User talk:Avenue/Archive2

Archived messages: 2004-2006

Auckland Meetup 2 Scheduled - Feb 10 2007

You are all invited to Auckland Meetup 2 on the afternoon of Saturday February 10th 2007 at Galbraith's Ale House in Mt Eden. Please see Wikipedia:Meetup/Auckland 2 for details. You can also bookmark Wikipedia:Meetup/Auckland to be informed of future NZ meetups. - SimonLyall 05:30, 7 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Image:Anand Satyanand and Silvia Cartwright.jpg

Thanks for uploading Image:Anand Satyanand and Silvia Cartwright.jpg. I notice the 'image' page specifies that the image is being used under fair use, but its use in Wikipedia articles fails our first fair use criterion in that it illustrates a subject for which a freely licensed image could reasonably be found or created that provides substantially the same information. If you believe this image is not replaceable, please:

Go to the image description page and edit it to add {{Replaceable fair use disputed}}, without deleting the original Replaceable fair use template.
On the image discussion page, write the reason why this image is not replaceable at all.

Alternatively, you can also choose to replace the fair use image by finding a freely licensed image of its subject, requesting that the copyright holder release this (or a similar) image under a free license, or by taking a picture of it yourself.

If you have uploaded other fair use media, consider checking that you have specified how these images fully satisfy our fair use criteria. You can find a list of 'image' pages you have edited by clicking on this link. Note that any fair use images which are replaceable by free-licensed alternatives will be deleted one week after they have been uploaded, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you. MECU≈talk 01:16, 9 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Waitangi

Hi, are you going to be on a marae this year for Waitangi day? I am asking just in case you are and are available to take a photo and have it available for a possible Wikinews report. Nzgabriel 05:56, 28 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Reply on User talk:Nzgabriel.

Census

Weird. I'd have thought the Herald would get that one right (and I am reasonably sure I copied it right). Later corrections to interim data, maybe? MadMaxDog 02:34, 5 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, you copied it right (assuming you mean the total Auckland population figure). But that's the wrong total to calculate these percentages on, because not everyone answered the ethnicity question. The Herald got some of the 2006 figures wrong (e.g. the figure for Other was for the Northland Region, and I have no idea where they got their NZer figure from). -- Avenue 08:53, 5 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Say, Avenue, maybe go have a look if you could spare the time to improve the Christchurch article (especially regarding census figures, maybe we could simply copy the table style we have for Auckland). I did quite a bit of work improving the article, but compared to Auckland, it is still a rather rough gem... MadMaxDog 11:42, 7 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Auckland Meetup 2 Scheduled - Feb 10 2007

HI. In case you are in Auckland (or near auckland) you are invited to Auckland Meetup 2 on the afternoon of Saturday February 10th 2007 at Galbraith's Ale House in Mt Eden. Please see Wikipedia:Meetup/Auckland 2 for details. You can also bookmark Wikipedia:Meetup/Auckland to be informed of future NZ meetups. - Linnah 10:58, 8 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Barnstar

		The Original Barnstar
		For statistically proven benefit to Wikipedia, and general industriousness in various areas. MadMaxDog 11:05, 13 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Auckland Volcanic Field

Adding a quick question: is the Tank Farm really a volcanic cone? I thought this was a artificial piece of land (actually pretty sure - its the 'Western Reclamation'). The map in the article also shows empty bay there... MadMaxDog 11:08, 13 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Ah, you're thinking of a different Tank Farm. The explosion crater just southwest of the Esmonde Rd turnoff from the Northern Motorway is also called Tank Farm, referring to concrete oil tanks that were sited there during World War II. It's also known simply as Tuff Crater. Here's a map of the crater. -- Avenue 11:37, 13 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I'll correct my edit to Volcanic Field then. As usual, I was a bit quick. MadMaxDog 11:42, 13 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

1a

Hi—Thanks for removing that repeated item. I hope to return to complete that project in May and June. Tony 14:31, 23 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

You're welcome. Your guide makes a handy reference, so I'm glad you're planning to finish it off. -- Avenue 13:36, 24 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Wikipedia:Featured_article_review#Margin_of_error

How do you feel about this after having done more work? Still a remove? It's been up an awful long time. Marskell 13:57, 28 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Herb Green

You added some material on Herb Green's views on abortion and fertility but the material was unsourced. If you still know where you found the information, could you add it to the article please.-gadfium 19:17, 4 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks. The article has come a long way from its origins.-gadfium 05:31, 5 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Portuguese explorers

You must have reverted the New Zealand article seconds before I did. Not realising you'd done so, I went on to add an explanation to the talk page. I think your paragraph at History of New Zealand is excellent.-gadfium 21:45, 22 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks, I'm glad you like it. -- Avenue 13:09, 23 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Volcanoes

Just wanted to say "Hi", Avenue, and thanks for all your great work on WikiProject Volcanoes, including dredging up another 30+ crater lakes the other day. I'm rather fond of crater lakes, including Crater Lake (one of my favorite places) but especially remote crater lakes hidden high out of sight in summit craters.

By the way, I corrected a font problem on your talk page stemming from the "thank you" card above. Hope that's OK with you. --Seattle Skier (talk) 17:11, 15 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

You're welcome, it's been my pleasure. I have a soft spot for crater lakes too. I've been glad to see all the work you've been doing on the project; thanks for starting it. And thanks for fixing the font problem above. -- Avenue 02:32, 16 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I decided to reoroganize the {{Volcano}} tagging templates into several separate ones for different types of pages. Hopefully, this will make it easier to keep track of lists and non-article pages. Maybe you've already seen this on the project page. --Seattle Skier (talk) 04:15, 16 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, good idea. The two images I had tagged aren't especially important for the project, so I'll remove those tags. -- Avenue 16:41, 16 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Dense-Rock Equivalent

Neither being a vulcanologist nor playing one on TV, I really appreciate your fixing the references on the article. I'm not a geologist by training, but I started the article because I was editing the Minoan eruption and it made reference to the term, and I thought it deserved a wiki-article. I was editing the Minoan article because I was interested in historical events that might have influenced biblical myths. Anyways, I am not usually a plagiarizer, but because I barely know tephra is, I had a difficult time converting the references into my own language. I just want to thank you for your help, and to make sure you knew I wasn't typically a plagiarizer. Also, the article might only deserve a couple of paragraphs, but anything you can do to make it scientifically correct would be greatly appreciate. Orangemarlin 17:01, 16 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for creating the article; I agree it's worth having. There's nothing wrong with copying that text, as long as we credit the original source. -- Avenue 17:42, 16 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Highest lake in the world is probably a crater lake!

Hi Avenue, I just found out an interesting bit of info. There is a permanent crater lake about 100 m in diameter at an elevation of 6,390 m on the eastern side of Ojos del Salado. This is most likely the highest lake of any kind in the world, exceeding 6368 m Lhagba Pool in Tibet. There is a photo and other info at http://www.andes.org.uk/peak-info-6000/ojos-info.htm. --Seattle Skier (talk) 08:43, 2 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Interesting. I see Category:Crater lakes now has over 150 members, by the way. -- Avenue 13:59, 2 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, I found a few more yesterday while updating the article crater lake. I also found a few good sources about volcanic lakes on the web, along with some info about them in a few of the numerous volcanology books on my bookshelf. At some point, I'm considering expanding that article substantially, to include extensive info about the types and composition of volcanic/crater lakes, their hazards, and notable incidents caused by them (lahars, outgassing, etc.). I think it would be easy to build it into a GA, and perhaps even an FA. Maybe we should collaborate. --Seattle Skier (talk) 17:39, 2 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I think crater lake would make a good featured article. It's a nice, compact topic, with lots of human interest and no shortage of pretty pictures. I'm not sure how much help I can be over the next few months, but I'll try to help when I can. -- Avenue 14:29, 3 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Over 160 now in Category:Crater lakes. I was surprised to discover that the Mount Rainier article had no mention (until just now) of its small crater lake, located beneath 50 m of glacial ice but accessible via steam caves along the bottom of the ice. People have scuba dived in that lake, which is the highest in North America at about 4330 m on its surface. It's about 10 x 40 m in size, and 5 m deep. And it's practically in my backyard! I've summited Rainier 5 times, but never managed to make the extra effort to camp on the summit for a couple days to allow time to explore the steam caves and visit the lake. Someday... --Seattle Skier (talk) 09:16, 4 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Problem adding date to Ongoing template reference

SmackBot seems to have broken the {{Ongoing}} template link in this edit to the David Bain article. I don't know if this problem is more widespread. -- Avenue 11:27, 10 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks only 3 articles were affected, all fixed. Rich Farmbrough, 13:29 10 May 2007 (GMT).

Hats off

Hats off for your recent work on David Bain article. I'm bold enough to suggest that you also read Keith Hunter's recent book on the Smart/Hope - Watson case, regards RichardJ Christie 13:35, 12 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Poás Volcano

Thanks for removing that stuff about the 4-mile high geyser. I can't believe I didn't see or deal with that myself when I updated the article a couple of hours earlier. --Seattle Skier (talk) 22:00, 13 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

You're welcome. We all miss things - I've seen a few bits of obvious but long-standing vandalism lately, that I and several other editors had missed. The claim that Poas is the world's largest geyser seems to be on almost every Costa Rican tourism site, so I wrote a bit in the talk page to try to forestall well-meaning but unfounded edits. -- Avenue 01:52, 14 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

A few things

Just thought you seemed interested in David Bain so you might be able to answer these questions.

Is there a free image avaliable for the David Bain article? If not, fair use must surely apply. Hopefully a wikipedia in Christchurch could help us.
Could you expand Joe Karam?

Cheers.--Hamedog_Talk|^@ 04:46, 15 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for starting the article on Joe Karam, and for adding that photo. I don't know of any free images, but I've seen older ones that are pretty clearly irreplaceable. I'll track one down. -- Avenue 08:32, 15 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I did find a few, e.g. [1]

[2], but having read the relevant policy page (WP:FAIRUSE), I don't believe they meet the criteria (especially #8, significance). -- Avenue 12:53, 15 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Arthur Thomas

I've been hosting a pdf of the royal commission's report on my website for a year or two. It's the only one I know of on the web. You can link the Thomas article to it if you wish. http://homepages.paradise.net.nz/r.christie/thomas_royal_commission_1980.pdf RichardJ Christie 11:54, 15 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks, I'll do that. -- Avenue 12:53, 15 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Mount Shasta

Hi Avenue, thanks for responding to anon over at Talk:Mount Shasta, and in the edit summaries. I was out of town on May 17-18, so I didn't notice any of that until this morning. I decided to carefully look through all of anon's contributions, before taking any action. I was surprised to discover just how extensive his pattern of abuse was: 30+ edits from 12 separate IPs, all traceable to a PacBell/SBC DSL connection in northern California. He had even been deleting other people's comments from talk pages a couple times. If he had been editing from a single IP or from a registered account, it is certain that he would have already been blocked, probably more than once by now. It seemed essential to give him a final warning, to give him another chance to improve his conduct, or else face a block the next time any disruptive edits are made. It seemed that posting the warning on that talk page was the only way to make sure he sees it, since his IP changes daily. I think I'll only leave it there for a week or so, and then archive that entire lengthy discussion, so that talk page can return to normal and resume discussing article content.

I'm not sure what the best way to proceed is if he should return in a non-constructive manner. I haven't taken any of his comments personally, so I still feel comfortable blocking him myself if forced to do so. But to avoid any notion of impropriety (i.e. abuse of admin tools), it might be best to report him on WP:AIV next time, with a link to Talk:Mount Shasta/Abuse so that the blocking admin can see the full pattern (instead of just the last 1-2 edits) and choose an appropriate degree of response. What do you think?

By the way, do you have any interest in getting admin tools? You've been here a long time, with 7000+ edits, and you'd probably sail through the RfA. Given your very gracious manner on talk pages, I assume you don't have any incivility or other black marks in your contribs that might be held against you in RfA. Having the extra buttons is very useful for cleaning up stuff like misnamed categories, moving articles over stuck redirects, etc. It would be nice to have more admins in WikiProject Volcanoes. Just something I've been thinking about asking you. Thanks. --Seattle Skier (talk) 04:41, 21 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

You're welcome. I was a bit annoyed that the anon had expressed their frustrations via that sort of misplaced innuendo against you; you certainly don't deserve it. I agree, it would be best to have another admin act on any further disruption from them, not because you wouldn't handle it properly yourself, but because it avoids any hint of a conflict of interest. Justice not only needs to be done, it needs to be seen to be done.

By the way, congratulations on becoming an admin! I would have liked to vote in support (not that you needed it), but I'm afraid I haven't been following RfAs much lately, so I missed it. I would like to take on adminship someday, but I'm expecting to be quite busy outside Wikipedia for the next few months so I'll probably wait 'til later in the year. -- Avenue 13:28, 21 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Map

I'm half way around the world, but this is the map I was working from: Image:North Island Map.PNG Not ideal, you'll admit. Samsara (talk • contribs) 02:30, 29 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

You'd need to fade the blue a bit, but it seems workable. Samsara (talk • contribs) 02:47, 29 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

DYK

Did you know? was updated. On 1 June, 2007, a fact from the article SS Dunedin, which you recently nominated, has been featured in that section on the Main Page. If you know of another interesting fact from a recently created article, then please suggest it on the Did you know? talk page.

--Yomangani ^talk 14:59, 1 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

VEI categories

Well, how am I supposed to know what VEI that volcano is if www.volcano.si.edu usually goes back only 10,000 years? Black Tusk 02:54, June 2007 (UTC)

Polynesian navigation

Since Polynesian navigation already exists, I've split the material off from Polynesia. Please help improve the article. Thanks. —Viriditas | Talk 23:04, 6 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Good idea. Thanks for letting me know. -- Avenue 01:54, 7 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Hatepe eruption

On 9 June, 2007, Did you know? was updated with a fact from the article Hatepe eruption, which you created or substantially expanded. If you know of another interesting fact from a recently created article, then please suggest it on the Did you know? talk page.

--howcheng {chat} 06:04, 9 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Valley of Geysers

Did you know? was updated. On 10 June, 2007, a fact from the article Valley of Geysers, which you recently nominated, was featured in that section on the Main Page. If you know of another interesting fact from a recently created article, then please suggest it on the Did you know? talk page.

--howcheng {chat} 01:36, 10 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Image:Valley of Geysers.jpg

Hi Avenue, I guess you probably know that this image has been marked for deletion on Commons. But it would qualify for fair-use if uploaded to en.wikipedia instead, since it is now non-replaceable (the same applies to pretty much any other pre-landslide photos of the Valley of Geysers). --Seattle Skier (talk) 05:22, 10 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for letting me know. I'm not so convinced that it meets our WP:NFCC criteria; given it's a tourist spot, there must be a lot of existing photos and some might be available under a free license. The closest I've found yet[3] is only CC-BY-NC, though. - Avenue 13:06, 10 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I'll contact the photographer and see if he is willing to change his licensing. howcheng {chat} 18:39, 10 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Booya! He changed to CC-BY-SA. Sweet! It's at Image:Valley of the Geysers.jpg. He also told me that if you are interested in getting any other photos of the valley from his gallery at [4], just let him know and he will be happy to license those CC-BY-SA too. howcheng {chat} 16:13, 11 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Great work, both of you, in finding a free image and convincing the author to change his licensing! That's much better than trying to fair-use the other image. --Seattle Skier (talk) 17:40, 11 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

That's great! Thanks for asking the photographer to change it, howcheng. -- Avenue 22:43, 11 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

ANZAC Day

Hi do you have sources for your Kiwi additions to the ANZAC Day article? Could you possibly add them in the appropriate fashion. At the moment they seem to be unsourced. Thanks. Ozdaren 12:55, 16 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Most of my sources focussed only on NZ, so citing them in sentences describing both Aus and NZ seems like it will be awkward. I'll have a go, though. The corresponding information on Australia was generally unsourced too, but I'm afraid I can't help much with that at present. -- Avenue 13:15, 16 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

No worries I saw you were editing and adding after I'd written my comment. It's good to see the article gain a balance. Ozdaren 14:19, 16 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Commas or parentheses for scientific name in opening sentence and elsewhere

(Now that was a long header wasn't it?) There's a debate here about commas versus parentheses for scientific names for organisms (well in this case birds). I'm not sure whether this has been raised elsewhere but would be good to establish once and for all here and could apply as MOS across all biology articles. cheers, Casliber (talk · contribs) 21:04, 18 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for letting me know. -- Avenue 22:35, 18 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

France national rugby union team FAC

As of time of posting there have been no comments at the France national rugby union team's FAC even though it's been an FAC for over a week. So i'm asking for some comments from some people that have commented on Rugby union FAC's before. Please comment here. A support or oppose (with reasons) would be greatly appreciated. Thanks. - Shudda ^talk 00:33, 22 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Meetup

Hi Avenue - can you please indicate which of the two dates of the meetup you prefer? Cheers Ingolfson 06:28, 16 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

New NZ map uploaded

Following your suggestion at User talk:Samsara, I uploaded a "clean" version of the NASA topographic map of NZ: Image:Nz large simple downsampled.gif. Perhaps the various tuatara locations can now be plotted on this map. Separa 18:10, 4 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Volcano project rating

Hi Avenue, is there a reason why you rate almost every volcano article low importance? Most of the volcano articles I have seen were rather mid-importance (e.g. Sturgeon Lake Caldera, Spectrum Range, Wells Gray-Clearwater Volcanic Field, Tweed Volcano, Vestmannaeyjar, etc). If it's large, well-preserved, very active, or a notable volcano, it's definitely not "low"-importance. Most articles about volcanic protected areas (such as national parks) should probably be rated as mid-importance. Black Tusk 16:23, 8 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Hi, you're welcome to change them if you like. I have tried to follow the assessment criteria as best I could, based on the information at hand. These do not mention state of preservation; perhaps they should. You seem to know a lot more than me about Canadian volcanoes, so I'm happy to defer to your judgment there. I thought Vestmannaeyjar was borderline; I rated it low not because the volcanoes there are not important (they are), but because they were only a small part of the article. -- Avenue 04:50, 8 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I see. But I don't think Vestmannaeyjar wouldn't be since the area is very volcanically active. The Wells Gray-Clearwater Volcanic Field is rather large, independent, and has been an area of active volcanism for the past three million years or so (possibly last active in the year 1500 and has been an area of recent seismic activity). The Sturgeon Lake Caldera is one of the worlds oldest well-preserved caldera complexes (2.7 billion years). But the Spectrum Range and Tweed Volcano are rather large volcanoes (Tweed has one of the worlds largest calderas). I agree it should be mentioned. Black Tusk 07:23, 8 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I accept your points about the Canadian articles, and I'm glad we agree about state of preservation being important. I don't agree about the Australian and Icelandic examples, however. Erosion calderas aren't really within the project's scope, so size is all that Tweed has going for it. Given its age, I think it's not that important. I would put Vestmannaeyjar in the same category as the Banks Islands, say; it's about a wider area that contains some important active volcanoes. The area's article is not really that important to the project, but the articles on the volcanoes themselves are important. -- Avenue 02:28, 9 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Does age matter to the project? Tweed's caldera is originally volcanic. It formed the same way most shield volcano calderas form. It's eroded because of how old the caldera is (probably 23 million years or so). Vestmannaeyjar needs to be expanded on volcanism anyways. Black Tusk 05:12, 9 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, I believe age (or youth) of the volcano should be a factor in judging the relative priority of different articles, along with how well-preserved, dangerous, accessible, large, high, or famous each volcano is. I haven't found any source claiming that the Tweed erosion caldera was originally volcanic, not even the tourist agency blurb our article links to. Do you have a source for that? -- Avenue 08:26, 9 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Monteregian mountain chain

Hi Avenue me again, do you think the Monteregian mountain chain should be added with the list of volcanoes in Canada? I just seen you added it and reverted your edit. I removed it because the magma that forms the present-day mountains in the chain was actually beneath sedimentary rock and wasn't erupted. Here they say they're the oldest remnants of volcanoes that were active about 125 million years ago. Here they say were formed by a series of plutonic intrusions. Black Tusk 04:12, 9 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

The McGill link seems much more convincing to me. It focuses directly on the question of whether Mont St. Hilaire was originally a volcano, and explains how the rocks give no evidence of this. NOAA only claims they were volcanoes in passing; this might be a deliberate over-simplification, to avoid having to explain about plutons. I guess it's possible that there may have been volcanoes above some of the intrusions, but I don't think our article should speculate about this, and we certainly shouldn't include them in the list based on that sort of speculation. Reporting someone else's speculations would probably be okay though, if we can find something. -- Avenue 07:58, 9 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

The Monteregian mountain chain is definitely the oldest part of a hotspot track which enters the Atlantic Ocean to form the New England Seamount chain. It's possible there might have been volcanoes above the sedimentary rock though, since hotspots could easily punch a hole though it. I was thinking maybe the present-day Monteregian Hills might be exposed magma chambers of the volcanoes, since hotspots always make volcanoes. Black Tusk 16:36, 9 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Although I don't agree that "hotspots always make volcanoes", the idea that the Monteregian Hills were the roots of volcanoes does have some appeal. However what matters for Wikipedia is not what you or I think may have happened, but what reliable sources say. While the two sources above contradict one another, on balance they suggest that the intrusions were not associated closely with volcanoes. You could discuss the contradictions in the article on the hills themselves, but I think there is enough doubt that they should not be in the list. -- Avenue 13:10, 10 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I'm just shearing my ideas with you. I ment it by hotspots usually make volcanoes or some sort of track like seamount chains and plutonic intrusions like the Monteregian Hills. Black Tusk 14:15, 10 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I see that Vsmith has added a reference that says some of the intrusions were the roots of volcanoes. See his note about the list on the talk page though. -- Avenue 04:03, 13 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I seen that earlier today. I also found out that the Monteregian mountain chain is actually not the oldest part of the New England hotspot track. It actually starts from the area northwest of Hudson Bay (most likely the Northwest Territories or Nunavut). About 50 million years later, the hotspot was under present-day Ontario. See the Volcanism in Canada article for more. Black Tusk 20:12, 17 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Copyright problems with Image:Kiwi distributn map.gif

Hey. Could you please delete that image as it does have a copyright problem, i am trying to obtain the image copyright but in the meantime can you please remove the image from Wikipedia? Cheers (♠Murchy♠) 02:50, 22 September 2007 (UTC))[reply]

I've removed it from the Kiwi article. I can't actually delete the image, but it should be deleted in a week or so. -- Avenue 02:56, 22 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Ok great, thanks for that :D (♠Murchy♠) 02:58, 22 September 2007 (UTC))[reply]

Disputed fair use rationale for Image:NZ 10c shilling front.jpg

Thanks for uploading Image:NZ 10c shilling front.jpg. However, there is a concern that the rationale you have provided for using this image under "fair use" may be invalid. Please read the instructions at Wikipedia:Non-free content carefully, then go to the image description page and clarify why you think the image qualifies for fair use. Using one of the templates at Wikipedia:Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to ensure that your image is in compliance with Wikipedia policy, but remember that you must complete the template. Do not simply insert a blank template on an image page.

If it is determined that the image does not qualify under fair use, it will be deleted within a couple of days according to our criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the media copyright questions page. Thank you.BetacommandBot 21:31, 6 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

New Zealand dream

I really appreciated your reference to government support for the New Zealand dream. However I am a little concerned about the other reference. I presume from the wording in the first paragraph that you think that the New Zealand dream is overly materialistic, and I agree with you.

Often commentators will try to define how they think culture should be rather than how it really is. For example the European dream has been defined by an American, where he tries to differentiate from the American dream. Yet the EU hasn't barely established a Pan-European identity and what finally emerges as their dream is yet to be determined and it probably won't be determined by an American. The Canadian identity is another example of commentators trying to differentiate themselves from the United States, rather than really describing Canadians.

Suggested Solution: What about have a section called “Criticism of the New Zealand dream” instead? New Zealanders are arguably the most materialistic people of earth. Worse than Americans. They spend all of their money and then borrow more from overseas countries and spend that too. Although consumer spending is good for the economy, most economists believe that New Zealanders spend far too much. Over the long-term New Zealanders are getting deeper and deeper into debt. Kiwi-saver is a government program designed to encourage Kiwis to spend less.

Please let me know your thoughts.Badenoch (talk) 05:16, 18 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

The quote I added seems to attempt a description of what NZ culture is, not what it should be. I'm not claiming that that definition is as common as the "house on a quarter acre" version, just that it is a valid definition that comes from a reliable source (in the usual Wikipedia sense). I don't really care whether it is described as "less materialistic" - that was just my attempt at contrasting the two definitions, but I guess it could be read as criticising the first definition, so perhaps it should be reworded.

I believe it's probably best to start off by summarising the range of definitions of the NZ dream, as in our American Dream article, before describing them in much detail. A "Criticism" section might also be useful later on, but can't substitute for a good, broad introduction. -- Avenue (talk) 12:00, 18 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

New Zealand

Sorry about wiping your edit. Some sort of edit conflict must have occured, but I got no message saying so.-gadfium 08:27, 5 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

That's fine. I've seen it happen once or twice before. -- Avenue (talk) 08:33, 5 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Lascar image

Hi, Image:Lascar eruption 2006a.jpg appears to be a cropping of an image found here, however it belongs to another Flickr user and has another license. I think the copyright status is unclear. What is your opinion? Jespinos (talk) 20:00, 22 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I think you're right; its status is unclear at best. I've nominated it for deletion on Commons. Thanks for spotting that. -- Avenue (talk) 22:07, 22 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]