User talk:Matilda: Difference between revisions

Browse history interactively

← Previous edit Next edit →

Content deleted Content added

VisualWikitext

Inline

Revision as of 11:19, 30 July 2008

Matilda is taking a short wikibreak and will be back on Wikipedia soon.

Previous discussions:

Archive 1 (March to July 2005) / Archive 2 (August to November 2005) / Archive 3 (November 2005 to January 2006) / Archive 4 (February 2006 to April 2006) / Archive 5 (April 2006 to July 2006) / Archive 6 (July 2006 to August 2006) / Archive 7 (August 2006 to September 2006) / Archive 8 (October 2006 to November 2006) / Archive 9 (December 2006 to March 2007)/ Archive 10 (May 2007 to December 2007) / Archive 11 from January 2008 to March 2008 / Archive 12 from March 2008 to May 30 2008 / Archive 13 from May 2008 to ...

Signpost updated for June 23 and 26, 2008.

The Wikipedia Signpost Weekly Delivery


Volume 4, Issue 25	23 June 2008	About the Signpost

From the editor
Board elections completed; results forthcoming	WikiWorld: "John Hodgman"
News and notes: Military media mention, milestones	Dispatches: How Wikipedia's 1.0 assessment scale has evolved
Features and admins	Bugs, Repairs, and Internal Operational News
The Report on Lengthy Litigation


Volume 4, Issue 26	26 June 2008	About the Signpost

Ting Chen wins 2008 Board Election	ArbCom's BLP "special enforcement" remedy proves controversial
Global group discussions in progress	WikiWorld: "Raining animals"
News and notes: Foundation hires, milestones	Dispatches: Reliable sources in content review processes
Features and admins	Bugs, Repairs, and Internal Operational News
The Report on Lengthy Litigation


Home \| Archives \| Newsroom \| Tip Line \| Single-Page View	Shortcut : WP:POST

You are receiving this message because you have signed up for the Signpost spamlist. If you wish to stop receiving these messages, simply remove your name from the list. Ralbot (talk) 07:40, 27 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

WikiProject Films June 2008 Newsletter

The June 2008 issue of the Films WikiProject newsletter has been published. You may read the newsletter, change the format in which future issues will be delivered to you, or unsubscribe from this notification by following the link. Happy editing! --Nehrams2020 (talk) 23:58, 1 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Signpost updated for June 30, 2008.

The Wikipedia Signpost Weekly Delivery


Volume 4, Issue 27	30 June 2008	About the Signpost

Private arbitration case criticized, vacated	Other ArbCom announcements reviewed in wake of controversy
Statistical model identifies potential RfA candidates	WikiWorld: "Mike Birbiglia and the Perils of Sleepwalking"
News and notes: Board votes released, milestones	Wikipedia in the News
Dispatches: Sources in biology and medicine	Features and admins
Bugs, Repairs, and Internal Operational News	The Report on Lengthy Litigation


Home \| Archives \| Newsroom \| Tip Line \| Single-Page View	Shortcut : WP:POST

You are receiving this message because you have signed up for the Signpost spamlist. If you wish to stop receiving these messages, simply remove your name from the list. Ralbot (talk) 03:39, 4 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Photo

Kim Carr owns the photo, he was not the photographer but all rights were relinquished to Kim Carr as the owner. The photographer does not need to be attributed. Please restore the photo and caption.Feadering (talk) 00:03, 25 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

G'day I have just read the copyright disclaimer at the bottom of the referenced image. Turns out that there was no need for a creative commons license after all as the copyright disclaimer releases it for public reproduction. see below. The material contained on this website constitutes Commonwealth copyright and is intended for your general use and information. You may download, display, print and reproduce this material in unaltered form only (retaining this notice, and any headers and footers) for your personal, non-commercial use or use within your organisation. You may distribute any copies of downloaded material in unaltered, complete form only (retaining this notice, and any headers and footers). Apart from permitted uses under the Copyright Act 1968, all other rights are reserved.

As the website is referenced i see no problem with copyright. Please restore.Feadering (talk) 00:56, 25 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

No, the image isn't fine, it was used because it was free. This image is far better but the problem was permissions, which have now been rectified. I'm still not sure exactly on what grounds you are disputing it. Who says the author's name needs to be given on a cc-by-2.5 license? Are you arbitrarily making such changes and demands? Timeshift (talk) 01:00, 25 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

The constitution can be found at http://www.comlaw.gov.au/comlaw/comlaw.nsf/sh/homepage if you are interestedFeadering (talk) 02:23, 25 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

In legal speak the minister is the commonwealth of australia and he is able to release the photo.Feadering (talk) 01:39, 25 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Good point! Matilda, I expect your revert very soon. Timeshift (talk) 01:42, 25 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

1421 Thanks

for merging the 1421 hypothesis article into the book article and saving me the trouble and approbrium! Chris55 (talk) 20:16, 7 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Laurenraz

She's an editor in good standing in that she's free to edit without any specific restrictions (i.e. she just has to follow the same policies and guidelines as everybody else). As such, I think it's inappropriate to have her tagged indefinitely as a suspected sock. If you disagree, though, I suggest that we fire this off to the administrator's noticeboard to get some other views. Sarcasticidealist (talk) 21:23, 8 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

You're right that checkusers mean different things by "possible" and "inconclusive", and I should have used clearer language. By "inconclusive" I just meant "not conclusive", which is a description that applies to a "possible" result. Anyway, I've brought it to WP:AN#Suspected sock tags and "possible" checkuser results, so hopefully it will be resolved swiftly there. Sarcasticidealist (talk) 21:30, 8 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

removal of "random fact templates"

Hi, sorry about the tag removal (now restored). I couldn't see the basis for application until your explanation. Best wishes, WWGB (talk) 02:13, 9 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Christianity WikiProject Newsletter - July 2008

This Newsletter was automatically delivered by TinucherianBot (talk) 09:07, 9 July 2008 (UTC) [reply]

Lyall

Dear Matilda. Why are you proposing to delete Lyall Howard? It was previously proposed to be deleted and debated. The article hasn't been touched in yonks. What has changed? Prester John had made a derogatory remark which I removed a few seconds before your proposed deletion. I think it was fair enough to remove such comments. --Lester 00:25, 10 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Matilda. Not a personal dispute with you, but I'm going to remove the deletion tag, as I disagree with it. The AfD method would be the only appropriate way for it to be debated. Thanks, --Lester 01:32, 10 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for sending me the message to let me know about it being listed again. --Lester 04:57, 10 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Matilda, the Lyall Howard article has been difficult. I believe an AfD gives around 5 days to improve the article, which is not much time. It's been doubly difficult due to the extraordinary events of Prester John's vandalism wasting everyone's time, time everyone could have spent on more useful activities.
I don't understand the Copra reaction. I've got no idea why there are such strong feelings about removing Copra information. Personally, I don't think it reflects badly on John Howard's reputation. It's just an interesting part of the story, so the strong feelings are a complete mystery to me. I would have thought there were far greater issues that affect peoples' impressions of John Howard than the Copra one. If Lyall gets deleted, it strengthens the case for the copra info to be moved to the John Howard article, just as most other world leaders have articles with information about the financial position of the parents and family. I want to expand the Lyall article. Especially the war section, as there is a lot of information about that which is available from archives, but not on the net, because it was published before the internet era. I know there are old newspaper articles which feature a photograph of Lyall, though all are pre-internet, so it will take more effort to source them. Whilst trawling through articles, I did find that another Howard relative, John Chapman (minister of the church and Lyall's great grandfather) gets a bit of coverage in old articles, though I wouldn't dare start an article on him or it would likely suffer the same fate as Lyall. There's already another article about a modern day person by the same name -John Chapman (evangelist)- which serves as an example of a real example of a non-notable article. Cheers, --Lester 00:12, 16 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

As you saw, that other John Chapman article does not compare to Lyall Howard as far as notability goes. Wikipedia is overflowing with articles like John Chapman. Minor third rate journalists. Minor third rate sports people. These are the non-notables we really should be targeting, not Lyall Howard. Anyway, I must find time today to drop by a local library for more Lyall information. I am also aware of the existence of articles in the National Library in Canberra, and the State Library of NSW, but I start with the easiest sources first. --Lester 00:34, 16 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

User:Kvacha‎

Thanks for that! With the blanking I'm now thinking that User:Kvacha‎ could be a possible sock puppet of User:Monica Rosu, User:Alexandra Georgiana Eremia which backs up this past edit[1] from Kvacha‎. Do you know the page where I can request other checks such as IP's ect? Bidgee (talk) 04:52, 10 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Scrublett

→ In re: user Scrublett (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log)

You were several steps ahead of me in reverting the removal of another user's posts from various talk pages. In this edit he added one, signing as User:Prester John. Before the 3 hour block has expired, note that this may be another for Category:Wikipedia sockpuppets of Prester John. — Athaenara ✉ 01:55, 11 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Prester John is back

Help. Prester John is back as Madingogo (talk · contribs). All Madingogo's reverts are articles that I've edited in the past. Urgent action required.--Lester 04:37, 11 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

User talk:207.47.96.26 seems to have made edits very similar to these sock puppets. Nunquam Dormio (talk) 19:53, 12 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Another sock has appeared as Hypopostumus (talk · contribs) . --Lester 04:32, 14 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Also, Putz removal going thru my contribs. Ie, indonesia, U2, and Oz politics related arts. It’s not as annoying as I’m sure he’d like to think, but talk about childish. I mean, really. How pointless can one get?

Thanks for your help! Regards (from the “putz”) --Merbabu (talk) 04:48, 14 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I've reverted some of the edits. Also use {{userlinks|Putz removal}} which does this Putz removal (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log). Just makes it a little easyer to look at their edits. I've also informed Sarah‎ (talk · contribs). Bidgee (talk) 05:00, 14 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Can we put a tag on Putz removal (talk · contribs · count) and Hypopostumus (talk · contribs · count) so they appear in the category: Wikipedia sockpuppets of Prester John? --Lester 20:55, 14 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks, Matilda, for the information on how to tag sockpuppets. Those links on how to get help will be very useful. It's good to revert any vandalism as quickly as possible, as when other editors make unrelated contributions after the vandalism was made, it gets really messy to sort through it all to remove the vandalism. --Lester 21:41, 14 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Hi there. Given PJ seems to be obsessed with a certain set of pages, is there any way they could be protected from editing by newly created accounts but longer established editors could still edit them? I seem to remember coming across something like that before. Nunquam Dormio (talk) 08:31, 15 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Perhaps i'm not WP:AGF but I think everyone is PJ lately. Timeshift (talk) 00:29, 16 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Re Colbran, please use a colon rather than an asterisk when replying to a comment, asterisks should only be used to vote. Timeshift (talk) 06:52, 16 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Fair enough. Timeshift (talk) 07:19, 16 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Actually, Prester John is moving amongst us. He's got lots of user names. He's logged on to view his watchlist. I think he's editing. Give it a bit of time and he'll be caught.--Lester 07:01, 16 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Signpost updated for July 7, 2008.

The Wikipedia Signpost Weekly Delivery


Volume 4, Issue 28	7 July 2008	About the Signpost

From the editor: Transparency
Wikimedia releases 2008-2009 Annual Plan	Defamation case against Wikimedia dismissed
WikiWorld: "Charles Lane"	News and notes: Adminbots, abuse filter, ArbCom, milestones
Wikipedia in the News	Dispatches: Style guide and policy changes, June
Features and admins	Bugs, Repairs, and Internal Operational News
The Report on Lengthy Litigation


Home \| Archives \| Newsroom \| Tip Line \| Single-Page View	Shortcut : WP:POST

You are receiving this message because you have signed up for the Signpost spamlist. If you wish to stop receiving these messages, simply remove your name from the list. Ralbot (talk) 08:57, 13 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Islam in Australia

Noice work. Good to see editors spending time adding to articles, rather than fighting POV or vandalism. I too find it very rewarding when I make the effort to develop from sources, rather than reviewing other editors. ---Merbabu (talk) 05:09, 15 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Lebanese Australian

Not a problem. Happy to help out. Cheers, WWGB (talk) 05:30, 15 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Nonja peters

Did the big book on dutch presence in oz 400 years - teaches at curtin - she did stuff on the northam migrant camp (ie post 2ww) - if the acotf gets up - let me know ie remind me between thread 57896 and 59444 :) - and ill dig around for her stuff - also the hydro in tas and the snowy project would never have got anywhere without em - cheers Satu Suro 06:11, 18 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Hmmm - give me the weeknd and the crazy weather to think about it - there is heaps on the snowy and hydro - and places like the northam camp - but hey - to do it properly is beyond my current edit style - i seem to be permanent project maintenance mode - havent done a good art in ages Satu Suro 06:39, 18 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Gardening at 8 degrees c - nah unlikely Satu Suro 10:58, 18 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Looks v good

Wow - I do have supporting refs - might take a few days to unlock them from captitivity tho - format is impressive Satu Suro 01:23, 20 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Dutch born in Australia

How do we solve this? The COB data was gathered by using thisABS tool to generate Excel charts for different cities in Australia. By putting them together into one single chart I was able to identify which cities had the largest number of persons born in a certain country. As the ABS data has been referenced previously I do not see a reason to include a citation - otherwise we could refer to the URL of the ABS Census table generator. Kransky (talk) 09:56, 21 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Howard Government is new ACOTF

Hi. You voted for Howard Government for Australian Collaboration of the fortnight. It was selected on Sunday, so please help to improve it if you can. Thanks for your support. --Scott Davis ^Talk 13:58, 22 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Oops - I just realised you've already done the user talk page spam notices - thankyou :-) --Scott Davis ^Talk 14:03, 22 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

press template

well done, i should have thought of that! Timeshift (talk) 23:29, 24 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for the Kim Carr image revert, I was getting sick of having to do it all the time. Timeshift (talk) 23:39, 24 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Signpost updated for July 14 and 21, 2008.

The Wikipedia Signpost Weekly Delivery


Volume 4, Issue 29	14 July 2008	About the Signpost

From the editor: Transparency
WikiWorld: "Goregrind"	Dispatches: Interview with botmaster Rick Block
Features and admins	Bugs, Repairs, and Internal Operational News
The Report on Lengthy Litigation


Volume 4, Issue 30	21 July 2008	About the Signpost

WikiWorld: "Cartoon physics"	News and notes: New Board Chair, compromised accounts
Dispatches: History of the featured article process	Features and admins
Bugs, Repairs, and Internal Operational News	The Report on Lengthy Litigation


Home \| Archives \| Newsroom \| Tip Line \| Single-Page View	Shortcut : WP:POST

You are receiving this message because you have signed up for the Signpost spamlist. If you wish to stop receiving these messages, simply remove your name from the list. Ralbot (talk) 05:50, 27 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Deletion

Can you restore this version by deleting the later reversions. Otolemur crassicaudatus (talk) 01:26, 28 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Hi I could deal with your request but it is a bit of a pain and I don't see why it needs to be done. You have reverted now to the previous version - why is that not sufficient? Unfortunately I have probably run out of time now and you will need to ask someone else to do it if you want it done today. Hmmm I see OIC has done it for you. --Matilda ^talk 01:35, 28 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

- I beg your pardon - why are you wasting people's time? Rather than remove old discussion - perhaps you had better explain yourself - else think much more carefully next time before asking again. You proposed to waste my time - you have consumed time and effort of OiC. --Matilda ^talk 01:48, 28 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I requested its deletion because I wanted so and I wanted to clean up it. You could have easily deleted it, however if is you matter. The previous deletion request was a mistake. Otolemur crassicaudatus (talk) 01:52, 28 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

- - - Selective deletion is somewhat time consuming - especially when the request is phrased rather poorly. You have now requested deletion of the whole page (and I have actioned it). That is quick and easy - your original request was not.--Matilda ^talk 01:56, 28 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Can you please keep the discussion in one page, it prevents the discussion being fragmented. Mistakes happen sometimes. Sorry. I have learned from your suggestion. Otolemur crassicaudatus (talk) 02:00, 28 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Revision as of 02:02, 28 July 2008 edit Otolemur crassicaudatus (talk \| contribs) Rollbackers 34,106 edits →Deletion ← Previous edit		Revision as of 11:19, 30 July 2008 edit undo Matilda (talk \| contribs) Extended confirmed users 22,807 edits wikibreak while I await the RfC that Skyring is threatening me with Next edit →
Line 1:		Line 1:
	{{~~busy~~}}		{{wikibreak}}

	<!--Because of their length, the previous discussions on this page have been archived.		<!--Because of their length, the previous discussions on this page have been archived.