User talk:The Drover's Wife

Manual archive

• User talk:The Drover's Wife/Archive

I notice you doing this and guessed you probably had the same problem I had when I set up archiving (the instructions appear insufficient). So I edited your User Talk to make the archiving settings match mine (which seems to work). I moved the archive you manually created so it appears as the first of the automated archives. So I think it should all work now (famous last words). Kerry (talk) 01:25, 23 January 2017 (UTC)

why did you edit my page? did you write the false things?82.26.100.71 (talk) 17:51, 13 February 2017 (UTC)

____________ -Culleton was found to have never been eligible to stand which means he was technically never a Senator; -Culleton has made outrageous claims about Australia's sovereignty and the courts; -Many have claimed Culleton owes them money; this is an important fact which also needs to be included.

I will contact Wikipedia as you're obviously a vexatious liar. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Faroutyouaregood1 (talk • contribs) 04:54, 14 February 2017 (UTC)

2017 Melbourne Car Attack

Hi Drover's Wife. Please refrain from reverting my edit regarding the man wearing a blue jacket signalling to the driver of the red car as I have correctly used a citation to a news site. Thanks. I noticed you also appear to be using Twinkle from Miranda to quickly revert but this is illegal according to Wikipedia Policy unless you provide an Edit Summary so the community can see why you reverted. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Honestwitness (talk • contribs) 04:15, 23 May 2018 (UTC)

Shroma

Hi The Drover's Wife, could you explain to me why you've reverted my changes? --g. balaxaZe★ 09:08, 2 March 2017 (UTC)

Ministerialists

I seemed to have had either a browser or page loading issue with Ministerialists_and_Oppositionists_(Western_Australia) - as it stands a mess - any thoughts from your perspective ? Do you have any thoughts on the matter, as I am not 100% about it being 'both' or the best way to explain the groupings - so any comment would be appreciated JarrahTree 10:11, 5 March 2017 (UTC)

Thank you so much for your response - it is encouraging. Problem with 1901 - 1911 and almost 1921 - the allegiances are so damned slippery. Tricky as ministerialists as a term slips in federal and various states with possible variations of meaning and dependent upon context. There was one ref that I have missed somewhere suggesting after the impossibility of west australian pollies to form long standing allegiances it was actually forrest in 1911 trying to organise them... sheesh - not sure where to do on that. JarrahTree 11:12, 5 March 2017 (UTC)

gone

pity to see gone (armies that is), I know more gone eds than active eds for years now. As for the teachers college - Nedlands, Churchlands - any help would dowhen get around to start em thanks fore the offer JarrahTree 23:57, 8 March 2017 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for March 10

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Lauta Atoi, you added links pointing to the disambiguation pages Buka and Bougainville. Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 10:49, 10 March 2017 (UTC)

PNG pollies

Fascinating work you're doing here! This is a topic about which I know precisely nothing, but it's great to see more articles on a clearly underexposed topic. Frickeg (talk) 08:13, 13 March 2017 (UTC)

Thanks! I was surprised to see that seat decided that way today as well! It's been decidedly odd to have the late counting be so pro-Labor so far, although I'm assuming the incoming tide of postals will see at least one of the current doubtfuls slip back to the Libs. (It's probably ridiculously cautious to still have Baldivis listed as in doubt, but given that we've been burned in the past ... I think the primary's probably too high for it to be realistically close at this stage, but I'd rather see an actual count before we lock it down.) Frickeg (talk) 12:16, 14 March 2017 (UTC)

Jim Bivoltsis

Thank you, that was it! I remembered as soon as I saw the name! --Canley (talk) 05:36, 16 March 2017 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for March 17

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Boka Kondra, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page West Papua. Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 10:16, 17 March 2017 (UTC)

A barnstar for you!

	The Original Barnstar
	Thanks for your edits on the pages for women in Australia and Pakistan. Keep up the good work! Doyen786 (talk) 19:59, 18 March 2017 (UTC)

From Quetta Memorial Precinct via the QHR

Given your interest in PNG, can you offer an opinion on this:

"The new Bishop had a formidable task ahead, and little funding. Fearing that it would be difficult to attract clergy to the Diocese, he proposed to establish a Diocesan theological training college on Thursday Island. This was made possible following an undertaking by Lord Beauchamp, Bishop of New Guinea, [my emphasis] to support three students at the Theological Training College for three years, from 1 January 1901."

Now my reading of this was that Lord Beauchamp was the Bishop of New Guinea, but when I went to wikilink the text, it all went pair-shaped. At that time 1900-1901, Montagu Stone-Wigg was the first Bishop of New Guinea and there is nothing in his rather longer ABD entry that suggests he's a Lord. Digging through the many generations of Lord Beauchamps, I find that at that time, Lord Beauchamp was William Lygon, 7th Earl Beauchamp who just happens to be the Governor of New South Wales at that same time. Clearly Lord Beauchamp is not the Bishop of New Guinea, but both were around in the right timeframe and the kind of folks I guess you might hit on for some cash for theology students. Do you think they meant Lord Beauchamp AND the Bishop of New Guinea? Kerry (talk) 02:42, 20 March 2017 (UTC)

Good find! With Lord Beauchamp funding 3 students, I think we can strike out the Bishop of New Guinea (maybe he helped find the students or had some other part to play in the storry). Kerry (talk) 13:46, 20 March 2017 (UTC)

huh?

About this, could you please explain? On one level: what's it to you? I don't see you in the edit history of that article or its Talk page, or in the Freopedia Talk page, either. Between you and me, I don't specifically recall past interactions, though I recognize your username, perhaps from long ago stuff about disambiguation pages maybe. --doncram 22:14, 23 March 2017 (UTC)

What is it to anyone ? - there happens to be a group of editors interested in Western Australian subjects and topics, and to query any one editor like this over common interests is trolling. The editor is interested in the subject as Toodyaypedia and Freopedia are 'live' on-going wikitown projects - I fail to see why someone needs to be queried as to their interest, or their involvement. JarrahTree 00:37, 24 March 2017 (UTC)

User:JarrahTree, I agree basically, but then why should The Drover's Wife be speaking to me that way? I have chosen to take a look at the Fremantle list of heritage places, and see some room for improvements, and it seems in their 3 edits they are suggesting someone with less than their knowledge should get lost. That's not how it should work. --doncram 01:43, 24 March 2017 (UTC)

Wikipedia is not what it seems... your user page tells it all JarrahTree 02:02, 24 March 2017 (UTC)

TDW likes to patrol items she has never ever edited and be lord overseer of how said items are edited because templates are hard. Dave Rave (talk) 05:55, 15 April 2017 (UTC)

Andrew Mald

Hi. The convention, I believe, is to consider that an MP's term ends on the date of the election. In this case, logically, the date that the election ended. And that his term as minister ended on the date a new minister was appointed in his place. We happen to know what day that was; so he served as interim minister between the election and the appointment of the new Cabinet. Having the infobox makes the article clearer for readers. Aridd (talk) 07:53, 31 March 2017 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for April 30

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Bire Kimisopa, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page New Generation Party. Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 09:58, 30 April 2017 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for May 7

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Joe Lera, you added links pointing to the disambiguation pages Buka, Bougainville and Arawa. Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 09:47, 7 May 2017 (UTC)

this all brought back memories

there are residual weirdnesses in many png subject areas - if I ever win lotto, youre my candidate to sit in the NLA in Canberra digging through all the resources that no one has brought out of the stack for the last 20 years .... good to have caught up in Melbourne JarrahTree 11:53, 10 May 2017 (UTC)

from memory, the petherick reading room card and the time spent in there made me realise there is so much that hasnt even been looked at let alone written up, it seems an elephant in the room, dark horse maybe - of australian scholarship JarrahTree 12:00, 10 May 2017 (UTC)

Robert Askin

This reverting is getting out of hand. Maybe request page protection? especially since he clearly isn't engaging with your talk page requests. Cheers.Siegfried Nugent (talk) 04:01, 20 May 2017 (UTC)

Who would engage? TDW doesn't engage, she is right and doesn't care for your opinion. Dave Rave (talk) 04:37, 20 May 2017 (UTC)

Please refrain from personals attacks on wikipedia or anywhere else for that matter.Siegfried Nugent (talk) 05:09, 20 May 2017 (UTC)

Gender dysphoria treatment for children

In good faith. The Drover's Wife, on 17 May, you reverted, without explanation, my contribution to Transgender rights in Australia: Gender dysphoria treatment for children. You asked that I take the matter to the TP. On 17 May, I did that, providing a detailed rationale. You have not responded - and no one else has responded. In good faith, considering the above, I would appreciate your response. B20097 (talk) 22:46, 21 May 2017 (UTC)

Yanakie, Victoria

I deleted some advertising material inserted on this page referring to a business operating near the location called "Coastal View Cottages". Another editor has already deleted the Wikipedia article this business created for itself and I tidied up the red link and promotional language on the Yanakie page. Why did you revert this edit? MarekJG (talk) 23:15, 1 June 2017 (UTC)

Thanks for the message you left on my page. I thought that i could keep my talk page tidy...no harm there?

Can you please answer the question I have raised here. I think I am correctly removing the promotional content left by spammers. Also I have removed the red links to articles that have been previously been deleted by consensus of other editors where it seems logical that there is no realistic hope of these articles ever being re-created. Is that ok?MarekJG (talk) 00:07, 3 June 2017 (UTC)

I think I am following the policy you said that I was breaking: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Red_link

Specifically: "The link is broken and no longer leads to an article (perhaps because the underlying article was deleted). In such a case, the link usually needs to be removed or renamed to point to an existing article."

I think I am following the policy exactly and with the effective result that is assisting other editors not creating work for other editors to clean up. Please provide a specific example of an edit that is unhelpful and why so that I can improve my skills! Thanks. MarekJG (talk) 00:17, 3 June 2017 (UTC)

Your comment left on my Talk page is condescending:

"Unfortunately, your reading comprehension seems to be a bit poor: from the page you just claimed you had read (and I quote): "In general, a red link should be allowed to remain in an article if it links to a term that could plausibly sustain an article, but for which there is no existing candidate article, or article section, under any name. Do not remove red links unless you are certain that Wikipedia should not have an article on the subject, or if the red link could be replaced with a link to an article section where the subject is covered as part of a broader topic." Please desist. The Drover's Wife (talk) 03:07, 3 June 2017 (UTC)"

Not only did I believe in good faith that the reference to "Coastal View Cottages" was blatant advertising but so did the editors who removed the page. There is clear consensus that the reference should be removed. Why are you simply not answering the question posed above. I am not asking for an apology or for you to say that you have made a mistake but you simply seem to be avoiding the question. And please don't tell me to " Feel free to remove business promotional material " - you don't own this place; I will continue to make legitimate edits that improve Wikipedia and keep it free from advertorial content.MarekJG (talk) 07:01, 4 June 2017 (UTC)

Your comment on my talk page (yet again implying that you are superior and that I am stupid) still does not answer the question:

If you're not making edits against policy, your edits won't get reverted. This is not a complex challenge. If other editors have to clean up vast swathes of your edits, the rare useful edit may well get reverted in the process of cleaning up the damage. If, like most other editors, you...don't require other editors to clean up your messes, that's not a problem you'll have again. The Drover's Wife (talk) 08:46, 4 June 2017 (UTC)

The short answer is nothing is wrong with the edits I am making. Nobody has had to clean up vast swathes of my edits. I hopefully won't have a problem again because you won't interfere with the valid edits being made by me and other editors. You have added nothing to the conversation nor have you reverted the edit you made to the Yanakie page. You are simply wasting the time of other editors with your opinions.MarekJG (talk) 09:35, 4 June 2017 (UTC)

North Queensland Party

I was surprised by this one too! I mean, how could you possibly get NQLP losing Mundingburra in 1956??? You're right about Plague on Both Their Houses - a lot of our minor party articles rely heavily on it because it's pretty much all there is in some cases without access to contemporary newspapers, but it really is a pretty shoddy piece of work. I've not looked at it in a while, but from memory the part with the most errors is the list of minor parties, which is full of really basic errors - I wonder if perhaps that part isn't by Jaensch at all but by his co-author, David Mathieson, who doesn't seem to have done much else. Frickeg (talk) 03:36, 3 June 2017 (UTC)

You could be right there - it's why I said "wrong move rationale" rather than "not known as ...", basically making sure the message got through that that wasn't a reason to move something before they move on to the rest of the Streets (I suspect they're related). Part of this goes to an issue that we haven't really dealt with, which is that the tendency in Australian political sources is often to list people by their initials as a general rule, which makes COMMONNAME a bit fuzzy (poor Stanley Bruce would be appalled to see himself at that name, but COMMONNAME compels it). I'm certainly not going to stand in the way if there is an actual reason to move these guys.

(As an aside, I have always thought that if I could go back in time and change one Wikipedia policy back when it was early enough to do these things realistically, it would be COMMONNAME. Imagine how much simpler everything would be if we had a CORRECTNAME policy instead. Vastly fewer arguments over primary topic, none of the Burma/Myanmar or Cote d'Ivoire/Ivory Coast drama, much less need for disambiguation. Imagine the possibilities! But sadly that ship has sailed and we have to work with what we have. The new user also moved another page to include "Sir" in the title, which is another thing I think is a good idea but is probably never going to get the support to implement.) Frickeg (talk) 08:01, 5 June 2017 (UTC)

List of physically disabled politicians

Hi, bother to explain your revert in List of physically disabled politicians? — kashmiri ^TALK 22:43, 5 June 2017 (UTC)

Talkback

Hello, The Drover's Wife. You have new messages at Kashmiri's talk page.
Message added 23:34, 5 June 2017 (UTC). You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.

— kashmiri ^TALK 23:34, 5 June 2017 (UTC)

Hi

You were at the meetup with Katherine Maher some weeks ago - about Strategy - and you may well have contributed responses in the appropriate areas - do you have any further thoughts you might like to add since then? I would be interested - either on-wiki or off wiki if you so choose - as to the strategy themes or strategy process - as I am in the final stages of compiling a report - any thoughts would be appreciated - or if you have already contributed and have no further comment - no problems! JarrahTree 04:02, 11 June 2017 (UTC)

Term dates

Well, generally I've been led by what the parliament says, but I'm guessing the PNG parliament may not have quite the same detail online as ours do (although it seems to have current MPs and does give a "date of election"). The general pattern has been that they begin on the day of the election. If the election is over more than one day, then I guess it would be from when the polls close in that particular constituency, although I don't think we have any examples of that here so I can't be certain (some early colonial elections were held over a period of weeks, but with individual polling days for different electorates). For the end of terms, our parliaments all differentiate between retiring and defeated MPs - retiring MPs' terms end at the dissolution of parliament, but defeated ones end on the day of the election. Hope this is helpful! And the work you've been doing in this area continues to be very impressive. Frickeg (talk) 13:30, 17 June 2017 (UTC)

Neil McInnes

Hello,

Noticed you were quick to revert changes on the Neil McInnes article. I've moved the old page to Neil McInnes (politician), I know I'm not doing it properly by copying and pasting but frankly it makes no difference to the end product.

Don't worry, I will go through all the 'What links here' to redirect them to the Neil McInnes (politician).

Thanks!

Early political parties

Great news! Well done for finding them! Of course for our purposes the ALP has always been the most straightforward of the parties (... unless it isn't after all). I'm not likely to be doing a whole heap of work over the next few months either, but from memory the main issue we had was determining the formation of the early conservative parties in most states (Victoria in particular) so anything there would be very helpful. Frickeg (talk) 10:11, 6 July 2017 (UTC)

List of closed South Australian railway stations

Hi. I would like to clarify that I did not intend to cite WP:DEADREF in my edit summary for the article List of closed South Australian railway stations, I had mistakenly copy-pasted the link to the guidelines article that I had been reading recently when I had intended to cite WP:REDLINK.

I removed the red links for the individual railway stations as they have existed in their current state, without new article creation, since 06:48, 21 June 2009 (UTC). In my judgment, this appeared to break WP:REDNOT: "do not create red links to articles that are not likely to be created and retained in Wikipedia". In keeping with the red link policy of "Do not remove red links unless [...] the red link could be replaced with a link to an article section where the subject is covered as part of a broader topic", I removed the excessive red links as each railway station could easily be covered in a general article on its respective railway line; lack of information on the individual stations would either result in WP:STUBS or continued lack of article creation.

Due to these reasons, I decided to WP:BOLDLY set about "weeding the link farm" and clean up the excessive use of red links in the article. – Nick Mitchell 98 ^talk 12:10, 3 August 2017 (UTC)

Wikipedia has many, many articles on closed railway stations, including in Adelaide, with Adelaide being among the only places in Australia that doesn't have articles on all of them. Trying to mash them into line articles would go against current practice in this area in every other state and territory. The Drover's Wife (talk) 21:53, 3 August 2017 (UTC)

Ryan

I've said most of this on Kerry's page - I'm fine being overruled here, but I still think this is really a style issue more than anything. With Evatt I actually think there's a pretty strong case to move to Bert, and if I can be bothered may have a go at it one day, but through a proper RM there. I mean, if we were following COMMONNAME strictly, the vast majority of pre-50s politicians would be at their initials. I just think if we have Billy (not W.M.) Hughes and Stanley (not S.M.) Bruce, we have no excuse for H.V. Evatt (or really T.J. Ryan either). Probably in the minority there but that happens sometimes. Frickeg (talk) 11:48, 4 August 2017 (UTC)

Changes to Wikipedia page

Can you please advise me why you reverted the Jenny Aitchison Wikipedia page?

I was going in to fix up the templates on my desk top and noticed everything had gone?

I wouldn't have minded if you contacted me or changed formatting, but it is quite disconcerting?

Jones230 (talk) 04:53, 16 September 2017 (UTC)

You messed up the template (so that the page didn't display properly) with a misleading edit summary of "fixed typo" when the edits were anything but. Had no clue what you were doing, but misleading edit summaries don't tend to lead to people getting the benefit of the doubt. Feel free to readd the edits without mangling the template. The Drover's Wife (talk) 04:59, 16 September 2017 (UTC)

Hendon railway station, Adelaide

Hi. In response to your reversion of the page move that I requested for the Hendon railway line article to Hendon railway station, Adelaide, please allow me to explain why I made this recommendation.

Mainly, the station in question is the only station on this former branch line; it is common practice on Adelaide and SA railway stations (uncertain about interstate) to summarise information in an article concerning the station as opposed to the branch leading to it due to this. This can be seen on several other single-station branches and spurs, most notably Port Dock station, the GMH station and its spur, and the old Clapham spur/branch. If it was a line with multiple stations that have little individual information (Mount Gambier) then yes it would be easier to summarise in an article concerning the line, but this is not the case.

Also, I would disagree with your comment "larger subject, more sources"; the line is hardly a larger subject due to its status as a simple short branch to its single station terminus. Consequently, both would feature the same content but would focus primarily on the actual station over the short alignment to the station, hence my WP:BOLD move request.

Regards. – Nick Mitchell 98 ^talk 15:36, 29 September 2017 (UTC)

List of schools in Far North Queensland

Good catch re my section deletion! Given I spent most of yesterday trying to fix the many errors in that very section, the last thing I would have wanted was to delete it all! It seems that this school page wasn't updated when the deamalgamations occurred, so I am working my way through it looking for schools that are in the deamalgamated LGAs. In the process, I am turning up lots of other errors including schools that weren't anywhere near Far North Queensland (to be fair, I do have a lot of useful resources to track down old place names since I run a web page on that topic, which probably gives me an advantage). Kerry (talk) 22:47, 30 September 2017 (UTC)

Changes to Wikipedia page

Can you please advise me why you reverted the Robert Holmes à Court Wikipedia page? I have invested considerable time correcting mistakes about this notable Australian person and within a few minutes of posting you have reverted the content, Why? I find it concerning that you are not being acurate and my contributions including re-ording events in a chronological order are being reverted. Please explain. Regards - Oakpont 12:41, 3 October 2017 (UTC)

WikiProject Women in Red/The World Contest

Hi. Thankyou for your participation in the challenge series or/and contests. In November The Women in Red World Contest is being held to try to produce new articles for as many countries worldwide and occupations as possible. There will be over $4000 in prizes to win, including Amazon vouchers and paid subscriptions. If this would appeal to you and you think you'd be interested in contributing new articles on women during this month for your region or wherever please sign up in the participants section. The articles done may also count towards the ongoing challenge. If you're not interested in prize money yourself but are willing to participate and raise money to buy books about women for others to use, this is also fine. Help would also be appreciated in drawing up the lists of missing articles. If you think of any missing articles please add them to the sub lists by continent at Missing articles. Thankyou, and if taking part, good luck!♦ Dr. Blofeld 09:05, 5 October 2017 (UTC)

Avenue Range Station massacre

G'day, I wondered if you would mind taking a look at this article, the latest in my work on the frontier wars in SA? I'd like to get a few opinions before nominating it for GA review. Cheers, Peacemaker67 (click to talk to me) 09:26, 14 October 2017 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for October 15

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Supreme Court of Western Australia, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Joseph McGrath (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver). Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 10:45, 15 October 2017 (UTC)

Murray Bridge redirects

Hi Drover's Wife. A quick note to say these are all fixed now, finally. See User:Donama/Murray Bridge suburbs. Donama (talk) 23:52, 19 October 2017 (UTC)

Marriage equality opponents call for broad right to discriminate content

"The Equality Campaign executive director, Tiernan Brady, said the comments showed the no campaign was engaged in “a blatant attempt to unravel existing anti-discrimination laws which serve everyone in Australia well, not just LGBTI people”" --122.108.141.214 (talk) 22:27, 22 October 2017 (UTC)

Wikidata lists of redlinks on Women in Red

Hi there. I have a feeling you did not get an answer to your question on the WiR talk page. These lists indicate the names of women who have biographies in a language other than English on Wikipedia. Wikidata creates antries on new Wikipedia articles and is particularly good at registering biographies, whatever the original language of the articles. We have found the lists useful in identifying women who also deserve articles in English. If you click on the Q number on the "Item" column, you can usually find at least one article in another language which you might understand or, if not, submit to Google translate to get a rough idea of the person's importance, etc. From the main WiR page, you can also access Wikipedia lists by occupation. Let me know if this helps or if I can be of further assistance.--Ipigott (talk) 13:42, 28 October 2017 (UTC)

Jacqueline Gleeson

Nice job on creating Jacqueline Gleeson - I had missed Category:Australian women judges so added it to the couple of judges I had created. Are you planning on writing articles for other Federal Court judges Sarah Gleeson, Berna Collier, Kathleen Farrell, Debra Mortimer, Bridgette Markovic and / or Natalie Charlesworth ? I think that is all that are in red. I am keen to help out the Women in Red project, but not to fussed about the contest, so if any are part of your plans I am happy to focus my efforts elsewhere. In the unlikely event you need assistance with sources, let me know - I have access to subscription journals as well as some very good law libraries. Cheers Find bruce (talk) 22:23, 1 November 2017 (UTC)

Keith Wright

Hi. Just a brief invitation, if you want, to join discussion on the Talk Page for the Australian politician Keith Wright. Cheers, Research17 (talk) 21:47, 9 November 2017 (UTC)

Women in Red World Contest

Hi. We're into the last five days of the Women in Red World Contest. There's a new bonus prize of $200 worth of books of your choice to win for creating the most new women biographies between 0:00 on the 26th and 23:59 on 30th November. If you've been contributing to the contest, thank you for your support, we've produced over 2000 articles. If you haven't contributed yet, we would appreciate you taking the time to add entries to our articles achievements list by the end of the month. Thank you, and if participating, good luck with the finale!

ArbCom 2017 election voter message

Hello, The Drover's Wife. Voting in the 2017 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23.59 on Sunday, 10 December. All users who registered an account before Saturday, 28 October 2017, made at least 150 mainspace edits before Wednesday, 1 November 2017 and are not currently blocked are eligible to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once.

The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail.

If you wish to participate in the 2017 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 18:42, 3 December 2017 (UTC)

Population updates for the 2016 Census

I note that you've been reverting updates to census figures for localities in WA. I'm afraid it is you that is using the wrong figures. As an example you've reverted Geraldton from the 2016 Census figure for the Geraldton SUA (37,432) to the 2015 estimate for the Geraldton SUA (39,825). I see that you feel that SSC figures should be used - for Geraldton this would give you just the Geraldton CBD with a population of 3,148. The Geraldton article describes a place much larger that the CBD. I disagree with your statement that "Australian locality articles have always been done on the basis that any figures, etc, refer to the gazetted locality, rather than any larger urban area (since we have other articles on those places)". The articles are actually done on the basis of a logical or general understanding of the extent of the places that are described in the articles such as for Geraldton, Albany, Broome, Kalgoorlie etc. Are you suggesting that we not use a figure of 13,984 for the place described in the Broome, Western Australia article, but a figure of 4,042 (Broome SSC)? It's also not helping by reverting the latest 2016 Census SUA figures back to inaccurate 2015 estimates (which are all SUA). I see your point with the major metro areas, but not for country towns with a unitary identity. regards John beta (talk) 20:01, 3 December 2017 (UTC)

An exceptional barnstar for you

	The World Contest Laurels
	Thankyou for the hard work you put into the Women in Red World Contest!! -♦ Dr. Blofeld 14:05, 4 December 2017 (UTC)

I make it $50 that you've won. Please double check. If you would like to donate any of your winnings into the Women in Red Book Fund to raise money to buy books for editors of women topics who need them on demand please add your name and the amount you'd like to donate in the sub section below the prize winners on the main contest page.♦ Dr. Blofeld 14:05, 4 December 2017 (UTC)

Personal attacks

Hi, As just noted at WP:AWNB I think that the repeated attacks on you warrant a block, but I'm not in a position to impose this. If a report is lodged please ping me and I'd be pleased to support it. Nick-D (talk) 01:34, 9 December 2017 (UTC)

Warren Pearson

Hi. I wonder if you think the current incarnation of this bio passes muster? Castlemate (talk) 23:38, 9 December 2017 (UTC)

Thank you. Castlemate (talk) 23:54, 9 December 2017 (UTC)

Your latest edit was an act of vandalism. I am undoing it until others have an opinion. You have removed many credible reference. Don't make this an edit war. Castlemate (talk) 23:59, 9 December 2017 (UTC)

Contest Prize

Please email me and state your user name and how much I owe you in your preferred currency.♦ Dr. Blofeld 17:01, 16 December 2017 (UTC)

You'll need to email me your email address as well :-)♦ Dr. Blofeld 18:04, 16 December 2017 (UTC)

Thank you for your work on Australian content!

Now it's time to relax with a lamington!

Kerry (talk) 02:28, 19 December 2017 (UTC)

Thank you for your work on Australian content!

Cheers and beers!

Kerry (talk) 02:30, 19 December 2017 (UTC)

Thank you for your work on Australian content!

For your outstanding efforts in Women in Red!

Kerry (talk) 02:31, 19 December 2017 (UTC)

Lots of WikiLove happening

It's happening for two reasons. 1) you deserve it. And 2) because I am experimenting with creating an Australian version of WikiLove which is sort-of working but clearly I have to figure out how to better control the size of the images. Kerry (talk) 02:34, 19 December 2017 (UTC)

AFC

On the ground that no one has told me that I can't, I've added you to the list of participants who can review articles. The reviewing tool should be working for you, although this seems like an oddly complicated process. - Bilby (talk) 07:02, 19 December 2017 (UTC)

NextGen

I see you have noticed my new QHR articles. These are not from the July 2014 release of the QHR that the earlier articles were constructed from but are pure "from the web" generated articles with my fabulous new NextGen tool (the old one being called Gen short for "generator"). When I say fabulous, I mean it sort-of works as well as I can hope, given that it's essentially a process where I unscramble the omelette of the QHR web page and then remix it into the souffle of a Wikipedia article. The attraction of this new approach is because the NSW HR will have to come "from the web" so I am hoping that the amount of tweaking I will need to do to make it work with NextGen will be relatively small. The bigger piece of work is the automatic wikilinking. It has to be fed lists of articles from categories that might be relevant to the article as the basis for wikifying. I use the Category:Queensland for the history section and some architectural category for the Description section. Obviously the NSW HR will need to work with NSW places, people, etc,not Qld ones. (This is where the petscan tool will be of great assistance as it can gather up all the articles in the NSW category tree for me). Kerry (talk) 09:00, 19 December 2017 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for December 21

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. An automated process has detected that when you recently edited Serpil Senelmis, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Jonathan Green (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver). Such links are usually incorrect, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of unrelated topics with similar titles. (Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.)

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 11:25, 21 December 2017 (UTC)

14:24:08, 21 December 2017 review of submission by Bengaloorugirl

• Bengaloorugirl (talk · contribs)
  • Draft:Wardy IT Solutions (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)

HI, I started my first article on a company that I thought would qualify for a decent upload.

Can you be more specific on how I can make my article pass the review?

@Bengaloorugirl: To meet the general notability criteria, there needs to be source material in which other people (independent of Wardy IT) talk about Wardy IT because they genuinely wanted to say something about Wardy IT (and weren't paid to do so). Sources that just reproduce the organisations's media releases don't count for this purpose (this is not to say that they cannot be use as citation for certain information, but they don't count for notability asssessment). I have added a couple of additional pieces of information with citations that appear to meet that criteria (the Young Entrepreneur Award) and the A2 Milk example. Can you find a couple more? If you could find more stories like the A2 Milk example, that is good because it actually adds some information to the reader about what the company actually does. In that regard the lede para could be much improved by saying more down-to-earth things rather than "total solutions" and "data analytics" which are OK in the trade press but not really insightful to the average Wikipedia reader. As the lede para currently reads, it does not serve to differentiate Wardy from any other organisation that delivers Microsoft SQL Server etc solutions (these are tools, what is it that the company actually does?). Kerry (talk) 21:37, 21 December 2017 (UTC)

Bunbury Terminal

Link to Google Streetview image, showing the name of the terminal no less than twice.

https://www.google.com.au/maps/@-33.3442559,115.6577603,3a,36.5y,255.31h,89.31t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1sJy0XMUemUDQbBgTw7g0ctw!2e0!7i13312!8i6656

I have seen no evidence of it being named 'Bunbury railway station' (other than the one which closed a few decades ago 4kms to the northwest). Rund717 (talk) 12:08, 22 December 2017 (UTC)

A kitten for you!

Thank you for reviewing the T2 page! And adding it the disambiguation page, too. Thanks so much!

SunnyBoi (talk) 12:26, 26 December 2017 (UTC)

Why

Why are you destroying my page? John555566667777 (talk) 11:55, 27 December 2017 (UTC)

Recently declined articles

You recently declined my two articles, List of top 10 singles in 2018 (Australia) and List of top 10 albums in 2018 (Australia). You bring up some fair points but on your comment saying it was messy, both pages use nearly identical formats to the Billboard top 10 articles so why haven't those articles been declined for the same reasons? Bc654 1:15, 1 January 2018 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for January 3

An automated process has detected that when you recently edited The Independent (Papua New Guinea), you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Bougainville (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver).

(Opt-out instructions.) --DPL bot (talk) 09:31, 3 January 2018 (UTC)

Mark Bagshaw

In a very short space of time with very few contributions and one I consider to be questionable I'm wondering if this person really is non-notable.

https://disabilityemployment.org.au/about-us/hall-of-fame/item/1327/

http://www.smh.com.au/business/technology-the-key-to-changing-the-culture-of-disability-20150129-130wv5.html

http://www.theaustralian.com.au/opinion/columnists/great-leadership-and-skill-shine-through-in-gillards-disabilitycare/news-story/fb1b8436dad891aad9b7a1a7dab9126f

http://www.theaustralian.com.au/opinion/columnists/great-leadership-and-skill-shine-through-in-gillards-disabilitycare/news-story/fb1b8436dad891aad9b7a1a7dab9126f

https://www.cesphn.org.au/document-categories/ndis/1622-ndis-impact-needs-and-planning-project-final-report-and-business-plan/file

https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=PE3x5IvpPs8

http://innov8group.com.au/linked/cv_summary.pdf

http://www.theablemovement.com.au/about-us/team/

http://pixel3.com.au/our-work/interview-dr-mark-bagshaw-disability-employment-australia/

http://www.abc.net.au/rampup/articles/2011/03/02/3153070.htm

http://www.gettyimages.com.au/detail/news-photo/mark-bagshaw-who-suffers-a-disability-and-is-wheelchair-news-photo/539722479?#mark-bagshaw-who-suffers-a-disability-and-is-wheelchair-bound-a-picture-id539722479

https://books.google.com.au/books?id=UnChTqH99Z4C&pg=PA66&lpg=PA66&dq=%22mark+Bagshaw%22+disability&source=bl&ots=Slyvht0gSR&sig=xHi8r-PzmVqGSkBV0F0ZSuBXYNM&hl=en&sa=X&ved=0ahUKEwiA4aCOlbTYAhXEi7wKHSPSDIwQ6AEIOTAJ#v=onepage&q=%22mark%20Bagshaw%22%20disability&f=false

https://books.google.com.au/books?id=pjEtZpGfdcwC&pg=PA123&lpg=PA123&dq=%22mark+Bagshaw%22+disability&source=bl&ots=W4l5ujs_jh&sig=Y8FRjeIAppxAH3djd-_kidavNGs&hl=en&sa=X&ved=0ahUKEwibm4fRlbTYAhUKW7wKHbDkAZ84ChDoAQhHMAU#v=onepage&q=%22mark%20Bagshaw%22%20disability&f=false

https://capeyorkpartnership.org.au/news/gillards-disability-care/

https://www.centreforwelfarereform.org/uploads/attachment/391/raising-the-bar.pdf

Castlemate (talk) 10:20, 4 January 2018 (UTC)

Thank you for your response on my talk page. Others are responding there as well. To the best of my knowledge I wasn't informed of the AfD and so I'm not sure if I created the article or not and don't know exactly what content it had at the time of the deletion. At this time I'm not sure that I wish to become involved in having it reinstated but I will think about it. Castlemate (talk) 09:47, 5 January 2018 (UTC)

joint Corporation and District Council LGAs

Hi, sorry to do another undo. I probably shouldn't have. I'm having trouble with former LGAs like Clare and Kadina. Somehow we need to make them consistent. Sue Marsden lists the "Corporation and District Council of Kadina" as a single LGA in 1936, based on the civic record but on close reading of that, it states Kadina has "two civic organisations", so probably you are right that they must be kept separate and I can be reverted again. Would you mind having a look at Corporation and District Council of Clare to see if it is the same as Kadina? It looks like Kapunda followed a similar pattern with the town corporation being established in 1865 and the DC following year. But it's unclear in the latter case when they were merged to simply be the DC of Kapunda. I really need help with this. Donama (talk) 23:42, 4 January 2018 (UTC)

Sherry Sufi

Hi there, I've had a look at the article submitted by Bathurst87: Sherry Sufi that was declined.

Given that we have articles such Karina Okotel and Avi Yemini, who have similarities with Sufi in regards to being right-wing former or prospective candidates who have a public profile, hold political positions, and were featured in interviews and write opinion pieces. Due to this I believe the article is sufficiently notable, and have resubmitted it for review

Judeti (talk) 11:38, 7 January 2018 (UTC)

@Judeti: For what it's worth, it might be helpful to understand that Wikipedia generally does not accept the argument "something similar exists" (see Wikipedia:Other stuff exists) in considering notability of new articles. My opinion (for what it's worth) is that there is no clear claim to notability here; it's a article with "a bit of this and a bit of that". This is demonstrated by the first sentence "Australian Political Commentator, Editor, Research Academic and Columnist." It is unclear whether we are to assess him as a commentator, editor, etc. What's he best known for? If you called out "who's Sherry Sufi?" in a crowded room (not the WA Liberal Party Policy committee room!), what would most people say "Oh, he's that guy who is/did SuchAndSuch". The SuchAndSuch is what's missing in the article. To pass Article for Creation, an article doesn't have to be very long (a common misbelief) but the claim to notability needs to be clearly stated in the first paragraph and supported by citations specific to that claim. You really only need that first paragraph to make the case for notability. I suspect that Sherry Sufi is someone with potential to become better known in the future, at which time he is likely to pass notability in relation to Wikipedia. It may just be a case of "a bit too soon" And, there is one other thing I should mention and that is Wikipedia's Conflict of Interest policy. Specifically, if you happen to have any association with the Liberal Party, it's probably not appropriate to be lobbying for the acceptance of the Sherry Sufi draft. Kerry (talk) 14:43, 7 January 2018 (UTC)

@Kerry Raymond: The subject is notable. There are more than 30 references from mainstream news papers and websites including The Australian, The West Australian The Sydney Morning Herald, SBS, ABC News, Sky News Australia and The Guardian. These are not casual one line mentions, they are dedicated news stories entirely focussed on the subject. The subject was elevated to national spotlight at 2016 federal election after a string of controversies. I never brought up the "something similar exists" argument but I'm curious why isn't that an acceptable argument? Do we not care about consistency. Either way the article has been updated in line with your recommendation. Good to publish. ~~ BT

@Bathurst87: Wikipedia has a long history of deleting failed electoral candidates of all political persuasions, per Wikipedia:Notability_(people)#People_notable_for_only_one_event. There will be a "national spotlight" on many candidates during any campaign, but that's held to be not notable enough for an article unless they are also notable for something else. This is, if anything, stronger where people are only known for controversies during that one failed candidacy, as per our policy on biographies of living persons. Sufi doesn't appear to get past that: he's a failed candidate who wrote a few opinion pieces, and has a few very tangential references in other stories due to being a minor party official. It is a shame because it's a well-written article - just on a subject who doesn't appear to be, at present, notable enough. The Drover's Wife (talk) 19:25, 7 January 2018 (UTC)

This subject is more than notable and should be on wikipedia. — Preceding unsigned comment added by RachelMcManus (talk • contribs) 18:32, 8 July 2018 (UTC)

Sorry, I overwrote your Decline on Draft:National Disability Insurance Scheme (NDIS) and Culturally and Linguistically Diverse (CALD) Communities with mine

It looks like both of us thought "easy to deal with, too lazy to mark as under review". Fortunately we were both saying the same thing (but me being me had to say it at greater length). Kerry (talk) 22:14, 7 January 2018 (UTC)

I have fixed it so both our declines appear on the draft. Or at least I think I have fixed it ... Kerry (talk) 22:16, 7 January 2018 (UTC)

CQU

Hi, Yes, I was a bit line ball on removing the stuff on campuses. I did so as the general tone seems to be spruiking them, and the uni has experienced issues over the quality of its campuses in the past (eg, the treatment of international students in the mid 2000s). Thanks for reverting me, and I'll attempt a more sensitive clean up tomorrow. Regards, Nick-D (talk) 10:39, 10 January 2018 (UTC)

A small token for a big contribution

		The Invisible Barnstar
		Thank you, The Drover's Wife, for getting involved at Articles for creation and helping whittle down the backlog. Your diligent reviewing is recognized and greatly appreciated! --Worldbruce (talk) 18:05, 11 January 2018 (UTC)

+1 from me too! Kerry (talk) 00:27, 12 January 2018 (UTC)

reverting clementine ford edit

Hello, if you have any problems with the edit you had reverted, could you please state it in the talk page? --2001:8003:54DA:E600:4D63:99B:887:A5F2 (talk) 04:57, 18 January 2018 (UTC)

17:41:33, 19 January 2018 review of submission by Hagtobel

• Hagtobel (talk · contribs)
  • Draft:Hans Fässler (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)

Dear "The Drover's Wife"! I have noticed your decision to decline my draft, which I don't quite understand. I am the author of the entry on Hans Fässler, and I have created an entry about Hans Fässler in German before, with the help of an experienced Wikipedia contributor and without any problems (see my entry in German). I h a v e used footnotes to cite my sources, but I do not understand why I have not met the standards for inline citations. Can you help? Thank you and with best wishes, Hagtobel Hagtobel (talk) 17:41, 19 January 2018 (UTC)

Dear "The Drover's Wife"! I have read your advice on my talk page. Thank you. I have tried to improve the Draft about Hans Fässler by adding more inline citations where possible, trying to use an international context. Also I have reduced the list of sources at the end. I think the problem with this article is that Hans Fässler is active in Swiss and international (English, French, Italian) contexts and that some of the sources (which can be accessed online), while being reliable in a Swiss context, may not mean much to an English or American reader. Thank you and with best wishes, Hagtobel Hagtobel (talk) 20:26, 28 January 2018 (UTC)

draft:WJCP

Isn't most of the information on my article verifiable on the "Radio Locator" & "FCC" databases? Aren't those databases independent of the station? I've looked extensively and have not found other references. I know that "similar" articles (which have been accepted) is not a valid argument, but if those other articles have been accepted in error, shouldn't they be deleted? talk

Suicide of Amy Everett

"Dolly" Everett now has an article - Suicide of Amy Everett. Want to work with me on it? Paul Benjamin Austin (talk) 23:01, 21 January 2018 (UTC)

?

So you have misrepresented me twice now in the discussion about NCORP. Please stop. Diffs:

• here you wrote and the attempt to put it again after 24 hours with comparatively very minor amendments (picking off two of the issues raised, but ignoring the others - most notably the non-US issue) suggests the same disinterest in engaging with editors who are critical for various reasons that doomed this attempt

which is not at all accurate, as what I wrote was I am going to leave this going for another day or two but am going to pull it before it ends, to refine and relaunch. I never said i was going to relaunch it right away. That would be indeed be stupid.

• You also repeated there the same misrepresentation you wrote back on the 7th here where you wrote, I think the refusal to engage with these objections is unhelpful. Numerous people have listed numerous problems with this proposal as it is currently framed, and rather than try to address any of those things, a response of "you will have your chance later to oppose it" is disappointing.

The actual proposal was amended several times in the discussion as is clearly visible here in the markup. The original proposal posted there was the result of along discussion back in July, which is linked in the OP.

What I actually said had to you before you wrote that was:

1) diff as noted in the OP, you will have the ability to oppose in the RfC. If you have any ideas about improving the proposal, please provide them. (And what the OP says, is For folks replying here, if you are opposed to any effort to raise NCORP standards for companies please just say so -- I understand very well that some people will take that position; there is no point arguing about that. There are a bunch of people who want to try, and you can oppose at the RfC. (I had written that in response to your initial comment, here, which i read as opposing any effort to raise NCORP standards)

In any case in response to your misrepresenting remark, I wrote: I noted in the OP that there are people who will oppose from the get go and you will have your chance to oppose at the RfC. Again if you have any kind of criteria that would not rule out the kind of companies you think should be in WP please propose them. A general "no" is just a waste of bytes at this point in the process.

So there are two requests, from me to you, for concrete proposals in that exchange.

Another editor then also asked you for concrete proposals to meet your concerns.

How did you reply to those three requests? With nothing. That is fine, you have no obligation to, but you had lots of opportunity to provide concrete input and you chose not to. (Per your contribs, your next comment was your oppose !vote.) Other people did give concrete feedback, and ideas that got consensus from people other than me, were enacted.

We are going through that process of refinement again now.

I get it that you are very concerned about what we might exclude. That is what it is, and could actually be helpful if you would provide concrete criteria that help would prevent that exclusion. On the other hand if you are just generally opposed, that is what it is. Others are concerned about the ongoing torrent of spam articles from companies looking to abuse WP for promotion, so this effort is going to continue.

Again it would be very very helpful to get concrete criteria from you that would ensure that articles about which you are worried would be retained.

But the discussion is hard enough without this kind of personalized, misrepresenting stuff. Please stop. Jytdog (talk) 17:20, 22 January 2018 (UTC)

copied response left at my talk page in this diff Jytdog (talk) 18:03, 22 January 2018 (UTC)

Yet you've again highlighted the problem: you keep requesting "concrete proposals" with the determination of proceeding with your precious five criteria, amended however slightly, as this is apparently (in your book) the only possible means of proceeding with necessary changes to NCORP.

I'm sympathetic to the problem: I review articles at AfC, and I see tons of the startup-spam dreck being submitted, and plenty that I can't be bothered delving through thirty crap sources in order to reject it. I am also very, very frustrated with our actual legitimate business coverage being thrown out with the bathwater - something which this proposal (in either format) is going to make much worse in very specific ways (of which I and the majority of respondents to the RfC highlighted). I am also very frustrated with the repeated assumption that being unimpressed with those specific five criteria means I'm opposed to altering NCORP standards to fix the same problem you're concerned about.

Now, there might be a way of proceeding with an amended version of your five criteria (and doing so in a way that could actually gain consensus) - but you've had plenty of editors raise wide-ranging concerns about how you're doing it - not that you're doing it. So many people responded with various takes on "I'm sympathetic to the idea, but this is not the right solution" that there's obviously a way to a consensus outcome there. But it needs collectively brainstorming a solution that is good: not insisting on "concrete proposals" mildly altering the same five criteria so you can immediately put it up again with minor amendments just after it tanked. The Drover's Wife (talk) 17:37, 22 January 2018 (UTC)

Thanks for your reply.

First, they are not "my criteria". If you go back and read the July discussion (and the discussion from Jimbo's page that is linked there, which links back to lots of other discussion), all that is happening here is gathering up specific criteria that have gained some consensus in those discussions. I am shepherding, for sure.

People have written several times that what we need are higher quality deletion discussions, where the existing guidelines are applied better. I actually agree with that and try to participate as much as I can but, that doesn't help much.

I think the sourcing guidelines are already pretty good with CORPDEPTH and ORGIND. Unfortunately people who are writing about that don't seem to be dealing with what they actually say. But if folks want to start discussions about improving those bits, I would be totally behind that. Perhaps I will open that discussion so folks who are focused on that have a place to concentrate.

If consensus develops that some other guideline-level approach would be better, I am completely open to that.

But I am in no hurry, whatsoever. None. You continue, even here, with that misrepresentation. Please stop. These discussions have been ongoing since last summer; keeping them moving along, is not "rushing" or "hurrying".

Again, if you have any ideas about how to improve NCORP to improve our ability to exclude spam, please propose it. What can I do, other than ask you to say what you do want? I am asking the same thing of everyone who is participating.

If you propose something better - completely outside the five or so things that have been gathered up so far -- that gets consensus, i would not complain at all. I would be very happy. Jytdog (talk) 18:13, 22 January 2018 (UTC)

I still think there's a really important conversation to have around the NCORP standards, as with the several people who preferred an approach based on sourcing to one rather than on worthiness. I've been thinking that these are quite vague in ways that are unhelpful across the board: there's a real need to clarify what business coverage we would accept, what we consider to be a good source. Quite a few of the NCORP criteria take out most reasons mainstream media report business news (because something happened), and the most extreme end, "other works in which the company, corporation, organization, or group talks about itself—whether published by the company, corporation, organization, or group itself, or re-printed by other people", interpreted strictly, could rule out all mainstream media coverage except where the company refuses comment.

I think our inability to set down what we would define as good coverage (and creating a situation where everything is arguable) is allowing a lot of PR people to play in the grey area. Very few of the crap articles I see at AfC are notable enough to have gotten more than (at best) one or two mainstream media articles, but they inevitably try to boost this with low-quality trade/industry journals/websites/magazines that NCORP don't address well. I'm left to dismiss this stuff by stretching the NCORP criteria and applying the one I mentioned above harshly, but it's not as easy to dismiss as it should be: the guidelines don't really differentiate NYT-standard business coverage from "Bob's low quality trade website". Do you get where I'm going with this? I don't really have a clear solution yet, I'm just trying to find ways to address this. The Drover's Wife (talk) 18:36, 22 January 2018 (UTC)

Thanks this is helpful. I agree with your description of the way that our sourcing criteria get played. Someone who used to be very active at [[WP:COIN] formerly had the job as a PR person placing pieces in trade rags and could spot them a mile away.

In and case I've opened a section at WT:NCORP to discuss what the guideline says about sourcing and I will think about how to improve that too...

I do most of my work in stuff already in mainspace (the kind of stuff that Carrite talked about here), but i have spent time doing NPP and AfC work to understand what that is like. The number of articles about pop culture cruft is staggering - the line there between people on the company side pushing the stuff, and on the fan side is almost impossible to determine (paid/conflicted vs advocacy/fans) and the sourcing quality is horrible... almost no line between WP and the blogosphere. That is another whole ball of wax that will be very hard to tackle due to the editors who are "fans". Business articles are a little different because there is less of the "fan" problem, which is why i have started here... anyway thanks for that last reply! Jytdog (talk) 18:57, 22 January 2018 (UTC)

17:33:16, 22 January 2018 review of submission by Carlymita

• Carlymita (talk · contribs)
  • Draft:Premise Health (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)

I'm struggling a bit knowing what "notability" and "trusted sources" refer to, since the article has references to The Wall Street Post, Healthcare IT News and some Business Journals. Can you provide any more direct feedback as to why the draft lacks notability? Carlymita (talk) 17:33, 22 January 2018 (UTC)carlymita

Carlymita (talk) 17:33, 22 January 2018 (UTC)

Okay, I'll keep that in mind in the future. Thank you.Carlymita (talk) 23:19, 22 January 2018 (UTC)carlymita

22:02:44, 23 January 2018 review of submission by Kathieserrano

• Kathieserrano (talk · contribs)
  • Draft:EviCore Healthcare (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)

Hello, I would like to understand what changes we need to do in order to get published this content. As a note I can tell you that the first review was approved by the reviewer "Bradv" but earlier by mistake, I have submitted my content in the draft, and brand asked to submit the content again.

I would appreciate your feedback in order for us make the right changes to help us get this content approve.

Thanks.

Kathieserrano (talk) 22:02, 23 January 2018 (UTC)

@Kathieserrano: I think you may have misinterpreted Bradv's comment; nothing was said about approval, simply that you should be developing the article in the Draft: space and not in your User Talk. Kerry (talk) 22:15, 23 January 2018 (UTC)

Request on 08:58:16, 24 January 2018 for assistance on AfC submission by Pt1979

• Pt1979 (talk · contribs)
  • Draft:Riau Ecosystem Restoration (RER) (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)

Thanks for your input on my first-ever article. I've amended the sources as you suggested, with one exception where the text specifically mentions a report published by RER so it makes sense to link to it.

I would dispute the need to include criticism of the project. The criticism you reference is of one of the multiple parties behind the project, not the project itself, and the criticism is already documented on the company's own wikipedia page, which is linked to in the article.

Pt1979 (talk) 08:58, 24 January 2018 (UTC)

Request on 02:24:48, 25 January 2018 for assistance on AfC submission by Pt1979

• Pt1979 (talk · contribs)
  • Draft:Riau Ecosystem Restoration (RER) (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)

Thanks for the guidance. I've added the section as requested.

Pt1979 (talk) 02:24, 25 January 2018 (UTC)

Erika Heynatz death

I have noticed you keep having to revert information by an unregistered user several times over last few days about her death. I have looked online and I cannot find any reliable sources to say she has died, so this must be vandalism. I was wondering whether this page ought to have a block on it so only registered users can edit it. Are you aware she has died, I mean she is quite a famous person in Australia so I am sure there would be news courage.(Amy foster (talk) 11:46, 26 January 2018 (UTC))

Updated Article's references Pericent Technologies

Hi,

I appreciate your time to review the article Pericent Technologies and allowed me to improve it notability. I have updated the article as covered in the independent references. I hereby request you again to please review the updated article of Pericent Technologies.

It would be great, if you please allow me to know if I missed anything, or kindly approve.

Regards, John — Preceding unsigned comment added by Johndesuza74 (talk • contribs) 16:53, 27 January 2018 (UTC)

Nomination of Robert C. Seacord for deletion

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Robert C. Seacord is suitable for inclusion in Wikipedia according to Wikipedia's policies and guidelines or whether it should be deleted.

The article will be discussed at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Robert_C._Seacord until a consensus is reached, and anyone is welcome to contribute to the discussion. The nomination will explain the policies and guidelines which are of concern. The discussion focuses on high-quality evidence and our policies and guidelines.

Users may edit the article during the discussion, including to improve the article to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the article-for-deletion notice from the top of the article. Rogerthat94 (talk) 23:30, 27 January 2018 (UTC)

09:15:09, 29 January 2018 review of submission by John Birchall

• John Birchall (talk · contribs)
  • Draft:Heinrich Liepmann (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)

After spending several hours with the German version of the article, it became clear to me that although the sources are not identified line by line, the article is is surely drawn from the two biographical dictionaries listed under 'Literatur,' and simply provides access to the material there for those who do not have those reference works to hand. I have added a little by way specified sources, so the English version of the article is slightly better sourced than the German, and it seems a pity to abandon it. Going back to those two German biographical dictionaries and adding footnotes line by line is within reach for German contributors with regular access to a German university library, and for me would involve a day travelling ot the British Library calling up those two sources for no greater reward than to confirm what is already reasonably clear: that they are indeed the real sources used by the German language contributor. The article would have been better had the original contributor specified rather than merely implied that two German biographical dicationaries are the sources. I am inclined to think that where two biographical dicationaries are listed under 'Literatur' that is sufficient attribution for thise brief notice on Herr Liepmann to be admitted to Wikipedia, though the sourcing is not ideal; I also think that if my view on this point is rejected, it is worth leaving the translation, which was performed with considerable care, in draft until such time as you consider that the German original has met Wikipedia's standards.

John Birchall (talk) 09:15, 29 January 2018 (UTC)

The 'Literatur' section in German seems to be the equivalent of 'sources' in English. If it had been better formatted I could have used the German version as such without change, with a substitution template: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Template:Literatur. I incorrectly called it 'Literature.' I have now improved the formatting of the sources and updated the References to make this clearer. The first source has a Wikipedia entry for the editor, and the second source has a Wikipedia entry for the work, which I have not attempted to link to. John Birchall (talk) 10:14, 29 January 2018 (UTC)

Following your last message, I have moved the sources list under References, and placed References after Notes (the order https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Help:Referencing_for_beginners#Notes_and_references seems to suggest). John Birchall (talk) 10:38, 29 January 2018 (UTC)

Resubmitted. John Birchall (talk) 12:36, 29 January 2018 (UTC)

15:21:52, 29 January 2018 review of submission by Rachirimim

• Rachirimim (talk · contribs)
  • Draft:Vitech Corporation (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)

Hi, Drover's Wife. Thank you for your recent edits. I am having a hard time understanding what constitutes "notability." There are not many articles written about systems engineering tools, so notability in the field is established in ways other than write-ups in famous newspapers. I was instead proving notability through facts like:

  1.	Vitech's founder was the president of the International Council on Systems Engineering, or INCOSE, the world's largest professional network of systems engineers (according to the Wikipedia page on INCOSE)
  2.	Universities' use of our product in engineering courses at colleges across the nation, including top-ranking universities like MIT
  3.	Usage of Vitech software in significant projects (for example, those run by the U.S. Department of Energy)

I am further confused by a page for another similar engineer tool in the same space, MagicDraw, which has as references: its own website, a comment on a blog, an unsecure website, and the website of an open membership association of systems engineering companies.

This has left me confused and I would really appreciate your help in further understanding what Wikipedia is looking for in order to establish "notability." Can you tell me specifically what we need to do to prove this?

Rachirimim (talk) 15:21, 29 January 2018 (UTC)

Request on 09:28:12, 30 January 2018 for assistance on AfC submission by Ahadzhiyska1

• Ahadzhiyska1 (talk · contribs)
  • Draft:PayU (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)

Good morning The Drover's Wife,

I hope you're well.

Thank you for taking the time to review my Articles for Creation submission on PayU. As I've worked hard on ensuring that I provide 40 independent, trustworthy references that support the notability of PayU, I was wondering whether you could elaborate on your decision to decline the submission. Thank you very much in advance!

Ahadzhiyska1 (talk) 09:28, 30 January 2018 (UTC)

06:37:51, 31 January 2018 review of submission by Keanugeanu

• Keanugeanu (talk · contribs)
  • Draft:Aneros (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)

Hi The Drover's Wife - thanks for taking the time to review my submission. As far as notability goes, from 2013-2016 Aneros won more XBIZ product awards than any other company except for a company called Fleshlight. In my mind that alone would qualify as being notable. The XBIZ awards are one of the two most prestigious awards in the industry. There is more information including a newly published medical papers that I can reference but shouldn't the awards be sufficient for notability? Compared to many other companies in the industry who have approved wikipedia pages this submission has much more information. Please let me know your thoughts, thank you. Keanugeanu (talk) 06:37, 31 January 2018 (UTC)

14:20:23, 31 January 2018 review of submission by Rachirimim

• Rachirimim (talk · contribs)
  • Draft:Vitech Corporation (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)

Thank you so so much for your helpful and timely response! I have reached out to multiple reviewers and you are the first to respond so just know you're awesome! I really appreciate your comments, they gave me a lot of insight. Rachirimim (talk) 14:20, 31 January 2018 (UTC)

XJDF - review

Hi and thanks for your update. I am not quite sure, why you see a German University or an international trade organization in the print industry (CIP4) as unreliable sources for a standard that is more or less a major update (thing XML vs. SGML) of an existing standard (see page: Job Definition Format). There are not many vendor publications yet, since it is a new standard that will be published next month. There will be press release, but again that will be published by CIP4.org.

I am a bit at loss how to continue. Wait 2 months until the press release is out?

Thanks again for your consideration. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Rainer.prosi (talk • contribs) 20:26, 31 January 2018 (UTC)

Sea World Culture and Arts Center

Thank you for reviewing my draft SeaWorld Culture and Arts Center. I have since written other articles including Gaston Lenôtre. I understand your saying it needs more references of which i have found a number So I am wondering now since I am able to publish articles and have the references to substantiate the notability is it alright with you to just go and publish it in regular article space?Williamsdoritios (talk) 22:41, 1 February 2018 (UTC)

Hello again I resubmitted Sea World with the links added. i hope you can have a look at it, ThanksWilliamsdoritios (talk) 23:29, 5 February 2018 (UTC)

References

Request on 21:59:43, 2 February 2018 for assistance on AfC submission by Nimbo.lo

• Nimbo.lo (talk · contribs)
  • Draft:Jan Lexell (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)

Why was my submission declined?

Nimbo.lo (talk) 21:59, 2 February 2018 (UTC)

Draft:Sudhakar Tomar

Hi There,

Thanks for the honest review of my draft https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Draft:Sudhakar_Tomar#cite_note-1 .I really appreciate your efforts but I think all the sources used in the article have related the subject and it also reflects subject's notability. I could be wrong please tell me how I can improve my article.

In case you missed, I am sharing few links used in the article (including Forbes Rank, Leading Indian Newspaper article, Dubai Government website etc.): http://www.hakanfoods.com/node/650 https://www.forbesmiddleeast.com/en/list/the-top-indian-business-leaders-in-the-arab-world-2016-owners-/item/48/ https://www.forbesmiddleeast.com/en/list/top-indian-leaders-in-the-arab-world/item/46/ https://www.dmcc.ae/events/dmcc-members-awards-2016 http://thecxoalliance.net/speaker/sudhakar-tomar/ http://thecxoalliance.net/advisory-committee/ http://http//www.thehindubusinessline.com/economy/agri-business/area-under-pulses-seen-static-in-near-future/article3288012.ece

Kindly have a look and let me how I can add more quality content as required by Wikipedia guidelines.

— Preceding unsigned comment added by Vishal.srivastava.rti (talk • contribs) 08:49, 3 February 2018 (UTC)

05:24:04, 4 February 2018 review of submission by Laura bachrach

• Laura bachrach (talk · contribs)
  • Draft:Quip (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)

Laura bachrach (talk) 05:24, 4 February 2018 (UTC) Hi. Thank you for your feedback. I have some questions that I hope you will answer so that I may improve the article. Might you be able to let me know why the cited publications such as Forbes, CNBC, TechCrunch, Venture Beat are not considered reliable sources when they are leading media outlets? As well, I have added a feature article from Fast Company. Each article used as a reference is reported by a journalist in detail and solely about the company which is one of the first subscription services for toothbrushes. I look forward to hearing from you. Thank you, Laura

Laura bachrach (talk) 05:24, 4 February 2018 (UTC)

16:49:05, 4 February 2018 review of submission by Garyt84

• Garyt84 (talk · contribs)
  • Draft:Harmon Cooper (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)

We now have more data and references to Harmon cooper than other authors on wikipedia what else can you suggest?

Garyt84 (talk) 16:49, 4 February 2018 (UTC)

Magdalene Catholic High School / Notable alumni

Any reason for removing the Notable alumni section along with Daniel Assetta from Magdalene Catholic High School? ---MarkehMe (talk) 21:30, 4 February 2018 (UTC)

Topface article declined

Hi. The first version of the article was declined (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Draft:Topface), so I went to Teahouse to get some wisdom. I was said that if my article is a translation, I should properly attribute it and re-submit. I did that.

Here is our discussion about the notability of the article. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Teahouse/Questions/Archive_703#Russian_speaking_editor

Could you comment it? Antonzaitsev (talk) 09:04, 5 February 2018 (UTC)

Copyvios - multiple URLs

I noticed an error when you posted this {{db-copyvio}} [1]. If there are multiple URLs that are copyvios (to a maximum of 3), each needs its own parameter, like this:

{{db-copyvio|url=http://www.url1.com|url2=http://www.url2.com|url3=http://www.url3.com}}

Using <br> tags doesn't separate the URLs. It just confuses the copyvio detector link into thinking it's one long, unbroken URL. --Drm310 🍁 (talk) 23:03, 6 February 2018 (UTC)

Your rollbacks made the papers.

Apparently you are also an "accredited" Wikipedia editor! Congrats on earning that mysterious title :) http://www.smh.com.au/victoria/hunt-for-public-servant-who-is-defacing-penny-wongs-wikipedia-page-20180207-h0v7uz.html. Manning (talk) 04:15, 7 February 2018 (UTC)

Erika Heynatz

Hi I have found some interesting information on Erika heynatz I am not sure but there is something fishy going on about her death. I have found a website called find a grave https://www.findagrave.com/memorial/186866426/erika-heynatz the memorial has been removed today , I went on it yesterday and it said Erika Heynatz Birth 25 Mar 1975 Port Moresby, National Capital, Papua New Guinea Death 14 Jan 2018 Adelaide City, South Australia, Australia Burial Yallourn Cemetery Newborough, Latrobe City, Victoria, Australia and then it gave a summary of her career, then it said On 14 January 2018, at the age of 42, while in Adelaide City Australia for a recording session, Heynatz died unexpectedly at the Adelaide Hilton hotel . The cause of death was not suspicious. The coroner's office said the results of its inquiry would not be released until April at the earliest. On a YouTube video link here Erika Heynatz tribute https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7O6DfMZ1jqU, I know things kept getting added about her dying, is she alive or dead could it be another person with the same name. ?  Amy foster (talk) 02:42, 8 February 2018 (UTC)    

her website, agent, assures me nothing is happening. Alive. as for the youtube video ... maybe not for long. Dave Rave (talk) 09:47, 8 February 2018 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for February 9

An automated process has detected that when you recently edited Kurito ole Kisio, you added links pointing to the disambiguation pages Maasai and Kikuyu (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver).

(Opt-out instructions.) --DPL bot (talk) 09:08, 9 February 2018 (UTC)

Request on 11:15:08, 9 February 2018 for assistance on AfC submission by Abmnn

• Abmnn (talk · contribs)
  • Draft:Nimble Commander (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)

Thanks for reviewing my article on Nimble Commander! You rejected it for notability reasons. I respectfully disagree and here is my argumentation that I hope you find reasonable:

Wikipedia's notability guidelines state that "a computer program can usually be presumed to be notable if it is discussed in reliable sources as significant in its particular field [...]".

Of the five sources I used, the first two (Softpedia and MacTech) are well-known websites/journals in the Mac software domain that both have their own Wikipedia articles. The third and fourth are a large Computer News website (CNET) and well-known tech blog (lifehacker.ru). The fifth is a recommendation by the author of the golden standard file manager of the last two decades (Total Commander).

Objectively, the quality of these sources is at least equivalent to the ones used in the acticles of Nimble Commander's direct competitors, all dual-pane file managers for macOS:

• Fman
• CRAX Commander
• ForkLift
• Path Finder

Please take 2 minutes and see for yourself. Take Fman for example: It cites three sources. The first is Softpedia, like in my article. The only difference is that Fman was rated 3/5 and Nimble Commander received a 5/5 rating. The second source is a journal, comparable to MacTech which I cited. The third is ProductHunt, a product launch website where everybody can post their product without any peer-review.

Please help me understand in detail why you rejected the article. Help me add a good article for a popular piece of software - thanks! :)

Abmnn (talk) 11:15, 9 February 2018 (UTC)

Request on 18:34:01, 10 February 2018 for assistance on AfC submission by Shengsheng555

• Shengsheng555 (talk · contribs)
  • Draft:Joan Bagaria (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)

Please look at the list of publications. They are published on well-regarded academic journals and are widely cited. I think they are sufficient to establish the notability.

Shengsheng555 (talk) 18:34, 10 February 2018 (UTC)

A goat for you!

Thank you very much for your work on my Rondo Neighborhood article! It was my first in the AfC process, so was very much holding my breath. Much appreciated!

ClarityKTMpls (talk) 19:41, 10 February 2018 (UTC)

Request on 21:58:28, 11 February 2018 for assistance on AfC submission by Shengsheng555

• Shengsheng555 (talk · contribs)
  • Draft:Joan Bagaria (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)

Thank you for your prompt and kind reply. Could you please look at the modified page Draft:Joan Bagaria and give some advice? I added more media coverage and independent sources.

Shengsheng555 (talk) 21:58, 11 February 2018 (UTC)

Request on 22:20:29, 11 February 2018 for assistance on AfC submission by Stevevil13

• Stevevil13 (talk · contribs)
  • Draft:Fantasma Magic (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)

WHY DID REFUSE MY ARTICLE???

WHY DID REFUSE MY ARTICLE???  First of all, I would think TIME MAGAZINE counts as a reliable source for backing up an article.  Also, I've had a previous article- The Houdini Museum Of New York- published using THE SAME SOURCES and no one groused about that!  I've read all of the "user talk" questions on your page and it seems like many article writers have issues with you and how you choose what "deserves" to get published.  As Fantasma Magic and The Houdini Museum of New York are both intertwined, it seems to me that the error is on YOUR part, not mine.  Please rectify this situation and publish this article.  Fantasma Magic is a multi-million dollar toy and magic manufacturer who supplies magic and toys worldwide and has been in business for over ten years.  They are not some fly-by-night little company.  Thank you. Stevevil13 (talk) 22:20, 11 February 2018 (UTC)

Stevevil13 (talk) 22:20, 11 February 2018 (UTC)

Reversion on Barry Jones entry

Thanks for taking an interest in my edit on the Barry Jones page. I was attempting to rephrase my own sentence as another editor had interpreted it as meaning Jones didn't have an opinion on euthanasia when in fact his opinion as a leading progressive thinker is highly contentious and well known. I wonder if you have time to consider whether or not simply stating that his position is 'inconclusive' is adequate to explain his intensely mixed feelings on the subject as expressed in the referenced documents. Gumsaint (talk) 00:13, 12 February 2018 (UTC)

Reviewing drafts

My drafts Jamie Pitt, Ian Gillan, and Petter Bennet all meet the criteria (jamie pitt and peter bennett have played in the Singaporean S.League see Wikipedia:WikiProject Football/Fully professional leagues while ian gillan has coached for a Philippines Football League team which also meets the criteria). Thanks, Das osmnezz (talk) 01:16, 12 February 2018 (UTC)

11:42:56, 16 February 2018 review of submission by RC1996

• RC1996 (talk · contribs)
  • Draft:Floriane de Saint Pierre (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)

Dear The Drover's Wife, Thank you for taking the time to review the page I am trying to publish. This is the second time that it has been rejected, and this time, I am not sure what more changes I should make? I have provided all of the references. Do you have any recommendations, as I have read all of the pages on wikipedia (and read blogs/watched youtube tutorials), so I am really lost at this point.. I thank you in advance for your help. Kindest regards, Rayan RC1996 (talk) 11:42, 16 February 2018 (UTC)

Altered lists

Could you provide a list of judge list formats I've altered? Nford24 (PE121 Personnel Request Form) 20:57, 16 February 2018 (UTC)

Hannah Mouncey

If you want to remove her born name then a discussion needs to be started at the talk page. You also need to use better edit summaries. AIRcorn (talk) 22:50, 18 February 2018 (UTC)

12:52:16, 19 February 2018 review of submission by Bartoszbielecki

• Bartoszbielecki (talk · contribs)
  • Draft:Codewise (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)

Bartoszbielecki (talk) 12:52, 19 February 2018 (UTC)

Hi,

A while ago you reviewed a page about the company called "Codewise", which you declined, and marked the lack of notability of this page as a reason. I'd really appreciate it if you could give me some tips on how to make it pass a review. I've studied the Wiki article about notability of organizations, but it wasn't helpful, because the page I created met all the rules mentioned in the article. It is the company from my city, and I saw it didn't have its Wiki page, even though it was named the second fastest growing company in whole Europe, and third in the entire EMEA region. It's one of the most recognizable companies in Poland, especially for IT people. I even stuck to citing large, globally known media outlets like Forbes and The Financial Times, which covered Codewise in deep and multiple times. So please, let me know what can be done to make it acceptable. I'm eager to contribute to Wikipedia, so any tips will be helpful.

Best Regards, BB

01:16:15, 23 February 2018 review of submission by Miaourach

• Miaourach (talk · contribs)
  • Draft:Andes Technology Corporation (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)

Hi The Drover's Wife,

Andes Technology is one of the top 5 CPU IP providers in the world, so I believe it's worthy of inclusion in Wikipedia.

Also, I would like to know how can I improve the referencing. It says "Wikipedia requires significant coverage..." and Andes is actually featured in some prestigious technology media such as EE Times and Digitimes. I don't know what else I can do to improve it so it would be very helpful to hear suggestions from the reviewers. Thank you!

Update: Thank you very much for the tips. I really appreciate it. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Miaourach (talk • contribs) 05:06, 23 February 2018 (UTC)

Miaourach (talk) 01:16, 23 February 2018 (UTC)

03:09:12, 23 February 2018 review of submission by Mark Abernethy

• Mark Abernethy (talk · contribs)
  • Draft:Coates Hire (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)

Not a re-review - clarification of why the Coates Hire submission was rejected. I included reliable, published sources such as Sydney Morning Herald articles, books with ISBNs and the announcements section of the ASX - which has a similar regulatory function to the US SEC (ie. by law it has to be true). I'm not sure which references were not good enough and I don't want to re-write it and remove all the references that were good enough, thereby prolonging the process. I understand the need for Notability: should I list, say, 20 articles from the SMH and Australian Financial Review that are about Coates Hire? Just need a few hints so I can complete this. regards, Mark Mark Abernethy (talk) 03:09, 23 February 2018 (UTC) Mark Abernethy (talk) 03:09, 23 February 2018 (UTC)

Topface article translation declined

Hi. I answered to you on my talk page and re-post it here. You said: "I declined because articles must reference significant coverage of the subject in reliable sources that are independent of the subject to demonstrate that they're notable topics for Wikipedia. Most of the sources either a) relate to one hacking incident, b) are to the company's social media, or c) are to trivial sources like "top so-and-so" lists. If it's a notable site, there will be people writing actual stories about it in newspapers, magazines, etc. - but if so, none of that has made it into the article."

That's not the whole truth. There are Russian sources that are notable sites with people writing actual stories. I have already had a conversation about this in the Teahouse, and I was recommended to re-submit the article as a translation. Antonzaitsev (talk) 20:49, 27 February 2018 (UTC)

23:27:35, 27 February 2018 review of submission by 144.139.95.219

• 144.139.95.219 (talk · contribs)
  • Draft:Peter Charleston (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)

Hi there,

I am new to Wikipedia. So i hope you can help. I'm writing this page about Peter Charleston, Australian Psychologist. I've updated some of the references in the hopes of them being a little more objective. Not sure if they re an improvement, so thought id ask.

Are you able to help me pin-point exactly how i can improve the referencing? I don't have scholarly articles regarding this topic, as the article is in reference to a person (not an object or historical topic etc), so i'm really not sure what type of references i can add other than links to the expert opinion/commentary he has offered etc.

Are you able to suggest if i should delete any of the information, if you feel that there is no particular suitable reference to go with it (e.g. i don't have a link online directly to the radio interviews he gave, but other people could easily call the radio station to verify etc).

Hoping you can offer some personalised/specific guidance so that i can make this article better. I have checked out a similar page (Australian Psychologist Jo Lamble, and her page has been approved but doesn't have as much content or references.

I'd be very grateful for any advice you have.

Cheers.

144.139.95.219 (talk) 23:27, 27 February 2018 (UTC)

00:34:57, 28 February 2018 review of submission by Mdbachmusic

• Mdbachmusic (talk · contribs)
  • Draft:Nate Jolley (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)

Can you please specify which lines of this article draft are causing an issue or need to be addressed? The article was rejected because of a lack of footnotes, but it currently cites multiple references so please advise on what needs to be changed in order for this draft to be approved. Thank you very much.

Mdbachmusic (talk) 00:34, 28 February 2018 (UTC)

Greens Australia

Discuss the issue of Greens ideology and political positions with me on The Greens talk page rather than unjustifiably reverting my edits, which provide sources.

Thank you.

T3hfix3r (talk) 12:56, 3 March 2018 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for March 4

An automated process has detected that when you recently edited Samuel Dennison, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Northern Argus (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver).

(Opt-out instructions.) --DPL bot (talk) 09:34, 4 March 2018 (UTC)

AFDds

Bring on the sources and I will be happy to provide a rebuttal on a per-se basis. ~ Winged Blades^Godric 11:12, 4 March 2018 (UTC)

14:29:44, 4 March 2018 review of submission by Aboutbeauty

• Aboutbeauty (talk · contribs)
  • Draft:Beini Da (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)

Hello, I would love to know why Beini's wiki has been decline. She is very famous in China. I posted the related news which are all well known publishing here in China. What can I do to make this version accept? Thank you.

Aboutbeauty (talk) 14:29, 4 March 2018 (UTC)

Das osmnezz

For a little background you might want to take a look at this. This is an undoubtedly well meaning editor who has managed to create a lot of low grade but acceptable articles. But who has also manifested dreadful CIR issues to the point where he has been blocked repeatedly and I was very close to indeffing him. I feel badly dumping him on AfC but he just isn't ready to be let loose on the project. On the other hand a look at his stats shows he is a work horse who has actually produced hundreds of articles. He really needs a mentor but that program appears to be moribund. In any event if you feel he has become too much of a time sink for AfC let me know. Unfortunately this is probably the kid's last stop before being indeffed. -Ad Orientem (talk) 02:58, 7 March 2018 (UTC)

I had a talk with him on his talk page. We will see what comes of it. -Ad Orientem (talk) 14:42, 8 March 2018 (UTC)

question on rejection

Hello to The Drover's Wife. Thanks for all you do to keep Wiki accurate, For https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Draft:ROUSH_CleanTech — This company page was rejected due to "submission's references do not adequately show the subject's notability. Wikipedia requires significant coverage (not just mere mentions) about the subject in published." The company has been featured in AP, Reuters, USA Today, CNBC, Detroit Free Press and about a hundred trade magazines, as well as the U.S. Energy Department's Alternative Fuels Data Center. Many of these were referenced in the draft (not all due to space and trying to keep the entry concise). Any guidance on what to include in order to get an approved resubmission would be appreciated. Thanks. Julie CoconutJulie (talk) 14:28, 8 March 2018 (UTC)

"Mass Moves" - apology please

Hi The Drover's Wife. Regarding this comment, please show evidence of my "mass moves" or any move against consensus at all or withdraw and apologise. I don't see why I should have to tolerate bad faith accusations directed at me personally from you because you disagree with me (and consensus). As for taking all renaming discussions to RM, that actually would be disruptive and more than a little bit WP:POINTY. -- Mattinbgn (talk) 06:07, 14 March 2018 (UTC)

• Mattinbgn's page moves can be found here. The vast majority of them are controversial. He is being sneaky by moving quiet pages are a low but steady rate with the effect of altering the appearance of consistency of the status quo, a major point in discussions on WP:NCAUST. --SmokeyJoe (talk) 06:32, 14 March 2018 (UTC)

Melbourne meetup

A quick note: There is a meetup in Fed Square this Sunday at 6pm. T.Shafee(Evo&Evo)^talk 00:58, 22 March 2018 (UTC)

3DB - The Minstrel Show.

Dear "Drover's Wife",

I start the section that you don't like by saying: "The majority of historians and historical commentators stress that when looking at the past, one must be careful to view the situation through the social mores, commonly accepted attitudes, and conventions of the particular era ...". In other words, from the beginning I am making it clear that this Wikipedia section speaks for many people. The section includes links to the following Wikipedia pages: minstrel show, Nigger and blackface. All of these pages certainly include the types of comments to which you appear to object, in some case with stronger language than I have used! For example, the introduction to the Nigger page uses expressions such as: racial slur, unambiguously pejorative, and racist insult. (There is also some criticism in the African Americans page, which is also linked to 3DB.)

If one were to leave the first paragraph of The Minstrel Show section without any qualification, it would look completely racist!

It is most important that the explanation of a general change of attitude over the past decades by the vast majority of people be made. Can you imagine the outrage if someone tried to produce a minstrel show today, in any media (including radio)?

Yours, Albert Isaacs (talk) 23:54, 3 April 2018 (UTC)

Dear "Drover's Wife",

Thanks for the compromise suggestion, which has been followed up, hopefully to everyone's satisfaction.

Yours, Albert Isaacs (talk) 01:09, 5 April 2018 (UTC)

Dear "Drover's Wife",

I am about to make yet another compromise which, hopefully, will satisfy all.

It is intriguing to read some of the negative comments on your user page. There appear to be many people who are intimidated. However, I personally want to think positive, and hope I therefore that we have now resolved at least one of the 119 difficulties listed on your user page for just over 12 months.

Yours, Albert Isaacs (talk) 02:22, 5 April 2018 (UTC)

Interested in becoming a new page patroller?

User:Amorymeltzer/sandbox/npp/note ~ Amory (u • t • c) 15:35, 10 April 2018 (UTC)

NPR granted

Hello The Drover's Wife. Your account has been added to the "New page reviewers" user group, allowing you to review new pages and mark them as patrolled, tag them for maintenance issues, or in some cases, tag them for deletion. The list of articles awaiting review is located at the New Pages Feed. New page reviewing is a vital function for policing the quality of the encylopedia; if you have not already done so, you must read the new tutorial at New Pages Review, the linked guides and essays, and fully understand the various deletion criteria. If you need more help or wish to discuss the process, please join or start a thread at page reviewer talk.

• URGENT: Please consider helping get the huge backlog down to a manageable number of pages as soon as possible.
• Be nice to new users - they are often not aware of doing anything wrong.
• You will frequently be asked by users to explain why their page is being deleted - be formal and polite in your approach to them too, even if they are not.
• Don't review a page if you are not sure what to do. Just leave it for another reviewer.
• Remember that quality is quintessential to good patrolling. Take your time to patrol each article, there is no rush. Use the message feature and offer basic advice.

The reviewer right does not change your status or how you can edit articles. If you no longer want this user right, you may ask any administrator to remove it for you at any time. In case of abuse or persistent inaccuracy of reviewing, the right can be revoked at any time by an administrator. ~ Amory (u • t • c) 00:29, 11 April 2018 (UTC)

08:46:55, 11 April 2018 review of submission by Saeedsafari266

• Saeedsafari266 (talk · contribs)
  • Draft:Emergency Journal (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)

Saeedsafari266 (talk) 08:46, 11 April 2018 (UTC)

Hello dear reviewer You have stated in your comment that the article does not have reliable independent sources. I made some changes and would like to know if are they enough and if not, what are your suggestions to make the article more encyclopedic. Because I have read the article https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Research_and_Humanities_in_Medical_Education and don't see more information than provided in the article. In fact I believe much more information is provided in the present draft. Thanks for taking the time to review the article and reply to this message. All the best

Did you ?

Hello The Drover's Wife, first of all: many thanks for your attention and your opinion. Please allow me a question: Did you read the complete section beginning from here or better beginning two steps above from there? Honestly it took me nearly one week of intense work in collecting, understanding and for evaluation of sources. Hm your comment about "foreign editors" made me made me feel a bit concerned - as I am editing from germany ;-) I agree with your opinion that the case was something like a "watershed" and that there are some editors from US which might have their own (local) motivations. Nevertheless, viewing at the article from the encyclopaedic side there are some deficits which need to be corrected. I would be happy to see you and more people from Australia to watch this. Any active help in the article would be even better. Best --Ｔｏｍ (talk) 23:59, 17 April 2018 (UTC)

Invitation to WikiProject Portals

The Portals WikiProject has been rebooted.

You are invited to join, and participate in the effort to revitalize and improve the Portal system and all the portals in it.

There are sections on the WikiProject page dedicated to tasks (including WikiGnome tasks too), and areas on the talk page for discussing the improvement and automation of the various features of portals.

Many complaints have been lodged in the RfC to delete all portals, pointing out their various problems. They say that many portals are not maintained, or have fallen out of date, are useless, etc. Many of the !votes indicate that the editors who posted them simply don't believe in the potential of portals anymore.

It's time to change all that. Let's give them reasons to believe in portals, by revitalizing them.

The best response to a deletion nomination is to fix the page that was nominated. The further underway the effort is to improve portals by the time the RfC has run its course, the more of the reasons against portals will no longer apply. RfCs typically run 30 days. There are 19 days left in this one. Let's see how many portals we can update and improve before the RfC is closed, and beyond.

A healthy WikiProject dedicated to supporting and maintaining portals may be the strongest argument of all not to delete.

We may even surprise ourselves and exceed all expectations. Who knows what we will be able to accomplish in what may become the biggest Wikicollaboration in years.

Let's do this.

See ya at the WikiProject!

Sincerely,    — The Transhumanist   10:24, 21 April 2018 (UTC)

Mervyn Lee

First of all, I am so glad I'm not the only one that uses those lists! I'm actually about to do a run through and try to identify some more birth dates of current MPs, but I don't like my chances too much. One day the SA Parliament will get a halfway decent website, but who knows when that will be.

As for Lee (good catch!), I really don't think there's any chances that isn't him, but at the same time I'm not sure we can use it. The Parliamentary Handbook is still showing him as living and unless we can find a direct reference to the ex-MP dying it might be a bit of a stretch. You would think there must be something around, though - I'll certainly have a look and now we know that it's likely to be out there it might be easier to find. Frickeg (talk) 05:34, 24 April 2018 (UTC)

Well, I've had a look at all the places I could think of (I'm sure you'd checked most of them already!) and there really doesn't seem to be anything online. I think the best thing to do is put a note on the talk page with what you've found. I suppose we could also write to the Parliamentary Library or even to Joanne Ryan and see if they know anything (presumably if they do they would at least fix the Handbook). Frickeg (talk) 06:05, 24 April 2018 (UTC)

Sandy Street

Regarding your trimming of my recent edits of Justice Alexander "Sandy" Street's page: "hugely trimming down the genealogy-cruft - this isn't about Sandy and belongs in Street family if anywhere" - might I ask who exactly his page is supposed to be about?

In any case, I do concur that his mother's family history is perhaps better kept on the family's page, although I disagree with your removal of reference to his British heritage and direct descent from the various Earls. It is only out of good-Wiki-will that I refrain from correcting this omission.

Good day, madame. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Evabonnier1967 (talk • contribs) 07:59, 7 May 2018 (UTC)

Reason Party (Australia) categorisation

re: [2][3]

Reason Party (Australia) is in Category:Political parties in Victoria (Australia), which is an (implicitly) diffusing subcat of Category:Political parties of Australia by state or territory, which is a diffusing category of Category:Political parties in Australia. Could you be more specific about why the article should be directly in Category:Political parties in Australia? Mitch Ames (talk) 12:51, 11 May 2018 (UTC)

Australia First Party

Hi, I see that the Australia First Party was re-registered as Australia First Party (NSW) Incorporated. I didn't realise they were the same party, sorry for that. In regards to some of the unreferenced claims about factional infighting, I'm going to remove those as they are unsourced and seem to be excessive and unnecessary detail seeing as it's a tiny group of criminals and neo-Nazis who's claims about branches and membership numbers don't stack up. I hope you'll agree that they hardly warrant a detailed account of infighting between members. Bacondrum (talk) 23:04, 15 May 2018 (UTC)

Thanks for helping fix this page up, much appreciated. Bacondrum (talk) 09:13, 16 May 2018 (UTC)

Melbourne Wikimeetup (June/July)

	Melbourne Meetup Next: Wikipedia:Meetup/Melbourne/46 - Tuesday 13 August, 2024 (watch)
See also: Australian events listed at Wikimedia.org.au (or on Facebook)

Hi, I've just made a doodle poll to vote on the best date for the next Wikimeetup in Melbourne (Beer Deluxe, Fed Square). Would be great to see you there. T.Shafee(Evo&Evo)^talk 12:21, 23 May 2018 (UTC)

Date of meetup decided:

• When: 6-8pm, Sunday 8 July 2018
• Where: Beer DeLuxe, Flinders St

T.Shafee(Evo&Evo)^talk 01:18, 10 June 2018 (UTC)

Thank you very much

The RfC discussion to eliminate portals was closed May 12, with the statement "There exists a strong consensus against deleting or even deprecating portals at this time." This was made possible because you and others came to the rescue. Thank you for speaking up.

By the way, the current issue of the Signpost features an article with interviews about the RfC and the Portals WikiProject.

I'd also like to let you know that the Portals WikiProject is working hard to make sure your support of portals was not in vain. Toward that end, we have been working diligently to innovate portals, while building, updating, upgrading, and maintaining them. The project has grown to 80 members so far, and has become a beehive of activity.

Our two main goals at this time are to automate portals (in terms of refreshing, rotating, and selecting content), and to develop a one-page model in order to make obsolete and eliminate most of the 150,000 subpages from the portal namespace by migrating their functions to the portal base pages, using technologies such as selective transclusion. Please feel free to join in on any of the many threads of development at the WikiProject's talk page, or just stop by to see how we are doing. If you have any questions about portals or portal development, that is the best place to ask them.

If you would like to keep abreast of developments on portals, keep in mind that the project's members receive updates on their talk pages. The updates are also posted here, for your convenience.

Again, we can't thank you enough for your support of portals, and we hope to make you proud of your decision. Sincerely,    — The Transhumanist   10:22, 25 May 2018 (UTC)

P.S.: if you reply to this message, please {{ping}} me. Thank you. -TT

NXT

No worries! At this rate they'll both be disqualified later on anyway for, I don't know, owning a strip of grass with a postbox on it or something. Frickeg (talk) 21:45, 28 May 2018 (UTC)

Saumarez Homestead

Cheers for your massive expansion of Saumarez Homestead. It was certainly a pleasant surprise. Have you been working on this expansion for a while? Many thanks in any case. I've got several images around the grounds of Saumarez Homestead that I took in 2014. I've uploaded one of Mary's Garden. I might get around to uploading more later as the article is now big enough to justify several images. :) Freikorp (talk) 12:21, 29 May 2018 (UTC)

Hi there The Drover's Wife, I've gone over your additions to Saumarez Homestead and made a start on a clean up, especially the use of ibid. in the references. It needs more work on cleaning up the refs and peters some tightening of phrasing. I've been using the {{convert}} on all measurements, too..... Cheers.

Freikorp, please let us know if you'd like to assist with rolling out articles for all NSW State Heritage Register places in New South Wales. Rangasyd (talk) 15:42, 23 June 2018 (UTC)

Ivan Marusic

Hi The Drover's Wife -- You declined this back in January but the subject is an extremely clear pass of WP:PROF per the two elected fellowships already in the article. Looking at the second reference it adds that he has a named chair, and his Google Scholar citation profile is very strong. Espresso Addict (talk) 13:43, 6 June 2018 (UTC)

Thanks for responding quickly. Academics are a bit of an anomaly because AfD goes almost entirely off WP:PROF except in very borderline cases. The depth of sourcing isn't important, as long as material such as chairs, prizes and fellowships can be confirmed. Most of the big academic societies publish complete lists of their fellows online, so verification is usually easy. Cheers, Espresso Addict (talk) 14:23, 6 June 2018 (UTC)

nothing to do with god

Mitch is always well intentioned in his subcat work - rather than an edit summary and getting into an edit war, why not state your case at the WA noticeboard, then it doesnt become personal - but a general discussion - it would be a good idea. JarrahTree 00:48, 8 June 2018 (UTC)

If you keep reverting without going to the talk page, I think you are placing yourself in jeopardy. cheers JarrahTree 00:55, 8 June 2018 (UTC)

Thank you, your WP:AGF response at my talk page is really appreciated. I have a particularly bad history with mitch and subcats, and made even the worse by the watching the now blocked machine head User:Wwikix almost single handedly re arrange the whole of wikipedia. I do think that the whole category policy/overview has had its time - and needs revisiting, but usually what happens is they get someone to do a project - and nothing eventuates.

To be honest I am at a bit of a walk away stage with subcats - due to the reverse - overcat here and on commons - where child parent and grandparent cats are included to promote something - the balance has not been found imho. JarrahTree 01:10, 8 June 2018 (UTC)

And if you feel threatened - hey there is simply the requirement that from an outsiders point of view it looks like the beginning of an edit war - and there is a need to make sure those involved are aware that an outsider would see a WP:3RR issue arising - I have met you and mitch in real life - and I have respect for the work you both do - I am more concerned what an uninvolved outside might make of it all. JarrahTree 01:14, 8 June 2018 (UTC)

Hmmm, I have real life looming - this discussion is important and I appreciate your good faith response - hey, there could be a very very good idea to have further discussion down the line. G'day for the moment. JarrahTree 01:17, 8 June 2018 (UTC)

@The Drover's Wife and JarrahTree: WP:SUBCAT is a well-established MOS guideline. If you disagree, with it, propose a change to it on the talk page.

If you want a category to be all-inclusive and/or a subcategory to be non-diffusing, then add the {{All included}} and/or {{Non-diffusing subcategory}} templates – that's what they are for, and that's why WP:DUPCAT says "Non-diffusing subcategories should be identified with a template".

The default method for categorisation is SUBCAT's "no duplication" rule. If you want to invoke one of the exceptions, that's fine, but I suggest that the onus is on the editor(s) wanting an exception to the general rule to clearly indicate that intent by using the templates provided for the purpose. I don't think it's reasonable to expect an editor to check hundreds of articles in dozens of categories to determine that "every suburb of Perth is in the parent". Mitch Ames (talk) 13:03, 8 June 2018 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for June 10

An automated process has detected that when you recently edited Raglan railway station, New South Wales, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Evening News (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver).

(Opt-out instructions.) --DPL bot (talk) 09:13, 10 June 2018 (UTC)

Helping the reader?

Hi there,

Re your edits to 443 Queen Street, Brisbane: could you please explain to me how you adding the citation in the edit summary –as opposed to adequately citing it within the article itself– allows the reader to know whether the content is reliable and verifiable? Thanks, —MelbourneStar☆^talk 05:34, 12 June 2018 (UTC)

Forum Alpbach Network

Dear Drover's Wife! The https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Draft:Forum_Alpbach_Network exists since the end of the second World War, but got most attention in the past 2 decades. It is a huge network of almost 20000 former scholarship holders from all over the world. The history is truthfully embedded and I added articles from 3rd parties, such as national and international newspapers reporting about it. There is still lots to do to finalize it and to get additional people on board to cover earlier stages of the network and keep it up to date. But it should be published in order to get the drive and motivate the correct people to research and tell the historic truth and facts of their period. Thank You for checking it and letting me know, what is missing and otherwise please take it online. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Giopur (talk • contribs) 08:42, 20 June 2018 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for June 21

An automated process has detected that when you recently edited Blayney railway station, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Gables (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver).

(Opt-out instructions.) --DPL bot (talk) 09:24, 21 June 2018 (UTC)

June 2018

Your recent edit changed a {{WikiProject Conservatism}} banner at Philip Ruddock. WikiProject banners are the sole responsibility of the project. If this was a mistake, don't worry, as your removal of this banner has been reverted by a project member. Note that placement of the WikiProject Conservatism banner does not imply that the subject is conservative nor right-wing. For more information see the Assessment FAQ. Feel free to contact the member who placed the banner, or post a message at the project talk page. Thank you. He was both the Father of the House and the Father of the Parliament from 1998 to his retirement. He is the second longest-serving parliamentarian in the history of the Australian Parliament – Lionel^(talk) 11:37, 23 June 2018 (UTC)

Victorian state election, 2018

I don't know much about Australian politics, but the edit I reverted listed a former leader of the Victoria Greens, not the current one. The anon has been "extending" the time in office of various politicians from both Australia and New Zealand.-gadfium 04:27, 24 June 2018 (UTC)

John Whitton Bridge and Meadowbank Rail Bridge over Parramatta River

These should be merged.--Grahame (talk) 07:30, 28 June 2018 (UTC)

@Grahamec: I was surprised at the effort gone to to delete the useful infobox, but it's quite well done. Dave Rave (talk) 02:42, 30 June 2018 (UTC)

The Spectator

I don't see anything to back up your view that the Spectstor is fringe and therefore unreliable. Could you provide proof of this in the clementine ford talk page? --1.136.104.203 (talk) 08:51, 28 June 2018 (UTC)

Kinchega Woolshed

Thanks for your correction of my disambiguation at Kinchega Woolshed but you have left a malformed link [[Cpp[er Creek|Cooper's Creek]].— Rod ^talk 12:05, 28 June 2018 (UTC)

But I didn't know whether it should be: Cooper Creek, Coopers Creek or Copper Creek so thanks for fixing it.— Rod ^talk 12:12, 28 June 2018 (UTC)

Tim Hammond

Seems to be some confusion, he did indeed resign subsequent to the others. He only announced the resignation a week earlier. @Timeshift9: re. Onetwothreeip (talk) 01:52, 30 June 2018 (UTC)

Speaker accepted Perth resignation 10 May, and Mayo resignation 11 May. But why use incorrect superfluous words that don't add anything? Brevity is key. Timeshift (talk) 02:03, 30 June 2018 (UTC)

Replied at Timeshift9's talk page. Onetwothreeip (talk) 03:01, 30 June 2018 (UTC)

NSW Heritage items

So the naming convention applied is that decided by a bureaucrat within the NSW Heritage Department. Am I right in thinking that these are just straight copy and pastes from their website? May explain the large amount of errors and outdated information. That is the problem when editors add articles on mass with little or no subject matter and thus cannot sense check. Oonoon00 (talk) 04:29, 30 June 2018 (UTC)

Thanks for the book

Oooh, thank you for the link to the NT book! Always good to have another reference as I'm noticing a few gaps and errors in the sources, so it's great to have another to compare and check against. --Canley (talk) 12:05, 2 July 2018 (UTC)

David Lleyonhjelm edit

Hi there, looks like you might not be aware of how we edit wiki pages around here. Not to worry, I'll give you a run down!

Articles are supposed to express fact, not an opinion of the author. The edit you made of the [PAGE ABOVE] seemed to imply an opinion, rather than stating fact.

A good rule to think of is 'Does this need to be changed, or am I just angry?' That, and count to 10 (my favourite!) and you should be able to figure it out. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 210.84.26.73 (talk) 14:39, 4 July 2018 (UTC)

--Hey there, you edited the article again, (GOOD FOR YOU!). You might want to read to wikipedia editor's entry, which says; you DON'T add your own commentary to ads. PLEASE remeber, just because you hate the person you are writing about, doesn't mean you are not gay .... — Preceding unsigned comment added by 210.84.26.73 (talk) 16:30, 4 July 2018 (UTC)

I hope this helps you next time you try to edit wikipedia! We'll be in touch! — Preceding unsigned comment added by 210.84.26.73 (talk) 14:34, 4 July 2018 (UTC)

homestead

Hi @The Drover's Wife: I made a change to your Courango?? homestead article, identifying the "Port Phillip Pines". However, my source was an email from the NSW Office of Environment and Heritage.... (Should I put the email into commons???) MargaretRDonald (talk) 06:43, 5 July 2018 (UTC)

Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Women in Red

Hi, just curious about this revert. Is this a known troll? In situations like this, I find it's better just to rebuke the editor's arguments factually. Ritchie333 ^{(talk) (cont)} 14:30, 6 July 2018 (UTC)

Strike that, it is. Good revert. Ritchie333 ^{(talk) (cont)} 16:24, 6 July 2018 (UTC)

Reverted content Greens

Hi I am happy to discuss with you the reasoning of placing the greens political spectrum as Left to hard left and why the evidence supports they are by no means center. Dr pragmatists (talk) 07:27, 8 July 2018 (UTC)

About article of Design Up

Greetings, Last time you have rejected the article, Is there any way I can get my draft reviewed before submitting. Please help me here. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Govindduc (talk • contribs) 16:12, 10 July 2018 (UTC)

Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents regarding you

There is currently a discussion at Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents regarding an issue with which you may have been involved. See LINK DCBarrow (talk) 06:11, 14 July 2018 (UTC)

Comments at the beginning of articles you created.

I see you have put a comment at the top of several articles like this one: <!-- Article title: The Ben Hall Sites - Wandi SHRNo:1827 DatabaseNo:5055031 -->

What's this for? Can/should it be removed?

Aisteco (talk) 00:30, 15 July 2018 (UTC)

Ah! I see. Thanks for the reply.

Aisteco (talk) 01:05, 15 July 2018 (UTC)

A barnstar for you!

	The Random Acts of Kindness Barnstar
	Glad that you are doing a great work. Very much appreciated. Sujith Ilamurugu (talk) 14:07, 18 July 2018 (UTC)

Emma Husar

I have opened a case at the https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Dispute_resolution_noticeboard#Emma_Husar Please comment there.Merphee (talk) 04:40, 20 July 2018 (UTC)

I just wanted to sincerely thank you for your reasonable and civil comments to me about my editing and interactions with other editors. When I have been wrong I have accepted it immediately and moved on. I think editing biographies of living persons is quite tricky and I appreciate your direction as I learn the ropes. I also appreciate how you have done it in a non hurtful way unlike a couple of other editors I have been dealing with who have constantly belittled me. You are a very good editor and an asset to Wikipedia.Merphee (talk) 01:44, 26 July 2018 (UTC)

Obviously as an experienced editor here I am wondering what I should do regarding comments like this? [4]Merphee (talk) 03:14, 26 July 2018 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for July 21

An automated process has detected that when you recently edited Narrandera railway station, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Gables (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver).

(Opt-out instructions.) --DPL bot (talk) 09:20, 21 July 2018 (UTC)

Possible problem with the NSW State Heritage Register

Hi, Thanks for creating articles using the NSW State Heritage Register. Not sure if you noticed, but I spotted a problem [5] with the way the material on Braidwood used the word 'settlement' and 'settlers'. As I understand it, the entries are written by different people/companies/organisations, so this probably isn't a systematic issue, but it might be something to look out for. I keep meaning to do a day trip to Braidwood to improve Commons surprisingly poor coverage of the town BTW - maybe when the weather warms up a bit! Regards, Nick-D (talk) 04:17, 28 July 2018 (UTC)

Richard Denniss

I'm too busy at the moment but the inclusion of that quote from the Saturday Paper is an obvious NPOV violation and the red-flagged editor reverting edits is flying very close to the three reverts rule. I'll contest that change when I have more time Gumsaint (talk) 00:26, 31 July 2018 (UTC)

Australian Coal and Shale Employees' Federation

Hi, your article on the Miner's Federation looks to be a good start. I think it'd take a very long article to do the subject justice, given the union's long history and key role in Australian industrial and political history - but at least there's no shortage of published sources. Personally, I try to avoid using contemporaneous newspaper articles (it feels a bit too much like original research for my liking), but that's only a preference. I'll try to help out on the article when I can.Warrenjs1 (talk) 13:30, 1 August 2018 (UTC)

The source/s

• Forde, Francis Michael (Frank) (1890–1983) Following Curtin’s death in July 1945, Forde was prime minister from 6 to 13 July, but caucus soundly rejected him as a permanent leader in favour of the more charismatic Ben Chifley.
• Frank Forde As Deputy Prime Minister, Forde took over as Prime Minister on Curtin’s death. He held the position for eight days, 6–13 July 1945, in a caretaker capacity, until the federal parliamentary Labor Party elected JB Chifley instead. As Deputy Leader of the party, Forde was bypassed twice for the leadership, in 1934 and 1945, when Curtin and Chifley respectively became the leaders.

To which the other editor, on my talk page, agreed that Forde was in fact interim. Mind you, this was correctly status quo in that article/list for years, and you've undone that. Regards, —MelbourneStar☆^talk 10:37, 21 August 2018 (UTC)

Further: I believe you may be unintentionally confusing the issue as indicated by your edit summary: my edit (nor the other editor's edit) disputes Forde as being PM; he was. But he certainly was not elected Labor leader. By being deputy, and with Curtin's death, Forde was temporarily elevated to the position — at which point a new leader was elected seven days later. —MelbourneStar☆^talk 10:42, 21 August 2018 (UTC)

So I see that you’ve been editing elsewhere and haven’t responded to the post above (not quite sure why you’d do that considering you undid my edit citing a reason, which surely, if you went to the effort of undoing the edit you’d be happy to elaborate further...). Anyway, I’ve gone and undone your edit but also added a citation too. Hope that suffices. Regards, —MelbourneStar☆^talk 15:15, 21 August 2018 (UTC)

A barnstar for you

		The Anti-Vandalism Barnstar
		This is for your valuable efforts for reverting and protecting enwiki from Vandalism PATH SLOPU (Talk) 07:37, 26 August 2018 (UTC)

Edit summary

Regarding this edit summary, the linked discussion is talking about categories set by {{infobox former country}} that are no longer being set due to its merger with {{infobox country}}. I was merely re-adding the appropriate category based on previous usage. If the category shouldn't have been there in the first place, that's fine, but if the only reason you reverted me was because "the discussion doesn't say why it's added", then I would kindly ask that you re-add it until someone verifies its accuracy. Primefac (talk) 23:38, 26 August 2018 (UTC) (please ping on reply)

Copying from an incompatible license

Hi, I noticed that you are importing text from the New South Wales State Heritage Register, e.g. in Ottery Mine. However, this source is CC 4.0 licensed, and according to Wikipedia:FAQ/Copyright, the WMF legal team has stated that the 4.0 license is not compatible with the wikipeidia license, and therefor 4.0 text may not be imported, not even with an attribution. I'm afraid that we'll have to delete all the articles you imported in this way, which isn't a nice thing to do; but sadly a necessary thing. I'm not blaming you for not knowing that this license was not acceptable here, I only learned about it last week myself. Fram (talk) 07:53, 28 August 2018 (UTC)

I went into more detail on your talk page, but tl;dr - please read the pages you link before threatening people based upon them. Your own page explicitly states that CC-BY is compatible - you're either confusing it with CC-BY-SA or you didn't read the page, or both. Either way, poor form. The Drover's Wife (talk) 08:02, 28 August 2018 (UTC)

(ec)Ah, I mixed up between CC-By 4.0 and CC-By-SA 4.0, these licenses are really too confusing. You are right, the things you imported seem to be perfectly acceptable, so please carry on. Fram (talk) 08:03, 28 August 2018 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for August 28

An automated process has detected that when you recently edited St John's Cathedral, Parramatta, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Gables (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver).

(Opt-out instructions.) --DPL bot (talk) 09:24, 28 August 2018 (UTC)

Your reverts on Laura Tingle Page

Why on earth are you deleting Tingle's revealing statement of her view of the "trouble with Turnbull" at his final press conference? Surely you are aware of alternative views? Why would you want to hide hers? She has repeated it in all her analysis of the downfall of Turnbull. Leave it please. Observoz (talk) 10:34, 29 August 2018 (UTC)

(talk page stalker) The questions journalists ask in interviews and press conferences can't be assumed to reflect their own views. It is a standard journalistic technique to put provocative views/propositions to interviewees. The text here stated that she was presenting the views of voters anyway. As such, this isn't useful content. Nick-D (talk) 23:02, 29 August 2018 (UTC)

Hot 100

Hi, I was curious why you considered the 3 women I submitted to the Hot 100 for improvement to GA status to be inappropriate. Lucille Ball is the only "Hollywood American"; Olivia Newton-John is an Australian entertainer, and Virginia Woolf is an English writer. 2 of the 3 articles are considered Level 4 Vital articles on Wikipedia, and the other (ONJ) is considered Level 5. I specifically chose them because of this importance. I was trying to add more articles for people to take note of since we had some vacant spots in the Hot 100. I don't mind if you think other women should be in these spots, but I would argue that whoever they are should be from the Vital lists. Cheers, LovelyLillith (talk) 15:24, 29 August 2018 (UTC)

This month

Hi i saw that you have made a complaint about at least this time you notified me. Thought I would just make it clear I am not a member of the Liberal party. --110.22.50.32 (talk) 03:05, 2 September 2018 (UTC)110.22.50.32--~~

Spinifex

Hi, I hope that I'm sorting out the "spinifex" links correctly, so it was good to have some reassurance from someone who appears to know about the Australian flora. As far as I can see, most links from the text "spinifex" in articles relating to Australia relate to the genus Triodia, because they are concerned with the arid interior, not coastal sand dunes which are the habitat of true Spinifex. If you see any errors I've made, do correct them and let me know. Thanks. Peter coxhead (talk) 08:17, 3 September 2018 (UTC)

Dede Alpert

Hi there, many thanks for your work on Dede Alpert - that's great, looks so much better now. Thanks again, Tacyarg (talk) 07:40, 6 September 2018 (UTC)

Bathurst

Hi there. Would you please tag me or send me a list of Bathurst articles needing photos. I will source pver the next few days. I have limited internet connectivity. Thanks. Rangasyd (talk) 05:03, 8 September 2018 (UTC)

Speedy deletion nomination of File:Thomas Elder 4.jpeg

A tag has been placed on File:Thomas Elder 4.jpeg requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section F1 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because the image is an unused duplicate or lower-quality copy of another file on Wikipedia having the same file format, and all inward links have been updated.

If you think this page should not be deleted for this reason, you may contest the nomination by visiting the page and clicking the button labelled "Contest this speedy deletion". This will give you the opportunity to explain why you believe the page should not be deleted. However, be aware that once a page is tagged for speedy deletion, it may be deleted without delay. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag from the page yourself, but do not hesitate to add information in line with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. Jo-Jo Eumerus (talk, contributions) 11:57, 8 September 2018 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for September 13

An automated process has detected that when you recently edited Sydenham, New South Wales, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Sydenham railway station (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver).

(Opt-out instructions.) --DPL bot (talk) 09:08, 13 September 2018 (UTC)

Are you paying attention?

Why? Did you misclick, or have you never heard of Queen Victoria or Queen Adelaide? 208.95.51.53 (talk) 13:04, 17 September 2018 (UTC)

brilliant

I used to dine out on the fact the Sydney project per se was the under-developed project for Australian cities (when watched over the last ten years) - well yourself, Kerry and Rangasyd have transformed the project - well done!!!! JarrahTree 10:11, 19 September 2018 (UTC)

The general increase of material about Sydney - even just the framework of articles and categories - is so important - you all need encouragement to keep at it! JarrahTree 11:34, 19 September 2018 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for September 21

An automated process has detected that when you recently edited Thomas Thompson (Australian politician), you added links pointing to the disambiguation pages Observer, The Advertiser and Recorder (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver).

(Opt-out instructions.) --DPL bot (talk) 09:28, 21 September 2018 (UTC)

Reverted your edit on Robert Askin

I don’t understand what you’re getting at. I added a new source; I haven’t removed the other (a Crikey article). Given that this is a biography, we should be very careful about the weight we give to unproven allegations... even if the subject is dead. Mqst north (talk) 06:14, 23 September 2018 (UTC)

Program for Australian television

Hello, in regards to your recent reverts of television shows where you left the edit summary "not Australian English, just awkward" when changing the term "program" to "series" in a large number of articles, you are actually not corrent. An RfC determined that "program should be used for Australian television series" and that "..program was the preferred usage for television series. The RfC looked at whether "program" or "programme" was the correct spelling for Australian television-related articles, and consensus was found that "program" is indeed Australian English for Wikipedia articles relating to Aussie television. -- Whats new?^(talk) 01:29, 24 September 2018 (UTC)

Federated Moulders' (Metals) Union of Australia

Hi, I'm thinking of submitting this article for re-assessment on the WP:Australia page (perhaps C-class?), as I think I've largely exhausted the sources available online. Do you have any suggestions for improvements? Thanks, Warrenjs1 (talk) 08:53, 27 September 2018 (UTC)

Thanks for your feedback - it's now been re-assessed as C-class. I'll keep looking for more sources on the union's later history, but there is very little published material available for the post-war period, unfortunately. Warrenjs1 (talk) 00:44, 30 September 2018 (UTC)

riot

thanks for your comment at frickeg - I have taken the history back - as I find the idea that because I was there I know what happened level of editing somewhat disconcerting. JarrahTree 22:46, 30 September 2018 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for October 4

An automated process has detected that when you recently edited Ebenezer Church, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Gables (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver).

(Opt-out instructions.) --DPL bot (talk) 09:19, 4 October 2018 (UTC)

Broome

Your baseless edit-summary notwithstanding, your claim that slavery could exist in 1880s Western Australia must be backed up by extremely solid sources written by historians, not environment specialists. How could slavery possibly exist when it had been outlawed by an Empire-wide Act of Parliament? Yes, kidnapping, illegal forced labour, and other slavery-like activities could exist, but as "Slavery is any system in which principles of property law are applied to people, allowing individuals to own, buy and sell other individuals, as a de jure form of property", you need to provide highly reliable sources explaining how slavery itself, and not merely a slavery-like setting, could exist in a setting to which the Slavery Abolition Act 1833 was applicable. Nyttend (talk) 00:11, 5 October 2018 (UTC)

PS, the source never asserts that slavery existed in this setting. The string slav appears three times: once in speaking of slavery-like conditions, once in "reports of slavery", and once in the title of a cited work. Let me remind you that placing information in connection with a citation is a specific claim that the source provides that information, that if the source doesn't provide that information, it's a hoax, and that repeated addition of hoaxes is grounds for blocking. Nyttend (talk) 00:16, 5 October 2018 (UTC)

I have taken this to the Australian noticeboard - It would ideal if you both could recuse yourselves and see what the Northern Australian circumstances show up at the noticeboard rather than a personal conversation. JarrahTree 00:38, 5 October 2018 (UTC)

[edit conflict] Slavery and slavery-like settings are not the same, even if they have the same result for the individuals involved, and if you once more insert a statement that is not reflected in the cited source, I will request a block for the insertion of hoaxes. Nyttend (talk) 00:40, 5 October 2018 (UTC)

Given your edit-warring, insertion of hoaxes, and personal attacks on me, I have requested a block. Nyttend (talk) 01:25, 5 October 2018 (UTC)

Slavery in Broome

Hello I found an article mentioning slavery in Australia although it doesn't specifically mention Boone. Going to do a bit more digging (via Google and other search engines) to possibly come up with some sources that prove/disprove slavery in Broome. Sakura Cartelet^Talk 01:53, 5 October 2018 (UTC)

Golriz Ghahraman

How does this edit qualify as removal of WP:UNDUE content – [6]? You have, in fact, re-added all the contentious material. Please explain yourself. — Nearly Headless Nick {c} 11:03, 6 October 2018 (UTC)

Merging WP:UNDUE content into the core of a short biography, therefore flooding it, is absolutely not an improvement: it's making it worse. I have been WP:BOLD and removed the content that you gave more prominence. I'm not sure about the best place for the remaining content, but it's impossible to resolve if you won't use the talk page. The Drover's Wife (talk) 11:07, 6 October 2018 (UTC) reproduced here from User:Sir Nicholas de Mimsy-Porpington's talk page

I have removed all contentious material from the BLP until the matter is conclusively resolved on the talk page. — Nearly Headless Nick {c} 11:11, 6 October 2018 (UTC)

I was posting here to thoroughly apologise, because I'd carelessly assumed that you had reinstated Ascv's edit (which I seriously objected to as making things worse), when you had in fact done your own. I don't particularly object to your version of the wording there; although I feel it's a little bit POV in Ghahraman's favour and doesn't explain the controversy as well, I don't know that it's worth fussing over.

Of course, while I was writing this message, you (again without discussion) have removed the content entirely, which is completely unacceptable. I'm not going to revert you immediately in the interests of stopping a revert war, but please revert yourself to your previous edit. We're clearly not far apart and this whole dispute would be completely unnecessary if you'd discuss first rather than ignoring the talk page. The Drover's Wife (talk) 11:15, 6 October 2018 (UTC) reproduced here from User:Sir Nicholas de Mimsy-Porpington's talk page

In accordance with WP:BLP policy, the burden of evidence rests on the editor who adds or restores contentious material. The current version is fine as it is, until the BLP dispute is conclusively resolved on the talk page. For the record, you were advised earlier to engage on the talk page, which you did not until moments ago – [7]. — Nearly Headless Nick {c} 11:22, 6 October 2018 (UTC)

A kitten for you!

hi The Drover's Wife, sorry about my kitten mistake at Talk:Ross River Meatworks Chimney, wont do it again.

Coolabahapple (talk) 12:41, 6 October 2018 (UTC)

Evelyn C. White

Spotted Draft:Evelyn C. White in the recently generated WiR list of AfC rejections. The creator (apparently a journalist who was profiling the subject) resubmitted but it was unlikely to pass 2nd review in that state. I rewrote it to show that the subject clearly passes WP:AUTHOR#3, but while I'm usually fine with moving rejected drafts into mainspace, I'm not sure if that's good practice for drafts that are still "waiting for review" in AfC. If you have a chance, could you take a look at it? Many thanks either way. Bakazaka (talk) 00:18, 9 October 2018 (UTC)

dont add fuel

Just saw your response at Freo, I suggest a revert as thats not all that helpful, either to you or the arguments. cheers Gnangarra 00:27, 10 October 2018 (UTC)

thanks for your message

Thank you JarrahTree 07:59, 12 October 2018 (UTC) email JarrahTree 00:37, 14 October 2018 (UTC)

Enmore High School

I saw your reversion of my edit to this article, and do not understand why you chose to address it that way. I see that you have a lot of experience on Wikipedia, but I think I still have to point out that even if a technical and further education school is called a TAFE in Australia, Wikipedia is not just for Australians. Wikipedia is also an encyclopedia, which is meant to educate. TAFE is not a word, it's an acronym that is not universally known, so it should be defined at its first use. An undefined acronym that is unintelligible to most of the English-speaking world is not helpful to readers. The TAFE hyperlink redirects to the technical and further education – as it should.

My edit also included quite a few other changes, such as deleting a duplication of the word 'the' and fixing random capitalizations and do not understand why you chose to revert those, too.

I have reverted your edit and defined TAFE.

Ira

Ira Leviton (talk) 12:06, 12 October 2018 (UTC)

It is called a TAFE. It is not called a "technical and further education institution". There are literally zero non-spam hits for "Enmore Technical and Further Education": there are well over 10,000 for "Enmore TAFE". For anyone who is confused and needs further definition, Wikipedia has a handy article at TAFE, which is unmissably linked from that very sentence. The Drover's Wife (talk) 12:13, 12 October 2018 (UTC)

Newcastle railway station, Sydney

The bug in the template which caused this redirect to be needed, has now been fixed and is no longer required. It and some others, are now causing a problem in the template which has needed to be expanded to cover that. Hence we are asking for their deletion.Fleet Lists (talk) 21:53, 13 October 2018 (UTC)

NSW SHR update

Hi there. Just checking in to see if you think City of Hawkesbury heritage sites are complete. I finished a few off for you, but you will need to update the CSV workbook. And then we should chat how we're going to manage City of Sydney LGA. Cheers Rangasyd (talk) 12:33, 22 October 2018 (UTC)

Hi again. Can you have a look over the revisions that I've just made to your edit of Jenner House and incorporate them (map, architectural style, categories, change portal from NSW to Sydney, create tags for talk page, etc...) into all your other edits in the Potts Point, Darlinghurst and Kings Cross articles. Many thanks. Rangasyd (talk) 09:07, 23 October 2018 (UTC)

About Yiu Ming Temple

Hi TDW,
Have you found anything in Chinese - reliable references only, of course - about this? I might be able to help out with the Chinese characters for its various names. CF: Sze Yup Temple
墨爾本之彼得 aka --Shirt58 (talk) 10:40, 26 October 2018 (UTC)

A barnstar for you!

	The Tireless Contributor Barnstar
	For keeping on trucking with the New South Wales State Heritage Register rollout! Kerry (talk) 19:13, 28 October 2018 (UTC)

Aussie Battler Party

I take your point that none of the others are directly sourced, but when I saw it, it was a redlink as well as being unsourced. That wasn't much evidence of its existence. HiLo48 (talk) 01:35, 29 October 2018 (UTC)

Frederick Hanson

Thanks for cleaning up my confusing edit summary at Frederick Hanson. I agree with your assessment that "Corruption allegations" is the only part that's okay, and it cannot stand alone after the revdel. –dlthewave ☎ 11:28, 31 October 2018 (UTC)

Vic LC ticket order

I'll check them all—that was the order in the VEC candidates file and it was seemingly only Labor in a weird order, but I obtained another VEC list so that might have a more realistic order. --Canley (talk) 23:07, 5 November 2018 (UTC)

I've updated the Labor tickets based on the new VEC file, seems much more realistic! I'll check the minor parties too. --Canley (talk) 23:16, 5 November 2018 (UTC)

sue hickey

please explain??? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 1199bob (talk • contribs) 05:39, 10 November 2018 (UTC)

November 2018

Please stop issuing false warnings against disruptive editing or against vandalism over what is nothing more than a difference of opinion. Fake warnings against vandalism and fake warnings against disruptive editing are abuse of admin status and can result in loss of admin status. It is your duty to try to remember, even though you disagree, that WP:AGF is still a Wikipedia policy, and you should behave in accordance. Jason Harvestdancer | Talk to me 02:54, 18 November 2018 (UTC)

It is bad practice to assume motives. WP:AGF and WP:ADHOMINEM both apply, and are still principles of Wikipedia. You should attempt to follow Wikipedia policies.Jason Harvestdancer | Talk to me 04:01, 18 November 2018 (UTC)

Please stop your disruptive editing. If you continue to vandalize Wikipedia, as you did at Barry O'Sullivan, you may be blocked from editing. Jason Harvestdancer | Talk to me 19:38, 18 November 2018 (UTC)

ArbCom 2018 election voter message

Hello, The Drover's Wife. Voting in the 2018 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23.59 on Sunday, 3 December. All users who registered an account before Sunday, 28 October 2018, made at least 150 mainspace edits before Thursday, 1 November 2018 and are not currently blocked are eligible to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once.

The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail.

If you wish to participate in the 2018 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 18:42, 19 November 2018 (UTC)

Shop, Distributive and Allied Employees Association

Undid your undo because there is no citation or evidence for the assertion that the SDA's culture is adverse to what it perceives as militancy by traditional unions. Indeed, the SDA was the biggest financial backer of the famously militant MUA in the 1998 waterfront dispute. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 192.76.8.88 (talk) 19:02, 25 November 2018 (UTC)

Please explain why you are deleting accurate information from a living person biography?

Hi Drovers Wife. Can you explain why you are continuously deleting and undoing accurate information I am editing on a living persons biography? Thanks. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Pke2018 (talk • contribs) 23:32, 25 November 2018 (UTC)

Thanks

Second very dumb mistake in a week. Yikes! Thanks for cleaning up my mess! Frickeg (talk) 05:30, 26 November 2018 (UTC)

Source for sitewide consensus on election article names

Hey there. You mentioned a "sitewide consensus" for a new naming scheme for articles on elections in a recent edit summary on 2019 Australian federal election, but didn't include a link to such a discussion. May I ask for the source to the discussion that produced a consensus on this issue? I'd like to help out on renaming articles while having the validity to back the consensus up in my edit summaries. – PhilipTerryGraham (talk · articles · reviews) 05:39, 27 November 2018 (UTC)

Your message on my talk page

Hello, you accused me of "disruptive editing" and "vandalising" Wikipedia. Could you please explain why you believe this to be the case? Gfcvoice (talk) 11:32, 27 November 2018 (UTC)

Because you disagreed with him about something. That's his definition of "disruptive editing" and "vandalism".Jason Harvestdancer | Talk to me 23:42, 30 November 2018 (UTC)

Category:Hospital buildings in Australia has been nominated for discussion

Category:Hospital buildings in Australia, which you created, has been nominated for possible deletion, merging, or renaming. A discussion is taking place to see if it abides with the categorization guidelines. If you would like to participate in the discussion, you are invited to add your comments at the category's entry on the categories for discussion page. Thank you. Rathfelder (talk) 10:00, 1 December 2018 (UTC)

WikiProject Australian historic places/Sydney central business district

We're duplicating content. Pleade hold off for five minutes. I've completed duplications and dabs. Rangasyd (talk) 11:39, 2 December 2018 (UTC)

OK. Over to you to make any more changes. I'm going to take a break for a while. Rangasyd (talk) 11:48, 2 December 2018 (UTC)

Hi there. I'm done with creating content. There are two entries left. Both of which you've been involved with to date, the Bulletin place warehouses and the adjacent dwelling to the Clarence Street Police Station. Would you please mind completing them. I'm not certain that the address is correct for the Royal George Hotel, Sydney. Would you please revisit and include the adjacent terraces, if they are part of this listing. Also the NSW SHR reference is missing for the terraces. Cheers. Rangasyd (talk) 02:57, 29 December 2018 (UTC)

110.174.62.147

Ok got it - thank you — Preceding unsigned comment added by 110.174.62.147 (talk) 03:47, 14 December 2018 (UTC)

Barnaby Joyce and Broad affairs

Come on now, the leadership of a conservative party that pushed family values having resignations over affairs is definitely noteworthy, it's been on the front page of every single paper in the country!. Why not edit and contribute rather than wantonly reverting? Bacondrum (talk) 00:28, 18 December 2018 (UTC)

I thought we were developing a bit of civility between us, but apparently not. what you claim on your revert is just not true. I spent ages on that more than half of it I wrote entirely and I tried to re-write the others, and I said it needed work...why not help? Why not help rewrite from the excellent source material. To just sit a revert and not contribute does not seem like editing in good faith to me, in-fact it seems a bit grubby. I'm going through and rewriting the bits that are too close to the source. Try and contribute in the future, instead of simply reverting, go through the source and help write the page. Bacondrum (talk) 08:32, 18 December 2018 (UTC)

whatever

the seasons greetings, if they are suitable and fit, otherwise enjoy it all - cheers JarrahTree 09:27, 19 December 2018 (UTC)

Women in Red

I've added your Women Bios list to the Wikipedia:WikiProject Women in Red/Redlist index - diff. Hope that's okay. --Tagishsimon (talk) 01:13, 24 December 2018 (UTC)

Next question is, do you mind if I cull valid blue-links? You'll see I've been tinkering, because I just can't help myself :) --Tagishsimon (talk) 12:30, 24 December 2018 (UTC)

Thanks. Mayhap I'll fork it; do some more DABs on yours, and then cull bluelinks into a WiR version. I see you have a towerblock about to collapse - I make the assumption you may be Sydney-based. Just be careful out there. Perhaps stick with the historic buildings, none of this modern stuff. --Tagishsimon (talk) 21:20, 24 December 2018 (UTC)

Please consider moving/uploading free images to Commons!

Thank you for uploading free images/media to Wikipedia! As you may know, there is another Wikimedia Foundation project called Wikimedia Commons, a central media repository for all free media. In the future, please upload media there instead (see m:Help:Unified login). That way, all of the other language Wikipedias can use them too, as well as our many sister projects. This will also allow our visitors to search for, view and use our media in one central location. If you wish to move previous uploads to Commons, see Wikipedia:Moving images to the Commons (you may view your previous uploads). Please note that non-free content, such as images claimed as fair use, cannot be uploaded to the Wikimedia Commons. Help us spread the word about Commons by informing other users, and please continue uploading! --Animalparty! (talk) 19:36, 26 December 2018 (UTC)

think

is not a useful explanation to revert category items - there is in general a conflagoration at https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Royal_Exhibition_Building of templates and categories - if you think all of that is really needed - then there are WP:MOS guidelines for WP:CATEGORIES that you might like to refer to, and offer in WP:AGF to Mitch, rather than the word 'think'. JarrahTree 07:57, 1 January 2019 (UTC)

ok the noticeboard answer does help JarrahTree 08:38, 1 January 2019 (UTC)

I personally think that the over-cat and over-templating of such items is really offputting - regardless of diffusion or not - https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sydney_Opera_House I find it hard to believe that all the templates and categories are valid. JarrahTree 08:44, 1 January 2019 (UTC)

The big problem is consistency throughout australia once it is separated - Kerry did a very good job of cleaning up and populating some archaeology categories that I started the other day, and Shyamsunder does very good work when he gets the ball rolling - (and when I dont interrupt) - the whole thing about tourist and landmark categories is that they can be very close to pov/arbitrary categories with in some cases very poor background reference points - they do need managing though, that is for sure JarrahTree 08:55, 1 January 2019 (UTC)

A very good example of what happens when there is not consistency - I know the chileans take their football very seriously, I have been exposed to the enthusiasm (similar to kangaroo ticks, another side issue) - and to go find the categories have been played with by up to three (if not four) different ways of looking at how they have been populated or managed - the lack of consistency across a larger category, or within a project reflects a very bad way on how wikipedia is maintained - is something I firmly believe that the Australian eds like kerry and shyamsunder need to be encouraged - the more eds prepared to put the time in to straighten out the variant usages across the project is vitally important that eds are able to see the bigger picture - rather than just sit in their small corner of their state and not see how it connects with others - regularly with shymasunders edits - I look at the larger global connections - and typically there are problems with some under-maintained or organised subjects/topics for the whole of wikipedia not just australian contexts.steps down from soapbox JarrahTree 09:12, 1 January 2019 (UTC)

Annalise Braakensiek

We ideally need sources that demonstrate why she is notable/detail her career etc. that aren't simply about her death... GiantSnowman 11:28, 7 January 2019 (UTC)

No, it's not - it's a standard maintenance tag which states "Please help to establish notability by citing reliable secondary sources that are independent of the topic and provide significant coverage of it beyond a mere trivial mention". If there are that many sources out there then please expand it. It's been in a sorry state ever since it was created. GiantSnowman 11:39, 7 January 2019 (UTC)

Thankyou

Oops- thanks for that on the Paul Whittaker article. I dropped in to update the CEO Sky job, saw them and actually thought it was someone having a laugh- the "Grapes of Bof" and "Palmersnorus" really sounded too good to be true, especially as they weren't referenced; I'm happy to know that they do exist heheh. You're right, I should have looked them up to make sure. And a belated thank you for trying to find that mediaweek ref as well. I'm beginning to wonder if its dodgy, because it was inserted into the article 3 days or so before the date given as the publication date, but then, sometimes magazines do release early. Curdle (talk) 14:56, 11 January 2019 (UTC)

Nomination for deletion of Template:Justices of the Federal Court of Australia

Template:Justices of the Federal Court of Australia has been nominated for deletion. You are invited to comment on the discussion at the template's entry on the Templates for discussion page. Find bruce (talk) 01:16, 13 January 2019 (UTC)

Pig-headed reverts

What on earth are you doing, cluttering up the openings of articles with fluff no one wants to read? Particularly concerning is the ignorant reinstatement of styleguide breaches, such as typography. Are you going to go back and fix them??? Tony (talk) 11:00, 22 January 2019 (UTC)

I'm sorry we came to blows yesterday, and that I said uncharitable things to you. Perhaps we might work together some time. Tony (talk) 00:58, 23 January 2019 (UTC)

The above

I sympathise with you, having to deal with people who repeatedly remove links from articles because they personally don't like them. The same two people regularly go through year in topic articles taking out links to dates, not caring that they are leaving one article out of kilter with all other year articles. Maybe one day they will get bored with the game and go away, but for now we just have to put up with it. Deb (talk) 08:26, 28 January 2019 (UTC)

Changes to Australian Country Party (2004)

Dear Drovers Wife,

Please do your homework before removing edits to the page.

All text edits are referenced and the new logo is clearly on all Party websites and social media.

All change of direction and the ideology outlined on the page are referenced and are clearly what the Party is and where it is now going.

Your deletion of edits means the Wiki page becomes historic and reflects the party before the Victorian Elections last year and before the complete change of Federal Executive early January this year.

I am happy to communicate with you more but do not change the page again, without your proper research, or I will have to report you to higher Wiki Authority for un-researched editing of our page.

Glennstapo (talk) 01:53, 6 February 2019 (UTC)

IDW's Transformers (2019)

Hello, I read your message. I confess I didn't know about the other article until I published my own. Besides, wrote to the other user (PanagiotisZois) about merging our pages, but I yet didn't have a word from him, but I guess he got aware of that. I'm sorry for this mess and I hope we all can solve it. F. E. Puricelli (talk) 02:02, 7 February 2019 (UTC)

Draft:Australian Joint Copying Project

I must misunderstand the point of a draft. I refer to Draft:Australian Joint Copying Project. If no one edits that draft, it'll be deleted, and nothing will ever show up again. But, if someone just goes and creates the page, then it will show up, and the current quality will be sufficient to prevent it from being deleted. As such, what's the point of the draft?

As it is an "obviously notable topic", with only a few minor changes, why not just approve the draft, and then let the wikiworld make the changes? Additional potential sources are listed on the talk page, and I will add more in about two minutes. 203.30.234.30 (talk) 02:11, 7 February 2019 (UTC) I have just added references inline in the text. 203.30.234.30 (talk) 02:24, 7 February 2019 (UTC)

András Nemescsói (February 2) question

Thank you very much for your feedback! Can you tell me which sources are considered problematic in this article? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Andrew93833 (talk • contribs) 16:12, 8 February 2019 (UTC)

FYI

Just a quick FYI, I don't think the submitter would ever get Draft:Prince Khaled bin Alwaleed bin Talal up to mainspace quality. I went ahead and made a new copy directly in mainspace here - Khaled bin Alwaleed bin Talal - but wanted to give you a heads-up since you also reviewed the sub-par draft. (Also, based on the posed photo of the prince labeled as "own work", I'm assuming this is an undisclosed COI, but c'es la vie.) Chetsford (talk) 07:11, 11 February 2019 (UTC)

realise

that this had some things I'd rather keep offline, sorry... thanks for the chat anyways - cheers JarrahTree 02:02, 12 February 2019 (UTC)

Draft: Rebekah Long

I'd like to ask what is considered "promotional tone" and exactly what is not "generic" mentions as the bluegrass unlimited was a feature article in a main stream magazine. She is prominent in Southern Gospel History and Bluegrass history as a wife of Ben Speer and a long lineage of bluegrass background as identical twin sister to Lizzy Long. Please be specific to what needs to be edited re "promotional tone" as everything written is biographical and informational. — Preceding unsigned comment added by [[User:{{{1}}}|{{{1}}}]] ([[User talk:{{{1}}}#top|talk]] • [[Special:Contributions/{{{1}}}|contribs]])

BLP articles for creation

IMHO - BLP adherence on talk page and categories should be mandatory regardless of who passes something for creation - too important to leave hanging loose as a goose unmentioned - have a good weekend anyways JarrahTree 09:07, 15 February 2019 (UTC)

My apologies - I was watching the new article and burst a friday afternoon boiler over https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Talk:Peter_Kidd - it was not adequately tagged - and also I unreleased the cats immediately (btw there is an ext link in the text a definite MOS nonono) from the article itself - https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Peter_Kidd - I have just got to a point in the Australian biota project where I have got unassessed australian bio project items down to less than 10k (although the Oz total is a healthy 3k https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Category:Unassessed_Australia_articles) so I probably jumped the gun on your new article - I just think they should never go open and free from impediments unless the BLP tags on both sides - talk and main space - are clearly there... but hey thats just me JarrahTree 09:18, 15 February 2019 (UTC)

reason for reversion

Inadequately discussed from your side - please go to the talk page and stop reverting that unless you can provide well reasoned argument rather than your edit summary conclusions.

If you so choose offer online or offline why you have developed such a problem. Just because you cannot see anything like it somehwere else does not create a condition for a sections removal - as it stands the background of the development of the cross and darlo require a hell of a lot of that sort of information get into even a par with what it could be. The darlinghurst article is full of problems, why not focus on cleaning up rather than removing good faith additions - in all this time no one even had started the darlinghurst fire station. Also as a matter of form, there is a real need to discuss than blanket reverts. Try the discussion, and maybe there will be some progress, reversions do not help anyone. JarrahTree 10:06, 17 February 2019 (UTC)

Potts Point, Kings Cross, Darlinghurst, East Sydney - all have quite complex historical geography - this glimmer of a view into something that you have contributed to - https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tusculum,_Potts_Point - is a fragment and each fragment add up to what the rather small geographical area contains - just removing parts of the earlier examples does not really help.

of the now well introduced (it would help to read the links provided in the introduction of the section) section actually situated the plans - and I would make effort to actually add more text if I was living in Sydney (unfortunately my residence in darlo was before digital photography, otherwise I would have more to back up my arguments) - the lynchpins of the earlier landscape - such as Tusculum, and the fire station - are important part of understanding the streetscapes, and rather than remove - I would say that to add text to the items, or even create good articles to link such as your creation of tusculum - is a better way to go.

But please discuss rather than revert - otherwise you can easily make the issue more complicated than we really need, thanks... JarrahTree 10:23, 17 February 2019 (UTC)

Thanks for talking, (not for trying to give up) - I honestly thought they were having going back in, with text with the items - but the text above is what gives the context for the moment - and sorry I dont take your giving up as anything that helps you or anyone else - I insist on the talk page furthering the issue - hey there are always more idiocies on around the place than this stuff... JarrahTree 10:58, 17 February 2019 (UTC)

understand completely - trying to suggest down to 4 and developing text for the remaining items JarrahTree 11:08, 17 February 2019 (UTC)

Hello, The Drover's Wife. Please check your email; you've got mail!
It may take a few minutes from the time the email is sent for it to show up in your inbox. You can at any time by removing the {{You've got mail}} or {{ygm}} template.

JarrahTree 00:30, 18 February 2019 (UTC)

Solicitors-General of Victoria

By way of explanation re Solicitor-General of Victoria, I tend not to red-link where I think there is unlikely to be a future article as the person doesn't meet WP:BIO. The reasons I hadn't linked Harold Berkeley QC or Douglas Graham QC were that both are deceased, no other article mentions them & I couldn't find any reliable sources to establish their personal notability, as opposed to their office. Murray, McLeish & Niall are clearly notable as judges of the Supreme Court. Given the rapid rise of Kirsten Walker, she will probably become so as well. It's not a big deal for me either way & I could be wrong about their notability. We should probably deal with Berkeley & Graham in the same way, either both redlinked or neither. Find bruce (talk) 01:03, 18 February 2019 (UTC)

Australian Judges

I have been thinking about the structure of categories for Australian judges. It seems to me having every judge in the category Australian Judges is unlikely to be helpful. I note we already have a non-diffusing subcategory Category:Australian judges by century, although the 19th Century is effectively a replication of the various colony of X judges categories. If a reader is are looking for an Australian judge, they might want to approach it by jurisdiction (ie federal, state) or by court. While the proposal to rename Category:Judges of Australian superior courts is being discussed, is it worthwhile creating Category:Australian judges by court, not as a parent category of superior courts, but as a separate sorting category? We can then adopt a similar approach to the Courts category - there is already a Category:Australian courts by jurisdiction, maybe an another set of non-diffusing categories would be Current Courts, Abolished Courts, Current Tribunals and Abolished Tribunals. Find bruce (talk) 10:13, 2 March 2019 (UTC)

You were right about Colony of X categories - I have just been through the Sup Court of Tas & Qld adding them to the relevant Sup Ct category. In terms of category tree I agree with you about not having a separate category for current X. Subject to your views, what I am thinking is:

• Australian judges‎

• existing categories "Australian judges by century‎", "Lists of Australian judges‎" "Australian women judges" etc
• Australian judges by court

• all categories of judges current courts - "Judges of the High Court of Australia" etc
• Australian judges of abolished courts

• all categories of judges of abolished courts - eg "Judge Advocates of New South Wales‎"

• Australian judges by jurisdiction

• Australian judges of federal courts
• Australian Judges of X state

• Colony of X judges

"Judges by court" would be a simple matter. "Judges by jurisdiction" would probably require some automated process to make it workable, so lower priority. There is probably some level of detail that I have skipped over. As lawyas, happy to hear your views. Find bruce (talk) 02:38, 5 March 2019 (UTC)

Thanks for all your ongoing work sorting out this category tree. That magistrates category looks very small even after that recategorising - I find it hard to believe we've only got 16 articles on magistrates across all of Australian history! The Drover's Wife (talk) 00:54, 8 March 2019 (UTC)

Like you I thought the number would be higher - it is probably an underpopulated category so I will try searching for more. (Edit: the Australian Dictionary of Biography lists 406 magistrates which would make them notable per WP:ANYBIO)

Speaking of magistrates, I noticed that list of ACT magistrates includes a bunch of stubs recently created, of which Margaret Hunter (jurist) has been nominated for deletion. I am still looking to see whether she is notable & would be interested if you wanted to contribute to that discussion. Find bruce (talk) 23:24, 14 March 2019 (UTC)

Request on 22:06:31, 5 March 2019 for assistance on AfC submission by Lak2017

• Lak2017 (talk · contribs)
  • Draft:The Conspiracy of 3 (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)

Lak2017 (talk) 22:06, 5 March 2019 (UTC)

David Risstrom

Hi, I don't mean to edit war with you and won't revert further, but my main concern with the material was that the sources don't actually support what is being referenced to them (that Labor's preferencing is the reason Risstrom failed to be elected, or that this was controversial). The first element of this seems odd given that the Greens have managed to get Senators elected in their own right, so a strong reference is needed to support the implication that the ALP somehow let Risstrom down (did they break an agreement with the Greens to help him get up, for instance?). Regards, Nick-D (talk) 05:10, 8 March 2019 (UTC)

your absence is felt

so few active knowledgable eds left in oz - have break - but please return! JarrahTree 00:44, 21 March 2019 (UTC) I can understand why you have had enough - thanks for what you have done JarrahTree 23:12, 21 March 2019 (UTC)

For services to New South Wales Heritage

	Barnstar of National Merit
	You have rolled out many hundreds of articles! Thank you! Kerry (talk) 07:32, 21 March 2019 (UTC)

Precious

Australian content

Thank you for quality articles on Australian people, places and politics, such as June van de Klashorst, Freshwater Creek, Victoria and Electoral district of Bayswater, neatly organized on your user page, for service from 2012, for reviewing articles for creation, for turning women blue, - you are an awesome Wikipedian!

we miss you! --Gerda Arendt (talk) 21:15, 21 March 2019 (UTC)

:(

It's already a desert without you. Thank you for all you have done and I hope you're doing something less stressful and more fun. Frickeg (talk) 11:35, 28 March 2019 (UTC)

RRR

The Drover's Wife.

No not the revert rule, but Rest, Recouperate and Return. Do not stay away too long.

Regards. Aoziwe (talk) 12:40, 3 April 2019 (UTC)

Senate article

What was the issue with that edit of mine you just reverted on Members_of_the_Australian_Senate,_2016–2019? Oz freediver (talk) 23:33, 5 May 2019 (UTC)