Talk:Australian ten-dollar note

Numismatics Mid‑importance

	Numismatics portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Numismatics, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of numismatics and currencies on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.NumismaticsWikipedia:WikiProject NumismaticsTemplate:WikiProject Numismaticsnumismatic articles
Mid	This article has been rated as Mid-importance on the project's importance scale.

Australia Low‑importance

	Australia portal Australian ten-dollar note is within the scope of WikiProject Australia, which aims to improve Wikipedia's coverage of Australia and Australia-related topics. If you would like to participate, visit the project page.AustraliaWikipedia:WikiProject AustraliaTemplate:WikiProject AustraliaAustralia articles
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.
	Need help improving this article? Ask a Librarian^{What's this?} at the National Library of Australia.
	The Wikimedia Australia chapter can be contacted via email to helpwikimedia.org.au for non-editorial assistance.

Putting the notes in order

I've lined the banknotes up to the right. I changed the order. The $50 article orders the notes from newest to oldest. I think that this makes more sense as it's the plastic notes which are in circulation now. I'll be making the other articles conform to this too. Jimp 08:00, 11 October 2006 (UTC) Done. I've edited the $20 & $100 articles also. They now all conform to the $50 article style. This got rid of a lot of blank space on the $10 & $20 articles & (by lining everything up to the right) tidied the $100 article up. Jimp 08:11, 11 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Nickname

I haven't heard a $10 note called a pavarotti, but the urban dictionary reckons it is. I have heard it called a 'heeler' (which lines up with 'lobster' for the $20 and 'pineapple' for the $50), but only by one person. I won't mind if other people think there isn't enough penetration for that term to justify including it here. Ender 23:50, 13 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Ive never heard on any, only on wikipedia, I wonder about the legitimacy of the sources stated though. But it makes the article colourfull. Enlil Ninlil 02:01, 14 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I'm Australian and i've never heard it be called a pavarotti or a heeler ever —Preceding unsigned comment added by 124.188.69.149 (talk) 08:25, 24 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

We used to have pictures to make the articles colourful. Just as the pictures are absent from the infoboxes, reliable references are absent from these Nicknames sections. I propose that they be deleted. JIMp_talk·cont 04:30, 27 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Potential Inaccuracy - definite discrepancy

For some reason, under the reverse of the note, it says the Design is Richard Gere and links to the actor's page. the text says the reverse features Mary Gilmore and it does look like a woman. That and I don't believe an Australian note would feature an American actor. I don't have enough information to correct this potential error, but someone should. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 24.125.100.62 (talk) 17:31, 17 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Someone has tinkered with this page to add a reference to 'ManBearPig' which is both inaccurate and irrelevant. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 121.44.113.139 (talk) 05:42, 21 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Image bots

Fair use rationale for Image: Australian Paper Ten Dollar Note Security Features.jpg

Image:Australian Paper Ten Dollar Note Security Features.jpg is being used on this article. I notice the image page specifies that the image is being used under fair use but there is no explanation or rationale as to why its use in this Wikipedia article constitutes fair use. BetacommandBot 04:42, 27 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Fair use rationale for Image: Lawson 10 dollar back biglawson 10 dollar back big.jpg

Image:Lawson 10 dollar back biglawson 10 dollar back big.jpg is being used on this article. I notice the image page specifies that the image is being used under fair use but there is no explanation or rationale as to why its use in this Wikipedia article constitutes fair use. BetacommandBot (talk) 22:21, 13 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Fair use rationale for Image: GreenwayNote.JPG

Image:GreenwayNote.JPG is being used on this article. I notice the image page specifies that the image is being used under fair use but there is no explanation or rationale as to why its use in this Wikipedia article constitutes fair use. BetacommandBot (talk) 22:44, 13 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Image copyright problem with Image: Australian $10 note 1988.jpg

The image Image:Australian $10 note 1988.jpg is used in this article under a claim of fair use, but it does not have an adequate explanation for why it meets the requirements for such images when used here. In particular, for each page the image is used on, it must have an explanation linking to that page which explains why it needs to be used on that page. This is an automated notice by FairuseBot. For assistance on the image use policy, see Wikipedia:Media copyright questions. --10:12, 12 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 2 external links on Australian ten-dollar note. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at {{Sourcecheck}}).

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 02:14, 22 October 2016 (UTC)[reply]