User talk:BenedictX

Welcome!

Hello, BenedictX, 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 name on talk pages using four tildes (~~~~); this will automatically produce your name and the date. If you need help, check out Wikipedia:Questions, ask me on my talk page, or place {{helpme}} on your talk page and ask your question there. Again, welcome! Firsfron of Ronchester 03:54, 31 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

AfD for Goler clan

~~You haven't listed your reasons for deletion at the article's talk page, which is part of the AfD process. I'm curious to see why you nominated it.~~ Also, I don't believe it should have been blanked, unless you're asserting copyvio or blatant attack. Flyguy649 17:15, 12 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

My apologies. Discussion was in the talk page instead of on the project page and I didn't notice. I moved it to the project page. Regards, Flyguy649 18:50, 12 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Uncategorised Stubs

Hi, I've noticed you've created a number of articles which have both categorised stub tags and a general, uncategorised stub tag. If you've included a specific stub template such as {{australia-bio-stub}} there's no need to also include the uncategorised stub tag. Thanks, Jeodesic 00:24, 20 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Referencing

G'day. Good work on the Australian judges. With regard to referencing, the refs must come from outside Wikipedia. WP cannot cite itself. See WP:References Maustrauser 21:29, 20 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I have not read the WP:References article yet; but are you saying that WP is not a reliable source?

Another query: why are there so many roadblocks to entry of WP?

I truly appreciate the kind word.

It's late here. I hope to have a more sensible argument set forth later (unless I abandon WP altogether in desparation). Really your "fight" is with user "King Bee" - but more on that later.

Respectfully, BenedictX 02:51, 21 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Don't give up!

Please don't give up on WP. It needs good rigorous editors. I am sorry that you wasted so much time adding references to all those Judges that cannot be used. That's why it is good to do a WP tutorial before you leap in. WP makes it really easy to edit and so lots of new editors say "Wow, I can do that," and then discover that they have accidentally not followed the 'rules' and their article is deleted. Unfortunately it looks like you will be finding out the hard (and boring way).

WP IS NOT a reliable source as it is so easy to edit (just like you have). It is a damn fine source, but not necessarily reliable. You can see why WP cannot cite itself. What is stopping me writing an article that says Maustrauser is Man of the Year (See: American Biographical Institute) in one article and then I write another article quoting the first article as evidence? That's why third party referencing is necessary. You are getting all these Judges names and appointments from somewhere. Simply cite that.

Roadblocks to WP? What do you mean? It must be the easiest website to edit in the world. The rules and policies exist to make it as good as possible. You should see some of the crap that I edit. Your stuff is excellent in comparison.

I don't actually fight with anyone. I simply hope to apply the guidelines that make WP such a marvellous resource. Best of luck with your editing and if I can be of any help, drop me a line. PS. You don't need to comment on my page, I have your page in my watchlist so any changes you make here I'll notice. Sleep well! Maustrauser 03:12, 21 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

My only real source, as you can see, is WP itself. The You are getting all these Judges names and appointments from somewhere. Simply cite that. comes from a list on, like, the Supreme Court of South Australia page. I give each judge his/her own page.

However, if I do that without citing something, then King Bee or someone else will come along and "speedily delete" all of my work. See: Bruce McPherson (Australian judge)

Roadblocks: Well, you'll see when you see Judge McPherson's history - if you need a more verbose explanation, I can give it.

Again, I really appreciate your words of encouragement.

Respectfully,

BenedictX 11:37, 21 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Bugger. I just wrote a long explanation and then lost it. Grr. In a nutshell, WP can't cite itself for the reasons given above. You need to cite external sources. Can't you use the external sources listed on the Supreme Court of South Australia to reference your judges? That should solve the referencing problem. I have reviewed King Bee's contribution and I would have done the same thing. Your articles were unreferenced and thus we had no idea whether your claims were accurate. King Bee acted in good faith when you responded with your 'hang on' tag by removing his speedy delete tag. Your challenge is to produce good properly referenced articles that meet WP:Bio and WP:Notability. If you do that, anyone who challenges you can be be easily rebuffed. Unfortunately WP is full of people sticking their mates into it and thus we are constantly deleting unimportant people.

I reiterate, you are doing a great job and if you follow the policies here you will make a great editor who is helping to produce the best reference source on earth. Keep your chin up. Maustrauser 22:48, 21 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

>>>>>>

A rather verbose reply - hopefully without the "Grrr" moment.

About me. Just an old man. I'm from the library era, but I try to put aside my objects to WP for the kids and have decided to work on WP instead of working on a putting together a picture puzzle. I started doing minor things to WP - adding commas; changing "prior to" to "before" - and now have worked up to bigger puzzle pieces: changing red links into blue ones.

Fears. One of my fears is . . . Well, we all have to avoid the "time sink", we all have to leave our work at the office, we all have time management stratagems. My addiction: finding myself with three open books on my desk plus two different dictionaries and an encyclopedia volume about something which just happened to engage my curiousity at the time. For WP, I have said: no books, no research. This is a picture puzzle. Just fill in the gaps. And this I must do for my own time management.

Basic entries. And so, I only create "basic entries". Place-holders, if you will. Information about (in my case) Australian judges who don't have there own entry yet, but according to WP standards of notability, should have their own entry. I blast through a whole list of red links. I hope someone else will come along with a specific interest in Judge ABC and will in more information about them. But, thanks to the Basic Entry, they now have a place to do that.

more benefits. Other articles (about specific court cases, for examples) also benefit from the basic entries by being able to think to them. And the basic entry serves as an aggregator of information about Judge ABC found on different articles scattered about WP. For example, I found the (1) the dates of service of Judge ABC on the Supreme Court page; (2) then I found the dates of birth and death on the common-name disambiguation page for that judge; and then (3) I found the middle name of Judge ABC on a page entited "List of Judges on the Supreme Court". Because of the basic entry, all three bits of this information is now found in article entitled "Judge ABC". Perhaps more importantly, I erased the information on the disambiguation page and the List page and put it only on the "Judge ABC" page; this is so, if the information happens to be incorrect, the person who corrects the information can correct it in only one article and need not hunt all over WP to "search and destroy" an incorrect date of birth for Judge ABC (for example).

no research. But through all of this, through all of my many, many entries, I never once consulted a reference outside of WP. I never once opened a book or looked at a different web site. So, in fact, I have no idea if the information I have supplied in any of my "basic entries" is correct or not. But if it isn't, but problem isn't with me - the problem is with all the sites that link to the "basic entry" site. I don't create. I collate.

The King Bee event. And I thought I was doing okay. I admit I must have spent over 20 hours on the Australian judges, so my time management skills aren't as hardy as I originally thought; but I've enjoyed putting the puzzle together. Then, just by chance - and I want to emphasize that: just by chance, I happened to notice that King Bee nominated Judge ABC for deletion. But not just deletion, but speedy deletion. And what worried me was that there was nothing very special about Judge ABC. Whatever I did with Judge ABC was just about the same with what I did with all 50+ other judges I had done. So looking me in the face the was the notion that all my 20 hours of work would be speedily deleted, without my knowledge, without my ability to speak up against it (unless I randomly happened across one of my previous entries with a "speedy delete" notice on it). The puzzle was going to be up-turned.

first roadblock to entry. King Bee said s/he wanted References in order to avoid all my work from being deleted. So I hastily looked at the reference rules and spent hours trying to figure out how and what to cite. I didn't want to read all the pages and pages of rules of WP. All I want to do is relax and put together a picture puzzle. But I didn't want my previous 20 hours of work to be deleted either. So to preserve my previous work, I overcame this roadblock and started spending more hours adding references to WP in the WP articles I had created. I only had WP references so those were the only references I could add. And I had to add references, otherwise my work would be deleted.

kiss of death. Then Maustrauser comes along and says that my references, the only references I have, aren't good enough.

verbosity. I just wanted to relax and put together a picture puzzle. To fill in gaps. To, for example, change "prior to" to "before" - very minor stuff that doesn't make a big difference, but that (I think) makes things better. I didn't want to write long, drawn out explanations and justifications for what I was doing. Like this essay.

It just seems that WP isn't the place for me. I tried. Then King Bee said it wasn't good enough. So I followed YOUR rules. And then you said that wasn't good enough either.

Sincerely, BenedictX 12:27, 22 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Dear Benedict, I reiterate. Please don't give up. There is a place (an important place) for people like you who wish to 'fiddle' and improve things with small changes. Such people are called WP:GNOME and it is the Wikignomes who clean all the mess up and gradually lead to an encyclopaedia that we are all proud. As I said before, your problem was to leap in and do the biggest thing possible on WP - create a new article - without a full understanding of the policies that we have in place to ensure that we get a good encylopaedia. Have a look on my talk page for some of the discussions I am having at present in an attempt to keep quality high. We haven't picked on you and I hope that you think that both King Bee and I have treated with you with respect and have assumed good faith.

We want you to stay and we want you (if you wish to do so) to create great articles. In the meantime, let's see if we can clean up the judge mess so that we don't waste your time and don't have the articles deleted.

I think the best thing is simply put the references tag at the top of the article. See what I put on Margaret Wilson (Australian judge) and that should save it from deletion until someone else comes along and fills in some more data.

If I have some time, I'll do some of the articles for you and this will mean I'll also keep an eye on them for you so they don't get deleted. Will that help?

With best wishes, Maustrauser 22:40, 22 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

PS. I note that your talk page has had its first bit of vandalism. Congratulations. It shows that you are a real editor when you have attracted vandals. The vandalism was promptly removed by another editor. Look at your page history to see what was done. Maustrauser 22:40, 22 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Will {references} be okay then?

>>that should save it from deletion until someone else comes along and fills in some more data<< Yeah, that's all I really want to do; just make a holding page (a basic entry) until someone else comes along who knows more and adds their little piece of knowledge. But I think the first step IS that basic entry - so that all links can point to the same place; [Margaret Wilson (Australian judge)] instead of [Margaret Wilson (judge)] or [Margaret Wilson (justice)] or etc.

But, alas, sorry for messing things up.

Sincerely, BenedictX 23:53, 22 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

No prob. We are delighted to have you. I think the ref tag will work as will the stub tags. I'll do a bit of editing to help you out. Maustrauser 00:30, 23 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

WA judges

I strongly suspect that your refs on the pages for wa judges is a non-allowablke form of referencing - has anyone else checked you on this? Dont worry as I am sure we can find other info, but...Satu Suro 06:35, 24 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Hey I have also absorbed a Nicholas Hasluck article into the original - well worth doing a check of most persons - they might already have a life apart from being trapped in those horrible wigs and gowns ... Satu Suro 06:49, 24 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Gah!

Could you please refrain from mass-creating stubs at names not actually used by the people themselves? As Wikipedia uses common names, the likes of Kevin Patrick Duggan should be at Kevin Duggan. You've done this quite a few times - could you please fix this up?

Secondly, could you please rethink creating these nanostubs at all unless you actually intend to expand them at some point in time? The likes of the Anthony Cavanough article are pretty much completely useless, and really don't do Wikipedia any credit - people expect to go there finding actual content and instead find that some guy has created a page just so he could say he created the page. Rebecca 04:04, 25 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

To Rebecca and WP:

I am sorry.

Good bye.

Respectfully,

BenedictX 16:35, 25 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Leaving?

I came across this talk page when I noticed that the link to Bruce McPherson's page on my talk page suddenly became red. I hate to think that I drove you off somehow, but there seems to be some distaste in your mouth for me. Trust me, I was acting in good faith the whole time. I hope you haven't left for good; we need more of the people like you who are interested in bettering Wikipedia as a whole. I apologize again if you feel as though I've bitten you. –King Bee ^{(T • C)} 06:20, 26 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

BenedictX, I'm sorry you have been badly treated by some members of the project - I believe you were trying to improve it. Sorry this may be a bit late - I only just stumbled upon your articles. One of the many rules you struggled to absorb is Please don't bite the newbies, and I think several people may have failed you in that (not just King Bee). Another is Assume good faith - ditto. I hope that one day you will feel you can return to the project. I would have sent you email if you had a registered address in the system. I hope you get to read this soon. --Scott Davis ^Talk 09:54, 4 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

WikiProject Australian law

Hi there, I've noticed you've done a bit of editing to articles related to Australian law recently, and I was wondering if you were aware of the WikiProject Australian law. It's a group of people interested in working on, surprise surprise, articles about Australian law. It's not the most active project, but there are plenty of areas to be worked on, from pages about Australian courts, to biographies of judges (particularly judges at state level, which are very limited at the moment) and articles on case law.

You're more than welcome to take a look at some of the materials we've prepared to help people write about Australian law, including our to-do lists, and feel free to offer your opinion about ways you think that our Australian law coverage could be better organised. If you're interested, just add your name to the list of participants, and maybe introduce yourself on the project's talk page! --bainer (talk) 04:30, 6 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Blake Hagman

I have added a "{{prod}}" template to the article Blake Hagman, suggesting that it be deleted according to the proposed deletion process. All contributions are appreciated, but I don't believe it satisfies Wikipedia's criteria for inclusion, and I've explained why in the deletion notice (see also "What Wikipedia is not" and Wikipedia's deletion policy). You may contest the proposed deletion by removing the {{dated prod}} notice, but please explain why you disagree with the proposed deletion in your edit summary or on its talk page. Also, please consider improving the article to address the issues raised. Even though removing the deletion notice will prevent deletion through the proposed deletion process, the article may still be deleted if it matches any of the speedy deletion criteria or it can be sent to Articles for Deletion, where it may be deleted if consensus to delete is reached. MisterHand 13:48, 10 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Unreferenced BLPs

Hello BenedictX! Thank you for your contributions. I am a bot alerting you that 4 of the articles that you created are tagged as Unreferenced Biographies of Living Persons. The biographies of living persons policy requires that all personal or potentially controversial information be sourced. In addition, to ensure verifiability, all biographies should be based on reliable sources. If you were to bring these articles up to standards, it would greatly help us with the current 69 article backlog. Once the articles are adequately referenced, please remove the {{unreferencedBLP}} tag. Here is the list:

Christopher Steytler - Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL
Anthe Philippides - Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL
Neville Owen - Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL
Patricia Relf - Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL

Thanks!--DASHBot (talk) 20:25, 16 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

ArbCom elections are now open!

Hi,
You appear to be eligible to vote in the current Arbitration Committee election. The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to enact binding solutions for disputes between editors, primarily related to serious behavioural issues that the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the ability 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, you are welcome to review the candidates' statements and submit your choices on the voting page. For the Election committee, MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 16:34, 23 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]