User talk:Tonyob

Welcome!

Hello Tonyob, and welcome to Wikipedia! Thank you for your contributions. I hope you like the place and decide to stay. Unfortunately, one or more of your edits have not conformed to Wikipedia's Neutral Point of View policy, and have been reverted. Wikipedia articles should refer only to facts and interpretations that have been stated in print or on reputable websites or other forms of media.

There's a page about the NPOV policy that has tips on how to effectively write about disparate points of view without compromising the NPOV status of the article as a whole. If you are stuck, and looking for help, please come to the New contributors' help page, where experienced Wikipedians can answer any queries you have! Or, you can just type {{helpme}} on your user page, and someone will show up shortly to answer your questions. Here are a few other good links for newcomers:

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 have any questions, check out Wikipedia:Where to ask a question or ask me on my talk page. Again, welcome! -- Longhair\^talk 09:14, 12 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Article in need of cleanup - please assist if you can

The article Assault rifle, to which you have helped contribute, has been flagged as requiring cleanup.

If possible, we would appreciate your assistance in cleaning up this article to bring it up to Wikipedia's quality standards. If you are unsure what the nature of the problem is, please discuss this on the article's talk page.
You have been left this message by PocKleanBot, an automated process that notifies editors that articles to which they may have contributed on more than one occasion in the past now need cleanup. If you have any comments or object to this message being left, please leave a message on PocKleanBot's talk page.

Australian Standard Garratt

I've just noted your work on Garratt, thank you.

You have written an informative paragraph on the Australian Standard Garratt. Were you aware there is already an article on this locomotive?

I have a bit of a problem in leaving your paragraph in the article. That is not because it is not well written and referenced, but because there is already an article, and to give the ASG so much space is I think giving it too much weight in this article on two grounds:

- the class was short lived in comparision with many other garratt classes, and generally had little influence on most of the railways it operated on.

- there is a danger this article will become Australian-centric. Garratts were far more prominent in Africa, and also prominent in Asia and South America. Natually there are a number of Australian authors on Wikipedia, and so we should be careful not to give the article too much of an Australian bias.

Can I suggest that you transfer your infomation to the ASG article, and then we can construct a link to that article, perhape in a paragraph that also mentions other wartime Garratt classes.

Cheers,

--Michael Johnson 23:19, 17 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I'm think you might be a little confused about the APC garratts. They purchaced two from BG prior to WW2, almost identical to the WA Ms class and the VR G class (apart from gauge, and being outside framed). One is now in the PB museum at Menzies Creek, and it's boiler was used in the G42 restoration. The ASG was a post war purchace, and went to Williamstown. Hope that helps. Cheers. --Michael Johnson 08:10, 18 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

RE ASG - the edit has AGS - in fact it is ASG! therefore an edit is required ... SatuSuro 06:55, 19 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

The article is now a real mess -with unnecesary duplication - presume you are doing that now? SatuSuro 07:01, 19 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

My apologies if I seem to be harrassing - I started the art and feel that it needed more added - all it seems to be at the moment is repetitious. There is quite a lot more to the issues around this particular garratt - - the points need expanding. I agree with michael that the absence of south african garratts is a serious flaw in the main art. SatuSuro 07:14, 19 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Bloemfontein Conference

I've removed your edit in the Bloemfontein article and placed it in the talk page: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Talk:Bloemfontein#Bloemfontein_Conference

Paul Hjul 08:05, 18 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Just to make sure we are on the same page: I didn't move the comment to the talk page because I disagree with it. In nothing could be further from the truth. The remark (which I believe I included in the text) certainly needs a reference and Im not entirely sure "insatisable arrogance" is encyclopedic language (I think thats the term they use). It is however IMHO a better remark than "Milner was hellbent on starting a war" or "Kruger refused to make any concessions, thus starting the war" and other such remarks. If you can give a nice all round reference or citation please do - the Bloem article needs to be improved in general. Paul Hjul 11:13, 18 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

2-10-2 article

Tony, I've fixed most of the problems with the Swengel reference in the 2-10-2 article. The basic problem was you were closing the reference with <ref/><nowiki> instead of using <nowiki></ref>. The form you used isn't recognized as a valid closing tag, so the rest of the article was being treated as one very long reference. Best, Gwernol 14:57, 14 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Could you hold off the edits to the California Gold Rush?

It is a Featured Article and a member of the FA committee just moved your unsourced material to the article talkpage. Ronbo76 04:25, 14 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

My suggestion would be to add the text to Edward Hargraves, and then include his article under See also. The content is tangential to California Gold Rush. I put the text on the talk page of Hargraves' article. Regards, SandyGeorgia (Talk) 05:00, 14 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

If I can "third" these sentiments. When an article is up on the Main page is a very inconvenient time to suggest a change of the magnitude you are proposing. My suggestion is come back in 2-3 days when the vandalism has calmed down, and see if you can get a consensus to add the material by proposing it on the Talk page. NorCalHistory 05:04, 14 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Hi again, Tonyob. It's not because it's an FA or because it's on the mainpage; the proposed addition should really be discussed at Talk:California Gold Rush, where all involved editors can opine and come to consensus on how to best incorporate the text. (By the way, there's no such thing as an "FA committee".) SandyGeorgia (Talk) 05:16, 14 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for your courtesy. See you in a few days. NorCalHistory 05:22, 14 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Garratt

Don't know if you noticed, but you added South Africa to a sentence that already mentions Africa. I've reverted, however if you do have infomation about preserved locos in SA, it would be more than welcome. Cheers --Michael Johnson 12:40, 14 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

OK how about:

In SA there is at least one 3'6" gauge main line Garratt preserved for tourist operation, and in P'maritzburg (Natal)there is a 2' gauge Garrat operating on a tourist line.

But spell out P'maritzburg?

Cheers

--Michael Johnson 00:37, 15 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Cool --Michael Johnson 00:43, 15 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for your entry. Re Kelly Gang, I think it is hard to describe the Kelly outbreak as important in any historical sense of the word, in that it did not have any effect on subsequent events. (Maybe on the reform of the Victoria Police). As for the Jerilderie Letter, it is interesting, but important? On reading it it is very largely a self-justification, the political content maybe half a dozen lines on about four of the 56 pages. Maybe if it incited a rebellion across Victoria. But it just sat in a trunk for what, a hundred years or so? It is an important document of social history, but not important in the context of political history. BTW there is no article on the letter, and it is notable enough to justify one. --Michael Johnson 04:50, 15 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Re: 4-10-2 article

I saw the edits but with the snowstorm over the weekend (officially we got 16 inches of new heavy snow) and shoveling taking me through late last night, I haven't had a chance to do much more. I'll see what I can find in my resources. Slambo (Speak) 16:36, 27 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

ArbCom elections are now open!

Hi,
You appear to be eligible to vote in the current Arbitration Committee election. The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to enact binding solutions for disputes between editors, primarily related to serious behavioural issues that the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the ability to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail. If you wish to participate, you are welcome to review the candidates' statements and submit your choices on the voting page. For the Election committee, MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 16:30, 23 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]