User talk:Barpoint

Welcome!

Hello, Barpoint, 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 Wikipedia:Questions, ask me on my talk page, or ask your question on this page and then place {{helpme}} before the question. Again, welcome! Victuallers (talk) 22:17, 5 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

This user's unblock request has been reviewed by an administrator, who declined the request. Other administrators may also review this block, but should not override the decision without good reason (see the blocking policy).

Barpoint (block log • active blocks • global blocks • contribs • deleted contribs • filter log • creation log • change block settings • unblock • checkuser (log))

Request reason:

You have blocked a wide range of addresses used by Verizon Online: see http://whois.arin.net/rest/net/NET-71-161-224-0-1 At no time have I ever had more than one account on Wikipedia and it is 'Barpoint'.

Decline reason:

see below for a way to help us solve this problem. This block may not be intended to affect you, but we need some more information first. --Jayron32 07:04, 7 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]

If you want to make any further unblock requests, please read the guide to appealing blocks first, then use the {{unblock}} template again. If you make too many unconvincing or disruptive unblock requests, you may be prevented from editing this page until your block has expired. Do not remove this unblock review while you are blocked.

Clearing an autoblock

Due to the nature of the block applied we need additional information before we can decide whether to unblock you. It is very likely that you are not personally blocked. If you are prevented from editing, it may be because you are autoblocked or blocked because of your IP address. Without further details there is nothing further we can do to review or lift your block. Please follow these instructions:

If you have a Wikipedia account, please ensure that you are logged in.
Your account name will be visible in the top right of this page if you are.
If it isn't, try bypassing your web browser's cache.
Try to edit the Sandbox.
If you are still blocked, copy the {{unblock-auto|...}} code generated for you under the "IP blocked?" section. This is usually hidden within the "What do I do now?" section. If so, just click the "[show]" link to the right hand side to show this text.
Paste the code at the bottom of your user talk page and click save.

If you are not blocked from editing the sandbox then the autoblock on your IP address has already expired and you can resume editing. --Jayron32 07:04, 7 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Sensational conduct[edit]

Hello.

My friend, there is something you should know: Overtly sensational behavior, like what you doing in Talk:Microsoft Office 2013, is not welcome in Wikipedia. Please cool off and look properly at what you are doing: First, I never said "lede" or "lead". I said it is already in the article and it indeed is there. Second, there is no call for disrupting the maintenance system by calling an RFC for something that is already discussed and approved. Third, we have a Manual of Style about lead section that says what should be in the lead and what should not be. Fourth, your own change was not in the lead.

What you have to do is to calm down, look properly at the article to see for yourself that I am telling the truth, and then read the discussion thread in the talk page. If you intend to make any change to that section in the article, please discuss it first; because Wikipedia works based on the consensus and there is already a consensus on how the contents in the article should look like. Just be patient and everything will work out faster than you'd expect.

Best regards,
Codename Lisa (talk) 05:56, 20 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Dear Codename Lisa: I am hardly being "sensational." The consensus - based on earlier discussions on this page and a Third Opinion above - is that the "locked to one computer forever" issue deserves more prominence than it currently has in the article. My RFC specifically stated that this critical point should be mentioned in the lede. Your followup that this was "Already done" (an exact quote) is simply not true. The fact that it's buried somewhere in the article skirts the whole issue that I (and others) have raised. And you have reverted changes by other editors that gave this fact more prominence.

To quote from the Manual of Style about lead section that you referenced, "The lead serves as an introduction to the article and a summary of its most important aspects." To judge from news coverage, the fact that Office 2013 is locked to one computer forever is pretty clearly one of "its most important aspects." In fact, typing "Office 2013" into Google News results in over 50 articles on the "one computer forever" issue, at the very top of the results. Articles discussing any other aspect of the product are somewhere down the page. Barpoint (talk) 06:41, 20 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

March 2017[edit]

Please do not add or change content, as you did at Minute Waltz, without citing a reliable source using an inline citation that clearly supports the material. The burden is on the person wishing to keep in the material to meet these requirements, as a necessary (but not always sufficient) condition. Please review the guidelines at Wikipedia:Citing sources and take this opportunity to add references to the article. Thank you. Goalbox (talk) 03:47, 22 March 2017 (UTC)[reply]

My first change was simply a change of emphasis - the article as it stood already noted that the "Minute" nickname was "given by its publisher" (not by Chopin). My second change corrects a misrepresentation of sources that are already cited at the end of the sentence. Neither of those sources (the text is included in the references) claims that "the composer ... name[d] the piece 'Valse du petit chien'" but instead that he was *inspired* by a dog chasing its tail. Barpoint (talk) 04:14, 22 March 2017 (UTC)[reply]

ArbCom 2018 election voter message[edit]

Hello, Barpoint. Voting in the 2018 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23.59 on Sunday, 3 December. All users who registered an account before Sunday, 28 October 2018, made at least 150 mainspace edits before Thursday, 1 November 2018 and are not currently blocked are eligible to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once.

The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority 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 in the 2018 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 18:42, 19 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]

ArbCom 2020 Elections voter message[edit]

Hello! Voting in the 2020 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23:59 (UTC) on Monday, 7 December 2020. All eligible users are allowed to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once.

The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority 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 in the 2020 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. If you no longer wish to receive these messages, you may add {{NoACEMM}} to your user talk page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 01:41, 24 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]

ArbCom 2022 Elections voter message[edit]

Hello! Voting in the 2022 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23:59 (UTC) on Monday, 12 December 2022. All eligible users are allowed to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once.

The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority 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 in the 2022 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. If you no longer wish to receive these messages, you may add {{NoACEMM}} to your user talk page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 00:32, 29 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]