Talk:Sydney

Wikipedia:Articles_for_deletion/Dunmore_Lang_College

"Dunmore Lang College is a residential college of Macquarie University in Sydney, Australia."

FYI Ikip (talk) 14:42, 28 August 2009 (UTC)

Edit warring over importance of 'fashion', etc

Hi folks, please desist from edit warring over the matter and discuss it here. I should also remind everyone of the 3 revert rule; if necessary the article will be semi/fully protected. Edit warring is disruptive and ultimately, it's unproductive to carry out the discussion in edit summaries. Thanks Kbthompson (talk) 10:43, 30 September 2009 (UTC)

I've been around long enough to know (as you no doubt have too), that an anon blank edit summary reverter is not really the type to engage in a civil and collaborative talk page discussion. Rather, the onus seems to be on us "respectable" long time registered users to toe the line. If this is as I suspect User:Jackp who was banned for his "incessant cluelessness" then I'm wasting my time discussing, as I am trying to explain to a new user. I guess you can understand the frustration. But thanks for the temporary block. :-) regards --Merbabu (talk) 10:48, 30 September 2009 (UTC)

recent edits

Now, let's not get nasty about this. I've made a number of invisible comments. Legendperson, do not remove them without fixing the issue or discussing it here.

Go have a look at image usage policy again, please. Tony (talk) 15:30, 19 October 2009 (UTC)

The comment that I deleted indicated only that you hadn't heard the term "Metroad". It didn't offer or request anything beyond that. As such it's a rather pointless thing to include in the article, which is why I deleted it. If you're ignorant of a common term, placing a comment in an article is not the way to announce it. Ask on the talk page. As for image policies, Wikipedia:Image use policy#Displayed image size says, "As a rule images should not be set to a fixed size (i.e. one that overrides this default), but see the Manual of Style for exceptions." After reading Wikipedia:Manual of Style#Images I didn't see any reason for overriding the default. --AussieLegend (talk) 22:59, 19 October 2009 (UTC)

I agree with Aussie legends comments about the images and about metroad. But I am glad that Tony has skimmed thru the article and made the other changes. It needs a lot more. The article has degenerated (death by a 1000 minor edits?) from a once high quality. It rambles on with trivia, it is dominated by pics from people more interested in showcasing their images than providing relevant and agreeable pics (although I had a go at partially rectifying that last night), it's full off "Sydney is the biggest, best, world centre of, blah, blah..." and the level of overal coherency is low. It was once both officially and realistically a "good article". Apart from pic sizes (he he) I hope Tony can have another go and be bold in fixing up - even if it is limited to fluff removal and adding cite tags. --Merbabu (talk) 23:34, 19 October 2009 (UTC)

I agree. Other than the image sizes and that single comment, the edits made by Tony were definite improvements. --AussieLegend (talk) 23:54, 19 October 2009 (UTC)

You've now called me "ignorant" twice. If you do it again, EVER, I will file an ANI complaint. Tony (talk) 01:33, 20 October 2009 (UTC)

Tony, since you last comment doesn't actually deal with the article, I've put my response to it on your talk page. Would be nice to see you doing further work on the article. regards --Merbabu (talk) 02:18, 20 October 2009 (UTC)

What I said above: it's a promise. Tony (talk) 02:40, 20 October 2009 (UTC)

Since Merbabu made the point so eloquently on your talk page[1] I see no point adding anything other than to point out that I did not call you ignorant. I said you were ignorant of a term. That is not abuse and I'd ask you to be more civil and not make threats. It's hard to collaborate if you're going to do that. --AussieLegend (talk) 06:29, 20 October 2009 (UTC)

• You know very well you were insulting me. I'm not falling for that. Tony (talk) 06:53, 20 October 2009 (UTC)

No, I don't know that. I was simply deleting a pointless comment. --AussieLegend (talk) 06:56, 20 October 2009 (UTC)

And taking the opportunity to label me as "ignorant" in your edit summary, and here. Tony (talk) 08:16, 20 October 2009 (UTC)

And no, it wasn't a "pointless comment"—yet another slight against me. I google "Sydney + metlink", and I get things like: "I have made a map of the CityRail network in the 'Metlink' style, used in Melbourne."Tony (talk) 08:20, 20 October 2009 (UTC)

I suggest you look up the definition of ignorant. You clearly have a misunderstanding of what it means. Saying that someone is "ignorant of something" is not an insult. It just means that they are "lacking knowledge or information as to a particular subject or fact". In this case, you are lacking knowledge of the use of "Metroad" and had you googled "Sydney + metroad" instead of "Sydney + metlink you would have seen a far different result.[2][3][4] It helps when you use the correct terms. "Metlink" is not even referred to in the article. And yes, the comment was pointless. As I've indicated previously, it offered no alternative or suggestion. It just stated that you'd never heard of the term. It certainly didn't say that it needed fixing. --AussieLegend (talk) 09:18, 20 October 2009 (UTC)

Do not post offensive messages such as this on my talk page:

As far as I'm aware there is nothing to preclude using hyphens in filenames. Regardless, you should always check edits as you make them. I most certainly did not introduce errors into the table. I copied and pasted the table that was in the article before you screwed it up. If there were errors in the table, they existed before either of us edited. You should really try just accepting your mistakes when they're pointed out, rather than making baseless allegations about other editors in a vain attempt to try to deflect from those errors.

You reintroduced hyphens for minus temperatures back into the table. You are not welcome on my talk page. Never post there again. Tony (talk) 10:39, 20 October 2009 (UTC)

Gents - this is dragging on, and I really don't hold high hopes for much benefit coming out of it. It's an article talk page. Let's move along. regards --Merbabu (talk) 10:45, 20 October 2009 (UTC)

I agree. What I wrote on Tony's talk page about the Melbourne article has absolutely no relevance here. Can we please stick to what is relevant to this article? --AussieLegend (talk) 10:51, 20 October 2009 (UTC)

Ref improve tag

With 106 citations, I'm not sure that a general tag is that useful, rather wouldn't a cn or fact tag against specific info be more practical and useful? --Merbabu (talk) 16:10, 19 October 2009 (UTC)

Sister Cities

Does Sydney have any Sister Cities? Portillo (talk) 21:37, 28 October 2009 (UTC)

Yes it does.[5] --AussieLegend (talk) 01:53, 29 October 2009 (UTC)

This is a perennial question/issue with this article. Please note: this article Sydney is about the greater Sydney metro area. There is another article about the much smaller local government area at the centre of the Sydney Metro area – ie, City of Sydney. The sister city relationships are formally with the City of Sydney, and not Sydney. Thus, on wikipedia they are mentioned in the City of Sydney article, and not this Sydney article. Perhaps they *should* be mentioned here, but with the clear note that the relationship is actually with the City of Sydney. What do you think? --Merbabu (talk) 02:31, 29 October 2009 (UTC)

Thanks. As long as its mentioned somewhere. Portillo (talk) 04:52, 29 October 2009 (UTC)

Fashion capital?

This reference is not translating reality. Melbourne is the undisputed capital of fashion in Australia and is considered one of the major centres for fashion in the world. Nick carson (talk) 02:25, 25 November 2009 (UTC)