User talk:Bidgee

Archive 2006 March - July August - December 2007 January - December 2008 January - April May - July August - October November - December 2009 January - February March - April May - June July - September October - December 2010 January - February March - April

Hobart 2020 Olympics bid

Re your reversion of User:NYC 55david's edits adding Hobart's proposed entry, this is getting into WP:3RR territory. I've warned NYC not to re-add the material without consensus, and asked him to start a discussion about the matter, and what sources can be used. I'd like you to join in the discussion, and between you try and find acceptable wording and sources that can go in the articles. Mjroots (talk) 13:30, 1 May 2010 (UTC)

The only way it can be considered a legitimate item within what wikipedia is is to identify very clearly it is an april folls joke that has grown legs and gets some people excited, so it gets stilts, and before we know it my old hometown of a few years Queenstown gets to become the long jump and high jump location. Nah if the recent election in Tassie, and the possible immanent death of the Wilderness Society in Canberra tommorrow - are anything to go by - small town states with less than 500,000 people have a lot more to worry about than international events occurring that far down the line :| SatuSuro 14:10, 1 May 2010 (UTC)

Speedy deletion declined: The Southern Times

Hello Bidgee. I am just letting you know that I declined the speedy deletion of The Southern Times, a page you tagged for speedy deletion, because of the following concern: A7 does not apply to creative works. Thank you. — Malik Shabazz ^Talk/_Stalk 21:01, 2 May 2010 (UTC)

Thanks

Thanks for bringing the Coles thing to my attention - actioned the 3rr report. Orderinchaos 07:53, 9 May 2010 (UTC)

Theslider09

Hmmmm...appears to have slid off shortly after your last note—I'll look again on-and-off over the next few days. I find it odd to see editors act like this, here quite a while but no edits at all outside of article space. I am curious about one thing.....this redlink. You've been here longer than me, have the bit on commons, have a sufficiency of gravitas, dignitas and pietas, and, I presume, would make as good use of the tools here (perhaps for image work) as I seen you use them over there ? - Peripitus (Talk) 13:12, 9 May 2010 (UTC)

Cheers for that. I had a editor review but didn't rally have any comments other then from some uncivil editors, so I didn't bother on requesting adminship. Bidgee (talk) 15:49, 9 May 2010 (UTC)

I've noticed that editor review is a bit of a crap-shoot. I never went for adminship as I could not be bothered doing the paperwork; only got over the line when Giggy prefilled the form. If you ever feel the buttons would be useful, I'd be happy to do the writeup. All the best - Peripitus (Talk) 10:23, 14 May 2010 (UTC)

Keys43 is back

Just thought I'd let you know that our Townsville loving sock is back, this time as Keysie89. His first edit was typical of the other socks in that he immediately removed templates on his old favourite, No. 3 Fighter Sector RAAF.[1] Interestingly, this was jumped on within 15 minutes by a new user who hadn't edited since 7 May, Slimsticky, who raised an SSP report (WP:SSP is inactive) at Wikipedia:Suspected sock puppets/Keys43 5th after Keysie89's single edit. Interestingly, Slimsticky didn't revert the edit. Also interestingly, Keysie89's only other edit was to his userpage.[2] Note how he calls Wikipedia "the wikipedia". Now, notice how Slimsticky also refers to "the wikipedia" in his posts and edit summaries.[3][4] There's also this edit that I'm sure one of the Keys43 socks made to another article. Unfortunately I can't find that and, at this time, I don't think there's enough evidence for another SPI but both of these editors should be watched. --AussieLegend (talk) 00:51, 11 May 2010 (UTC)

Listed Keysie89 for a SPI. I just got back from Coolamon but on the way out again to do a few things. Bidgee (talk) 04:43, 11 May 2010 (UTC)

M31

I find it unacceptable that you continue to threaten me with an ip ban. I am simply removing speculative text pertaining to the legal definition of the term "freeway" in the state of Victoria. The M31 article features language that is dismissive of the legal and factual classification of the Hume Freeway throughout Victoria. There are many examples of freeways around the world (and in Victoria) that not only contain sporadic at-grade intersections but there are ones that are 2 lanes, contain traffic lights (for example in New England, USA) or there's the Mornington Penninsula Freeway in Victoria that has a two-way, single carriageway section with a roundabout at each end. Simply put, the M31 is a "Freeway" in Victoria by any means (not just "catagorised", it is in fact a legally binding freeway). - And also, it is not a "Freeway (although most of this section is dual carriageway rather than freeway)" -it is all Freeway. Unless, of course a dozen wikipedia members can decide the legal terminology for Victoria's roads -dismissing the legal reprezsentational bodies of over 4 million people, on a whim? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 119.161.71.12 (talk) 05:34, 16 May 2010 (UTC)

Legally binding freeway. Gotta love it. :) Orderinchaos 09:49, 4 June 2010 (UTC)

Messages

You have messages on my talk page --5 albert square (talk) 04:38, 19 May 2010 (UTC)

Just wanted to let you know — neither 5 albert square nor I saw the message on my talk as a personal attack; I see it as "hey, the situation has changed since you edited it, so I've undone you, and I'm telling you in case you weren't sure" and nothing more. Thanks for looking out for me! Nyttend (talk) 04:43, 19 May 2010 (UTC)

Olympic Highway

I know we have had this discussion a few months ago but I have taken the trouble and the right to create a template of Australian highways, that detailed major roads and crossings that the highway experiences (which is currently ongoing and mostly done in Victoria and New South Wales). What I do fail to understand, is why would you would remove the Major Intersections and Towns of the Olympic Highway. I haven't seen this being removed on other important routes, such as the Hume, Castlereagh, and Cobb Highways. Could you please refrain from removing the MI&T, unless a reasonable explanation can be attained as to why this should be removed. (Your earlier explanation does not justify it!) Cheers --Rom rulz424 (talk) 04:45, 22 May 2010 (UTC)

I would remove it from the other articles but you will just readd them, they have no encyclopedic value as it is a guide, it would be more suited to a Highway wiki (not Wikipedia), your distances are unsourced and you're the only editor who created the MI&T so you have a POV towards it. Bidgee (talk) 04:50, 22 May 2010 (UTC)

Correction, I was not the one that instigated it as you claim. I have sourced from WhereIs.com so if you could put in an example on the Olympic Highway on how to reference each source and their distances, I will be more than happy to apply it to all highways currently with the MI&T guide. --Rom rulz424 (talk) 04:59, 22 May 2010 (UTC)

You're the one inserting the MT&I in every Australian highway article, a table like that belongs at an information Wiki or a highway guide/map. You also didn't source the distance, it is up to you to cite the source. Bidgee (talk) 05:22, 22 May 2010 (UTC)

This time, I have updated the Olympic Highway with the following changes:

• Maintained the NR20 duplex, however the size of the shield is unneccessarily large, and have been reduced, the same will be done to the Newell Highway if you agree to this.
• The MI&T now has a source showing exactly the starting and ending points of the highway, its correct distance of 318km, and the major roads it crosses onto an external page, and is listed below under Source. Again if you are satisfied with this strategy, I will apply to all highways of Australia with the MI&T included.

Please note, if you are unsatisifed with this, then please tell me where I can put this information onto the Wiki section. Cheers

--Rom rulz424 (talk) 03:26, 23 May 2010 (UTC)

Again MI&T table does not belong on Wikipedia, it is a guide which does not belong here. I wouldn't see an issue if you could reduce the size of it be only including the stating point, not including road sign images (e.g. traffic lights, roundabouts, crossroads ect), connections to trunk roads (e.g. Irrigation Way [Trunk Road 80]), state or national highways and the end of the highway. Also never rely on Google Maps for distances (Even Google states it should never be relied on). Bidgee (talk) 04:01, 23 May 2010 (UTC)

Thanks

For reverting that comment on my talk page. You wouldn't believe the trouble I plus other editors have had in trying to explain copyright violations to the user! --5 albert square (talk) 09:03, 23 May 2010 (UTC)

Tony Abbott

Hi Bidgee. I see the Tony Abbott article has been locked for 5 days. My feeling is that locking a page is a very blunt instrument that won't really solve the problems going on. You've got editors from the right and left of politics deleting each others' additions as soon as they are made. I always think that immediately deleting referenced content is a bad practice, no matter what side of politics it is. When someone immediately deletes the content, it destroys any chance of building consensus. The deleting will start up again as soon as the article is unblocked. I'd preferably like to see the article unblocked, and a non-involved (maybe non-Australian) admin to keep an eye on the article for a while, to deal with individual warriors. What do you think? --Lester 02:02, 28 May 2010 (UTC)

I meaning to reply yesterday but was too tired. I requested page protection as edit warring war in progress at the time but I didn't request 5 days. Bidgee (talk) 05:43, 29 May 2010 (UTC)

QantasLink

Sorry Bidgee, in the QantasLink article, I deleted your logo File:QantasLink logo.png and replaced it with a new vector logo: File:QantasLink logo.svg. Tiny, but it doesn't matter because the new svg one is free of any pixels or resolution. Regards, Lester 04:47, 29 May 2010 (UTC)

No issues with me, I only uploaded the png version as it is better then jpg but I've yet to workout creating and saving files as svg on Windows. Bidgee (talk) 05:46, 29 May 2010 (UTC)

Araucaria bidwillii‎

Whilst it was a little strange to receive a welcome message {{subst:uw-test1}}on my talk page after 5 years as an editor it was, a little misplaced, although I am sure unintentionally. Looking at the history it looks as though both you and I tried to undo a series of test (?) edits but that my very slow lap-top edit clashed with yours and resulted in my inadvertent restoration of the previous version. I  Velela  ^{Velela Talk}   10:00, 30 May 2010 (UTC)

How am I meant to know? Bidgee (talk) 14:31, 30 May 2010 (UTC)

Optus

RE: Trading name, thanks for clearing that up mate. 203.134.114.104 (talk) 03:19, 1 June 2010 (UTC)

Talkback

Hello, Bidgee. You have new messages at Fallschirmjäger's talk page.
You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.

 Fallschirmjäger  ✉  09:54, 3 June 2010 (UTC)

:)

	The Working Man's Barnstar
	For the work done in getting the 2009 population estimates into all the NSW and VIC LGA articles over a 5-hour period yesterday - much appreciated! Orderinchaos 22:18, 3 June 2010 (UTC)

Leeton

Hello, re my changes- was contacting you (and others) before completing. will do so abt 3 hrs. Regards (Crusoe8181 (talk) 07:30, 4 June 2010 (UTC)).

Leeton has no suburbs. In 1993 a line was drawn to define the limits of the town of Leeton and five erstwhile unbounded, mainly rural, places were subsumed into the locality and henceforth ceased to exist as places; North Leeton (or Leeton North) has never existed. So, Category:Suburbs of Leeton and the articles on the suburbs are clearly false. My changes (when the suburb articles become redirects and the empty category is deleted) are clearly true. The NSW geographic names definitions are given as placename: Gralee Designation: Rural Place Status: Discontinued 16th April 1993; the Federal lists at ga.gov.au simply list as Historic place. Leetonians may well retain the now colloquial names for parts of their hometown (as none would gainsay them), but we, as Wikipedians, should probably make a reasonable attempt to record the facts as they are clearly presented to us. So the articles on the suburbs of Leeton must not exist, as the suburbs do not exist.

(For a bit of fun Google Longlowong (until very recently on Wikipedia for 3 years as Longlowong, New South Wales, apparently a sizeable town between Carcoar and Canowindra, together with Longlowong regional eisteddfod and The Digby Theatre, Longlowong). Regards (Crusoe8181 (talk) 11:33, 4 June 2010 (UTC)).

Black_Saturday_bushfires

This comment gave me a bit of a shock: "... incorrect cite templates being used." Please can you point me to an example of a template-error? I'd be glad to go back and correct any omissions and such errors. Black_Saturday_bushfires --wcrosbie, Melbourne, Australia 09:49, 5 June 2010 (UTC)

You wrote: "Hardly minor, it does need work but not like this as this needs more work then it started off with." Please can you tell me more?

Can you point me to an example of a template-error? I'd be glad to go back and correct such omissions and such errors. --wcrosbie, Melbourne, Australia 09:56, 5 June 2010 (UTC)

A number of issues, newspaper= should only be used for newspapers (IE: sources that are from a newspaper where the article isn't online), dates should be DD MM YYYY, no need to over link (IE: [[The Age]]), use the correct name of the media organisation (IE: The Age not Age). Bidgee (talk) 11:05, 5 June 2010 (UTC)

Thanks. This is (somewhat) constructive, but I'm sure you can do better. Where are these 'standards' documented?

Is it Template:Cite_news (and not Wikipedia:Citation_templates)?

I'm happy to follow the standard; however, I've not seen where it says anything like: "newspaper= should only be used for newspapers (i.e. sources from a newspaper where the article isn't online)." Where does it say: "no need to over link" (e.g. [[The Age]])? You must know it's common in many Australian pages?

--wcrosbie, Melbourne, Australia 17:17, 5 June 2010 (UTC)

Problem is to do with the new "cite" feature in the edit box as "newspaper" is default (Clearly wrong as some 'news' sites don't even publish a newspaper and online articles are not really newspaper articles) and a lot of us (editors) are a bit lazy to fix it up to publisher/work. Also one wikilink (to a Wikipedia article) is enough other wise the References section gets fugly with blue links. Bidgee (talk) 17:25, 5 June 2010 (UTC)

2UE

Hi. I understand the comments you have made about 2UE, but I really think it is beneficial to have a list of presenters and shows on this page. Most other Sydney radio stations, newspapers and television stations have these types of guides. Whats new? (talk) 06:55, 7 June 2010 (UTC)

Just because it may exist on other articles does not mean that it is allowed, adding who is on when (Using time or even just saying mornings, evening, overnight ect) still is a guide and an advert. I have been trying to enforce the policies on other article but IPs who are PR, fanbois or those who think it is ok (not directed at you) keep adding it and I do not have the time to keep enforcing the policies these days. Bidgee (talk) 12:52, 7 June 2010 (UTC)

Deletion of legitimate comments on Discussion pages

You insist on deleting my legitimate discussion points on the discussion page associated with the article Doug Anthony. I insist that you cease this behaviour. It is flagrantly in violation of the principles of wikipedia and prevents discussion. You may comment all you like but deletion of other's discussion points is out of order. Mjspe1 (talk) 04:23, 8 June 2010 (UTC)