How bizarre! Although I must admit I thought it was odd when I told him that I lived near where he spent his idyllic youth and he suddenly became vague.Porturology (talk) 23:34, 24 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Thoughts on User:Cactus1974? I've done some searching for a meeting on the Central Coast (held today according to images uploaded by them) but found nothing, EXIF date and time is clearly wrong but I hope my feeling of this editor is wrong. Bidgee (talk) 11:05, 3 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]
HAHA! They're trying the claim that they happen to have the same camera, so seems odd that the Newie photo is near the Central Coast, they have the same interests and the editing (typing) is similar! Bidgee (talk) 06:10, 4 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Maybe you should ask another administrator to view this. 'they' is I, there is only one of me, the other person is just a mere coincidence to have the same camera that is mass produced. I possibly live near another editor somewhere, I live in Terrigal. Terrigal and Newcastle are geographically in 2 different regions, 3 regions apart. You could also say that we have the same interests (I have edited 7 articles) all close enough to what concerns myself. How is my typing simmilar to anothers, mine looks the same as yours and the next users and the next users. I think you are getting a tad weired, have I done something to you? —Preceding unsigned comment added by Cactus1974 (talk • contribs) 06:29, 4 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Seems awfully defensive for a newbie... I am also suspicious. Orderinchaos 06:45, 4 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Yep, and they clearly know how to use Wikipedia but just acting and saying they don't know. I find it very strange that they say the camera is mass produced (as is any other camera [DSLR, DC or CP]) but I'm yet to see any other Wiki editor to be in the same area to have the same camera, interest ect which what makes me think this editor (Cactus1974) is Watchover/Stravin. Bidgee (talk) 07:50, 4 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]
It needs an animated gif and a Hip Hop Hooray soundtrack. (I may just be showing my age.) Orderinchaos 12:21, 4 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]
LOL! Age pfffft, it is just a number! ;) Well Cactus has been confirmed as a sock, why am I not surprised! Bidgee (talk) 13:28, 4 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]
I think growing up in a recession has its benefits. You get to have childhood memories about driving around in a bombed out car with everyone (including the driver) doing the window wiper rap guy thing up West Coast Drive to Hip Hop Hooray. It is probably amazing that we didn't end up either in the sea or in hospital. And LOL... not really surprising. Orderinchaos 14:37, 4 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]
True! They must be bored, as they are back but this time using 138.130.129.64! Can't be stuffed listing it on SPI as I'm just going to have more fun getting the home web server working (did an update which in turn has killed Apache2, but having problems with the PostgreSQL which is preventing me fixing the Apache2 issue). Bidgee (talk) 14:34, 6 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]
If you were being treated like a criminal on a place that asks for contributions would you let them get away with it. All I want is to add the picture until another is found that is better and I want nothing more to do with this. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Cactus1974 (talk • contribs) 06:48, 4 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Duck crossing ahead anyone? Isn't it a pity that accounts/IP's don't log the coordinates on Wikipedia (though could be seen as a privacy nightmare ;) ), my mobile does included the location (using GPS) of any photograph I take and even has the altitude. Bidgee (talk) 12:29, 13 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]
G'day, as you seem to be the only other editor taking (any) interest in the acticles that were moved into the incubator, I want to alert you to an issue I found. They don't show up in the Unreferenced BLPs cat after they've been moved back until they've been edited. I first noticed it on Ben Tari, and now again on Andrew Parkinson (basketball). I've just moved Allan Lawrence (athlete) back (as an example to show you the issue) and when you click the edit button, you don't see the hidden cats listed under all of the templates and he won't appear in the Category:Unreferenced BLPs from October 2009. It isn't just a job queue issue - Tari had been moved for about a week or more before I noticed he wasn't on my lists. I don't know if it's a hidden cat thing, transclusion thing, cross namespace move thing or move over deleted page thing or something else, but the way to avoid it happening is to move first, then remove the incubator tags. Any edit in mainspace seems to reset the cats properly. So I don't know if it's worth reporting it as a bug. Cheers, The-Pope (talk) 18:02, 2 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]
If possible can you please keep an eye on contributions made by people possibly with a barrow to push, to ensure they meet wikipedia guidelines/do not violate WP:BLP and others. Thanks. Timeshift (talk) 21:38, 2 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Long time no speak, I hope you don't mind but I edited your picture Albany-Spencer Park to make Mtmelv.png which I 've put on the Mount Meville article. Is this OK with you?
I want to put a bit of effort into finishing the main Albany suburbs this year so I was hoping you wouldn't ind me doing the same for the other burbs too. Cheers and all the best. --Hughesdarren (talk) 07:18, 6 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]
I was not aware that the FallingRain maps had been blacklisted, nor do I know why. As far as I know, the FR maps are very useful for a number of reasons, which were listed in a page which was unhelpfully deleted without explanation by someone unknown.
If you know of a mapping system that showing topography in some detail, including railways, and which are accessible in a single click, (MSN map are reasonable but not as good and require several clocks) then say so, otherwise left FallingRain be.
I did a bit of a silly thing and wrote Mirima National Park without noticing that Hidden Valley National Park alreadt existed. Would it best to delete one or merge? I'm not too sure how to proceed in fixing things up.
--Hughesdarren (talk) 11:49, 7 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]
As one is fairly new and mostly yours, I would suggest you could ignore the guidelines on cut and paste merges on this one (the rules exist to preserve copyright history), and copy your content into the existing one and make the new one a redirect to it. Orderinchaos 12:45, 7 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Hello finally someone came and helped me help myself on the Victorian election 2010 page. Thank you for deleting that pendlum, it looked shonky and I was cautious of its existence in the page. I have been copy and pasting everything from the New South Wales next election page but unfortunatley I cannot do the same witht the pendlum there. I dont have the slightest of a clue of how to make one do you? If you could show me that would be a great start. Thanking you Wikistar (Place order here) 09:47, 8 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Personally I feel pendulums don't belong in election articles - it should be in a separate article. For example, Pre-election pendulum for the 2010 Victorian state election. As an occasional user of Wikipedia on my mobile phone I can well appreciate how this stuff clogs up articles and makes them unreadable on non-computer devices (and, for that matter, even IE6). Orderinchaos 09:53, 8 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]
That makes sense I dont edit with my mobile or vist wikipedia on my mobile but I know where you are coming from with other sites. I was using New South Wales and South Australia as a base for what I was doing at the Victoria page. Is there a pendlum from the last election somewhere? as it could be used once the margins have been changed and so forth. Any suggestions? Wikistar (Place order here) 10:12, 8 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]
(Haven't yet figured out how to edit from my mobile... can only read it at this stage. Handy if in a library, especially one where you need an account for net access but can't get one, such as a uni library)
Antony Green doesn't even have his site up yet for 2010 Victoria - the only suggestion I can make really is that the figures for post-2006 appear to be on pages 20 to 22 of [1]. Orderinchaos 10:26, 8 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Hello sorry to bother you again. I have added a table to the Tasmanian election artice (copyed the table from UK elections) how do I get the colour green to come up under Nick McKim and his picture to show. I am cropping the pictures of the leaders now, just wont work for me. Thank you Wikistar (Place order here) 12:48, 9 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Never mind I was able to fix it with a smaller photo and correct part name Wikistar (Place order here) 12:56, 9 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]
I was able to find our electoral pendlum from Anthoy Green today, Im going to construct it on my user page. You can find the pendulum here [2]. Wikistar (Place order here) 07:38, 12 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Hey, I see you've semi-protected Michael Atkinson (and this is probably presumptuous and hopefully irrelevant to you, but I agree with this action). Just out of interest, I was just wondering how one goes about adding the silver padlock icon to the top-right of the page. Is that something I can do, something you have to do, or something a bot does? Thanks!-- Lear's Fool (talk | contribs) 05:22, 9 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks for that, and thanks for fixing the link on my talk page!-- Lear's Fool (talk | contribs) 23:58, 9 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Hi, I think you should consider adding a column for 'party' allegience also in the very earliest member list. It may be simply remain empty where we don know, or are not sure. Yet I will almost certainly begin to fill them in and I know most of them quite well. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Helsned (talk • contribs) 01:03, 12 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Hi orderinchaos,
I am slowly making List of New South Wales state by-elections but I have runinto a technical difficult changing from 8 columns to 6 for the pre-party section. Any help is greatly appreciated
Porturology (talk) 01:36, 14 March 2010 (UTC)
Sorry I didn't see that you were having a break. I will ask elsewhere Porturology (talk) 03:45, 14 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Many thanks I have broken it in two at this stage - but it does not look as pretty. I will play wiith the other suggestion. Cheers Porturology (talk) 04:07, 14 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks, I appreciate that. Ericoides (talk) 15:50, 15 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Interesting stuff, thanks for taking the time to type it out. We'll have to see what happens. On a completely different tack, I did a lot of collaboration with a guy on here who was 1. very helpful and 2. unusually knowledgeable (you can guess who he is from my talk page, see Garmo). He got banned over some silly issue, an outrage really, given the amount of useful and eloquently phrased material he gave to the project. I'd like to get in touch with him but obviously can't. As an admin, are you in a position to say ... find an email address? Ericoides (talk) 16:36, 15 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks, I knew you'd know something "covert"... Ericoides (talk) 16:47, 15 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Nope, never come across those neither... Must really get back to my work, but thanks for the tips! I'll have a good look at them (particularly the second one) later on. Ericoides (talk) 16:53, 15 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]
As a followup to the withdrawn CFD 2010 March 14 discussion on settlements/cities, tows & villages, please see User:BrownHairedGirl/ctvs, where I have drafted something to start a centralised discussion on the naming of the top-level categories for human settlements/inhabited places, and I'd be v grateful if you could take a look at it before I post it. Feel free to edit away; we can discuss any changes afterwards.
My intention was that once complete, it should be posted at a suitable place for a centralised discussion. I thought of WT:GEOGRAPHY, but I'm not sure whether that is the best place, and other alternatives include WT:CAT. Do you have any preferences?
The subpage looks pretty good from where I sit. This from my point of view has been a "credibility gap" for Wiki for some time, and all of the proposed solutions I'm seeing meet both our needs (for an efficient and non-cumbersome category structure) and those of readers (for names which make sense). Whatever we come up with should be solid down to "by country" level with no need for side duplication. I have no preference for where should be approached for ideas, although WT:GEOGRAPHY sounds good as they may have better ideas than we have had so far, given they work with the content side of things in this area. Orderinchaos 20:17, 15 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]
As has been explained to you before, I regard your previous category work in early February as a form of good-faith mass vandalism. I do not see how you are able to rip apart categories and category structures with impunity and a shade of incompetence, and expect it to just sit there because you said so. Wikipedia is not a bureaucracy. And you did not establish it with consensus, therefore, it does not need consensus to remove it - I am not creating anything brand new, I am simply reverting to the way things were before the damage was done. Your attempts to bully me for doing the right thing are fast wearing thin. Orderinchaos 19:51, 15 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]
I noticed you again emptied out countless categories containing the word "organizations" (using this account and your secondary account) and redirected them to their newly created "organisation" counterpart (e.g. Category:Student organizations in Austria to Category:Student organisations in Austria). You're citing a "pending C2C", however for some reasons there is an established process that allows emptying out only in cases where the change is "non-controversial (such as vandalism or a duplicate)". This is clearly not the case here. Rather, you are using all means in order to push through your agenda spreading the word "organisations" with 's'. Understand that I'm fine with using whatever spelling the community agrees to, but it can't be accepted that you repeatedly disregard the community consensus and/or well established processes. There simply is no consensus that the s-spelling were to be preferred. The community has been very accommodating with this kind of renames if they are correctly filed at WP:CFD. Finally, this is not a big deal and nobody wants to argue back and forth again and agian on such peanuts. However, the community can't let a persistent breach of rules pass. My girlfriend is expecting a child and I certainly have more enjoyable things to do, but hell, I won't let you lead me around by the nose. So I expect you to file a proper CfD by tomorrow for these categories. PanchoS (talk) 23:56, 15 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Every single one of these was correctly done via a loophole that someone (actually someone I was arguing with) pointed out to me. Because they were created incorrectly in violation of the existing category tree, bringing them into line with what was already there was a simple matter of invoking C2C. Obviously this doesn't apply to those for which the bottom end of the tree is, in my view, incorrect, but it clears out at least half of them. which is a significant readability improvement. Indeed, the community should not let a persistent breach of the rules pass, and your blatant (lazy or deliberate? not sure which) breach of them on 5-6 February, advancing the cause of American English when the first instance in each and every case (as in, first case here on Wikipedia) I fixed was, and has always been, International English, is now being fixed as a result. I still have half a dozen or so to do under the same provision, but that will conclude my work in this area for now. As I didn't want a fight this time, I deliberately stuck to the exact letter of the law, every single change I made in that particular series is a perfect candidate for C2C because of the existing structure and category tree that *long* pre-dated either of our work in this area and hence implies some form of "wider consensus", which, although I disagreed with it in parts, fixes some of the damage at least.
I really hope you're proud of yourself, by the way, that in Educational you appear to have made what is already a crazy situation even worse by adding a fourth level of complexity to what was already three, and adding this random "Student organisations" category that doesn't appear to fit anywhere and will probably have to be dissected in a series of CfDs which, judging from your inappropriate conduct on my talk page over past days, will probably be quite heated and waste a lot of time.
And your talk of "the community" when you rammed this down everyone's throats a month ago without a single piece of consultation, and until our engagement late last month, I think you had 4 talk page credits to your name over your entire wikicareer, is amusing to say the least. Orderinchaos 04:42, 16 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]
I have no idea why you continue to bother with categories, OIC. The entire process for managing categories is fatally flawed and quite simply corrupt and there is nothing that will fix it save root and branch reform. Until then, you would have more chance of reasonable discussion with the wall! Participating in the "process" only legitimises it. -- Mattinbgn\talk 05:36, 16 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Nah its a bit more complicated than that SatuSuro 05:51, 16 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Do you think Paul F Downton warrants instant removal? I'd rather not leave the article there until after the election, in the interests of fairness to other non-noteable candidates do you think instant removal is warranted? Timeshift (talk) 16:55, 16 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]
It reads like an ad. It's difficult to tell as from reading it he appears right on that borderline of notability, as an author, strangely enough. (See [3]) But whatever way, even if kept, the article would need to be rather dramatically rewritten. Orderinchaos 18:23, 16 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Oh, he's a borderline noteable author. Oh well. Timeshift (talk) 18:46, 16 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Yeah, my feeling was "Damn!" when I found that. Orderinchaos 18:51, 16 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Care to help fix up this WP:BLP a bit more, and format citations with WP:CIT-templates, instead of having bare links? -- Cirt (talk) 21:24, 18 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Hi Orderinchaos, is it too early to start creating pages for newly elected S.A. members? Of course under 'Member elect' statuses. Thanks Wikistar (Place order here) 13:04, 20 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Yes, as they are not newly elected. They are still candidates until the SAEC declares one way or the other - those declarations should come after the postal counts are done, I'd say probably by Wednesday or Thursday. Even if they are likely winners (as is the case for the two new Labor MPs who won Little Para and Taylor) all we have are a bunch of uncertified, on-the-night counts and I'm sure there will be a fair bit of toing-and-froing at the commission's Fullarton offices in coming days. (I remember at the WA election, our commission even managed to lose 1,000 odd votes in one race, and mistakenly had on their website the wrong guy as the winner by a very significant margin in another.) There was also the famous case in Victoria where the commission simply stuffed up - something it's admitted to quite openly - and declared a DLP candidate the winner then subsequently revoked their own declaration after an addition error was discovered late in the day. There's no rush - we can do this all in a few days. If you want to write pages about possibly elected candidates, probably best for now to do that in your userspace. (If you need help with that, let me know.) Orderinchaos 13:39, 20 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Hi, I am about to start on the newly elected candidates for the Libs and will then move to the ALP if they aren't covered somehow by another user (know of any?). I am going to start the project on my userpage, all I need is the most preferred info box that you know of, there is so many to choose from! Other than that I'll get to work. Wikistar (Place order here) 03:16, 21 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Hello, Orderinchaos. You have new messages at Jayjg's talk page. Message added 03:34, 21 March 2010 (UTC). You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.[reply]
Just to notify you that a user you blocked for: "Abusing multiple accounts" has requested unblock here: User talk:Spotsdoes11. They don't seem to be on any of the archived sockpuppetry cases for the sockmaster, so I thought you may be able to comment and help out the scenario. Specifically, the two accounts are connected by editing this page: Nicola Roxon, however the editing patterns are not identical. Could you come and leave a comment? Thanks in advance, --Taelus (talk) 09:06, 24 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Hi Orderinchaos, where do I go to find colours for pendulums such as 31C3FF] and DF716D? I need a bigger range for the QLD pendulum. Thanks Wikistar (Place order here) 11:44, 24 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Special:PrefixIndex/Template:Australian politics/party colours is probably your friend. They're simply red, green, blue in hex - #FFFFFF is red 255, green 255, blue 255 (which is white), #FF0000 is pure red, etc. So if you want to make something lighter, just add 1 to each second character - as an example, if you needed to make #BF716D lighter, it would be #CF817D. Orderinchaos 11:45, 24 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]
WOW, I don't meen to be obsessive but your reply was so quick by the time I read over my question again and started to fix the typo with the bracket you had already replied. Well done! Barnstar for you lol! Wikistar (Place order here) 11:50, 24 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Haha thanks. :) Was just luck I guess, I happened to be at my desk when your message arrived, while dealing with the unblock matter in the message above yours. Orderinchaos 11:53, 24 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]
If you have got a minute, could you have a look at the unfinished pendulum on my user page and leave your opinion here or on my talk page (or edit them with your preferences for each) particularly the Very Safe LNP colours. Cheers Wikistar (Place order here) 12:04, 24 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Is the dark blue to dark, thats what I think the problem is Wikistar (Place order here) 12:05, 24 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Yeah - I had a look, the red was right down at 14 (20 out of 256) and the green was at about half. I got the red to drop more smoothly and that seems to have fixed the problem. (Sorry for editing your userpage btw :)) Orderinchaos 12:17, 24 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]
No problem, I invited you to edit my userpage, no biggie (I plan to make it resemble my personality, but... well I haven't a credible excuse to get around to it). Yep that was exactly what I was after. Thank you, I hope I haven't been to much of a pain :) Wikistar (Place order here) 12:26, 24 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Not at all - glad I could help. Orderinchaos 12:28, 24 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Evening Orderinchaos, how do I create a sand box, my userpage isn't cutting it anymore... Wikistar (Place order here) 10:18, 25 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Go to your userpage, and then in the Mozilla/IE bar at the top which has the "en.wikipedia.org" URL in it, just type /Sandbox (the slash is important) after the end of the name. Then when that page comes up (eg User:Wikistar2/Sandbox), click the "Start this page" text and voila, you're in it. You can call it anything really. I've got a fair few - the only requirement is it must start with User:Wikistar2/". Orderinchaos 10:23, 25 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Sorry to bother you again, in the article South Australian state election, 2014 you will see I have completed the new pendulum although the see also, external infulences and references want to sneak up the side of the pendulum. Could you have a look at it when you have a chance, its got me beat. Wikistar (Place order here) 12:47, 25 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]
For the record - SA's probably the one where it's not such a good idea to do the pendulum for the next. It's okay to have it as the post-election pendulum for the previous (i.e. 2010) but SA have a mandated redistribution every election (read [4] p.5 to see why this is unique for SA in how it is done). But with that noted, I will have a look when I am awake. Orderinchaos 23:36, 25 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Hello, Orderinchaos. You have new messages at Taelus's talk page. Message added 11:44, 24 March 2010 (UTC). You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.[reply]
I'll perform the unblock and keep an eye, thanks. Taelus (talk) 11:44, 24 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]
I am concerned about this remark about your "bastard actions".[5] Do you know who that account is, and why they haven't been blocked yet? JehochmanTalk 12:44, 26 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]
No problem, truth be told I just pick a tag at random and hope it's the right one! Kindest regards, SpitfireTally-ho! 16:36, 27 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Hello, Orderinchaos. You have new messages at Htonl's talk page. You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.
Rann, Redmond, 2010 election all currently in vandal wars. Can I request temp protection? Timeshift (talk) 01:01, 1 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]
I looked and it's actually not necessary at this time - generally the presumption is anyone should be able to edit, and this seems to be one person (who got blocked for disruption) and their sockpuppet (now blocked). Had it been say two or three accounts I would have decided differently. Orderinchaos 05:20, 1 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Just an FYI, because he's at it again, the IP (124.185.246.175) who has been editing List of cities in Australia by population, is the self admitted IP of User:Keys43, a blocked puppetmaster.[6] His edits are aimed at promoting Townsville and I've found him to be unresponsive to discussion. I've opened yet another SPI case, but it's a matter of waiting for him to be blocked. I'm not sure how this can be effectively achieved, as he's with BigPond[7] and therefore has a dynamic IP. In the meantime, expect more disruption at List of cities in Australia by population. --AussieLegend (talk) 14:37, 3 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Ah, makes sense now - thanks for the tipoff, I'll keep an eye on it. Orderinchaos 14:41, 3 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]
"With I/Okip, it tends not to be so much what he says as how he says it, how often, and how far he takes it (i.e. to the verge of WP:POINT / WP:NPA). In fact, at times, I find myself strongly in agreement with him and can see where he's coming from, even if I often find myself in disagreement with his methods. I think if he was to stand back and take a big picture view more frequently, he'd probably realise when he's looking like a bit of an ass and it's time to stop. It's something we all have to do sometimes - I have ended up strongly on one side or another of some genuinely lame disputes at times and it's a matter of knowing "OK, nothing further I can do here will make any difference and I'm probably hurting my own case if I continue in the same direction.""
I especially am impressed with the bolded sentence, even better than this comment:
"The article rescue squadron does some great work in improving poor articles and demonstrating the notability of a topic"
I haven't seen such beautiful prose since, [8] and yes, I am being honest.
I suspect we have never agreed on anything, but I have no idea who you are. Regardless, that was awesome, compromising language. I could learn a lot from the way you use words. :) I think you maybe even deserve a barnstar.
The Barnstar of Diplomacy
The Barnstar of Diplomacy is awarded to users who have helped to resolve, peacefully, conflicts on Wikipedia.
Hi Orderinchaos, at what year do copyright restrictions run out on photographs? I am looking through the NLA collection and there are a heap of good ones for Australian political and historical articles. Thanks, Wikistar (Place order here) 12:47, 6 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]
[9] claims 1 January 1955 is the key date. Orderinchaos 14:15, 6 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks, what date would you give this image? Holt only started getting attention like this in the 60's but there it states it was taken in the 1950's. Wikistar (Place order here) 09:28, 7 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]
(They say a week is a long time in politics - it can be even longer here. I was busy preparing for a trip so had deferred this question until I could ask a friend who knows historical federal politics stuff, but before I got to, a checkuser request linked them to a banned user and they got added to the list - something I'd always suspected, but hoped was not the case as they did genuinely seem good faith and I enjoyed being able to help them, as one can see from my Mar-Apr talk page archives.) Orderinchaos 01:24, 24 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]
As I'm more familiar with the requirements of WP:ATHLETE than WP:POLLY or WP:LAWYER... what's your opinion on George Williams (lawyer). I've removed the "is seeking preselection" section once, but Mr IP put it back. To me, if it was a company, we'd delete it on the spot as advertising. How do we counter referenced Pollyspin?The-Pope (talk) 13:56, 6 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Politically, definitely not notable yet. Fraser is a dead certain seat for Labor so if he does win the preselection, he'll win the seat.
Lawyer-wise - I'd suggest speaking to User:Mkativerata or one of the other law project people - I've looked and I can't definitely say in or out. Orderinchaos 14:18, 6 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Hi there, just butting in per Orderinchaos's invitation on my talk page. I think Williams would almost certainly meet WP:PROF. He has been a full professor at the largest research university in Australia (Australian National University although he's now at UNSW) who has written a stack of textbooks on Constitutional law (see here and whose opinion is regularly sought by the mainstream press. This is entirely subjective, but I think he's currently Australia's top Constitutional law academic; certainly the most prominent. Definitely doesn't meet WP:POLITICIAN (yet) though. --Mkativerata (talk) 19:13, 6 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Hi, you have previously voiced support for the rename of Icelandic_debt_repayment_referendum,_2010, now there's a vote going on in the talk page, I was wondering if you could cast your vote in there? Thanks! Baldur (talk) 12:35, 10 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks for letting me know. I've cast my votes accordingly, in line with the comments I'd already made on the page so they will not be a surprise to anybody. Orderinchaos 15:43, 10 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Don't have an interest in the template but bloody unhappy with the mess it has now created with the proposed deletion.
On another matter, don't you love it when a site uses your photo then puts all these terms, copyright and usage of the site rubbish like this. This is the photo in question which doesn't have any attribution. Bidgee (talk) 07:36, 13 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks for letting me know but I can't do anything about it until the weekend after next due to being away from internet. I shall leave it here as I know a number of people read my talk page. Orderinchaos 22:24, 14 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]
I cannot believe that falling rain was not balck listed. What a waste of my time. Look at this. We now have hundreds of fresh new stubs with false data. Great one. I don't have a problem with the new stubs except for the source and data which is false. Falling rain should be blacklisted asap.Dr. BlofeldWhite cat 14:24, 20 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Yeah there is no accounting for idiocy - balck listed indeed ! it should be lockedb SatuSuro 14:46, 20 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]
This is very irresponsible]. People who are obviously unaware of its errors made up some bull about blacklisting being problematic. Apparentlyy the 9,000 odd false articles are not problematic. How are we to obtain consensus when lesser experienced people with geo article are unaware of the gross errors on that site? I'm sure both your and Satusaro are well aware of the often extreme errors in data on that site, old hamlets that no longer exist etc. How are we to solve this problem? Don't these people want the encyclopedia to use reliable sources and be accurate? Is it really that difficult for a bot to remove the sources and data next to it?Dr. BlofeldWhite cat 15:55, 20 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]
I share your opinion. I was the last person to actually try and blacklist it, but it caused problems because there were so many links. If we could find a way to remove the links (and/or stubs) to get the usage down then that would be the best way to go with it. Orderinchaos 21:13, 20 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Good to see Falling Rain being washed away (removed) as a source and external links! ;) I hope you get well soon, I know what it is like to be unwell and it isn't nice! :( Bidgee (talk) 05:04, 24 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]
It will sure take time to get it out (out damned spot) completely SatuSuro 11:28, 24 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Hello again. Another request for move has started and I'm hoping that this time around we'll finally be able to close the book on this one. If you could leand us your suppor then that would be great.--Icelandic Viking POWER (talk) 23:23, 23 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]
I will do so shortly - thanks for notifying me. Orderinchaos 12:37, 24 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks for the kudos. I do understand your issues, I decided to classify the larger and more important settlements in both the Wheatbelt, Mid West and Great Southern. I thought it was best to classify the settlements based on population size and sort the major settlements (e.g Northam, Narrogin) out from the less populated areas. Andyman14 (talk) 11:35, 25 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Hi. When I reluctantly filed a report on Carola56's sockpuppets a previous report by you came up. Just doing you the courtesy of telling you. Cheers.--Nickm57 (talk) 11:44, 25 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Hi - thanks for support on this. Can you tell me, is it appropriate to warn Lyle on his various user pages of the investigation? I havent done this before and don't really know protocol.--Nickm57 (talk) 01:11, 27 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Hiya, The article for Albany Senior High School, Western Australia is being regularly vandalised by user 203.59.28.108. Could you please check the article history (particlulry where the user has changes basics like the school motto and reverted his/her own edits regarding the style of building). I'm not sure what needs to be done, but I'm getting fairy cheesed off at this point. --Hughesdarren (talk) 03:01, 1 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Just experimented, I'll be watching myself next time. —Preceding unsigned comment added by GameEnforcer (talk • contribs) 22:47, 2 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]
I have been trying to contribute to the Albany Senior High School article by including information regarding a Pine Forest on campus that was removed to allow room for facility upgrades. This addition is continually removed and slated as vandalism by user Hughesdarren. While I understand this user's intent is not to harm the integrity of wiki articles, The information about the Pine Forest is accurate. I do not know why it is being considered vandalism when it is an honest contribution towards a more comprehensive article - I feel that it is simply being removed because the article is quite brief and annotated, rather than a fully realized cultural artifact. What is the point of a Wiki is only one person is contributing to the article, and this one person is behaving totalitarian in their self-supposed right to edit it. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 130.95.128.51 (talk) 08:37, 3 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]
The information being added to the article was unsourcedPOV - I did look at it before reverting it. On looking further it didn't take long to find that a lot of very strange stuff had been added over the April school holidays and beyond. Orderinchaos 12:37, 3 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]
OK Fair Point - The bizarre stuff you would have found was the Third Reich reference, which remained intact while the real information about the Pine Forest was removed over and over - The changing of 'Keep Truth' to 'Keep Troth' is an accurate adjustment. I removed the Third Reich reference which I had placed as a joke, and saw the page reverted again, bringing the Third Reich back. How do I show the legitimacy of my POV on the Pine Forest (which is wholly accurate and known to anyone who knew the school during the noted year), where there are no documents online (that I know of) that explain it. Take a petition? Essentially, if something is true, that cant be proved with a document - How can articles based on community knowledge grow? There is little on line that credibly documents the Albany Region - And I fear the Albany Senior High School article will remain very bare and bland because of this, when it should not. There is a lot of knowledge about the School held by informed citizens like myself and my peers - but it seems there is no viable way for it to ever be published due to the complete lack of recorded data available online. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 203.59.28.108 (talk) 16:28, 3 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Unfortunately Wikipedia works from a "verifiability, not truth" point of view - if it's not in a reliable source, we can't publish it. I do understand where you're coming from on this, though - have you checked the Albany Advertiser or other local news publications? Orderinchaos 16:51, 3 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Due to the revert and locking of the Albany Senior High School Wikipedia page, you have saved incorrect information which cannot be altered. The School's motto is 'Keep Troth' not 'Truth' Troth being a definition for 'a solemn pledge of fidelity ' (see http://www.google.com.au/search?hl=en&client=safari&rls=en&q=define%3A+Troth&meta=&aq=f&aqi=g-sx1&aql=&oq=&gs_rfai= ). The motto is written on the school's emblem. This is extraordinarily frustrating, the user Hughesdarren has sought to ignorantly 'protect' this article, and in doing so has locked in false information. Well Done.
I've adjusted the motto per the above. It is a "caught in the crossfire" situation as it was a helpful change made in the same time period as less helpful ones. As a freaky coincidence, the principal of the school was *my* principal at an entirely different school in the early 90s. Orderinchaos 09:05, 6 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks for your reaction, but I find you're comment a bit akward
I was confused and you say it shouldn't be confusing to anybody. Am I that strange, or if you like that stupid :-)
And that's why I was talking about Europe. I don't want to put it on the same footing, all I want to say is that the mind set for a person in Europe can be different from that for a person in Australia. I guess that you're from Australia and that you are accustomed to use road distances. I, we here in Europe, are not.
Until a week ago I never could have imagined that you were using road distances, I figured it out cause the text in the Darwin-article was really strange:
"Darwin is closer to the capitals of five other countries than to the capital of Australia: Darwin is 3,969 kilometres (2,466 mi) away from Canberra......
Even Singapore is only slightly farther away at 3,350 kilometres (2,082 mi), ........"
3,350 kilometres is farther away than 3,969??? Without this I would not have known that it were road distances
So all I want to say is this: Ok road distances are pretty set (in Australia) and there is a consensus to use road distances in the Australian articles. Problem is that, at least I, but I think many more people (who are not familiar with the Austalian customes), aren't aware of this consensus. I think that the underlying problem is that many of the Australian articles are made by Australians (and I think you/they have done a good job) but you have to understand that the English Wikipedia is globally read (probably it's less likely for an Australian to read about Australia than for a foreigner who wants to know more about it). Things that are so obvious for you, could be strange for people from other cultures. So that's why I'm suggesting to make it more clearly.
Greetings,
Rob
Hello, Orderinchaos. You have new messages at 212.238.53.47's talk page. Message added 02:19, 6 May 2010 (UTC). You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.[reply]
Orderinchaos, some responses to this IP user's and your own comments at his talk page. Bleakcomb (talk) 02:19, 6 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]
I'm a teacher. Frequently, when criticising a student for doing something wrong, I get a response of "But sir, he's doing it too", while pointing at another student. My response nowadays is "If he murdered someone would that make murder OK?" The existence of some unreferenced material on Wikipedia does not justify the creation of more.
Wikipedia likes references. You found a reference. Why not use it?
I'm a teacher as well. In general, lists do not use references as the thing quickly becomes cumbersome, unwieldy and difficult to read. I've written literally hundreds of lists here, and if I had to reference every point on every one of them, they'd look like spaghetti. Orderinchaos 06:08, 9 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks. Wasn't aware of that exception HiLo48 (talk) 07:22, 9 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]
BTW no hard feelings - it's not unreasonable at all to ask for a source for an assertion (especially a controversial one) - just that in these cases actually recording them would probably be a significant drag on the list in question (just think what the refs section would look like if we did all of them!). We had a similar situation with the QLD 2009-2012 member list recently where 2 MPs quit their party to become independents and someone evidently caught wind of the news nearly a day before the papers did and updated it. It was reverted, then re-reverted when it hit the mainstream media. Orderinchaos 14:44, 9 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Cheers for that. I don't like asking this but could you also revert back the stable version? As Darnotley's unstable version is showing. Bidgee (talk) 08:00, 9 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]
User is now block evading. I've issued a SPI. Bidgee (talk) 01:28, 10 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Hi. Would you mind looking at this IP 121.216.255.237 (talk·contribs)? I was looking through the archives at SPI and I saw that you blocked 124.179.0.131 (talk·contribs). Both are the same ISP and are in the same location, but I'm not too familiar with the behavior with Stravin. Elockid(Talk) 14:32, 9 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks for the quick response! Elockid(Talk) 14:45, 9 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]
I remember back to the vibrant, collaborative atmosphere that was WikiProject Western Australia in 2007 and early 2008
Bit like a morgue now the attendants dont even bother to turn the lights out :| SatuSuro 14:35, 9 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]
I was actually surprised how it was handled - the last time I took it to AN/I (a few months ago) the admin who took it on acquitted themselves pretty well, from my point of view - hence my confidence in reporting on this occasion. Without criticising those who handled it this time, I think the situation is rather complex and sometimes things can look one way and be another. I genuinely wasn't sure what the situation was (and genuinely didn't have the time to investigate - my life's moved on a fair bit since I last got properly involved in trying to find a solution to the BKWSU stuff), so went to a neutral forum to ask anyone with more time than me to have a look - and I'm not sure that actually happened. If I didn't know that any admin I can think of that I trust would regard NRMs as a veritable minefield they don't wish to enter, I'd offer to get one of them to review the current situation more completely. (However, if one is reading this message, I'd appreciate it.) Orderinchaos 19:41, 15 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Hi. Could you please explain this removal? I would just like to understand your reasoning on this. Thanks. Bksimonb (talk) 09:00, 17 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Generally we don't let people with a COI write screeds using Wikipedia operational pages about those who have attacked their organisation. If the conduct being identified is sufficiently bad we have ample neutral admins and editors capable of writing such a report. Given this area is already under ArbCom probation, if you're in the middle of something, it's best to avoid inflaming it. This would apply no matter what kind of organisation it is - most of my work has actually been with members of political parties and employees of companies and schools. Orderinchaos 10:30, 17 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Yes, I can appreciate your reasoning and I agree. In many ways it would be better if someone neutral had written the entry. I didn't write it because he attacked an organisation though. That would be small. I wrote it was more because he had attacked me, personally, and other editors in the past. I believe the way he does this could be stressful and cause real life difficulties to editors, if for example, he were to start sending emails to someone's boss. Certainly he DOES take issues off-wiki and I am fortunate that those who received these emails don't take him too seriously. I also have to live with my name coming up in various forums according to his somewhat distorted POV of me.
Certainly, there is a clear, repeating pattern of long term abuse and an MO. Do you think it would be possible to condense what was there into something more appropriate? And if so, do you have any suggestions as to who would be prepared to do it?
I found another copyright violation on the Queensland Book Depot using a word-for-word copy from the FAQ on the official website in the external links section. Can you take the appropriate action or in light of your recent decision to step back from editing should I ask another Australian admin (who would be best?) or just post it to the WikiProject Australia noticeboard? - Shiftchange (talk) 22:41, 17 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]
drop the detail here theres enough admins lurking around :) Gnangarra 01:18, 18 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]
reverted to last version before cv text was added, suggest possible deletion of the article unless theres some substancial sources our there. Gnangarra 01:26, 18 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]
You made some interesting comments about me on User_talk:Maunus#BKWSU. I would like the opportunity to put my side across since I feel a bit put out by some of them.
"...in fact has previously said he is their web manager..." I'm in the IT department as a teckie, a sys-admin. I do not create or manage content, PR or express represent the views of the organisation in any capacity.
"...he got the original Lucy user banned...." Lucy initiated the arbitration case. The case was undertaken mainly by Fred Bauder, a retired lawyer. Lucy was banned because Fred found that he had clearly threatened another editor. This is not sommething I did to Lucy and I am surprised and disappointed if you think I somehow was able to manipulate arbcom when the behaviour and evidence of the behaviour that got Lucy banned was so blatant and obvious.
"...so we have an organisation singlehandedly censoring their adversaries, basically." I am not an organisation. I am an editor like yourself. I don't report to anyone or take any orders from the organisation, except for my first exchange with Lucy in July/August 2006 I as described in the Abcom case. I have never sought to censor anyone other than obvious personal attack posts on talk pages that have no value on Wikipedia. I have stated on many occations that my objective is a neutral, balanced article and my reasons for wanting this are because...
As a BK I do not want to encounter undue prejudice simply for being a BK as a result of people reading the article, I'm thinking in terms of job applications etc. Any prejudice based on what someone reads on Wikipedia should be in proportion to how evil, or not, the organisation really is and not based on how evil someone with a grudge and an agenda says it is. Basically I want a fair article, not a biased one.
I value Wikipedia and use it as a resource at work and at home. I respect what the project is aiming to achieve and those involved in creating it. The project does not want or need someone using it as a soapbox for propaganda any more than it needs someone writing promotional puff-pieces.
"...one side is using admittedly weak Wiki policies/procedures to push their case..." Would that be from my side? Please indicate what policies or procedures you consider to be weak so I can address this issue if it applies to me.
"I wouldn't like to see a situation where this ends up at ArbCom again..." arbitration is the last resort of dispute resolution when two or more parties are unable to reach agreement. It would be a unique precident for an arbitration case to be accepted between an unsanctioned editor and an effectively banned editor with such a prolific collection of confirmed and suspected disruptive sockpuppets to his name.
"I was around at the time that happened, and the user was engaging in good faith when they could be calmed down." Obviously this is some definition of "good faith" I was not aware of. There is no justification I can see for abusing multiple accounts to rage against other editors and make their lives a misery. All this happened in my absence and I feel vindicated that it isn't just me who experienced issues with this editor.
i reverted ur edit on this section as the section is valid in context, u are right that the section only contains one point of view however maybe it could be expanded to show other points of veiw on the issue. if there is enough info then maybe a new article should be created and then linked with a small explanatory blurb in the article
I've withdrawn all complaints regarding Lucy[edit]
After cooling off I have decided that there is no further benefit in highlighting Lucy's behaviour. You have drawn my attention to the fact that it all looks quite bad even if my intentions were good. We can live without the long term abuse entry and I have deleted my personal blog about my experiences on Wikipedia. It is better to leave the sound of one hand clapping. Of course, I will continue to report any sockpuppets and disruption I see to the appropriate channels but will do so discretly. Peace Bksimonb (talk) 08:34, 20 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]
User:GJGardner... mainly NSW and US politics with a little bit of other politics on the side, check. Instant knowledge of wikipedia despite new user, check. I suspect it's another of "his" socks. Timeshift (talk) 20:58, 23 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Order – could you please have a look at User:Ottre’s editing over at Tony Abbot. IMO, there is clear consensus against his edits, but he’s reverting to keep it in. I’ve reverted him once today – I will not revert him again. Or alternatively, could you please refer this to another admin if you see fit. Regards --Merbabu (talk) 06:31, 24 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]
The tendentious editing has been going on for days, and has now exceeded 3RR in the past 24 hours, so I listed it at WP:AN3.--Lester 07:40, 24 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]
I know you're right it was wrong. I just didn't like been called a moron,a vandal or not bright by him.--English Bobby (talk) 09:56, 24 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Actually, I would be happy to take the risk of being scrutinised. I would like to find a solution for the article(s) and disruption that takes me out of the direct firing line without compromising the need to identify and deal with the disruption. I've had some help and advice already from admins such as not performing reverts myself any more.
Having more editors around would probably solve a lot of problems anyway since there would a consensus in identifying and dealing with disruption with no single "prosecutor" any more.
I show how the very first sockpuppet accusation was bogus.
That there never was such an offence. How the Brahma Kumari adherent knew this.
And yet went on to compose the successful accusation which has then been used to railroad me every since. --Yet another 5000 years (talk) 19:57, 25 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]
If you could answer my challenge on the BKWSU talk page (regarding outlining specific issues with content), I would be most appreciative. Please in doing so avoid anything that looks like commenting on the person rather than the content. Orderinchaos 04:26, 26 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]
There has been some input on the Dada Lekhraj page, but I'm not sure if it's quite there yet... Bksimonb (talk) 20:34, 26 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]
I have no idea what the dispute is over. I reviewed and reverted a bunch of extremely mediocre edits to the article. I then listed on the talk page what my concerns were. No-one except me is talking about the content, they are all just going on and on about how I shouldn't have reverted such a large bunch of edits. I think the issue was confused by User:Craftyminion who called the original edits "vandalism". User:Craftyminion seems to be a bit of a troll.
I dunno, I really can't see how the edits in question improve the article. Merbabu, Digmores and Lester won't tell me. I suspect that they haven't really read the edits in question. --Surturz (talk) 03:49, 28 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]
i cant speak for the others but for myself i was opposed to the hard revert and the blanket way it was applied to all edits, wat i was trying to do was give benifit of the doubt and improve. I wont say wat i think about wat surturz was trying to do to avoid bad feeling and a flame war but for the moment ive excused myself from direct editing of the article and the talk page for a while as i think that my actions have been misinterpreted by others.
Digmores (talk) 08:16, 28 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]
ps i did read the edits
Digmores (talk) 08:32, 28 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]
For working on the QLD LGA articles by fixing the populations with the 2009 ABS estimates and cleaning up the articles! Bidgee (talk) 12:24, 4 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks (and LOL) :) Sad part is I appear to have lost my 1933-47 populations so can only do the current LGA articles covering the old LGAs I've already done. Orderinchaos 13:25, 4 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Your welcome! Well I'm not the only one fixing out dated populations, some which still has 2001 stats! :) Bidgee (talk) 13:29, 4 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Worst part is when you find yourself fixing errors and omissions which, on further investigation, turn out to be your own errors and omissions from years prior. Orderinchaos 14:17, 4 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Heheheh! I just say "it wasn't me" ;) I'm having to fix my own typos but also removing the old LGA name to the correct one, removing links that add nothing to the LGA, trying to source content ect ect. I'm just doing the main part which is fixing the populations (and a little more if I see it) but I'll start doing some work on the LGA articles as soon as my (not just myself but a team) museum exhibition research and setting up is over! I'll be away in about two weeks time (no internet though as I'm traveling lite) to Melbourne. Bidgee (talk) 14:30, 4 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Thank you for taking care of User:Five Years' notice about WikiProject Homeschooling. I went ahead and delivered the notice even to retired members just in case they might be around sometime and see it. However, I think it was very nice of you to go ahead and take care of that. Cheers! PrincessofLlyrroyal court 01:11, 5 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]
On User talk:Striving4 you asked me to assume good faith. Did I ask something that didn't AGF? 1) I asked nicely to wait and he said no. This was simple enough and in my opinion he gave a rude answer. 2) He has done a ton of editing for a brand new user so I asked if he has another handle here. Nothing illegal about having multiple handles but I would have told him that if he had another that he must link them so everyone knows. He did not answer. 3) I have now been told by an administrator to be on the lookout for a vandal in the tennis articles who is switching from account to account to make multiple changes. I assume good faith but but I won't be a deer in the headlights either. Fyunck(click) (talk) 05:16, 14 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]
I think "mentioned in passing at" is far more accurate. Orderinchaos 13:16, 20 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]
True, I'm not good at sending out notices or templating vandals. I've read your response BTW. Three points:
The impression I got out of all this was that you strongly favour material sourced to the ABC, you do not accept that impartiality is a form of bias and you would not agree that relying upon a minority, impartial point of view is a violation of WP:NPOV. I don't think you really took into account my argument that the most reliable source I could find (the front-page article in the Fin Review) makes no mention of Abbott's supposed "portrayal of the Rudd Government's third budget as a "tax and spend" budget".
I do not think you appreciate how confronting it is for an admin to say that Lateline is a reliable enough source to use in a BLP. The more librarians I speak to about this, the more I am convinced that Lateline is considered a discussion forum. However, I am also convinced that I would be blocked if I went about challenging the dozens of cases in which Lateline stories are cited as evidence of news coverage. I would like to make this edit war a case in point.
I would really appreciate a kind word now and then. I've copped a lot of flak considering the amount of effort I put into researching articles. I think this edit is worthy of a barnstar.
Hello, Orderinchaos. You have new messages at GJGardner's talk page. You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.
Hello, thanks for amending the Banks Peninsula template. Could you please have a look at its talk page, as I've posted a question there? Schwede66 23:53, 1 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]
You sure about those coords? Fraser Island is 153E approx and that's east of anywhere in PNG. Orderinchaos 17:56, 10 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]
That's better. I found some decimal coordinates from an old planation named Sangara. Looks OK now.Dr. BlofeldWhite cat 18:10, 10 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Figuring out the LLG (which can be less than obvious) usually helps as it narrowly locates even the smallest village to a fairly small area. Orderinchaos 18:12, 10 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]
On a side note, it's good to see something productive happening now that you've both apparently followed Beeblebrox's suggestion. :D —DoRD (talk) 18:16, 10 July 2010 (UTC)
Who is Beeblebrox ? I haven't looked at the "debate" since you moved it from the village pump. I thought I was wasting my time so decided to just get on with the referencing work I wanted to do.Dr. BlofeldWhite cat 18:18, 10 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Oh, sorry, I was commenting on the WP:VPP thread and had just assumed that you'd seen it. —DoRD (talk) 18:21, 10 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Just saw it, big cajones LOL. That was funny.Dr. BlofeldWhite cat 18:25, 10 July 2010 (UTC)
When you update the infobox can you also move the photograph to the top like the Australian infobox and add a timezone parameter +10 I believe.Dr. BlofeldWhite cat 19:16, 10 July 2010 (UTC)
Haven't been able to create any map province maps. Don't know what's up with OSM but even if I try to make a small crop of a province it keeps saying "strain on the server". Maybe I'll try again in a few days. Thanks for sorting out the maps though.Dr. BlofeldWhite cat 18:46, 13 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]
