User talk:Moondyne

Mark John Currie

Thank you for the image of Crawley Bay (14 Nov 2007) The article on the Harvey River mentions 'Captain Mark Collie' and links to 'Mark John Currie'. Should it refer and link to Dr 'Alexander Collie'? Apuldram (talk) 15:59, 20 November 2007 (UTC)

Bill Lawry

Hi there Moondyne. We still use caps for Fifth and Sixth Tests I think. Also, if you have a spare minute can you take a look at Arthur Morris? I have had a few complaints at FAC from two American reviewers who think that the article is a bit too technical.. I'm not sure how to act on that one though, unless I engage in hyperbole (not good, obviously), Blnguyen (bananabucket) 04:17, 21 November 2007 (UTC)

Some personal opinions.

1st off, I believe if Carcharoth wants to get Robert unblocked, he should be going to Maxim instead of BrownHairedGirl since it was Maxim who blocked Robert.

And secondly, BrownHairedGirl made it so only admins can post on RYoung122's talk page. Her intent wasn't to make it so regular users can't post on his talk, but mainly so Robert cannot post on his talk (at least as far as I know). I guess, logically, by doing that, she would have to weigh in on the fact that other non-admins that may want to post on his talk page cannot.

On the other hand, I may not know what gain she gets from preventing Robert to post on his talk.

1 alternate suggestion to that is request a way for admins to block users from posting on their own talk page (an option). Perhaps we could request that. If you want to request that I'd support that as well. Otherwise people like me would just have to find other means to post if we wanted to post on his talk. Neal (talk) 06:02, 21 November 2007 (UTC).

Neal, admins can protect a page so only established users can edit it or only admins can edit it. As RY is/was an established user, there was no point in using the 1st option as he was already circumventing the block by continuing to post stuff unrelated to his block on his talk page. So option 2 was the correct protection option. —Moondyne 06:24, 21 November 2007 (UTC)

Ah, so I guess someone should have already pointed that Robert was by default violating his block by posting off-topic stuff in the first place. Hmm, perhaps you can inform Carcharoth of this, since no one seemed to brough this premise up. Neal (talk) 06:43, 21 November 2007 (UTC).

I thought I had asked Maxim earlier. I now see I was thinking of the StanPrimmer block. See here. Neal, if you want to post at User talk:Ryoung122, post a request at WP:ANI, and see if an uninvolved admin will agree to unprotecting the page to allow you to post there. Carcharoth (talk) 15:26, 21 November 2007 (UTC)

No I don't think I will be doing that.

Anyways, I consider the situation between Robert and BrownHairedGirl to be just about over. Carcharoth's debate that BrownHairedGirl should remove the block for his talk page is pretty much finished since 1) she said the answer is no, and 2) Robert Young now has both Moondyne's and Carcharoth's e-mail. Therefore, if a 3rd or 4th admin were to post on his talk, he would have to consider e-mailing Robert and paste the e-mail conversation if that's the plan. Therefore, the only thing left is Maxim's block. In other words, there's no point to continue with the "appeal to BrownHairedGirl," except maybe she will re-block Robert Young if Robert is ever unblocked by Maxim or a committee.

As far as what BrownHairedGirl said about how does she feel about Robert ever getting unblocked, can I just point out that it's very possible for 2 users on Wikipedia that don't get along to not even have to deal with each other? Robert's interests and contributions on Wikipedia are very narrow: he contributes to supercentenarians. Suppose Robert joins or takes part in WikiProject: Ireland, then I'm sure chaos brakes lose between the 2 and ArbCom will have to settle everything in their everyday disputes. As far as what BrownHairedGirl said about Robert continuing to do is walled garden, 0 citations, and COI, etc. (after if he ever gets unblocked) - I'm sure she could send the meanest admins she could think of to have them watch over and bully RYoung122 about policy.

It seems that Carcharoth is the admin who was the most faith in Robert. And the fact that he is willing to work with Robert on some of the articles is a help. In other words, Carcharoth is Robert's last resort on Wikipedia (with the exception of ArbCom of course). Therefore, if Robert fails to get along with Carcharoth, then I would consider him to be a failed Wikipedia user. Neal (talk) 22:16, 21 November 2007 (UTC).

WA Inc.

I was thinking that it would be good to have maybe a paragraph about Burke's reign as Premier, and a couple of paragraphs about the WA Inc scandal to explain why he became persona non grata to begin with. I guess all I'd be looking for is just a short summary of the scandal, Burke and Grill's role in it, and the repercussions for them both. It doesn't really need much more than that, I think - anything else could go in WA Inc as a further information link. Rebecca (talk) 00:59, 23 November 2007 (UTC)

Paul Keating

Like the refimprove tag, I don't believe the bias tag is needed either (Skyring/Pete seems to insist on it). No attempt has been made to fix supposed issues. I don't see any issues with the article, I think it is not biased, NPOV, and neutral. Your review and hopeful tag removal would be appreciated. Thanks. Timeshift (talk) 03:53, 24 November 2007 (UTC)

Could you please explain more fully?

I see you deleted the old versions of Image:Beaufort Sea and disputed waters.png. Is this really the policy? What if it is necessary to access the older versions?

Cheers! Geo Swan (talk) 14:30, 25 November 2007 (UTC)

Thanks for your reply, and for taking steps. Cheers! Geo Swan (talk) 17:34, 25 November 2007 (UTC)

List of longest-serving members of the Australian Senate

Can you tableise and fix List of longest-serving members of the Australian Senate please. PMA (talk) 18:51, 25 November 2007 (UTC)

---

Thanks - i just put in Ron Boswell because from July 1 next year he will be the longest serving member. PMA (talk) 01:42, 26 November 2007 (UTC)

Oh my gosh

You know I am always keeping an eye out for online databases to add to my resources page. Here's one I don't think I'll be adding:

Have a look at http://www.toiletmap.gov.au/. It hosts The National Public Toilet Map, a component of the Australian federal government's National Continence Management Strategy. For those who like a personalised site, one can create a account with their "My Toilet Map" service.

I had to look thrice before deciding it was serious.

Hesperian 04:28, 26 November 2007 (UTC)