User talk:Skyring

Request for Informal Mediation

Your request for Informal Mediation (MedCab) has been accepted by User:Ronk01. Please give an opening statement in the indicated section on the case page. (Located here) Ronk01 talk 14:49, 28 February 2011 (UTC)

Mediation

Thank you for your Statement. I have read each of them, and encourage you to give rebuttals where you feel it to be necessary. I would now ask that you propose a solution on the talk page for review by all participants in hopes of developing consensus on a compromise. This message has been delivered to all participants Ronk01 talk 15:19, 1 March 2011 (UTC)

United Kingdom

Welcome to the den of confusion. GoodDay (talk) 22:50, 6 March 2011 (UTC)

Australian head of state dispute

You need to take a break from that article, Pete. From where I sit, you're starting to come across as its owner. PS- This is just some advice, which you're free to ignore. GoodDay (talk) 23:24, 9 March 2011 (UTC)

This is your repeated opinion, which has not been expressed by any of the many other contributors to the article. --Pete (talk) 00:32, 10 March 2011 (UTC)

I can understand the greater disconnect between Australians & Elizabeth II, compared to Canadians & Elizabeth II. We've only got the Atlantic Ocean seperating us from Buck Palace, where's you guys are seperated by the Pacific Ocean, the Americas & the Atlantic Ocean (about half a world away, from Buck Palace). GoodDay (talk) 05:05, 14 March 2011 (UTC)

Fix up

I'm not certain why, but when you responded to Mies in the "Where did the republic go?" section, at 9:45 today - it duplicated the section 'minus' the following posts. Anyways, I've fixed'em up. GoodDay (talk) 16:23, 15 March 2011 (UTC)

WP Australian Politics in the Signpost

"WikiProject Report" would like to focus on WikiProject Australian Politics for a Signpost article. This is an excellent opportunity to draw attention to your efforts and attract new members to the project. Would you be willing to participate in an interview? If so, here are the questions for the interview. Just add your response below each question and feel free to skip any questions that you don't feel comfortable answering. Other editors will also have an opportunity to respond to the interview questions. If you know anyone else who would like to participate in the interview, please share this with them. Have a great day. -Mabeenot (talk) 16:48, 3 September 2011 (UTC)

You're invited to the Canberra WikiMeetup on 20 November 2011

Hi! We're having a Canberra Wikimeetup on 20 November 2011 at Siren Bar in Gunghalin from 2pm to 4pm. It's most just a chance to chat with other local Wikipedians, get a chance to go a different sort of bar (which is reasonably kid friendly, serves real food, and has non-alcholic options), and, if you're interested, learning more about what Wikimedia Australia and local GLAM projects are happening. We'd love to see you and any Wikipedia/Wikimedia/wiki loving friends you have there. --LauraHale (talk) 07:22, 31 October 2011 (UTC)

Good luck with Qantas. ;) And will do. :D --LauraHale (talk) 08:55, 31 October 2011 (UTC)

Rfc/U stuff

Howdy. I think ya should inform Mies that you linked to Mediation, as he was involved. GoodDay (talk) 17:29, 5 December 2011 (UTC)

The issue is your behaviour, not Mies's. Fair warning. Now that I've reached a period of stability in my life, with no career moves, house moves or international travel on the horizon, I'll pursue that matter of head of state consistency outlined in the mediation case as the way forward. --Pete (talk) 17:32, 5 December 2011 (UTC)

Thanks for the notification. GoodDay (talk) 17:52, 5 December 2011 (UTC)

Re "Getup" page and reference to non-neutral and biased sources

Yes, it may well be that claims about Getup membership could be viewed as misleading, but the tone of that section of the page is clearly prejudicial in nature, I would say.

And again, the nature of the sources referenced is the most dubious thing about that section. As Nick-D said when he banned "Brandonfarris", the person responsible for posting that section, and the "Labor party front" section, and the "Spam" section, use of dubiously sourced negative material from people like Andrew Bolt isn't appropriate.

All of this material is clearly and intentionally negative, and it is part of the overall and transparently obvious agenda pursued by "Brandonfarris" around Wikipedia, as stated by Nick-D a little while ago on this person's talk page.

Sam 3982 (talk) 09:27, 13 December 2011 (UTC)

Moreover, I have now posted to that effect, along with other information, in detail, within the "Talk" section on the Getup page.

Given that Wikipedia is supposed to be documenting in a balanced impartial manner, avoiding advocacy, as is stated on the "Five Pillars" page, the majority of these three sections is not in keeping with that standard. Sam 3982 (talk) 10:06, 13 December 2011 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification

Hi. In List of things named for Queen Elizabeth II, you recently added links to the disambiguation pages Queen Elizabeth High School, Queen Elizabeth Park and Coronation Park (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) 10:55, 16 December 2011 (UTC)

Can we leave it at that?

Bias is better declared. There is nothing on wikipedia to say that people who are biased cannot edit wikipedia. What matters is making sure the bias does not extend to article edits. I don't want to fill up Rudd talk page any further. Timeshift (talk) 07:51, 29 December 2011 (UTC)

RE: User junk

uim not forcing hiom to read anything, hes free to delete it. i was REPLYING to a statement where there was context lest it getl lost. see the colon.(Lihaas (talk) 21:13, 16 January 2012 (UTC)).