Jump to content

User talk:Bidgee/Archive 28

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Archive 25Archive 26Archive 27Archive 28Archive 29Archive 30→Archive 35


Freeboard

Howdy! The Commons de-linker just removed an image from Freeboard (skateboard) after you deleted it from Commons. I'm not sure what is going on in the background but that page, User:Unotretre and related trademark issues are currently at WP:ANI. Unotretre seems keen to delete material about a competitor brand (Freebord, by any means) and replace it with content/images about his own company's products (Gravitis). He has already been blocked on en.wiki per SOCK and NLT. Just thought I should give you a heads-up before you unintentionally wade into an ongoing conflict. Stalwart111 01:18, 3 January 2013 (UTC)

The files that I deleted were not requested by Unotretre nor am I helping them. I deleted photographs by both commons:User:Freebord and commons:User:Unotretre, as they were of copyrighted works at already exist elsewhere and do not have permission to license under a free-use license. Bidgee (talk) 01:33, 3 January 2013 (UTC)
No problem at all - just thought I should mention it given the timing. Stalwart111 04:41, 3 January 2013 (UTC)

Outside of

Hello. On the Canberra page, I'm not sure why you undid my revision of "outside of" to "outside" -- and why you think my revision was not a minor edit. The "of" is an unnecessary/superfluous preposition if the phrase is intended to indicate location. (By contrast, in the case of a sentence like "He painted the outside of the house," "outside" is a noun and the preposition "of" is required.) But perhaps I have misunderstood and the phrase "outside of" in this case is supposed to mean "politically separate from". If so, then perhaps "politically separate from" should be used, to avoid ambiguity. What do you think? Scales (talk) 05:33, 8 January 2013 (UTC)

Gold Coast, Queensland - photo.

I have started a discussion regarding the photo used in the info box for Gold Coast, Queensland, on its talk page. As you have been involved I thought you would like to contribute.--Dmol (talk) 22:38, 12 January 2013 (UTC)

Hi Bidgee, I recently came across Police Stations in New South Wales which you created long ago. Currently being nothing beyond a photo gallery, I was torn on whether to Prod it, suggest merging it into something like New South Wales Police Force, or otherwise. What are your thoughts? --Qetuth (talk) 03:50, 14 January 2013 (UTC)

EnergyAustralia

Hi, Bidgee. There is a proposal concerning EnergyAustralia and TRUenergy articles. Your opinion is appreciated. Beagel (talk) 06:05, 14 January 2013 (UTC)

Rex

G'day, I have changed the location of Rex's HQ back to Mascot. In addition to the refs I added to the article, the aircraft are owned by Regional Express Holdings and operated by Regional Express Pty. Ltd., with the address for both given as Mascot; and the address quoted for Regional Express Pty. Ltd. on CASA's AOC page is also Mascot. Pel-Air's address is also Mascot, while the address for Air Link is Dubbo and for the Pilot Academy it is Forest Hill. AFAIK only maintenance operations are based at WGA. Cheers. YSSYguy (talk) 07:20, 15 January 2013 (UTC)

Sockpuppet

Oh! That's disappointing. Sadly, not surprising, but nevertheless, disappointing. Thanks for the alert. Cheers, Pdfpdf (talk) 13:07, 17 January 2013 (UTC)
P.S. Happy New Year!! Pdfpdf (talk) 13:07, 17 January 2013 (UTC)

Harris Park

Have been looking at the Harris Park, NSW article and am uncertain about this pic:

Harris Park Mt Austin

Could this belong to a different Harris Park?

Have just looked up Mt Austin and answered my own question. The pic was in the wrong article.

Sardaka (talk) 08:28, 18 January 2013 (UTC)

Was added by an editor in September 2011. Shall rename it, as it didn't occur to me at the time, that there's also a Harris Park in Sydney. Bidgee (talk) 11:30, 19 January 2013 (UTC)

All states when abbreviated are in capitals

Hi Bidgee, With the changes to the 2 templates Template:Australian_premiers and Template:Law_enforcement_in_Australia I was actually trying to fix up consistency. Everywhere I look on the templates Qld, Vic and Tas are used. See this...

[1] says to use NSW, Vic., Qld, WA, SA, Tas., ACT [2] says use ACT, NSW, NT, Qld, SA, Tas, Vic, WA Also this I think I am right, but am happy to be corrected by you if you back up your assertion. If the "right way" is all uppercase, then a lot of other Wikipedia pages need fixing. Philiashasspots (talk) 06:39, 21 January 2013 (UTC)

Hi Bidgee, I found [3] as well that says use NSW, Vic, Qld, SA, WA, Tas, NT, ACT. The Qld Government says use Qld Philiashasspots (talk) 08:06, 21 January 2013 (UTC)
Hi Bidgee, I have found that List of U.S. state abbreviations agrees with how I had it. (Not the "Postal" or "Codes" because they are for the postal system using text recognition and requiring the upper case 2 letter code) The US article refers to the AP Stylebook. Philiashasspots (talk) 11:07, 21 January 2013 (UTC)
Came across some of these today and a few more which also stated that NSW is N.S.W. ect. Bidgee (talk) 11:47, 22 January 2013 (UTC)
In the interests of standardization across Wikipedia should this talk section be moved off your talk page and placed somewhere else? I have also noticed a convention that if there is a list of Australian States and Territories - the order is always "NSW, Vic, Qld, WA, SA, Tas, ACT, NT". I just fixed up an article that I created that had a different order when I realized that there was some sort of convention. Philiashasspots (talk) 12:42, 22 January 2013 (UTC)
The widely accepted Australian Guide to Legal Citation, at 3.1.3, gives "Cth", "NSW" and so on. That is: capital and then lower case where it is an abbreviation, and all capitals where it is initials. I think this is also government usage. "N.S.W." seems to be an old style. And I think I've seen all capitals for an abbreviation, e.g. "VIC", only for postal use. As to the order, I don't think there is any settled convention. A reasonable approach, to my mind, is that of AustLII - the first online port of call for law in Australia - which puts the Commonwealth first and then the states and territories in their alphabetical order. --Wikiain (talk) 01:20, 30 January 2013 (UTC)
Thanks for contributing to the discussion Wikiain. I have also had a discussion here. The Australian BOM [4] mixes case, but uses the order NSW, VIC, QLD, WA, SA, TAS, ACT. AustLii uses [5] Cth, ACT, NSW, NT, Qld, SA, Tas, Vic, WA. I think it makes sense to move this discussion before a larger group of people, then once some sort of consensus is made I'll fix any changes I made that go against consensus - in the interests of consistency Philiashasspots (talk) 02:09, 30 January 2013 (UTC)
Yes, Philiashasspots, let's have a move so that this and your earlier discussion can be consolidated - though the present discussion is not only about the states and territories but also about the Commonwealth. Not sure where it should go, but happy for others to decide.--Wikiain (talk) 04:46, 30 January 2013 (UTC)

Happy Australia Day! Thank you for contributing to Australian content!

Australian Wikimedian Recognition (AWR)
Thank you for your contributions on English Wikipedia that have helped improve Australian related content. :D It is very much appreciated. :D Enjoy your Australia Day and please continue your good work! Hawkeye7 (talk) 22:14, 25 January 2013 (UTC)

Main Southern railway line, New South Wales

These bold edits are uncontroversial and add the correct use of route diagrams and {{Infobox rail line}} similar to the one used for North Coast railway line, New South Wales. Dbromage [Talk] 10:22, 6 February 2013 (UTC)

Sorry but they're controversial, you're making a huge change without any discussion. The North Coast article is another that you changed, it hasn't been formatted that way in the past. Bidgee (talk) 10:31, 6 February 2013 (UTC)

YGM

Hello, Bidgee. Please check your email; you've got mail!
It may take a few minutes from the time the email is sent for it to show up in your inbox. You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{You've got mail}} or {{ygm}} template.

WP:ANI

Hello. There is currently a discussion at Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents regarding an issue with which you may have been involved. Thank you. I didn't raise the thread but you hadn't been notified so I'm doing so. Stalwart111 07:31, 11 February 2013 (UTC)

Tracy

Just wondering was Tracy defined as a Severe Tropical Cyclone at the time in 1974.Jason Rees (talk) 00:46, 19 February 2013 (UTC)

No, in 1974 it was just known as Cyclone Tracy (Report on Cyclone Tracy December 1974 (1977) by the Bureau of Meteorology and Big Blow Up North (1984) by Kevin Murphy). The use of "Tropical Cyclone X" rather than "Cyclone X" was during the late 80s/early 90s but the use of "Severe Tropical Cyclone X" came in to use in the early 2000s IIRC. Bidgee (talk) 01:05, 19 February 2013 (UTC)
Your view on the common usage is interesting, however it is also interesting to note that on the BOM report Page 6 and 62 onwards (PDF page 15 and 69), you can clearly see them using "Tropical Cyclone X" and "Severe Tropical Cyclone X" with the same windspeeds as the present day.Jason Rees (talk) 02:49, 19 February 2013 (UTC)
Yes I know, Warnings issued by the BoM have always used "Tropical Cyclone X" but there was a lot of inconsistencies in the past (above report shows that), indeed the wind speeds are still the same but "Severe Tropical Cyclone X" used for TCs at or greater than category 3 is really only over a decade old. Bidgee (talk) 03:48, 19 February 2013 (UTC)
What do you mean by inconsitencys? and yes i am aware that the BoM didnt start to use the TCIS until the season after Cyclone Aivu, allthough at least Darwin have applied it to storms before Aivu, which i think gives us the green light to at least say it was equivilant to a modern day category x TC while being careful and using the current estimates of the MSW since Tracy was the benchmark for a while.Jason Rees (talk) 13:34, 19 February 2013 (UTC)
No need to be narky at me, you asked a question and I answered it. The inconsistencies are clear in the report for Tracy, uses of both Cyclone and Tropical Cyclone is one of them. Bidgee (talk) 14:00, 19 February 2013 (UTC)
I wasnt intending to be narky and if it came across that way i apologise, but all i was trying to do is expand my knowledge of the Australian warning system.Jason Rees (talk) 02:13, 20 February 2013 (UTC)
List of Severe Tropical Cyclones (2000-onwards) where the BoM doesn't use the wording "Severe Tropical Cyclone X" on pdf reports.
List where "Severe" is used in the TC name.
Thankfully we are starting to see much more consistency with the BoM these days! Bidgee (talk) 05:46, 20 February 2013 (UTC)

Quentin Bryce

Great photo! Nick-D (talk) 09:24, 19 February 2013 (UTC)

Skytrax & Qantas

Hello Bidgee! Regarding this edit, it was indeed agreed at WT:AIRLINE that Skytrax information should not be included in airline articles. I'll try to provide the link were this discussion is archived. Regards.--Jetstreamer Talk 11:01, 19 February 2013 (UTC)

Here it is.--Jetstreamer Talk 11:05, 19 February 2013 (UTC)
(EC) Rather then saying that "Skytrax is not notable", it should be something on the lines with "Per the discussion at WT:AIRLINE, Skytrax info shouldn't be added to airline articles". Bidgee (talk) 11:08, 19 February 2013 (UTC)
Agree.--Jetstreamer Talk 11:12, 19 February 2013 (UTC)

Reverted additions by IP 58.169.215.13

Hi Bidgee, the other day you reverted revisions made by "IP 58.169.215.13", who has subsequently added on the "Trams in Melbourne talk page" that they can't create an account as they were banned, they seem to be aware and understanding of why they were banned, remorseful and wanting to constructively add to Wiki, but at the same time somewhat confused about what a banning means, and contributing without an account. May I know what username they held, which is now banned, and the banlog? Although it is serious that they are circumventing the ban by editing as an IP, if they can now be a constructive editor it may be time to loosen the ban and put said user on a probation, or remove the ban altogether, but with out a history I can't tell and can only speculate. Thanks for your time, and I await your response. Liamdavies (talk) 04:28, 23 February 2013 (UTC)

I suggest that you take a read of WP:SOCKS and WP:EVADE. If they want to be unblocked, this must follow the process. Editing under IPs and creating sock accounts to by-pass their original block isn't helping them to be unblocked. I'll not be supporting this editor, had this been before their mass disruption to the project, may be. Bidgee (talk) 11:03, 23 February 2013 (UTC)
Hi again, thank you, after seeing that I can see why you won't support them, if I see activity I'll add it. I hope you understand why I asked. Liamdavies (talk) 16:12, 23 February 2013 (UTC)
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk:Bidgee/Archive_28&oldid=1146616416"