User talk:Lentisco

Thank very much-will check it out laterMelbob 06:17, 28 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Master Servant Acts

Master Servant Act is very topical with the current Industrial relations Changes. I doubt there is much on the internet. A Library might be your best bet, especially books on labour history. Okay, I've just done a visual check of all the indexes of the journal Labour History and only one article leaped out at me. I would have thought someone would have done an analysis of the Master Servant Acts as part of Labour history.Mmmm. The only article I found was in Labour History number 16, May 1969. Newcastle Miners and The Master and Servant Act, 1830-1862 by J.W. Turner.--Takver 13:39, 29 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]

I have created a page on the Master and Servant Act. I reckon there is still room for expansion.--Takver 16:02, 29 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]

The 1902 Master and Servant Act sounds like something that should be loaded to wikisource. It can then be linked from the Master and Servant Act Wikipedia page as a source text. Perhaps read the requirements for loading source texts at wikisource, but I would think the text would be more imnportant than preserving the original typography. I would be certainly interested in looking through the Act.--Takver 10:09, 6 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for scanning the images. I have downloaded them to read/print myself. Give me a hoy if you need help loading the act to wikisource, although I'm a newbie there as well.--Takver 05:04, 7 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Thankyou for scanning and transcribing the text of the Act. I can appreciate the work involved. I have now put links between the Wikipedia article and the 1902 Act and vice versa. It took me a little while to grapple with the correct linking templates. Not much use has been made of wikisource for Australian articles so far, which is a bit of a shame. --Takver 07:46, 9 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Lazlo Toth, vandal

In view of your comment on my talk page I have changed the speedy deletion notice to an AFD, and you can enter your comment on the Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Lazlo Toth, vandal page. Stifle 00:49, 12 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you for your further comments. Please see WP:CIV. Stifle 00:53, 12 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Melbourne Hotels

Thanks very much for that information. I'm glad people have found that Hotels sub-page. At the moment, it's just a storage space for all the bits of information I come across. Eventually, I'll make it into a proper page. The 'Dover' of which you speak sounds like the Devonshire Arms, which I've written about in that article. There's a photo of it too. I agree that St Vincents have probably destroyed a lot of the important old buildings in that area - just like the housing commission flats nearby. If you manage to track down that article from The Sun, I'd be very interested in having a look. Maybe if you can give me a reference number or something.

By the way, I also noticed you've made a start on Clifton Hill Community Music Centre. Great work. I've been meaning to get around to this for quite some time. Cnwb 05:34, 15 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Image:Youngcostello.gif listed for deletion

An image or media file that you uploaded, Image:Youngcostello.gif, has been listed at Wikipedia:Images and media for deletion. Please look there to see why this is (you may have to search for the title of the image to find its entry), if you are interested in it not being deleted. Thank you.

Admrboltz (T | C) 19:11, 16 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Attilio Guarracino

You bio of Attilio is extremely thorough - more information than I had, for sure. I was wondering whether anyone has in hand a biography of Donald Friend or Jeff Smart - it would be an excellent handle for an overview of that whole generation of artists, and it should be done now, while people like AG are still around. DF would be the more obvious subject, because of the diaries. Back to your article on AG, my only concern is that you tell where he's currently living - I think this could be bordering on an invasion of privacy, even tho you only give a suburb.

Incidentally, I'm a bit curious as to why you felt AG merited an article - he has had an interesting life I guess.PiCo 01:54, 18 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]

So I phoned Curtis Brown (the literary agents) and said what did they think of the commercial prospects of a biography, and got the predictable response that they'd have to see something. DF would be by far the better subject - he's famous - but in his case there'd be the problem of getting the agreement of the estate, and I suspect that the estate already has someone lined up. I'm not a professional biographer, but competition is fierce among those who are - the ratio of biographers to biographees is seriously unbalanced - and it would be hard to get the agreement. JF, I don't know about - more highly regarded than DF, but judging from his autobiography, a less interesting person. I'll file this away in the back of my mind :) PiCo 02:55, 18 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I'm not in a financial position to employ anyone, not even for an hour a week :). Writing just doesn't pay. But if you'er ;iterate (and I can see you are), why not try doing a little freelancing? This is what I do - articles in small-circulation magazines, with photos provided (which makes the articles more saleable). I get about $300 for an average article, though add in a few nice photos and that comes to $600. No great way to provide for retirement, but fun and a useful litle source of pocket money if you're already retired, as I am. From your posts here you seem to have a wied range of interests. See if there aer any magazines that cover the same areas (Ausrtalian ones to start) and phone the editors offering articles - ones already written, preferably with illustrations. They usually accept things by email, no need for SAEs these days. PiCo 04:06, 18 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Tch Tch Tch

Maybe you could give this a try: → ↑ →. Cnwb 03:30, 19 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Glad to help - it's good to see someone wikifying this important, and often overlooked, music scene. Cnwb 03:52, 19 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Could one of you two edit that article to make it a bit clearer why Tch³ are notable? Ta, Ben Aveling 04:02, 19 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]

At the moment, I'm assuming that Philip Brophy, David Chesworth, Clifton Hill Community Music Centre and Essendon Airport (band) are actually notable but for some reason that currently escapes me. Could you just make my life simple and actually tell me which of the ticks at Wikipedia:Notability (music) these guys hit? Thanks, Ben Aveling 06:31, 19 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]

If you're trying to win me over with flattery and charm, it's not working. I don't care if they were brilliant or if they sucked. I just want to know that they were more important than they are overlooked. Just let me know what their importance was, that's all. Regards, Ben Aveling 06:51, 20 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Athenaeum

Thanks for the comments on my talk page. The building is certainly old but I do not know enough about early Melbourne to know what if anything that was built before 1842 still stands. Also, the front was rebuilt later. I think the brief history I referenced is accurate. I am a member of the Athanaeum library so I know the building fairly well. Bduke 04:24, 23 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]

The refurbishing of the front in 1885/86 is mentioned. I do not think the library should have a separate entry. The various things that go on in the building are very much bound up together. There is for example a committee that runs the Athanaeum, concentrating on the library amd the building but it has representatives of the theatre. To many in Melbourne it is just the Ath - library, theatre, whatever. --Bduke 04:36, 23 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Not too sure about your last message. I think the Melbourne Athanaeum is important and always has been important since it was founded. This includes the library, the art gallery, and the theatre. I hope the article brings out the importance of all activities in the Athanaeum. If it does not, let us see how we can improve it. It is not necessary to split up the various parts of the Athanaeum. --Bduke 04:49, 23 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Sockpuppetry

I have been with the 'pedia for almost 5 years and an Administrator for almost 3 - in that time i have had to face nationalist squabbles, the actions of Marxist apologists, right wing Cold Warriors and the multiple sockpuppetry and vandalism of people like User:DW and User:Lir. Please forgive me for my sensitivity. PMA 04:35, 7 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Cut and paste move

Hi, you just moved List of extinct and endangered animals of Lithuania to List of extinct and endangered species of Lithuania via cut and paste. Since this kind of moves destroyes the page history, it is better to move the page via the page move process, see Help:Moving a page. I will tag the page for repair of your cut and paste move by an administrator, so the contributors can be acknowledged at the new title of the page. See here for an explanation of the repair process. Happy editing, Kusma (討論) 03:32, 15 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Bodgie

Grutness I'd like to set a seperate page for 'Bodgie' but I believe you have redirected it to 'Greasers'. I have nothing against this except there is now no where for the australian phenomenon to be separately discussed. Could you please make the sperate 'bodgie' page availible?

Well, you're half-right. I just created it as a redirect, though - there wasn't a separate page before that. If you want to start the new page then click Bodgie then click on the blue link at the top of Greasers that says "Redirected from Bodgie" (which will take you to the redirect page itself) and edit the redirect it like you would an ordinary article - take out the #Redirect link and add whatever you think should be there. You can probably take some of the information from the Greasers page to start it (you should also add a "See also" section for that article). BTW Bodgie and Widgie are/were common NZ terms too. And be sure to refer to "The Newcastle Song" in the article! :) Grutness...wha? 06:05, 21 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Hope you get the record right with Bodgies & Widgies. I saw a lot of them in Auckland in the 1950s & 60s. They hung around Queen Street & were in motorbike gangs. In fact, I think having a bike was a prerequisite, the bigger the better - Triumph 650 was the most popular. Because of that they all wore leather jackets. Widgies were the female equivalent, & just hung around with the bodgies. GrahamBould 12:50, 20 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Perth too, will drop back ref. Fred

PKD

Please review the talk page and comment appropriately. This has nothing to do with content and everything to do with presentation (See also: WP:LEAD, WP:1SP). The Template:QuoteSidebar should never be added to the lead section of any article, although I notice that there are at least two articles that do this. There are a multitude of issues with doing so, including the problem of display. Please use the QuoteSidebar in the body of the article. —Viriditas | Talk 04:33, 23 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you for making the article easier to read. —Viriditas | Talk 05:11, 23 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

WP:AFL

Hi mate, I suggest you check out the WikiProject AFL site, as well as Category:VFL/AFL players. Drop me a line with any questions you may have. Cheers, R o gerthat ^Talk 23:15, 23 March 2006 (UTC) [reply]

John Zarb

Thanks for starting this one. Have expanded it and added references.--Takver 13:33, 12 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Relax

Please, calm down. Actually, I am a going to major in history and I pride myself in my knowledge. I am sorry if I sounded abrasive, but you need to state in the article. I am sure he has had a key role in history like Ebernezer MacIntosh, but he doesn't have a page. We need to view it from the standpoint of someone who has no knowledge of the subject. Please treat all matters in an intelligent way. Thank you. Yanksox 04:10, 18 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Please explain how I am proud and ignorant? I'm actually a somewhat self consious person, like Quentin from The Sound and the Fury. Also, the nation I reside in was the one I was born in. I really didn't have a decision in where I am from or how people behave. I have no effect and American Foreign Policy and I think it has been a disaster since 1948. Yanksox 04:04, 19 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I really don't appreciate how you are extremly ignorant and attack me. Is it that far fetched to form a reasonable argument? Or is calling me a moron the most logical statement you can form? Yanksox 04:15, 19 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Incivility

Regarding edits such as this: Please do not make personal attacks on other people. Wikipedia has a policy against personal attacks. In some cases, users who engage in personal attacks may be blocked from editing by admins or banned by the arbitration committee. Comment on content, not on other contributors or people. Please resolve disputes appropriately. Thank you. --InShaneee 04:25, 19 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

No, the community as a whole 'dictates' what goes on articles. As you'll see on the main page of this site, wikipedia is the free encyclopedia that anyone can edit, regardless of race, religion, sex, or nationality. So no, you don't get any more say on an Australian article than an 18 year old american. I would suggest civilly discussing whatever issues you may have with him on the article's talk page and attempting to reach consensus or compromise. --InShaneee 04:33, 19 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

If other editors agreed with him and followed the policies of the site, then yes, in theory, he could. As long as policies and guidelines are followed, users are to be treated equally, ignoring age and nationality. For example, I'm a 21 year old american, I've never heard of the port philip association, and I'm telling you again not to call other users 'ignorant' or you may be temporarily blocked from editing for being incivil. --InShaneee 04:41, 19 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

And so we see another famous example of InShaneee having a argument with himself! --Avillia ^{(Avillia me!)} 04:48, 19 May 2006 (UTC) _{Disclaimer: This is a joke.}[reply]

3RR violation

Regarding your 8 recent reverts to William Sams:

You have been temporarily blocked for violation of the three-revert rule. Please feel free to return after the block expires, but also please make an effort to discuss your changes further in the future. Note also that removing tags without discussion is in the vast majority of cases considered vandalism. --InShaneee 04:50, 19 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

William Sams

I agree with keeping this article as you know, and don't think it should have been proposed for AfD. I can understand your frustration, but I strongly recommend a reasoned debate to put the points across and sticking to the facts. Personal imputations will only weaken the case. As you can see, there has been a good response for keeping the article. Tyrenius 09:28, 21 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Sams image

Thanks for going to all that effort of finding WS image. Much appreciated as it should save the entry from the onslaught of the ignorant. Lentisco 04:31, 21 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Lentisco, no worries. But please refrain from comments such as this which was made after your block expired. I suggest you read Wikpedia's policies on civility, no personal attacks, assume good faith and three-revert rule. You were blocked specifically for breaking the 3RR, but run the risk of further sanctions if you don't show more respect to other editors. Remember that anyone has the right to make a nomination for deletion if they believe there are grounds to do so, and while I also support retention of the article, User:Yanksox and User:InShaneee have nothing to apologise for. -- I@n ≡ talk 09:38, 21 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Personal attacks

Please stop your personal attacks [1] [2] [3]. I appreciate that you feel that other editors are just arguing for deletion because of ignorance, but it's possible to portray this with civility, without causing unnecessary friction and I ask you to exercise your good judgement to do so. --Tony Sidaway 16:25, 21 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Vandalism to the United States Declaration of Independence

Thank you for experimenting with the page United States Declaration of Independence on Wikipedia. Your test worked, and has been reverted or removed. Please use the sandbox for any other tests you want to do. Take a look at the welcome page if you would like to learn more about contributing to our encyclopedia. - CrazyRussian talk/contribs/email 02:32, 22 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Please stop!

Please do not add nonsense to Wikipedia. It is considered vandalism. If you would like to experiment, use the sandbox. Thank you. - CrazyRussian talk/contribs/email 02:34, 22 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Please don't be angry. Consider reviewing WP:POINT and WP:COOL - CrazyRussian talk/contribs/email 02:36, 22 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

The difference between William Sams and The Declaration of Independence is that the later actually outlined why it was notable. When you wrote the article you presumed that people knew about you. You didn't state notability. Other users have done that and I have reversed my vote for deletion. Unlike you, I believe I can be openminded. I am willing to move past this if you drop whatever vandetta you have agaisnt me. Yanksox 02:36, 22 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I am not trying to attack you. I am just trying to revert vandalism where I see it, and to prevent reoccurrence as best I can. If you've got beef with other editors, I strongly advise you to go drink a latte, watch your favorite cartoon/sitcome/whatever, and then return to editing WP refreshed, and with a new supply of friendliness. We're here to build an encyclopedia, not to be at each others' throats. - CrazyRussian talk/contribs/email 02:43, 22 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

LOL. Stop trying to make a WP:POINT. Your position is understood and appreciated. The Sams AfD is proceeding for an overwhelming keep - so forgive the Americans for not knowing and being a little quick with the delete button, and don't compound one sin by committing another. - CrazyRussian talk/contribs/email 02:48, 22 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

You have vandalised it a third time. Enough. Here's your third-level warning.

Please stop. If you continue to vandalize pages, you will be blocked from editing Wikipedia. - CrazyRussian talk/contribs/email 02:51, 22 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I am sure you will agree that the comment on the article talk page was posted just to make a point, and is therefore unproductive and your Nth violation of WP:POINT. Enough. It's not censorship - it's simply that that page is not an approriate forum for you to vent your frustration with what happened. Please use my talk page for that :) Please remove the comment yourself - or I will have to do this for you. Unfortunately, you're moving closer to another block, this time for persistent vandalism. Let's be constructive 100% of the time, in all our edits. PLEASE. - CrazyRussian talk/contribs/email 03:19, 22 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I had to take it out, b/c someone attacked you there for your comment! :) Please, let's be reasonable. - CrazyRussian talk/contribs/email 03:23, 22 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I don't ban, I report, and I am going to great lengths here to avoid this, in part b/c I think your grievances are meritorious - CrazyRussian talk/contribs/email 03:25, 22 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I'm blocking you for forty-eight hours for trolling, incivility and edit warring despite ample warnings and a prior block for edit warring. --Tony Sidaway 16:12, 22 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Just to make it clear, I didn't not ask Tony or anyone else to block you. - CrazyRussian talk/contribs/email 16:49, 22 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Gippsland massacres

Do you have any sources related to the Gippsland massacres article? --cholmes75 (chit chat) 15:41, 26 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Henry Arthur

You just came off a block! You're unbelievable...

Please see Wikipedia's no personal attacks policy. Comment on content, not on the contributor; personal attacks damage the community and deter users. Note that continued personal attacks may lead to blocks for disruption. Please stay cool and keep this in mind while editing. Thank you. - CrazyRussian talk/contribs/email 17:55, 26 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Antique description of Christ euphemism

I had a look at Thesaurus dot com but didn't come up with anything that would clearly be better than the word antique, although that word looks quite odd there as you admitted. No reason for this comment. Grumpyyoungman01 05:12, 8 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Buttlejorrk

I found the info in the Encyclopedia of Melbourne. There's another town I want to create an entry for, but I can't remember it's name off-hand. It was near Thomastown, and was demolished to make way for the Hume Highway. I love learning about whole towns that were demolished to make way for some huge infrastructure - something spooky about it - ghost towns that have completely disappeared. Cnwb 23:59, 2 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

William Darke

Sorry Lentisco, my error. Also, I didn't realise that I accidentally changed your correction - that was also an error on my behalf. Cnwb 04:07, 24 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

License tagging for Image:Hume&hovellMap2.gif

Thanks for uploading Image:Hume&hovellMap2.gif. Wikipedia gets thousands of images uploaded every day, and in order to verify that the images can be legally used on Wikipedia, the source and copyright status must be indicated. Images need to have an image tag applied to the image description page indicating the copyright status of the image. This uniform and easy-to-understand method of indicating the license status allows potential re-users of the images to know what they are allowed to do with the images.

For more information on using images, see the following pages:

This is an automated notice by OrphanBot. If you need help on selecting a tag to use, or in adding the tag to the image description, feel free to post a message at Wikipedia:Media copyright questions. 03:05, 2 August 2006 (UTC)

Copyvio

Please do not cut and paste copyrighted text into Wikipedia as you did on John Bowen (colonist). The Australian Dictionary of Biography is a copyrighted source and tha copyright needs to be respected.--Peta 03:35, 2 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Just use the history tab to get to an old version. But the history of the page has to be deleted.--Peta 03:43, 2 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

You should add a refernce to the source, per WP:CITE. I will delete the copyvio and replace it with this version.--Peta 04:30, 2 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

License tagging for Image:Chuchillislandmap.png

Thanks for uploading Image:Chuchillislandmap.png. Wikipedia gets thousands of images uploaded every day, and in order to verify that the images can be legally used on Wikipedia, the source and copyright status must be indicated. Images need to have an image tag applied to the image description page indicating the copyright status of the image. This uniform and easy-to-understand method of indicating the license status allows potential re-users of the images to know what they are allowed to do with the images.

For more information on using images, see the following pages:

This is an automated notice by OrphanBot. If you need help on selecting a tag to use, or in adding the tag to the image description, feel free to post a message at Wikipedia:Media copyright questions. 05:05, 15 August 2006 (UTC)

Unspecified source for Image:Hume&hovellMap2.gif

Thanks for uploading Image:Hume&hovellMap2.gif. I notice the file's description page currently doesn't specify who created the content, so the copyright status is unclear. If you have not created this file yourself, then there needs to be a justification explaining why we have the right to use it on Wikipedia (see copyright tagging below). If you did not create the file yourself, then you need to specify where it was found, i.e., in most cases link to the website where it was taken from, and the terms of use for content from that page.

If the file also doesn't have a copyright tag, then one should be added. If you created/took the picture, audio, or video then the {{GFDL-self}} tag can be used to release it under the GFDL. If you believe the media meets the criteria at Wikipedia:Fair use, use a tag such as {{Non-free fair use in|article name}} or one of the other tags listed at Wikipedia:Image copyright tags#Fair_use. See Wikipedia:Image copyright tags for the full list of copyright tags that you can use.

If you have uploaded other files, consider checking that you have specified their source and tagged them, too. You can find a list of files you have uploaded by following this link. Unsourced and untagged images may be deleted one week after they have been uploaded, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you. Zsinj^Talk 14:41, 16 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Yash Pal Suri In 1965, Yash Pal Suri left India for the UK. The first thing he did on his arrival in England was buy two Super 8 cameras, two projectors and two reel-to-reel recorders. One set of equipment he sent to his family in India, the other he kept for himself. For 40 years, he used it to share his new life abroad with those back home images of snow, mini-skirted ladies dancing bare-legged, the first trip to an English supermarket his taped thoughts and observations providing a unique chronicle of the eccentricities of his new English hosts. He then exchanged the journals with his parents¹ recordings, their own Œcine-letters¹ telling tales of weddings, festivals and village life. I for India, skillfully assembling these dispatches, is a portrait of immigration in 60s Britain and beyond, seen through the eyes of one Asian family, a bittersweet time capsule of discovery and belonging and, later, also of alienation and racism. Nominated, Grand Jury Prize, World Documentary, Sundance Film Festival.

http://www.zizekthemovie.com/sightsandsounds/

The Sun News-Pictorial

Are you sure about the Sun never having editorials - i was looking at microfiche of 70s-era issues of its sister paper The Herald and they have editorials - wouldn't make sense for its sister paper not too. PMA 19:21, 10 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Clifton Hill Community Music Centre

Keep an eye out for the October 2006 issue of The Wire magazine, wherein Jon Dale writes about the Clifton Hill Community Music Centre [4]. The airmail copies usually cost about $18, but if you wait a few months, you can pick up the surface-mail copies for about $12. Cnwb 07:21, 14 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Hey Lentisco, surface-mail copies of that issue of The Wire have just hit the newsagents. I picked it up today. Keep an eye out. Cnwb 02:28, 30 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Central Hall

Hi Lentisco, Thanks for the message. I'll be happy to write something about Central Hall, but I'm a little unsure about what I can include. I've noticed that there's some issue with including original research in Wikipedia entries, and that seems to conflict with my personal background with Central Hall. What is worse, my work has not been published to date.

So in short, do you know what 'original research' actually entails? Does it simply mean that the analysis and opinions that I made in my history of Central Hall cannot be included? How about the basic facts - Am I able to refer to a newspaper article from 1903 as a legit reference, for example?

Many thanks, Rob Lindsey 05:40, 28 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks heaps for the positive feedback, glad to share a digestible portion of my research (though I do hope to improve it quite a bit when I have more time). Mannix definitely lectured at the hall - I've found references to speeches relating to Irish Home Rule, but not sure about the anti-conscription side of things. Still, it does make good sense that his activism amongst the Catholic Labor Party faithful of Melbourne would have centred on events at the hall. If you do have some direct reference to this, definitely let me know or put in an edit. Cheers, Rob Lindsey 09:48, 11 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Gender

I wish it wasn't noteworthy at all but;

At Carmen Lawrence you changed female to woman.

"(woman not female. Female as an adjective should be 
only and correctly used when mentioning reproduction and sex etc)"

was your edit comment.

Curious to see where this is mentioned in Style manuals or guides, if it is.
Is this the current mode or best practice produced by the feminist dialectic, or your view?
Is the word Feminism still ok when not referring to reproduction or sex?
1. Does sex in this sense refer to the act or gender?
Is woman an adjective now?

There is something wrong with that article. Keep looking. Fred 14:55, 15 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Slightly irreverent. Slightly. I can not find a wisecrack in my statement. My position as a feminist is not relevant to wikipedia, but are you making another assumption?

Assume good faith and reread my statement. Please take the time to respond to my (now numbered) comments. I'm hoping to see the section in MoS that you referred to. I believe you have misinterpreted something somewhere. If I am wrong I want to know why, at least within wikipedia. Fred 09:41, 17 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

You may find we agree on a lot of things. ""Carmen Lawrence was the first woman to become premier of an Australian state." ... is how it stands now. I think you will agree that this is easier to read. I am focusing on problems of libel at the article when I noticed your adjective substitution and grouchy edit comment. Your absolute position is what got up my nose, not your intention to correct bias or incorrect usage which is laudable. My colleague informs me that 'woman' is an adjective, but I don't expect to use it as one any time soon. Faithfully Fred 01:50, 20 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Age and Herald Sun

I have again reverted your edits to these articles. The Age has always been quite clear that it has no political alliegance, and has supported both major parties at different times. Calling it "centre" is just a weak and meaningless compromise. The Herald Sun generally supports the Liberals, but to class it as "Conservative" is no more than your opinion. Logically you should class it as "Liberal," but it has no formal links to the Liberal Party. If you go on trying to impose your personal opinions on articles, I will report you for vandalism. From the other comments on this Talk page it is obvious that you have a history of doing this. Are we clear? Adam 09:27, 25 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I am aware that the West Australian newspaper has "conservative" in this field. In this one case, it's an easy one to substantiate - there's been ample RS coverage of its biases. However most newspapers in Australia really don't have much of a bias at all, or if there is one, it tends to be with particular issues and not a unified stance. Even a "conservative" newspaper like the Daily Telegraph or Herald Sun can bag out the conservative parties, esp if in power - that's what they get paid to do, after all. Neutral does not equal centrist in this instance. Orderinchaos78 12:18, 29 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Regarding your comments on my talk page, I'm really not interested in your opinions about Adam (or any other editors). The point is, all information in Wikipedia needs to be able to be verified with reliable sources. This is a cornerstone policy on Wikipedia (see WP:V). The policy also states, "The obligation to provide a reliable source lies with the editors wishing to include the material, not with those seeking to remove it." Currently the information you want to add is contested. Therefore, you need to find a reliable source. Until you provide a source, the paper's political disposition is merely your opinion and other editors may continue to remove it.
I find your comments on my talk page very argumentative. I have not said political disposition cannot be included. All I am saying is, per Wikipedia policy, please cite a reliable source. I don't see what is so unreasonable about that or why you should be so argumentative about it when I already explained on the article's talk page Wikipedia's policies and how they apply to adding contested information. Please read the policies and guidelines I linked to on the article's talk page and please consider dropping the argumentative attitude because it's not conducive to collaborative editing. Sarah 07:07, 31 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Tasty nightclub raid

The image has no source information, therefore copyright cannot be verified. It's easily fixed, and the image keepable. If you know the origins of said image (you refer to a "now defunct entertainment site", which one?), simply edit the image details and add them, and remove the no source template whilst there. Doing that will spare the image from deletion. -- Longhair\^talk 05:27, 23 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I have removed your last message from Longhair's talk page. If you are able to refactor it into a form that is not a series of personal attacks, feel free to do so. Hesperian 03:07, 26 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

why dont you mind your own fucking business. Lentisco 03:08, 26 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Because as an administrator, it is my job to uphold basic community standards of behaviour, and your messages to Longhair and now me are nowhere near the kind of basic civility that the community requires of you. Hesperian 03:13, 26 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

You have been temporarily blocked from editing for disrupting Wikipedia by making personal attacks and being generally uncivil. You have been warned about such behaviour in the past. If you wish to make useful contributions, you are welcome to come back after the block expires. --cj | talk 03:12, 26 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Image tagging for Image:Tastycard.jpg

Thanks for uploading Image:Tastycard.jpg. The image has been identified as not specifying the source and creator of the image, which is required by Wikipedia's policy on images. If you don't indicate the source and creator of the image on the image's description page, it may be deleted some time in the next seven days. If you have uploaded other images, please verify that you have provided source information for them as well.

For more information on using images, see the following pages:

This is an automated notice by OrphanBot. For assistance on the image use policy, see Wikipedia:Media copyright questions. 12:12, 29 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Port Philip Herald

I remain mixed about having a separate article - issues of the Herald before the Murdoch ownership have "Est. 1840" in the masthead etc. PMA 09:39, 13 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Map of Gardiners Creek

Hi - a minor point on your map - I think you've labelled Gardenvale where you might mean Gardiner (or maybe Glen Iris). Cheers Murtoa (talk) 01:15, 18 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Unreferenced BLPs

Hello Lentisco! Thank you for your contributions. I am a bot alerting you that 1 of the articles that you created is tagged as an Unreferenced Biography of a Living Person. The biographies of living persons policy requires that all personal or potentially controversial information be sourced. In addition, to ensure verifiability, all biographies should be based on reliable sources. If you were to bring this article up to standards, it would greatly help us with the current 699 article backlog. Once the article is adequately referenced, please remove the {{unreferencedBLP}} tag. Here is the article:

Attilio Guarracino - Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL

Thanks!--DASHBot (talk) 01:49, 16 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Sun News-Pictorial

I read a reference on this page to the Sun News-Pictorial not running editorials. This is true. The Sun News-Pictorial was the only newspaper in Australia without editorials until at least into the 1970s. The newspaper did, however, make exceptions during election campaigns. In 1952 the newspaper supported Reg Leonard, its editor, who was the Electoral Reform League (that is, Hollway Liberal) candidate for the seat of Ivanhoe, in fact won by the ALP and later DLP candidate Michael Lucy, I think. During the period Henry Bolte was Premier the Herald Sun also ran rare editorials supporting the re-election of the Bolte government.

Caitcatt (talk) 23:56, 4 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]

File:Molesworth.jpg missing description details

Dear uploader: The media file you uploaded as File:Molesworth.jpg is missing a description and/or other details on its image description page. If possible, please add this information. This will help other editors to make better use of the image, and it will be more informative for readers.

If the information is not provided, the image may eventually be proposed for deletion, a situation which is not desirable, and which can easily be avoided.

If you have any questions please see Help:Image page. Thank you. Sfan00 IMG (talk) 12:05, 23 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]

File:Molesworth.jpg listed for deletion

A file that you uploaded or altered, File:Molesworth.jpg, has been listed at Wikipedia:Files for deletion. Please see the discussion to see why this is (you may have to search for the title of the image to find its entry), if you are interested in it not being deleted. Thank you. Sven Manguard Wha? 05:14, 11 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Possibly unfree File:Rofe+JOK+Lee+Devlin.jpg

A file that you uploaded or altered, File:Rofe+JOK+Lee+Devlin.jpg, has been listed at Wikipedia:Possibly unfree files because its copyright status is unclear or disputed. If the file's copyright status cannot be verified, it may be deleted. You may find more information on the file description page. You are welcome to add comments to its entry at the discussion if you are interested in it not being deleted. Thank you. Magog the Ogre (talk) 17:50, 14 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Non-free rationale for File:Youngcostello.png

Thanks for uploading or contributing to File:Youngcostello.png. I notice the file page specifies that the file is being used under non-free content criteria, but there is not a suitable explanation or rationale as to why each specific use in Wikipedia is acceptable. Please go to the file description page, and edit it to include a non-free rationale.

If you have uploaded other non-free media, consider checking that you have specified the non-free rationale on those pages too. You can find a list of 'file' 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 "File" from the dropdown box. Note that any non-free media lacking such an explanation will be deleted one week after they have been tagged, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If the file is already gone, you can still make a request for undeletion and ask for a chance to fix the problem. If you have any questions, please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you. Sfan00 IMG (talk) 15:13, 23 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Propoposed Deletion Attilio Guarracino

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Attilio_Guarracino

Hi, I have proposed the above article, which you authored, for deletion. Given the evolution of WP guidelines I don't think Attilio's actions in saving people from drowning warrants the creation of an article. The inclusion of his relationship with Smart and Friend can be dealt with under those articles. The lack of verifiable external sources for some contentions in the article means they would not be included in a wp:bpl. Obviously if you object then the article need not be deleted. Very best and peace. XcommR (talk) 05:25, 13 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Notification of automated file description generation

Your upload of File:Aripilesmap.png or contribution to its description is noted, and thanks (even if belatedly) for your contribution. In order to help make better use of the media, an attempt has been made by an automated process to identify and add certain information to the media's description page.

This notification is placed on your talk page because a bot has identified you either as the uploader of the file, or as a contributor to its metadata. It would be appreciated if you could carefully review the information the bot added. To opt out of these notifications, please follow the instructions here. Thanks! Message delivered by Theo's Little Bot (opt-out) 12:13, 4 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Another one of your uploads, File:Bassrivermap.png, has also had some information automatically added. If you get a moment, please review the bot's contributions there as well. Thanks! Message delivered by Theo's Little Bot (opt-out) 12:58, 23 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Nomination of Camp Sovereignty for deletion

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Camp Sovereignty is suitable for inclusion in Wikipedia according to Wikipedia's policies and guidelines or whether it should be deleted.

The article will be discussed at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Camp Sovereignty until a consensus is reached, and anyone is welcome to contribute to the discussion. The nomination will explain the policies and guidelines which are of concern. The discussion focuses on high-quality evidence and our policies and guidelines.

Users may edit the article during the discussion, including to improve the article to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the article-for-deletion notice from the top of the article. --benlisquare_T•C•E 03:54, 28 September 2014 (UTC)[reply]

File:James Harrison2.jpg listed for discussion

A file that you uploaded or altered, File:James Harrison2.jpg, has been listed at Wikipedia:Files for discussion. Please see the discussion to see why it has been listed (you may have to search for the title of the image to find its entry). Feel free to add your opinion on the matter below the nomination. Thank you. Cloudbound (talk) 21:29, 31 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Proposed deletion of File:Sullvanbaymap.png

The file File:Sullvanbaymap.png has been proposed for deletion because of the following concern:

Orphaned map.

While all constructive contributions to Wikipedia are appreciated, pages may be deleted for any of several reasons.

You may prevent the proposed deletion by removing the {{proposed deletion/dated files}} notice, but please explain why in your edit summary or on the file's talk page.

Please consider addressing the issues raised. Removing {{proposed deletion/dated files}} will stop the proposed deletion process, but other deletion processes exist. In particular, the speedy deletion process can result in deletion without discussion, and files for discussion allows discussion to reach consensus for deletion. ~ Rob₁₃^Talk 23:24, 3 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Proposed deletion of File:Ladyjuliamap.png

The file File:Ladyjuliamap.png has been proposed for deletion because of the following concern:

Orphaned map.

While all constructive contributions to Wikipedia are appreciated, pages may be deleted for any of several reasons.

You may prevent the proposed deletion by removing the {{proposed deletion/dated files}} notice, but please explain why in your edit summary or on the file's talk page.

Please consider addressing the issues raised. Removing {{proposed deletion/dated files}} will stop the proposed deletion process, but other deletion processes exist. In particular, the speedy deletion process can result in deletion without discussion, and files for discussion allows discussion to reach consensus for deletion. ~ Rob₁₃^Talk 23:27, 3 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Proposed deletion of File:Chuchillislandmap.png

The file File:Chuchillislandmap.png has been proposed for deletion because of the following concern:

Orphaned map.

While all constructive contributions to Wikipedia are appreciated, pages may be deleted for any of several reasons.

You may prevent the proposed deletion by removing the {{proposed deletion/dated files}} notice, but please explain why in your edit summary or on the file's talk page.

Please consider addressing the issues raised. Removing {{proposed deletion/dated files}} will stop the proposed deletion process, but other deletion processes exist. In particular, the speedy deletion process can result in deletion without discussion, and files for discussion allows discussion to reach consensus for deletion. ~ Rob₁₃^Talk 23:29, 3 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Proposed deletion of File:James Harrison3.jpg

The file File:James Harrison3.jpg has been proposed for deletion because of the following concern:

unused, low-res, no obvious use

While all constructive contributions to Wikipedia are appreciated, pages may be deleted for any of several reasons.

You may prevent the proposed deletion by removing the {{proposed deletion/dated files}} notice, but please explain why in your edit summary or on the file's talk page.

Please consider addressing the issues raised. Removing {{proposed deletion/dated files}} will stop the proposed deletion process, but other deletion processes exist. In particular, the speedy deletion process can result in deletion without discussion, and files for discussion allows discussion to reach consensus for deletion.

This bot DID NOT nominate any file(s) for deletion; please refer to the page history of each individual file for details. Thanks, FastilyBot (talk) 01:02, 23 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Proposed deletion of Paul Harris (film critic)

The article Paul Harris (film critic) has been proposed for deletion because it appears to have no references. Under Wikipedia policy, this biography of a living person will be deleted after seven days unless it has at least one reference to a reliable source that directly supports material in the article.

If you created the article, please don't be offended. Instead, consider improving the article. For help on inserting references, see Referencing for beginners, or ask at the help desk. Once you have provided at least one reliable source, you may remove the {{prod blp/dated}} tag. Please do not remove the tag unless the article is sourced. If you cannot provide such a source within seven days, the article may be deleted, but you can request that it be undeleted when you are ready to add one. — Mikehawk10 (talk) 04:31, 26 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Nomination of Paul Harris (film critic) for deletion

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Paul Harris (film critic) is suitable for inclusion in Wikipedia according to Wikipedia's policies and guidelines or whether it should be deleted.

The article will be discussed at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Paul Harris (film critic) until a consensus is reached, and anyone, including you, is welcome to contribute to the discussion. The nomination will explain the policies and guidelines which are of concern. The discussion focuses on high-quality evidence and our policies and guidelines.

Users may edit the article during the discussion, including to improve the article to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the article-for-deletion notice from the top of the article until the discussion has finished.

Thebiguglyalien (talk) 00:37, 5 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]