User talk:Barek

Barek is tired of wikidrama, and has chosen to spend more time in the real world; but may still wander back online occasionally. During this time, replies to queries may be greatly delayed.

Please click here to start a new message at the bottom of this page.

If you post a message to me here, I will usually reply here - if you want a {{talkback}} notice, please request it.
If I left a message for you on your talk page, I have it on my watchlist and will see replies made on your talk page.
Please sign and date your posts using four tildes (~~~~).
I reserve the right at my discretion to remove uncivil comments from this page, as well as threads which are perceived by me to be disruptive.
My alternate talkpage can be used to contact me if Wikipedia indicates that this page is protected due to vandalism.

Please note:
This talk page is known to be monitored by talk page watchers. This means that someone other than me might reply to your query. Their input is welcome and their help with messages that I cannot respond to quickly is appreciated.

Server time (update):
November 29, 2024 15:45 (UTC)

This is a Wikipedia user talk page.
This is not an encyclopedia article or the talk page for an encyclopedia article. If you find this page on any site other than Wikipedia, you are viewing a mirror site. Be aware that the page may be outdated and that the user whom this page is about may have no personal affiliation with any site other than Wikipedia. The original talk page is located at https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User_talk:Barek.

purge cache

This is a Wikipedia user talk page.
This is not an encyclopedia article or the talk page for an encyclopedia article. If you find this page on any site other than Wikipedia, you are viewing a mirror site. Be aware that the page may be outdated and that the user whom this page is about may have no personal affiliation with any site other than Wikipedia. The original talk page is located at https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User_talk:Barek.

My talk page archives

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

Administrators

Hi, I am one of the newest ( and most idiotic ) Wikipedia editors. I'd like to ask what you must do to become an administrator. go to user talk:0alx0 — Preceding unsigned comment added by 0alx0 (talk • contribs) 20:29, 16 June 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Information can be found at Wikipedia:Administrators#Becoming an administrator. In short, the process involves a nomination process throgh a Request for Adminship (RfA) during which candidates have their past edits reviewed, are posed questions, and in which the community weighs in on their belief of if the candidate is fit and/or adequately experienced, and if the candidate has a firm enough understanding of Wikipedia policies and guidelines.

It can be a grueling process, as every edit from the user is effectively placed under a microscope. It's best to review existing (both current and past) RfA applications to understand what it is that the community wants to see in candidates, what has tripped up other candidates, etc. That can allow you to prepare yourself better for eventually pursuing the process. --- Barek (talk • contribs) - 03:13, 17 June 2013 (UTC)[reply]

@Barek:, I just noticed the above question, and couldn't help but draw a parallel to this question asked of another admin by Leoesb1032 just a few days earlier. Intrigued, I looked further at 0alx0's contribs, and notice that the user account was created on June 16, 2013 at 14:14, a mere 3 hours after @DMacks: blocked him, and only 2 hours before leaving you the above message.

0alx0 quickly went about disruption left and right, as evidenced by the tremendous quantity of warning templates accumulated on that user's talk page in just a few short hours. 0alx0 continued exhibiting somewhat familiar behavior, including removal of unfavorable tags and blanking his talk page.

Arguably, while the above is compelling, it is nevertheless circumstantial evidence. But then, I noticed one more thing: 45 minutes after leaving the above question on your page, he edited the "Baren" page, and I recall that he has referred to you as "Baren" on at least one occasion from one of his accounts (I'm still looking for that edit). To me, personally, that eliminated any doubt that 0alx0 was created in order to circumvent User:DMacks's latest block, but a checkuser would prove or disprove that more definitively.

Curiously, this user experimented with two failed attempts (1st attempt and 2nd attempt) to block himself! I can think of no good faith reason one would attempt to "learn the art of blocking" unless one intends try to:

use the technique on another user, or
"un-use" the technique on a blocked sock.

Thankfully, he's attempting the impossible, but either way, no good can come of such continued attempts at gaming the system. Shortly thereafter, 0alx0 abandoned that account – no doubt, he has gone on to create several more by now. By his own admission and usage, we know that his IP address is 68.84.125.66; it is reasonable to believe that the rest of his socks will also be associated with that IP. I don't know the right way to go about requesting a checkuser, but I think that tool should be used to confirm whether or not he has in fact been creating additional socks. Thoughts? —Grollτech (talk) 00:46, 23 June 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for bringing this up. I don't recall Leoesb1032 calling me "Baren" previously, but I could have easily missed it. Looking at the edit history of 0alx0, I'm not seeing any overlap with common articles edited by Leoesb1032 - so for now I think linking of the two appears too circumstantial. If you want, you could still try submitting a case at WP:SPI; but it may get thrown out if there's not enough evidence to justify the use of the tools.

I had been aware of the IP; but since the block that IP appears to have only been used to edit talk:Leoesb1032. As long as he only edits his own talk page from the IP, it can be argued that he just forgot to sign in and is not circumventing the block by using it (although if he does edit a different page from the IP while the block is still in place, that would be a block evasion violation). --- Barek (talk • contribs) - 03:11, 23 June 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Alright, this time I really am not sockpuppeting and I have no idea who this new user guy is. I know I'm not supposed to edit pages besides my talk page with my IP while I'm blocked, I just wanted you to know that I learned my lesson and I wouldn't ever do sockpuppetry again so I would really appreciate it if everyone could cut me some slack about editing this page while I'm blocked. Again, the only reason I'm doing this is so everyone knows I'm not a sockpuppet again. 68.84.125.66 (talk) 02:31, 29 June 2013 (UTC)[reply]

A pussy for you!

I don't like em, but maybe you do! Thanks for the revert. It was much appreciated

ツ Jenova 20 ^(email) 21:12, 26 June 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Re: bad check restitution

Barek -

Thanks for the response. I'll try to figure out what you're talking about and revise accordingly. I still don't understand why you are allowing the "NSF Fees" link, which is nothing but an ad., and why you are willing to include the vacated jury verdict, which is nothing but a defendant saying, "I had a one good day in twelve years, but the judge erased it." I also don't know how to get free links to judicial decisions. I have to pay for mine, or get them from PACER which is a pay site that is not feasible for someone who just wants to look at on case.

Paul 6/26/12 98.125.174.224 (talk) 06:46, 27 June 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Jmwman

Hi Barek. Given that this user has agreed to stop posting external links, would you be amenable to my unblocking him? The unblock would, naturally, reiterate a prohibition on linking to his site again, with the understanding that any future infringements would be grounds for an immediate indefblock with little chance of appeal. Your thoughts? Yunshui 雲‍水 09:19, 28 June 2013 (UTC)[reply]

I'm hesitant given their only behavior to date has been to add the link; but I'm open to giving them a chance to contribute constructively to Wikipedia given the conditions you mentioned. Feel free to use your own best judgement on unblocking. Should you unblock the user, I'll also make a posting to their talk page re: WP:COI to help them understand those concerns as well, given they now acknowledge it is their own website. --- Barek (talk • contribs) - 15:42, 28 June 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Okay. I'll go for the unblock and keep an eye on future edits; let's see what he does with the WP:ROPE. Yunshui 雲‍水 18:34, 28 June 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Question on correct use (if any) of hidden-HTML-comments within articles

Hi Barek, given these three policy statements -- 1. all hidden-HTML-comments, no matter how terse, are Bad(tm) -- always use the talk-page 2. if the edit-war situation warrants, a single neutral "check talk-page before editing" hidden-HTML-comment is okay 3. too many hidden-HTML-comments constitutes clutter, but one or two brief (non-generic-template) hidden-HTML-comments are okay What is the Official Wikipedia policy, if any? Failing that, is there unwritten consensus among admins? Failing *that*, what's your personal recommendation? Thanks for your guidance. 74.192.84.101 (talk) 14:54, 29 June 2013 (UTC)[reply]

now that the Albert Pyun page is no longer protected:

Pyun has returned spamming the page with non-encyclopedic, self-promotional fluff. Readyforanderson (talk) 23:20, 30 June 2013 (UTC)Readyforanderson[reply]

Spam

I dont understand your message. I did NOT add that information or that crap (radio is it?) link. I only came over to undo it. I put a cite needed tag up so we can get a better source from others. It was only later I realised it was an unreliable source That was me mate. I have created a history section where this stuff, with RS of course is drafted. I would appreciate a retraction re the citation point, on my talkpage. Cheers Irondome (talk) 02:53, 3 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Re-read your post. I apologise. Yoyu were not accusing me of putting that crap cite on. However I did leave,in good faith the cite up. I didnt think it would be utter BS. Cheers! Irondome (talk) 03:00, 3 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]

replied at User talk:Irondome#Spam --- Barek (talk • contribs) - 03:03, 3 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]

OpenBroadcaster

Barek, I'm looking for a backup copy and restoration of the entry for OpenBroadcaster. I set up a Creative commons licence on openbroadcaster.com and released the logo into the public domain. I recieved lots of positive feedback on this article about community radio in a box. RadioRobYukon (talk) 15:56, 3 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]

The text in the article was a cut/paste from www.openbroadcaster.com, which is a copyright violation, so we are unable to restore the article text at this time. The site does now show a creative commons license[1]; but the infringing text is no longer on that site. As a result, the text is still subject to the license in place at the time it existed on the site.[2]

I would also recommend that you review WP:COI, specifically the section "Advice for editors who may have a conflict of interest" - as you have a close association to the subject, that article can provide pointers for working within the Wikipedia systems and provide guidance to avoid issues that can potentially cause problems with your submittals.

Additionally, even if not for the copyright issue, it's unlikely that the article as it was written would meet Wikipedia inclusion criteria WP:CORP. What are needed are multiple third-party reliable sources that provide significant coverage of the subject. Trivial or incidental coverage is unlikely to meet the threshold. --- Barek (talk • contribs) - 16:45, 3 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Hypercarnivores Article

Pelicans are hypercarnivores. In fact, out of all the animals that are notable for being hypercarnivores, pelicans are probably the most notable for being hypercarnivores, due to their cultural significance for being known as hypercarnivores. On the other hand, not all sharks are hypercarnivores. Many species are not even regular carnivores. Two of the most notable sharks, the basking and the whale, are not hypercarnivores. They are in fact filter feeders. 71.255.81.232 (talk) 04:14, 5 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]