User talk:Orderinchaos/Archive 08

This is an archive of inactive discussions. Please do not edit it. If you wish to revitalize an old topic, bring it up on the current talk page.

Archive : August 2007

Thanks for last night

Hello dear OIC. Just wanted to drop by and say thanks for last night-I had a great old time and I hope you did too. I'm just feeling really bad... and very very embarrassed that I fell asleep on you! twice! I hope you can forgive me for that! :) But i guess you run that risk when you decide to keep an older (please note thats oldER, NOT old!) woman up all night! LOL Talk to you soon, Sarah 06:09, 31 July 2007 (UTC) 06:09, 31 July 2007 (UTC)

I can only wonder what this is about.

Same here :) Twenty Years 12:01, 31 July 2007 (UTC)

Tee hee. I was just stirring you guys who watch this page. OIC and I were chatting the other night on g-talk and by the time I fell asleep in the middle of the conversation, I'd been up all night, though it would still have been the middle of the night for OIC since he's on the other side of the country. In my sleep deprived state I decided to play around with the guys who watch his talk page.:) Sarah 13:39, 1 August 2007 (UTC)

It worked quite well. Twenty Years 13:56, 1 August 2007 (UTC)

Odd deletion

I'm a bit puzzled why you'd list Category:Gosford suburb geography stubs on the stub proposals page, and then decide it was a "speedy deletion", and I can in no way see that it'd qualify as a "C2", fitting as it does absolutely none of the various criteria under that heading. Could you talk me through the reasoning for that? Can I suggest in future, taking deletions of stub templates and categories to WP:SFD? Alai 04:13, 1 August 2007 (UTC)

DYK

On 1 August, 2007, Did you know? was updated with a fact from the article Brand Junction, which you created or substantially expanded. If you know of another interesting fact from a recently created article, then please suggest it on the Did you know? talk page.

--Wizardman 16:28, 1 August 2007 (UTC)

Leaving Wikipedia

Just letting you know i have decided to leave Wikipedia as i no longer have the time to participate. Thanks for your support. Addios Boylo 03:28, 2 August 2007 (UTC)

• Do you know of the template to use to say you have left ? Boylo 03:37, 2 August 2007 (UTC)
• Thx, i have put up ' Long Break ', as i am unsure when or if i will return. I am just finding Wikipedia time consuming and need to focus on some other things for awhile. But i still may contribute on some topics, when i have the time, so you can keep me on your adoptee listing. I just thought it best you knew i was away, rather than just disappear. Have removed myself also from Project listings, till i know i can be of assistance again. Thx again Chaos Boylo 05:54, 2 August 2007 (UTC)

RfA Questions

Hi Orderinchaos, thanks for your additional questions. I am going to be away for the next 24-48 hours or so (have a black tie event to attend in real life). If you don't mind, I'll answer your questions when I am back on-line. Cheers Brian | (Talk) 04:31, 2 August 2007 (UTC)

Re: Support

Yes, I meant for that to go in the support section, thanks. -- John Reaves 04:34, 2 August 2007 (UTC)

Explanation

There's an interesting discussion here: Wikipedia talk:Requests for adminship/Elonka 2. Care to explain? pschemp | talk 02:57, 3 August 2007 (UTC)

You'll have to explain here, since you were blocked. I will put this page on my watchlist. Andre (talk) 02:58, 3 August 2007 (UTC)

See also WP:AN#Alleged sockpuppetry by Orderinchaos.Proabivouac 03:37, 3 August 2007 (UTC)

Firstly, let me make it clear that I take this accusation very seriously - I am a firm believer in Wikipedia's sockpuppetry policy, and I am a firm believer in the integrity of Wikipedia as a project. I have literally travelled over a 1000km breadth collecting pictures and information to put on here, and I've been heavily involved in either setting up or assisting with a range of WikiProjects. I take a lot of pride in these contributions, and as such, a lot of myself is invested in them. I also take pride in helping newbies and others in their contributions, as many in WP:WA and other Australian projects will attest.

Secondly, I am not a sockpuppeteer (unless you count my official sock at User:Orderinchaos 2 which is used for AWB edits). Unfortunately, I chose to allow my friends to use my computer on a number of occasions when they stayed here, and my own addiction to Wikipedia wasn't enough to keep me off it when I was at theirs. I can't recall exact times and dates, but there would have been a few as I do not have a car and User:Zivko85, who lives nearby, often gives me a lift home from places. DanielT5 once stayed at my house for four days a few months ago when his accommodation arrangements fell through. On all occasions, my admin access was safe from their hands, as only I know my password. As an admin, I would be blatantly stupid to sockpuppet and expect to get away with it, as I know my actions are scrutinised by the community - nor is it in my nature to lie, as honesty is the best policy and it has gotten me through years in the workplace and in real life. I am disappointed that I was not consulted by the user before raising these allegations publicly, but such is life.

My interests are as anyone who checks my contribs will see, very specialised. I did try to get User:DanielT5 interested in WA geography articles considering his background as a country person, however, he never really got into it and instead became more involved in the politics articles. I understand DanielT5 plans to unleash an entire series of notable biographies of political figures in Western Australia, which would be valuable I think to the project. Urban geography is my thing, I love it, I love finding out how places came about and what evidence exists today, and I got a featured article and a good article on two Perth suburbs, and at present am helping to reorganise NSW Central Coast suburb articles (I was actually just about to launch into some new changes in that after having generated 148 articles offline). I have similarly tried to get others of my acquaintance interested in geographical articles, such as Twenty Years and Thewinchester, with varying rates of success. A basic check of those accounts would reveal they edit from different locations with (I'm guessing) different ISPs, although I am with the second biggest provider in Western Australia.

In summary, I am sorry for my oversight in mutually using computers with other users. It will not happen again, I do not want any cloud to hang over my edits or those of my fellow contributors because of an issue like this.

I'm afraid that I'm going to have to decline this request. When I saw earlier this morning that you'd been accused of sockpuppetry, I was openly cynical, and I immediately raced to check the results myself. I was all the more surprised when my searches confirmed the results reached by Mackensen. I'm still wondering why someone of your stature as an editor would sockpuppet, especially as your sockpuppetry seems to have had no effect on the results of any of the affected discussion - but your explanation falls well short of explaining the CheckUser results, which were about as incriminating as CheckUser gets. I hope you'll stick around editing from your main account, but in light of this affair, I think this week-long block should stand. — Rebecca 05:11, 3 August 2007 (UTC)}}

Thank you for posting this explanation. I'd like to ask about a closely related issue. Do you think it looks good for all these connected users who share computers to appear and vote at the same RFA? Does this create the appearance of WP:MEAT or WP:CANVASS in your opinion? Jehochman ^Talk 05:05, 3 August 2007 (UTC)

I did know about Zivko85's vote before he voted (although it was his choice to place it), I didn't know about DanielT5's (actually was SMSd about it by another contributor while in a lecture at uni). In retrospect there are some things I would seriously have done a lot differently (mainly with regards to who I let use my machine when they visit, which in the case of Zivko85 is rather frequent). It does not look good, I agree with you on that, although it would be difficult for me to stop people voting merely because of a perception. If this is sorted out then I may have to have some offline discussions with certain people on this matter. Orderinchaos 05:10, 3 August 2007 (UTC)

Rebecca, if you're reading this, please check your email. Orderinchaos 05:18, 3 August 2007 (UTC)

On consideration - and thanks

Sometimes things happen for a reason in life, and the opportunity is lost if one doesn't learn from and act on it - this now-rescinded block, short as it's been, has made me think carefully about just what I am doing on Wikipedia at the moment. While I am no sock puppeteer, standing back, looking at my contribs, I am not proud of the way I have been acting as an editor of late. I think it's possible for all of us to forget sometimes about why we're here, and end up in an offline trade of links of AfDs with other users where one of two situations is the case:

• Article clearly nominated in bad faith or without due consideration.
• Article is in such a bad state that you wonder why there isn't a blanket delete vote and people are fighting to keep the thing.

My project work has been suffering as a result. I believe I have 12 outstanding issues to deal with, some of which have been sitting there for more than 3 months, and while some of this can be explained by being busy in real life, some of it is that I quite literally waste my time here. I'm finding that I am becoming more aggressive and less tolerant of others, and that's not a good thing. Wikipedia will be no worse off if I don't vote, as I have the good fortune of working with a great WikiProject with a lot of intelligent and thoughtful editors. Wikipedia however will be better off if I spend my time improving articles and filling in gaps and working on getting my 2nd FA and some more GAs.

So as a measure of my good faith to the community, I am going to abide by a self-imposed moratorium on AfDs and other community votes (RfAs etc) for a period of time - probably a few months, until the end of October. The only exceptions I will make is if an article I have written is placed for deletion, or a colleague merits my support at an RfA in that time. I will, however, be unwatchlisting WP:DSA.

Thank you, to those who have unblocked me or defended/stood up for me today, for your good faith and I hope that in a month or so you can look back at my contribs and agree it was a stance worth taking. Oh, and anyone who wants to help me with suburbs of Geraldton, Bunbury or Albany is more than welcome to do so. Orderinchaos 07:14, 3 August 2007 (UTC)

Albany. Fred ☻

OIC, I honestly believe that many users (admin or otherwise) would not stand up to the sort of scrutiny that you have. Although I do not personally support cabals, off-pedia work or meatpuppetry, we have wikiprojects, irc channels, and user groups... I guess, where do you draw the line? aliasd·U·T 15:29, 3 August 2007 (UTC)

At the risk of drowning in thankyous - thank you also to all those who emailed or otherwise contacted me today with jokes, thoughts, kind words, and reflections. It means a lot, and I appreciate it. Orderinchaos 18:36, 3 August 2007 (UTC)

Some additional thoughts after a few days reflection:

1. Personally, I was brought up to understand that the fire of argument needs fuel to keep it going, and that it takes a man to walk away from a fight. Any time that I spend addressing these already-closed, already-dealt-with matters (as one or two are insisting I do) is time that I'm not spending on productive project work.
2. In the last 4 days I have been reminded of the reasons I signed up to Wikipedia. It wasn't the bureaucratic tangles or the fights, it was the editing and my ability to contribute in areas of my interest, and to work with others collaboratively to reach common goals. I enjoy expanding my own knowledge while taking society with me for the ride.
3. As another very wise editor in my project once told me, Wikipedia won't fall over if I don't participate in every deletion debate. Sometimes it's easy to forget that when you start seeing things as an "us and them" battleground, whether you be a deletionist, an inclusionist or that particularly long one I always forget the link to but generally identify with myself. Sometimes people get carried away. Sometimes entire groups of people get carried away, and the group mentality aids all of them in getting into arguments they never should have gotten into in the first place.
4. Meanwhile, other priorities need attention. I have had too many important things on the backburner for far too long and finally, they're starting to get the attention and work they need from me, and the encyclopaedia is actually improving for it. Orderinchaos 19:49, 7 August 2007 (UTC)

Auckland Malls

I saw that you were positive about saving the (or some) of the mall articles. For personal reason, I would not like to edit them, or be connected to them too much. I have done some research to allow you or others to add notability and references to them, if you are interested in working on them:

Westfield Downtown:

[1] - provides 2005 retail sales figure at very bottom.

[2] - minor note, not really adding to notability, talking about the huge billboards around it.

[3] - actually, if you have the time, extend the signage discussion, as discussed in this article - even if the Wikipedia article calls it a bland building covered with garish signs - thats info, and adds to the article's quality. Also has some minor details about the centre referenced.

Westfield St Lukes:

[4] loads of minor and major info about St Lukes AND Downtown. Gives info on the time of name rebranding of Westfield Downtown. Has LOADS of info on St Lukes expansion and data on the mall itself.

Westfield Westcity

[5] Stage One of its existence.

[6] Info on the The Warehouse move into it.

[7] first NZ Village Skycity cinema (link to the Village Skycity article in Wikipedia too, please), same article also has info on the cinema in St Lukes.

[8] Mall turnover

[9] Some more info about its value.

[10] Already historical article, info on its previous ownership.

PS: When you add the reference summaries of the bdcentral articles, maybe use the info here to show the credibility of the source. The site may also be useful with its search function for the other malls.

Here's a quick summary of major shopping areas in Auckland, off the top of my head:

• Major shopping streets
  • Queen Street, Auckland is the "golden mile"
  • Karangahape Road not really close enough to Queen St to explore on the same trip and more of a seedy/cultural experience than a shopping mecca.
  • Newmarket, New Zealand is the runner up to Queen St
• Malls
  • Three malls which were among the first in the country: Westfield Manukau City, Lynnmall and Westfield St Lukes. The latter has considerably expanded in the early 90s and again early this century. The other two are a bit smaller but still pretty important in their areas.
  • Three huge new malls/centres: Botany Town Centre, Howick, Sylvia Park, something in Albany but I'm a little confused as to what its name is. It might be Albany Mega Centre. Note that Westfield Albany is about to open next to it.
  • Westfield Downtown is a small mall in the Auckland CBD; the article could be merged into that one.
  • Two Double Seven is a substantial mall in Newmarket, currently due to be expanded further. It could reasonably be merged into the Newmarket article.
  • Westfield Shore City is I think the mall which used to be North Shore Galleria. It could be merged into Takapuna.
  • Several other substantial malls are Westfield Pakuranga, Westfield West City, Milford, New Zealand
  • There are quite a number of smaller malls/centres such as Royal Oak Mall, Westgate Shopping Centre (a dab page not listing the one I know), Three Kings Mall, Meadowbank Shopping Centre and probably a dozen more I don't know about.

Auckland is very spread out compared to most cities, so although I know a lot of the city there are areas which are just names on a map to me. Westfield Glenfield I can't picture at all.-gadfium 05:00, 4 August 2007 (UTC)

One I missed is Victoria Park market, which is a very large permanent craft market quite close to the CBD. There are other markets, most notably the Otara one, but they usually operate in a car park on weekends only.-gadfium 06:29, 4 August 2007 (UTC)

Wikipedia administrators open to recall

I'm gland things were resolved, but your actions have shaken my faith in your understanding of what Wikipedia consensus is all about and in your ability to proceed as an admin. I think we need more details from you as an admin on the extent to which you have been involved in efforts with others outside of Wikipedia to push certain ongoing agendas within Wikipedia. Also, am I to understand that you stood by while someone logged in as Zivko85 so that you and this person could !vote together at an AfD? Pascal.Tesson has suggested that you give up your adminship.[11] In view of the unwise series of meatpuppet edits, I agree that you should stand for re-confirmation of adminship. At a minimum, I would suggest you listing yourself at Category:Wikipedia administrators open to recall. Also, your quickly archiving the block user post on this talk page does not help inspire confidence in your judgment. -- Jreferee ^(Talk) 17:14, 3 August 2007 (UTC)

Oh get over it. -- Ned Scott 20:38, 3 August 2007 (UTC)

Consensus is that this matter has now been settled, and we should move on. Tyrenius 21:11, 3 August 2007 (UTC)

I concur, OIC does a fine job as an admin, and has even agreed to exercise more caution than most on such matters in the future. aliasd·U·T 05:54, 5 August 2007 (UTC)

Dropping by

Since we were both active at the same RFA I want to say I was as surprised as everyone else by what happened last night (night in my time zone). I'm very glad things weren't as bad as they looked at first glance and I'm glad to see your post about doing some introspection and changing priorities. It can't be easy to be under that kind of scrutiny and it's even harder to step forward like that. I won't comment on most of Jreferee's suggestions, but I will say that I'm open to recall. I encouraged Elonka to make that offer too and I've encouraged other candidates I've nominated for adminship in the past. It's the sort of action that demonstrates one's willingness to adhere to the site's highest standards. No one should be forced or coerced into it - I just hope it's something you'll consider. Warmly, Durova^Charge! 17:54, 3 August 2007 (UTC)

perspective

What you did might have been questionable, but people are blowing it out of proportion. In any case, none of it has anything to do with your actions with admin tools. Being humble is good, but you're committed no great crime. I can't stress how important perspective is at this point. -- Ned Scott 20:50, 3 August 2007 (UTC)

My 2^c

If you are editing in conjunction with other people (ie editing wiki while your friends are around) and you both come to the same conclusion in a debate etc - whether that be because of on wiki or off wiki discussions (ie mates chatting) then so be it. That isn't socking, it isnt even a meatpuppet - its two people who happen to hold the same view/coming to the same conclusion. It is also not malicious - wiki can be a social affair as this shows. I hope your friends have not given up, and I really hope you dont even consider those idiotic calls for you to be de-sysopped. You did nothing wrong, and your demeanour in this was a credit to you. Viridae^Talk 04:00, 4 August 2007 (UTC)

I'll second that (at risk of overloading you with messages). This is a case of three individuals — each with their own contribution history (especially Daniel) and views on Wikipedia — happening to agree on particular issues. There might have been a problem with disclosure, but that is minor (if at all valid), and certainly not a basis to request or suggest what some users are. You should take heart that, throughout this whole affair, the respect and trust many users hold in you stayed true.--cj | talk 04:09, 4 August 2007 (UTC)

Very well said. -- Ned Scott 05:30, 4 August 2007 (UTC)

Viridae, no one has called for Orderinchaos to be desysoped if the allegations aren't true.

CJ, this goes beyond users "happening to agree on particular issues."Proabivouac 07:09, 4 August 2007 (UTC)

And you would know this.. how? -- Ned Scott 07:27, 4 August 2007 (UTC)

Look 3 sections up. Viridae^Talk 09:16, 4 August 2007 (UTC)

Just wondering

Orderinchaos, you've generally struck me as a good editor and a reasonable person. I am having trouble following what I'm seeing here, and I wonder if you'd be willing to flesh out the story a bit for me. Of course, you're not obliged to do so - it sounds like some personal details might be involved, and I respect your right to privacy - but if there is an explanation which is consistent with the known evidence and the has ring of truth, it would save me the trouble of examining this more closely.Proabivouac 07:04, 4 August 2007 (UTC)

Orderinchaos is a great editor in good standing with the wider Wikipedia community. He's put in hours of effort in order to make a positive contribution. I think that is all we need to know and keep in mind when dealing with OIC. Sammy lightfoot 06:21, 6 August 2007 (UTC)

I think that there's been a decision, and whether or not you agree with it, you should avoid belaboring this issue, Proabivouac. OIC is a good person who is sincere and he has made many great contributions. The community has forgiven whatever mistakes he might have made and we have strong assurances that they won't be repeated. Let's leave it at that. Jehochman ^Talk 06:23, 6 August 2007 (UTC)

I followed this matter closely. The situation that eventually came to light from my perspective was basically this: These statements represent my viewpoint of the situation, as a third party.

• There were allegations of sockpuppetry against OIC. These allegations may simply have been instigated as part of a flamewar campaign. Evidence was given of some similar edits and a lack of overlapping of edits between OIC and his alleged sockpuppets. This was naturally enough to have a checkuser performed.
• A checkuser confirmed that there may have been some truth to these allegations. OIC logged out from a computer and other accounts logged into the same computer and performed edits, often in places like AfD discussions.
• Although the user who performed the checkuser claimed this was very damning OIC and the other parties involved were able to convince her outside of Wikipedia that they were in fact different people sharing the same computer. It seems more than probable that personal information was shared that has no place becoming public on Wikipedia, or being extracted again. OIC claimed that these people were Wikipedians he knew personally and who would share information and discussions on general 'happenings' of Wikipedia with these users, such as AfDs or possibly RfAs.
• No evidence came to light that OIC abused his powers as an admin or allowed these users access to his admin tools.
• The allegations shifted to meatpuppetry.
• General consensus was that OIC was merely sharing general and public Wikipedia information with other users with some common viewpoints. This is essentially not meatpuppetry, as there is no tangible proof that OIC fostered these users specifically to promote his viewpoints.
• OIC agreed to be more careful with his interactions with other users, which, in my opinion, was unnecessary. It was his gesture towards the community. He will become more reclusive with his discussions with other users outside Wikipedia to avoid a future incident.
• OIC was quick to search himself to determine where he may have possibly been at fault with this situation, which in my opinion was essentially a storm in a teacup.
• OIC remains in good standing with the community.

In my opinion, the handling of this situation was very diplomatic on the part of OIC, probably to his detriment. Furthermore I believe this matter has been resolved as 'no issue' and I believe as this situation has been investigated and OIC has been cleared, and anyone who wishes to pursue this matter further is promoting unwanted Wikistress, trying to extract highly personal information from a respected member of the Wikipedia community who has already been investigated and cleared, and probably witch hunting. aliasd·U·T 07:47, 6 August 2007 (UTC)

I have but one further question, if you'll indulge me, Orderinchaos: granting that DanielT5 and Zivko85 are individuals distinct from one another and from you, was there any time at which you'd posted under their usernames, or any time when one of them might have posted under yours?Proabivouac 08:40, 7 August 2007 (UTC)

Mate, cant you just give the guy a break, hes gone through hell and back over this issue. He was proven beyond a reasonable doubt to have done little wrong. He is a quality admin, lets remember that, not this debarkle. Twenty Years 08:43, 7 August 2007 (UTC)

Proabivouac you have already said on WP:AN about OIC that I think we can all agree that your contributions to Wikipedia are valued and respected.Proabivouac 10:39, 6 August 2007 (UTC) I am starting to wonder what your intent is. This continuation is looking more like a pointed discussion at best and intend to be disruptive at worst. Either way there are formal processes you can use if its that much of a concern. Anyway the only response to such a question is definitely not and by the way you keep pushing this cart I doubt you'll be happy with that. What every the reason I think its to stop feeding this discussion. Gnangarra 11:13, 7 August 2007 (UTC)

Gnangarra, I asked Orderinchaos a straightforward and specific question. My intent is to see if there if there might not be a scenario which is consistent with both Orderinchaos' previous explanations and the observed evidence. I am not certain how you could be in a position to answer my question.Proabivouac 11:21, 7 August 2007 (UTC)

Can i remind everyone here of WP:CIVIL, this appears to be causing some problems. So basically you are asking him to churn out the same answer he gave before. I am going to request that you do not ask any more questions of this man, the matter has been sorted, and you are just opening up new wounds. Please, remember the fine contributor that he is, not the position that others have attempted to put him in. Thank you. Twenty Years 11:29, 7 August 2007 (UTC)

He hasn't been to hell and he hasn't come back. He got caught with red handed and has presented a story that is consistent with some parts of the violations he has been accused of, but far from all of them. The question being asked -- "was there any time at which you'd posted under their usernames, or any time when one of them might have posted under yours" -- can be answered with a simple yes or no without requiring any disclosures of personal information, and will go a long way to putting this matter to rest. Alansohn 13:05, 7 August 2007 (UTC)

It won't put anything to rest because for our purposes, this distinction makes no difference whatsoever because WP:SOCK and WP:MEAT are treated the same way. Your repeated questioning is a form of pestering. Please stop now. If that doesn't satisfy you, dispute resolution is available. Jehochman ^Talk 13:12, 7 August 2007 (UTC)

I have read OIC stating on more than one occasion that these other parties were never allowed access to his admin tools, so, this has been expressly denied. As far as OIC using their accounts to do something? That would only be relevant under certain circumstances. I can personally admit to not logging out of someone else's account accidentally before making an edit on a shared computer. Why don't you request a checkuser on me? Scrutinize my edits, see if you can find it... Start up a flamewar, hell, I am only a lowly contributor to this encyclopedia thing... I should be surely more involved in the sappy wikidrama heart of this place. Make it happen. aliasd·U·T 14:09, 7 August 2007 (UTC)

I just can't help but think, when OIC comes through here and says no, that it wouldn't be good enough for you aliasd·U·T 16:25, 7 August 2007 (UTC)

Note as Alansohn has been advise 5 time in the last day or so to take the matter to formal disput resolution or stop I have warned him for WP:AGF and link each of the occasions where he's been adcised to do such on his talk page. I recommend that all other editors(including OIC) stop feeding this [[trollish behaviour and ignore further queries posted about this matter unless the issue is raise at WP:RFM or WP:ARBCOM

Agreed. Considering that Alansohn thinks puppetry such a serious charge, he has been pretty quick off the mark to level completely false allegations of sockpuppetry against other editors, as documented at his RfC. He has no credibility on this issue - simply a manic passion for relentless wikilawyering (on display above) and self-righteously insisting that the sanctity of the project is at stake when faced with honest disagreement. Orderinchaos has already answered these accusations and the answer was no. Now move along. Eusebeus

Some background

Guys, I have a couple of things to say about this sock/meatpuppetry issue. Personally, I agree with what CJ has said above and I think calls for OIC's bit are over the top and unnecessary. OIC has obviously made some mistakes, he has admitted them, learned from them and apologised more than once for them.
But anyway, OIC and I have spent many hours chatting on g-talk, have exchanged emails and generally become good mates. Prior to there being even a hint of the slightest suspicion that OIC may have been engaging sockpuppetry, he and I shared some private and very personal information. One of the things that OIC shared with me was the fact that Zivko and Daniel were close personal friends of his, that they live close to each other and spend a lot of time together and at each other's houses. I have not been editing much and only became aware of this issue hours after it had been resolved by Rebecca or I would have tried to help shed some light on the issue. I know this won't have any impact on the person(s) who would like to wind up a lynching squad, but I feel it needs to be noted that OIC confided this information, of his own free will, with absolutely no prompting or questioning from me, with another administrator prior to there even being a hint of suspicion regarding these accounts. At the time I did not go through and check the history of these accounts as OIC had and has my full support and trust and the thought of socks didn't even occur to me, but I am not surprised to learn that there has been some overlap of edits since we are talking about three people who are very close friends and spend a lot of time together in real life. I would be very surprised if such people didn't share similar interests and therefore didn't edit the same pages and discuss Wikipedia issues. Sarah 08:53, 4 August 2007 (UTC)

Very well said Sarah. —Moondyne 16:42, 4 August 2007 (UTC)

What is the best way you know of (online) of finding the coords of a particular place? Is there a trick to it I'm unaware of? —Moondyne 16:42, 4 August 2007 (UTC)

Thanks. What I've been doing is this:

1. go to maps.google.com,
2. enter the place name and press search maps

   (if you need to adjust the centre of the screen, right click on the preferred location on the map and press centre map)

3. click on the 'links to this page' button (above the map), and the decimal coordinates are midway along inside the url string.

I just wanted to now if there was a secret that everyone knew about except me. It sounds like yours is about as good as mine. —Moondyne 17:04, 4 August 2007 (UTC)

NZ shopping mall stubs

Re: your comment at Wikipedia talk:WikiProject New Zealand,. I suppose you know there's a list at List of shopping malls in New Zealand? Grutness...wha? 00:36, 5 August 2007 (UTC)

Wikipedia:Requests for adminship/Elonka 2

Thank you for taking the time to participate at the discussion in my Request for Adminship. Unfortunately the nomination did not succeed, but please rest assured that I am still in full support of the Wikipedia project. I listened carefully to all concerns, and will do my best to incorporate all of the constructive advice that I received, into my future actions on Wikipedia. If you can think of any other ways that I can further improve, please let me know. Best wishes, Elonka 03:40, 5 August 2007 (UTC)

Informal editor review

Can I get your views on my contributions and how you think I could improve them? I would appreciate all input. Thank you very much! Auroranorth 10:43, 5 August 2007 (UTC)

Peter Andre

Thanks for the looking into it OIC. I think when I hit the "undo" button the history changes? Thats why you may not see the "gay" stuff. I hit the button a few times and then just cut and paste an older edit that made sense and had formatted tables. Your 31 week addition that likely got omitted was my mistake, hope you can re-add it back as it is quite notable - the chidiac remix attributed for the longevity as well as efforts by his then backup chorus CDB and andre being support act to the Madonna "Girlie Show" Tour! Ta T--T3Smile 15:38, 5 August 2007 (UTC)

• Best person to give you full timeline is Anthony Chidiac. He spotted CDB as a viable act when they were managed by a colleague of his, Mr. Roger Abboud. You probably have heard of the CDB Comeback as well coming in the next six months. I've messaged Chidiac on his userpage so he can answer your q's on them as I know he is still very well in touch with them. You can see CDB in the "blooper" video that was added to the chidiac bio in my userspace. Chidiac and Siew Ooi did a remix of "Hook Me Up" in the 001 days. I'm unsure of the Rockmelons involvement, best ask chidiac. his username here is User talk:Achidiac. --T3Smile 15:58, 5 August 2007 (UTC)

Hi OrderInchaos, rockmelons did original 3 track demo. Abboud (manager of CDB) dropped off cassette to Andre Barallon, and he played tape to me at Molly Meldrums place. Barallon was then head of Melodian records (Peter Andre, etc. etc.). I loved "Hook me Up" and told barallon to sign em up. Other 2 Tracks were "Hey Girl" and "Light Up the candle". (unnamed) rep for Sony came over Mollys one night and was sniffing around for new talent, where CDB Demo was casually played. CDB snapped up by Sony, before Molly/Andre/melodian had the chance to say "hello". Rest is history. "Hook Me up" cd single had three mixes, 1st one was from Andy DeSilva, 2nd one was the mix I helped with (and turned into DJ Mix) at 001 studios with Siew Ooi and Sam, 3rd track was a remix by rockmelons. CDB have reformed, andy desilva and gary pinto busy at new album - links: http://www.myspace.com/andrewdesilva http://www.myspace.com/cdbofficial http://www.myspace.com/gazzapinto

Any other q's write me a message. Hope I did enough name drops :) Could you help out T3Smile with wikifiying the entry on me - I just wont touch my own bio - I got really frowned on for it. The more you help her the more info I can get for you on stuff :) Best regards, --Achidiac 09:51, 6 August 2007 (UTC)

Spammer

Hi, I need some admin help. I found a spam only account that is adding external links, creating spam articles, and adding internal linkspam to those articles. Could you consider this one for an indefinite block please. Edit history: [12]. No hard feelings. Jehochman ^Talk 16:35, 5 August 2007 (UTC)

Really what needs to be done is for a user to be warned incrementally, we have a warning system where you can level up the warning template to a final warning and then if the user re-offends, you can create an entry here as a user-reported incident, the account will be blocked almost immediately. aliasd·U·T 16:58, 5 August 2007 (UTC)

In the edit history I see nothing but spamming and product promotion. He's previously received the full range of warnings and been blocked. [13]. Blocking policy states "accounts used primarily for disruption are blocked indefinitely." Warnings are good for users who are attempting to be productive but make some mistakes. This case is different because there is strong evidence of bad faith. Please have a look at the edit history and let me know what you think. I appreciate a second (or third) opinion. Jehochman ^Talk 17:10, 5 August 2007 (UTC)

He's been blocked before for the same thing and has been doing this consistently, so I see no probs with an indef block in this case... it's always open for another admin to unblock him on AGF later if he undertakes to behave. Orderinchaos 17:19, 5 August 2007 (UTC)

Thank you very much! Jehochman ^Talk 17:21, 5 August 2007 (UTC)

Heh, actually last night, I thought the process would be quicker than waiting for OIC to wake up, OIC, do you ever sleep? Anyway, sorry for being mostly unconstructive. aliasd·U·T 22:50, 5 August 2007 (UTC)

Returning

I have decided to return, mainly to focus on working on articles for Wikipedia:Australian Collaboration of the Fortnight. I will stay on so i can assist making the articles reach a Wikipedia:Good articles status. Thought i could at least do that with the spare time i do have. Boylo 03:35, 6 August 2007 (UTC)

• Thx for your words. I think i was overloading by being involved with so many Projects at the one time. This way i can stay focused and work with others in reaching a worthy goal.

20,000...

[14]

Just a marker for later. Orderinchaos 03:56, 6 August 2007 (UTC)

Freemans

CSD A7. Thewinchester ^(talk) 05:01, 6 August 2007 (UTC)

Infobox Government agency

Have just completed the field list, which I'd like your input on: User:Thewinchester/Sandbox/InfoboxGovtAgency. Cheers, Thewinchester ^(talk) 05:46, 6 August 2007 (UTC)

It's now in mainspace (Template:Infobox Government agency), but as you can see from the Department of Environment and Conservation (Western Australia) it's doing some weird things. There's a table marker appearing where it shouldn't, and the title of the Agency Exec is not appearing (something might be wrong with the nested if statement). Any ideas? Thewinchester ^(talk) 02:34, 7 August 2007 (UTC)

Cheers on that formatting fix. Still an issue with the agency exec position however, there's two fields involved in this There's the name of the actual executive (chief_name) which is displaying correctly, and there's another for their title (chief_position). chief position is only supposed to show when the chief_name field has a value, but the nested if there is not working. Thewinchester ^(talk) 02:54, 7 August 2007 (UTC)

Mister number two

Summaries are incorrect for some - it looks as tho mister longhair has cleaned up the template so cat doesnt have any dangly bits any more - thats good. SatuSuro 09:23, 6 August 2007 (UTC)

whatever/whenever - some you have summary for Perth when you did WA SatuSuro 09:25, 6 August 2007 (UTC)

I have lost faith in most bot devices/imitators anyways - they all seem to come to sticky ends SatuSuro 09:28, 6 August 2007 (UTC)

gmailSatuSuro 02:39, 11 August 2007 (UTC)

You are a racist

Why did you delete my post about the town of Umina? I am a proud Muslim and I Work on the Gosford City Council. There have been plans to build a Mosque on West Street in Umina. Please Retract your deletion —The preceding unsigned comment was added by LucyInTheSkyWith (talk • contribs) 02:15, August 7, 2007 (UTC)

Sheik en Bake? [15] It was obvious that this was a joke rather than a serious addition. While the juvenile side of me found it funny, the Wikipedia editor in me knew it had to go. Orderinchaos 02:19, 7 August 2007 (UTC)

Agreed, also I doubt the Council will confirm that such a person as you claim to be works there, nor will the Council confirm that a Mosque is being built by that name. my Arabic speaking friend said there is no such thing as "Sheik en Bake" in Arabic. Also if you were going to have a go at vandalism you would have at least chosen a believable name that wouldn't arouse suspicion. Michellecrisp 02:23, 7 August 2007 (UTC)

EEK!! retract that edit, no need to start educating smarter, sneakier vandals! aliasd·U·T 03:15, 7 August 2007 (UTC)

Damn you OIC for being such a racist - we all know you secretly support One Nation :P Timeshift 02:28, 7 August 2007 (UTC)

Yea, saw it. I like the article showing Labor back to 56-44 more though :P Timeshift 02:54, 7 August 2007 (UTC)

Funny. Auroranorth 12:00, 9 August 2007 (UTC)

Baking

Yes, so many flaws in this vandal. It's also racist to satirise foreign languages. Michellecrisp 02:42, 7 August 2007 (UTC)

Sheik En-Bake

Well look him up om google he is a spiritual leader. 'Speaking from his prayer mat in sector G9 at Guantanamo Bay, Cuba, Sheik En-Bake, leading cleric and fatwa retailer for Redeemer of the Martyr (not Catholic) Mosque, and the spiritual and political spokesperson for the Radical Islamists for Christian Elimination declared the results a "great day for the infidel.'

LucyInTheSkyWith, please sign your edits. you can simply sign them with a ~~~~ aliasd·U·T 01:02, 8 August 2007 (UTC)

Orphaned non-free image (Image:Icac.png)

Thanks for uploading Image:Icac.png. The image description page currently specifies that the image is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, the image is currently orphaned, meaning that it is not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the image was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that images for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).

If you have uploaded other unlicensed media, please check whether they're used in any articles or not. You can find a list of 'image' pages you have edited by clicking on the "my contributions" link (it is located at the very top of any Wikipedia page when you are logged in), and then selecting "Image" from the dropdown box. Note that any non-free images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. BetacommandBot 00:39, 8 August 2007 (UTC)

FFP

What do you think their chances are this election? Michael is confident that Family First will nationally get 6% or more in one house or the other that he's bet $10 with me on it... Timeshift 02:21, 9 August 2007 (UTC)

Unprotection

Re User talk:Auroranorth, I'd like my userpage protection reviewed. Thank you! Auroranorth 11:59, 9 August 2007 (UTC)

Thanks for your help with Speers Point, New South Wales' markup and referencing. Auroranorth 12:27, 9 August 2007 (UTC)

Little wobby coords

I know its not exactly a reliable source, due to dubious stitching of maps, however if you view little wobby in google earth you see that Little Wobby appears in parsley bay, which is clearly incorrect. Wobby is almost due east of Dangar Island and it has the tag {{Mapit-AUS-suburbscale|long=151.23810|lat=-33.54142}} versus {{coord|-33.549|151.235|format=dms|display=title}} for little wobby (using LTP approximation its 900m apart, which is reaonsable). Something is out, and im not sure whom, but if the reference exists, then that would be more correct. How do you get the coords for all these places? Some gov. website? User A1 15:32, 10 August 2007 (UTC)

Wikimania 2008

Hey! I'm contacting all the members of wikiproject Perth because, I have put in an incomplete bid for Perth to hold Wikimania 2008. Please show your support by adding your name to the list and help contribute by improving our bid which is incomplete and located here - thanks Talk to symode09's or How's my driving? 18:09, 10 August 2007 (UTC)

I don't think anyone who wants to host wikimania will be supporting us Talk to symode09's or How's my driving? 01:22, 11 August 2007 (UTC)

TfD

BTW: You might want to participate in the TFD I started on all the other Mapit-* templates at Wikipedia:Templates for deletion#Template:Mapit-Canada-cityscale. Last I checked, it is four unanimous votes for deletion the whole kit and kaboodle.--SallyForth123 01:42, 11 August 2007 (UTC)

Never a dull moment on this talk page. aliasd·U·T 04:41, 11 August 2007 (UTC)

You could say that again - what with that and this - its all go go go SatuSuro 05:28, 11 August 2007 (UTC)

DYK

On 11 August, 2007, Did you know? was updated with a fact from the article Cameron Park, New South Wales, which you created or substantially expanded. If you know of another interesting fact from a recently created article, then please suggest it on the Did you know? talk page.

--Wizardman 18:30, 11 August 2007 (UTC)

Reminder

Wikipedia:Meetup/Perth/3 is next sunday 19th August, if you haven't already please sign on the meetup page if your coming, if your still unsure indicate anyway so I can confirm numbers with the venue thankyou Gnangarra 00:48, 12 August 2007 (UTC)

Rail templates

I've asked JRG (talk · contribs) to stop reverting so that some discussion can occur. Best, Mackensen (talk) 14:39, 12 August 2007 (UTC)

I don't like the British-inspired rail templates with the colour bands in the middle and nor do a lot of other editors - we took them out of NSW pages a long time ago and resolved to keep them that way. For the GSR trains they are inaccurate and don't reflect the colour scheme properly. If someone can implement the design that I have now into a consistent Australia-wide template then I am happy to change it to that, but I'm not satisfied at present. I want to see Mackensen's suggestions at a compromise on this. JRG 05:46, 13 August 2007 (UTC)

John Howard

Page has been locked - as the only real place to report issues the government experiences is on the Prime Minister of the time's page, I find it quite simply a 'whitewash' to have the AWB/cole enquiry section on his page, there since it happened, removed a few months before the election. Your views? Timeshift 23:40, 12 August 2007 (UTC)

Joe Hockey: And what the public doesn't know is that SEVENTY PERCENT of the Labor Party are former trade unionists! Really? He means there's a Labour Party that's based on trade unionists as a part of the labour movement? What a scandal!... real world: God Hockey's a moron. Timeshift 22:30, 13 August 2007 (UTC)

Stuff

Hope you don't mind this:[16][17] - it saves typing time for those of us that visit you often. Just delete them if you don't like them.

I would have thought the "Description" would contain information on location, extents, facilities and management, with just a little on the key landscape factors (i.e. plain, sand, heath), and maybe something on the conservation significance of the park. Most of the detailed stuff currently in the description probably belongs in a "Natural history" section. Actually, ideally there would be an article on the Lesueur subregion of the Geraldton Sandplains, with a detailed description of geology, topography, biogeography, vegetation, flora, fauna, climate, etc. Then the park article would simply say that it is typical of the Lesueur region, i.e. heath on sand with low relief.

Our heath is very different from the global understanding of heath. We need an article on kwongan, but since we don't have one yet, I would get in the habit of referring to our heath as proteaceous-myrtaceous heath. Also the Geraldton Sandplains heath is extremely rich in endemics, and this would bear mentioning.

Hesperian 02:06, 13 August 2007 (UTC)

• (Registered User:OIC as a doppelganger account) Orderinchaos 06:54, 13 August 2007 (UTC)

Census 2006 information

Hey Orderinchaos, How do you find the 2006 Census information? I have done 20 laps around the Census Website and it isn't intuitive. Mayfield doesn't even come up! I have a choice of Mayfield East or West and I only get a population figure of 3130, which is way lower than what is in Mayfield. Macr237 02:14, 13 August 2007 (UTC)

Revert

I have reverted your removal of the picture and timezones at Speers Point, New South Wales. In my opinion, the timezones should stay, and I can't see why the picture can't stay either. Auroranorth 12:01, 13 August 2007 (UTC)

Thanks

Thanks. —Preceding unsigned comment added by TheJosh (talk • contribs) 02:40, August 16, 2007

Cheers

Just realised you donated $10 to the 40 hour famine. Thanks a lot for you generosity. https://secure.famine.org.nz/faminebook.aspx?username=hamedog . BTW, don't bother replying, I've actually left Wikipedia, first time back on here for months! Thanks again, --Hamedog_Talk|^@ 07:06, 17 August 2007 (UTC)

Mapit-AUS-suburbscale

You're welcome. It was Adam.J.W.C. who reported the problem at Wikipedia:Help desk#Contents boxes. PrimeHunter 21:20, 19 August 2007 (UTC)

David Marr

Interesting [18]. Recurring dreams 07:48, 21 August 2007 (UTC)

AU article statistics

User:Moondyne/Australia related article statistics, per our discussion the other day. —Moondyne 08:42, 21 August 2007 (UTC)

Day Dawn

I have decided - regardless of any who might wish to argue to the contrary - to start a stub of day dawn - even if it had a 20 year long life and that was it. I would appreciate it if you put a watch on it - as t might take more more than a day to show why cue and day dawn need sep arts - ta SatuSuro 08:04, 22 August 2007 (UTC)

Moondyne has slipped in and obviously ransacked henrietta and made a great go of it - no need to worry about it at all - all in one overnight go! cripes SatuSuro 01:00, 23 August 2007 (UTC)

Sandover

After our discussions tonight I went looking to turns Jewells daughter married William Sandover of William Sandover & Co. His brother younger brother Alfred Sandover who was part owner of WS & Co was the one who provided the Sandover Medal, but it has given cause to consider two new articles. Gnangarra 13:23, 23 August 2007 (UTC)

reply

yes I see what you're saying, it's a fine line, but it's where someone is editing on wikipedia for the sole purpose of pushing an agenda where issues really come up, as I said to Lester I don't think being a member of a political party is really too much of an issue as there would be tens of thousands of members of parties, being more aware of issues within a party and being well connected to get good sources would be an advantage. it just seemed to me that PJ is pushing a partisan line on these pages which really should not be welcome. WikiTownsvillian 14:57, 26 August 2007 (UTC)

It may be because it's late but I have no idea what those two are :) perhaps Exclusive Brethren? WikiTownsvillian 15:15, 26 August 2007 (UTC)

What do you think of this proposal? WikiTownsvillian 10:38, 27 August 2007 (UTC)

I liked it personally, but you may wish to include the leader of the nats (deputy pm - currently Vaile, previous anderson - i believe) in the lead too. Twenty Years 10:57, 27 August 2007 (UTC)

Let's not forget Tim Fischer either (first Nats deputy PM under Howard), who probably had a higher profile than either of the above. Orderinchaos 06:32, 28 August 2007 (UTC)

Thanks for the encouragement, I'll be bold and do the article now. Cheers, WikiTownsvillian 08:53, 28 August 2007 (UTC)

Bats

I think im pretty good for info currently, Cheers anyway. Will have to go in there myself one day and compile a few bits and pieces. Twenty Years 04:28, 27 August 2007 (UTC)

census template

Thanks for the heads-up. At this stage I have always used |quick=on, and will probably continue to unless I wish to refer to something that can only be found in the BCP. Hopefully, the UCL data wont be far behind. Cheers, Mattinbgn\ ^talk 22:27, 27 August 2007 (UTC)

124.149.1.111

Can admin block this user or is that too hard to do? I noticed all he has contributed is to vandalise pages. -- Macr237 10:00, 30 August 2007 (UTC)

Thanks OIC, I had a strange feeling that, that was the case. At least he is stopped for 24hrs. -- Macr237 10:06, 30 August 2007 (UTC)

Warning

I regret that I have to tell you that removing a referenced assertion that Claude Martin has seven schools named after him as cruft appears to be just a vendetta. Can you please return this to how it was. I am happy for you to remove the cruft (and I admit there is some) but wikipedia should not suffer because someone wants to make a point. Victuallers 10:21, 30 August 2007 (UTC)

In the interests of affording you a speedy reply, and with my own warning that I cannot talk on behalf of OIC, there are a few points to consider here:

• With the title of your section here, you seem to be threatening OIC to bend to your point of view, or you would bring 'consequences' upon him. This is not a good approach when trying to open a dialogue with a seasoned administrator.
• A reference does not automatically mark a section of text as relevant or important. Referenced information can still be removed like anything else.
• You are both in agreement that this is cruft. Do you really think this information, if you are sure it belongs in the article, belongs in the lead? Have you considered that you may have been able to incorporate sections of this text elsewhere in the article and there it may not be an issue?

I know this discussion does not directly involve me, but I think it is a good thing when editors try to reach an amicable agreement initially, before flinging dung at each other, and I try to encourage this whenever possible. aliasd·U·T 13:06, 30 August 2007 (UTC)

OIC

You>MSN>Online :-) Timeshift 10:19, 28 August 2007 (UTC)