User talk:Daveosaurus

Please note:

I am currently extraordinarily busy doing work which isn't going to end up on Wikipedia any time soon so please do not be alarmed at my lack of activity. If you need to send me a message please leave one on this talk page and I will try to get back to you within a couple of weeks. Thank you for your patience. Daveosaurus (talk) 07:48, 8 August 2020 (UTC)

Welcome!

Hello, Daveosaurus, 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:

• The five pillars of Wikipedia
• Tutorial
• How to edit a page
• How to write a great article
• Manual of Style

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!

Requested photograph categories

Welcome, yes the region list is more practical than national. Also there is a partial map on the category page. XLerate (talk) 22:25, 18 November 2008 (UTC)

I had to laugh...

I just went to the other end of the house and there was your nickname on my wife's list of NaNoWriMo buddies! Small world. dramatic (talk) 08:46, 27 November 2008 (UTC)

It's the same "me" as well, in case you're wondering. You have *no* idea how much a bogged-down NaNoWriMo story is conducive to editing Wikipedia, writing holiday cards, doing *anything* but That Darned Story! Daveosaurus (talk) 09:02, 27 November 2008 (UTC)

Min's answer to that is this tool. BTW she says she isn't a buddy but you were on the list of NZ participants she is trying to catch up to. :-) dramatic (talk) 10:12, 27 November 2008 (UTC)

Hello, Daveosaurus. You have new messages at Dramatic's talk page.
You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.

Categories

It isn't normally done to add a parent category when an article is already in a subcategory. For example, Lake Alice, Southland is in Category:Fiordland so it doesn't need to be in Category:Southland, New Zealand as well. See the guideline Wikipedia:Categorization#Subcategorization.-gadfium 01:29, 14 June 2009 (UTC)

Thanks for letting me know that. I just noticed a lot of articles dealing with Southland topics that weren't in the Southland category. Daveosaurus (talk) 02:15, 14 June 2009 (UTC)

Moving pages

If you go down to the bottom of the page (note: depending on the skin you use, it may be elsewhere), you should see a link marked "Move this page". If you click on it, it will give you a blank into which you can write the proper title. Unless the article actually exists, you can go ahead and perform the move; you don't need admin privileges to do it.

Thanks for catching those - as I say, I'm kind of on the other side of the world, so all I have to go on is what others have input for a list. And here I was assuming that the Lilburn River was named for the composer, and thinking how nice it was that there are countries that name landforms after classical musicians. Find me a Copland River, or a Bernstein River, in the United States... --User:AlbertHerring ^{Io son l'orecchio e tu la bocca: parla!} 14:32, 13 July 2009 (UTC)

Thanks for the info. ... I'm still new to all this and finding my way by blundering around treading on people's toes. There are a few other rivers listed that I *think* are in the Otago - Southland area but I'll have to wait until I get my mapping software reloaded (my computer fell down in a great screaming heap a week or so back and has had to go in to the shop for various upgrades, reloads and replacement bits) so I can verify that they're the most notable rivers of that name in the country. Once I'm sure there isn't (for example) a notable Lillburn River elsewhere in the country I'll move the article to Lill Burn. Which, according to Herries Beattie, is named after the Lil Burn in Northumbria (the extra "L" having arrived later); and the space is omitted in the name of the Lillburn Valley (and also the Lillburn Survey District). I can't recall many instances of commemorative naming of rivers; and nothing much musical about mountains. Town names other than original Maori names generally commemorate places in Britain or politicians in general (the town I live in shares its name with a famous march, and little else, but the march was named after the town and not the other way around) but the richest source of commemorative names is in township streets. Original town surveys often named their streets according to a theme: counties, places and rivers of Britain were a perennial favourite, but some local towns named their streets from the classics, or for their earliest settlers, or even (in one case) from a British scandal of the 1820s or thereabouts! One town, Rolleston, west of Christchurch, may interest you if you track it down on Google Maps: most of its streets are named after writers or artists of right up to the 20th century. Daveosaurus (talk) 07:38, 14 July 2009 (UTC)

You're quite welcome...it took me something like a year of blundering to figure out that I could move pages, too. So I definitely sympathize. As for naming things after people, I think the only continent which has a substantial number of landforms named after composers and artists is Antarctica, if the stuff I've read on the subject is any indication. I come from a rather colonial-style part of Virginia, where every street is called Duke, or Prince, or King, or something along those lines. If you're lucky you get a Braddock here and there. And Washington, of course. --User:AlbertHerring ^{Io son l'orecchio e tu la bocca: parla!} 15:27, 14 July 2009 (UTC)

OK, I've given it a go. Just as well I didn't just barge on ahead - it turned out to be a river somewhere completely different, and that its name had been corrected from Lillburn River to Lilburne River in 2003! Not sure who it would have been named after, but considering that Canterbury was a Church of England settlement, and the only Lilburnes notable enough for inclusion in Wikipedia were Roundheads during the English Civil War, a fair guess could be made... Daveosaurus (talk) 08:52, 19 July 2009 (UTC)

Tyne in Scotland

Actually there are several places in Scotland containing the element "Tyne", including "Tynecastle".--MacRusgail (talk) 15:17, 5 October 2009 (UTC)

Thanks for the comment. John Turnbull Thomson, who named the streets of the original town survey at Invercargill, named them after the rivers of the Scottish / English border country. I noticed while researching this that the Wikipedia article on Thomson contains very little about his later career in New Zealand, and I'm planning on expanding it somewhat the next time I've got access to one of John Hall-Jones' biographies of Thomson). As well as Tyne, another almost certainly non-Scottish river street name in the original survey is Bowmont. If you're after a town with a definite Scottish street naming convention, I'd recommend you use Wallacetown as an example; its street names are all places in Ayrshire and the surrounding area, although some of them are quite inventively spelt (e.g. Culzean --> Collean, Dalquharran --> Dalwharn). Daveosaurus (talk) 07:48, 6 October 2009 (UTC)

I agree with you that the Tyne in question is probably Newcastle's, although like I say, there are a number of examples in Scottish place names e.g. River Tyne, Scotland, which is not too far from Edinburgh. (I don't know anything about Bowmont) I'm just annoyed that a particular user (not you) seems intent on destroying the article by removing completely relevant subject matter. I didn't mean to remove your edit about the rivers.--MacRusgail (talk) 12:45, 9 October 2009 (UTC) p.s. - "Collean" & "Dalwharn" are probably for the better, as that's close to how they'd be pronounced traditionally in Scotland, and I can imagine that they'd end up being mangled if they were written in the original fashion.

Re; Congratulations (Caversham)

Thanks, though it's a shame - I was deliberately holding off on nominating it until Otago Anniversdary Day - somehow it slipped through the FA process without me noticing it... Grutness...wha? 23:03, 30 November 2009 (UTC)

Hello, Daveosaurus. You have new messages at Dramatic's talk page.
You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.

Your recent edits

Hello. In case you didn't know, when you add content to talk pages and Wikipedia pages that have open discussion, you should sign your posts by typing four tildes ( ~~~~ ) at the end of your comment. You may also click on the signature button located above the edit window. This will automatically insert a signature with your username or IP address and the time you posted the comment. This information is useful because other editors will be able to tell who said what, and when. Thank you. --SineBot (talk) 23:43, 2 July 2010 (UTC)

Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Peter Cresswell

I have replied to your comment. Ironholds (talk) 02:23, 15 August 2010 (UTC)

Re ugg boots

Nice researching there! Will try to find confirmation other sources to see if John Arnold as inventor in 1965 can stand up to the studied scrutiny of the commercial POV pushers. As an Adelaidean myself it's quite exciting to think ugg boots might have started here :) Donama (talk) 06:12, 14 September 2010 (UTC)

No worries. It's just that so much of what's in the article didn't even slightly mesh with my recollection of the 1970s etc. that I was sure that some book about fashion and/or nostalgia would have something. Hopefully the Australian Magazine article will be comprehensive enough that it can be used as a source, thereby doing away with all the vague recollections and suggestions that the history section currently contains. Then perhaps a start can be made on de-spamming the article. Daveosaurus (talk) 06:53, 14 September 2010 (UTC)

Dave, you are cordially invited to participate in mediation here. Phoenix and Winslow (talk) 00:46, 20 September 2010 (UTC)

Request for mediation rejected

The Request for mediation concerning Ugg boots, to which you were listed as a party, has been declined. An explanation of why it has not been possible to allow this dispute to proceed to mediation is provided at the mediation request page (which will be deleted by an administrator after a reasonable time). Queries on the rejection of this dispute can be directed to the Committee chairperson or e-mailed to the mediation mailing list.

For the Mediation Committee, AGK 23:06, 21 September 2010 (UTC)
(This message delivered by MediationBot, an automated bot account operated by the Mediation Committee to perform case management.)

Mayor of Invercargill

Hi there, in case you are online, we have only 10 hours left to get this this article expanded for it to qualify for DYK. I've got it to 1400B – only 100B to go. Schwede66 09:16, 23 October 2010 (UTC)

Thanks for letting me know. I'll see what I can do, but I am not particularly experienced at all this (most of my actual activity here is simply stomping on vandalism) and, in particular, the subtleties of reference formatting escape me. Daveosaurus (talk) 10:18, 23 October 2010 (UTC)

Awesome. I've submitted it. Ah, yes, referencing – there's a lot that one can learn. I'm most happy to mentor you; just fire your questions at me. The most basic step is to turn the referencing toolbar on; click on the 'Cite' button on the editing toolbar. If you then start using the 'Templates', it should be reasonably straightforward. I've started shortened footnotes for the Mayor article, as it allows to make repeated use of the same source, but each time quote the page number (which is handy for JOP Watt). Schwede66 20:15, 23 October 2010 (UTC)

The article is in good shape now. Thanks for your help. The DYK will be on the WP homepage from 1 am tomorrow (NZ time) for 6 hours. It's got a lot of redlinks, though. I wonder whether you'd be interested in writing pages for some (or even all) of them? I'd be most happy to show you how to go about it, and would lend you a hand. There's a page for every Wellington mayor and most of them are quite simple, like William Guyton. Celia Wade-Brown's page has an infobox and a succession box, which is easily achieved, and would be the next step up. Let me know if this interests you and we can talk how to go about this. Schwede66 18:57, 26 October 2010 (UTC)

Thanks. I've had a quick go at adding references to my most recent edit (to Stuart Street, Dunedin and they seem to have worked. I don't have much time to spend on editing Wikipedia (I also have a very unreliable computer - I had been planning on doing some Wikipedia work over the new year break, but my computer spent that entire time in at the shop being fixed - and it still doesn't work properly). I'll try to add info. about the more notable former Mayors if I get the chance though. Daveosaurus (talk) 08:08, 28 October 2010 (UTC)

DYK for Mayor of Invercargill

— Rlevse • Talk • 12:05, 27 October 2010 (UTC)

Failed attempt at comedy

Why not DSK for Mayor of Invergiggle? Surely the Americans must be releasing him sometime soon after their trumped up charges fell to bits? And if not DSK, surely Julian Assange must be being released soon, and be available to stand? Surely, British judges will dismiss the warrant arresting him for 'questioning' on those trumped up accusations? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 202.161.3.131 (talk) 21:33, 20 July 2011 (UTC) If you think he would make a good Mayor of Invercargill (note spelling), please feel free to nominate him in time for the 2013 Mayoral election. You will of course need to be a resident of Invercargill to do so. Daveosaurus (talk) 05:38, 21 July 2011 (UTC)

Passing off other people's photographs as your own is a bad thing, all right?

Stop changing Please stop changing the picture on the Invercargill page, all photos were edited and are my property. The majority of cities have a montage of locations around cities. Invercargill should too. Thanks. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 203.109.208.206 (talk) 08:20, 15 January 2011 (UTC) The composite image is being reverted because at least one of its elements is copyrighted. Copyrighted images should never be used in instances such as this, where a perfectly adequate free image is available. Also, the act of editing a copyright work does not cause its copyright to cease to be; certainly in cases such as this, where all you have done is taken a copyrighted image and shrunk it down. Please read Wikipedia:Copyright for more information. Also, please self revert your addition of this copyrighted image, otherwise you may find yourself subject to the remedies described at Wikipedia:Copyright violations: Contributors who repeatedly post copyrighted material despite appropriate warning may be blocked from editing by any administrator to prevent further problems. Daveosaurus (talk) 09:03, 15 January 2011 (UTC)

Thank you

		The Modest Barnstar
		Thanks for your recent contributions! -Mike Restivo (talk) 20:00, 29 April 2011 (UTC)

Um.... Thank you. I'm not sure what I've done to deserve this... I'm just an occasional fixer of typos and pruner of nonsense. I can think of a couple of dozen other editors I've seen around who would deserve such an award better than I would, if you want a list of account names let me know. Cheers. Daveosaurus (talk) 07:01, 4 May 2011 (UTC)

Well, some of us think that those are valuable contributions, too! And if you happen to know some other deserving users, why not let them know by sharing the WikiLove? Mike Restivo (talk) 17:40, 1 December 2011 (UTC)

John Munro

Thanks for contributing to the John Munro naming discussion. I've put the last two cases up for requested move again, and you might want to contribute again. Schwede66 04:08, 26 September 2011 (UTC)

FYI

This is a record I kept of my previous dispute with P&W. I hope you will understand why I have trouble with AGF and sometimes get short with him. Wayne (talk) 02:34, 5 November 2011 (UTC)

Thank you for the message. However I am not an admin so I don't think there is anything I can do about this. I suggest you just concentrate on making the article as neutral, spam-free and as well-sourced as possible and ignore P&W's attempts to bait you. With so many of his/her sock puppets now exposed s/he has little support for his/her corporate propaganda. Daveosaurus (talk) 02:45, 5 November 2011 (UTC)

Thanks

Thanks for doing what you did. I wondered how to do it myself. Bloody meatpuppets. Donama (talk) 01:39, 24 November 2011 (UTC)

Hi... You're welcome... I wouldn't mind knowing some time what it is I've done that I'm being thanked for though. About my only actual contribution to the Ugg boots debate was to find a neutral, verifiable source that dated the term to several years before the corporate mythology begins (and even so I haven't bothered trying to add it to the article yet - I've been waiting for the edit war to finish). Otherwise all I've been doing is trying to push the article towards being neutral and away from being a pile of spam.

actually, having a quick look at what's been going on... I can guarantee that Christie Switz is a P&W meatpuppet (just look at his/her talk page and see which otherwise single-purpose account just "happened" to see him/her join up and deliver a welcome message) and it doesn't matter whether or not Liangshan Yi is any sort of puppet as here [1] s/he admits to having a conflict of interest. Will try to get to the neutrality page some time this evening but can not guarantee anything (I have very limited time to work on wikipedia and a very unreliable computer). Cheers. Daveosaurus (talk) 04:38, 24 November 2011 (UTC)

A Polite Thank You

Hey Dave. I just wish to extend a thank you for permitting me to stay in the discussion and have my vote counted. You could have abstained but chose to take the high road. Again thank you.--Factchk (talk) 20:28, 8 December 2011 (UTC)

You're welcome. I don't have a "side" in this debate other than the side of neutral and reliable sourcing, and I prefer to address an argument (and its quality) rather than the character of those making it. Cheers. Daveosaurus (talk) 05:40, 9 December 2011 (UTC)

Your cut-and-paste repair requests

Hi I noted your cut-and-paste repair requests. Just in case you didn't realise, I thought I'd let you know, in the case that there has been no further editing at the target article (as in for example Te Tai Tokerau, this is simple to do yourself by reverting the edits to both pages (I have gone ahead and done this for that article - I am not an admin). Also, it's always worth warning the person who made the move, to try and prevent repeats (your edits are recent so maybe you just hadn't got round to this yet).

Thanks for spotting this and bringing it to everyone's attention. Cheers, --MegaSloth (talk) 09:50, 14 December 2011 (UTC)

Thanks for the message. I have very little technical ability with this sort of thing so thought it best to leave it to people who know what they are doing. I also did leave a quick message on Fanx's page asking him/her not to make cut and paste moves. I asked as part of a discussion on the topic, instead of using the standard template, so perhaps you missed it? Cheers. Daveosaurus (talk) 10:55, 14 December 2011 (UTC)

Cool no problem. You did the right thing if you weren't confident to do it yourself. I was looking for a template warning message and was in a hurry since I wanted the moving to stop, but any kind of message is fine of course. Sorry I missed it. For future reference, if you find the same thing again, you can look on the page history of both pages involved in the move. If the cut-and-paste edit is the last (top) edit on both pages, you can simply click on the "undo" link for each and commit the edits. If you do feel confident, this is the best thing to do as the less time the cut-and-paste move exists, the less risk of intervening edits. --MegaSloth (talk) 11:05, 14 December 2011 (UTC)

I didn't just revert them as I didn't object to the moves as such - only the manner in which they were done. Daveosaurus (talk) 11:10, 14 December 2011 (UTC)

I see. The problem is, cut-and-paste moves can quickly become an administrative nightmare, so the best thing to do is to revert them as soon as possible, even if you agree with the move. If you agree with the move, you can then request the move at WP:RM. If you think it is non-controversial, there is a special section to do that (you won't be able to do it as a non-admin since the target page will have a history by then). --MegaSloth (talk) 11:53, 14 December 2011 (UTC)

Nonsense from the Phoenix and Winslow sock farm

WP:Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents#User:Phoenix and Winslow Hello. This message is being sent to inform you that there is currently a discussion at Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents regarding an issue with which you may have been involved. Thank you. This is in regards to P&Ws ongoing personal attacks. Cheers. Wayne (talk) 17:31, 27 November 2011 (UTC) Don't template the regulars, Dave. Phoenix and Winslow (talk) 18:58, 19 December 2011 (UTC) I don't make ad hominem attacks. I seriously believe there is a strong likelihood of cultural bias on the part of some editors on the page. There is an ongoing effort by those whose editing raises such concerns, to dismiss my concerns as personal attacks. Phoenix and Winslow (talk) 19:01, 19 December 2011 (UTC) I'll take the liberty of moving this section to the bottom of the page so that it's more easily spotted, Dave. And I'll take this opportunity to add that if I was as sensitive about criticism as you, I'd describe your repeated failed efforts to have me blocked as a sockpuppeteer, without any notice at all to me, followed by consistent efforts to inaccurately describe unrelated accounts as proven sockpuppets/meatpuppets of mine, as a long-running series of personal attacks. Please stop immediately. Phoenix and Winslow (talk) 19:08, 19 December 2011 (UTC) Uninvolved editors and administrators please note that the above message was left by an editor who demonstrates an extreme loathing of Australians and all things Australian, and who characterises any attempt by Australians to improve articles on specifically Australian topics as a ridiculous PC weasel-phrase, "cultural bias". Oh, and possible sock: [2], confirmed sock: [3], confirmed sock: [4]. Daveosaurus (talk) 23:00, 19 December 2011 (UTC) FYI, Phoenix and Winslow has deleted behaviour warnings from his talk page that had been placed by six editors. Wayne (talk) 01:44, 20 December 2011 (UTC) Dave, I don't feel any "extreme loathing," not even any dislike or anger. Just a little annoyance. There are no "confirmed" or "proven" socks, only unproven suspicions — and when those suspicions keep getting repeated with words like "proven" and "confirmed," even after a Checkuser result of  Unlikely here, I would suggest to any uninvolved editors and administrators that it's a personal attack. Or even "extreme loathing." And Wayne, I think I'm allowed to remove unwelcome remarks from my own User Talk page. Phoenix and Winslow (talk) 01:49, 20 December 2011 (UTC) Deleting warnings is acceptable if the user stops behaving in the manner that led to the warning being given. Deleting valid warnings related to ongoing disputes is never acceptable. Deleting warnings is acceptable if the warnings are archived. I'm not disputing your right to delete, I'm questioning your motives. Wayne (talk) 02:09, 20 December 2011 (UTC) Actually P&W is correct in this (and only this): as I understand it, s/he is entitled to remove anything s/he likes from his/her user page (there are some exceptions, but generally to do with blocks, and P&W does not seem to be blocked at the moment). Removal of a warning is considered confirmation that the editor has received and read said warning. Therefore, while P&W can remove said warnings, s/he can not claim ignorance the next time s/he is reprimanded for refactoring talk page comments, racially motivated personal attacks, sock puppetry or anything else s/he has been warned about on his/her talk page. Daveosaurus (talk) 04:26, 20 December 2011 (UTC) You're starting to notice that Wayne is mistaken about a great many things, Dave. There's hope for you. Phoenix and Winslow (talk) 12:56, 20 December 2011 (UTC) I have also noticed that Wayne understands the importance of reliable sourcing. You would do well to emulate his example. Daveosaurus (talk) 18:16, 20 December 2011 (UTC) LOL. Phoenix and Winslow (talk) 03:20, 21 December 2011 (UTC) ROFL. Daveosaurus (talk) 12:26, 27 December 2011 (UTC)

Help needed

I'm not familiar with this process so would be gratefull for your input here. Do I go ahead or let it slide? I have added some text at C2 to save you searching and hope you can take part and fill in that section yourself if you feel it should proceed. Feel free to point out any improvements or points I have gotten wrong. Comments are welcome. Thx. Wayne (talk) 11:52, 21 December 2011 (UTC)

You'd probably be better off checking with an Administrator or someone who hasn't got as tired of this whole mess as I have. Possibly Elinruby? You might also want to wait until the Christmas / New Year holidays are over as it seems that there's a time limit for certification. Daveosaurus (talk) 12:26, 27 December 2011 (UTC)

Southland District

Hey

Thanks very much for the compliment. I've been mostly basing the criteria based on map searching via methods such as Google Maps and from memory. However, if you want to add more communities to the template based on your criteria, be my guest :). Andyman14 (talk) 10:12, 2 January 2012 (UTC)

Hi, thanks for the message. I'm more inclined to start creating articles for the redlinked communities. I just need to get some info. together (plus go out and get some photos) and finally get the new computer up and running (the one I am typing this on is on its last legs). Daveosaurus (talk) 04:45, 5 January 2012 (UTC)

Article on the Kingitanga State?

See talk pages:

• http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Talk:Māori_King_Movement *http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia_talk:WikiProject_New_Zealand/M%C4%81ori_task_force#Article_on_the_Kingitanga_State.3F

I am wondering if there should be a new article created for the state or confederacy ruled over by the Maori monarchs of the Kingitanga and allied chiefs. It seems like from the time the confederacy was formed in around 1858 until 1881, when the Kingitanga Movement began leaving aside isolation and finally made peace with and opened up to the settler government, the Kingitanga functioned as an independent state.

From what I understand, the Kingitanga held power over a substantial portion of North Island, originally centered in the Waikato Region. Then the settler government under Governor Grey interpreted their existence as a threat to British sovereignty and justified attacking them and initiating the Land Wars in the Waikato based on a claim that Ngati Maniapoto warriors helping other tribes fighting settlers in Taranaki Region were Kingitanga agents. After brutal fighting, the Kingitanga government occupied Ngati Maniapoto territory and became a neutral player throughout the rest of the Land Wars although remained independent from and at war with the Colonial Government until they opened what had by then been regarded as "King Country" in 1881. Afterwards, they progressively integrated with the rest of New Zealand over several decades, beginning with rail projects several years after peace was established although the Tainui chiefs and Maori king directly ruled the territory and didn't suffer land confiscations and settlement quite on par with other regions which allowed for a higher-than-average Maori population to exist there even to the present day. Unfortunately, not all of this is in the Kingitanga Movement article, and I'm not sure if it would be best for some parts of this to be applied there or if the Kingitanga should actually have its own state article for the period between 1858 and at least 1881 or 1894 (the year when the second Maori King, Tāwhiao, died) in addition to the existing article on the Maori King Movement.

Based on this background, do you think it is reasonable to create a new article for a state with this information included or that it should be included only here in the Maori King Movement article or both or neither?Nanib (talk) 00:06, 26 January 2012 (UTC)

The following are relevant articles on nzhistory.net.nz, a New Zealand government history resource (that you likely already know of) that is a wealth of information for New Zealand and even other Polynesian histories, which I believe would be helpful to consider:

http://www.nzhistory.net.nz/politics/maori-king-movement-1860-94/build-up-to-war http://www.nzhistory.net.nz/politics/maori-king-movement-1860-94/response-to-war http://www.nzhistory.net.nz/politics/the-maori-king-movement-1860-94/raupatu-confiscations http://www.nzhistory.net.nz/politics/maori-king-movement-1860-94/maintaining-te-kingitanga http://www.nzhistory.net.nz/politics/the-maori-king-movement-1860-94/tensions-ease

Legal threats from the Claudia IP

Pai Maire article Hello Dave,The PM article information itself makes it clear that PM was not a christian religion in any (orthodox) sense. Im refering to the info on cannabalism , belief in magic words making a person bullet proof and the info about "jews" If you read "PM" and then read "cult" they are an exact fit. The situation is of course blurred somewhat in that the PM/hauhau movement was of course far more about politics/power/race/culture /xenophopbia, than about christianity. There is no doubt that PM and HH were effectively the same organization,the HH version appealing to the warrior culture of some Maori men.In the article it says that Pakeha had a dim view of him- "harmless lunatic". Well perhaps not so much of the harmless. A "religion" like this is called a cult.ie based around 1 person,the idea of visions,the idea of destiny(!!), the sense of entrapment, being victims and there only being 1 solution -getting rid of all Pakeha . All these Maori religions owe much to there own ancient ,stone age, mystical cultural beliefs as the article makes clear by the use of the term syncretic. Of course it wasnt called cult in those days as the word wasnt invented till many years later. What makes a cult is nothing whatsoever to do with its degree of deviation from orthodoxy - if that was all it took you may as well call all Protestant religions "cults"! Neither does any reference to cannibalism (and that in itself would be highly doubtful, particularly if you still derive your content from seriously WP:FRINGE writers such as Paul Moon). Note that one of the most important sacraments of the Christian religion is at its heart symbolic ritual cannibalism. The link I suggested you read has this to say: Value-laden labels—such as calling an organization a cult, an individual a racist, terrorist, or freedom fighter, or a sexual practice a perversion—may express contentious opinion and are best avoided unless widely used by reliable sources to describe the subject, in which case use in-text attribution. I strongly suggest you take this into account and amend your writing style, otherwise you will keep on getting reverted, and, eventually, once enough people have lost patience with your style, blocked from editing. Daveosaurus (talk) 06:39, 1 February 2012 (UTC) Hello Dave you have stepped over the line by refering to a highly respected and well published author and professor(I think its about 12-14 academic books ) as in the lunatic fringe. Such a comment is probably legally actionable and certainly well outside what is acceptable by wikipedia.I have probably read at least 10 sources that refer to Hau hau as cannibals.Come to think of it I have never read an account that doesnt refer to the actions of eye eating. Your comment about Paul Moon could only be made by a person of extreme prejudices.I have kept a copy of your remarks for future action. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 122.58.185.98 (talk) 08:36, 2 February 2012 (UTC) I have warned Claudia about making threats of legal action, and will block her if she does not retract the final sentence above.-gadfium 19:38, 2 February 2012 (UTC) Thanks. Going by how bent out of shape she got at that phrase it must mean something different these days so I have altered the comment to something that sounds like something a younger person would say. Daveosaurus (talk) 11:23, 4 February 2012 (UTC) Claudia has provided an explanation at User talk:122.58.184.199, and I have unblocked her.-gadfium 04:36, 10 February 2012 (UTC) Hi Gadfium. Thanks for that. If only it was that easy to get her to improve her actual editing! Cheers. Daveosaurus (talk) 05:16, 16 February 2012 (UTC)

Ugg page

As the page is locked I have set it up in my sandbox and made test changes per talk to see how it looks. I have also rewritten the history a bit. The page should not be seen as a replacement but one we can do test edits on. Feel free to have a look, make changes if you like and/or comment on the sandbox talk page. I have posted this message on several editors talk pages. Despite P&W's usual claims in this regard, we have a consensus for the edits per talk page so if we (editors who have shown they can work together and compromise if needed) can agree on how the article page reads it may avoid the inevitable long winded discussions in Talk once the page is unlocked. Wayne (talk) 22:38, 5 February 2012 (UTC)

Hi Wayne. Looks interesting. I will leave some comments on the talk page of the proposed improved article. I do think you should gain at least a broad consensus of non-SP editors on the talk page before going ahead with anything major because to a complete outsider what has gone on does look a lot like edit warring. To be honest I would be sorely tempted to take the next set of shenanigans against consensus to the edit warring notice board and let them worry about it. Cheers. Daveosaurus (talk) 05:16, 16 February 2012 (UTC)

Wikipedia:HighBeam

Hey I recommend that you request access Wikipedia:HighBeam/Applications, I just got mine and the resource is fantastic, the number of pre decker ugg article are interesting. Gnangarra 02:00, 14 April 2012 (UTC)

Thanks for the message. Yes does sound a great resource, I'm seriously short of spare time at the moment for anything Wikipedia related so won't be asking at the moment (don't want to take up a slot that an active editor could use). Cheers. Daveosaurus (talk) 08:04, 17 June 2012 (UTC)

dispute resolution

Hello. This message is being sent to inform you that there is currently a discussion at Wikipedia:Dispute resolution noticeboard regarding an issue with which you may have been involved. The thread is "Department of Corrections (New Zealand)". Thank you.

Thanks for the message. I'll try to get on to this some time this evening if I have time. Cheers. Daveosaurus (talk) 08:02, 17 June 2012 (UTC)

OK I tried to find it but couldn't find anything on the page, if it has been moved somewhere else can you let me know where it is. Cheers. Daveosaurus (talk) 05:43, 18 June 2012 (UTC)

It's at Wikipedia:Dispute_resolution_noticeboard/Archive_32#Department_of_Corrections_.28New_Zealand.29 I withdraw due to this apparently being the wrong forum. After a reasonable period of time (maybe a week?), I'll probably submit to Wikipedia:RFC/U as suggested. Stuartyeates (talk) 05:51, 18 June 2012 (UTC)

Thanks, can you give me a heads up once you've started the RFCU. Cheers. Daveosaurus (talk) 05:59, 21 June 2012 (UTC)

RFC discussion of User:Offender9000

A request for comments has been filed concerning the conduct of Offender9000 (talk · contribs). You are invited to comment on the discussion at Wikipedia:Requests for comment/Offender9000. -- Stuartyeates (talk) 05:47, 25 June 2012 (UTC)

Thanks, will try to get to it later tonight. Cheers. Daveosaurus (talk) 06:27, 25 June 2012 (UTC)

Te Ururoa Flavell

I reverted your change on Te Ururoa Flavell, and added a reference for the name. I don't believe that this is controversial. Stuartyeates (talk) 06:54, 2 July 2012 (UTC)

No worries. The main reason I reverted it was that it was an unreferenced addition from a regular IP editor who has a habit of making rather dubious and slanted edits to Māori subjects, and a name I'd never heard used before, so in light of WP:BLPSOURCES I chose to err on the side of caution. Cheers. Daveosaurus (talk) 07:33, 2 July 2012 (UTC)

Pronunciation

Daveosaurus, may-OR-ee is commonly used in America, and not considered offensive here. I have never heard MOWR-ee, only may-OR-ee. It should be included as an alternate pronunciation. Also, can you find proof it is offensive in New Zealand English.

Thanks,

OttomanJackson (talk) 16:37, 28 July 2012 (UTC)

Discussion of interest to you

Please see User talk:Gadfium#IPCA.-gadfium 04:10, 8 November 2012 (UTC)

Hi thanks for the message. I'm happy to leave the situation in your hands; I don't do diplomacy very well and you've got the patience I don't have. I don't know if Wikipedia has any contact for organisations who want to call attention to attack articles against them, but if it does, it would probably be an idea to point the IP in that direction. Cheers. Daveosaurus (talk) 06:08, 9 November 2012 (UTC)

Further to that, I notice that while my back has been turned he has continued writing attack pages, reinstating spam links to his own self-published book [5] and threatening the IP (who has no more of a conflict of interest than he has) [6]. If you don't want me interacting with him let me know and I will hunt through the notice boards to see if there is an appropriate one to consult about his behaviour. Daveosaurus (talk) 04:45, 14 November 2012 (UTC)

I'm not asking you not to interact. I am suggesting that you reduce the level of hostility, because I think he makes a genuine contribution to Wikipedia, and I also think you are a very valuable editor, and if you continue along the present path I think this will end in tears.

The situation has already been taken to a noticeboard, and to mediation, without resolution. We're not supposed to use the mediation to thump other editors, but the mediator's recommendation was to back off a little bit, and I have tried to take this on board. The next logical step is Arbcom, and that isn't going to be good for anyone.

I suggest you add specific criticisms of his edits to the appropriate talk pages. Full reversions of edits with only an edit summary aren't sufficient, because a bald accusation of "CoI" or "PoV" isn't adequate for multiple paragraphs of sourced content. He has asserted his book to be of significance; if you think it is unsuitable as a source, then WP:RSN is probably the place to go. Most of his edits do not however use his book as a source.

You are welcome to email me about this. My email name is my user name, and my provider is yahoo.com.-gadfium 08:09, 14 November 2012 (UTC)

Hello Daveosaurus, first up, I greatly respect you as an editor. I don't know what has gone so wrong in this case, but I also sense that there is a lot of hostility being expressed. The suggestion of taking specific issues to article talk pages, instead of simply reverting edits, is a sound one. I also fear that Wikipedia might well lose a valuable editor over this whole affair, which would be a real shame. Schwede66 08:50, 14 November 2012 (UTC)

I have taken to unwatching articles when I notice a particular editor editing them. I can tell you I'm a much happier, more productive, editor for it. Stuartyeates (talk) 09:06, 14 November 2012 (UTC)

Hi everyone thanks for the messages. I have almost no spare time to do any work on Wikipedia apart from checking watchlisted articles for vandalism or test edits every few days, and this situation is likely to continue until early to mid 2013 at the very earliest. Gadfium: I didn't see my edits as being particularly hostile so if Offender is that bent out of shape about them it's probably best someone else try to clean the articles up. Schwede66: I don't know who you're referring to but I've not contributed much at all lately - in the last nine months all I've added is one stub and some minor tidying. Stuartyeates: I vaguely recall reading one comment from Offender saying he'd be willing to go back to mediation - I can't find the comment at short notice but if you've go the time to deal with him it sounds like a possibility. Cheers. Daveosaurus (talk) 07:19, 18 November 2012 (UTC)

And speaking of problem editors, I notice that Claudia has recently deposited this [7] charming little turd in the punchbowl of Wikipedia. I honestly do not think any person who can in all seriousness describe an entire modern race as "stone age people with a very violent culture" has any business editing Wikipedia at all. Daveosaurus (talk) 07:32, 2 December 2012 (UTC)

More wibbling from Claudia

I've just noticed this old comment taken out of several paragraphs I wrote, a very long time ago, about the historian Michael King, RIP. The editor above has selectively used a sentence, out of context, to attempt to denigrate my contribution. Clearly my remarks were about their ancient culture, not Maori as they live now. It is indisputable that Maori were at one time "Stone Age" or neolithic and equally true that they were a very violent people in those ancient times. Our history is full of accounts of untold battles, torture, cannibalism,slavery, infanticide,treachery and other depraved behaviour that has long since stopped. King wrote in the spirit of the times in the hay day of historical revisionism. The writing of history has moved on since those days. That's not to say that King was always wrong, he just wrote in the ethos of the day. Today historians have access to more material, world wide, than ever before, so accounts tend to be more informed, balanced and nuanced than previously.Claudia

Lake Hayes

Hello - go to Google Maps and check boundaries. Frankfort is part of Queenstown; Lake Hayes is not. Regards Crusoe8181 (talk) 10:21, 21 November 2012 (UTC)

Hi there. NZ Post, not Google Maps, is the arbiter of postcode boundaries. Go here: [8], click on "search" and you will see that Lake Hayes Estate (not Lake Hayes itself) has Queenstown as its mailtown. Cheers. Daveosaurus (talk) 11:03, 21 November 2012 (UTC)

IP user with apparent Maori agenda

Hi Daveosaurus, Thanks for raising the issue with admins over the IP user who may or may not be known as Claudia. [9] He/she is a very problematic and dogmatic user, though I've only recently begun interacting with this person. I did follow up the issues I'd raised with this editor at Talk:New Zealand land confiscations#Sales of returned land; though the editor did finally provide a page reference for the Michael King book, it turned out to be quite wrong. I think it was nothing more than a wild guess. Oddly enough, the material he/she had added was from the book, though in a different place. I have yet to return to the article to judge whether that material is relevant to the subject or not. The totality of this person's edits seem to suggest an agenda to portray Maori as primitive aggressors with few redeeming qualities. The editor is persistent, however. My tactic is to simply remove what they write so long as it continues to ignore WP citation style and the rudiments of careful writing. Anyway, thanks again for taking action. We'll see what develops from here. BlackCab (talk) 07:29, 5 December 2012 (UTC)

Thanks

I appreciate your taking the time to help explain the problem with non-com licensing here. :) --Moonriddengirl ^(talk) 14:07, 15 December 2012 (UTC)

No problem. Best of luck trying to get Offender to understand this though, have just done a quick check and he's currently still edit warring to keep in copyrighted material see [10]. See also [11] for a bit of background to this editor and why a number of NZ based editors are running out of patience dealing with his behaviour. Daveosaurus (talk) 05:24, 2 January 2013 (UTC)

Removal of reference

Hello Daveosaurus, can you please explain why you removed a book reference from the Judith Collins with this edit? You have been around for long enough to know that you can't just go into an article and remove a reference. You may not be aware, though, that this particular article uses shortened footnotes, and the footnote in the notes section that is linked to this reference is now broken. Would you mind self-reverting yourself at the earliest opportunity? I give you the benefit of the doubt, but if this was an intentional act and you did this deliberately, it constitutes vandalism and will certainly require action beyond me simply reverting your edit.

I think I have suggested to you in the past that maybe you should avoid editing justice-related articles. In case I haven't, I herewith make that suggestion, as your editing behaviour will get you into trouble, and I would hate to see you being lost from the pool of Kiwi editors, as you are otherwise making rather useful contributions. Schwede66 17:48, 22 February 2013 (UTC)

Hi Schwede. That reference didn't seem to me to be linked to anything and as its target was a self-published polemic, references to which are repeatedly inserted into articles by Offender, who has in the past claimed to be its creator. Note that SPS states "Never use self-published sources as third-party sources about living people" and that Judith Collins was still a living person as at recent news reports. Cheers. Daveosaurus (talk) 22:02, 22 February 2013 (UTC)

For the record, I sorted out the referencing for that article and put that reference there. So will you now self-revert? Schwede66 22:13, 22 February 2013 (UTC)

Hi Schwede. You can revert if you like, but first please make sure that this is an appropriate use of a self-published source. Cheers. Daveosaurus (talk) 22:18, 22 February 2013 (UTC)

Hello, I'm Schwede66. I wanted to let you know that I undid one or more of your recent contributions to Judith Collins because it didn't appear constructive. If you think I made a mistake, or if you have any questions, you can leave me a message on my talk page. Given that you are not prepared to self-revert your removal of the reference as outlined above, your actions constitute vandalism and I issue this level 1 vandalism warning to you. I will put it back myself. I reiterate my advice that you should consider staying away from justice-related topics. Schwede66 22:28, 22 February 2013 (UTC)

Hi there. Please read [[12]] Cheers. Daveosaurus (talk) 22:53, 22 February 2013 (UTC)

Improper RfC closure at Talk:Ugg boots trademark disputes

Hello. There is currently a discussion at Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents regarding an issue with which you may have been involved. Thank you. Wayne (talk) 12:58, 29 April 2013 (UTC)

Thanks for letting me know about this. I seriously think yourself and P&W should disengage from each other and will be suggesting a way about doing so at that discussion. Cheers. Daveosaurus (talk) 19:01, 29 April 2013 (UTC)

Ugg boots rearing it's head again

Phoenix and Winslow is using the Wikipedia:Arbitration/Requests/Case/Tea Party movement case[13] in an attempt to get me banned by making extensive use of my editing at Ugg boots as evidence of bad behavior. Specifically "WLRoss eventually became aggressively involved in the content dispute against Phoenix and Winslow and other editors at Ugg boots and related articles in October 2011, and continued the content dispute for the next two years" and the recent "improper closure" Rfc at the Ugg boots trademark dispute article. I'm not asking you to comment as I think the diffs I posted speak for themselves but I thought this dispute may interest you. Wayne (talk) 15:14, 18 August 2013 (UTC)

Replied at your talk page. Daveosaurus (talk) 08:00, 23 August 2013 (UTC)

Just an update. Phoenix and Winslow has been indef blocked for sockpuppetry. I wont breath a sigh of relief though as I'm now arguing with a new editor in another article who writes like his twin. I just can't win lol. Wayne (talk) 11:34, 11 September 2013 (UTC)

There's something bloody suspicious going on, not just over there but at Ugg boots trademark dispute. I suggest that you try to avoid the probable socks and just work on draft improvements to the article in your sandbox for the next few days and hope that everything blows over in the meantime. Daveosaurus (talk) 02:19, 15 September 2013 (UTC)

I disengaged from the article as soon as I noticed the editor was reverting everything I was doing. Unfortunately it is very hard to disengage from the discussion as he keeps making very P&W like accusations regarding my editing which winds me up. I've tried keeping my replies brief without success so I will now try not replying at all although he has claimed that that is evidence I can't refute his argument lol. I think I'll continue work on the draft of a new article I was writing before the Ugg trademark debacle instead for a while. Wayne (talk) 15:38, 15 September 2013 (UTC)

See Me Go

Hey, thanks for the update re the debut of "See Me Go". I'd got the info from Official New Zealand Music Chart, but I see you've updated that list too. (I'm quite pleased it was a Joy Division song that was the first to debut at #1!) Robyn2000 (talk) 00:25, 27 October 2013 (UTC)

No worries - glad to be able to help. I've found that a lot of 'list' type articles are incomplete - e.g. this one appears to only contain data from 1995 on. I'm fairly sure there were other #1 debuts in between as well but can't think of the exact songs just off the top of my head. (I actually originally misremembered and thought that "Love Will Tear Us Apart" had also debuted at #1, but upon checking the charts site it looks more like it had spent a week in the lower reaches of the chart beforehand). Cheers. Daveosaurus (talk) 00:51, 27 October 2013 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for January 21

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Duncan Cameron (British Army officer), you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page James Belich (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver). Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 12:16, 21 January 2014 (UTC)

Fixed now. Daveosaurus (talk) 21:41, 23 January 2014 (UTC)

Stamp catalog numbers

Based on your participation in this discusssion Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Philately/Archive 8#Catalog numbers as references 3+ years ago you may want to comment on a renewed duscussion on the same topic. ww2censor (talk) 13:04, 23 July 2014 (UTC)

Thanks. Have left a short comment, although I think you've already covered most of what needs to be said. Cheers. Daveosaurus (talk) 10:33, 30 July 2014 (UTC)

Re: Tino Rangatiratanga flag

Hi Dave - I've added my 2¢-worth over on AN/I. Not sure whether what I've said has cleared anything up though! Grutness...wha? 11:10, 5 February 2015 (UTC)

Thanks, I was just trying to bring someone with experience to the discussion because it looks like what's happening is a new potentially good editor starting off on the wrong foot in an area on WP that desperately needs a competent editor to sort out the massive mess that a (now blocked) IP editor left it in. Cheers. Daveosaurus (talk) 21:14, 5 February 2015 (UTC)

Note to self

The following letters are used in NZ English for a specific purpose Ā Ē Ī Ō Ū ā ē ī ō ū ref AS/NZS 4819:2011 s. 3.5.6, 4.7.7. Daveosaurus (talk) 11:16, 26 August 2015 (UTC)

File:Markup.JPG listed for discussion

A file that you uploaded or altered, File:Markup.JPG, has been listed at Wikipedia:Files for discussion. Please see the discussion to see why it has been listed (you may have to search for the title of the image to find its entry). Feel free to add your opinion on the matter below the nomination. Thank you. Sfan00 IMG (talk) 14:24, 11 November 2015 (UTC)

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) 13:55, 24 November 2015 (UTC)

New admin complaint re "Claudia"

You may wish to read and comment on my complaint to admins about the IP editor known as "Claudia" at Wikipedia:Biographies of living persons/Noticeboard#Duncan Cameron (British Army officer). Your thoughts would be appreciated. BlackCab (TALK) 04:33, 1 April 2016 (UTC)

Thanks, I'll go and look at that now. Daveosaurus (talk) 06:13, 1 April 2016 (UTC)

I have now taken this up at AN/I. See here. Your input would be appreciated. BlackCab (TALK) 01:06, 7 April 2016 (UTC)

i predict 1990

wanted to leave you a comment personally rather than on a contentious debate. I remember an additional booklet, but it was available during Freedom '88 in the temporary bookstore if you went in after Steve Taylor played live. I speculate that it had something to do with the Canadian distribution, whatever the case thank you for the comment, and thank you for helping stir the memories.18abruce (talk) 04:33, 9 June 2016 (UTC)

ArbCom Elections 2016: Voting now open!

Hello, Daveosaurus. Voting in the 2016 Arbitration Committee elections is open from Monday, 00:00, 21 November through Sunday, 23:59, 4 December to all unblocked users who have registered an account before Wednesday, 00:00, 28 October 2016 and have made at least 150 mainspace edits before Sunday, 00:00, 1 November 2016.

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 2016 election, please review the candidates' statements and submit your choices on the voting page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 22:08, 21 November 2016 (UTC)

September 2017 at Women in Red

		Welcome to Women in Red's September 2017 worldwide online editathons.
		"Hispanic and Latina Women" "Women in the Olympics" "Women from New Zealand"

(To subscribe: Women in Red/English language list and Women in Red/international list. Unsubscribe: Women in Red/Opt-out list) --Ipigott (talk) 16:16, 31 August 2017 (UTC)

ArbCom 2017 election voter message

Hello, Daveosaurus. Voting in the 2017 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23.59 on Sunday, 10 December. All users who registered an account before Saturday, 28 October 2017, made at least 150 mainspace edits before Wednesday, 1 November 2017 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 2017 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 18:42, 3 December 2017 (UTC)

ArbCom 2018 election voter message

Hello, Daveosaurus. 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)

ArbCom 2018 election voter message

Hello, Daveosaurus. 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)

ArbCom 2019 election voter message

Hello! Voting in the 2019 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23:59 on Monday, 2 December 2019. 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 2019 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) 00:11, 19 November 2019 (UTC)

ArbCom 2020 Elections voter message

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) 01:43, 24 November 2020 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for May 23

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. An automated process has detected that when you recently edited List of former territorial authorities in New Zealand, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Murchison. Such links are usually incorrect, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of unrelated topics with similar titles. (Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.)

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 05:58, 23 May 2021 (UTC)

Cheers for that - Fixed it now. Daveosaurus (talk) 07:02, 23 May 2021 (UTC)

ArbCom 2021 Elections voter message

Hello! Voting in the 2021 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23:59 (UTC) on Monday, 6 December 2021. 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 2021 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) 00:20, 23 November 2021 (UTC)

Discretionary sanctions alert - gender and sexuality

This is a standard message to notify contributors about an administrative ruling in effect. It does not imply that there are any issues with your contributions to date.

You have shown interest in gender-related disputes or controversies or in people associated with them. Due to past disruption in this topic area, a more stringent set of rules called discretionary sanctions is in effect. Any administrator may impose sanctions on editors who do not strictly follow Wikipedia's policies, or the page-specific restrictions, when making edits related to the topic.

For additional information, please see the guidance on discretionary sanctions and the Arbitration Committee's decision here. If you have any questions, or any doubts regarding what edits are appropriate, you are welcome to discuss them with me or any other editor.

Just letting you know about the stricter rules for gender and sexuality related topics on Wikipedia. Don't worry, it's just a standard notice that has to be given and you've not done anything wrong. Sideswipe9th (talk) — Preceding undated comment added 19:36, 1 December 2021 (UTC)

Thanks for the message. Don't worry, I've got no intention of going down THAT particular rabbit hole. I'm just a bit wary about emphasising a BLP's unfortunate opinions at the expense of their actual claim to notability. Daveosaurus (talk) 08:22, 2 December 2021 (UTC)

Nomination of List of people on the postage stamps of the Bahamas for deletion

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article List of people on the postage stamps of the Bahamas, to which you have significantly contributed, is suitable for inclusion in Wikipedia according to Wikipedia's policies and guidelines or if it should be deleted.

The discussion will take place at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Lists of people on the postage stamps of countries (A-B) until a consensus is reached, and anyone, including you, is welcome to contribute to the discussion. Users may edit the article during the discussion, including to improve the article to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the article-for-deletion notice from the top of the article.

To customise your preferences for automated AfD notifications for articles to which you've significantly contributed (or to opt-out entirely), please visit the configuration page. Delivered by SDZeroBot (talk) 01:04, 3 June 2022 (UTC)

Nomination of List of people on the postage stamps of Fiji for deletion

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article List of people on the postage stamps of Fiji, to which you have significantly contributed, is suitable for inclusion in Wikipedia according to Wikipedia's policies and guidelines or if it should be deleted.

The discussion will take place at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/List of people on the postage stamps of Fiji until a consensus is reached, and anyone, including you, is welcome to contribute to the discussion. Users may edit the article during the discussion, including to improve the article to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the article-for-deletion notice from the top of the article.

To customise your preferences for automated AfD notifications for articles to which you've significantly contributed (or to opt-out entirely), please visit the configuration page. Delivered by SDZeroBot (talk) 01:02, 8 June 2022 (UTC)

Your thread has been archived

Hi Daveosaurus! The thread you created at the Wikipedia:Teahouse, Interlinear glossing, has been archived because there was no discussion for a few days. You can still read the archived discussion. If you have follow-up questions, please . See also the help page about the archival process. The archival was done by Lowercase sigmabot III, and this notification was delivered by Muninnbot, both automated accounts. You can opt out of future notifications by placing {{bots|deny=Muninnbot}} on top of the current page (your user talk page). Muninnbot (talk) 19:01, 28 July 2022 (UTC)

ArbCom 2022 Elections voter message

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) 00:44, 29 November 2022 (UTC)

Invitation to an in-person meetup in Mohua / Golden Bay

Golden Bay Air are holding some seats for us until 21 November

Thinking about your summer break? Think about joining other Wikipedians and Wikimedians in Golden Bay / Mohua! Details are on the meetup page. There's heaps of interesting stuff to work on e.g. the oldest extant waka or New Zealand's oldest ongoing legal case. Or you may spend your time taking photos and then upload them.

Golden Bay is hard to get to and the airline flying into Tākaka uses small planes, so we are holding some seats from and to Wellington and we are offering attendees a $200 travel subsidy to help with costs.

Be in touch with Schwede66 if this event interests you and you'd like to discuss logistics. Schwede66 09:14, 13 November 2023 (UTC)

ArbCom 2023 Elections voter message

Hello! Voting in the 2023 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23:59 (UTC) on Monday, 11 December 2023. 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 2023 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) 00:34, 28 November 2023 (UTC)

Happy New Year, Daveosaurus!

Happy New Year!

Daveosaurus,
Have a prosperous, productive and enjoyable New Year, and thanks for your contributions to Wikipedia.
Abishe (talk) 21:01, 31 December 2023 (UTC)

   Send New Year cheer by adding {{subst:Happy New Year fireworks}} to user talk pages.

Abishe (talk) 21:01, 31 December 2023 (UTC)

Your recent changes to Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents

This is your only warning; if you vandalize Wikipedia again, as you did at Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents, you may be blocked from editing without further notice. Holland trip (talk) 07:21, 5 March 2024 (UTC)

You seem to have found the wrong page here - you should be adding this to your OWN talk page. Daveosaurus (talk) 07:26, 5 March 2024 (UTC)

Sinfest deletion

Hi! Can you please vote in the Sinfest deletion discussion? I'd love to get that page taken down, and you've expressed interest in voting to delete! 2601:447:C801:3AD0:4401:E46F:BEE7:403 (talk) 04:47, 26 July 2024 (UTC)

See my comment on the deletion page. Your time would be better spent scouring publications for information about Sinfest's decline and fall. Daveosaurus (talk) 06:10, 26 July 2024 (UTC)

ArbCom 2024 Elections voter message

Hello! Voting in the 2024 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23:59 (UTC) on Monday, 2 December 2024. 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 2024 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) 00:21, 19 November 2024 (UTC)