User talk:HappyWaldo

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Jump to: navigation, search

Welcome[edit]

Welcome!

Hello, HappyWaldo, 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 messages on discussion pages using four tildes (~~~~); this will automatically insert your username and the date. If you need help, check out Wikipedia:Questions, ask me on my talk page, or ask your question on this page and then place {{helpme}} before the question. Again, welcome! SatuSuro 13:08, 17 November 2010 (UTC)

L Scott Pendlebury[edit]

I've just edited Andrew Pendlebury, an Australian musician, and notice there is an article on his actress sister, Anne Scott-Pendlebury, but nothing on their visual artist parents. His father, L Scott Pendlebury, seems to deserve an article but I'm very weak on Australian artist's biographies. He appears to have been an entrant for national art prizes including finalist for the Archibald Prize, winning the Wynne Prize (four times?) and the Dunlop Art Contest. Would you be willing to collaborate on such an article? If so, I'm about to incubate it at one of my sandboxes: here. If tempted, jump in whenever you like.shaidar cuebiyar (talk) 04:05, 16 November 2012 (UTC)

Thanks for the heads up. I've started with some basic info. See how I go.shaidar cuebiyar (talk) 05:43, 16 November 2012 (UTC)
L. Scott Pendlebury now ready and moved to mainspace.shaidar cuebiyar (talk) 06:00, 18 November 2012 (UTC)

A barnstar...[edit]

Original Barnstar Hires.png The Original Barnstar
Your work at Tasmanian Gothic has been excellent. Great work! Stalwart111 22:41, 1 December 2012 (UTC)

Shrine of Remembrance[edit]

Hi, I understand we also have an image of it in the infobox, but we also have two images of the skyline in the article as well as the infobox. Plus, one is at night, the other is day, and it's not such a drastic change either and it highlights an important part of Melbourne's culture. Bibzy (talk) 09:24, 9 January 2013 (UTC)

The skylines show different buildings, and some sections demand an image of the skyline. Different stuff can go in the culture section. If a building needs to be shown at day and night, it's in the building's article. - HappyWaldo (talk) 11:21, 9 January 2013 (UTC)

Talkback[edit]

Nuvola apps edu languages.svg
Hello, HappyWaldo. You have new messages at MikeLynch's talk page.
Message added 16:15, 21 January 2013 (UTC). You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.

MikeLynch (talk) 16:15, 21 January 2013 (UTC)

Popular sports in Australia[edit]

*babbles* If some one wants to nominate it for deletion under whatever criteria, that's fine with me on some level. The problem is the content organization is fundamentally non-neutral and an RfC on the article said the organization for Sport in Australia as it stands without those sections was acceptable. The sections for Popular sports in Australia tend to end up with lots of fanboyism promoting particular sports. (The historical version of Sport in Australia had the AFL section and the NRL section both saying there were the most popular code in the country. The current version forces a more fact based approach so this popularity argument could not be used.) As it kept getting put back in despite all these issues, I just content forked as the easiest solution to this problem. The information should not be Sport in Australia. --LauraHale (talk) 08:42, 16 October 2013 (UTC)

I'm not sure what to do with that problem. Popular sports is so completely subjective. I would have a hard time rating any sport other than swimming as a popular individual sport. But golf, tennis and motor racing are some of the big individual "money" sports despite low participation rates. Walking and yoga are listed as some of the top sporting activities in the country, but they almost certainly wouldn't go in the article despite that measure of popularity. The original article before the reformat had a section on I believe Underwater hockey. No way should underwater hockey be given equal weight to Australian rule football. Just annoying problematic, and most "Sport in COUNTRY" type articles should be rewritten to not include specific sections on sport. Beyond the NPOV weighting issues, they pretend that sports exist in complete isolation from each other when they do not. --LauraHale (talk) 10:06, 16 October 2013 (UTC)
Um! HappyWaldo, this is bemused Amanda.
Your last edit comment on Culture of Australia is just a little odd. State funerals for Sportsman are just a wee bit uncommon; who but Bradman has received a State Funeral, in Australia?
And you are correct, the use of the term "Sir" does imply that he was knighted. He was knighted. Another honour rather rare among Australian sportsmen.
Amandajm (talk) 08:19, 29 October 2013 (UTC)
I wasn't suggesting that the info was put back. I agree that such details are not essential in article. I was simply registering my surprise at your comment. Amandajm (talk) 09:06, 29 October 2013 (UTC)

A beer for you![edit]

Export hell seidel steiner.png Here's cheers! Amandajm (talk) 11:41, 29 October 2013 (UTC)

Edit summaries[edit]

Please provide a summary for your edits. It is not too much to ask. That is what is expected from all editors. - Shiftchange (talk) 09:32, 5 January 2014 (UTC)

Your GA nomination of Tom Wills[edit]

Hi there, I'm pleased to inform you that I've begun reviewing the article Tom Wills you nominated for GA-status according to the criteria. Time2wait.svg This process may take up to 7 days. Feel free to contact me with any questions or comments you might have during this period. Message delivered by Legobot, on behalf of Roisterer -- Roisterer (talk) 05:10, 14 January 2014 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for February 12[edit]

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited List of Australian rules footballers and cricketers, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page South Melbourne Football Club (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver). Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 09:02, 12 February 2014 (UTC)

Block[edit]

My block had little to do with edit warring, it was to do with copyright images and sock puppetry. The edit warring may have been a contributing factor, but it wasn't the original reason. You are the one edit warring by clicking undo constantly, why are you so rigid with edits, particularly when they are constructive? Ashton 29 (talk) 06:48, 16 February 2014 (UTC)

Your GA nomination of Tom Wills[edit]

The article Tom Wills you nominated as a good article has passed Symbol support vote.svg; see Talk:Tom Wills for comments about the article. Well done! Message delivered by Legobot, on behalf of Roisterer -- Roisterer (talk) 03:11, 24 March 2014 (UTC)

Re: DYK QPQ[edit]

Hi HappyWaldo, you only have to review someone else's DYK after you've submitted 5 of them. See the eligibility criteria #5 :) Sam Walton (talk) 08:34, 28 March 2014 (UTC)

DYK for Tom Wills[edit]

 — Crisco 1492 (talk) 16:02, 30 March 2014 (UTC)

Montage[edit]

What on earth do you have against change? Is there an image so particularly unappealing that you cannot fathom seeing it used in the montage I replaced? I don't understand the rigidity. A lot of the images I chose were superior to the ones in the current one. Ashton 29 (talk) 09:21, 23 May 2014 (UTC)

Interesting to see you ignored me here about the exact same problem. Ashton 29 (talk) 01:36, 18 September 2014 (UTC)

Thanks![edit]

Whoops! Hadn't noticed the shenanigans going on. Just dropped in to fix a few links. Cheers! --Pete (talk) 17:29, 24 May 2014 (UTC)

Have YOU learned anything?[edit]

Wikipedia is a collaborative website and there is always room for change. Whether the current montage "looks better" is subjective... if you think that cloudy, dull and low resolution images look better then fine. But your rigidity - this constant opposing of any type of change regarding images, is beyond frustrating. You ruin the editing experience for those who have innovative ideas and so on. As for notable buildings, what isn't notable about St Peters Anglican Church (one of the oldest churches in the town), or the Bridge Hotel (an iconic red brick structure)...or how about Craig's Hotel, perhaps one of the most distinctive Grand Hotel buildings in the Victoria... they aren't notable? Your definition of 'notable' must be quite skewed, then. Ashton 29 (talk) 10:32, 11 June 2014 (UTC)

"Iconic" and "notable" buildings have Wikipedia articles. - HappyWaldo (talk) 04:30, 12 June 2014 (UTC)
Well no, not always. I still disagree. Ashton 29 (talk) 04:31, 15 June 2014 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for June 17[edit]

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Yarra Park, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page The Argus (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver). Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 08:51, 17 June 2014 (UTC)

August 2014[edit]

Hello, I'm BracketBot. I have automatically detected that your edit to Nicky Winmar may have broken the syntax by modifying 1 "[]"s. If you have, don't worry: just edit the page again to fix it. If I misunderstood what happened, or if you have any questions, you can leave a message on my operator's talk page.

List of unpaired brackets remaining on the page:
  • |}
  • booksandartsdaily/basil-sellers-art-prize/5613874 Basil Sellers Art Prize: where sport meets art], ABC Radio National. Retrieved 4 August 2014.</ref>

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, BracketBot (talk) 16:01, 3 August 2014 (UTC)


Hello, I'm BracketBot. I have automatically detected that your edit to Australia may have broken the syntax by modifying 2 "[]"s. If you have, don't worry: just edit the page again to fix it. If I misunderstood what happened, or if you have any questions, you can leave a message on my operator's talk page.

List of unpaired brackets remaining on the page:
  • The Implementation Costs of the GST in Australia: Concepts, Preliminary Estimates and Implications [2000&#93; JlATax 23; (2000) 3(5) |journal=Journal of Australian Taxation 331|publisher=[[
  • <ref>[http://www.artgallery.nsw.gov.au/discover-art/learn-more/australian-art/ Australian art], [[Art Gallery of New South Wales. Retrieved 27 August 2014.</ref>

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, BracketBot (talk) 03:11, 27 August 2014 (UTC)

Thank you for your vigilance and diligence on the Melbourne page[edit]

Will move the update from Conde Nast to the Tourism in Australia page. Keep up the Melbourne-page monitoring :-) Regards,--Soulparadox (talk) 13:09, 18 August 2014 (UTC)

No[edit]

I'm not going to reopen a discussion on the talk page because its generally just you and your Wikipedia friends chiming in on a fruitless debate about irrelevant 'problems' that leads to nowhere constructive. The purpose of Wikipedia, or the illustration side of it, is not to remain in stasis but to evolve. That montage is boring, it's been there for more than two years. What about the remodelled montage doesn't contain significant buildings? Everyone of the photos contains a significant structure and that's why I carefully selected them. I said to myself, "right, I'm going to select only images of buildings that are significant to Melbourne and its history and if HappyWaldo rejects the edits, then he's looking for reasons beyond what he says to dislike it." So your objection really clarifies that you have personal problems with any type of change relating to that info box montage and I do not understand why. I've never had problems doing the Brisbane montage, people there have accepted my changes but your odd and seemingly relentless rigidity makes Wikipedia an uncomfortable place. This is not an attack nor is it an insult, but I really do dislike the fact that you oppose everything I do. It's quite unfair. Ashton 29 (talk) 01:34, 18 September 2014 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for November 8[edit]

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Nick Cave, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Live at the Royal Albert Hall. Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 16:54, 8 November 2014 (UTC)

Nick Cave[edit]

1) WP:NEUTRALITY is one of the rules of wikipedia. "Gothic" is one of the adjectives that critics have always used to describe Cave's music. There are WP:RELIABLE SOURCEs that support this information. If this information was edited out once again, an administrator would be contacted.

2) All the gothic artists dislike this label and it is not relevant to mention this in the body of an article. Had a style section existed in the bottom of the article, this might be added. You can use The Cure's article as a model.

2) WP:ORIGINAL RESEARCH is also a rule to follow. Nick Cave has never stated thaat he "detested" or hated or resented the gothic genre. He stated in 1982 that he "rejected the honory title of forefathers" to the goth scene. That what Smin magazine related in 1989. However, Cave helped spawn the goth scene as it was related many times. Wikipedia has to reflect all opinions from critics, however an article is a Hagiography. Woovee (talk) 17:22, 15 November 2014 (UTC)

Sidney Nolan[edit]

Although you claim "clear copyright violation" you are 100% incorrect.... and it is unclear HOW you reach this strangely blunt conclusion. The picture is in the Tate Gallery in London, and (as in most UK galleries) public photography is permitted subject to using no flash... What world do you live in ??--Stephencdickson (talk) 23:24, 21 November 2014 (UTC)

"Photography in the main galleries is allowed for personal, non-commercial purposes only. It is the visitor’s responsibility to ensure no copyright is infringed." - HappyWaldo (talk) 00:35, 22 November 2014 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for December 15[edit]

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Ned Kelly, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Peter Carey. Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 09:54, 15 December 2014 (UTC)

Changes to Ned Kelly Page[edit]

I notice that you have reverted the addition of photo's to the Ned Kelly page. Most of the photo's have been there for some time but in you latest slew of edits you have decidied to arbitrarily remove them with no justification. I also see that you have a history of this type of behaviour. I have simply put them back, and put them in a spot more relatable. For instance, the photos of amour, in the armour section. It's good for readers to be able to see actual photos of the armour, as no amount of text will ever be able to properly describe them. Also, relating to the photo of the person in armour, this was added some time ago for a reason. The reason being is that photo has been used by the popular media in the past, but they would say that it was Ned Kelly himself. This is obviously incorrect, and so it's good for Wikipedia to give the real situation. You are unaware of the history, and delete the images with no justification. I have also added photos of historical areas of interest as they appear today so that others who are interested in Kelly may seek to find them for themselves.

Now I know that you are not a fan of Trove, with your edit comment 'why is the Burra Record, an SA newspaper, singled out as a publisher of excerpts of Kelly's letter when numerous VIC and NSW papers got there first? this is the problem with using Trove', but I did not single out the Burra Record, someone else added the 'according to the 'Burra Record comment. (But I respected the changes) You then replaced that with just 'press', but did not provide any other citations. There was no reason to remove that section of test, and was in place because another editor found the original text confusing. By just deleting text with no justification, you are ruining the history.

Just show some respect, and leave the images in place. I may not agree with the images that you have added, especially since you have not provided any in text attribution, but I respect the changes you have made and would not engage in an edit war with you just because of my own subjective opinion. Unless the images breach copyright, you have no real justification other than 'your subjective opinion' to remove them. I think the more images that can be added to enhance the article the better.