User talk:StormcrowMithrandir

Hello, StormcrowMithrandir, and welcome to Wikipedia! I hope you like the place and decide to stay. Here are some pages you might find helpful:

I hope you enjoy editing here and being a Wikipedian! Please sign your name on talk pages using four tildes (~~~~); this will automatically produce your name and the date. If you need help, please see our help pages, and if you can't find what you are looking for there, please feel free to ask me on my talk page or place {{Help me}} on this page and someone will drop by to help. Red Director (talk) 03:44, 3 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Copying within Wikipedia requires attribution

Thank you for your contributions to Wikipedia. It appears that you copied or moved text from Australian English into Australian English vocabulary. While you are welcome to re-use Wikipedia's content, here or elsewhere, Wikipedia's licensing does require that you provide attribution to the original contributor(s). When copying within Wikipedia, this is supplied at minimum in an edit summary at the page into which you've copied content, disclosing the copying and linking to the copied page, e.g., copied content from [[page name]]; see that page's history for attribution. It is good practice, especially if copying is extensive, to also place a properly formatted {{copied}} template on the talk pages of the source and destination. The attribution has been provided for this situation, but if you have copied material between pages before, even if it was a long time ago, please provide attribution for that duplication. You can read more about the procedure and the reasons at Wikipedia:Copying within Wikipedia. Thank you. If you are the sole author of the prose that was copied, attribution is not required. — Diannaa 🍁 (talk) 13:45, 13 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Disambiguation link notification for June 9

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. An automated process has detected that when you recently edited Australia, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Victoria (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver). Such links are usually incorrect, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of unrelated topics with similar titles. (Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.)

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 14:31, 9 June 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Disambiguation link notification for June 16

An automated process has detected that when you recently edited Post-war immigration to Australia, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page European (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver).

(Opt-out instructions.) --DPL bot (talk) 13:31, 16 June 2019 (UTC)[reply]

New Brisbane skyline image

Hi StormcrowMithrandir, I left a new message on the Brisbane talk page regarding changing the current skyline image which dates from 2012 to one from 2019 which I think is a much better image. Please come to add your thoughts.--Caltraser55 (talk) 04:59, 14 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]

revert at Australian English

Hi - a polite heads up, I rolled back your revert. I've made a comment on the talk page, happy to continue the discussion there, but to emphasise my point: the issue is not difference, but *considerable* difference; every source indicates that New Zealand English and Australian English are very similar (when compared to other varieties).--Goldsztajn (talk) 09:16, 22 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]

White people

Just saw your update at White people. You have quite accurately reflected what the seemingly high quality source says, but I've got my doubts about those numbers, or perhaps more particularly, the wording in the document. To explain my point, I'll copy the relevant chunk of the article....

"We estimate that about 58 per cent of the population has an Anglo-Celtic background. An estimated 18 per cent of the population has a European background, 21 per cent of the population has a non-European background, and 3 per cent of the population has an Aboriginal or Torres Strait Islander (Indigenous) background."

My concern is that those descriptions are mutually exclusive, and they add up to precisely 100%. but they make no allowance for what must be millions of Australians who are a mixture of two or more of those categories. For starters, most people who identify as Aboriginal have mixed ancestry. A lot of people I know, including myself, have partly British and partly European ancestry. My brother married a lady from Sri-Lanka, so his kids are partly British, partly European, and partly non-European. So, I'm not sure what writers of that article were thinking of, but I don't like their figures much at all.

Now, I'm not criticising your efforts at all here, just wondering if you can see the problem I'm seeing. HiLo48 (talk) 08:40, 17 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, they note in the source which is purely from their analysis of the individual ancestry responses in the census, they note that that figure is for those of pure European ethnicity. Anyone with non European ethnicity they deem to be other. This is why on the main articles for Australian demographics we only use data for individual ancestries as per the census and we do not use estimates such as this one which focus on broad ethnicities/races as distinct from ancestries to avoid the very problem you've identified - this way, people of both full and part decent of the various ethnicities are counted just as the ABS intends. Only where such broad ethnic categories are discussed in such separate articles as these do we have to refer to them. Clearly though of course it's superior to the flat 22,000,000 / 90% pure speculative nonsensical figure that was used on this page previously - this measure is flawed but superior to anything else we have where we are forced to refer to broad racial categories. If we want to be more accurate we would properly say 76% (full European ethnicity) or (excludes partial European ethnicity). This would be the absolute best we could do with what we have.--StormcrowMithrandir 10:30, 17 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]

I'm certain that I answered "Australian" to the question on ancestry. I believe around 30% of us did. So where does the ABS get its figures from? HiLo48 (talk) 10:59, 17 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Self identified of course as per every other nation. Thus you along with 30% of the rest of the population are listed as Australian ancestry. For the broad racial estimate linked on the white people article (which of course is not from ABS) they have just counted 'Australian' response toward the Anglo Celtic European category on the basis that ABS previously commented that most people nominating Australian are admixture of the various Anglo Celtic ancestries. Like I say it's far from perfect which is why we don't use it on any of the main articles, only when we are forced to address a broad racial category like in this stand alone article as it's unfortunately the best we have to go on for that purpose and clearly superior to the mere guess which was there before.--StormcrowMithrandir 11:11, 17 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Hmmm. That's certainly not what I meant when I chose "Australian". Do we have to include anything at all? Or, if we must, can we at least qualify it in some way to explain it as you have just done? The figures are not a sensible estimate. They are simply wrong. HiLo48 (talk) 17:22, 17 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Just to add, I'd recommend that, rather than including figures that are nonsensical, we should replace the final sentence with "Australia today makes no formal attempt at all attempt to describe any fraction of its population as white." HiLo48 (talk) 23:47, 17 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Yes it's a mandatory question (unlike religion) and there is some explanation to the effect that you choose either one or two and an 'ancestor' is usually more distant than a grandparent. That's the good system though that we use as it allows for multiple responses. Only Canada has a similarly ideal system in their census. Thus relates to individual ancestries such as 'irish' or 'chinese' however and is completely seperate and distinct from the more vague broad categories like white people above which other countries use which deliberately doesn't go on any of the main Aus demographic pages as it is so unideal compared to what our actual census provides by way of individual ancestries. For a page such as white people which relates to a vague category which we don't take census data on I'm fully agreeable for you to just say Australia does not collect data on this topic.--StormcrowMithrandir 00:27, 18 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks, and thanks for the chat. I wondered where I could discuss this issue, and thought the Talk page of the article itself would be unlikely to see any responses from other Australians or people interested in the Australian data (or lack of it). HiLo48 (talk) 03:18, 18 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]

I'd say you'd be right about that. Thanks mate!--StormcrowMithrandir 03:57, 18 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Disambiguation link notification for October 20

An automated process has detected that when you recently edited Australian English, you added links pointing to the disambiguation pages Grifter and Popsicle (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver).

(Opt-out instructions.) --DPL bot (talk) 07:41, 20 October 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Disambiguation link notification for October 27

An automated process has detected that you recently added links to disambiguation pages.

Brisbane (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver)

added links pointing to Milton, Gold Coast, Sunshine Coast, Spring Hill and Kelvin Grove

(Opt-out instructions.) --DPL bot (talk) 08:07, 27 October 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Disambiguation link notification for November 3

An automated process has detected that when you recently edited Brisbane, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Albert River (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver).

(Opt-out instructions.) --DPL bot (talk) 07:18, 3 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Copying within Wikipedia requires attribution (2nd request)

Thank you for your contributions to Wikipedia. It appears that you copied or moved text from Australia into Politics of Australia. While you are welcome to re-use Wikipedia's content, here or elsewhere, Wikipedia's licensing does require that you provide attribution to the original contributor(s). When copying within Wikipedia, this is supplied at minimum in an edit summary at the page into which you've copied content, disclosing the copying and linking to the copied page, e.g., copied content from [[page name]]; see that page's history for attribution. It is good practice, especially if copying is extensive, to also place a properly formatted {{copied}} template on the talk pages of the source and destination. The attribution has been provided for this situation, but if you have copied material between pages before, even if it was a long time ago, please provide attribution for that duplication. You can read more about the procedure and the reasons at Wikipedia:Copying within Wikipedia. Thank you. If you are the sole author of the prose that was copied, attribution is not required. — Diannaa 🍁 (talk) 12:12, 4 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]

ArbCom 2019 election voter message

Hello! Voting in the 2019 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23:59 on Monday, 2 December 2019. All eligible users are allowed to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once.

The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail.

If you wish to participate in the 2019 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. If you no longer wish to receive these messages, you may add {{NoACEMM}} to your user talk page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 00:24, 19 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]

ABS URLs

Could you please create full citations not just naked URLs. There are tools out there that make it automatic in some cases. Have you tried the Visual Editor (go to Preferences > Editing > and set Editing mode to "show me both tabs"), then you can use its Cite > Automatic or if that won't work, Cite Manual with a form to make it easier. Happy to help if you need it. Kerry (talk) 08:26, 1 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]

@Kerry Raymond: My apologies Kerry I had been meaning to learn how to do that, and will do so. StormcrowMithrandir 23:49, 11 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Disambiguation link notification for April 12

An automated process has detected that when you recently edited Brisbane, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Mount Pleasant (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver).

(Opt-out instructions.) --DPL bot (talk) 12:09, 12 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Brisbane Montage

Greetings Mithrandir, I appreciate your efforts to improve the article of Brisbane and peoples perception of this great city, I do however object to the removal of Queenslander architecture from the montage image. While South Bank Parklands is certainly Brisbane's most important tourism precinct, identity and iconic are two different things. Double decker buses are identifiably "London", its part of the cultural landscape of that city. And those sorts of things form a cities identity in a day and age when all buildings the world over look the same, etc. Identity of cities is becoming increasingly harder to form, if you want to look at how lucky Brisbane is to have something as iconic as the Queenslander, go look at the Sydney talk page discussion on making a montage of Sydney, they can't come to ANY conclusion of what is Sydney's identity. They put up images of the beach (but that makes west Sydney unhappy because it doesn't represent them), then they put up terraces (but terraces aren't uniquely Sydney), etc and so on and so on. The Queenslander house is identifiably Brisbane, it may not be a tourism drawcard (yet!), but it does differentiate Brisbane from any other city in the world, our inner suburbs are defined by these quaint buildings and that gives Brisbane her identity that unites the city, rather than the mess poor Sydney is still trying to find its identity. Like the City Cat (Brisbane's version of the double decker bus), and Jacaranda trees, etc they are Brisbane's identity.--Caltraser55 (talk) 10:17, 19 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]

@Caltraser55: Upon reading that I am in full agreement that we need the Queenslander - thank you. You and I are on the same "page" re what we are trying to do for this page.StormcrowMithrandir 10:44, 19 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]

And let me just say I also tried to have an image of South Bank as part of the montage but Kerry Raymond wanted an image of a city cat. At the time I was annoyed with the decision and didn't like it, but now I wouldn't replace that either, Queenslanders and City Cats are part of Brisbane's identity, and that counts. Something like the Story Bridge I would consider an icon but not an identity (if that makes sense), and I think the Story Bridge is a great icon of Brisbane but I would rather swap that for South Bank than anything other as you could argue its just a bridge similar to many others the world over. Sorry I ramble.--Caltraser55 (talk) 11:16, 19 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]

@Caltraser55:Just found the perfect clearer Story Bridge image with CityCat large passing under in foreground - screams Brisbane - I think both are very iconic.StormcrowMithrandir 11:19, 19 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Yeah just saw that, it looks much better. If I could possibly make a suggestion, I would change the South Bank Parklands image to an image of the Bougainvillea Arbour, which to me personally has always been the image I think of when I think of South Bank, though unfortunately I don't think there's many good images of it. Looks great nonetheless.--Caltraser55 (talk) 11:24, 19 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]

I also started the Cuisine of Brisbane page if you wanted to check that out!--Caltraser55 (talk) 11:24, 19 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]

@Caltraser55: I was also thinking of the arbour and previewed a few before streets beach area - if you look on the commons the photos (although I only looked at the first 250) are pretty uninspiring/nondescript when they are displayed as a small thumbnail image in the sidebar and you can't work out what it is unless you're familiar with it - some of these things people just need to take and upload better photos - Flickr generally has good pics of everything but 95% have rights reserved. Yes I saw the cuisine article and linked it under see also today. Next time I have time to do a bunch of editing work I had on my list to add some further stuff to cuisine as well - nice work. Main article is looking pretty good now except for the utilities section which I plan to do a bunch extra on transport etc when I have time - best of the Australian capital city articles although Sydney would be if they weren't constantly obstructing a montage for such an iconic city - harbour bridge, opera house, Bondi, Sydney ferry, QVB - how hard could it be!StormcrowMithrandir 11:41, 19 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for the praise, I say likewise to you for your work in the architecture section. And yes I feel pretty bad for Sydney's image being held back by pointless bickering. Make a montage, any montage, no matter how bad it is it gives you a base to work from, then over time you can craft it down into something good that captures the place.--Caltraser55 (talk) 11:48, 19 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Disambiguation link notification for April 25

An automated process has detected that when you recently edited Brisbane, you added links pointing to the disambiguation pages Sunshine Coast and Captain Cook Bridge (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver).

(Opt-out instructions.) --DPL bot (talk) 12:07, 25 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Capitalisation of QLD

Hi there! I saw your reversion of my edit to Queensland. HiLo48 and myself are having a conversation about this on my talk page, but since this is an unexpectedly controversial edit, I'd like to suggest that we pick up this conversation on the article's talk page. Australia Post's official determination capitalises all states and territory abbreviations, which would mean that it would be right to capitalise it. Nonetheless, let's have a civil conversation about this. ItsPugle (talk) 10:24, 29 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Disambiguation link notification for May 25

An automated process has detected that you recently added links to disambiguation pages.

Parliament of Queensland (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver)

added a link pointing to Imperial Parliament

Queensland (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver)

added a link pointing to Redcliffe

(Opt-out instructions.) --DPL bot (talk) 11:10, 25 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Disambiguation link notification for June 1

An automated process has detected that when you recently edited Parliament of Queensland, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Imperial Parliament (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver).

(Opt-out instructions.) --DPL bot (talk) 05:24, 1 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Need some help

Hi Stormcrow, the Brisbane city montage has been removed by User:HappyWaldo, without any prior discussion he removed it. Coincidentally HappyWaldo is also a Melburnian and seems perfectly happy for the Melbourne page to be represented by a montage, but apparently he's unhappy that Brisbane has one, probably because it makes him feel insecure about his own city or that Brisbane's rise threatens Melbourne on the national stage. I don't know how to retrieve the previous montage, so could you help out with the page please?--Caltraser55 (talk) 14:13, 4 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]

I gave a very clear reason in the edit summary for why I removed the montage: the landmarks featured are already shown in the article body. The montage is therefore pointless and goes against MOS guidelines, which ask for variety MOS:PERTINENCE. Showing the same buildings again and again is not variety, but "decoration", which the guidelines advise against. I then swapped in a different image of the Treasury Building, because I felt that such a great building deserves a better image. So your claim that I'm insecure about Brisbane due to some petty regional rivalry is hilariously weird and off the mark. - HappyWaldo (talk) 15:19, 4 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]

It is simply not appropriate to unilaterally delete content which has long been on the article - there has been a montage for many years on this article arrived at by the editors. It is also consistent with most other Australian and world city articles. The only image which has another image of the same subject matter in the article body is the Story Bridge and this is fine - many city articles will have 2 images of their most famous landmark from different aspects. All of us will be aware how controversial any change to montage-related questions is from the Sydney talk page which makes this edit all the more inappropriate. If you seek to remove it, take it to the talk page and obtain a consensus and that will be fine. That is the only way it should occur. Also, altering any images which are problematic would be a far less controversial proposal to the editors of this article than removing the montage. For instance, the Cultural Centre shot could be removed if you have an issue with several of its constituent buildings being individually portrayed in the article or the City Hall image could simply be changed to another one if you are concerned about the top of the tower being cropped as you have flagged.--StormcrowMithrandir 05:07, 5 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]

ArbCom 2020 Elections voter message

Hello! Voting in the 2020 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23:59 (UTC) on Monday, 7 December 2020. All eligible users are allowed to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once.

The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail.

If you wish to participate in the 2020 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. If you no longer wish to receive these messages, you may add {{NoACEMM}} to your user talk page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 03:00, 24 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Queensland

thank you for your edit 1. Executive is a branch of a government : head of state , parliament, cabinets, government department all come under it .. not just Queensland government .. i reckon you should write Body
2. federated state is not a type of government. Constitutional monarchy is enough u can add Parliamentary if you want
3. No need write Australian State

use this link for more help https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Template:Infobox_settlement

Muzi (talk) 07:34, 25 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Style Manual: For Authors, Editors and Printers moved to draftspace

An article you recently created, Style Manual: For Authors, Editors and Printers, is not suitable as written to remain published. It needs more citations from reliable, independent sources. (?) Information that can't be referenced should be removed (verifiability is of central importance on Wikipedia). I've moved your draft to draftspace (with a prefix of "Draft:" before the article title) where you can incubate the article with minimal disruption. When you feel the article meets Wikipedia's general notability guideline and thus is ready for mainspace, please click on the "Submit your draft for review!" button at the top of the page. Onel5969 ^{TT me} 16:25, 10 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Brisbane Info Box

Not majorly concerned with you taking those away, by 2023 Brisbane will have several major new landmarks appear on that list; Queen's Wharf, Victoria Park, etc. I do think though that Riparian Plaza deserves to be there, it is one of the most iconic Australian designs of a skyscraper, key is 'Australian'. What Melbourne calls 'iconic' like Collins 101 is really a copy of American post-modernism and not representative of an Australian vernacular in architecture. Really, Riparian in my view is Australia's most iconic skyscraper, just guesswork but I'd say were Riparian in Sydney rather than Brisbane it would be far more appraised as an icon of Australian post-modernism.--Caltraser5 (talk) 11:14, 13 June 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Yeah good point. Also correct that MLC, another Seidler building, in Sydney gets more attention despite being much less interesting. I agree it is Brisbane's most significant. Unfortunately public recognition of 1 William appears to be higher despite its design being pretty non-descript. I actually like 101 and 120 Collins despite them being derivative. A lot of the 80s-90s buildings like those, Rialto, Governor Philip in Sydney are much more memorable than all the cookie cutter residential stuff particularly in Melbourne in the last decade - also the two Meritons/Aurora here... Shame it looks like the days of 200+m office buildings are gone with them all moving to massive floor plans.StormcrowMithrandir 11:38, 13 June 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Agreed, it's evident its Sydney-centrism at work, I do think though that once Brisbane is confirmed as the 2032 Olympic host city it will start to slowly take that influence away from Sydney and Melbourne, especially since Brisbane is now the fastest growing city in Australia and not to mention has a bunch of major cities around it; Gold Coast, Sunshine Coast, Toowoomba, Springfield, etc, whereas Melbourne and Sydney are actually pretty isolated with no big cities near them. And couple that with unaffordable housing, and Brisbane's far more spread out cities each with their own CBDs I do think Brisbane is actually going to take the mantle away from Sydney by the end of this decade. Unlike Sydney or Melbourne, Brisbane already has Australia's largest airport (also the cheapest airport for airlines to operate out of due to no night curfew over bayside) and its the best placed with existing rail and future metro links, it's closer to Asia and the Great Barrier Reef and north of Sydney so closer for a lot of international tourists wanting to come here so I do think it will end up becoming the airport most airlines will want to fly to thus making Brisbane Australia's international gateway. I'm really quite determined to see Brisbane usurp the southern cities, I think first impressions matter.

Not to be arrogant but I think a large part of all of Brisbane's rising has been from me, I was the first person to recognise the Queenslander house as an icon of this city rather than just a passing interest, for the longest time I tried to work out what I could put into the wiki photomontage to help sell the 'image' of Brisbane, and eventually seeing an article I saw a review by a German tourist to Brisbane, they found Brisbane to be boring but in it they stated the most fascinating thing here was the quaint houses completely unlike anything in Europe, and it was sort of a light bulb moment lol. I really do believe in the theory of value=icon, basically you can say somethings iconic and it will have no value, but if you say something has value than it becomes iconic, and that's when I pressured other wiki editors to include the Queenslander in the photomontages, giving it value where it had previously been ignored has thus given it an iconic status.Although they were always iconic, but you get what I'm saying--Caltraser5 (talk) 11:38, 14 June 2021 (UTC)[reply]

A wise move. It is correct that no other city in Australia has its own distinctive architectural style specific to the city (and in fact, I would say that even the vast majority of much older and larger cities overseas lack a specific architectural style that is not found in other large cities). We will have to see what the outcome is of the Olympic Games and impending large-scale interstate migration from NSW and Vic. The 'muh Sydney and Melbourne' meme is 150+ years old so could be difficult to kill.StormcrowMithrandir 11:50, 14 June 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Good point! Haha--Caltraser5 (talk) 14:34, 14 June 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Concern regarding Draft:Style Manual: For Authors, Editors and Printers

Hello, StormcrowMithrandir. This is a bot-delivered message letting you know that Draft:Style Manual: For Authors, Editors and Printers, a page you created, has not been edited in at least 5 months. Drafts that have not been edited for six months may be deleted, so if you wish to retain the page, please edit it again or request that it be moved to your userspace.

If the page has already been deleted, you can request it be undeleted so you can continue working on it.

Thank you for your submission to Wikipedia. FireflyBot (talk) 17:02, 10 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Your submission at Articles for creation: Style Manual: For Authors, Editors and Printers (October 30)

Your recent article submission to Articles for Creation has been reviewed! Unfortunately, it has not been accepted at this time. The reason left by Slywriter was:

This submission is not adequately supported by reliable sources. Reliable sources are required so that information can be verified. If you need help with referencing, please see Referencing for beginners and Citing sources.

The comment the reviewer left was:

Zero improvement before being submitted.

Please check the submission for any additional comments left by the reviewer. You are encouraged to edit the submission to address the issues raised and resubmit when they have been resolved.

If you would like to continue working on the submission, go to Draft:Style Manual: For Authors, Editors and Printers and click on the "Edit" tab at the top of the window.
If you now believe the draft cannot meet Wikipedia's standards or do not wish to progress it further, you may request deletion. Please go to Draft:Style Manual: For Authors, Editors and Printers, click on the "Edit" tab at the top of the window, add "{{Db-g7}}" at the top of the draft text and click the blue "publish changes" button to save this edit.
If you do not make any further changes to your draft, in 6 months, it will be considered abandoned and may be deleted.
If you need any assistance, or have experienced any untoward behavior associated with this submission, you can ask for help at the Articles for creation help desk, on the reviewer's talk page or use Wikipedia's real-time chat help from experienced editors.

Slywriter (talk) 14:09, 30 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, StormcrowMithrandir! Having an article declined at Articles for Creation can be disappointing. If you are wondering why your article submission was declined, please post a question at the Articles for creation help desk. If you have any other questions about your editing experience, we'd love to help you at the Teahouse, a friendly space on Wikipedia where experienced editors lend a hand to help new editors like yourself! See you there! Slywriter (talk) 14:09, 30 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Brisbane talk page

Since so many members on here apparently can't understand a simple logic, you're deleting factual information without ACTUAL reason.--Caltraser5 (talk) 03:36, 16 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

@Caltraser5: I truly believe focusing on the LGA diminishes Brisbane. People will just say its a city of 1.2 million, whereas for Sydney and Melbourne (and indeed Perth and Adelaide), noone will ever refer to or care about the LGA. It will never happen. Emphasising that draws attention to the population of the LGA and makes Brisbane look like a city of 1.2 million compared to Sydney's 5.3 million and Melbourne's 5.1 million as opposed to a city of 2.6 million vs Sydney's 5.3 and Melbourne's 5.1. On a similar level to Adelaide. The implication will be Sydney definitely includes Paramatta, the Northern Beaches, the Sutherland Shire, etc, Melbourne definitely includes Werribee, the Mornington Peninsula, etc, but Brisbane does not include Ipswich, Redcliffe, Redlands, etc simply because the LGA takes up a higher share of the metro area. Whenever people focus on LGAs as a special case for Brisbane, this is the impression it gives. I have seen this before.

I guarantee you, if you draw attention to the LGA, everyone knows the population of Sydney and Melbourne is 5 million (and no one will EVER say it is 150,000 or 200,000 or the 33rd largest city in Oz) but for Brisbane their eyes will go straight to the 1.2 million LGA population and say hey its 1/5th the size of Sydney and Melboure, about the same as Adelaide - this is why focussing on LGAs gives a false and negative view of Brisbane. StormcrowMithrandir 03:49, 16 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

ArbCom 2021 Elections voter message

Hello! Voting in the 2021 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23:59 (UTC) on Monday, 6 December 2021. All eligible users are allowed to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once.

The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail.

If you wish to participate in the 2021 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. If you no longer wish to receive these messages, you may add {{NoACEMM}} to your user talk page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 00:53, 23 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]

00:40, 31 December 2021 (UTC)

Overseas Chinese

It has been Identified that you were trying to delete a File of data Map chart that shows the data of (2019+MapChart), DON'T delete the file that represents new data it opposes several benefits even if it has an update of re-coloring. As you may think it updates the whole continent. Several continents were missed and not colored correctly, the next edits you made abuses several conditions made on Overseas Chinese if you undo another edit showing False citation (RIGHTS) and no benefit of the article you might be banned from editing Overseas Chinese. Don't oppose edits that improve articles, that is not helping or improving Users editing skills, In addition to that you deleted an important role in the Data (ALERT)

MrStephenLeon (talk) 20:05, 22 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

I have identified that you are in breach of Wikiedia's policies on vandalism and citation. You persist in making edits to claim a much larger number of Mexicans of Chinese ancestry than is identified in any cited source. You continue to make edits which make claims which have no citation. Worse than that, you actually tried to actively mislead by stating there are 1.9 or 2.3 million Mexicans of Chinese ancestry and referred to news articles which said no such thing. This is deliberately misleading and will result in a ban from Wikipedia.--StormcrowMithrandir 00:04, 23 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Continious over multiple reverts and deletion of other people edit from vandalism this is the last warning. You may be blocked from editing without further warning the next time you vandalize Wikipedia. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Kurec03 (talk • contribs) 10:17, 22 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]

If you had read it carefully, it is sourced from the government. The newspaper was just quoting him as the latest confirmed figures. The previous figure was just an estimate. Cyberxwiki (talk) 12:18, 15 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]

undefined ref in Australians

This edit of yours seems to have added an undefined named reference "censusdata.abs.gov.au" that still exists in the current version. Could you fix it please. Mitch Ames (talk) 23:19, 24 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Fixed this. Thank you for pointing it out.StormcrowMithrandir 10:00, 25 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Broken AfD

Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Overseas Asians appears broken. Do you want me to re-start it? Star Mississippi 19:17, 14 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Yes please! I couldn't figure out how to fix it.StormcrowMithrandir 05:34, 15 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks. @AssumeGoodWraith got to it before I did (thank you). @Sandstein is there any concern about this not having appeared on the logs, or is this functionally an A1/3? Star Mississippi 14:36, 15 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]

I'm not sure what the problem is; the AfD is transcluded on Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Log/2022 February 6 and Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Log/2022 February 15. Sandstein 14:51, 15 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]

I think the one on 2/15 (now deleted) is @AssumeGoodWraith's second one, which they since requested G7 housekeeping on since they were able to fix Stormcrow's original. Until 2/15 when AGW fixed it, it was a malformatted AfD to which no one could contribute. My only issue is process, I agree with you that there was no article there. Star Mississippi 15:06, 15 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Disambiguation link notification for July 18

An automated process has detected that when you recently edited Vietnamese Australians, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Victoria.

(Opt-out instructions.) --DPL bot (talk) 09:21, 18 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]

ArbCom 2022 Elections voter message

Hello! Voting in the 2022 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23:59 (UTC) on Monday, 12 December 2022. All eligible users are allowed to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once.

The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail.

If you wish to participate in the 2022 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. If you no longer wish to receive these messages, you may add {{NoACEMM}} to your user talk page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 01:42, 29 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Nomination for deletion of Template:British and American English terms not widely used in Australian English

Template:British and American English terms not widely used in Australian English has been nominated for deletion. You are invited to comment on the discussion at the entry on the Templates for discussion page. – Jonesey95 (talk) 04:15, 30 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Wikipedia research project at University of Technology, Sydney

Hi! I'm a researcher at the University of Technology, Sydney, on the "Wikipedia: our nation's story" research project. Our focus for this year is on Australian place articles: primarily, Katoomba, NSW, Tasmania, and Australia. I would love to interview you about your work on the Tasmania article if you were interested! You can reply here, on my user talk page or find my email on my user page. Very best! Francesca FSidotiUTS (talk) 21:13, 13 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

ArbCom 2024 Elections voter message

Hello! Voting in the 2024 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23:59 (UTC) on Monday, 2 December 2024. All eligible users are allowed to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once.

The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail.

If you wish to participate in the 2024 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. If you no longer wish to receive these messages, you may add {{NoACEMM}} to your user talk page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 00:41, 19 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]