User talk:Vanished user 5zariu3jisj0j4irj/Archive23

Archives: 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | 9 | 10 | 11 | 12 | 13 | 14 | 15 | 16 | 17 | 18 | 19 | 20 | 21 | 22

New Rudd cabinet

Hi, Rebecca. Is the current event tag inappropriate for the new Rudd cabinet? Zipzipzip (talk) 02:46, 29 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Comparison of Australian parties policy

Hi

I would like to know what consensus it was when you deleted this article

23:43, 12 November 2007 Rebecca (Talk | contribs) deleted "Comparison of Australian parties policy" ‎ (not an article, consensus that it doesn't belong

I haven't had a chance to even respond to the discussion, if it was conducted. Looking at the talk page, didn't help either.

I cannot see how it is not an article seeing that i compared the structure, of this article with the other "Comparison of" type of articles. From experience, i really don't think this cannot be considered a valid article, considering the existence of these types in wikipedia. You also cannot argue that it is incomplete, as it is under construction.

Really, this is starting to get to me. First somebody objected on the basis of copyright violation, so that was sorted out by emailing the source. Now it on a basis of some 'consensus', which i didn't even hear of.

For now I will be politely waiting for your response in few day. Afterward, in which a no reply, would be considered as a implicit consent to remake the article.

Anyway, good work with your contribution to wikipedia.

-Akimbo

Thank you!

Thanks in part to your support, I am Wikipedia's newest bureaucrat. I will do my best to live up to your confidence and kind words. Andre (talk) 09:32, 11 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Hello

I'm not going to give one of these cheesy and pointless "smile" or flower stickers or images or what not here, but a big thanks for supporting my stuff, saying hello every now and then, and backing me up. Big cheers Bec! Michael ^talk 14:20, 11 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

LGBT WikiProject Newsletter

Delivered on 16:00, 6 July 2007 (UTC).

ganja butter

I would like to add an entry, I will do something better to describe this. I re-added the page but kept it simple. I may not be a great writer but I do know a great deal about some things so I hope you can work with me to get a good version up and not just delete everything I do. Please to make changes and suggestions. Thanks

Australian Democrats page

Hi Rebecca. Or Beck. I don't know much about Wikipedia, but I would swear this page has been 'vandalised'. As an instant measure, how could we make the page 'disputed'? I have no idea. Hope you can help, would love your assistance. THANK YOU! Helloquestionmark 10:22, 13 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Shelly Archer

Please read the talk page as to my rationale. I asked a senior WP:WA editor regarding this, and they said that my rating was fair given the current state of the article. On the talk page i said that i would change the rating when it was broken into sections, and had an infobox. Id even settle for just an infobox. Any problems with this, please feel free to contact me. Twenty Years 12:44, 14 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

To be perfectly honest, i think the article is quite good, i first looked at it and thought this is actually decent, why hasnt someone assessed it. 40+ references is quite alot for an article as small as that. If you add an infobox to the article i will tag it B-Class. I understand that you are trying very hard to remain civil, and so i am trying to make it easier for you. I once again should state that a senior (admin) WP:WA editor said it was start for the same reasons i did. Please consider what i am saying. Twenty Years 12:53, 14 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

With all due respect I actually do agree with Twenty Years here. I believe something can fail the next class up on one issue which, when resolved, almost automatically qualifies it for reassessment at that level. As a person with a very slight vision impairment, I'm not seeing anything that guides me through the content, even though I'm familiar with the substance of the material. Orderinchaos 13:24, 14 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Please note: I have since re-assessed the article as B-Class due to the recent changes, a pic and a infobox still wouldnt go astray, good luck with this. Seems well thought out and researched. Twenty Years 13:27, 14 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I will more closely monitor my ratings, but you may wish to take into account that in my ratings of ~250 articles - you are the only person to have questioned my ratings. What other articles do you have a problem with? tell me so i can re-consider my ratings. Best wishes. Twenty Years 14:23, 14 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

signature

Hi Bec, I'm playing with my signature, do you think a signature like this one is too messy and distracting to other users? Wiki Townsvillia n 13:19, 16 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

FYI - Attempt to prod a shopping centre article

Orderinchaos advised me to let you know that an attempt has been made to prod Karrinyup Shopping Centre. Significant major shopping centre that dates back to the 70's, and needs some serious expansion. Just distracted by transport in perth and have not had time to action. Cheers, Thewinchester ^(talk) 14:45, 16 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Andrew Robb

Hi Bec, can you check out this article and Melbournewater (talk · contribs). Thanks, Wiki Townsvillia n 00:10, 19 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Weak

Hi Rebecca. I was expecting a keep on this, too optimistic :P. But what do I know about the weak deletion process! Regards, Fred ☻ 22:40, 19 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

"Keep article, shoot nominator" made me cack myself laughing. Mind you, it's rivalling "Trading As Usual, Entry Via Rear" outside a being-renovated gay bar in Perth City today, but hey, it's been that kind of a day. Orderinchaos 11:32, 20 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

SA electoral history CD

Sounds promising - what is on the CD? I don't suppose it has pictures of opposition leaders? I've been wanting to do SA elections prior to 1965 like i've done federally but with only premier pictures and no opposition leader pictures i've gone off the idea. Timeshift 04:14, 21 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I know i've seen them somewhere but now I can't find where it had a list of previous state opposition leaders... I need them to see if they're in that promising link you sent me. Thanks for that! Do you know where I might be able to find the names? Timeshift 04:24, 21 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

George Macleay

Hi Rebecca, I saw you had deleted an article on George Macleay ; the deletion log shows the article atarted with : 'Sir George Macleay (1809 - 1891) was an Australian explorer and politician, elected as a member of the New South Wales Legislative...'. Just wondering why it was deleted; I was planning to start an article on him using the Australian Dictionary of Biography article - http://www.adb.online.anu.edu.au/biogs/A020157b.htm as a reference, thanks. — Diverman 11:32, 23 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Unblock of User:Liftarn

I considered this very carefully before blocking him, but what struck me the most was that Liftarn has been blocked multiple times (6 if I recall correctly) for violating the 3 revert rule. Obviously, he knows by now that getting in edit wars will do no good and is against policy - yet he persisted. In addition, Dbachmann and Zora actually had legitimate arguments (ignoring whether or not they were valid - which IMO they were), while Liftarn's arguments usually consisted of "stop being uncivil" or "you don't have consensus" (funny, a user in a single-handed dispute with 3 or 4 users says they don't have consensus). Okay, assuming good faith, maybe he legitimately thought his argument was superior to the other users' and for a moment, maybe you can ignore the multiple revert wars on multiple articles with multiple users. But doing things like repeatedly reverting edits to Dbachmann's RFC (see the edit for yourself - maybe the original edit was in good faith but the reverts were certainly not so much) and listing him on "Suspected sockpuppets". Now, as far as I am concerned, the big difference between Liftarn's actions and Dbachmann/Zora's actions is that Liftarn has a history of being uncivil and violating Wikipedia policies, while Dbachmann has made vastly more edits (and, I assume, gotten in vastly more conflicts) without ever receiving as much as a 15 minute cooldown block. In any case, I assume no argument will be enough to convince an admin for the necessity of a reblock, I just thought you should hear my more detailed rationale. ugen64 13:16, 23 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

RFV

Obviously the proposal is flawed [1] as have been similar proposals in the past, The question is how can we remove the flaws? Jeepday (talk) 13:35, 24 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Your unprotection of Template:PD-Australia

I would like you to restore the protection on this sensitive template, to allow time for a consensus to be reached on ony changes. Physchim62 (talk) 15:18, 24 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Runcorn again

Rebecca. Just to let you know that I have renominated Runcorn for consideration as a FA. I have addressed all the comments made by you (and others) including copy-editing. Peter I. Vardy 16:08, 24 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Many thanks, Rebecca, for your prompt support. Peter I. Vardy 09:26, 25 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Poll Bludger

Nice to see you're the same Rebecca there! Michael ^talk 10:37, 25 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Your conduct

Rebecca, either:

revert your edits to Template:PD-Australia and restore the protection so that a consensus can be reached; or
suggest another route for dispute resolution.

In either of these cases, you should stop your personal attacks, on me and on other editors who happen to have a different perspective from your own. I am certain that you are acting in good faith in believing that your edits are correct, but your conduct makes it impossible to convince you otherwise. My edits were not "incompetant", nor "a blatant abuse of admin powers", nor "ignorant", nor "lazy". It is you who feels that you have the right to change a copyright tag after two days "consultation", in which views contradictary to your own were expressed. The template is not, and never shall be, the property of WP:AWNB. Physchim62 (talk) 16:18, 25 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I am unwilling to debate with a person who shows such breathtaking bad-faith and lack of simple manners. I suggest that you take a wikibreak before one is forced upon you. Physchim62 (talk) 12:14, 26 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/1982-83 United States network television schedule

Heh, I find myself actually please to be in edit conflicts with you, I'm glad there's somebody else who is supportive of these articles and willing to make arguments for their retention. FrozenPurpleCube 03:52, 27 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

One last try

Rebecca, you will not escape accusations of wheel-warring simply by getting another admin to do the changes for you. If you are honestly interested in resolving this, you should (once again) either:

revert your edits to Template:PD-Australia and restore the protection so that a consensus can be reached; or
suggest another route for dispute resolution.

If you fail to do at least one of those two actions, I shall be forced to take the case to another forum. Physchim62 (talk) 14:48, 27 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

The british are coming, the british are coming

They're at it again. 1 2. Cheers, Thewinchester ^(talk) 15:08, 27 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

And you'll be pleased to know that this article has now come back to life with some decent references. OIC and myself are in the middle of sourcing even more for it, so don't be suprised if it gets further expansion. This is us being a little spiteful towards a user who doesn't have a snowflakes chance in hell of getting the mop. Thewinchester ^(talk) 09:52, 30 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I wouldn't call reversing faulty non-binding decisions "spiteful", it comes under improving the encyclopaedia. But yes, Warrawong is back. Orderinchaos 09:56, 30 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

And North Rocks is back with avengance too. Thewinchester ^(talk) 15:22, 30 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Your oppose

Rebecca, in regards to your oppose at my current RfA, I appreciate that you feel that I was a problem with delete tags in the past, but honestly, as I've mentioned to you before, I think you may be confusing me with someone else. You commented a couple times about previous discussions that I was involved in, that I assure you, I wasnt involved in. Could you please doublecheck my contrib history, and consider that you may have confused my track record with someone else's? It would help to see some actual evidence in the form of diff links, which you haven't provided. If I have made mistakes in the past, I definitely want to acknowledge them. I want to improve my behavior. But your accusations are honestly bewildering me, and I can't see how I can improve my behavior, regarding something I don't remember doing! Thanks, --El on ka 18:09, 30 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Rebecca, I am truly very sorry that I have done anything which makes you feel that I cannot be trusted. Could you please tell me then, what I could do to help regain your trust? I am definitely willing to improve my behavior, and am very open to constructive criticism. What do you think would set your mind at ease? Perhaps, I could make a pledge in terms of deletions? For example, promise not to delete any article without oversight? What if I were to promise to only delete articles that were already tagged by another editor (assuming of course that I agreed with their reasoning). I am very open to your suggestions, please let me know, --El on ka 22:59, 1 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

203.87.127.18

Please review edits to Family First Party and my talk page, this user needs dealing with. Timeshift 10:51, 31 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

ALP

Is it possible to go back to non-anon only edits? Timeshift 10:55, 31 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Taken care of.--cj | talk 13:58, 31 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Shopping malls

Hi,

You recently rolled back several of the speedy deletes I added to shopping malls, claiming (a) that they assert notability, and (b) that they regularly survive AfD.

I would question this, because:

(a) I can't see that any of them asserted notability (except Southmall Manurewa, my mistake), and

(b) at least three of them have already been speedy deleted at least twice: Westfield Pakuranga, Westfield Downtown, Meadowlands Shopping Plaza, which was the basis of my recent sweep of CSD tags. Oli Filth 23:50, 1 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Just so that I know for the future, could you provide me with any reference for the precedent that they "shouldn't have been" deleted (or speedy deleted)? Presumably whichever admins deleted these articles thought differently, so I can't place 100% confidence the veracity of your response yet! (no disrepect intended) Oli Filth 23:58, 1 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Don't get me wrong, I'm not adding tags just for the sake of getting things deleted! But as far as I could see, this (CSD) happens regularly to articles on other organisations that assert no notability, with very little complaint, or concern that the article could be expanded given time. I'm just not clear as to why malls are a special case. Do you have an example of a particular AfD case where such an article was kept, so I can see some of the common "keep" arguments? Oli Filth 00:15, 2 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Andrew Murray

while he's become increasingly distant from the party leadership, I see no evidence to justify this suggestion
I don't know who got it wrong but, as usual, you're right--Andrew may act like an independent but it's clear at the Dems' homepage that everyone's still pally! Cheers -- Bjenks 08:18, 2 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Family socks

Hi Bec. I was wondering whether you might be able to do me a favour and run a check on the following accounts:

AoG The One Ture Church (talk · contribs)
Richard Marsland (talk · contribs)
Tony F Martin (talk · contribs)
Ed Kavalee (talk · contribs)

I suspect they are connected to 203.87.127.18 (talk · contribs). I know the Marsland and Martin accounts to be socks of AoG though creation logs, and Kavalee's contributions plainly link the accounts. The anon and these accounts also have very similar editing interests. Thanks, --cj | talk 02:36, 3 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Ah, very good. Another troll bites the dust. Thanks for your help, :)--cj | talk 05:30, 3 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Good show

I was out for several hours and am just catching up on things. Whatever else comes out of this, I just want to know my hat goes off to you for this edit.[2] Must've been a tough decision to reach. Means something coming from you. Durova^Charge! 05:20, 3 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Following up, I trust your solution and I'm glad you could work things out. Best regards, Durova^Charge! 17:18, 3 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Rebecca, I am puzzled. Having spent a bit looking through contribs, I am not certain that these are two different people, much less three. If there is some credible evidence (as opposed to just an explanation) to this effect, I'd like to hear about it.Proabivouac 06:58, 4 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

The RickK Anti-Vandalism Barnstar

		The RickK Anti-Vandalism Barnstar
		I'm awarding you this RickK Anti-Vandalism Barnstar for your great contributions to protecting and reverting attacks of vandalism on Wikipedia. Wikidudeman ^(talk) 05:38, 3 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

IRC

Hi, can you go to the IRC admins channel if you could. As Orderinchaos want to speak to you privately. Thanks Jaranda ^{wat's sup} 05:49, 3 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I wouldn't mind a few minutes of your time either. Zocky | picture popups 05:51, 3 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

The usual thanks

Hey, we've got some problems on notability with our trans-tasmin cousins and your input would be appreciated. All the information can be found here. Cheers, Thewinchester ^(talk) 12:33, 3 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

RS2007

Hello Rebecca. How are you? I am RS. I joined Wikipedia on July 15, 2007. I have a problem. How can I nominate an article for Featured article or good article? Thank you. RS2007 13:02, 3 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

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, El on ka 03:38, 5 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Centro Tuggeranong

Hi Rebecca, we are trying to work out why the Tuggeranong Hyperdome article was moved to Centro Tuggeranong. It still is called Hyperdome, so I would expect that to be the main name. GB 02:28, 6 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for fixing that up so fast! GB 03:02, 6 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Invitation

You discussed the name of Vossstrasse the last time it came up; you may be interested in doing so again. See Talk:Voßstraße#Page_name. Septentrionalis PMAnderson 00:16 8 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 23:39, 12 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Rebecca, could you let me know what you think of my suggestion at Talk:John_Howard#BLP_reminder? Thanks, Wiki Townsvillia n 01:02, 14 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Electoral divisions

I feel I've got a leg to stand on here. Well over a month ago I asked here whether these election boxes should be the same as British ones (like Cambridge or not. As there was no response at all, I went ahead and did them. Although I don't feel particularly strongly about it I can't see a huge problem with the one-date tables and I find them perfectly readable. I based the tables on the British ones and am not particularly good at coding tables so if you would like to come up with a standard members' table then I'd be happy to implement it. Also, you'll notice that the years are coded to the election year and it's certainly redundant to code these twice. Frickeg 07:24, 16 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I've been having a look round and on second thoughts find I sort of agree with you. I'll see what I can do. (I've gotten rid of most of the infoboxes too.) Frickeg 07:49, 16 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Done. Hopefully these meet with your approval! (All New South Wales current Federal electorates plus Victorian ones up to Chisholm.) Frickeg 09:00, 16 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Sigh. All right then. Frickeg 23:13, 16 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Paul Keating

There seems to be a dispute on the inclusion of certain information, Talk:Paul_Keating#Costello_and_Keating, interested in hearing your thoughts. Michellecrisp 00:36, 17 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for your comments. Have a nice day Michellecrisp 01:10, 17 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Socialist Alternative (Australia)

An editor is repeatedly trying to reinstate blogged opinions, I have told them time and time again not to do it as it contravenes WP:RS, WP:SPS and also NPOV but they don't listen. Require some advice on how to proceed? thanks Michellecrisp 04:09, 20 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Same editor is also introducing blog references to an article they created Tim Andrews, suspect it's not demonstrating a NPOV. Michellecrisp 04:16, 20 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Help desk post

Hi Rebecca. There is a help desk post that you may wish to be aware of. Best. -- Jreferee ^(Talk) 22:31, 21 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Catalyst (magazine)

Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Catalyst (magazine). Little help..? :-( alexis+kate=? 23:03, 22 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Replaceable fair use Image:Garyhumphries.jpg

Replaceable fair use

Thanks for uploading Image:Garyhumphries.jpg. I notice the 'image' page specifies that the image is being used under fair use, but its use in Wikipedia articles fails our first fair use criterion in that it illustrates a subject for which a freely licensed image could reasonably be found or created that provides substantially the same information. If you believe this image is not replaceable, please:

Go to the image description page and edit it to add {{di-replaceable fair use disputed}}, without deleting the original Replaceable fair use template.
On the image discussion page, write the reason why this image is not replaceable at all.

Alternatively, you can also choose to replace the fair use image by finding a freely licensed image of its subject, requesting that the copyright holder release this (or a similar) image under a free license, or by taking a picture of it yourself.

If you have uploaded other fair use media, consider checking that you have specified how these images fully satisfy our fair use criteria. You can find a list of 'image' pages you have edited by clicking on this link. Note that fair use images which could be replaced by free-licensed alternatives will be deleted 7 days after this notification, per our Fair Use policy. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you. Calliopejen1 12:45, 23 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Funny how it's only americans that delete our politicians. Timeshift 13:27, 23 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Hello just wodering why my addition of 'The Dykeenies' to the Cumbernauld page was deleted? they are from Cumbernauld and are proud of it. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Mountain Sport (talk • contribs) 20:40, August 24, 2007 (UTC)

John Chanter

Hi Rebecca. I just wanted to let you know that I have recreated the page John Chanter that you deleted. I noted that you had deleted it because it was a "sub-stub", and would really appreciate it if you could look over it and let me know if it is acceptable as it is my first attempt at a biographical article. Thanks. Frickeg 22:55, 24 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for your support! I have also done some other articles on some other politicians I found in the electorate articles (there's a list on my user page. Hopefully I haven't made any errors (most of them are from the Dictionary of Biography at the ANU). Thanks again! Frickeg 07:33, 29 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Replaceable fair use Image:Pennywong.jpg

Replaceable fair use

Thanks for uploading Image:Pennywong.jpg. I noticed the 'image' page specifies that the image is being used under fair use, but its use in Wikipedia articles fails our first fair use criterion in that it illustrates a subject for which a freely licensed image could reasonably be found or created that provides substantially the same information. If you believe this image is not replaceable, please:

Go to the image description page and edit it to add {{di-replaceable fair use disputed}}, without deleting the original Replaceable fair use template.
On the image discussion page, write the reason why this image is not replaceable at all.

Alternatively, you can also choose to replace the fair use image by finding a freely licensed image of its subject, requesting that the copyright holder release this (or a similar) image under a free license, or by taking a picture of it yourself.

If you have uploaded other fair use media, consider checking that you have specified how these images fully satisfy our fair use criteria. You can find a list of 'image' pages you have edited by clicking on this link. Note that fair use images which could be replaced by free-licensed alternatives will be deleted 7 days after this notification, per our Fair Use policy. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you. — Carl (CBM · talk) 15:00, 30 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

List of Judges of the Supreme Court of South Australia

I notice that you reversed a lot of edits on this page. The page is a list of former and current Justices of the Supreme Court of South Australia.

The edits including adding middle names and post nominals (although those were not the only changes). You reversed ALL of the changes on the basis that Wikipedia

Unlike an ordinary article I think there is value in having full names and post nominals for a list such as this one. That is so for the following reasons. First, many of the members of the list do not have their own page on wikipedia, so it is not possible to display their full names there. Secondly, full names and post nominals are useful in a list such as this because judges often are not well known - for almost anyone who wants to consult this list, havign the judge's full name is not likely to be regarded as unnecessary detail and is actually likely to assist in further research much more than just using their most common name (especially since many of the "common names" to which you have reverted are names by which these judges were never known!). Thirdly, full names and post nominals are conventionally almost always recorded in lists of judges which appear in books, etc.

I can understand your approach but in this case I think it is preferable to provide as much information as possible on the list page. As the wikipedia naming convention itself says, it is not a rule set in stone and there are good reasons for including this additional information in this case.

Of greater concern, however, is the fact that you reversed ALL of the edits, not just those which added further information about names and post-nominals. Many of the judges actually generally were/are known by a middle name so many of the links actually point to non-existent pages which, if they did exist, would not refer to the judge in question. In the case of Richard White, the link even wrongly points to another judge of that name. The edits which you reversed addressed all of the problems in the list, and by simply reversing them you actually have done a lot more damage to the list and its usefulness than by leaving in middle names and post nominals.

Rather than just reverse your edits, I thought it would be more polite to give my views on your discussion page. I would ask you to consider undoing your edits to this page.

Cheers Steve mcdee 03:58, 1 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Werriwa by-election election box

I've just come across your reversion on Werriwa by-election, 2005 of the AU election box I had added. The candidates were in ballot paper order (as they are in all of the federal electorate articles). There is currently a discussion on this here. (I haven't reverted the article as yet as there is not really a full consensus at the discussion.) Frickeg 04:20, 1 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Sorry to be a pain, but could you let me know your thoughts on this? I don't want to revert any edits without discussion but the election box on the Werriwa by-election page is at odds with the ones on the 150 federal electorates. If the consensus reaches a different conclusion then I'll be happy to go around and fix them all myself. Thanks! Frickeg 08:46, 12 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

If you have time...

...could you run a sock check on the following accounts?

Thanks, --cj | talk 15:22, 1 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Julia Gillard

Hi Rebecca, I would have thought that the subject person's POV would be relevant? Wiki Townsvillia n 06:07, 2 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Rebecca, are you saying it should be left the way Joestella has rewritten it? PS you still haven't replied to my query above. Cheers, Wiki Townsvillia n 13:25, 5 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Oh good, thought I might have trodden on toes by being quick to revert. As for Gillard, that certainly was not my intention, I went to the library as part of the ACOTF to try and find something detailed about Gillard and found that book, unfortunately the only things I thought were usable out of the chapter on her were the Latham references, I do wish there had been more, or I had time to work on the article a bit more. Anyway I thought it was useful as it was a significant part of her rise so quickly through Labor ranks. Cheers, Wiki Townsvillia n 13:36, 5 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Images over 50 years old of Prime Ministers

I'm looking at adding them to wikimedia commons, however I just want to check your opinion on how well the Images over 50 years old of Prime Ministers thus copyright-free line will hold up over there. Timeshift 00:03, 3 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I don't recall it actually. Why 1945? If it's 2007, anything 1957 prior is 50+ years...

Would you care to have your 2c worth at the talk page of Stanley Bruce? Ta. Timeshift 04:46, 3 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

LGBT WikiProject Newsletter

Delivered on 16:00, 6 July 2007 (UTC).

Joestella and ChampagneComedy

Tweedledum and Tweedledee are back, and what coincidental timing so close to an election. Must we really put up with them or can we show the many previous examples of their idiocy and get them banned straight off the bat? I'm sure neither of us want to return to the days of Joe, it's just been so peaceful... Timeshift 14:58, 5 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

dont let me spoil your fun... vandalise WA articles all you want. ChampagneComedy 15:02, 5 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I prefer to constructively contribute... but let me know if those two words are too big or complex or ambiguous for you to understand. Timeshift 15:04, 5 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Rebecca, just had a word to OIC, he agrees with your sock/meat plans. The vast majority would be behind it. The proof is in the pudding by the sharp rise of disruption when they are editing aus pol articles. Timeshift 15:13, 5 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Members of the Australian House of Representatives, 2004-2007

What is overkill, what is ugly? .....Todd^#661 09:11, 6 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I disagree. The list that I recently had featured makes extensive use of references and footnotes, another recently featured list has 133 refs. It seems that you have made a habit out of reverting my work before I have had a chance to finish (see this edit you reverted, and what I had brought the article upto a day later). I'm gonna keep going, in the meantime, can you stop, and assume good faith? .....Todd^#661 09:27, 6 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

As I have said, you are judging my edits before I have had a chance to complete my edits to it. Ugliness is not a reason to revert. Also, who made you the boss on Wikipedia? Why are you the judge of what is good? By the way, in one of your posts on my talk page you said you don't like reverting edits. That is crap. i look at your contributions and 1 in 3 are reverts. .....Todd^#661 11:58, 6 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Also:

You currently appear to be engaged in an edit war according to the reverts you have made on Members of the Australian House of Representatives, 2004-2007. Note that the three-revert rule prohibits making more than three reversions in a content dispute within a 24 hour period. Additionally, users who perform a large number of reversions in content disputes may be blocked for edit warring, even if they do not technically violate the three-revert rule. If you continue, you may be blocked from editing. Please do not repeatedly revert edits, but use the talk page to work towards wording and content that gains a consensus among editors. .....Todd^#661 11:58, 6 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Boka Kondra

Hi Rebecca! I noticed you were looking for information on Boka, and as someone who spent most of his life in North Fly district (and wrote the article :) I hope I can be of help. I am pretty sure you have his name spelled correctly, and I am pretty sure he moved around his political alliances before settling to be an independent for this election. I do not know where he stands as far as alliances with any political party at the moment, but I am sure he is still an independent. I know there was some pre-election talks about some of the independents teaming with NA as far as political ideals are concerned, and I think Boka was mentioned. He ran last election as a member of Yumi (there are 2 YRP's). Again, I hope this all helps. I guess you might have been over all this before anyway. aliasd·U·T 11:15, 7 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I see the problem - he was elected as an Independent; then The National said he joined PNC, but Pacific Magazine said he joined NA in the post-election window. Under the new electoral laws candidates can only change party after the return of writs and before the first sitting of Parliament, when the PM is elected. I have been meaning to update the election results page with the rest of the changes of party membership. Sorry, no immediate confirmation on Boka Kondra to hand - I'll let you know if I find something. Cheers, Wantok (toktok) 15:31, 7 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Anna Bligh

Hi Rebecca, what do you think of the recent images? If they are what they obviously look like they should of course be immediately deleted, however I suspect this user is from the Government and might legitimately have copyright ownership over this image, this is given a combination of this user's edits, the username and the timing, your thoughts? Wiki Townsvillia n 12:01, 13 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Style

Based on the recent WP:AN thread I'm going to go ahead and rename the MOS to something less official-sounding; several people pointed out that it possibly won't help, but nobody has made any big objections or allusions that it would be harmful. Please keep an eye out, it is possible that some wonks will vehemently object to this on bureaucratic grounds. >Radiant< 13:27, 17 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Manukau Supa Centre

Hi Rebecca. I'm a little confused by this article. I was going to delete it as a fairly obvious G4 as the content is identical to that deleted per Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Manukau Supa Centre. But then I realised it isn't a repost - you undeleted it. You seem to have been one of the people who commented on the AfD and I can't find a DRV for it. Could you explain why you restored it? Thanks, WjBscribe 18:50, 17 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Mmm, it looks like a borderline AfD to me - could have been closed either way and the closer gives a reasonably convincing rationale. I don't like the idea of one admin running round behind another's back and undoing their actions. Still, as I have no strong feelings one way or the other about the notability of this article, I am prob not going to waste time raising the matter at DRV. Someone else might though - it really needs more references. WjBscribe 01:02, 18 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

RE: Greatorex

No problem. Those Northern Territory election sites are a bit confusing! Frickeg 01:56, 20 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

By the way, I notice that you've been using the basic Template:Election box candidate with party link for the election boxes. It's much easier to use Template:Election box candidate AU party, both for the actual results and the "hold" boxes. Just use "Labor", "Liberal", "Greens", etc., rather than typing the whole party name. It's good to put Independents in there as well, as this creates a link to Independent (politician) and gives them the standard independent grey colour. Hope this helps. Frickeg 04:02, 20 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

1945 or 50 years?

http://www.nla.gov.au/pict/pic_copyright.html - thoughts? I hate copyright is mine. Timeshift 08:56, 21 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Advice sought

Talk:Leanne Clare RE: →Chris Hurley - remove hopelessly POV commentary, how did all this get by without my noticing?

Hi Bec, OIC, VS and CJ (Aussie Admins that I know of); wow Jb3 can go on! I think we have a wikilawyer-in-training, although he/she only seems to ever focus on this one issue.

If you're interested I'd like to know your opinion, the section seemed pretty blatant POV to me, the neutrality of the sources themselves could also be questioned. His analysis is flawed but I think it would be counterproductive for me to get into a whole point by point technical argument for pages and pages, I didn't have the page on my watchlist otherwise I would have been on to this long ago. So your third opinion is sought on how much I should engage/disengage on this issue, or if you might like to come in as a non-involved party. Cheers, Wiki Townsvillia n 11:54, 24 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

The WikiProject Universities Newsletter: Issue I (September 2007)

The September 2007 issue of the WikiProject Universities newsletter has been published. You may read the newsletter, change the format in which future issues will be delivered to you, or unsubscribe from this notification by following the link. Thank you for your continued support of WikiProject Universities! -- Noetic Sage 19:22, 8 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Shrine of Remembrance

Hi Rebecca. Is it possible at all to get inline refs for this FA? There are none at the moment. Thanks, Blnguyen (bananabucket) 03:44, 9 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Post Oak Mall

I see you 'voted' at the above deletion debate, but neglected to provide a valid reason for your assertion! Could you do so when you get a chance please? Thanks! Chase me ladies, I'm the Cavalry 05:30, 9 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

It seems

Many of the fringe parties (shooters et al) have very poor cites/refs - yet a careful check on even nla catalogue throws up the odd item Satu Suro 01:54, 11 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

LGBT WikiProject Newsletter

Delivered on 17:31, 11 October 2007 (UTC).

Removal of notability on Student Youth Network

I note you've removed the tag from the SYN article. Might I ask why? There is no claim to notability anywhere on that page other than it's existence, which doesn't meet WP:Note. The tag was left there in order to encourage someone to actually produce some citations or other proof, by removing it and not actually doing anything else, well that's hardly helpful is it? Especially as that article has been deleted twice due to lack of notability already. --Blowdart | ^talk 05:24, 15 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Have a read of WP:Note again. There's no proof of notability on that page, no independent references. The tag isn't a prelude to deletion, if you had taken the time to read the talk page you'd see some encouragement to the original editor to get some 3rd party links and citations. By a sulky removal of the tag you're doing the article a disservice as it's there to encourage someone who knows the subject matter to offer some proof of notability and glossing over the fact it doesn't meet WP:Note as it stands. Find some independent references *then* remove the tag, but until there's proof beyond your "Well I live there, so it's notable" then the tag removal is running close to vandalism. --Blowdart | ^talk 05:46, 15 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Soliciting a pattern review :)

Hi, I thought I'd have a go at rewriting the 15 WA federal division articles to make them a bit more professional. If you could have a look at Division of Moore and let me know any ideas for improvement/repair I'd be most grateful. Cheers Orderinchaos 05:38, 15 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Great! At this stage (I consider it a work in progress) I was just getting outside feedback that I'm taking it in the right direction or not. The demographics are pretty easy because the census actually has stats for the electorate from 2001 and 2006 (we have to fall back to 2001 for labour statistics as they haven't been released yet for 2006), and with the suburb breakdowns we can explain anomalies (in Moore there's a little stripe down the middle that is consistently Labor despite the character of the electorate as a whole and neighbouring suburbs in Cowan). The Paul Filing incident from 1996 was actually a very interesting one and deserves more attention, and we can cite some quite funny press - like the unsuccessful 25yo Liberal candidate, favoured by Noel Crichton-Browne, allegedly trying to sue Filing for - wait for it - winning the election. Talk about a sore loser... Filing's attempts to join One Nation before his defeat in 1998 as well (we really need an article on him). Meanwhile, I'm going to have fun - voting in Melbourne, working in Eden-Monaro on polling day. Orderinchaos 06:57, 15 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Independent Sovereign State Of Australia

Hello. I see you deleted Independent Sovereign State Of Australia, would you mind also deleting Independant state of australia ? Thank you, Comte0 11:10, 16 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Student Youth Network

I initially wrote a fairly scathing note here about you wheel warring to overturn a valid AFD. But it was not really appropriate. So I will simply say that, instead of me continuing the wheel war with you, I will be taking this to DRV, which is what you should have done if you felt that the AFD result was invalid. - TexasAndroid 14:14, 16 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Little context in Lisa miller

Hello, this is a message from an automated bot. A tag has been placed on Lisa miller, by another Wikipedia user, requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. The tag claims that it should be speedily deleted because Lisa miller is very short providing little or no context to the reader. Please see Wikipedia:Stub for our minimum information standards for short articles.

To contest the tagging and request that administrators wait before possibly deleting Lisa miller, please affix the template {{hangon}} to the page, and put a note on its talk page. If the article has already been deleted, see the advice and instructions at WP:WMD. Feel free to contact the bot operator if you have any questions about this or any problems with this bot, bearing in mind that this bot is only informing you of the nomination for speedy deletion; it does not perform any nominations or deletions itself. CSDWarnBot 23:07, 16 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Manukau Supa Centre

Hi. The article Manukau Supa Centre failed AfD. You later restored it. Now somebody has speedied it as a recreation of a previously deleted article. Could you pop by the talk page and explain your logic for restoring it? Thanks, William Pietri 01:12, 17 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Never mind. I found where you explained this on WJBscribe's talk page, and copied your explanation to the article talk page. Hopefully that will sort things out. William Pietri 01:21, 17 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Admin help required with vandalism of nomination page

Hi Rebecca: Unfortunately, there is a user Ludvikus (talk · contribs) who is tampering with the formatting of a nomination page [3]. See the wildness of what he is doing at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/The Protocols of Zion (imprints). He is inserting and changing the original formatting and even the wording, totally unheard of. Please take a look at it. Thanks a lot. IZAK 15:12, 17 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

The Chaser's War on Everything controversy

Hi Rebecca. I see that you have deleted the above article. I am not sure if you are aware but there was an AfD on the article earlier today where the plans for the article were set out. There was also discussion on the future of the article here. I am not sure if I am missing anything but was there consensus to delete? Note, I agree with the deletion rationale, and if restored it should be userfied until the split is complete. -- Mattinbgn\^talk 05:50, 23 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for the response. Just to clarify, I have no problem with the deletion, I was only wondering if there had been some discussion elsewhere I had missed. Mattinbgn\^talk 06:18, 23 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Piers Akerman

I'd like to put that section to a RfC. Skopp 07:00, 24 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Or just leave it as it is now. Skopp 07:13, 24 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

AfD Closing

Thanks for closing Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/White privilege (sociology). Bearian 15:20, 24 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Somers

Please advise / direct me to rationale behind removing my edits to this article thanks, CryRedMao —Preceding comment was added at 03:31, 26 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Australian politicians

Hi Rebecca, Do you still stand by your October 2004 comment here, or has categorisation produced the same result. Those lists and subpages seem to be hopelessly out of date and I'm attempting a bit of a spring-clean per the talk page. —Moondyne 14:59, 27 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

The WikiProject Universities Newsletter: Issue II (October 2007)

The October 2007 issue of the WikiProject Universities newsletter has been published. You may read the newsletter, change the format in which future issues will be delivered to you, or unsubscribe from this notification by following the link. Thank you for your continued support of WikiProject Universities! —Noetic Sage 19:48, 30 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Nonsense

Until Rudd admits it that is. I hope that's not Latham I see on the horizon... Timeshift 06:20, 31 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Westfield Group revert

hi there given there are two list articles for the Westfield Group - List of Westfield Group shopping malls and List of Westfield Group shopping centres in Australia - how long do you think the list should be in the main Westfield Group article?

I'm asking because I don't want a revert war, AND the article looked stupid when it was dominiated by a list of every Westfield location across the USA, Australia, UK and NZ.

My preference was to do away with the list in the main Westfield Group article altogether but I was convinced that it would be better to list the major locations direct in the main article. Penrith Plaza isn't major in anyones' imagination.

Ga rr ie 04:16, 1 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I agree with your comments. Some prose outlining which site is meaningful and why in each state would be better than a list which screams out "add your local site".Ga rr ie 00:38, 2 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Melbourne Meetup

	Melbourne Meetup v t e Next: Wikipedia:Meetup/Melbourne/46 - Tuesday 13 August, 2024 (watch) Last: 18 February 2023
See also: Australian events listed at Wikimedia.org.au (or on Facebook)

Hello! The Melburnians are having another meet-up! Please consult this page if you are interested to participate in the discussion! Thanks! Phgao 03:30, 2 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

AFD

As a major contributor to the page, just letting you know that Clea Rose is at AFD. Recurring dreams 04:03, 6 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Comment request

Hi becca,

Sorry to disturb you, but there's a bit of a discussion and your name's mentioned as one of the sources in it.

Can you comment on a claim that there was private checkuser confirmation of some kind by yourself (and Raul), here?

Edits timestamped 14:00 and 14:08, 8 November 2007, refer.

Thanks!

FT2 ^{(Talk | email)} 14:15, 8 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

LGBT WikiProject Newsletter

Delivered on 12:00, 1 November 2007 (UTC).

List of religious leaders in 1220

Hi Rebecca! Way back when you were still Ambi you voted to keep this article, and since then I have had the insane urge to make it as complete as possible. I just thought you might be interested to see how far it has progressed in the past few years. I am usually a curmudgeonly deletionist, but I'm glad in this case that inclusionism won out. Thanks for supporting the article back then! Adam Bishop 08:13, 14 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

User:Miguel Uribe L

Hello, could you please explain to him/her why you reverted his/her edit to Diana Turbay‎? Thanks. Cheers,Je t Lover (Report a mistake) 00:40, 15 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Victorian railway line mergers

I've noticed you have reverted by merges, but am going to leave them as is for now.

I have the opinion that in some instances it is better for stations and the lines to be in one article - for example the Spring Vale Cemetery and Flemington Racecourse lines.

Also, the previous arrangement of country railway lines was a hodgepodge of 'actual' physical lines, and 'imaginary' lines as defined by current V/Line passenger services. As a result we have a messy history listing on the main page at Rail_transport_in_Victoria, and a series of stubs with just stations listings (as linked to from Template:VictorianRailwayLines)

Where would be the best place to discuss merging the various railway line stubs and stations into relevant articles with some other parties. Let me know, and I shall explain my reasoning, and show the examples to everyone. Wongm 07:05, 15 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I've gone an posted over on the WikiProject Talk pages - Wikipedia_talk:WikiProject_Victoria#Railway_line_merges and Wikipedia_talk:WikiProject_Melbourne#Railway_lines.2C_stations.2C_and_stubs. I do see your reason for the Victorian line objections, but have some examples for lines and stations that are best of with a merger. I would prefer if we kept the discussion over there. Wongm 08:55, 16 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Barnstar

		The Barnstar of Diligence
		For your excellent work here on Wikipedia. Acalamari 20:27, 15 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Taepyeong Station

Since you think all railway stations should be kept, you might care to have a look at this lot - there are 250 up for deletion in one hit. I had a go, but the deletion !votes are winning. --Bduke (talk) 00:09, 18 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

RE:AfD

I didnt want to add any more Comments to the AfD, it is already crowded as it is. What I am trying to say is that bus stops, train stations and subway stations are not inherently notable. How many of these are there in our world? If we had an article on everyone of these, Wikipedia would grow exponentially at a huge rate. And just so you know, I would be in favor of deleting any articles on subway, train, and bus stops that dont have any outside notability, that is to say that there is notability outside of just being a train station. Hope this helps to explain my thoughts, and sorry if I jumped to WP:AGF but it seemed like you were accusing me of being biased or having a systematic bias, which I do not. Thanks.
Gonzo fan2007 ^{talk ♦ contribs} 01:09, 18 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Image:Liz Cosson (MAJGEN).jpg

Rebecca, Could you give me a hand with this one? Having finally gotten Liz Cosson's pic past the wiki-bots, she got herself promoted and I now need to get an admin approval of the new pic. Aaargh. Hawkeye7 (talk) 06:40, 18 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

PNG by-election

Hi! Do you happen to know when the Rai Coast by-election result will be announced? —Nightstallion 20:11, 19 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Ombudsman

Hello,

You may know that we are looking for changing the ombudsman team. Whilst talking to people, your name was suggested :-) What do you think ? Willing to do the job ? If that is the case, it will be necessary that you provide us with information about your real identity. Also, I would rather prefer that ombudsman do not act as CU for reason of conflict of interest. I have a list of a couple of names, I am contacting three people right now; Best Anthere (talk) 21:15, 21 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Mass deletion of User:Borgarde's politician stubs

Just wondering which particular speedy deletion criteria you deleted those 60 stubs under?

I understand from reading User talk:Borgarde that you don't like these minimal stubs but I don't believe it's acceptable to mass delete them. --Stormie (talk) 04:32, 22 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Someone should have told you by now that this is under discussion at Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Australian politics#Mass deletion of substubs (although I suspect you already know). Hesperian 01:33, 23 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Brian Burke redux

Re WA Inc. What specifically were you after (ie. background, cause, fallout, cost, players, prosecutions. etc)? The article gives a reasonable overview, but each of the big deals should be expanded more I suppose. If you're reading the Kennedy report, you'd see that the enquiry was very far reaching and there's literally dozens of people named. I'm happy to help if I can. Sorry for the late response. —Moondyne 14:40, 22 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Rebecca, I forgot to tell you I left some notes at User:Moondyne/Burke & Grill. Feel free to use them or ignore them as you see fit. Let me know If I can be of any further help. —Moondyne 16:31, 28 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

ombudsman

Hello

http://lists.wikimedia.org/pipermail/foundation-l/2007-November/035415.html

Feel free to organize yourself as you feel is the best. You may ask Cary help if you need anything (a list, whatever). Also, if you feel the policy needs changes etc... please do not hesitate to say so and suggest changes. Thank you ! Anthere (talk) 16:37, 24 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Scott Ludlam elected

Hi Rebecca. Nice to meet you. I noticed your edit comment on the Scott Ludlam article, about jumping the gun on his electoral win in the Senate. I made the edit after the Sydney Morning Herald and the ABC both said he has secured his seat. I'll let you change it back when you see fit. Regards, Lester 23:48, 24 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Just drawing attention to the Scott Ludlam article again. Do you think we may be over conservative to call him "provisionally elected", as the article currently says? Every major news organisation has used the word "elected" for Ludlam. Another example from the Murdoch press. Cheers, Lester 20:47, 27 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Members of the Australian Senate, 2005-2008

[4] Would you care to expand on your edit summary please. I'd have thought that the benefits of live links in and out of the notes would easily outweigh the loss of a chronological list. —Moondyne 08:30, 29 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Members of the Australian Senate, 1901-1903

Hey Rebecca, I thought I would take the bull by the horns and move your draft of the Members of the Australian Senate, 1901-1903 to the live page and am working on it there. Hope this is okay with you. Cheers --Roisterer (talk) 11:29, 29 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

The WikiProject Universities Newsletter: Issue III (November 2007)

The November 2007 issue of the WikiProject Universities newsletter has been published. You may read the newsletter, change the format in which future issues will be delivered to you, or unsubscribe from this notification by following the link. Thank you for your continued support of WikiProject Universities! Noetic Sage 19:41, 1 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

ArbCom questions

Hi. I'm Ral315, editor of the Wikipedia Signpost. We're interviewing all ArbCom candidates for an article next week, and your response is requested.

What positions do you hold (adminship, arbitration, mediation, etc.)?
Why are you running for the Arbitration Committee?
Have you been involved in any arbitration cases? In what capacity?
In the past year, are there any cases that you think the Arbitration Committee handled exceptionally well? Any you think they handled poorly?
Why do you think users should vote for you?

Please respond on my talk page. If you can get your answers in as soon as possible, I'll try to ensure that they're in the candidate guide as quickly as I can -- hopefully before the elections start. Thanks, Ral315 » 23:01, 1 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

LGBT WikiProject Newsletter

Delivered on 20:05, 3 December 2007 (UTC). SatyrBot 21:26, 3 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Reworking MPs leads

Thanks, Rebecca. It's a pretty rare event that I receive a compliment around Wikipedia, so I appreciate that :) I often do "housework" kind of edits, like intros & Wikilinks, but I think that because I sometimes delve into controversial subjects of politicians (eg, Howard's 1988 policies or his family New Guinea plantations, or Rudd's opposition to S-S marriage and Garrett's support of the Tassie pulpmill)... the sort of thing that you don't find on the politicians' official pages, usually has people running after me with knives, rather than compliments! Today, I started a stub for Tammy Lobato, as she is in the news just about every day, and I was surprised she had no article. You may want to check if it conforms to Wiki protocols. Lester 23:25, 3 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Arbcom

Good luck on the arbitration committee elections! It's good to have some users with prior experiance as an arbitrator running.--U.S.A.U.S.A.U.S.A. 01:13, 4 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

It's completely non-personal; I just did a series of oppose for people who decided to stand up for an election just before (a day or two) ArbCom elections started, because such late coming may (may, doesn't have to, but may) indicate they didn't want to bother with most of the Q&A session or that it was a 'spark of the moment' not very well thought out decision. Good luck, --_{Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus | talk} 04:30, 4 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Retraction.

Your recent rewording was helpful in assuaging my concerns; it just seemed so dodgy when phrased with the word "experience," y'know? Thanks for the clarification, as I'll likely continue vote-switching as time passes and further dialogue unfolds. Cheers, Shem^(talk) 07:20, 4 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

hi rebecca

why would you even want to step down as ombudsperson? that's the most respectable job here. there are far too few checks at wiki. if you've got the ombudsperson job, make the most of it! the average editor has very few advocates. check out my block log and all the capricioius blocking. i was sometimes unblocked but the admins were never castigated.

Justforasecond 08:54, 4 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

hmmm ok i misunderstood. i thought you were making sure the arbitrators werent abusing their power such as checkuser. well i'd happily give you a vote if you are concerned with some of our admins. one guy blocked me for a month and falsely accused me of vandalism (later he changed it to "edit warring" or something else like that). if you had known about this case what would you have done? Justforasecond 09:07, 4 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

ArbCom elections

Hello Rebecca, and thank you for the explanation. Since you have taken the time to respond to me, I will in turn indent my oppose for now and reconsider my stance. I try to be a fair opposer, and you have given me reasons to support, both by explaining your actions, and by discussing like this: two qualities I'd like to see in an arbitrator. I have to say I should have assumed more good faith your actions, and apologize for not doing so. Acalamari 23:05, 4 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you, Rebecca, for your thoughtful response explaining your actions. You're certainly gutsy (and always have been), which is actually a good attribute for an arbitrator. I'm quite satisfied with your answer above (on my talk page I mean) and in the past have generally appreciated your unique and valuable insight on things. I'm always open to changing my mind, and you've convinced me that we could really benefit from having you on Arbcom again. --MPerel 03:06, 5 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

ArbCom table with portfolio links

Hello! As we did for last year's election, we are again compiling a Wikipedia:Arbitration Committee Elections December 2007/Summary table. This table contains a column "Portfolio" for links that display candidates' pertinent skills. I will be going through each candidate's statements and gradually populate the column, but this may take some time. Please feel free to add some links in the form [link|c] if you feel it shows conflict resolution skills, or [link|o] otherwise. It would also be helpful if you can check if the information about you is correct. I'm sorry that this message is so late; I wasn't aware about your nomination when I sent out these messages.

My motivation is that as a voter, I don't want to just rely on a candidate's words, but also see their actions. Moreover, I believe a portfolio of "model cases" to remember in difficult situations can be useful for each candidate, as well. I believe that conflict resolution skills are most pertinent to the position, but if you want to highlight other skills, please feel free to use a new letter and add it to Wikipedia:Arbitration Committee Elections December 2007/Summary table#Columns of this table.

I used the template Wikipedia:Arbitration Committee Elections December 2007/Summary table/cand to make it easier to enter the values in the table. I'm sorry that I didn't get around to entering all values, I will do that in about 21 hours if you don't get around to it. — Sebastian 09:36, 5 December 2007 (UTC) (I may not be watching this page anymore. If you would like to continue the conversation, please do so here and let me know.)[reply]

My support rationale

I've decided to support your ArbCom candidacy, as I do believe you have the necessary experience for the task; your explanation was good; and, as I mentioned before, you're an excellent editor. I am not overly concerned by other issues raised in the opposition section. I know it wasn't necessary to mention this here, but as you came to my talk page first, I feel I should leave a courtesy note regarding why I support you. Good luck. Acalamari 22:42, 5 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

AfD nomination of 2004 Australian Greens candidates

An article that you have been involved in editing, 2004 Australian Greens candidates, has been listed for deletion. If you are interested in the deletion discussion, please participate by adding your comments at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/2004 Australian Greens candidates. Thank you. Frickeg (talk) 08:11, 6 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Minister articles

Thanks, did you notice the threat to delete the electoral district of Rylstone article on my talk page?--Grahame (talk) 09:35, 6 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

re Vote

To be honest I'm not sure, it's just that you seem to provoke opposition and concern from a few editors who've been around much longer than I have. I apologise if my comments were poorly worded, and I certainly wasn't intending to attack you. I wasn't yet a Wikipedian when you were an arbitrator in the past, and haven't interacted with you at all, so I can't evaluate your candidacy on the basis of past experience. Given that I know so little about you, I'm not 100% comfortable supporting, but I won't oppose you either. Either way, good luck. Walton^One 11:52, 6 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Electoral district of South-West Coast

Electoral district of Essendon, Electoral district of Flemington and Electoral district of Essendon and Flemington

Hi Rebecca - I am very disappointed in you for deleting all former MPs for Electoral district of Flemington and Electoral district of Essendon and Flemington. The reason why I put those MPs in that page was so that I did not have to create separate pages for Electoral district of Flemington and Electoral district of Essendon and Flemington. So you have a choice a) We create Electoral district of Flemington and Electoral district of Essendon and Flemington and you put in the MPs for Electoral district of Flemington and Electoral district of Essendon and Flemington or b) you revert your edits in Electoral district of Essendon. Because I'm not expert in Wikipedia and I put a lot of hours into this and I feel let down that stuff I put in has now been deleted. In particular Alfred Deakin the 2nd PM of Aust was a former MP for Electoral district of Essendon and Flemington and I would like to see that noted in an article - can you pls make the adjustments - thanks cheers 06:55, 7 December 2007 (UTC)

Hi Rebecca - many thx for your edits - I'm very happy and I'm agree with your comments - cheers 03:07, 8 December 2007 (UTC)~ —Preceding unsigned comment added by CatonB (talk • contribs)

Electoral district of Evelyn

It wasn't your intention, I'm sure, but you inadvertently changed the colour representing the last ALP member to hold this seat to that of the Liberal party, which made the table confusing. I've changed it back. BigHaz - Schreit mich an 09:44, 8 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Spouse of the Prime Minister of Australia

Why exactly do you think this page needs to exist? The text at the top is just puff, the only piece of info is that the PM's spouse is not a public office. Very few of the people on that list have pages, that is, they're not prominent in their own right.

Sure, we need a category, but we already have that. We'd be better off rolling that info into the PMs' pages. Maybe adding a spouse column to the chronological list of PMs.

Nick 04:29, 10 December 2007 (UTC)

PS Apparently Thérèse Rein does insist on the accents in her name (despite the fact that Rudd pronounces it in some strange, non accented way!).

I came here to make the same point, Rebecca. The link redirects to the accented version in any case. Not sure what "bogus prod" meant [5] - can you explain? Cheers. -- JackofOz (talk) 09:24, 10 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Wikipedia:Arbitration_Committee_Elections_December_2007/Vote/Rebecca

I'm worried only about wheel warring that seems to have occurred(albeit over a year ago for the first case, but this is for Arbcom, and not just a standard RFA type issue) and worried about something causing another burnout. Dureo (talk) 10:49, 10 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

WikiProject Australia newsletter

WikiProject Australia publishes a newsletter informing Australian Wikipedians of ongoing events and happenings within the community and the project. This month's newsletter has been published. If you wish to unsubscribe from these messages, or prefer to have the newsletter delivered in full to your talk page, see our subscription page. This notice delivered by BrownBot (talk), at 22:01, 11 December 2007 (UTC).[reply]

Rai Coast results

According to the PNG EC homepage, the election results are in -- but I haven't found them anywhere... Help? —Nightstallion 22:19, 13 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

William Ruthven

Rebecca, I see you deleted this article yesterday. I understand your concerns about the ADB content, but I wondered if there was perhaps an earlier version of the article that could be restored, without the ADB content. As a winner of the Victoria Cross, the article subject certainly passes the notability test. David Underdown (talk) 11:35, 14 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Got my hands full with other things at the moment really, I just happened to notice his redlink in List of First World War Victoria Cross recipients (one of only two), clicked on it and saw you only deleted it a day or so ago. I thought there might have been earlier version as most of the VC articles were created by migrating info from another website (with permission), but since I'm not an admin I couldn't tell. I could probably at least find the citation in the London Gazette, but the rest fo the background is harder to put together (though I think the ADB may be online?, so it can at least be used for source info, without copying it word for word). David Underdown (talk) 11:54, 14 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks, I've done a bit of tidying. Could you possibly check Adam Wayne Horsfall for any deleted revisions, as he was the only other redlink in the list? David Underdown (talk) 12:46, 14 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Following a bit more research I've concluded that Horsfall's addition to the list was vandalism. He's not listed here:

"No. 31259". The London Gazette (invalid |supp= (help)). 28 March 1919. {{cite magazine}}: Check date values in: |date= (help) Which is supposed to be an index of First World War VCs, nor at
http://www.nationalarchives.gov.uk/documentsonline/victoriacross.asp

David Underdown (talk) 14:18, 14 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Happy Holidays

You got a Christmas card! → → →

Wishing you and yours the very best of the holiday season. May the coming year bring you peace, joy, health and happiness. God bless us, every one! Jeffpw (talk) 20:02, 14 December 2007 (UTC) [reply]

Copyright problems

Hello. Concerning your contribution, Pulitzer Prize for Feature Writing, we cannot accept copyrighted text or images borrowed from either web sites or printed material without the permission of the author. This article or image appears to be a direct copy from http://www.pulitzer.org/cgi-bin/catquery.cgi?type=w&category=Feature+Writing&FormsButton5=Retrieve. As a copyright violation, Pulitzer Prize for Feature Writing appears to qualify for deletion under the speedy deletion criteria. Pulitzer Prize for Feature Writing has been tagged for deletion, and may have been deleted by the time you see this message. For text material, please consider rewriting the content and citing the source, provided that it is credible.

If you believe that the article or image is not a copyright violation, or if you have permission from the copyright holder to release the content freely under the GNU Free Documentation License (GFDL) then you should do one of the following:

If you have permission from the author, leave a message explaining the details at Talk:Pulitzer Prize for Feature Writing and send an email with the message to "permissions-en (at) wikimedia (dot) org". See Wikipedia:Requesting copyright permission for instructions.
If a note on the original website states that re-use is permitted under the GFDL or released into the public domain leave a note at Talk:Pulitzer Prize for Feature Writing with a link to where we can find that note.
If you own the copyright to the material: send an e-mail from an address associated with the original publication to permissions-en(at)wikimedia(dot)org or a postal message to the Wikimedia Foundation permitting re-use under the GFDL, and note that you have done so on Talk:Pulitzer Prize for Feature Writing.

However, for text content, you may want to consider rewriting the content in your own words. Thank you, and please feel free to continue contributing to Wikipedia. Bruxism (talk) 07:18, 19 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Pulitzer Prizes

Hi Rebecca, an editor just tagged one of the Pulitzer Prize pages as a copyvio. I know you and I discussed some Pulitzer stuff awhile back and I recall you worked on the pages. I reverted so we could discuss at the talk page. My initial thought is that lists of Nobel Prize winners or Pulitzer Prize winners were never copyrighted text in the first place, and that the Pulitzer Web site simply maintains a list of its winners just as we do. I am not a lawyer however and don't have a lot of experience with this sort of stuff. I'll start a discussion at Talk:Pulitzer Prize for Feature Writing and if you have any further experience with this stuff than me, I'd like to hear your perspective. If it's determined this were a copyvio then it seems that all Pulitzer pages would have to go. --JayHenry (talk) 07:19, 19 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Pendal et al

Definitely! Thanks for that. David Black's volumes stop at 1990 (quite abruptly in fact) so this will be a very useful addition to our resource library :) Orderinchaos 12:17, 19 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Articles you might like to edit, from SuggestBot

SuggestBot predicts that you will enjoy editing some of these articles. Have fun!

Stubs: Division of Corinella (1990-96); Member of the Western Australian Legislative Council; John Monash; Ballarat East, Victoria; Division of Mallee; Ursula Stephens; Division of Solomon; Division of Murray; Division of Isaacs; Helen Polley; Eric Ripper; Claire Moore; Cabinet of Australia; Division of Jagajaga; Division of Corinella (1901-06); Division of Pearce; Division of Moira; Paradise, South Australia; Jan McLucas

Cleanup: Plympton, South Australia; Electoral reform in Canada; John Kerr
Merge: Woolworths Limited; Yugoslav wars; Computed tomography
Add Sources: Kerry O'Brien (politician); Russell Trood; Division of Lang
Wikify: Electoral calendar 2005; Linda Kirk; How Are We to Live?
Expand: St Leonards, Victoria; Henry Dobson; Wik Peoples v Queensland

SuggestBot picks articles in a number of ways based on other articles you've edited, including straight text similarity, following wikilinks, and matching your editing patterns against those of other Wikipedians. It tries to recommend only articles that other Wikipedians have marked as needing work. Your contributions make Wikipedia better -- thanks for helping.

If you have feedback on how to make SuggestBot better, please tell me on SuggestBot's talk page. Thanks from ForteTuba, SuggestBot's caretaker.

P.S. You received these suggestions because your name was listed on the SuggestBot request page. If this was in error, sorry about the confusion. -- ForteTuba (talk) 15:08, 20 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Merge proposal

It has been proposed that WP:EPISODE be merged into WP:WAF. Your input is desired, so please comment here. Ursasapien (talk) 11:15, 21 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Past Electorates

Hi Rebecca - thanks for your assistance and your advice re Past electorates much appreciated :) Cheers --CatonB (talk) 09:10, 28 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Abolished Victorian Upper House Provinces

Hi Rebecca, can you please add into Victorian Legislative Council abolished provinces prior to 2002 as well ie Boronia and South Eastern etc. Thanks Cheers --CatonB (talk) 10:08, 28 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Any kind of help would be appreciated - but many thanks for the assistance. I've put in some of them in Victorian Legislative Council and we will fill it in as we go. Cool Thanks Rebecca. Cheerio. --CatonB (talk) 11:28, 28 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Rebecca - don't worry about it - leave it for tomorrow - have a good night sleep - I'll probably do the same. Good night and many thanks for your contribution to Wikipedia. Cheers --CatonB (talk) 12:08, 28 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Rebecca - on the Vic Parl Re-member website - when searching for a former MP, you can search by name, electorate (district, region or province). Once search is done if it says MLA it is a district, otherwise MLC indicated the electorate is regions or province. Good night.--CatonB (talk) 12:15, 28 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

No worries --CatonB (talk) 02:19, 1 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Portal:New South Wales candidacy

Hi Rebecca, I've completed the Things you can do box and the Topics box on the New South Wales portal (nomination). I hope I have addressed your initial concerns satisfactorily. Cheers, Spebi 02:37, 29 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Robert Tickner

Yep, did read before tagging. Was not aware Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander Affairs was a "big" thing in Australia, thought it was similar to US Dept of Interior, etc. Article was unsourced and seemed like it couldve been a one-hit wonder due to Hindmarsh controversey. Apologies. Mbisanz (talk) 22:45, 30 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

The WikiProject Universities Newsletter: Issue IV (December 2007)

The December 2007 issue of the WikiProject Universities newsletter has been published. You may read the newsletter, change the format in which future issues will be delivered to you, or unsubscribe from this notification by following the link. Thank you for your continued support of WikiProject Universities! —Noetic Sage 23:41, 30 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Louise Pratt

Another editor has added the "{{prod}}" template to the article Louise Pratt, suggesting that it be deleted according to the proposed deletion process. All contributions are appreciated, but the editor doesn't believe it satisfies Wikipedia's criteria for inclusion, and has explained why in the article (see also Wikipedia:What Wikipedia is not and Wikipedia:Notability). Please either work to improve the article if the topic is worthy of inclusion in Wikipedia or discuss the relevant issues at its talk page. If you remove the {{prod}} template, the article will not be deleted, but note that it may still be sent to Wikipedia:Articles for deletion, where it may be deleted if consensus to delete is reached. BJBot (talk) 04:45, 1 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Disputed fair use rationale for Image:Adelthunderbirdslogo.png

Thanks for uploading Image:Adelthunderbirdslogo.png. However, there is a concern that the rationale you have provided for using this image under "fair use" may be invalid. Please read the instructions at Wikipedia:Non-free content carefully, then go to the image description page and clarify why you think the image qualifies for fair use. Using one of the templates at Wikipedia:Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to ensure that your image is in compliance with Wikipedia policy, but remember that you must complete the template. Do not simply insert a blank template on an image page.

If it is determined that the image does not qualify under fair use, it will be deleted within a couple of days according to our criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the media copyright questions page. Thank you.BetacommandBot (talk) 06:52, 2 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Happy New Year

Hello Rebecca, I hope you had a pleasant New Year's Day, and that 2008 brings further success, health and happiness! ...and further nationalist conquests ;) All the best!.... ~ Blnguyen (bananabucket) 06:57, 2 January 2008 (UTC) [reply]

Disputed fair use rationale for Image:Hunterjaegerslogo.png

Thanks for uploading Image:Hunterjaegerslogo.png. However, there is a concern that the rationale you have provided for using this image under "fair use" may be invalid. Please read the instructions at Wikipedia:Non-free content carefully, then go to the image description page and clarify why you think the image qualifies for fair use. Using one of the templates at Wikipedia:Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to ensure that your image is in compliance with Wikipedia policy, but remember that you must complete the template. Do not simply insert a blank template on an image page.

If it is determined that the image does not qualify under fair use, it will be deleted within a couple of days according to our criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the media copyright questions page. Thank you.BetacommandBot (talk) 16:55, 2 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Mississippi elections

You recently reverted United States Senate election in Mississippi, 2008. Could you also do the same with United States Senate special election in Mississippi, 2008 since it redirects to the one you reverted? They were both seperate articles but someone came in and merged them together. I tried to revert the special election one but it's not showing any history to revert to. -- ALLSTARecho 04:45, 3 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

WikiProject Australia newsletter

WikiProject Australia publishes a newsletter informing Australian Wikipedians of ongoing events and happenings within the community and the project. This month's newsletter has been published. If you wish to unsubscribe from these messages, or prefer to have the newsletter delivered in full to your talk page, see our subscription page. This notice delivered by BrownBot (talk), at 22:10, 3 January 2008 (UTC).[reply]

Councillors of City of Glen Eira constant vandalism

Hi Rebecca, there has been constant vandalism by former Glen Eira councillors and I have been asking for it to stop but it just not going to happen. I have requested twice for semi-protection and it has been rejected. So if that page if vandalism again - I'm just going to give up and request for deletion of page - it is a joke that bias has to come into Wikipedia. --CatonB (talk) 05:51, 6 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Rebecca - thanks for doing that. Now I hope that the councillors will stop vandalising Wikipedia --CatonB (talk) 07:38, 6 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Town Halls

Thanks for that, though the credit should be directed to Mattinbgn who took all of the rural shire photos and Orderinchaos whose output of former LGA articles has been astonishing. I've just been doing a bit of tinkering here and there and taking a few photos around the metro area. And thank you - I've seen you busy at work updating all the mayors in my LGA travels. --Melburnian (talk) 11:45, 7 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Statistical records

Hi Rebecca - the website certainly has gotten it's act together in terms of getting more historical info online. I came across this PDF a month or so ago and was pleasantly surprised to find it had a list of leaders of the opposition going back to 1884. I've been considering for a while to go the whole hog with SA state elections, and like federal create them all. It's just actually finding the motivation at the moment to do it is a bit hard. Timeshift (talk) 23:24, 8 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Agreed. And emailed. Also, i'm not sure if you're aware, but betacommandbot now goes around checking image descriptions, such as making sure each page has a fair use rationale written for it. I made a change to the above image which should stop betacommandbot, but FYI pages they appear on need linking to now. Timeshift (talk) 23:30, 8 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Fascinating! Can't wait! Timeshift (talk) 03:42, 9 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Les Tyrell

Hi and thank you for your support, i know that the refs i added are not the best but i added them to point out that it wasn't hard to find any in a few minutes, the place you say to look for refs needs to be paid for before you can get the full story and im sure that not many people on here will do that (i may be wrong and sorry if i am), i added info to the Les page some time back about all the awards that he and his council had got, only to have it removed, i thought i was doing the right thing as did other editors. Also I just want to let you know that i feel that the Les page (and other pages about Thuringowa) was put up for deletion only because i had something to do with it as it seem that every page that has the name Thuringowa in it somewhere or i have worked on is being attacked, and i am lost as to why, I have seen that the pages about Tony Mooney and most of the other Townsville pages that i built the Thuringowa one's on are not up for deletion (just more proof that it is a pick on Thuringowa) also it keeps coming up that i have something to do with the council because i have Thuringowa in my username....so what, i know a lot of people on here with city names in the user name, can you please put some light on what is going on here if you can, becasue i have had about all i can take of the one sided crap that is being pushed at me, when all i want to do is keep these pages True, up to date and correct with the Facts as they come in.
I would also like to thank you and all the other users that understand what i have done. Thuringowacityrep (talk) 07:31, 11 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you for your reply and I understand what you are saying about some of the things I have done, but this is still no reason to go on the way a user has, when I did add some of the info to the page it got the new rating and the old one was low, so this is where I am lost ...how can taking away info that gave it a B make it any better, I can understand that a re-word and a better layout will make it better (and I know that some info would need to be removed) but what this user has done is really overboard and petty.

Most of the info that was added (not only by me) was put on to inform people of what the City of Thuringowa is and has (just like a lot of other pages on here). I have a bad feeling that the page will be no more after Thuringowa as a city is gone, but I would like to see the page stay up but change the name to Thuringowa, Queensland and let it tell people about what is used to be, what it used to have, how things came to be as it is a major part of history that is ending but very few people seem to understand that, I hope you do.Thuringowacityrep (talk) 10:05, 11 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I'm sorry if I gave you the impression I wanted the Tyrell article deleted, particularly on the feeble basis that a quick internet search couldn't find significant sources. I actually haven't expressed an opinion either way on deletion. It's true that a google search generates nothing much but there are a host of other sources I don't have access to - you mention Factiva but there are also books on Queensland politics or Thuringowa City, community newspapers, State Library archives, whatever. My question whether anyone could point to significant sources was a genuine one - I couldn't find any but if others can that would help close the debate. So - a genuine question, and sorry if I phrased it the wrong way. Euryalus (talk) 06:34, 13 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Your edit to User talk:Thuringowacityrep

Hello. Per WP:TPG#Others' comments, please do not overwrite the comments of others on talk pages, as with this edit: [6]. Thanks, Sandstein (talk) 12:05, 14 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Your Edit in Isotopia Festival

Thanks for removing the PROD banner from the article. Can you please explain me why did you do it? Should'nt you have to discuss it first. Sorry about the questions I am new to Wikipedia and still trying to catch up with the protocol.Luis v silva (talk) 02:23, 15 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for the reply Luis v silva (talk) 05:10, 15 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Re: Any chance you could whip up an article on this?

Hey, I noticed last night that we don't have any article on Frank Galbally. It'd be a pretty useful one to have, because he was such a well known figure, but I've got a to-do list a mile long already and I probably won't get around to it for ages, and I figure it's more your area than mine. Any chance you'd be able to whip up something on him? Rebecca (talk) 10:07, 15 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I probably won't have time to do much just now; I'll be away for a fortnight from Saturday. It would be a good one to do when I get back though, when I can get into the newspaper collections at uni. There should be plenty of material on him in there. I get some stuff back to the late 80s through Factiva, but some 60s/70s stuff would be good. --bainer (talk) 11:05, 15 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

West Towne Mall

Welcome, and thank you for editing the page West Towne Mall on Wikipedia. May I ask that you please be careful to not remove maintenance tags from an article without addressing the problem the tag presents? If you believe the tag is placed there in error, you may feel free to use the talk page to explain why the tag was removed. Thank you. - Mdsummermsw (talk) 13:35, 15 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you for your comment. I have restored the tag in question because the article is unsourced and does not assert notability.

As you suggested, this was a judgement call on my part. In my judgement, the tag was, and is still warrented. If you would prefer, feel free to list this under A7.

Have a great day!

Mdsummermsw (talk) 13:55, 15 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks again for your comments. I have added discussion on this on the talk page.

Please direct any further comments about me and/or my editing to my talk page.

Have a good one!

Mdsummermsw (talk) 14:43, 16 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Centralized TV Episode Discussion

Over the past months, TV episodes have been reverted by (to name a couple) TTN, Eusebeus and others. No centralized discussion has taken place, so I'm asking everyone who has been involved in this issue to voice their opinions here in this centralized spot, be they pro or anti. Discussion is here [7]. --Maniwar (talk) 23:35, 15 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Orphaned non-free media (Image:Aiscandarterslogo.png)

Thanks for uploading Image:Aiscandarterslogo.png. The media description page currently specifies that it is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, it is currently orphaned, meaning that it is not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the media 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 media 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 all non-free media not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. BJBot (talk) 20:18, 19 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Orphaned non-free media (Image:Hunterjaegerslogo.png)

Thanks for uploading Image:Hunterjaegerslogo.png. The media description page currently specifies that it is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, it is currently orphaned, meaning that it is not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the media 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 media 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 all non-free media not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. BJBot (talk) 20:36, 19 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Orphaned non-free media (Image:Melbkestrelslogo.png)

Thanks for uploading Image:Melbkestrelslogo.png. The media description page currently specifies that it is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, it is currently orphaned, meaning that it is not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the media 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 media 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 all non-free media not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. BJBot (talk) 20:48, 19 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Orphaned non-free media (Image:Qldfirebirdslogo.png)

Thanks for uploading Image:Qldfirebirdslogo.png. The media description page currently specifies that it is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, it is currently orphaned, meaning that it is not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the media 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 media 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 all non-free media not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. BJBot (talk) 21:03, 19 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

LGBT WikiProject Newsletter

Delivered sometime in January 2008 (UTC). SatyrBot (talk) 23:51, 19 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Proper procedure?

I believe that you are an esteemed member of the Wikipedia community and have experience in ArbCom. However, since you are not a current member of ArbCom, it is ethical to contact you since you would never adjudicate the dispute as an ArbCom member.

The question to you is what is the proper process for community ban or defacto community ban? With RFAs, there is discussion for seven days. With ArbCom elections, its two weeks. With something so grave as permanently banning someone, it shocks the conscience that we allow minimal discussion of perhaps 15 hours. It further shocks the conscience that we should community ban someone when there is opposition to it by several editors. Several intermediate actions were proposed. The major issue that concerns me is rush to judgment.

1. An editor has been indefinitely blocked. The editor’s indefinite block was not supported by consensus. Three users seemed to oppose it and a fourth was neutral. A fifth was agreeable if indefinite blocking was not done. I was not involved previously and was not among the 5 users. In fact, I have never made any statements in support of the blocked editor's behavior.

2. Based on 1., I proposed an unblock and a review of the editor’s edits for the next 7 days. This was explained prior to unblock. I proposed that I would not intervene if the editor edited contentiously and was reblocked. This is a compromise between the indefinite block and not blocking the person.

3. The admin who originally made the indefinite block has engaged in wheel warring and has reblocked the editor indefinitely (same action as he originally did). This was despite a suggestion to propose another compromise solution if he was not satisfied with the original compromise solution.

4. The process is very disturbing because the blocked editor was never notified that his defacto community ban was being discussed at ANI nor was the editor given a chance to defend himself at ANI. This violates the time-honoured practice in Wikipedia and in many civilized countries of the right to defend oneself.

I have never proposed that the editor in question was a good editor. Others have. The ANI post had remarks such as:

I want to stress that I do not agree or disagree with the block - I just think it needs to be discussed to ensure that there is community support for an action: B

…and may be a tad too controversial about how edits are made, but he/she isn't totally wrong.: Anynobody (referring to the blocked user)

Has CltFn been a party to any form of DR at all?: Anynobody (I think there’s been no DR)

I think an indef. block is a bit harsh, considering what he did. CltFn has, after all, been good for over a year since the last block…I am very confused as to why this disserves an indef. block.: Yahel Guhan

All I am proposing is that we give him one last chance to change before an indef. block after a month. Heck, we give repeat vandals that opportunity all the time, with 1 month, 3 month, 1 year blocks, but almost never indef. Besides, at least he remained on the talk page for the most part this time, rather than in the article, where he is less disruptive, which may mean he might be trying to improve himself: Yahel Guhan

Not that I am trying to sanction what he did, but I do think an indef. time period is excessive, at least at this point: Yahel Guhan

A suggestion for formal WP:DR has been made onthe user's page. Perhaps, given his long-term contributor status, it may be to our advantage to let him try that process?: ThuranX

I am however also happy to endorse Thuran's proposed course of action and comments above also.: Orderinchaos struck by Orderinchaos 17:45, 21 January 2008 (UTC) - selective quote which misrepresents my position[reply]

based on looking through his contributions, if an admin is willing to keep a close eye on a problem user, that's a low risk proposition: B

I don't have a problem with Archtransit's action providing tha the follows through on it. I do have a problem with the same admin who originally made the block reimplementing it.: B (being critical of JerseyDevil’s wheel warring)

Note to those who were opposed to my temporary unblock of CltFn and proposal of a compromise between the editors for defacto ban and those opposed to ban, my actions were done as a compromise between parties given most of the above statements. It is not uncommon for the conciliator or third party diplomat to be attacked. The conciliators’ actions are often unpopular but they are made in the interest of compromise.

The easiest thing to do is to do nothing. However, that just proves to others that there is a cabal and a conspiracy of silence. If there is true consensus, let’s join hands. If there is not a consensus or where one hasn’t fully formed, then censorship and ending discussion plays into the hands of those who suggest that there is a cabal. Archtransit (talk) 18:18, 20 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Aust Barnstar

		The Australian Barnstar of National Merit
		for your efforts with Australian articles Gnan garra 00:37, 26 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Cynna Kydd

Hi there Rebecca. Can you have a look in here because some bits are looking out for refs. It's good to put in a bit of work because the incumbency factor on Wikipedia is so big that it's easier to maintain the article rather than re-FAC it. Blnguyen (bananabucket) 00:28, 28 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Query

Why do you think this guy is noteable? Timeshift (talk) 04:42, 2 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

The WikiProject Universities Newsletter: Issue V (January 2008)

The January 2008 issue of the WikiProject Universities newsletter has been published. You may read the newsletter, change the format in which future issues will be delivered to you, or unsubscribe from this notification by following the link. Thank you for your continued support of WikiProject Universities! —Noetic Sage 22:05, 3 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Remember User:Jackp?

The guy who was constantly trying to turn the Sydney article into a travel guide? You indef'ed him way back in July '06 but he's returned as various socks every time his previous incarnation is blocked. This list is non-exhaustive, as most are blocked quickly without any tagging, but he's probably created around 30 socks since... At least he moved off Sydney, and focussed on B-grade movies! The socks I've blocked include User:BlueVelvet86, User:AddictedToFilm, User:DaGodmotherrox, User:Timeandtimeagain2007, User:MobyDick2007, User:Shrek2007, User:Moviemonster, User:Kayto, User:Cinefile81, User:Trueromance33, User:Disco dog23 and User:Delia19, the latter whom I blocked yesterday. Can you have a look and see if I have missed any, and suggest a hard range block for the IP, as it's becoming rather tiresome. Thanks. --Step hen 23:45, 10 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Blnguyen had a look at this. Not a lot that can be done unfortunately. --Step hen 21:08, 13 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Cynna Kydd

Hi Rebecca. Are you planning to make the last push on this article? Its review shows it's improved, but it's been a while since there was work. Marskell (talk) 15:17, 17 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

It is being left open, BTW, and that's been noted on the review. Marskell (talk) 15:10, 22 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Well done. Thanks for your work. Blnguyen (vote in the photo straw poll) 01:52, 3 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Fred Miller (Australian politician).

Was it deleted for lack of notability? -- Jeandré, 2008-02-29t14:52z

helloooooo

g'day rebecca - and I hope you're good, and not too busy....

you probably recall that I've sent through some emails over the last few months trying to ascertain the ombuds. folk's ideas on the following;

I was wondering if the ombudsman commission has any opinion as to the propriety of an individual checkuser telling an editor (me!) when they have been checked, by whom, and for what rationale.

I have understood that the commission is not minded to instruct the release of such information, but I'm wondering if that implies a general restriction or not.

If you get the chance to give it some thought, it would be appreciated! thanks, Privatemusings (talk) 00:54, 3 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Speedy deletion of Template:Abolished Electoral Divisions of Northern Territory

A tag has been placed on Template:Abolished Electoral Divisions of Northern Territory requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section T3 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because it is a deprecated or orphaned template. After seven days, if it is still unused and the speedy deletion tag has not been removed, the template will be deleted.

If the template is intended to be substituted, please feel free to remove the speedy deletion tag and please consider putting a note on the template's page indicating that it is substituted so as to avoid any future mistakes (<noinclude>{{transclusionless}}</noinclude>).

Thanks. --MZMcBride (talk) 02:58, 3 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Rail transport in Victoria

I am trying to get some discussion about the naming and notability of the former passenger / current freight network of Victoria going - if you have some time to have a look at Talk:Rail transport in Victoria it would be appreciated. Wongm (talk) 10:42, 3 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

LGBT WikiProject Newsletter

Delivered by SatyrBot around 17:14, 3 March 2008 (UTC) SatyrBot (talk) 17:54, 3 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

George Maxwell (Australian politician)

I tried to move George Arnot Maxwell (moved by User:Cygnis insignis for unknown reasons) back to its correct title of George Maxwell (Austrlaian politician) (sometimes these moves seem to work even though I'm not admin) but I stuffed up the spelling, and I can't delete the George Maxwell (Austrlaian politician) redirect. I'd be grateful if you could fix.--Grahame (talk) 11:57, 6 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Rebecca. I undid the move and posted my reasons at User talk:Grahamec. Regards, cygnis insignis 02:42, 7 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Happy Birthday!!

The Wikipedia Birthday Committee wishes you a very happy birthday! Enjoy your special day.

Comet styles 23:00, 7 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Councillor of Glen Eira=

Hi Rebecca - I would like to have Councillors_of_City_of_Glen_Eira nominated for deletion as there is constant vandalism Many thanks in advance. --CatonB (talk) 04:02, 10 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Hi - Done - can you please review if I've done it correctly (I'm really sick and tired of this vogon red tape - there is a clear case for vandalism on that article and it has to stop and no one is doing anything about it) Thanks --CatonB (talk) 21:54, 12 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

ED

You may want to know there's a page about you on ED. --Sonjaaa (talk) 05:00, 11 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

AfD nomination of List of shopping malls in the United States

I have nominated List of shopping malls in the United States, an article you created, for deletion. I do not feel that this article satisfies Wikipedia's criteria for inclusion, and have explained why at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/List of shopping malls in the United States (4rd nomination). Your opinions on the matter are welcome at that same discussion page; also, you are welcome to edit the article to address these concerns. Thank you for your time. Collectonian (talk) 19:42, 11 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

THURINGOWA PAGE

Hi i was told that if any editor wanted to remove a large amount of info like you have just done , it needs to be talked about on the talk page, not only myself but other editors want to see the Thuringowa page stay but be reworded so that the 128 years of history can be kept. So can you please just slow down a bit and wait until some other editors can have their say on how this page should be kept....most of what you removed can be reworded to how how it was the Thuringowa council that built or funded etc. This is being fair isn't it. Thuringowacityrep (talk) 10:30, 16 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you for your words, i want to add more info to the history part but it seems every time i added something it gets removed (not by you) but i will try again soon ....i also must say sorry if i snapped a bit...it's just i was told that before i move any info or change the page name i MUST discuss it on the talk page, and then to see all my hard work get removed with out any input, ...got to me a bit, so again sorry if i bit your head off, i see your not like some of the other editors now and i will do my best to add more history to the Former City of Thuringowa page and to the Suburbs (lets hope it stays)Thuringowacityrep (talk) 10:53, 16 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

It goes back some time now ...nothing right now....it was back a while that i added some info about the history and it got removed and i was told to stop using my POV plus as you may know a lot of stuff i added to Thuringowa was removed by an editor....why ...i don't know to this day. But one think i can say is that now that Thuringowa city is no more a few editors will be happy. Thuringowacityrep (talk) 11:03, 16 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Wikilinking railway template stations

Regarding your recent wikilinking of railway stations on some templates such as the Mungindi Line, are these minor stations really going to get to get their own pages, are they noatble enough? If so, who is going to do it? Until such time arises, in my opinion it looks messy having blank links to non-existant pages.Quaidy (talk) 10:30, 17 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Some of these stations don't even have articles for the town/locality that the station is in so why should there be need for one for the station? Also to be bruatlly frank, a lot of the Victorian station pages are no more than station x is on line y which is q km from Melbourne, nothing more than the template would tell us. Quaidy (talk) 21:00, 17 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Calling me a dickhead is not particularly mature or constructive. I gave good reasons for my revisions, and have contributed more to NSW rail articles than most users. Why don't we see if articles for the stations appear in the next 2 weeks, if not, then I'll revert them back. Quaidy (talk) 02:27, 18 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]
- I have no intention of preventing them being created (although I don't intend creating them, and don't think there is enough info out there to justify creating individual pages- try looking and you'll see). To me, it seems unsightly and pointless having redlinks for a whole lot of pages that seem to have little or no chance of being created.Quaidy (talk) 04:48, 18 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

- Go for it, I won't be. Quaidy (talk) 05:29, 18 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

WikiProject Universities Newsletter: Issue VII (March 2008)

The March 2008 issue of the WikiProject Universities newsletter has been published. You may read the newsletter, change the format in which future issues will be delivered to you, or unsubscribe from this notification by following the link. Thank you for your continued support of WikiProject Universities! —Delivered on 17:57, 31 March 2008 (UTC) by MiszaBot (talk)

==Netball project==--talk-to-me! (talk) 08:55, 12 April 2008 (UTC) See http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:WikiProject_Council/Proposals#Netball[reply]

Matt (talk) 00:22, 9 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for starting the project page, Rebecca. I will focus on developing the project page, project banner, player infobox and associated templates and categories. (Since my netball knowledge/involvement is probably that of the typical kiwi bloke i.e I watch tests on TV). I'm accumulating some code ~~pinched from~~ inspired by other sports wikiprojects. I think we shoul try and push 2 or 3 articles towards featured status: Netball, 2007 Netball World Championships and ANZ Championship. Since we currently appear to be 3 Kiwis and and Aussie, we should probably try to recruit members from England, Africa and the Carribbean. dramatic (talk) 02:08, 11 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Exposing Identity on wikipedia

Hi Rebecca,

This is in connection with one Checkuser case filed against me [8], I noticed that one of the user User:Reneeholle, who is having an disagreement with me regarding one of the topic's, has intentionally exposed my IP address [9] as such, exposed my real world identity, This puts my personal security at great risk, given nature of conflicts. I have recently noticed that few more people who have dis-agreement with the subject which i unknowingly took-up, were subject to threats by the said group. I request speedy deletion of that post and appropriate sanctions if applicable. Any help in this regard will be highly appreciated.--talk-to-me! (talk) 08:55, 12 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for the quick reply, I understand the slip from my side, but does that gives, user's having dis-agreement over some topic, liberty to publicly expose identity ? this is more of a query with privacy policy. --talk-to-me! (talk) 10:25, 12 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Revert War

Hi Rebecca, before we get into a revert war here over Scrubs episodes, can you please indicate that part of the arbcom case which explicitly prevents content that is in violation of our policies and guidelines from being merged and redirected? Also, can you please point me to the section of WP:FICT or the ongoing discussion at WT:FICT that permits the existence of episodes that are vehicles for plot summaries? I have made considerable efforts to merge the content of these articles to the LOE and would appreciate some feedback that provides explicit links to the policies and practices that we have in place before simply being reverted since as I see it articles that aspire to plot summary and trivia are, by consensus, deemed inappropriate for Wikipedia. Thanks, Eusebeus (talk) 14:53, 21 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

P.S. I agree upon review that My Screw Up is sufficiently sourced and has enough real-world potential to exist independently. Eusebeus (talk) 14:54, 21 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]
- Yes, well I am confident you would not have undone my redirects without first having participated at the Scrubs discussion extensively and more importantly at the ongoing policy discussion at WT:FICT. Indeed, do I not recall your many valuable contributions to that ongoing discussion with respect to consensus? Nonetheless, it will have demonstrated convincingly there is almost nothing I have merged and redirected that does not fail our renewed - note renewed - injunction against standalone articles that are simply vehicles for plot summary - but then I have long been warmed by your many thoughts on this matter and apologise if I suggested you had simply decided ex nihilo to revert me without first having made your views on this matter count. I made an extensive effort at the Scrubs discussion to link to the relevant policy and guideline pages, including the recent arbcom case - I must thank you for having done the same before indiscriminately reverting me. As they say in Syria, Shukrun! Eusebeus (talk) 04:34, 22 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  - Briefly answered on my talk page and I'll keep any further discussion (seems unlikely) there. Good luck with your law studies - it's a major time commitment to be certain. Eusebeus (talk) 14:49, 22 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Blue Heelers (season 13) FLC

Hello Rebecca,

Just a quick note asking for your consideration of Blue Heelers (season 13) (article talk) (FLC page). I noticed you had left comments, which I have carried out, and now I am asking for your consideration again, as the list still has not garnered enough support votes and is due to end shortly.

Thankyou, Daniel99091 (talk) 06:59, 24 April 2008 (UTC).[reply]

CLP

I changed it to the same as the Liberals because I thought that it would be better to be the same as them (as it was before the Liberal colour change a while back) rather than the same as the UAP. Timeshift wanted the Liberals and the CLP to be slightly different. We adjusted the blue of both the CLP and the UAP so that the CLP and Libs were more distinguishable when they appear together in federal election tables. Frickeg (talk) 08:39, 27 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

WikiProject Universities Newsletter: Issue VIII (April 2008)

The April 2008 issue of the WikiProject Universities newsletter has been published. You may read the newsletter, change the format in which future issues will be delivered to you, or unsubscribe from this notification by following the link. Thank you for your continued support of WikiProject Universities! —Delivered on 21:28, 2 May 2008 (UTC) by MiszaBot (talk)

Amanda Marcotte

Hi, Why did you think of the removal of the material recently added to the Amanda Marcotte article as bizarre? (I mean, sincerely, not aggressively, asking!) I checked the references and they were just to a blog accusing her of plagiarizing it, and then a couple other blogs discussing that accusation. My reaction to that was the strong impression of a manufactured controversy with no substantiating third-party coverage cited, and especially not sources of the sort required by the living-persons-biography standards. The material recently added appears to be added by someone close to the original source. I mean, I can't just accuse George Bush of something on my blog, get the attention of a couple other blogs, and then write (or have an ally write) a whole section of the George Bush article about the "controversy" over that accusation. That's not legit. material, especially for a living person. Isn't it original research? Or, do you feel I am misreading the situation? Thanks for your opinion, CHE (talk) 02:20, 3 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

CHE, I copied this comment to Talk:Amanda Marcotte because I wanted to respond, and I thought others might want to, as well. -- Irn (talk) 03:49, 3 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Simon Corbell

I've gone ahead and created a stub. Will add more to it when I can consult Who's Who at uni later this week. Informing you as I note you had a draft at User:Rebecca/Drafts/Simon Corbell for this one. Orderinchaos 01:03, 6 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

No worries. Was more a courtesy notification anyway - case of trying not to step on people's toes if they've already got something in the works. :) Orderinchaos 01:12, 6 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Talk:Louisiana's 6th congressional district special election, 2008

replied--Dr who1975 (talk) 01:41, 6 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Victorian rail images

Hi Rebecca. Not sure if you can help but I have a query about the images used in Victorian railway station articles. Many of these images were uploaded by User:Alex1991.

Some background: I have a bit of a mini-project going where I am moving to Commons images of Victorian towns to develop a resource there - commons:Towns of Victoria. I saw the image Image:Longwood1.jpg and given it was marked in the public domain I moved it to commons. I planned on moving most of the Victorian rural station images there.

I then had a another look at the image and saw this "Image copyrighted. Obtained from http://www.vicrailstations.com/ and used with permission". I am not sure if this is compatible with the licence used and I can't see any evidence of permission such as an OTRS ticket. A quick look saw a similar problem with other rail station images in Victoria. I had planned on asking Alex but saw his talk page was full to the brim with image tagging notices, indicating that he may not be familiar with our image use policies.

To cut a long story short: Do you know the history of these images and do you have an opinion on their current licencing status. If they comply I would love to move them to commons but if they don't I am afraid they may all need to be deleted, which would be a shame as they add immeasurably to the articles. Any advice, etc. would be much welcome. -- Mattinbgn\^talk 02:04, 19 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I have emailed the site owner to find out which way to go. What needs to happen after this? Wongm (talk) 02:58, 31 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I have received a reply - has has had 2 other Wikipedians talk to him about it, but the last in 2006. He was told the licence needed to be updated so they didn't be deleted, advised to use:

"The copyright holder of this file allows anyone to use it for any purpose, provided that the copyright holder is properly attributed. Redistribution, derivative work, commercial use, and all other use is permitted."'

He says he was happy with that, so I just need to know about this OTRS ticket caper. Wongm (talk) 11:15, 2 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Hope you don't mind us using your page here Rebecca but it keeps all the discussion together. I have never had much to do with permissions either but the basics are listed at Wikipedia:Requesting copyright permission#When permission is confirmed I think this is the licence that the material has been released under. Cheers, Mattinbgn\^talk 11:42, 2 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Fair use rationale for Image:Acrashcourseinroses.jpg

Thanks for uploading Image:Acrashcourseinroses.jpg. You've indicated that the image meets Wikipedia's criteria for non-free content, but there is no explanation of why it meets those criteria. Please go to the image description page and edit it to include a fair use rationale. If you have any questions, please post them at Wikipedia:Media copyright questions.

Thank you for your cooperation. NOTE: once you correct this, please remove the tag from the image's page. STBotI (talk) 14:51, 19 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Party names

A very belated question, but I notice that you changed some of the party affiliations in NSW state electorates (e.g. Electoral district of Auburn) to the full party name (i.e. "Australian Labor Party" rather than "Labor"). Is there a policy for this? All the federal articles use "Labor"/"Liberal" (and, yes, I standardised these so I may have overlooked a convention somewhere). It seems odd to use "Australian Labor Party" when it bulks out the table so much. I can't see the British articles, for example, ever using "Conservative and Unionist Party" or "Labour Party". Frickeg (talk) 04:41, 20 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I can understand that, but what a great example of how individual tastes differ! (I find the extended "Australian Labor Party" quite ugly myself.) I agree completely that acronyms are confusing and need to be avoided. Perhaps the Labor/Australian Labor Party should be discussed at WikiProject Australian politics to get others' opinions? And on a related note, a while ago I queried an editor who had changed the tables at Candidates of the Australian federal election, 2007; as a result there is now no link to "Labor" or "Democrats" in the columns. The problem is that with the new tables, colours have been used and these are removed (made blue) if a link is added. Any thoughts? Frickeg (talk) 23:11, 21 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Judge photo rationales

Hi Rebecca - I know you've fought against Australian politician photos being deleted before— I was wondering if you wouldn't mind commenting on this deletion discussion for the photo of Justice Hayne on the High Court— deletion of this photo will mean that all photos of judges in Australia except those where the photo is in public domain (which means every judge since the 1950s/60s, essentially) will have to be deleted, except for Spigelman's picture which was provided by a family friend. I don't think some users understand that it is practically impossible to get a photo of an Australian judge (Justice Kirby aside due to his human rights & LGBT rights commitments). Feel free to let others know and get them to comment too. JRG (talk) 05:42, 21 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Unblock

I would advise you consult the blocking admin before unblocking [10], since your summation in that diff seems to suggest you have misinterpreted the reason for the block. Rockpocket 07:58, 4 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Well one way to generate drama is to indulge in WP:WHEEL (An administrator undoes another administrator's actions without consultation.), especially when your justification doesn't not even acknowledge the reason for the block in the first place (the removal of warnings had nothing to do with it, it was the persistently insulting edit summaries). The editor himself wasn't even asking to be unblocked - and numerous times suggested he intended to wait it out. Please, reblock and consult the blocking admin before unblocking before we find ourselves at ANI. Rockpocket 08:11, 4 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Furthermore, the warnings were not "sanctimoniously added back", he was independently warned three times by three different admins, each unaware that he had been warned previously because he had removed them immediately (with an incivil edit summary to boot). If you plan to remove warnings immediately, then you can hardly be "irked" than others don't realize, in good faith, that you have been warned already. Again, I ask you to reinstate the block and discuss the matter with the blocking admin. Rockpocket 08:21, 4 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Your unblock of Timeshift9

I'd like to register my displeasure with your unblock of this user without checking with me as the blocking admin, especially since you do not appear to have understood the reason for the block. It had nothing to do with removing warnings from his talk page, and nobody re-added warnings after he did so. The issue was that he engaged in personal attacks - calling User:Werdna and "idiot", calling several users "sooky la-las" - and responded to warnings from several different users with blatant incivility. This was a short block and obviously isn't really worth fighting over, so I'm leaving it at this, but I think it's good form to i. make sure you understand blocks before undoing them, and ii. giving the blocking admin the courtesy of a note. Sarcasticidealist (talk) 08:34, 4 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

There are a couple of kinds of uncivil users. Certainly, there's the kind that's emotionally invested in the project and often lets their temper get the better of them. You seem to be suggesting that that's what happened here: that Timeshift was provoked until he got mad, and was then blocked for getting mad (I'm not sure how a user blocking Betacommand for edit warring constitutes provocation of the kind that would prompt Timeshift to call the blocking admin an idiot). I don't think that's the kind of uncivil user that Timeshift is, though, because that kind of user, when you point their incivility out to them, usually responds with either "Oh, yeah, sorry, I let my emotions get the better of me" or "Fuck that, did you see what he said to provoke me?". But Timeshift doesn't respond like that, which suggests to me that he's the second kind of uncivil user: the kind who, for whatever reason, feels entitled to disregard the community's behavioral guidelines. He doesn't engage in incivility in a white heat, he does so as part of his M.O. Anybody who suggests to him that he shouldn't call people "idiots" for making good blocks is a "sooky la-la". This sneering contempt for WP:CIVIL is a poisonous attitude that I fear that you've enabled. In any event, time will tell. Sarcasticidealist (talk) 09:04, 4 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Sarcasticidealist makes some good points here. "sneering contempt" is exactly how I would describe it. Timeshift never once showed any signs of changing his behaviour. Let's put it this way: if an IP address had dropped into Betacommand's talk page with that "I lol at idiots who..." comment, then the IP comment would have been uncontroversially reverted as a drive-by trolling comment. Reverting and ignoring the comment, even though it came from an established account who was prepared to sign the comment, would have been best, but the situation escalated. I don't think a block was the right result (certainly not for incivility on one's own talk page), and I found the sook-la-la comment funny, rather than offensive, though I admit I was laughing at Timeshift, rather than with him (it was like OMG what has he called me? scrabble for a dictionary, and then a sense of mild disappointment - oh, he called me a crybaby - can't he do better than that?). I would have preferred a listing of past incivilities (for example, an RfC on the attitude of "sneering contempt" pointed out by Sarcasticidealist) and a final warning, as opposed to a block, or maybe just a bit of mild ridicule (can be very effective sometimes in making people see that their attitude is not big, not funny and not clever), or even just completely ignoring the kind of immature attitude displayed by Timeshift. For the record, I was one of the admins who warned Timeshift. I wouldn't have added my warning if I had looked and seen the previous warning, and I apologised afterwards for doing so. But to be frank, given the urban slang and the attitude, I assumed this was a juvenile user who didn't know better, and I advised others to just let it drop. Oh well. Carcharoth (talk) 12:48, 4 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

(I'm going to comment here, rather than at Sarcasticidealist's page). I just wanted to note that I completely agree with the above comments. While one 24hr block may not stop that sort of persistent poisonous type of incivility, blocks of increasing length will - one way or another. Editors that have no regard whatsoever for WP:CIVIL or WP:NPA, are not good editors, no matter how much content they add, because this is a community project that relies on collaboration. We are not talking about a knee-jerk response made in the heat of discussion, later regretted. That is entirely forgivable. We are talking about interjecting on a discussion nothing to do with him, the only conceivable purpose to insult an admin who was following policy. That is pretty childish behaviour.

Finally, I'd note that this form of personal attack, only to claim innocence because it is not, apparently, aimed at anyone in particular is a common tactic of Timeshift that I have seen a number of times before. See [11] [12] I hope your unblocking has not re-inforced his belief that is is acceptable, Rebecca, because it ain't. And if it continues, then he will end up being blocked again for it. Rockpocket 16:50, 4 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Newtown, Victoria

Hi Rebecca. The names of these articles are being discussed at Wikipedia:Australian Wikipedians' notice board#Duplicated place names in a state if you would like to contribute. Cheers, Mattinbgn\^talk 04:05, 11 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

New Rudd cabinet

Comparison of Australian parties policy

Thank you!

Hello

LGBT WikiProject Newsletter

ganja butter

Australian Democrats page

Shelly Archer

signature

FYI - Attempt to prod a shopping centre article

Weak

SA electoral history CD

George Macleay

Unblock of User:Liftarn

RFV

Your unprotection of Template:PD-Australia

Runcorn again

Poll Bludger

Your conduct

One last try

The british are coming, the british are coming

Your oppose

203.87.127.18

ALP

Shopping malls

Family socks

Good show

The RickK Anti-Vandalism Barnstar

IRC

The usual thanks

RS2007

Centro Tuggeranong

Invitation

John Howard

Electoral divisions

Paul Keating

Help desk post

Replaceable fair use Image:Garyhumphries.jpg

Replaceable fair use Image:Pennywong.jpg

Werriwa by-election election box

If you have time...

Julia Gillard

Images over 50 years old of Prime Ministers

LGBT WikiProject Newsletter

Joestella and ChampagneComedy

Boka Kondra

Style

RE: Greatorex

1945 or 50 years?

Advice sought

The WikiProject Universities Newsletter: Issue I (September 2007)

Shrine of Remembrance

It seems

LGBT WikiProject Newsletter

Removal of notability on Student Youth Network

Soliciting a pattern review :)

Independent Sovereign State Of Australia

Little context in Lisa miller

Admin help required with vandalism of nomination page

Piers Akerman

AfD Closing

Somers

Australian politicians

The WikiProject Universities Newsletter: Issue II (October 2007)

Nonsense

Westfield Group revert

Melbourne Meetup

AFD

Comment request

LGBT WikiProject Newsletter

Alice and her harasser

Harry Potter and his homosexual teacher

"My Fellow Americans"

Same name, same sexuality: a riddle for the ages

Beat writer arouses Irish guy

Love those Texas Longhorns

Point and Counterpoint

Drudgery on offer

"My Fellow Americans" redux

This month's Wiki stars