User talk:Meredyth/ArchiveMay-September07

Thank you for the welcome. I hope that this new language will become easier: at the moment editing and entering messages is like trying to breathe though glass. Stellar 10:27, 22 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

WikiProject Australian literature

Hi there! I noticed some of your contributions, and I thought that you may be interested in Wikipedia:WikiProject Australian literature. Wikiprojects are a good way of talking with other editors who contribute to similar topics. Have fun editing. Recurring dreams 13:49, 26 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

There is an adoption program here: Wikipedia:Adopt-a-User. There is a list of people who are willing to adopt here: [1]. Also you can ask for help at the Wikipedia:Help desk, or at the Australian noticeboard. Recurring dreams 08:11, 27 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Australian women writers

Hi, I noticed a couple of days ago that you had added the above category to an article I had done some editing on. I hadn't realised that that category existed - I've been a Wikipedian for less than two months and am still finding my way around. Anyhow, Aussie women writers are one of my special interests and so I decided to add the category to Aussie women writers that are in Wikipedia. I hope you are happy to have that help as I see that you have made that one of your projects, and that you have been adding a lot too. I see you are also doing some work on awards. Last time I looked there wasn't a page for the Age Book (or whatever they are called). Are you interested in creating one? Sterry2607 07:20, 28 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

No you didn't tread on any toes by updating the page I'd worked on. I wrote you a message because I was worried that you might feel I was treading on your toes by latching onto your project of adding the Aussie Women Writers category to articles. I'm pleased to discover someone else interested in Aussie women. I've created a couple of pages for authors not in Wikipedia at all and have gradually been updating some of my favourite authors. I'm also working on some Australian film areas. Sterry2607 11:49, 28 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I was wondering if either of you had access to or knew of Debra Adelaides' Australian women writers a bibliogarphic guide? at all? although 1988 and a bit dated - it does have some things to do with some important wa women writers which I have in my sights later on - anyways hows that for intruding? - it is really great to see you both working on the oz lit project - thanks and keep at it! Satu Suro 13:55, 28 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

The idea being if i made a sub-page of the oz lit project of all found in adelaides biblio guide - it might be a useful check list for the project - being male and baby boomer - having met some of the west oz writers and knowing their publications/work - it seems that most need arts - and my late father was a book collector - so there are some delightfully obscure west oz poets who in their eccentricities deserve arts as well from what i have caught in my dispersing the collection - the one who often comes to mind is lillian wooster greaves who wrote poetry - and whose books are hard to come by and of whom a well known collector here in perth actually once wrote to me'if you have anything of hers - i'll have it!' - so it goes Satu Suro 23:50, 28 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Ha, that sounds like a good idea ... then we could build articles from there. If you had the time that would be great. I have the book - bought it back in 1989 when I renewed my interest in Aussie literature and women in particular - but I don't know how to do the sub-page? Sterry2607 01:14, 29 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

No need better stubs than sub page at this stage - Satu Suro 01:17, 29 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

You have both set up the way forward. It seems a great idea. I looked at my contributions last night after I finished and I am minus 600+. I think I need to stop finding new people and start trying to link records already created for a while, at least until my total starts going up again.

If you need someone to help with the research on books, I live in Canberra and the National Library is on my way home. I can help with preparation for any literary article.

I think I have just worked out the wiki citation feature, and it is great. Another task is to now go back to earlier edited pages and revise.

When I type into this talk section on my page, do you both get the message? Not used to the communications yet.Stellar 08:58, 29 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Some users will not post to others talk pages at all.(and admins) they just stay on theirs. I usually always post on others. Some admins will reply on their talk page and the other persons talk page. If we have each others talk pages on watch - we see a change and check it Satu Suro 09:02, 29 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Canberrans

You live in Canberra? So do I. I notice that the WA wikipedians have regular meetings - is that right SatuSuro? I wonder whether Canberrans do too? Have you added your name to the WikiProject Canberra page? I'm happy to coordinate a meeting (eg at Bookplate at the NLA if there's just a few of us) if Canberrans are interested in outing themselves ;-) Sterry2607 10:03, 29 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for your response. That's great. I guess I'll try to put a message on the Wiki Canberra page and see what happens. How does a Saturday afternoon sound to you? Sterry2607 07:57, 1 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Okey doke. I'll put it out there for next Saturday at Bookplate at 2.30pm and see what happens. Sterry2607 11:23, 2 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Well, I've had only one response - from Rebecca who's not free for a couple of weeks. Would you like for just the two of us to meet on Saturday afternoon at Bookplate? I'm very happy to meet and talk about our Aus Lit work - I have some questions and comments that I'd love to talk about. It's up to you though - if you'd rather not, I understand. Sterry2607 09:20, 5 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

That would be great. How about we meet in the chairs (hopefully some will be free) at 2.30pm just outside the inside entrance to Bookplate. I am in my 50s and have short grey hair, am average build and height. I'm usually pretty punctual! It probably will be too cold to be outside and, anyhow, I think the outside area is currently closed for their big podium redevelopment...I can't remember the exact date for the closing but I think it might be now. Sterry2607 12:38, 5 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Great ... see you there. (With my glasses too - forgot those!). Sterry2607 05:54, 6 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Talk pages and hi

Hi Stellar. Hope you are enjoying editing here. Some things, like talk pages, seem mysterious at first, but it is quick to get the hang of it. Posting here or there is flexible, it often depends on the situation. Anyone can read it, if you haven't gathered that. Women and aus-lit needs a lot of work, it is great that you are focusing on that. Regards, ☻ Fred|☝ discussion|✍ contributions 09:52, 29 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

It is different to email, it is to discuss (in theory at least) matters relating the editing community. The toolbox links at left contain one to an email address (e.g. [2]) if two users want to discuss something 'offwiki'. You might need it later, but your address will be exchanged in the process. Talking to other editors is a good way to find things out, another is to:

edit a page
see and copy snippets of code
cancel the edit, or hit the 'back' button.

You can use this to improve a shorter page with a similar one's categories, templates, or the layout of a section. Citation styles are numerous, but add 'em if ya got 'em. Some whiz will fix it later. If you have a particular interest, I ~~may~~ will know an article that needs improving. But you have already noticed the (?systematic) gaps. Regards, ☻ Fred|☝ discussion|✍ contributions 10:43, 29 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Writers Awards and Nominations

Hi, you might notice that I moved your Awards and Nominations on Elizabeth Jolley from AFTER her list of works to BEFORE. I think the common style is to have the list of works at the end of the article (before refs/sources/links etc). I hope this is OK. Change it back if you disagree or talk to me. Cheers Sterry2607 11:53, 29 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

wow

you are in for it! you ask fred and self to keep talking - you will never hear the end of it :| Satu Suro 13:49, 29 June 2007 (UTC) ok - thats fine - I really need to brush up on that as I have heaps of cites to insert back into older arts - maybe i'll have to ask you :) ! Satu Suro 14:00, 29 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

User preferences - search

It's amazing what you don't see when you don't expect to find something. I've looked at that page a few times but didn't expect it to be the answer to my problem. I've added Help to my preferences and lo and behold found what I wanted immediately! Thanks - and it was good meeting you! Sterry2607 07:15, 7 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Sterry2607 - it was great talking and I have sorted out Telstra, at least for today and am back on line. I have great plans to go forth, etc. The watchlist, after you had explained it was useful also. I might be able to find my way back and forth better. See you next month Stellar 09:51, 7 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Welcome to Oz Literature

Hi Meredyth ! I was having a break when you joined up on Oz Lit, so am just sending you a belated warm welcome. Its great to see more members joining. Boylo 09:38, 7 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Aus Lit articles

Hi Meredyth. I did a bit of work on Olga Masters today. It's by no means a complete article but I added a bit of info that I had here and restructured the article a bit. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Olga_Masters I'm thinking its structure - the subheadings and their order - is what I will base most of my work on, with, of course, changes as appropriate to individuals. For example, if I have Nominations as well as Awards I'll change the subheading to say that. Or if the writer has some specific topics relevant to them I'll add subheadings for those. But, overall, I'd be interested in what you think of this as a basic plan for structuring articles about writers. BTW I didn't use the Infobox Writer template for her because she has some famous children and that template doesn't let you put in children. (Oh, and she won a couple of interesting awards, too, that there's not much on out there!) Sterry2607 13:58, 9 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks - and you fixed a typo I noticed. Thanks for that too. I worked on two more writers today - fascinating people (Tilly Aston and Caroline Calvert/Louisa Atkinson). Have found a couple of good sites for biographies besides the ADB. One is the National Women's Biography project. I loved Olga Masters books - so sad that her fiction career was so short. I'm going to the NLA tomorrow for an hour or so to have coffee with a friend who still works there. I might do a little research. Good luck with Telstra Sterry2607 11:01, 10 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

LOL I certainly don't want you to do that - go forth young woman and multiply (articles that is). BTW I notice that Boylo pointed you to the Infobox Writer Template. This is one of the issues I was talking about on Saturday. I don't find it very useful for, say, Caroline Calvert/Louisa Atkinson whom I worked on today because it only has fields for Pseudonyms and not for other names or maiden names. I more often use the Infobox Person Template. It has a lot of fields I don't use but it covers all the bases I need. I also used it for Olga Masters because I could enter all her famous children. I couldn't do that in the Writer template. Then again, maybe I'm missing the point about what these infoboxes are about. I understand the formal role of Persondata but am still getting my head around Infoboxes. I assume they are to summarise the data (to provide a snapshot) but I saw one page where someone had removed it because it didn't add anything. If boylo or satusuro watch your page maybe they'll answer for me. Cheers, Sterry2607 12:28, 10 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Projects

Are very good for keeping articles in groups/families - which can be appraised - evaluated and checked within th compound/fence walls so to speak. islated orphan articles under too large umbrella - like just oz - cannot get the attention. Oz lit might even get too large one day and might have to have subsidiary parts. Hope that answers it cheers ~ As for the name of a particular isp just mentioned - I am leaving them this week - buts thats another story cheers Satu Suro 11:04, 10 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I would back what boylo has eft below - looks good!

I would debate having 3 teenagers on school holiday as equating to free time - or a very uncontactable technical support at a particular isp anything either, but Satu Suro 11:56, 10 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Style

Looks like Satu has given you the lowdown on what Projects are. As far as style and content goes, this is what baby_ifritah recommended to myself that i found useful.

What wikipedia is not (esp. see indiscriminate collection of info - plot summaries)

Writing about fiction

Useful templates are:

* {{Wikipedia:WikiProject Novels/ArticleTemplate}} - article template for novel articles

* {{Wikipedia:WikiProject Novels/InfoboxCode}} - infobox for novel articles

* {{Template:Infobox Writer}} - infobox for writer's bios

PS. Distinction between real world perspective versus "in-universe" is important for novel articles

Boylo 11:29, 10 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Women and names

Hi Meredyth. I notice you've done some work tonight on Dorothy Auch...... I was intrigued because I had gone past her entry in my Debra Adelaide book, which I am slowly going through alphabetically, because Adelaide said 'See Dorothy Green'. I thought I'd wait until I got to Green before I checked Wikipedia. Well, now I see you are working on her, I thought I'd do a search on Dorothy Green and she doesn't come up under that name - someone else does. However, in the last couple of days I worked on Louisa Atkinson. When you do a Wikipedia search on Louisa Atkinson you get several results, the first one being Caroline Louisa Atkinson and then follow a few other variations on her name. These results click to the article for Caroline Calvert. Now, Adelaide has her under Louisa Atkinson and doesn't even make a reference from Calvert (her married name) in the C section. So, I'm thinking I need to work out how you can get multiple names to point to one article. I haven't investigated that. I think some of it is done by MOVING an article, which I've only done once and not for that purpose, but I need to do more research. Hmmm...it might be done through the 'What links here'. You didn't want to know all that did you?? I read some good Wiki stuff on articles today. When I'm less tired I'll point you to some info. Cheers Sterry2607 13:10, 11 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Green et al

I will let you know - and if you come across something in the meantime I know you'll do the same. This name stuff is really complicated. I did a lot of work on our Archive's authority file structure to get a good result (including separating out synonyms from alternative names) BUT we've lost alot of that in our online catalogue which searches Google (text) style, mostly, rather than using the underlying database structure. It's a shame, but most users don't notice what they're missing and therefore the people with the money decide not to spend it on such things. Re Gail Jones. Funny you should mention that. It was my Mum's birthday (July 4 actually!) last week and I suggested my daughter give her a Gail Jones book, which she did. But, no, I haven't read her yet - would like to though. I heard her interviewed on Radio National a couple of weeks ago. She has a funny little voice. You have? Sterry2607 00:08, 12 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Disambiguation

Yes, thanks, this is the way I decided yesterday was probably the main way to go also, and printed out the pages on Disambiguation to research it a bit further. There's also links such as those for George T Miler: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/George_T._Miller. There's a disambiguation page for George Miller but if you choose the wrong one then there is a link/pointer to the other one. I've come across a few of these. This only works where there is an existing article for a different thing/person of the same name (as there is for Dorothy Green, for example). Of course you'd only do it if you think there was a reason for people perhaps having chosen the wrong one in the first place (which is the case with the George Millers - both Aussie film directors/producers active at the same time) otherwise some articles would be full of pointers to other articles!! There's a lot to do isn't there! Sterry2607 00:44, 13 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

hmph - the more imaginative one is the more potentials articles. There are many australian authors with names same as totally unrelated strangers from o.s. - well worth getting used to creating disambig pages - and in some cases creating moves from joe bloggs to joe bloggs (Australian auther) for the separate and disambig'd article. feel free to check on the processes - as the larger the article with more links the more has to be taken in checking for rediect issues. but wiat for that until you come to it - cheers Satu Suro 00:50, 13 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

TAG Hungerford Award

Nice catch, nice page. As well as the Category for Australian Literary Awards, there is a page List of Australian literary awards so I added it to that page . OK? Sterry2607 00:55, 13 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Literary Awards

Oh, good on you. It is lovely being there isn't it? I had noticed that other List but hadn't looked at it recently. I think I'll just keep populating the List of Australian Literary Awards since there's a pointer to it anyhow from that list. I have been working this afternoon on The Age Book of the Year Awards. It's a bit of a mess because there's no clear straightforward listing available (which is pretty poor for a newspaper eh?). They have two or three awards - fiction, nonfiction and later poetry - and then one of them is ALSO chosen as THE Book of the Year but when people list their awards they don't always make it clear so I'm going cautiously on filling out that part. Fun, fun. Sterry2607 11:35, 13 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Ah thanks, I checked Amy Witting and have added her into the Fiction award for 2000 - I'm finding it hard to confirm which book won the actual AGE BOOK OF THE YEAR as I said above. But, if at least I (we) get the books into the Fiction/Nonfiction/Poetry categories they are at least listed. And yes, add any links you like. I have read Amy Witting - she's another of those late writers like Olga Masters and Elizabeth Jolley. I really admire them - so, if you have the desire to write, don't give up! (I know that I'm too prosaic so I'll just stick to this sort of writing, and reading) Sterry2607 04:08, 14 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Age

Thanks ... and thanks for updating Thea Astley - update whichever ones you like. I started trying to catch the pages that currently link to THE AGE when they really wanted the Awards but there are hundreds and hundreds of pages that link to the Age. So I think I'll give that up as a bad joke. If we get all the winners linked properly then the various shortlisted people currently linked to the AGE will just have to be caught as they are come across. (BTW I like short stories too - don't read enough of them but today Mum showed me a very funny little one by Eleanor Dark called The Serpent. Pretty traditional one but delightful). That WA site looks great. Anyhow, I'm tired so am off to bed for a bit of a read before lights out. Catch you later (PS We've made a great foray into Aussie Lit in our short little time here I reckon) Sterry2607 13:09, 13 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

National Biography Award

Hi Meredyth. I saw that you had a go at changing the format for joint winners of this award. Good on you...It's clearer seing them listed rather than running on as I had done, but they didn't quite line up, so I had a look at other awards and tried what they do in the Miles Franklin Award. That method lines them up better but is a bit 'bullet point-y'. Anyhow, see what you think. Sterry2607 04:22, 14 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Age Book of the Year

Ah, I see you are linking every reference to an author. I thought I'd read that you only link the first mention in an article rather than all mentions, but I must admit that I did wonder whether with these award lists it might be a good idea to link each time, so I'm happy for you to have linked all the Peter Careys, Elizabeth Jolleys etc. I also wasn't sure about linking authors that might be one-offs but I'm happy for us to make those red links now - we can always remove them later if we do think that they are not likely to be worth an article. Might as well get them highlighted? Oh, and I should explain myself re Isobel. I'm training myself out of library listing - library cataloguing practice is to use sentence case ie "Isobel on the way to the corner store" (that's how you will see it it most library catalogues) but I know that we were taught at school (and many citation guidelines too) to capitalise all main words. I started here at Wikipedia doing my usual library style - which I prefer but it's an aquired taste I realise - but have decided that perhaps I should do what most people do here, AND then forgot when I entered Isobel!! Sterry2607 04:43, 14 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Okey doke. We'll both keep looking out for format options. I guess I do like listed things to line up - but would like a second hierarchy of 'dots' like you can do in Word. Sterry2607 04:47, 14 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Don't worry. I didn't read it as dismissive - and I'm not easily offended. I totally agree re tables - they mostly look pretty awful and are best kept I think for very messy lists. BTW I've just done my first user talk archiving. I haven't got the neat navigation that some have but at least I've had my first shot at it. As in all Wikipedia there are so many ways of doing it and I'm too lazy to spend time on reading it all up - I will one day though!Sterry2607 05:07, 14 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

A little wikithing for you

		The Working Woman's Barnstar
		Do you realise that about a month ago there were only about 45 women in the Australian women writers category and now there are nearly 150. This is in large part thanks to you for doing a lot of it and for making me realise it was there to be done. For this and all your other work on adding Persondata and Infoboxes and sundry other value adds, I send you this BARNSTAR Sterry2607 07:35, 15 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, it looks nicely substantial now...but as you say there's a lot to flesh out as well as more people to add. My Star was because you brought my attention to it AND did a lot of the work as well. Are you following a particular plan now OR wandering as your fancy takes you? Sterry2607 08:42, 15 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Sounds good. I have two literature prongs: I'll work out a bit from the Age Book of the Year awards and will also continue working alphabetically through the Debra Adelaide book. I might also get back to my Australian documentary film strand. Sterry2607 09:50, 15 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Documentaries

My first real articles here were relating to documentaries. My first editing work was in literature but the articles were film. As they were my first they are a bit primitive in terms of Wiki style but are works in progress: John Heyer (a real favourite of mine, whom I met in 1994), Stanley Hawes, and The Back of Beyond (a film I've seen a few times and have on DVD). I'm really keen to work out from Heyer and Hawes and into more current people. Sterry2607 10:06, 15 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

You beat me to it

(BTW I edited your talk page to stop all the messages being sub messages of the Project heading. I hope that's ok) Anyhow, I see you are working on Glenda Adams. I noticed that page yesterday when I was researching the Book of the Year stuff and planned to work on it. Good on you! The only thing that bothers me (not re your work but re her death) is that yesterday and this morning I searched the web for news of her death and found nothing (though you have that AusLit ref). Now, why is that? I hadn't heard that she'd died and I feel I should have...and yet the person who posted that on the article was from the US (at least I think that's where they were from). I guess she hasn't produced much for a while, but still, if some awardwinning footballer from the 90s, say, dies, we hear about it... Sterry2607 11:52, 15 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Jean Bedford

Yes, I have read one of her books - "Love child" I think, though her most well known is probably "Sister Kate". I've read a couple of Glenda Adams - a novel and a book of short stories. We will probably cross each other's paths with our two books but that's good as we can add to each other's info as we go, eh? Sterry2607 13:30, 15 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Jean Bedford et al

I think some people create brief stubs for others to fill in later. I guess there's value in that but I'd rather do something a bit more thorough. I've had a frustrating day losing things I've worked on. I got the sense that people don't like multiple saves to a page but you either do that or lose stuff so I'm going to go back to more saves. That's fine re Bedford. We can leave her till later. I've decided to do the Grace Leven award as I've come across too many people who've won it that it has irritated me that it's not there Sterry2607 10:59, 16 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

History awards

Good work last night! I saw the listing of Nadia Wheatley as a winner of one of them and was horrified to discover she doesn't have an article so that's been today's project. I don't know her but I worked with and knew pretty well her foster sister (Nadia was fostered with this friend's family) and so I have always kept an ear out for her. Also, I loved her 'My place' when it came out. I'm still trying to sort out the Grace Leven awards - so much confusing data out there. You can see how a mistake can be copied through and through: it might look like three pieces of corroborating evidence whereas in fact it's the same info copied from one place to another! Oh well, back to the fray. (It's patchwork tonight anyhow). Sterry2607 07:37, 18 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Children's awards

Hi Meredyth. I'm glad you've changed from Subpages to Links. I was thinking of discussing that with you because I felt that the Links to separate pages was probably the better and more "Wiki-common" way to go. I am so glad that you are tackling this HUGE award group. My Age Book of the Year pales by comparison. Daughter left this am and I'm feeling a bit bereft Sterry2607 00:06, 1 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Quick response - off to patchwork. You're right about motherhood and independence is what we want, but the moment of separation is still sad! See you Sat'dee Sterry2607 09:38, 1 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Were you planning to delete the subpages you created, or something else? If it's the subpages, could you MOVE them instead of DELETE them? I've done that a couple of times and you can do that yourself. Sterry2607 23:54, 1 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Move Delete

Yes, look forward to catching up. Thinking about it I guess the main difference between Moving and Deleting is if you want to keep the old page as a redirect, which was my situation. That probably wasn't the case in yours. Anyhow, looking forward to discussing conundra, experiences, et al. (Went to movies last night, so not Wiki-ing then) Sterry2607 23:17, 2 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Rabbit Proof Fence

Hi Meredyth. Did you notice that Moondyne has already moved the Bolt stuff into a separate section and summarised it slightly...so that it looks a lot better than it was. BUT It would be good if you could enhance the discussion further with more solid inf than Bolt's blog and the rebuff to it. Cheers Sterry2607 23:24, 2 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Discussion

You left a couple of question on SatuSuro talk page I've answered them there, for further reading Help:Watching pages covers it in more detail. Gnan garra 10:56, 15 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

unlinking

I'm just keeping my works clean :) --necronudist 13:34, 19 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

dab Verse

WikiThanks

Thanks for finishing disambiguating Verse. rpyle731 ^talk 06:08, 26 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

dazzled by the daisy. Thanks Stellar 11:59, 27 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for welcome back

Yes, had a lovely break though it rained pretty much all the time .... Wish there'd been rain here in Canberra. I read 2 1/2 books! So, that always makes for a good holiday. Hope to catch up soon Sterry2607 00:39, 28 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Frank Dalby Davison

Hi Meredyth. I notice that you did some disambiguation of place names in my Frank Dalby Davison article...by concatenating the Hawthorn and Melbourne refs. I entered them to give a link to Hawthorn (Vic) AND to Victoria, but you have made them just to Hawthorn (Vic). No problem but just thought I'd let you know my thinking on the issue of place...I'm never quite sure when I do these articles whether it is useful to link to just the place or to the place and the state. I've done both at different times. It's one of the conundra/ums? re linking that I wonder about - too many links? too few links? useful links? meaningless links? When do you link to the state itself, when to the place itself, and when to both? Sterry2607 07:31, 31 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Though I do realise that I'd been careless with the Victoria part and had not disambiguated it ... I try to remember to check my links but sometimes forget! Sterry2607 07:35, 31 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for the response...I agree that there is room for discussion on the links issue. Good on you for working on the working groups - the amount of work to do is overwhelming isn't it? I did a bit today on Documentary disambig cos I like Film stuff (what do you do about 'ambiguous' stuff on all the Talk pages etc when you do those disambig lists?), but today I got some books from the library, including one with more stuff on Frank, so I will go back to article writing. Sterry2607 11:01, 31 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Edits to page: Les Murray (poet)

Just to let you know that I removed the links to the Guardian and New Yorker articles on the Les Murray page (27 Aug 2007), because Les Murray asked my to do so (I edited as 86.158.130.97). He sees them as overtly political and potentially damaging. I have inserted two new links which give a more neutral overview of the poet; more detailed accounts can be had from his homepage, LesMurray.org. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Jasonedwardclapham (talk • contribs) 09:01, 1 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

plural possessives

No, it's not. A simple Google query reveals that you are in error.

Also, any changes such as that will be made without note from now on and from a different IP address. 24.250.31.123 01:49, 4 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Kenneth McIntyre

Great work on McIntyre's entry. Thanks so much! Gillyweed 22:12, 4 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Speedy deletion

As I understand it, you flag it with the template appropriate to why it should be deleted (see WP:CSD). I think only administrators can actually delete but if you use the template I presume they have a watch program to pick them up. Does that help?? Sterry2607 11:24, 5 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Great. I wasn't on Wiki when your message came through. My other project is to catalogue our photos, which Len has put into a database (well over 20,000) - I was doing that and had just had enough and came back to Wiki to see your message. You are right about some, let us say, not so nice people being around. Sterry2607 12:03, 5 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Category:Australian nonfiction book awards

Hi Stellar ! Just found your post about there not being any Category for Australian nonfiction book awards. So have now made one that you can now use

.

Have added it to the pages of awards i could find.

Disregard the see also, as thats the Category, as its the only way i could post you the link. Also made

Boylo 04:36, 12 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Well Deserved Award

		The Tireless Contributor Barnstar
		Well deserved for all the contributions you have done for Wikipedia in the last 3 months. Boylo 14:27, 12 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

NT History

It would be well worth a read of WP MOS and the issue about lead sentences - if you do some sorts of queries on oggle and popups - the first 10-20 words are more important than the rest sometimes - hope to go none of my old mates from up there recognise me - will change it to give you an idea my interpretation of what one needs to do to them Satu Suro 05:05, 13 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Still playing with it - better to always spell out in bold the specific subject - and there is a strong thing in feature article creation discussion about not having refs or citations in the first sentence as well. You might be able to cleanup my mess - but I hope you get a gist of what I am trying to point to Satu Suro 05:14, 13 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Same with the vistorian one - apologies for checking em - but see how I did it Satu Suro 05:26, 13 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

btw - very impressed by your hard work - wow! Satu Suro 05:30, 13 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

There are arguments against no links in the lead sentence (like I have attempted) from some versions of lead sentences - and refs/cites are ok - so depends on whose style prefs to go by Satu Suro 13:07, 13 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

There are more than one way (ok bad grammar) to do it - its just that I remember from some guys trying to Feature article thingos earlier in the year - and some reviewers are quite big sticklers for it - as for my way of doing it i bet there are other ways too - dont take me too seriously over it - am struggling with other aspeccts of article formation as it is - cheers Satu Suro 13:19, 13 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]