination of George Baugh Allen for deletion
A discussion is taking place as to whether the article George Baugh Allen 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 Articles for deletion/George Baugh Allen until a consensus is reached, and anyone, including you, is welcome to contribute to the discussion. The nomination will explain the policies and guidelines which are of concern. The discussion focuses on high-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 notice from the top of the article until the discussion has finished. JMWt (talk) 09:33, 5 November 2023 (UTC)

Nomination of Alan Davies (headmaster) for deletion
A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Alan Davies (headmaster) 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 Articles for deletion/Alan Davies (headmaster) until a consensus is reached, and anyone, including you, is welcome to contribute to the discussion. The nomination will explain the policies and guidelines which are of concern. The discussion focuses on high-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 notice from the top of the article until the discussion has finished. BangJan1999 21:05, 9 March 2024 (UTC)