User talk:SauliH/Archive2

ACOTF

Hi SauliH. If yo want to nominate Burke and Wills expedition (or anything else) for ACOTF, click the link under Wikipedia:Australian Collaboration of the Fortnight#Nominations, then follow the instruction in the comment at the bottom to make your nomination look like the others. Also add " | collaboration-candidate=yes " to the {{WP Australia}} template on the article's talk page to add it to Category:Australia collaboration candidates. Thanks. --Scott Davis ^Talk 02:57, 10 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

An Automated Message from HagermanBot

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 name 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! HagermanBot 03:10, 15 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks :)

Thanks for your kind comments. I was doing the box and saw the article was badly in need of attention (and had been tagged as such for six months) so thought I'd go through. Hopefully the Newcastle ones won't require quite so much attention! :) I've been less active on the conversions as I'm trying to get my political map of Melbourne done atm. (One of my hobbies is mapping how people vote, and also mapping census details and comparing the two - it's interesting what myths I've managed to explode thus far) Orderinchaos78 08:38, 15 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Recent

Very valid most recent additions - but the bussels and others spent more time settled and procreating rather than exploring - diffuclt that one as they were important ground breakers in the Leeuwin Naturaliste region anyway - oh well - my favourite is Dale - there are inadequate records of Dales movements in the Helena Valley but my current house and previous house are within woopee of his initial foray into the Darling Scarp you've hit my home territory! SatuSuro 06:15, 16 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Commodity Fetishism

I believe that Diamonds are definitely related to commodity fetishism, much like gold or sports cars, as diamonds have little value except for what we perceive their value to be.

Banks

There's only one genus, Banksia, but I count 15 species with specific epithet "banksii" and a further three with specific epithet "banksiana". There's no way to know for certain that these were all named for Joe without going back to the original publications. Hesperian 06:33, 19 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Jewelry and Gem project

Absolutely. Count me in. It's funny you should mention it because it DID strike me that wikipedia was underdeveloped in that area, much more than the geology or mineralogy pages. Vsmith is very active there I noticed. In any case, it also reflects the internet as a whole, where I find mineral dealers, mineralogical info much more developed than jewelry and gems. The only exception is the really commercial arena of diamonds/engagement rings and a number of internet jewelry retailers as well as brick and mortars (Zales and www.jewelry.com (which sells to Zales and JC Penney etc. for example).

Let me have a look at your project definition and I can make some comments on here ? Or where ? Ofcourse Christmas IS coming up *wink*.

Cheers,

Gem-fanat 10:30, 20 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I think just tagging the WP to certain articles may be the best and simplest approach. (But I have no experience with what is "tradition" in WP projects). Furthermore I would not try to mix it with rocks and minerals. The projects gets way too large and the dynamics are simply different. Where there is overlap is mostly, with the gemstone minerals.. such as sapphire, ruby etc. There is a clear inclination to make those pages as scientific as possible, and whilst I do not exactly agree, I do not think it's wise to start an edit-war on this. We can choose to leave these pages alone for now, since they are also pretty well developed. There is still a lot left with regards to mining, history of gemstones, certain characteristics etc. The overlap I see with those pages is actually to bring in the gemological point of view, something which has not been done much such as treatments and other aspects. I also see that editors on those pages have no clue which references are really valuable as some of the top experts in the gemological world had been kicked out, whilst being called "self-proclaimed". Therefore there is definitely added value, without having to break the existing structure: we could add 1 or more paragraphs as far as they pertain to the gemological relationship. What is your background in the jewelry-retail industry exactly ?

Gem-fanat 23:35, 22 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Well you've done an impressive amount of edits since October ! Let me think a day or so about the WP. I think announcing may be a good idea, to formalize the matter. Then perhaps link it to some articles but I am not sure if there is a procedure for that or that any project can simply do that. I also am a bit concerned to have endless definitions of each type of page, but I guess we could work at some form of a template. Or else some boundary conditions. I prefer to spend a bit more time on editing pages etc... then on all the "meta-stuff". Let me think about it for a day or two :-)

Gem-fanat 00:16, 23 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Canning stock route

Is an exceptionally bad article - problem is I am unlikely to do anything about it in the near future unfortunately. SatuSuro 16:15, 28 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Considerable numbers of above the tropic of carpicorn articles show excessive uncited anecdotal rubbish and irritatingly zilch undertsanding of historical context. Oh well, thats life. (I took my two younger children on a tall ship for the first time today - a good incitement to get back to the maritime project rather than tagging errant west australian and indonesian arts)SatuSuro 16:23, 28 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Favenc index

OK, I'll leave Favenc alone, and may be concentrate on translating Jules Dumont d'Urville from Italian with the help of Google and a pocket dictionary. You seem to have been up all night. --Grahamec 00:54, 29 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks

Thanks for the barnstar and the kind words. Only 4 to go! - Mattinbgn 12:55, 29 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]