User talk:Aaroncrick

Launceston

The census was for statistics in 2006 not 2007 as stated.

• List of Mayors needs to be added to Launceston page not just Launceston City Council one
• Expand the history section
• Expanded media section such as Radio Channels Aaroncrick (talk) 22:26, 15 August 2008 (UTC)
• Population Statistics for past years. Aaroncrick (talk) 22:30, 15 August 2008 (UTC)

Launceston Airport

• More history as the Airport has been around for a long time. Aaroncrick (talk) 22:34, 15 August 2008 (UTC)

Launceston Climate

Climate data for Launceston
Month	Jan	Feb	Mar	Apr	May	Jun	Jul	Aug	Sep	Oct	Nov	Dec	Year
Source: Bureau of Meteorology

Other daily elements

	Jan	Feb	Mar	Apr	May	Jun	Jul	Aug	Sep	Oct	Nov	Dec	Yearly
Mean Temperature at 9am	16.6	16.0	13.9	11.7	8.5	5.7	5.2	7.1	9.9	11.8	13.8	15.7	11.3
Mean Temperature at 3pm	22.7	23.1	21.2	17.8	14.8	12.1	11.6	12.8	14.3	16.6	19.0	21.0	17.2
Source: Bureau of Meteorology

Temperature Extremes

	Jan	Feb	Mar	Apr	May	Jun	Jul	Aug	Sep	Oct	Nov	Dec	Yearly
Lowest Maximum Temperature	14.8	16.0	13.6	10.9	9.8	5.9	6.0	8.1	9.8	9.4	13.2	14.3	5.9
Highest Minimum Temperature	20.3	20.3	18.5	17.0	15.1	13.2	11.5	11.5	14.5	15.3	18.7	19.1	20.3
Source: Bureau of Meteorology

Rainfall Elements

	Jan	Feb	Mar	Apr	May	Jun	Jul	Aug	Sep	Oct	Nov	Dec	Yearly
Highest Monthly Rainfall	139.4	107.4	106.2	124.6	152.9	183.0	157.7	183.6	115.8	121.4	85.2	145.1	829.6
Lowest Monthly Rainfall	9.8	0.0	2.6	4.3	4.0	4.3	36.8	14.9	8.4	9.9	5.6	6.1	394.8
Source: Bureau of Meteorology

Launceston Events

• 4 AFL matches a year + 1 NAB Cup match
• V8 Supercars (Tasmanian Challenge)
• YMF Australian Superbike Championship at Symmons Plains
• AAMI Launceston Cup
• Launceston Christmas Parade
• Carols by candlelight
• Festivale
• MS Fest
• News Years fireworks Aaroncrick (talk) 06:31, 16 August 2008 (UTC)

AFL Players

What AFL players are from Launceston? Aaroncrick (talk) 06:31, 16 August 2008 (UTC)

• Sam Lonergan
• Brad Green

Devonport AFL players

• Grant Birchall Aaroncrick (talk) 06:35, 16 August 2008 (UTC)

Launceston article

Bidgee downgraded the article because the article is not in as good a condition as it used to be. This is most likely due to changes in the article in the last few months. More information is not necessarily better information. Too many tables and lists are not recommended, and sources for new additions are preferred. Take a look at Manual of style, Writing better articles, Guide to layout. In the specific case of the Launceston, Tasmania article, check out WP:WikiProject Cities, and look at some of the "Feature articles" or "Good articles" in that project. That is the kind of format, layout and content that editors should aim for. -- Chuq (talk) 10:19, 28 August 2008 (UTC)

hmmm still believe that it's a bit harsh Aaroncrick (talk) 10:23, 28 August 2008 (UTC)

The only real answer is to make the article "better" - which may mean more careful selection of information that goes in as much as just adding stuff, even if it is cited. I think the article is too long rather than too short just now. And we ought to have fewer citations based on web sites (NOT on the whole good sources - in fact some are really bad) and more on the kinds of source we residents could access with a visit to the Northern Regional Library -(OK I am as remiss here as anyone). The history bit needs cites - and the information about Launceston's situational drawbacks (drainage problems, liability to flooding, landslips, smog etc.) needs to be restored with better cites. If you've tried discussing this directly with Bidgee without getting anywhere, and you badly want to improve the article's rating, then look at the helpful pages Chuq mentions above and work towards a real improvement - deserving a better rating is after all even more important than getting one.--Soundofmusicals (talk) 23:19, 28 August 2008 (UTC)

Launceston

Oops can anyone help me with the Launceston government part. Aaroncrick (talk) 06:01, 2 September 2008 (UTC)

Whats the problem? Moondyne 06:18, 2 September 2008 (UTC)

Thanks very much for fixing it. (Aaroncrick (talk) 06:22, 2 September 2008 (UTC)

You're too kind. Moondyne 11:02, 2 September 2008 (UTC)

I think that C is about right for this article at the moment. Its not yet as sharp as Hobart which has a map, Education and Demographics sections, and has superior prose. It has improved considerably though and is not far off. Keep up the good work. I'd give it a B with a decent map. Moondyne 07:20, 4 September 2008 (UTC)

September 2008

Can you please stop deleting everything! If something does not have a reference try to find one or give 48 hours for someone to find one. You seem to be too busy trying to get everything perfect. Valuable information is being deleted. Yes half of it it correctly done so but the other half is just unconstructive edits. Aaroncrick (talk) 10:17, 4 September 2008 (UTC)

Anyone can edit so you can't tell any editor to stop removing unsourced (including unreliable sourced) content since it doesn't belong on Wikipedia. Bidgee (talk) 10:21, 4 September 2008 (UTC)

Well maybe it does. Everything should be sourced but make a note of it in the discussion. Talk about it first. Care should also be taken in deleting information that is obviously correct and has yet to be sourced. For example on the Launceston Airport Page, it was announced on the news that another flight will be added to the Melbourne to Launceston route. I didn't have time to add a reference and was going to do so, if no other editor did. I was suprised to see next time i checked it was deleted. You didn't even bother to look for a source or mention it in the discussion. Aaroncrick (talk) 10:27, 4 September 2008 (UTC)

I hope you don't mind me interjecting here. Bidgee used the edit summery to indicate a reason for removal; that it was unsourced. It didn't just randomly combust. If you didn't have time to add a WP:Reliable source, why didn't you wait till you've located a WP:RS and then add it. I applaud you for your effort and your contributions just Wikipedia:Assume good faith when dealing with editors. Mvjs (talk) 10:37, 4 September 2008 (UTC)

"Care should also be taken in deleting information that is obviously correct and has yet to be sourced." If it's correct then it should be easy to source but just because you feel it's obviously correct doesn't mean others feel the same. As for the removal the editor who does so doesn't have to look for sources since it's up to those who add content here. Also Blogs and forums can't be added as sources (See WP:RS). Bidgee (talk) 10:32, 4 September 2008 (UTC)

Where have blogs and forums been added as sources? Aaroncrick (talk) 10:33, 4 September 2008 (UTC)

[1] Tiger Airways will add another Launceston to Melbourne service, on December 15. <ref>[http://tigeraustralia.wordpress.com/ Launceston Airport, Tasmania, Australia - Media Releases</ref> Wordpress is a bloghost. Bidgee (talk) 10:36, 4 September 2008 (UTC)

It's like talking to a brick wall to you. You have just deleted the Accidents and incidents part out of airport article becuase it's noted in the Melbourne Airport page. You have also no discussed it! You don't listen to what is said and you just carry on doing what you do best. I don't know if it's arrogence or vandalism or what? Aaroncrick (talk) 10:45, 4 September 2008 (UTC)

Please remain civil and assume good faith. Accidents and incidents had not relevance to the article since it happened near Melbourne and not Launceston Airport, No discussion needed for the removal. Bidgee (talk) 10:49, 4 September 2008 (UTC)

Stop it with the Please remain civil and assume good faith thing. It's getting annoying. How about "Please make appropriate edits and slow down with deleting everything". Thankyou Aaroncrick (talk) 10:52, 4 September 2008 (UTC)