User talk:Rohanstorey
Welcome!
|
Disambiguation link notification for October 5[edit]
Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited T & G Mutual Life Assurance Society, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Canterbury earthquake. Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.
It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 11:11, 5 October 2016 (UTC)
Disambiguation link notification for October 12[edit]
Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Leviathan (clothing), you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Beaux Arts. Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.
It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 11:05, 12 October 2016 (UTC)
April 2017[edit]
Hello, I'm MelbourneStar. I noticed that you recently removed content from List of tallest buildings in Melbourne without adequately explaining why. In the future, it would be helpful to others if you described your changes to Wikipedia with an accurate edit summary. If this was a mistake, don't worry; the removed content has been restored. If you would like to experiment, please use the sandbox. If you think I made a mistake, or if you have any questions, you can leave me a message on my talk page. Additionally, please ensure that whatever content you add to said article -- or any article on Wikipedia -- that it is verified by provided reliable sources. —MelbourneStar☆talk 07:01, 24 April 2017 (UTC)
Palais Theatre[edit]
I've explained my reasons for reverting the text to its original format in the edit description that I provided on the first of the most recent edits that I did. But, to repeat, it's my view that the most logical progression in which to describe the theatre and its history is as follow :
1. Explain precisely where the current theatre is located and its significance as being part of the original Edwardian era entertainment precinct
2. Provide an overview of the history of the site i.e. all and any previous structures that have been on that exact spot - detailing their construction in chronological order.
3. Outline the specific history of the current building
4. Discuss the Phillips brothers - simply using the existing text which is already on the page as there is absolutely nothing wrong with it.
Really don't know why on earth you're so hell bent on doing things in an utterly illogical, reverse order i.e. putting point 4 at the top of the list. It makes no sense, what so ever, from either a journalistic narrative /story telling viewpoint or from a heritage report viewpoint to discuss personalities before you have, even briefly discussed, the site and the buildings. The main point of the Palais Theatre page is to discuss the building, not the Phillips brothers, and that priority should be reflected in the text
Also, when you state that the Phillips "developed" the theatre... really .. what do mean by "developed" ? If you're inferring that they controlled the site, paid for the design and construction of the theatre and were the original owners why not just say so ? In fact, why not just leave the very simple, self explanatory line that I wrote some time ago i.e. the theatre was originally owned by the Phillips brothers.
Sorry, but with respect, you're going about things the wrong way.
Hi Sixties,
Thanks for more clearly explaining why you undid my revisions.
There dont seem to be any hard and fast rules about the arrangement of Wikipedia pages, but as an historian, in the history section, I would have thought putting the first events first, namely the arrival of the Phillips brothers, or maybe just one, in c1910. As to the text about them, its not completely correct; according to a reference on the JD Williams page ("Modern nomads and national film history: the multi-continental career of J. D. Williams") it isnt clear which or when exactly the Phillips' arrived, though i think they were all involved in the creation of Luna Park. Williams himself left about 1913 or 14, so actually he doesnt have anything to do with the current Palais, might be best not to discuss him in any great detail. Also I used the word 'developed' rather than owned because they built the theatre on leased state govt land (which it still is), so developed or maybe just 'built' is most correct.
The description of the location on the foreshore should perhaps go in the intro; doesn't really belong in the history, except to say the foreshore long been a place where entertainments built.
Im thinking that maybe the entry has too many odd sections, so maybe we should decide on a better format ? eg not sure a section for 'Firsts' is useful when its only got one ! and 'Features' is normally called 'architecture', where there could be a fuller description of the eclectic styles and of the inside too.
So maybe :
History of site - history of foreshore, the phillips, and the various earlier palais History of the building - opening night, first films, jimi hendrix, use by ballet etc, death of phillips, recent controversies, loss of interior elements, and recent repainting and reopening. Architecture - description of the features and the eclectic styles used (it is definitely NOT art deco)
ArbCom 2017 election voter message[edit]
Hello, Rohanstorey. Voting in the 2017 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23.59 on Sunday, 10 December. All users who registered an account before Saturday, 28 October 2017, made at least 150 mainspace edits before Wednesday, 1 November 2017 and are not currently blocked are eligible to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once.
The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail.
If you wish to participate in the 2017 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 18:42, 3 December 2017 (UTC)
Disambiguation link notification for March 18[edit]
Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. An automated process has detected that when you recently edited Palais Theatre, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Neoclassical (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver). Such links are usually incorrect, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of unrelated topics with similar titles. (Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.)
It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 09:29, 18 March 2018 (UTC)
Image of Veneto Club[edit]
Hi Rohan - do you have a photo that could be used in the article?Garyvines (talk) 05:00, 14 June 2018 (UTC)
Funny you should mention ! will load up to wiki commons.
And i will add ot article on Smrekar - ive just about finished editing in my sandbox. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 203.214.40.85 (talk) 05:34, 14 June 2018 (UTC)
Disambiguation link notification for July 2[edit]
An automated process has detected that when you recently edited George Raymond Johnson, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Second Empire (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver).
(Opt-out instructions.) --DPL bot (talk) 10:25, 2 July 2018 (UTC)
Disambiguation link notification for August 4[edit]
An automated process has detected that when you recently edited Beverley Ussher, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Hawthorn (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver).
(Opt-out instructions.) --DPL bot (talk) 09:17, 4 August 2018 (UTC)
ArbCom 2018 election voter message[edit]
Hello, Rohanstorey. Voting in the 2018 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23.59 on Sunday, 3 December. All users who registered an account before Sunday, 28 October 2018, made at least 150 mainspace edits before Thursday, 1 November 2018 and are not currently blocked are eligible to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once.
The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail.
If you wish to participate in the 2018 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 18:42, 19 November 2018 (UTC)
Your submission at Articles for creation: Henry Eli White has been accepted[edit]
The article has been assessed as C-Class, which is recorded on the article's talk page. You may like to take a look at the grading scheme to see how you can improve the article.
You are more than welcome to continue making quality contributions to Wikipedia. If your account is more than four days old and you have made at least 10 edits you can create articles yourself without posting a request. However, you may continue submitting work to Articles for Creation if you prefer.
- If you have any questions, you are welcome to ask at the help desk.
- If you would like to help us improve this process, please consider .
Thank you for helping improve Wikipedia!
Missvain (talk) 05:51, 28 August 2019 (UTC)Disambiguation link notification for October 19[edit]
Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. An automated process has detected that when you recently edited CRA Building, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Bernard Evans (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver). Such links are usually incorrect, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of unrelated topics with similar titles. (Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.)
It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 07:21, 19 October 2019 (UTC)
Disambiguation link notification for November 12[edit]
An automated process has detected that when you recently edited Ernest Hébrard, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Beaux Arts (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver).
(Opt-out instructions.) --DPL bot (talk) 10:13, 12 November 2019 (UTC)
ArbCom 2019 election voter message[edit]
| Hello! Voting in the 2019 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23:59 on Monday, 2 December 2019. All eligible users are allowed to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once.
The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail. If you wish to participate in the 2019 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. If you no longer wish to receive these messages, you may add |
Copyright problem on Norma Redpath[edit]
Content you added to the above article appears to have been copied from https://www.theage.com.au/national/australian-sculptor-who-was-enamoured-with-italy-20130122-2d5ko.html, which is not released under a compatible license. Copying text directly from a source is a violation of Wikipedia's copyright policy. Unfortunately, for copyright reasons, the content had to be removed. Content you add to Wikipedia should be written in your own words. Please leave a message on my talk page if you have any questions. — Diannaa (talk) 10:52, 20 March 2020 (UTC)
Your submission at Articles for creation: Hoffmann Gallia apartment collection (April 4)[edit]
- If you would like to continue working on the submission, go to Draft:Hoffmann Gallia apartment collection and click on the "Edit" tab at the top of the window.
- If you now believe the draft cannot meet Wikipedia's standards or do not wish to progress it further, you may request deletion. Please go to Draft:Hoffmann Gallia apartment collection, click on the "Edit" tab at the top of the window, add "{{Db-g7}}" at the top of the draft text and click the blue "publish changes" button to save this edit.
- If you do not make any further changes to your draft, in 6 months, it will be considered abandoned and may be deleted.
- If you need any assistance, you can ask for help at the Articles for creation help desk, on the reviewer's talk page or use Wikipedia's real-time chat help from experienced editors.
|
Hello, Rohanstorey!
Having an article declined at Articles for Creation can be disappointing. If you are wondering why your article submission was declined, please post a question at the Articles for creation help desk. If you have any other questions about your editing experience, we'd love to help you at the Teahouse, a friendly space on Wikipedia where experienced editors lend a hand to help new editors like yourself! See you there! DGG ( talk ) 18:55, 4 April 2020 (UTC)
|
Your submission at Articles for creation: Gallia family Hoffmann apartment collection (May 26)[edit]
- Draft:Gallia family Hoffmann apartment collection may be deleted at any time unless the copied text is removed. Copyrighted work cannot be allowed to remain on Wikipedia.
- If you need any assistance, you can ask for help at the Articles for creation help desk or on the reviewer's talk page. or use Wikipedia's real-time chat help from experienced editors.
Your submission at Articles for creation: Gallia family Hoffmann apartment collection has been accepted[edit]
Congratulations, and thank you for helping expand the scope of Wikipedia! We hope you will continue making quality contributions.
The article has been assessed as Start-Class, which is recorded on its talk page. Most new articles start out as Stub-Class or Start-Class and then attain higher grades as they develop over time. You may like to take a look at the grading scheme to see how you can improve the article.
If you have any questions, you are welcome to ask at the help desk. Once you have made at least 10 edits and had an account for at least four days, you will have the option to create articles yourself without posting a request to Articles for creation.
If you would like to help us improve this process, please consider .
Thanks again, and happy editing!
Calliopejen1 (talk) 05:27, 27 June 2020 (UTC)Disambiguation link notification for August 11[edit]
An automated process has detected that when you recently edited Parabolic arch, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Darwin.
(Opt-out instructions.) --DPL bot (talk) 06:24, 11 August 2020 (UTC)
ArbCom 2020 Elections voter message[edit]
| Hello! Voting in the 2020 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23:59 (UTC) on Monday, 7 December 2020. All eligible users are allowed to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once.
The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail. If you wish to participate in the 2020 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. If you no longer wish to receive these messages, you may add |
Your submission at Articles for creation: Rialto building, Melbourne has been accepted[edit]
Congratulations, and thank you for helping expand the scope of Wikipedia! We hope you will continue making quality contributions.
The article has been assessed as Start-Class, which is recorded on its talk page. Most new articles start out as Stub-Class or Start-Class and then attain higher grades as they develop over time. You may like to take a look at the grading scheme to see how you can improve the article.
If you have any questions, you are welcome to ask at the help desk. Once you have made at least 10 edits and had an account for at least four days, you will have the option to create articles yourself without posting a request to Articles for creation.
If you would like to help us improve this process, please consider .
Thanks again, and happy editing!
Bkissin (talk) 14:27, 15 July 2021 (UTC)ArbCom 2021 Elections voter message[edit]
| Hello! Voting in the 2021 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23:59 (UTC) on Monday, 6 December 2021. All eligible users are allowed to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once.
The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail. If you wish to participate in the 2021 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. If you no longer wish to receive these messages, you may add |
ArbCom 2022 Elections voter message[edit]
Hello! Voting in the 2022 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23:59 (UTC) on Monday, 12 December 2022. All eligible users are allowed to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once.
The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail.
If you wish to participate in the 2022 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. If you no longer wish to receive these messages, you may add {{NoACEMM}} to your user talk page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 00:34, 29 November 2022 (UTC)
ArbCom 2023 Elections voter message[edit]
Hello! Voting in the 2023 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23:59 (UTC) on Monday, 11 December 2023. All eligible users are allowed to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once.
The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail.
If you wish to participate in the 2023 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. If you no longer wish to receive these messages, you may add {{NoACEMM}} to your user talk page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 00:29, 28 November 2023 (UTC)
List of demolished buildings and structures in Melbourne[edit]
Hello, thanks for reaching out about this, and sorry for not getting back sooner. The destruction of Melbourne's Victorian landmarks is certainly a fascinating topic. I understand your approach to it, but I think by limiting it to the Victorian era (essentially ends with the death of Queen Victoria?), we miss out on some notable buildings that just fall outside the timeline. Even though these buildings were essentially the same in style. So it becomes a rather arbitrary distinction. I think opening it up to all buildings, and grouping by decade would be most helpful. - HappyWaldo (talk) 20:23, 24 March 2024 (UTC)
- Yes theres plenty of notable early 20thC buildings demolished too - so group by date of construction ? Any other parameters ? Like I said, if you put in everything going right back eg to the first wooden princes bridge, and if we start to include mansions - there were once so many ! - then the list will get very long. For instance, Im reading a book on early St Kilda right now, and theres at least 20 mansions demolished from the 1910s to the 1960s, and early hotels replaced by later ones, so Id stick to the 1904 sea baths, the palais de danse, and the St Moritz. So perhaps restrict to places that were well known landmarks ? Probably mainly city buildings ?
- Also I see the long list doesnt have any references. And Id say a few not really notable eg ANZAC house, Chalmers Hall, The Strand (1929), Elizabeth Street, Mercantile Mutual Chambers and RACV Insurance Queen Street, all nice but not remarkable.
- I might still resurrect my original page as a subsection, since its about a specific group of big landmarks all built in the 1880s, and all demolished 1950s-70s. Rohanstorey (talk) 04:26, 25 March 2024 (UTC)
- I think there are several equally valid approaches to organising the list. NYC goes by building type, then allows the reader to sort each individual list alphabetically, or by date of construction/demolition. Maybe this is the best way to go? As for which buildings to include, there is a murky space where notability starts to drops off. It would be absurd to include every little land boom cottage. If a building turns up in a decent number of secondary sources, it's a pretty good sign it's noteworthy and worthy of inclusion. And yes, it's great the detail you go into on the Victorian landmarks. I'm cool with the subsection or dividing it up into new articles for each building. - HappyWaldo (talk) 06:03, 25 March 2024 (UTC)
- Ok the NYC list is good in that you can sort it a number of ways, so ok, list by type then i guess mainly alphabetical. Im not very skilled with tables, but i guess i / you can copy the new york list and repopulate it ? Btw only NY and London have lists of demolished places that i can see, so we're the third one ! London specifically notes its not exhaustive. Rohanstorey (talk) 07:48, 27 March 2024 (UTC)
- I think there are several equally valid approaches to organising the list. NYC goes by building type, then allows the reader to sort each individual list alphabetically, or by date of construction/demolition. Maybe this is the best way to go? As for which buildings to include, there is a murky space where notability starts to drops off. It would be absurd to include every little land boom cottage. If a building turns up in a decent number of secondary sources, it's a pretty good sign it's noteworthy and worthy of inclusion. And yes, it's great the detail you go into on the Victorian landmarks. I'm cool with the subsection or dividing it up into new articles for each building. - HappyWaldo (talk) 06:03, 25 March 2024 (UTC)
Yeah, just a matter of copying. Here is an example to build upon:
Image
|
Name
|
Date of built
|
Date of demolition
|
Address
|
Comment
|
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
|
Federal Coffee Palace | 1888 | 1973 | Collins Street | |
|
Queen's Coffee Palace | 1888 | 1970 | Carlton |
Interesting that Melbourne is third. Certainly other cities lost a lot in the 50s-70s, but I feel like Melbourne was uniquely ruthless in tearing masterpieces down. There is an element of morbid curiosity to compiling these lists. Stings but can't help but look. - HappyWaldo (talk) 01:59, 10 April 2024 (UTC)
- I dont think Melbourne was uniquely ruthless, but we had a lot of rather large Victorian things given the size of the city - I think Birmingham for instance was even more ruthless, wiping out much of the Victorian city, and for the last 20 years wiping out the modernist blocks that replaced them ! I will set up the page in my sandbox and message you when its ready. Rohanstorey (talk) 06:16, 10 April 2024 (UTC)
- OK, I had a go, but then realised that many of the buildings have a lot of text, and that the New York and London have hyper links to an article for most of the places in the list. So I think well just have to go for sorting without a table - Id prefer period of construction, or we could possibly do building type, but there's a few that were both banks/financial institutions and office buildings, so hard ot know where to put them. Rohanstorey (talk) 06:47, 13 April 2024 (UTC)
Disambiguation link notification for March 27[edit]
An automated process has detected that when you recently edited Bijou Theatre, Melbourne, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Benjamin Fuller.
(Opt-out instructions.) --DPL bot (talk) 18:07, 27 March 2024 (UTC)