User talk:Bjenks

Proposed deletion of Tim Johnston, businessman

A proposed deletion template has been added to the article Tim Johnston, businessman, suggesting that it be deleted according to the proposed deletion process because of the following concern:

no assertion of notability independent of the organisation.

All contributions are appreciated, but this article may not satisfy Wikipedia's criteria for inclusion, and the deletion notice should explain why (see also "What Wikipedia is not" and Wikipedia's deletion policy). You may prevent the proposed deletion by removing the {{dated prod}} notice, but please explain why you disagree with the proposed deletion in your edit summary or on its talk page.

Please consider improving the article to address the issues raised because, even though removing the deletion notice will prevent deletion through the proposed deletion process, the article may still be deleted if it matches any of the speedy deletion criteria or it can be sent to Articles for Deletion, where it may be deleted if consensus to delete is reached. Ironholds (talk) 03:40, 14 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Reply: I have to say I resent the application of a delete proposal only 7 minutes after I created the article as a stub. As a result, my very first revision encountered an edit conflict! Be that as it may, I will not be contesting the deletion. I am not the sole judge, nor even a significant judge of notability in WP :). Cheers Bjenks (talk) 04:01, 14 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

95%

I didn't really care too much, i just got annoyed that someone was cite tagging something that I knew to be true and wasn't contentious, so i did a quick google. Feel free to get a better ref if you so wish :) Timeshift (talk) 06:50, 14 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

The Queen

I would never put Prime Minster Tony Blair but always Tony Blair the Prime Minister [of Great Britain] because it is not a title but a job description. Why do you use capitals for Regicide but not for the King? I put capital in there because we are not talking about any old king but using it as a shortening of a full name and title King Charles I, King Charles II or whatever. In the case of the Commissioners, we are not talking about any old bunch of commissioners who topped a king, but to "the Parliamentary Commissioners who topped the King" which are the ~~subjects~~ Objects^{Less confusing ;-)} of the article. I think that this article would look strange if it used a lowercase queen but kept uppercase "Prince Philip". As to this specific article, I have used capitals in a similar way to that used by Kirby, a major source, notice he writes "execution of a king is a remarkable event in the history of any nation" but uses King when referring to "the King" and "Commissioners" when referring to "the [Parliamentary] Commissioners" --PBS (talk) 08:21, 14 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

FYI, I was wrong about where the advise on intermediate citations is. It is not in WP:V but in the WP:CITE guideline see WP:CITE#SAYWHEREYOUGOTIT. --PBS (talk) 11:54, 14 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

What I meant by title is I find it ironic that the US constitution has the clause "No title of nobility shall be granted by the United States..." yet they use the job description Senator and President in a way similar to the way noble titles are used in the UK "President Obama", "Senator Kennedy", "Ex President Carter" and many American sources do the same with the job description Prime Minister, "Prime Minster Brown".[1] It is next to never done in the UK for jobs like that of the Prime Minster and is seen as an Americanism. --PBS (talk) 19:02, 14 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Dorothy

Knew her quite well due to a range of things - good to see youre doing something on her Satu Suro 06:43, 19 May 2009 (UTC) More I think of it a long coffee/other varieties is overdue - at your leisure - sometime - I think we might have known a few in common over the years :) Satu Suro 01:47, 20 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

who?

I never made any contributions to "My Classic Car". A.B. Moon (talk) 23:26, 13 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Kerr

I replied on my Talk page (I prefer to keep discussions in one place, if that's OK). Peter Ballard (talk) 06:07, 3 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I have replied

Replied here. Pdfpdf (talk) 12:04, 3 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Didn't get around to replying (TAFE work :|) - thanks for the nice note on my talk page. I redid my edit, not modifying yours otherwise. Orderinchaos 23:49, 9 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Orthographies and dyslexia Merged to Dyslexia research

I have reverted your merger, which completely went against the consensus of the Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Orthographies and dyslexia. The discussion regarding this article takes place on the Talk:Orthographies and dyslexia including editors from other disciplines who are trying to develop this article and waht happens to this article is not the result of discussions on Talk:Orthography.

The members of the Wikipedia:WikiProject Dyslexia are always open to discuss a wide range of issues regarding the whole new series of dyslexia project sub articles and their future development, especially with multi-discipline editors from other areas of specialist knowledge that relates to the greater understanding of dyslexia, and help us explain the some of the basics of the specialist area which we need to include in our articles to explain the wider issues to those interested in dyslexia especially these who have dyslexia and are trying to discover a better understanding of their problems. dolfrog (talk) 09:15, 26 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Technical question

Hi. I'm puzzled. Why is File:Jamoe.jpg black & white, but File:Combe.jpg sepia? Cheers, Pdfpdf (talk) 13:19, 30 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I shot the original group on Tri-X (b/w film) for a local paper. Years later I made a (digital) sepia version from a scanned print. For Combe, I may have edited a cropped version just to make it look better. Someone else edited this Jamoe crop. I can't check my files right now, being overseas for a few weeks. Cheers, Bjenks (talk) 07:05, 4 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Is it my imagination, or is the cropped photo "grainier" than the original? Pdfpdf (talk) 11:19, 5 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]

More on Combe photo

Yes, these two edits (1 & 2) are an improvement - perhaps I should have put the comments on the talk page in the first place. Thanks, Pdfpdf (talk) 11:00, 5 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Gareth Evans

Please Excuse me if this is not the place to talk about Gareth Evans. I have just concluded referencing a number of needs citation on this page to do with Evans' involvement with East Timor and Indonesia. Please don't delete the item on Evan's failed attempt at the Secretary General's position until you have read the speech by John Pilger, I have cited. Please, please help us. Having known Gareth Evans (since 1986) as I do he may just make another run at a later time. This information which is already on the public record may make a difference. 219.133.65.222 (talk) 05:41, 15 October 2009 (UTC) Dilidoug[reply]

OK, No--best talk about Gareth Evans on the relevant Talk page. I've reposted your request there. Cheers Bjenks (talk) 15:08, 17 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Raffles Hotel, Perth

Have started the article with all the early history (have to go through and insert references) but have only got up to the time of redevelopment. Dan arndt (talk) 01:43, 27 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Combe

http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:David_Combe&curid=20207528&diff=324088336&oldid=324065376

Oh dear. I don't want to get involved in a "How many angels on the head of a pin?" discussion.
What was there, was there for a reason, and served a purpose.
Your reasons are probably quite justifiable, but really, I have no interest in arguing about it.
I have been quite supportive of your POV, no doubt because, largely, it matches mine.
However, if you are going to get fussy, I'm just going to piss off and leave you to it.
Never-the-less, I'd like it noted that, to date, I've enjoyed working with you, and wish you well.
Cheers, Pdfpdf (talk) 15:10, 5 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I was just looking at the issues and had no idea any of that was your stuff, or anyone else's. I really can't see it as "fussy" to ditch unhelpful citations. Just sorry I seem to have hurt your feelings. Nothing of the sort was intended. Cheers Bjenks (talk) 15:19, 5 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Double "Oh dear"! No, you haven't "hurt my feelings". It's late. I'll write a less ambiguous reply when it's daylight, saying more definitively what I'm reacting to. (Obviously, I didn't think the quotes were "unhelpful" ... ) But I don't really see that this is a matter to get "twisted nickers" about, and I apologise for making it sound otherwise. The poorly stated point I was unsuccessfully trying to make was ... Well I'll perhaps drop it, or make it at another time. In the meantime, Sorry to have made a fuss. Cheers, Pdfpdf (talk) 15:44, 5 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Florence

No no, I don't mean promoting tourism, I mean to include a section on tourism. Since Florence is one of the world's greatest art capitals, it is suprising that the article is so short! The section gives people a brief way to know the museums of the city. I think it's good and helpful

What I think would be useful to the article is a total re-write of the page to make it similar or an exact translated version of the Italian version. I know everyone says wikipedia is about quality not quantity, but I'm not keen on having a page of one of the world's most important cultural centres being under 80,000 bytes (I aim for it to be around 100-110,000 bytes, like the Italian version)

However, I disagree with your 'duplication' story. You say that there are three Boboli Garden sections (in your message), however, I see only one, the one I created. Anyway, the Italian wiki is just like that

Please reply as soon as possible

--Theologiae (talk) 13:55, 20 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Ok, I agree in a way...

Yes, but I'm not being now too radical about the Florence article. When I mean it needs a total re-write, I don't mean to cancel the whole article and start again, since that would be highly selfish. I mean to totelly re-write the landmarks/culture section, not deleting info, but carrying some extra info from the Italian wiki. Also, I know what you mean by Italians giving an overly enthusiastic and colloquial spin to their articles, however some of the 'promotional' info included in the Italian version which I have translated has been slightly neutralized. Anyway, good work and cheers! Please reply as soon as possible!--Theologiae (talk) 17:51, 20 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Yes brief and prose, but also detailed...

Yes, I agree, prose should be used, but info should not be deleted. Just put lists into prose. Also, I agree with you that encyclopedia articles have to be quick, but also detailed and long (simple english is used for a brief summary of the topic), since wikpedia is a serious encyclopaedia, not a quick and simply easy-to read holiday brochure. Cheers--Theologiae (talk) 20:24, 20 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Studebaker

You asked about my recent Studebaker edits, and I should warn you that the information I included was only a VERY minor part of what is a long and convoluted story, gleaned from years of studying numerous books on Studebaker's history, as well as newspapers and magazines published around the time Studebaker closed the South Bend factories in 1963-64.

The purchase of Studebaker's General Products Division by Kaiser Jeep Corporation happened in the summer of 1964, largely through the work of then-Congressman John Brademas, who represented South Bend and the surrounding area for many years.

The "Committee of 100," a group of businessmen and civic leaders in South Bend, sought to find a "savior," if you will, a large employer or more than one, indeed, to take over the empty factories and, more importantly, utilize the great number of unemployed workers whom Studebaker had left behind.

At the time of Studebaker's closure, Brademas was aware that the company had two large government contracts, and he lobbied President Johnson and the Defense Department very hard to find a way to keep the contracts in South Bend. As a Congressman, Brademas also had a great many contacts in the business community, a resource which he would call upon in this instance.

This is where Kaiser Jeep Corporation comes in. A part of the empire of Henry J. Kaiser, known as the builder of Liberty ships and Hoover Dam, Kaiser Jeep was building civilian vehicles and numerous military and postal vehicles -- legacies of its 1953 buyout of Willys-Overland -- but the company needed additional manufacturing capacity, as the aging Jeep factories in Toledo, Ohio, couldn't meet demand.

Studebaker's comparatively modern (built for aircraft engine production during WWII) Chippewa Avenue plant, on the south side of South Bend, had abundant capacity. It also came with a product already in place that all but guaranteed fat profits for Kaiser: The Reo-designed 6x6 trucks that Studebaker had built off-and-on since the early '50s. The trucks were simple in design and simple to manufacture, as the tooling had long ago been paid for.

Kaiser brought several thousand workers back, although I've not been able to determine an exact number. Nor have I been able to determine how much Kaiser paid for the plants, but since it was considered a vital defense purchase by the Johnson administration, I would not be surprised to learn that it was subsidized by the U.S. government, at least to a point.

By 1969, Kaiser Jeep Corporation's Defense and Government Products Division, by this time based mainly in the South Bend facilities, was bringing in the largest portion of the company's profits. I've seen sources all over the map on this, but I believe the most credible estimates were 70% or more. In other words, if Kaiser hadn't purchased Studebaker's plant and put a large number of people back to work, Kaiser Jeep would have had several very lean years in the late '60s.

Indeed, domestic civilian vehicle sales of Jeeps (regular, pickup and Wagoneer models) had fallen off dramatically beginning in about 1966-67. Kaiser was losing interest. Around this time, American Motors executives approached Kaiser about buying the Jeep business, but were rebuffed.

In 1970, however, the Kaiser family decided the time had come at last to divest themselves of their automotive holdings, and AMC won the whole thing -- lock, stock and barrel.

The new General Products Division of American Motors Corporation, however, had one major problem. Kaiser really didn't distinguish it from the rest of Kaiser Jeep Corporation, despite its fancy title. Therefore, AMC really couldn't get much of a handle on how much profit or loss from the Jeep division actually came from government production!

To fix this problem, AMC split GPD off as a separate but wholly-owned subsidiary named -- you guessed it -- AM General Corporation.

The Humvee folks. Of course, that came later.

AM General, as you can read in its article, had to be sold in the early 1980s after Renault purchased controlling interest in AMC. At that time, the U.S. government would not allow foreign ownership of a defense contractor. I am not sure if that is still the case today.

I hope this clears up some things for you. If you have any other questions, please do let me know. —Preceding unsigned comment added by JNewkirk77 (talk • contribs) 08:40, 2 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I get what you're saying. I'll have to do some searching; if what I've added gets deleted before I can get what I'm looking for, I'll re-insert it as soon as I have what I need. It will take some time, as I'm disabled and no longer have the ability to quickly mobilize myself for travel to libraries where such info can be retrieved. JNewkirk77 (talk) 09:41, 3 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Les Murray and Les Murray

Good afternoon Bjenks!
Thank you for your message - most sincerely appreciated.
Mea culpa. I did not notice that user:203.16.173.17 had switched Murrays on 15 February 2008, in the edit immediately before I added the link to Ted Matthews on 15 March 2008. My only consolation is that all the subsequent editors also didn't notice.
In the circumstances I would think it only fair that you, who picked this up when so many others did not, should make and get the credit for the correction.
On a personal note, I think it's high time that Paul Kelly (no, not that Paul Kelly, and no, not that Paul Kelly} was recognised as an Australian Living Treasure... but that is, of course, for the National Trust to decide.
Thank you again, --Shirt58 (talk) 09:04, 11 December 2009 (UTC) (nb: no, not that Shirt 58)[reply]

Michal Morey

I used to have the book "For Rooks and Ravens:The Execution of Michal Morey of Arreton in 1737" years ago. It is more of a pamphlet and published by Isle of Wight Museum Publicatios- author K.S. Phillips. The IOW Museum contact details are; Guildhall, High Street,Newport, Isle of Wight, PO30 1TY, 01983 823366 Thank you very much for your appreciation. I'll have a look at improving it.--Streona (talk) 16:23, 22 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Paddy O'Brien

Ping. –Moondyne 04:27, 24 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Unreferenced BLPs

Hello Bjenks! Thank you for your contributions. I am a bot alerting you that 1 of the articles that you created is tagged as an Unreferenced Biography of a Living Person. The biographies of living persons policy requires that all personal or potentially controversial information be sourced. In addition, to insure verifiability, all biographies should be based on reliable sources. if you were to bring this article up to standards, it would greatly help us with the current 709 article backlog. Once the article is adequately referenced, please remove the {{unreferencedBLP}} tag. Here is the article:

Michael Macklin - Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL

Thanks!--DASHBot (talk) 19:53, 8 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Surveyor Generals Corner

Hello, officially there are now NO geographical names anywhere in Australia using the PA (some references can be wrong). This was the very last of the apostrophised Australian articles which I recently corrected, I just had to make sure the name was official before doing so - see [2]. So, if you ever see a road, street, hill, creek or any other such within Australia with an apostrophe in its name you may remove without further checking (unless a book title, quote or perhaps historical naming reference). Pity about the map on the article, but I will get that corrected shortly. Regards (Crusoe8181 (talk) 05:40, 12 February 2010 (UTC)).[reply]

Cynwyl Elfed

I think they could be talking about the same place. I can't find anything for Conwyl Efed, and another rail article, Carmarthen and Cardigan Railway names the location as Conwil. I have found these photos of a derelict station at Cynwyl Elfed, [3] and [4], though I'm finding it difficult to work out how such a small community got their own station. Maybe it was just en route? FruitMonkey (talk) 09:54, 28 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Democrats Howler

Upon reflection that mistake, unfortunately, is mine. My understanding when I made that edit, when the party was formed and he assumed the leadership of the party he was the member for Hotham. I do remember discovering the error and fixing, but obviously I only did it for one table, and not the other. I do assume you've correct the error? Paul ( Paul Roberton (talk)) 09:04, 2 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]