User talk:Barrylb

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Archive 1

Contents

[edit] re Bipolar external links

Greetings from Southern California Barry,

I saw the reverts you made eliminating UCLA Bipolar Webcasts and the Sixth International Bipolar Webcasts. I noticed that you commented that wikipedia isn't a web directory.

First, I'd like to let you know that I agree that wikipedia isn't a web directory. You may have been referring to a comment I made earlier about placement in a search engine. Regardless, I know that wikipedia's mission is dissemination of knowledge, not adverts. These links aren't adverts.

That being said, I don't think UCLA Bipolar Webcasts as well as Sixth International Bipolar Webcasts should be eliminated for two reasons.

First, neither are adverts. Second, both are free open access scientific information that the public ought to be able to get. Third, the other links still there are similar in intent, open access and information dissemination.

I'd be interested in hearing your opinion as well. Hopefully we can come to a mutually agreeable solution.

I look forward to reading your response.

Until then, have a good one.

Rob Towers

I know these links are not adverts. The reason I do not believe they should be there is because I think they are leading towards an overloaded external links section. -- Barrylb 08:13, 3 May 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Basestations

If you replace one basestation covering a larger area with three smaller ones, the total signal power from the base stations do not increase. But the necessary power from the mobile is lowered.

[edit] Nomination for adminship

Hello Barrylb. I'd be happy to nominate you for adminship if you're willing to assume such responsibilities. I've witnessed your good work, mostly over at the Big Brother article, and would be happy to add my support to your candidacy. -- Longhair 06:49, 2 June 2006 (UTC)

Thanks Longhair, I will give it some thought. -- Barrylb 22:01, 2 June 2006 (UTC)

[edit] The messy BB AU article

Hi, you reverted the BB AU page again saying it still looked messy. I'm don't want to start a big argument or anything like that, but I'd like to ask what browser you're using if I may. --JDtalkemail 14:53, 10 June 2006 (UTC)

Using both IE and Firefox I find it looks messy, or perhaps "cluttered", in both. I find the old version a lot easier to read without all the tables and large number of logos... -- Barrylb 14:56, 10 June 2006 (UTC)
Oh, I'm using IE 7 and Firefox, it looks terrible in IE but it doesn't look that bad in Firefox, though it's probably a matter of opinion. Do you mind if I add the Launch and Under the Radar info back, without the logos and tables and other stuff? --JDtalkemail 15:06, 10 June 2006 (UTC)
Yep, no problem. -- Barrylb 15:07, 10 June 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Aff.Marketing Resources Link.. Objections? Support?

Hi Barry, Based on your statement: "better idea is to discuss first before adding a link to your own site - reverted" and resulting action must I assume that you object. You are Invitated to express your opinion and share your thoughts with us. Thanks --roy<sac> Talk! .oOo. 16:06, 12 June 2006 (UTC)

I don't see why there needs to be external links - why don't those site owners move the relevant content into the article, instead of getting free traffic to their site where they have newsletter signups and earning money from advertising?

[edit] Affiliate Marketing Article Discussion - Invitation to Participate

Your Contribution History shows that you have some interest in the content and the quality of the Article Affiliate marketing. The Concern has been expressed that this article or section is missing information. An open discussion was started at the articles talk page and I would like to invite you to participate in this discussion and express your opinion regarding the issue that was raised. Sincerely. --roy<sac> Talk! .oOo. 09:51, 13 June 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Cleanup tags

I tagged the articles because I am not interested in BB Aus, I noticed they needed a cleanup (particularly the table), so tagged it. However, I may clean it up in the future. -- 9cds(talk) 23:47, 18 June 2006 (UTC)

Actually, I changed my mind and did BB5 :p -- 9cds(talk) 00:45, 19 June 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Lemon64

Hello Barry,

I noticed that on the Wikipedia page for Lemon64, you indicated that its notability is in doubt. I wanted to open a discussion about it to hear your thoughts about the tag placed. Lemon64 is considered a large resource, like http://www.C64.com (which merged with http://www.c64hq.com), for the Commodore 64 community as it provides a plethora of information on games released for that computer. Indeed, a Google search for Commodore 64 on Google brings up Lemon64 as the 5th highest ranked Web site. Could you please expand on your thoughts or reasons for the placement of the tag?

Guroadrunner 06:10, 5 August 2006 (UTC)

Hi, I added the tag because the article needs to provide references about its notability per Wikipedia guidelines (I think WP:WEB is the applicable one in this case). If you can provide such references then the tag can be removed. -- Barrylb 07:20, 5 August 2006 (UTC)
I'll look into that. Thanks for responding. -- Guroadrunner 10:48, 29 August 2006 (UTC)

[edit] For Sale By Owner article: your removal of the FSBO links

I posted this yesterday:

[edit] Thank goodness these links have been removed....

...but PLEASE make a comment on this TALK PAGE re: chages.

I certainly support what has been done. Vivaverdi 03:32, 10 August 2006 (UTC)

If you would, please go to the Talk:For_sale_by_owner and put a note in that top section where I laid out a proposal to either remove them all; allow only 1 per state; or do nothing.
It will help build consensus that your actions are justified. The more people who post objections to the "spam" links, the better off we'll be. Thanks, Vivaverdi 17:32, 10 August 2006 (UTC)
Thanks for your support in removing these links. We now have 2 in formal opposition. However, futher revers may be neccesary. I shall inform anyone who chooses to add a link of this decision, and may I ask you to mark this page and do the same?? Vivaverdi 04:07, 11 August 2006 (UTC)
Will do. -- Barrylb 04:27, 11 August 2006 (UTC)


[edit] Links

Thanks for the tassie cleanup - check out Maria Island, Tasmania  !!!!

Health Wiki Research

A colleague and I are conducting a study on health wikis. We are looking at how wikis co-construct health information and create communities. We noticed that you are a frequent contributor to Wikipedia on health topics.

Please consider taking our survey here.

This research will help wikipedia and other wikis understand how health information is co-created and used.

We are from James Madison University in Harrisonburg, Virginia. The project was approved by our university research committee and members of the Wikipedia Foundation.

Thanks, --Sharlene Thompson 18:19, 4 December 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Mobile phone radiation and health

Regarding your reversion on Mobile phone radiation and health, I'm not sure what you mean by "improperly explained". Could you explain your objection on the talk page? Unfortunately there was an edit conflict, and those changes got mixed in with another set of changes pulling new information from the WHO. But hopefully I can untangle these things and address whatever problems there are with my previous changes. -- Beland 05:22, 8 December 2006 (UTC)

Hi, I guess something messed up due to the edit conflict. I just meant to revert a very small piece of text "(See also placebo effect.)" because I felt you needed to be clear whether you were saying the health effects were due to a placebo effect. I didn't mean to revert all the other stuff. Regards. -- Barrylb 06:39, 8 December 2006 (UTC)
Ah, OK. Yeah, actually I would have to agree. Psychosomatic illness is the right place to link to, and it's already linked. Thanks for sanity-checking that. -- Beland 23:43, 8 December 2006 (UTC)

[edit] primarysources flag on Wrest Point Hotel Casino

I see that you removed the flag from the article.

Surely the casino rates some occaisional press mention down there? The bars and restaurants must get reviewed occaisionally or something? Is it not mentioned in the state tourism publications? The article mentions a referendum. Surely there is something somewhere in Tasmania regarding that?

I am restoring the primarysources tag. In fact it doesnt even have any sources! Please - don't remove the tag if you haven't made real attempts (ie including offline!) to find secondary sources.Garrie 01:49, 14 December 2006 (UTC)

Hi Barrylb. Firstly, please accept my apologies for your late reply. I missed your message to my talk page (as I sometimes do when messages are placed under an already existing section of my talk page. My mistake there... oops). I see this conversation has already began, so I'll add to it best I can.
A lot of articles (and not just Australian content) exist at Wikipedia containing only a primary source, or no source at all. The Wrest Point Hotel Casino article would benefit from external sources on such information like its' construction costs, construction methods, the numbers of people visiting then and now, and its' impact on the city. Information of this type would surely have made local newspapers from time to time.
A lot of articles containing just a primary source usually serve to promote the article in a biased manner. Criticisms for example are rarely (if ever) included if the only source provided is the subject's own website. It's a good thing to aim for external sources from as many external (reliable) sources as we can muster to give articles some balance. Newspapers may very well be a good source of information where online content is lacking. All too often we easily fall into the trap of "if it aint found at Google, it doesn't exist". Hope this help to explain my usage of the {{primarysources}} template. -- Longhair\talk 07:54, 15 December 2006 (UTC)
A search on "Wrest Point" provides 61 resources within the State Library of Tasmania catalogue. -- Longhair\talk 09:57, 15 December 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Affiliate Marketing

Thanks for the help with the Affiliate marketing article. I am trying to mobilize more people to contribute but had only limited success so far. Affiliate marketing is very complex and an industry with a lot of issues that still need to be solved. It's funny because the basic principle affiliate marketing is based on is actually ridiculously simple. Happy Holidays. --roy<sac> Talk! .oOo. 11:57, 17 December 2006 (UTC)

You are most of the time faster with removing spam than me, but I think its getting old for you too. I just requested permanent semi-protection for the article. I believe you agree with me on that one. Cheers. --roy<sac> Talk! .oOo. 16:24, 21 December 2006 (UTC)

[edit] RE Social anxiety link

Hi Barrylb, SAUK is my far the biggest online resource for social anxiety in the UK.It has been operating for several years.I found this information on the website and there is also an email contact address which is very easy to find for anyone who bothers to look.


Social Anxiety UK - www.social-anxiety.org.uk Social Anxiety UK was founded in March 2000 by SA sufferers themselves, who realised there were no UK-based websites for people with social anxiety problems. The fledgling SA-UK community grew very quickly, and in August and December 2000, the first SA meetings were held in London, offering SA sufferers the chance to get together and share their experiences. Regular meetings sprung up around the country and local support/self-help groups began to set up. The website, including members profiles, chatrooms and discussion forums also developed and expanded over the following months, receiving a major revamp in the summer of 2001. SA-UK is a volunteer-led organisation for people with social anxiety problems and their supporters. Our aims are to: Increase awareness and understanding of social anxiety and related issues Provide an environment where those with social anxiety and related problems can find support, advice and encouragement Provide access to reliable information on social anxiety and related issues Promote greater accessibility and opportunity for those with social anxiety and related problems, including in employment, education and health services Develop, support and co-ordinate local self-help groups and meetings for people with social anxiety and related problems Work together with other organisations and bodies in the pursuit of common goals Ensure that our practices and services are guided by reliable information on social anxiety and related issues Operate from a principal of consensus and inclusiveness to ensure that our services are accessible to anyone The chat rooms and discussion boards are now run independently of the website. SA-UK makes no charge for any of our services but donations towards our work are greatly appreciated.


More importantly you have rubished all external links on the discussion page and appear to be obsessed with deleting all of them and ignoring anyone elses point of view.I now realise that you have something to do with the anti spam policy but with half the site cluttered up with vast quantities of pointless references I think having some useful external links are in no way a problem for the article.This is the English language version of wiki so having the some online resources if they exist for English speaking countries must be of help to many people.Why wouldn't it?

The sauk site also links to more local resources and arranges meetings for additional help.It has a news section with events such as public workshops and national and local events.It has thousands of members and comes up first on google search for social anxiety in the Uk.It is not a small bedroom set up on a personal web page.

Obviously having too many links is a problem and their content needs monitoring but having none whatsoever is going way too far in my opinion and I think is too big a decision for just one unknown person to decide upon.Klodo123 19:41, 31 December 2006 (UTC)

I am quite well aware of that information you have pasted in above. Anyone can write something like that and post it on a website. Despite your assertion, this organisation does appear to be a small bedroom setup to me. As I mentioned, there is no phone number, no names, no detail of their funding, no address, no indication of how many people are behind it. An email address is not good enough and is indicative of a small-bedroom setup. I have not particularly removed the link to the site because there are too many links. I have removed the link because it does not appear to be a credible organisation. -- Barrylb 04:11, 1 January 2007 (UTC)
I'll add that we already have a link to a directory of social anxiety related sites, and the site you want to add is listed in that directory. Having a directory link avoids favouring one particular site over any number that could be listed. -- Barrylb 04:27, 1 January 2007 (UTC)
Fair enough as the link is in the directory.However your opinion which is no more important than anyone else whom you ignore as you show with incredible rudeness and arrogance in the page discussion.I just wonder first if you have any knowledge of SA and how does someone like you get to be sole judge on the matter.You go into great trouble reviewing each site which are all then critised in every way as if to justify your decision and screw everyone else.You then say that this is just your opinion in reply yet decide that just your opinion matters and that is good enough to justify deleting ALL links without debate.Debate doesn't just mean you against all others and you win because you are Wiki anti spam man.How do I or anyone else get to be anti spam man because you are doing an awful job.That is just my opinion but it is no less important than yours.

What criteria do you need to include a link?A personalised letter from Tony Blair?A visit from the Queen?Any website could be just what someone writes down.How dare you imply that this is not a credible organisation just because you say so.You appear to be nothing but a little Hitler in his bedroom in Tasmania with a personal obsession.Give a small man even a little power or resonsibility and it goes to his head.I bet you wake up in the middle of the night just in case there is something on Wiki you can delete with smug satisfaction.Klodo123 10:44, 2 January 2007 (UTC)

Whatever dude. I don't claim to be the arbiter of all decisions. Anyone can join the anti-spam group. I don't claim that my opinion is worth any more than anyone else's. If you want to discuss the issue I suggest you make your arguments on the article's talk page. Decisions on wikipedia are made by consensus. If enough other people agree to including the link on the page then it will happen. How dare I claim the organisation is not credible? Well I have given my reasons. You have given nothing in response to convince me otherwise. -- Barrylb 12:29, 2 January 2007 (UTC)

[edit] customedit.php for forms

Barry,

I am fairly new to using MediaWiki and I need to create some custom entry forms. I have looked over your customedit extension and it seems to be what I need. However, I am not sure how to pull it all together.

What I need is a form that would be displayed whenever a user enters a title in a "create new article" box (the box is from the inputbox extension). Can you give me a little more insight into how I would go about creating such a form?

Thanks —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Macuhail (talk • contribs) 00:08, 14 February 2007 (UTC).

[edit] AFD 2006 Victorian election campaign

As a contributor, you may wish to comment on this: Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/2006 Victorian election campaign. Peter Campbell 07:42, 17 February 2007 (UTC)

Retrieved from "http://en.wikipedia.org../../../b/a/r/User_talk%7EBarrylb_04e2.html"