User talk:Michellecrisp

Hi! I welcome comments and suggestions.

READ THIS FIRST: You may place valid comments here. However, I will ignore any comments from anonymous identities. Also note that if you place uncivil comments, they may be retained for a later date as evidence.

Please click here to leave me a new message at the bottom of my talk page. Thanks.

Archives

Archived Contents

This page has archives. Sections older than 14 days may be automatically archived by .

Bexley

Hi, with regards to my edit to the article Bexley, the fictional location of New Old Melbourne Town is in Bexley. I felt that therefore it belongs in the pop culture section of the article.

Thankyou, Kingutd (talk) 02:35, 16 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

RMIT

Michelle, firstly I understand and respect your edits regarding the RMIT article. However, I do believe some of the content you removed is valid, even if it's not written in the correct (non-advertorial/unbias) language. As opposed to deleting it completely, perhaps rewording it in an appropriate language may be a better option for all. Also, one thing I don't understand is you reworking of the articles headings. I'm not a seasoned Wikipedian, so I'm curious as to why they were changed, since the edits regarding them weren't explained. Thanks! AshGreen (talk) 02:17, 07 May 2008 (AEST)

Thanks

Hi Michelle. Thanks for your reply and advice. I've edited the RMIT article with appropriate language, and I hope it's in accordance. If not, please advise me so, since I am eager to get it right for future articles. AshGreen (talk) 12:12, 07 May 2008 (AEST)

KLIA Operations and Infrastructures

Hi there. Good job for moving the section into a new page. However, please do a short summary on each section in the main article. Thanks! Jannisri (talk) 02:55, 5 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Brisbane Lions "Stats"

Hi! Have you read the article clearly enough for your explanation in your edit summary. This is what it says:

"Statistics. Long and sprawlinglists of statistics may be confusing to readers and reduce the readability and neatness of our articles. In addition, articles should contain sufficient explanatory text to put statistics within the article in their proper context for a general reader. In cases where this may be necessary, (e.g. Opinion polling for the United States presidential election, 2008), consider using infoboxes or tables to enhance the readability of lengthy data lists. "

Quite clearly these "stats" are not long and sprawling, they are neccessary to keep track of the club's progreess and give a much clearer idea on the club's progression (this is one of the main ideas of an encyclopaedia) and it's in a table; nice, neat and easy to read. So what is the problem with putting them on the page? Shaggy9872004 (talk) 06:26, 6 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Hi! I just received your message. I don't think (and neither does Wiki "there is no practical limit to the number of topics it can cover, or the total amount of content") that it shouldn't be there. The reason we need those things from 2005 onwards is because Brisbane is still a young club. It can handle that much information; further more we don't need to give ggraphs from 2001-2004 becuase we know they won the premiership. As for it being not in context - we can ezil move those graphs for them to be in context and it isn't easy to find that info on the internet (apart from the season articles for AFL which don't give easy to read info for Brisbane it self anyway). It is neccessary for this info to be displayed if there is need of it, at the moment, there is.Shaggy9872004 (talk) 06:59, 6 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

UPDATE: I've just tweaked and moved the tables. I hope we have afinal decision.--Shaggy9872004 (talk) 07:04, 6 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Brisbane meetup invitation

	Brisbane Meetup v t e Next: To be decided (watch) Last: Saturday 13 January 2018
See also: Australian events listed at Wikimedia.org.au (or on Facebook)

Hey there, you're invited to the second Brisbane Meetup. Please see the page at Wikipedia:Meetup/Brisbane/2 for more details. Hope to see you there!

Automated message delivered by Giggabot (stop!) to Wikipedians in Queensland and known Brisbaneites, at 03:59, 7 June 2008 (UTC).[reply]

Hey, thanks for adding yourself User:Giggy/Brisbaneites (and thanks for your contributions!)... just wondering if you have any date preferences for the meet (if you're interested)? giggy _(:O) 04:40, 7 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Vyner Brooke

I can count 5 sources. Counter-revolutionary (talk) 08:02, 12 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Geoffrey Edelsten

I was no longer watching the article and certainly had not referred back to his website since. Just re-added to my watchlist and admired the talk page. Our defence is definitely WP:V and WP:NOR. All facts ont eh public record and I can't see the identity fraud claim given the public record - nor sure what it is based on. Obviously some unpleasant memories for Edelsten brought up in that aticle but I don't think it breaches WP:BLP. Thanks for letting me know. Regards --Matilda ^talk 06:10, 13 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]
- Ah waded through to page 18. I knew there was a reason for remaining strictly pseudonymous! I am not sure how though he might proceed about Action will be taken to name and shame and if necessary legal proceedings will be instituted. I am prepared to stand by my edits. --Matilda ^talk 06:14, 13 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I have raised at WP:AWNB#Geoffrey Edelsten --Matilda ^talk 06:34, 13 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I've replied to the PDF in some depth at the article's talk page. I honestly can't see what Wiki can do to meet his concerns - nothing is unreferenced and the key facts are repeated over 100 times in the media. Orderinchaos 11:47, 13 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Suggest ignore Janus's stirrings--Matilda ^talk 10:46, 15 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

The professor

Yes, I was quite surprised to see my user name listed there. It's made me even more committed to ensure that the article remains balanced and tells the whole truth. I don't think the "threats" can be raised formally in WP unless he tries to edit under his own name. Stay vigilant! Best wishes, WWGB (talk) 06:14, 13 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

RE: Preston

Hey Michelle. Just a quick note to thank you for the little tidying up you've been doing on the Preston page. I've been checking it for a while but didn't know where to start he. doktorb _words^deeds 15:42, 15 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]