User talk:Five Years/Archive 1

This is Archive #1 for User talk:Five Years

This is an archive of inactive discussions. Please do not edit it. If you wish to revitalise an old topic, bring it up on User talk:Five Years.

Archive 1
2
3
4
5
6
10
20

Welcome!

Hello, Five Years, and welcome to Wikipedia! Thank you for your contributions. I hope you like the place and decide to stay. Here are some pages that you might find helpful:

I hope you enjoy editing here and being a Wikipedian! Please sign your name on talk pages using four tildes (~~~~); this will automatically produce your name and the date. If you need help, check out Wikipedia:Questions, ask me on my talk page, or place {{helpme}} on your talk page and someone will show up shortly to answer your questions. Again, welcome! Gnangarra 07:44, 21 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Leave a Message[edit]

I cleanup my talk page regularly, but still feel free to leave a message. Thanks =D Smbarnzy 16:45, 30 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Aquinas College Related[edit]

Sorry - not this morning :0 - will look sometime. Your talk page should be sequential and archived - the eccentric nature of 'cleaning up' might sort of get in some issues. School arts are always a problem - whichever school. Later SatuSuro 16:55, 30 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for the information about Aquinas' sport history as successor to the CBC. I changed the Aquinas College, Perth Sport article along the lines of the main article. Maybe some more detailed information about the split could be added to the main article's history section? --Huon 17:44, 4 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Image copyright problem with Image:Front_Building.JPG[edit]

Thanks for uploading Image:Front_Building.JPG. The image has been identified as not specifying the copyright status of the image, which is required by Wikipedia's policy on images. If you don't indicate the copyright status of the image on the image's description page, using an appropriate copyright tag, it may be deleted some time in the next seven days. If you have uploaded other images, please verify that you have provided copyright 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. 09:34, 31 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Aquinas daughter articles[edit]

Ok they survived AfD with no consensus, this means they have issues and you've got the opportunity to try to address those issues and improve these articles. The most specific concern raise was notiability to over come this third party references need to be found, what this means is providing the source isnt the School or and organisation associated with the school(aka olq aquinians) then its third party.

The exceptions would be from Christian Brothers, PSA and Education Department which will need to be considered in context on a case by case basis. What this means is that WA newspapers, Sunday Times, other out of publication newspapers, Heritage Council, Historical Society, Government agencies (excluding ed dept) and Biographies by past students are good sources to be cited for information. Gnangarra 12:19, 31 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

If your the only editor of an article just ask User:Moondyne, User:Hesperian or myself as admins we are able to delete articles. Where others have contributed to the article then AFD or WP:PROD. Gnangarra 14:23, 1 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Hey, im just wondering why you deleted the section on the AC article about the College Theme. I was also wondering i you could review the article, i need some feedback to show me where to take the articles from. You can write on th talk page about it. Thanks =) Smbarnzy 02:29, 2 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Hi, just thought I'd explain my "rm supercat" edits that are popping up all over your watchlist... I removed anything that was in "Private schools in Western Australia" from the generic "Schools in Western Australia". Ideally the latter category should not even exist and two categories "Private schools" and "Government schools" should come off Education in Western Australia... but that'll take a while to sort out :) Orderinchaos 02:57, 4 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Sorting Talk pages[edit]

PLease dont sort talk pages into sections as its best for new discussions to be at the end of the page, If discussions have been completed you should create archives. Also all discussions, etc on your talk page should also be archived. The only talk page discussions that can be deleted are are vandalism. Gnangarra 14:35, 1 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

References[edit]

Hi, I just saw your new references for Aquinas College, Perth and related articles. If I'm not mistaken, you added the very same references to some, possibly all, daughter articles, whether the daughter article has any connection to the reference or not. For example, I doubt that this PDF has any connection whatsoever to Aquinas College Perth Academic Studies. Besides, you seem not to be used to Wikipedia's reference methods - neither am I, but I'll use this opportunity for on-the-job training. I'll improve the main article, but I would ask you to have a look at the others and to remove from each those references which aren't related to the specific article. Yours, Huon 16:00, 2 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

The place to look for an how-to might be Wikipedia:Citing sources. Currently I'm busy editing the main Aquinas College, Perth article and adding the links etc., so it might be helpful if you didn't change that article at the same time. Once I have saved it (which might take some time), you might have a look at what I've done. Yours, Huon 16:18, 2 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

OK, I'm finished for now. I linked all references mentioned in the article and removed those not mentioned. The one reference you might want to look after is the Aquinas College history stored on the Aquinas Intranet and inaccessible from outside. I hope that helps. --Huon 17:09, 2 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Good see the reference getting sorted out sorry I've been to busy to help out, as requested I'll have another read and make any suggestions Gnangarra 10:13, 3 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

you fixed it before I could even get there Gnangarra

Article Assessments[edit]

Since its looking really good, I'll do another review tonight. Yet you could list at Wikipedia:WikiProject_Australia/Assessment#Requesting_an_assessment which is a good spot to get a fresh set of eyes on the article who'll have some general knowledge of Australian schooling. Alternatively you can also go to peer review where a Bot will check basic styling formats as per WP:STYLE, you also get an editor opinion but that doesnt always happen. Alternatively you can take the first plunge into the more formal reviews by listing at Good Articles Candidates, the review here is almost as critical as a WP:FA this process can be a duanting and generate a harsh comment, if you choose this path dont bite the reviewer they are only trying to help you improve the article according to agreed guidelines a positive review here means you can think about nominating it for WP:FA.

I'd go through the steps in this order though step one you could skip. Gnangarra 10:51, 3 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

WikiProject_Australia/Assessment
GA
PR
FA

William Thomas Bryan[edit]

Appears as if this Gentleman, past student may warrant an article. This site http://www.naa.gov.au/the_collection/family_history/armed_services.html has available service records of all Australian servicemen during WWI available you mioght find some interesting information there. Gnangarra 11:49, 3 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

from that page, the archive has 56 pages(viewable) of his service record which includes correspondence from wife and list the medals he recieved, location of his grave etc. Not a lot of other information there enough to expand the section in the article on him. adds another reference source. Gnangarra 12:18, 3 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

peer review[edit]

I finished the process for peer review you'll need to add this Wikipedia:Peer review/Aquinas College, Perth/archive4 page to your watch list as comment will occur tere, just be patient as it may take a couple days before any responses Gnangarra 22:47, 3 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

License tagging for Image:Aquinas Blazer.jpeg[edit]

Thanks for uploading Image:Aquinas Blazer.jpeg. 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. 16:05, 4 January 2007 (UTC)

A quinas College, Perth article[edit]

Hey i was wondering if you could AfD the "Aquinas College Perth Academic Studies" page - once you see it, you will realise why. Thanks =) Smbarnzy 03:01, 7 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Are you saying you want me to delete Aquinas College Perth Academic Studies? I am happy to do so; I just want to double check that's what you want. Hesperian 00:47, 8 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

If you want it gone, I think it would be better to turn it into a redirect to Aquinas College, Perth. Hesperian 00:49, 8 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Nuked. Hesperian 23:53, 8 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Unspecified source for Image:House Shields.JPG[edit]

Thanks for uploading Image:House Shields.JPG. 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 tagged, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If the image is copyrighted under a non-free license (per Wikipedia:Fair use) then the image will be deleted 48 hours after 10:34, 9 January 2007 (UTC). If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you. Ilse @ 10:34, 9 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Possibly unfree Image:House Shields.JPG[edit]

An image that you uploaded or altered, Image:House Shields.JPG, has been listed at Wikipedia:Possibly unfree images because its copyright status is disputed. If the image's copyright status cannot be verified, it may be deleted. Please go to its page for more information if you are interested in it not being deleted. Thank you. Ilse @ 01:19, 10 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Category:Aquinas College, Perth[edit]

What is your rationale for adding the other PSA schools to the AC category? Is that not what Category:Public Schools Association is for? —Moondyne 08:30, 10 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

On a somewhat related note, I removed the category from talk pages. When the article has a category, there's no need to give the same category to the talk page. I believe article categories are not supposed to be used on talk pages at all, but I didn' look up whether there's a guideline on the subject. --Huon 09:06, 10 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Category:Public Schools Association serves the purpose for what you describe. Adding the other college articles to Category:Aquinas College, Perth makes the PSA category redundant. —Moondyne 09:32, 10 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

~~And why is Trinity College a special case? —Moondyne 09:42, 10 January 2007 (UTC)~~ Sorry, the penny just dropped. I still maintain my opposition to the other schools being there though. —Moondyne 10:11, 10 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I don't really like to see articles like Brad Hogg tagged into school categories like Category:Aquinas College, Perth. It somehow implies a more substantial link between the person and the school than mere high school attendance. Therefore I have created a subcategory Category:Former students of Aquinas College, Perth, and tagged all the biography articles into that. If I have incorrectly tagged in a founder or teacher or someone associated with the school in some other way, please revert them back into the school category. Hesperian 10:40, 10 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

The link between Langer and the school, other than attendance, is pretty tenuous. I personally wouldn't put him in the school category as well as the students category. I'll explain my reasoning below.... Hesperian 23:36, 10 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

More[edit]

Smbarnzy, I feel that you are missing the point about how categorisation works in wikipedia. Linking everything that has a mention in the article is not a good idea (eg, Kwinana Freeway, Mt Henry Bridge, Salter Point, TEE exam etc.) Where would you stop? The article itself contains links of loosely related articles in its verbage. Categories should contain articles which have a direct and unambiguous relation with the category name. Justin Langer is in Category:Australian cricketers because that's clear and precise. It's a bit hard to explain, but believe me, less is more in this case. —Moondyne 13:29, 10 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

There's two rules of thumb that I would urge you to adopt:

Always tag the part into the whole; the member into the group; the specific into the general. For example, Aquinas College is a part of the City of South Perth, so it would be appropriate to tag the Aquinas article into Category:City of South Perth, if such a category existed; but it is not appropriate to tag City of South Perth into Category:Aquinas College, Perth, because the City of South Perth is not a part of Aquinas. Another example: Aquinas is a member of Public Schools Association, so it is correct to put the school article into Category:Public Schools Association, but not to put article Public Schools Association into Category:Aquinas College, Perth, because the Public Schools Association is not a member of Aquinas. Same thing for Congregation of Christian Brothers: Aquinas is one of their schools, so by all means tag Category:Aquinas College, Perth into Category:Congregation of Christian Brothers; but the opposite doesn't apply.
Don't tag an article into a category unless the relationship is notable from the point of view of the article. For example, there is clearly a relationship between Aquinas and Langer. From the point of view of Aquinas, that relationship is notable: he is one of their most successful and prominent former students, and has maintained substantial ties with the school. From the point of view of Langer, however, the fact that he has maintained ties with his high school is decidedly uninteresting. There are lots more interesting things to say about Langer, such as the story of his career, details of his technique, his stats, etc.

Hesperian 23:36, 10 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

SmBarnzy, I'll try to look at the Peer review page in the next day or so and I'm sure others will also. My little piece of friendly advice is to back off a little bit and allow others do some editing on the article themselves. Perhaps you should try editing something completely unrelated to Aquinas for a week or three. Please understand that it is not your article [1]. At the bottom of every edit screen it says If you don't want your writing to be edited mercilessly or redistributed by others, do not submit it. —Moondyne 13:43, 10 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I'll try to have a look too. Hesperian 23:36, 10 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Kwinana Freeway[edit]

I am very sorry but I am at a loss why a highway is attached with a school category? - it really is inappropriate! SatuSuro 12:58, 10 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

As for calling me doctor? hey no way. As for reviewing your article - be warned I am not into being friendly or generous - not a good idea to ask me - I am a stub tagger at the moment - anything longer than twenty words gets up my nose :) SatuSuro 13:02, 10 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Fair use rationale for Image:Student Intranet Portal.jpg[edit]

This file may be deleted.

Thanks for uploading Image:Student Intranet Portal.jpg. I notice the 'image' page specifies that the image is being used under fair use but there is no explanation or rationale as to why its use in Wikipedia articles constitutes fair use. When you use a generic fair use tag such as {{fair use}} or {{fair use in|article name}}, you must also write out on the image description page a specific explanation or rationale for why using this image in each article is consistent with fair use.

Please go to the image description page and edit it to include a fair use rationale.

If you have uploaded other fair use media, consider checking that you have specified the fair use rationale on those pages too. You can find a list of 'image' pages you have edited by clicking on the "my contributions" link (it is located at the very top of any Wikipedia page when you are logged in), and then selecting "Image" from the dropdown box. Note that any fair use images lacking such an explanation will 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. NMajdan•talk 14:15, 10 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Fair use rationale for Image:College Website.jpg[edit]

This file may be deleted.

Thanks for uploading Image:College Website.jpg. I notice the 'image' page specifies that the image is being used under fair use but there is no explanation or rationale as to why its use in Wikipedia articles constitutes fair use. When you use a generic fair use tag such as {{fair use}} or {{fair use in|article name}}, you must also write out on the image description page a specific explanation or rationale for why using this image in each article is consistent with fair use.

Please go to the image description page and edit it to include a fair use rationale.

If you have uploaded other fair use media, consider checking that you have specified the fair use rationale on those pages too. You can find a list of 'image' pages you have edited by clicking on the "my contributions" link (it is located at the very top of any Wikipedia page when you are logged in), and then selecting "Image" from the dropdown box. Note that any fair use images lacking such an explanation will 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. NMajdan•talk 14:17, 10 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Steven, User:Nmajdan tagged this image asking for a fair use rationale. You removed that notice and added {{fairuse}}. I'm unsure if you misunderstood his request or you misunderstood the purpose of the fairuse template or something else altogether. I've reverted your change. You need to write a convincing argument on the image page why you believe the image should be considered fair use, else it may be deleted. See Help:Image_page#Fair_use_rationale for guidance. —Moondyne 13:46, 11 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Peer review[edit]

Hi, I was sorry notice that you are unhappy with your peer review process. Your article was one of the first to be supported by the new WP:WA. I had left a few comments on the talk page, eg.

From the talk page;

I have found it interesting to watch this article improve. A lot of content instead of too liitle. A few comments:

Too many headings and 'subpages'.
Some sentences replacing tables or lists?
"They had come to the new colony at the invitation of Bishop Matthew Gibney who knew of the work of the Christian Brothers in the other States and in England and Ireland ...(emphasis added)" could be reworded a bit. The MoS is the doc I have reread the most, WP:NPOV and WP:CSB are good too.

I was reluctant to change anything myself, you have put so much work in. It will surely be G/A before long.

I will have another look tomorrow and give further suggestions. I'm sure the well regarded and more experienced editors who have contacted you already can help you improve this article or renew the Australian project review process. Regards, Fred 15:06, 10 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Sorry for delays - research, family duties and helping with the Peel by-election have kept me quite busy. I promise to look at it at the weekend, though. :) Orderinchaos 11:36, 11 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Deep breath[edit]

and count to ten.

Things have happened while you've been gone.

I have speedily deleted Old Aquinians Hockey Club as a copyright violation of the original webpage. I realise you have edited it quite a bit since then, but the copyright violation was still in place. If you want me to email you the text of the article, so that you can work on it offline and rewrite the bits you copy-pasted from the website, I'm happy to do so. Just let me know
Your Aquinas College subarticles have been nominated for deletion. The discussion is here.
Your PSA Sports series of articles have been nominated for deletion. The discussion is here.

Hesperian 11:30, 11 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Having so many of your articles AfD'd at the same time really, really sucks. The biggest challenge for you right now is maintain your dignity and keep treating people respectfully. If you're that pissed off, take a break from Wikipedia for a day or so. (This is difficult; I have repeatedly failed to take my own advice on this front).

Whoever wrote the original text has copyright on that text; that means they have the legal right to decide who can copy and publish it. Only they get to decide whether to upload it to Wikipedia or not. Wikipedia takes copyright very very seriously, because it only takes one author to sue Wikipedia for publishing their work without permission, to bring the site down.

Email to follow in a few minutes.

Hesperian 12:15, 11 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Email sent. Hesperian 12:16, 11 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

The ==History== section of Old Aquinas Hockey Club was copied from this website. Hesperian 12:22, 11 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

To be honest, im not going to stay away from wiki - I am going to fight for my articles until the death, and then fight for them some more.

Your choice; you've gotta live with yourself if you over-react and make a goose of yourself. I should say the most likely outcome in both cases would be a merger back into the parent article. Is that a problem? Hesperian 12:26, 11 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

My advice would be to fight the battles you can win (not too hard - if you do it right, people who are neutral the first time might even support you on a second occasion) and concede the ones you can't, and merge the latter cases back into the article. I know it's hard when random people keep trying to have articles of which you're understandably proud deleted, but if you see it as a challenge (to improve the articles) rather than an affront, then the end result is good for yourself, good for the subject of the articles and most importantly good for Wikipedia as a whole. Orderinchaos 14:39, 11 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

As an administrator, removing copyright violations is one of my jobs. If I see a copyvio, I am obliged to remove it. See Wikipedia:Copyright violations for an insight into Wikipedia's attitude on these things.

Look on the bright side: your Hockey club article has now been removed from the scope of the AfD. Once you have rewritten it to get rid of the copyright violation, you are well within your rights to re-post it, even if the other articles get deleted under the AfD process. Hesperian 23:04, 11 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Possibly unfree Image:Justice Day Picture.jpg[edit]

An image that you uploaded or altered, Image:Justice Day Picture.jpg, has been listed at Wikipedia:Possibly unfree images because its copyright status is disputed. If the image's copyright status cannot be verified, it may be deleted. Please go to its page for more information if you are interested in it not being deleted. Thank you. —Moondyne 12:20, 11 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Fees[edit]

No, I meant how much the college charges students for tuition etc. Sorry for not being clearer. —Moondyne 14:03, 11 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Where to put it? I can't answer that for you as it depends on what your going to to write. ie. length, format (list, table, prose etc.) —Moondyne 14:48, 11 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Language[edit]

Everything you write in wikipedia is alway there - it is impossible to remove - so when you continue to use swear words on talk pages - you might find that you will not get very far with some things! Try to moderate your language - regardless of your feelings. Also biting admins is a bit like saying you want to leave wikipedia - if you listen to them - you might learn something. Biting and swearing on wikipedia will not win you friends! SatuSuro 14:02, 12 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

You might have your preferences for who you work with - but you can be done for WP:Civility in your current state! Outski grotowski - wham bam thank you mam! First stop arguing with admins - pull your head in - keep your language to yourself - and go to google and try putting in search items for things that youi have done - its there - the whole internet has you covered - swear words and all. Nothing to be proud of. If you want to stay around - find a blog or an irc channel to let your guts hang loose - this is the last place to do it! After all that have a good night - I'm off! SatuSuro 14:11, 12 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

In fact stop editing right now - and read every word of Wikipedia:Etiquette before you do anything else, OK? SatuSuro 14:14, 12 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Probably right? I have three teenager children and would not let them speak to me like that. SatuSuro 14:16, 12 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

While you are at it Wikipedia:No angry mastodons might help SatuSuro 14:18, 12 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

OK chin up - think about it - theres something to learn about all this - this is an online encyclopedia - not a blog or irc - its meant to inform readers about things. Just take it ieasy - get away from the computer for while - and try to think through how you can take notice of things that have happened - you will probably learn a few things in the process. The froth and bubble of wikipedia will continue to torment many editors and it will keep going if they all got knocked over by a bus tommorrow - try to leave something positive- rather than your swear words. I'm off and out! SatuSuro 14:28, 12 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

For gods sake stop biting! You'll need to quote something to me from inside the mastodon or etiquette articles before I am prepared to speak with you again. You remove the whole section and apologise! Then later - after the weekend try negotiatiing - If I was an admin I would seek to wipe you out for leaving the last uncancelled comment about a life SatuSuro 14:34, 12 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I really gotta go - but as far as Im concerned you are not apologising enough - and you are in effect still biting. I've had it! SatuSuro 14:46, 12 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

After reading the section in question - ouch! If you want to get blocked you're going the right way about it. :/ I would agree with Satu's comments above - you should remove the section (he can still read it anyway if he really wants to, it's in his history) and apologise to him. Going off like that may be acceptable in some quarters but is looked down upon heavily here, it's seen as abuse - I know that you feel very strongly about the issues behind this, but you should avoid taking it personally, or taking it out on bystanders (he actually voted "weak keep" on your pages and provided a possible reliable source you could link, it was someone else who nominated them). At the end of the day all of us are here for the same reason, and that is to improve the encyclopaedia. I hope that you choose not to leave, and instead look to find ways of dealing with your Wikistress(tm) more constructively. Orderinchaos 15:04, 12 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Civil society[edit]

Was that your first stubbie? Does your mother know you are out? Fred 16:32, 12 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Partial response[edit]

Full response when I have time to read your entire message.

Very brief response now: you've misunderstood my role in this.

I did not nominate any of your articles for AfD. In fact, I don't think I've ever nominated any article for AfD. I prefer to work through friendly discussion rather than formal channels.

I deleted one of your articles, which was a copyright violation. I was obliged to delete it for legal reasons. I stand by that. And I was nice enough to email you the text so that you can fix it up offline then re-post it.

Someone else, not me, nominated all the other articles for AfD. I noticed that someone else had nominated them, and was nice enough to let you know.

This is exactly what I was talking about. You're flying off the handle at me just because I was nice enough to let you know that someone else had nominated your articles for deletion. I know it's a stressful situation for you, but if you can't restrain yourself from acting the goat, you should take a break for a while.

Hesperian 01:20, 13 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Full response[edit]

Firstly, if you follow through with your stated (but struck out) intention to disrupt Wikipedia in order to defeat the consensus, then I will block you.

Secondly, yes, Gnangarra is an excellent admin. And so is PDH, who nominated your articles for AfD. One of the very best. I assure you she wouldn't nominate an article for deletion in order to raise her delete count. And besides, the delete will go on the count of whoever closes the AfD, not who opened it.

This may come as a surprise to you, but administration is not a popularity contest.

Thirdly, as I said above, it was PDH, not me, who nominated your articles for deletion. Feel free to politely suggest to her that she should have discussed it with you, and ask her why she didn't. But - listen carefully - I don't much care that you unleashed a tirade of abuse and profanity on my talk page, but I will not tolerate you doing the same to PDH. It is not acceptable.

Four: I would have no objection to you merging all the PSA sport articles into Sport in the Public Schools Association. But I can't speak on behalf of anyone else here, so I can't guarantee that such an article wouldn't be nominated for deletion. After all, these AfD's have nothing to do with me.

Fifth: Moondyne and I have both told you that you don't understand how the category system works. Is that so hard to believe?

Okay, so Trinity and Aquinas are "like brothers". I don't dispute that. But that's not what the category system is for. South Australia and Western Australia are like brothers too, but I haven't seen anyone put South Australia into Category:Western Australia lately. Banksia aquilonia and Banksia integrifolia are like brothers but I don't see anyone putting Banksia aquilonia into Category:Banksia integrifolia either.

Okay, so all these articles are relevant to the Aquinas page. So what? - "relevant" is not what the category system is for. As I've already said, it is for "is a part of" or "is a member of" relationships.

"PSA makes up part of Aquinas" is just a ridiculous thing to say. You know very well that Aquinas is a member of the PSA, rather than the other way around.

Sixth: I couldn't care less about Scotch College. If you genuinely think the Scotch College houses article doesn't belong on Wikipedia, then nominate it for deletion. If you think the existence of a Scotch College houses article is a good argument for keeping the Aquinas houses article, then bring it up at the AfD discussion. Really, this AfD has nothing to do with me, so stop attacking me and go punch a pillow or something.

Hesperian 04:03, 13 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Pictures[edit]

Hey Barnzy,

I'm currently on the gold coast however, I shall take the pictures and have them up by the time I am back on tuesday

sorry I haven't already done them, :] symode09 07:39, 13 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Apology[edit]

You have shown character by apologising to Hesperian.

You should find his comments helpful and carefully thought out.

Good luck with the article. Fred 15:13, 13 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Agreed :) Orderinchaos 16:14, 13 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Archives[edit]

BTW re archiving - what you do is create a subpage like say User talk:Smbarnzy/Archive 1, and copy and paste the contents of your talk page there. When you remove them from here, put an edit summary indicating it's been archived, just so people don't think you're blanking your talk page for the hell of it.

Then on your main talk page you just put near or at the top: {{subst:Archive box|[[/Archive 1]]}} which will then point to it. At a later stage when you want to make a second archive you just have to duplicate a line and change the details, it's really easy.

Feel free once that's done to blatantly copy my archive setup if you wish :) I ripped most of mine from others anyway. In particular you want something up the top of the archive page to say that it's an archive and not to edit it, and whack it in the category Category:User archives. (see User talk:Orderinchaos/Archive 1). Note that Hesperian has done his differently again - that also works. Any questions (I'm in half sleep mode so am not at my clearest) just ask. Orderinchaos 16:14, 13 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Archiving[edit]

Hope you don't mind but I fixed this page so it goes to your archive instead of Hamedog's :) Orderinchaos78 11:59, 14 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Yeah I don't want your talk page there!--Hamedog_Talk|^@ 12:53, 16 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Aquinas College[edit]

We r so close to getting Aquinas College, Perth to an A rated article. when my friend created this article and the Mount Henry Peninsula article we were aiming of course to make them featured articles, and we r close, but we need to extend the paragraphs that is pretty much all, and mabey merge some of those sub pages. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Yungur (talk • contribs) 04:03, 17 January 2007 (UTC). [reply]