User talk:Barkeep49

	; Archives (Index) ;
	1; 2; 3; 4; 5; 6; 7; 8; 9; 10; 11;

December music

On the Main page today Jean Sibelius on his birthday. Listening to Beethoven's Fifth from the opening of Notre-Dame de Paris. We sang in choirs today. -- Gerda Arendt (talk) 21:58, 8 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

What pretty choral spaces. Best, Barkeep49 (talk) 23:53, 8 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you! - Rehearsal was difficult - too many new pieces, too little light - but the singing, with raised vigilance, was good. - What do you think of this edit? --Gerda Arendt (talk) 10:04, 10 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Listen today to the (new) Perplexities after Escher. - Do you expect to see the places of birth and death in an infobox, - that is the simple question. Do you have time to say yes or no? --Gerda Arendt (talk) 10:25, 12 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

The Samuel Barber situation looks resolved. I still find it sad that it happened at all, wasting time of five editors. I understand that you are busy, but in the new year, I want to engage arbitration to get to terms with editors still thinking that edit warring is a method to prevent information that our MoS displaced from the lead, such as places of birth and death, and recently honorific suffix. Where should they go if not in an infobox? - I will see an opera tonight! By the composer with the ongoing RfC!! The trailer (in my story) looks spectacular!!! --Gerda Arendt (talk) 10:45, 14 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

So one of the great joys of not being on arbcom is I get to decide what I want to spend time on. And at least at the moment that isn't infoboxes. I know it remains on your mind but between the u4c and what already sucks me in I have a full plate of project work (especially relative to the content I've done lately). I am on team "edit warring about them is bad" so I wish good luck with cutting down on that in the new year. Best, Barkeep49 (talk) 05:42, 16 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

One of the great joys on Wikipedia is that the Barber case has now (overnight) been completed nicely. May it be for a bright future. Enjoy the seasons, and me not bothering you again. On Beethoven's birthday I recall a DYK from 2020 (when his 250th bday was remembered). I fondly remember when Worm That Turned (who had co-written the infoboxes case) installed the community consensus. I thought that possibility of a compromise would end the conflict, DYK? - Right now I'm working on 6 Bach cantata GAs parallel, almost too much of a good thing, but they all turn 300 years, and Christmas in Bach's Leipzig was on 3 days, each with a new cantata. I love creating content! --Gerda Arendt (talk) 11:07, 16 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I think the community consensus provision has shaped and dulled the conflict even as it hasn't quite eliminated it. Best, Barkeep49 (talk) 16:27, 16 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Listen today to Beethoven's 3rd cello sonata, on his birthday - I picked a recording with Antônio Meneses, because he was on my sad list this year, and I was in Brazil (see places), and I love his playing. --Gerda Arendt (talk) 16:09, 16 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I come to fix the cellist's name, with a 10-years-old DYK and new pics - look for red birds --Gerda Arendt (talk) 17:50, 18 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Io Saturnalia!

		Io, Saturnalia!
		Wishing you and yours a Happy Holiday Season, from the horse and bishop person. May the year ahead be productive and distraction-free. Ealdgyth (talk) 14:58, 17 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Deletion review for 15.ai

An editor has asked for a deletion review of 15.ai. Because you closed the deletion discussion for this page, speedily deleted it, or otherwise were interested in the page, you might want to participate in the deletion review. – The Grid (talk) 16:26, 17 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Deletion review for 15.ai

An editor has asked for a deletion review of 15.ai. Because you closed the deletion discussion for this page, speedily deleted it, or otherwise were interested in the page, you might want to participate in the deletion review. — Preceding unsigned comment added by GregariousMadness (talk • contribs) 18:58, 17 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Feedback from QuicoleJR

Thing(s) I would like Barkeep to continue doing: You are overall an amazing admin, keep up the good work!
Thing(s) I wish would Barkeep would stop/things I wish Barkeep would do differently: As a regular Signpost reader, I agree with Whatamidoing that some Signpost contributions in regards to the U4C would be appreciated.
(Optional) Questions I have for Barkeep:
(Optional) I consider you to be one of the best admins on the site. QuicoleJR (talk) 19:09, 17 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks @QuicoleJR for taking the time to think this through and leave some feedback. I am hoping to do something around blogging about the U4C - more to come there. Best, Barkeep49 (talk) 23:50, 17 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Is relisting the AfD a possibility? I'd still like a consensus for the new sources I researched

I'm not sure if it's appropriate to post in your talk page regarding this, but would relisting the AfD be a possible outcome? I spent a lot of time digging up those sources, and I don't know if I can rewrite the whole article with the new sources without the previous version of the article. I'm just hoping that my time and effort isn't going to waste because I truly do believe that my argument is solid enough to establish GNG of 15.ai. GregariousMadness (talk to me!) 22:46, 17 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisting is absolutely a possible outcome. Feel free to suggest it at DRV. Best, Barkeep49 (talk) 23:49, 17 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I had already done that, sorry for the confusion -- what I meant was since you were able to change it from "no consensus" to "delete", would it be possible to change it to "relist" to gain a better consensus on the sources? Or is that an inappropriate question to ask? I apologize in advance if I shouldn't have asked that. I just can't remember what the article used to look like and the logs don't exist.

And also, should I tag the users that I mentioned voted Keep? For example, I wrote "Schützenpanzer changed their vote from Weak Keep to Keep, JarJarInks voted Keep, Aaron Liu expressed his Keep vote (but didn't bold it)" without using the User tag. I don't know if this would be considered canvassing, so I thought I'd ask you before I did anything like that. GregariousMadness (talk to me!) 23:52, 17 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I'm sorry for not discussing with you on your talk page before creating the deletion review. I didn't know that it was considered polite to ask and then bring it to DRV, and sadly Liz hadn't responded by the time I had already posted it on DRV. I think it's too late for that now, but I would have asked you to reconsider de-weighting EC's arguments because I feel like I gave a pretty good one. I really, really think that moving it from "no consensus" to "delete" was incorrect, so if there's any alternative that could keep the article intact so I can edit in my drafts, I implore that I be given a chance to do that. GregariousMadness (talk to me!) 12:55, 18 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Navigating Wiki procedures can be a challenge. One general tip is to read the full set of instructions (where discussing with a closer was mentioned) and not just the "how to" (which I know is itself intimidating). In this case it does not matter as I could relist but I stand by my re-close of the topic. While I appreciate your passion and the work you did on the article and it certainly had an impact, I think there was a consensus (but not a vote) to delete this article. As discussed, I do think giving you access to the deleted text (if it stays deleted) is appropriate as there might be another place you could use the writing and incorporate your further research. Barkeep49 (talk) 15:37, 18 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

New pages patrol January 2025 Backlog drive

January 2025 Backlog Drive \| New pages patrol
On 1 January 2025, a one-month backlog drive for new pages patrol will begin in hopes of addressing the growing backlog. Barnstars will be awarded based on the number of articles and redirects patrolled. Each article review will earn 1 point, while each redirect review will earn 0.2 points. Streak awards will be given out based on consistently hitting point thresholds for each week of the drive. Barnstars will also be granted for re-reviewing articles previously reviewed by other patrollers during the drive. Interested in taking part? Sign up here.
You're receiving this message because you are a new page patroller. To opt-out of future mailings, please remove yourself here.

MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 01:52, 18 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Could you mention that as the closing admin, I was never sent a draft of the old article?

People seem to think that the new article is a copy of the old 15.ai article, but it isn’t since I spent all of last night writing this one. I’d really appreciate it if you could clarify that for anyone who thinks that. GregariousMadness (talk to me!) 19:27, 19 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

New U4C Blog

Following the suggestions of @WhatamIdoing & @QuicoleJR in my solicitation for feedback, I have now started a U4C blog. You can read it at User:Barkeep49/U4C. Best, Barkeep49 (talk) 18:06, 20 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Feedback from Goldsztajn

I appreciate the way someone with your profile has engaged on the HF/WTT RfAs - we might have different views, but you set a standard worthy of emulation. Thank you and regards, --Goldsztajn (talk) 01:17, 21 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for that feedback. I know on this kind of position I'm part of a wiki minority but I also believe consensus can change and I work to try and change it. Best, Barkeep49 (talk) 01:24, 21 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Season's Greetings

Hello Barkeep49: Enjoy the holiday season and winter solstice if it's occurring in your area of the world, and thanks for your work to maintain, improve and expand Wikipedia. Cheers, AntiCompositeNumber (talk) 01:54, 23 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Spread the WikiLove; use {{subst:Season's Greetings}} to send this message

Invited collab on Arbitration report

Hi Barkeep49, I noticed your extensive research posted at Wikipedia:Arbitration/Requests/Case/Palestine-Israel articles 5/Evidence and your followup notes in the workshop. I'm usually the writer for The Signpost's Arbitration report and it caught my eye. Would you be interested in collaborating on a writeup for the next issue (~January 7)? ☆ Bri (talk) 17:41, 23 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Sure @Bri. How could I help? On a different note someone has suggested that the Signpost might be interested in User:Barkeep49/U4C. Best, Barkeep49 (talk) 17:43, 23 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Cool! I'm most interested in the hypothesis you mentioned at Wikipedia:Arbitration/Requests/Case/Palestine-Israel articles 5/Workshop#Analysis of Barkeep49's evidence. I'll leave it up to you how you want to present that, the data gathering, and how you decided your hypothesis was falsified. Maybe my part is to do a succinct introduction and wrapper describing where we are at with PIA5? What do you think?

I've put a shell in place at WP:Wikipedia Signpost/Next next issue/Arbitration report. ☆ Bri (talk) 19:36, 23 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Now that the final 2024 issue is done, I've moved this to "next issue" space for next Signpost issue: WP:Wikipedia Signpost/Next issue/Arbitration report. ☆ Bri (talk) 03:19, 25 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks. Let me know if you need anything further from me but absent feedback from you I don't have any expansion plans (though am happy to do so if you think something needs expanding). Barkeep49 (talk) 16:53, 25 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

The Signpost: 24 December 2024

News and notes: Responsibilities and liabilities as a "Very Large Online Platform"

Op-ed: Beeblebrox on Wikipediocracy, the Committee, and everything

Opinion: Graham87 on being the first-ever administrator recall subject

In the media: Delhi High Court considers Caravan and Ken for evaluating the ANI vs. WMF case

From the archives: Where to draw the line in reporting?

Recent research: "Wikipedia editors are quite prosocial", but those motivated by "social image" may put quantity over quality

Humour: Backlash over Santa Claus' Wikipedia article intensifies

Gallery: A feast of holidays and carols

Traffic report: Was a long and dark December

* Read this Signpost in full * Single-page * Unsubscribe * MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 23:59, 24 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Happy Holidays

Merry Christmas and a Prosperous 2025!

Hello Barkeep49, may you be surrounded by peace, success and happiness on this seasonal occasion. Spread the WikiLove by wishing another user a Merry Christmas and a Happy New Year, whether it be someone you have had disagreements with in the past, a good friend, or just some random person. Sending you heartfelt and warm greetings for Christmas and New Year 2025.
Happy editing,
Abishe (talk) 04:18, 25 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Spread the love by adding {{subst:Seasonal Greetings}} to other user talk pages.

Abishe (talk) 04:18, 25 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Question about 15.ai AfD

I'm not sure if I'm correctly following the recent discussion, but did I do something wrong? I tried to avoid WP:BLUDGEONING the discussion but I might have gotten too carried away. Is there any chance that the AfD will be speedily deleted? GregariousMadness (talk to me!) 04:07, 26 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Each individual post of yours is defensible but the total number of edits has been a lot. Obviously not so much I've yet said anything, but you're playing with fire each time you past. As for deletion it's possible some admin could come and close it as speedy deletion but I think that's unlikely at this time both because it's unlikely an admin will notice it and because even if they do, they would have to explain how it met the criteria. Barkeep49 (talk) 04:46, 26 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

But most of my edits are me just editing my own messages in quick succession right after I submitted one… I don't think I made 52 separate comments as BusterD said. I want to respond to their comment because I want to defend myself but I don't know if I should. GregariousMadness (talk to me!) 10:38, 26 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

You have painted yourself into this corner, GregariousMadness. It is your behavior, not content of those individual edits, which has made such an impression on me. On Wikipedia, it's usually better to make your point with sources, not argumentation. It's a forgivable newbie error. What I said at the AfD is what I believe any closer might say when they come to this discussion. Remember I started this process neutrally, disinterested in the outcome, as an admin should be. But as page creator, I'm a page watcher as well. I have a wide difference of views from many of the !voters, but I have largely sat quiet. Your behaviors in this process wouldn't reflect well on any participant. That you can't see that is precisely the handicap under which you're laboring. BusterD (talk) 11:02, 26 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

On Wikipedia, it's usually better to make your point with sources, not argumentation. I'm really confused by what I did wrong because I thought all of my arguments were based on sources I was finding. I have 17 comments in the AfD total right now. I tried being cautious so as not to bludgeon and I was told that commenting new sources as a new comment would not be counted as a bludgeon, which was why I was happy to make my point there. I'm asking you, as a veteran editor, how I can improve going forward, and explicitly pointing out where I went wrong would be very helpful to me. But right now, I am just too scared to say anything in the AfD. GregariousMadness (talk to me!) 11:08, 26 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@GregariousMadness I count about 90 replies. You having about 1/5 of all replies is an issue. Your % of bytes is even more disproportionate - coming in at 1/3 (the # of edits you've made is even more disproportionate but that reflects your habit of making tweaks to edits you've made as much as anything). My recommendation going forward is not to post. And where you feel you must do it on the talk page. I'm really trying to give you leeway - I'm here to create not delete stuff and so letting the best case possible be put forward for a marginal topic is something I value - but you're basically out of that leeway and if you can't show good judgement about when to post I will force the issue through a partial block. Barkeep49 (talk) 00:15, 27 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I'm really sorry. I'll stop posting, but again I don't think I have 90 replies. I counted them one by one, and the reason my reply count seems so big is because I have a habit of making trivial edits after I've made a post. GregariousMadness (talk to me!) 00:22, 27 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

There are ~90 total replies so your 17 is about 20% of the total replies. As noted here and at the AfD by bytes you have a higher proportion. Barkeep49 (talk) 05:57, 27 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

And as for the last reply, I did it because I originally brought to topic to HyperAccelerated's talk page, but they told me to continue the conversation in the AfD instead. GregariousMadness (talk to me!) 00:23, 27 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Archives (Index)
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11