User talk:VirtualSteve

	Archives
	1 2 3 4 5

This talk page is automatically archived by Werdnabot. Any sections older than 7 days are automatically archived to User talk:VirtualSteve/Archive5. Sections without timestamps are not archived.

* * * * * * * * * * * * * Except in the case of very short responses I will normally reply to your posts here and copy to your talk page.
^{Please be polite,assume good faith & no personal attacks. Please sign and date your posts by typing four tildes (~~~~).}

Please leave a new message.

VirtualSteve - Wikipedian since November 16, 2005.

Wagga Wagga

Hi Steve, my thoughts on the Wagga Wagga article are at Talk:Wagga Wagga, New South Wales. What do you think? --Mattinbgn/^talk 11:58, 24 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks, it is starting to look like a half decent article now. I think the headings inside the media section can be removed now. Good to see you have the 5 O'Clock wave section trimmed down a bit too and made a start on referencing the history section. - Mattinbgn/^talk 11:10, 26 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Go the mighty lions! From an old Fitzroy fan. -- Mattinbgn/^talk 08:26, 27 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I hope you enjoyed the game on Saturday, it must have been a great game to watch even if the Blues lost. I have taken some time to pause on the Wagga Wagga article at the moment. I have some thoughts going forward and will add them to the talk page shortly. The one thing that would be handy is a copy of that History of Wagga by S. Morris. I am in Wagga for work on Wednesday and will see if I can pick one up somewhere. Cheers, Mattinbgn/^talk 22:23, 29 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Game was brilliant (even despite the ending) with 35 goals kicked. Worth the trip. Good call on Wagga, other than cosmetic changes (if any) I will wait for your thoughts. I will also try to pick up Sherry's book if possible. Regards --VS ^talk 22:28, 29 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Good morning to you, VS. I think the templated refs are better to use as then style of referencing is consistent throughout the article. They can be compressed up after entry so it looks a little clearer when editing, and if I get time this morning I will do just that. Off to Wagga Wagga today for a conference/training, on WorkChoices no less, and if I have time and my fellow conference attendees from here are willing to wait while I do so, I will grab a copy today. Cheers, Mattinbgn/^talk 22:04, 1 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Fair enough. I will use same system (but already compressed version). - Happy travelling. Oh BTW many copies of the book available at City Library - walk in the door and go all the way to the far end of the shelves - literally the last one on the back wall and you will find them in a snap.--VS ^talk 22:15, 1 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Got the book during the lunch break today, it was exactly where you said it would be which saved me a bit of time so thanks for that. I will try and do a bit of history work on Thurs and Fri, unfortunately real life will intrude tonight. -- Mattinbgn/^talk 07:43, 2 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Ashfield

Thanks for your comments on Ashfield, New South Wales. It will take me a little while to change the formatting of all the references as you have suggested, but when I have I'll let you know. I would appreciate your further assessment. Crico 21:54, 25 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

That will be fine Crico - just let me know when you are ready and I will reassess.--VS ^talk 22:08, 25 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Question: How does we know the residents of Ashfield 'like the architecture'? Please can you ensure that a direct reference is provided to the source of this assertion. It would also be good to have a direct reference regarding the accommodation preferences and numbers of 'transient residents'.Eyedubya 04:20, 26 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

That architecture quote predates my contributions. I have tried to keep as much of other people's contributions as possible but I'm happy to change anything if wiser heads advise. That's partly why I'm looking for assessment and advice now. Of course, I won't blame all the articles problems on former contributors. The accommodation and transient part is mine. No hiding there. The info is from the ABS. I'll get a specific reference. Crico 05:34, 26 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Crico at best Eyedubya is being cheeky - he has enough work to do in his own articles. At worst he is being rude using my talk page as his soapbox - I am going to assume that his edits are the former under WP:AGF but my discussions with you are private on this page and if he wants to discuss with you your edits then he should do so your talk page. (PS Keep up the good work on raising the standard of the Ashfield page).--VS ^talk 06:04, 26 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

:) Sorry, about being on the wrong page, I though we were all on the same page? Consistency is implicit in the concept of policies in the first place. Moreover, I'm genuinely interested in the answer to the question about Ashfield's residents' preferences more than anything else. I'll watch that page from now on - is there a way of knowing who's keeping a watch on what, or whom for that matter? Eyedubya 06:54, 26 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

No need to be sorry unless you do it again. If you want to discuss these things then it is correct to move away from private discussions between two editors and move your question to the article's talk page - sometimes that won't help but in many cases an editor interested in the topic (and hopefully the one that did the editing in the first place will respond). In terms of watching who and what - heck I can't answer that otherwise I will be exterminated .... (no seriously you can watch anything you want by adding it to your watchlist but be warned that's a great way of going absolutely insane) best to watch your own area of interest, build up some decent editing and learn the 'rules' as you go.--VS ^talk 07:17, 26 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I have changed the formatting of references and fixed the image problem on Ashfield, New South Wales. I would appreciate your further comments if you're still happy to do so. Crico 13:12, 30 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for your message. I should be able to get to it later today (this afternoon).--VS ^talk 21:57, 30 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Spam links

If the business's claim to notability rests on the shoulders of the attack and an argument with the local council, it is definitely not notable. Those articles (the Leader, the Age) would be available online through Factiva. Also, interesting, I just noticed that the source cited in the article is from Takver.com and according to his user page, is Tirin's own site. That is really unacceptable as referencing and adds to the feeling of spam wrt that article. Actually, we're currently hosting 79 outbound links to Takver's site. [1] That is going to have to be looked at as WP:RS, WP:V#SELF and SPAM. *sigh* Sarah 22:17, 26 April 2007 (UTC) P.S Steve, no, unfortunately I didn't make it to the breakfast meeting with Jimmy. I just couldn't drag myself out at that time. :( Sarah 22:17, 26 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for the information regarding this [2] - I am going to go through each one next week. Any special rules/considerations I should know about?--VS ^talk 22:29, 26 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Thankyou for pointing out that conflct of interest. I don't mind abiding by it henceforth. takver.com is my site and there is a large amount of source material there, some researched and written by myself, but most of it researched and written by others which I host on my site. This includes at least four books (at least one only available by internet) and many pamphlets. I have put in links from wikipedia articles to my own site where the source material was highly relevant. I note that many other editors have also inserted links to my site, and quite possibly they outnumber the links I have inserted. I have no problem in a review of all these links, but I believe such review should be impartial and judged as to their relevancy to each article. I do not think you should undertake this review. Can we perhaps decide on another Australian admin willing to do this?--Takver 07:45, 27 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Fair question. I do not mind at all who does the review - but I hasten to add I actually have not done a review myself either - except for two or three articles which declare themselves as SPAM because they were presented as links within the body of the article placed not as a reference but as a direct link to your website.
For all the others I have set them up - fairly - so that you and others can review the inclusion or otherwise. To see this in action please go to those articles you will see I have as is required temporarily removed the link and then set up a discussion area on the talk page. In my view if you discuss the addition of references to your site for any given article (in a way that meets WP:SPAM guidelines) then they are free to go in.
However IMHO the great majority of your links are problematic in the way that they refer to eg: an author and a book - which is of course fine but rather than giving us an ISBN as the reference your or someone leads us back to your site.
I should also add that I have tagged a couple of articles which with respect do not meet inclusion criteria except for the reference to your own page which you added as the initial editor - in other words there are no other references but yours.
To conclude I hope that you understand I have no problem with your website at all nor in fact those articles to eg: poets and the like except that they must be referenced to third parties, excluding of your own site except where absolutely such a reference does not display a conflict of interest--VS ^talk 07:59, 27 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Wow! Thanks Steve! I certainly wasn't expecting you to start going through them yourself. You have no idea what a nice surprise it was to come online and today and read that you had checked them 70% of them already. :) I was going to continue on but I wasn't sure where you were up to when you stopped. :/ Thanks Steve and I hope you had/have a good time at the footy. :) Cheers mate, Sarah 09:03, 28 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Sarah, thanks for your return message, I appreciate your words of encouragement. Footy trip was good - game was exciting with 35 goals kicked. In relation to self-references what I did was to go down the list and remove the self reference for 70% of article inclusion as a reference, with a suuitbale message at the edit summary, then leave a discussion point on the talk page. I also removed totally 3 links which were simply spam links in the content of the article. As you know I informed Tirin. He took it politely (probably even well) and I note that he has gone through to make discussion comments. Examples are Talk:Sydney Push, Talk:Friendly society, Talk:William Holman, and here - Talk:History of Freemasonry where another editor altogether has addressed the situation. Perhaps if you have a moment you could look at what's left as I'm sure I may have missed a few others?--VS ^talk 22:05, 29 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for the info VS. I had a quick look and it looks like you've applied the policies perfectly. :) I think I'm going to have to get to work on that application to give you more work and get yelled at and abused a lot!! Anyway, I have to go offline shortly, just a fleeting visit tonight, but I'll try to have a closer look through those pages in the next day or so. By the way, I'm glad you enjoyed your footy trip. I'm afraid that Harrison is feeling a little outnumbered on the footy front and is trying (no hope, of course) to convert me to NRL! Take care Mr S, Sarah 11:55, 30 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Gregadoo, New South Wales

Hi Steve,

Do you think this article needs to be added to {{Riverina}} -- Cheers, Mattinbgn/^talk 10:49, 27 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

This was a bit hard to call - Gregadoo is the site of the tip for Wagga - but on reflection and using the same parameters as we have previously discussed my answer is yes - Gregadoo is a village location that should be on Riverina.--VS ^talk 22:11, 29 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

DYK

On 28 April, 2007, Did you know? was updated with a fact from the article Andrew Rochford, which you created or substantially expanded. If you know of another interesting fact from a recently created article, then please suggest it on the "Did you know?" talk page.

--Carabinieri 11:11, 28 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Not a problem. By the way, I know "how hard is this?" sounds quite harsh, but I came up with it, and now a couple of other editors are using it - we hope it might spread to farther corners of Wikipedia. Still, I hope it didn't upset you too much. Biruitorul 17:41, 29 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

No No nothing about your edit summary upset me at all - that's one of the benefits of DYK's - lots of other editors looking at them. Cheers!--VS ^talk 22:07, 29 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Climate of Australia is the new ACOTF

Climate of Australia is the new Australian collaboration. Please help to improve it in any way you can. --Scott Davis ^Talk 10:56, 29 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Union Stock Yards GA

	Wikipedia:WikiProject Chicago/Chicago Collaboration of the Week
Midway International Airport is the current Chicago COTW You were a contributing editor to Union Stock Yards during its tenure as CHICOTW. It has successfully achieved Good article status thanks in part to your efforts. See its GA review and help us raise it towards the featured article classification level. Recall that during its tenure as CHICOTW we achieved this Improvement. See our CHICOTW Improvement History. Note our good articles.
Contributing editors:AKeen, ChicagoPimp, Howcheng, SmackBot, Speciate, TonyTheTiger, VirtualSteve.
	Good Article

TonyTheTiger (talk/cont/bio) 21:42, 29 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

DYK

On 29 April, 2007, Did you know? was updated with a fact from the article a feather in your cap, which you created or substantially expanded. If you know of another interesting fact from a recently created article, then please suggest it on the "Did you know?" talk page.

--Carabinieri 23:26, 29 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Wikibreak

Hi Steve, I am going on a Wikibreak for a week or two because of my moving and ISP change effective of tomorrow. Thanks Harrison-HB4026 04:59, 30 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for informing me Harrison - hope all goes well with the move. Cheers--VS ^talk 05:04, 30 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Sure. Thanks Harrison-HB4026 05:06, 30 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Cats

Hi I have been slowly trawling the australia project (and others) and its marvelous zoo of categories - and tonight I found - Category talk:Australian Egyptologists - and I sort of did a double take. I am wondering to myself after the unknown number of cats that I have tagged for a range of projects - um - is that what I was meant to be doing? I mean no one has ventured to question my tagging (maybe no one is watching) but for any category I usually do WP Australia class=NA - and now I find list? I must say it makes one feel uneasy after the numbers that I have done to think there might another way of looking at a category tag - but I would hesitate on the side of hysteria - or to go ape and take my frustration out on fellow wa prject talk and gmail that maybe the great projct to tag all oz cats was using the wrong item? I hope you are wrong for my sake :) I would really appreciate a good humoured response on this - I am bald and grey anyway - it just feels all a bit whiter at the moment. I would suggest that you try WP Australia class=NA for category discussion pages. Or perhaps any clues from any samples of other projects where alternative devices such as list - is actually used - and maybe we need to keep talking... sigh Satu Suro 13:29, 1 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Ahmm - I'm trying to think this one through. Firstly you are correct and what scant hairs remain are safe for now). Two possibilities - I was up late and someone spiked my drink/s or (actually this is more likely to be the truth) assessment was a glitch in using script from Outriggr in the first few trials that got past me - as I was trying the script out to see how we could get rid of that damn big list of unaccessed articles. However that ~~list~~ category has since been fixed and thank you for trawling. Stay Sane!!!--VS ^talk 13:42, 1 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Re Stay Sane!!! (in spike milligan voice) - never! Thanks for the response - but I am thinking that there might be the very rare occasions where a category is indeed most honourably full of lists - and that would be in that case of no particcular worry and indeed ok. Also some projects (i think I see glimmers of this when I creep into the back door of the singapore project) seem to have lists as NA items - I have not done that for the tagging here in oz or over in the indonesia project but i have seen things about that somewhere) hey the potential dog jokes are accumulating as I wander the discussion pages of some very odd categories (thinking of spiking drinks - there is indeed a drinking category that I might let out for walkies sometime - it might need a shot or be shot I am not sure which) - my late father was a vet and I have a pekinese skeleton in the next room maybe it needs to get photod or my user page hehehh cough um - thanks again cheers and until we meet again in the fascinating terrain of the dog and cats :| Satu Suro 13:52, 1 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Thought process? getoff it - its cat tagging - another dimension of wandering through the collective insanity of australian editors for however many years this project has been going- nah - not a single thought i suspect :| Satu Suro 13:57, 1 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

There are some days ones that need to be hallowed as the epitome of something uniquely australian, crazy and well, unique. Tonights is Category:Huts in Australia, bless their draughts, spiders and mud floors - cheers Satu Suro 14:02, 1 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Wagga map

Hi Steve, the only one I could find was the one already on Wynyard - I've zoomed it in to this. Doesnt have much detail so might not be usable. I'll let you know if I come across anything better. --Astrokey44 22:28, 1 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks Astrokey - this one might still be useful but if you find any other/s that would be brill.--VS ^talk 22:34, 1 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Sp VS is a meat whatever it is, of himself. isnt that parasitic?

Archives
1 2 3 4 5