User talk:Shiftchange/Archive 1
Welcome to Wikipedia!
Thanks for your work on Azalea. The article looks much more professional now. Keep up the good work! – Quadell (talk) (help)[[]] 11:52, Oct 2, 2004 (UTC)
Umbrella tree
Hi Shiftchange - the page Umbrella tree had (by confusion of the same name being used for several different plants) become very mixed up, with more than one species mixed. I've moved the details to Umbrella magnolia (the species to which the scientific name given applies; an American species, not Australian) and changed Umbrella tree to a disambig page. If you let me know which one your 'umbrella tree' referred to, I'll paste your original text (sitting in the page history of Umbrella magnolia) into the relevant new page. My guess is you'd intended Schefflera actinophylla (which fits with the Australian distribution you gave), but I can't be certain. - MPF 12:33, 28 Nov 2004 (UTC)
Energy Development and Hubbert's Peak Theory
There is a little storm brewing at Hubbert peak concerning, well, many things. But currently concerning how to organize information concerning future development of energy schemes (phrased as "Oil Alternatives" or "Future energy development" depending on whom you ask). As you might guess, Hubbert Peak is an article that might be expected to draw a lot of public interest and heat; Energy development is not. We could use your input regarding how to proceed. Visit Talk:Hubbert Peak to contribute. Thanks for your consideration. Tom - Talk 21:06, Dec 15, 2004 (UTC)
Queen Mary Falls
According to the Queensland Parks and Wildlife service, Queen Mary Falls are part of the Main Range National Park. I've added a mention in that article. You might like to expand that rather than make a new article. I think all of the National Parks in Australia already have an article, and the lists of protected areas in each state are complete, too. --Scott Davis Talk 11:00, 3 December 2005 (UTC)
Platycerium
Thanks for your thanks. I didn't understand why the pic was not moved elsewhere in the article. Best Wishes - Adrian Pingstone 21:26, 6 December 2005 (UTC)
- Hi Shiftchange
- Sorry for maybe not putting enough reason to the replacement. I thought that the zoom in wasn't that clear which is why I replaced it. Normally I would have put the picture somewhere else in the article, but I recently copped a lot of flack when I went to the Parliamentary Triangle page and added my photo (which I thought better than the existing one) and left the old one. So as a result of the argument I vowed to not saturated articles with images. I very sorry if I've hurt your feelings, and if are attached to the photo feel free to remove my photo altogether and I'll just put a little commons link at the bottom. --Fir0002 06:54, 7 December 2005 (UTC)
Question
Hello. I was wondeering if you could help me. I've noticed that you've edited articles on forms of government. What form of government would it be called of it was a dictatorship but rather then there being one dictator it is an agency. So for instance the CIA becoming the leaders of the United States rather than having just one person be the leader. If your wondering why I need to know, I am contributing to Mindbenders and you have to write a fictional article. Check it out. RENTASTRAWBERRY FOR LET? röck 01:04, 13 December 2005 (UTC)
Pollution article
hi shift, thanks for your contribution to the pollution article, this article needs a ton of work. you need to be more specific about how oil spread in the environment cases rashes. Do you mean people swim in water where oil is spilled and contract a rash? we need to set some priorities here. you may be correct but the far more serious outcome of an oil spill is the massive damage to aquafauna. i would challenge and welcome you to be part of this article. bring in results of your research and bring references too. best regards Anlace 01:03, 11 February 2006 (UTC)
Cossacks: European Wars
You recently nominated Cossacks: European Wars at Wikipedia:Computer and video games improvement drive. Unfortunately, this drive is inactive. I suggest you nominate the article at Wikipedia:Gaming Collaboration of the week instead. Pagrashtak 03:02, 22 February 2006 (UTC)
Userbox
I've replied on my talk page. JesseW, the juggling janitor 00:25, 24 February 2006 (UTC)
see the latest comments on the Talk:Environmental noise page. we may need a vote or final concensus on this merge idea, cheers Anlace 03:53, 5 March 2006 (UTC)
Brisbane Tasks
Hello Shiftchange. I appreciate the work that you have been doing on updating the Brisbane Tasks template. Some of the other Australian cities wikiprojcts (such as Sydney, Canberra, Adelaide, Perth, and Melbourne) seem to have a mix of red and blue links on the list of tasks. I think it gives an impression that there is more activity at those wikiprojects and that some of the articles listed actually get worked on. Because While I know that some of the articles on the Brisbane tsks list have been created (because it is on my watchlist), I worry that to a random visitor it might just appear to be a daunting list of red links. Removing them quickly also means that interested editors such as myself can't see what articles have been created recently and can't go and look at them and contribute to them. I think that keeping some blue in there makes it look like there has been some activity and may encourage people to get involved in the project and contribute to recently created articles. I also worry that the template may have a few too many links in it. Perhaps it might be better to leave some blue links in there for a while and reduce the clutter a little bit by leaving some of them on a talk page like they do at Template talk:WikiProjectMelbourneTasks. Could we try this approach for a while?
- Thanks for the reply. Having had another look, I agree that it doesn't look particularly cluttered, and it does appear well organised. The only thing I would add though is that I don't think 'tasks' should necessarily only include articles that need creating. I think it would be useful to leave stubs that need to be turned into short articles on the list. I think that many editors find it easier to contribute to a stub once it's created rather than starting from scratch. I'm happy for you or I to post a message on the Brisbane Project talk page to see what others think.
- Another think I have been thinking about is that people seem to be working on Brisbane related articles with out others necessarily knowing where the activity is. I wonder whether a 'recent activity' notice board might be useful in focusing people onto common projects. This could just be a 'Recent Activity' section on the project talk page. - What do you think? Any other ideas you might have on how to stimulate some activity on the project would be great. -- Adz|talk 03:58, 26 March 2006 (UTC)
- I created the list of tasks not so much as a simple 'to do' list but as a way of trying to focus people's efforts and to generate some activity. I think just about any article benefits from the input of more than one editor. I was going to create a 'recent activity' section so I'll do that. I think your idea of rotating things through sounds good like a good way of keeping momentum going, but I think that it needs some sustained activity to work. The priority tasks idea sound like a good one though. The WikiProject Canberra went through a frenzy of activity last year where they had a 'workup' to turn the Canberra article into a featured article. (It was on the front page on Friday). They then followed up with a frenzy of activity on History of the Australian Capital Territory and Walter Burley Griffin. I think all the activity encouraged more people to join in the project. That's the sort of thing I would like to try to achieve with the Brisbane WikiProject. I think using the project talk page encourages people to keep an eye on what's going on, so it'd be good if people were encouraged to use that page for discussing various things . Anyway, thanks for the suggestions and for your work. I'll try to keep plugging away when I have time. -- Adz|talk 11:44, 27 March 2006 (UTC)
George Bush
I just want you to know that most Americans now (about 70%) do NOT approve of this moron. I am one of them - for many of the reasons you describe. molly bloom 05:34, 15 May 2006 (UTC)
Image:MtBarney.jpg
Hi. I updated the image tag to PD-user as the PD tag is deprecated. Also, could you update the description page to include a date and what direction the photo was taken from or the mountain face in view? I would like to include this in the caption for Mount Barney. Thanks. RedWolf 17:05, 1 June 2006 (UTC)
Great Barrier Reef peer review?
Hi Shiftchange, I noticed that you've made some good edits to Great Barrier Reef. I've recently put the article up for peer review. I hope that you'll participate! - Malkinann 04:49, 9 June 2006 (UTC)
History of Australia is new ACOTF
Hi, you voted for the History of Australia series as Australian Collaboration of the fortnight. It has been selected, so please contribute in any way you can. Thankyou. --Scott Davis Talk 00:52, 3 July 2006 (UTC)
Image:Wollomombi Falls.jpg
Hey there. Nice picture of the falls, would you mind putting in the discussion page for it some details about when you took it... it looks like the dry spell is really taking it's toll on the falls, I remember them running much better in the mid '90's but never took any photos. The article would be done justice by a photo taken when there is actually a bit of water running! --Garrie 23:11, 17 July 2006 (UTC)
Disambiguation pages
Hi, Shiftchange,
I'm currently working on cleaning up references to the Development disambiguation page, and noticed that you've linked to it in the Resource depletion article. I've fixed the link; but wanted to make you aware of what disambiguation is and how to avoid it. The best thing to do would be to go read about it here: Wikipedia:Disambiguation. Please test the links you create in articles and be sure they don't point toward disambiguation pages. Thanks! Chidom 09:55, 23 July 2006 (UTC)
Sydney Mardi Gras
I'm afraid we can't use those pictures on Wikipedia, for two reasons, one policy and one technical.
Licensing policy: Both pictures are licensed under a CC-ND "No Derivatives" license, which is acceptable on Wikinews due to the brief lifespan of their stories and their own licensing policy. However, as we intend everything on Wikipedia to be freely reusable by others, we do not allow "non-commercial only" or "no derivatives" licenses. If the copyright holder is willing to change the license to CC-BY ("attribution required"), CC-SA ("share-alike", deriviatives must remain free), or both, CC-BY-SA, we'd be more than happy to have them here. (They could also use the GFDL license or release it into the public domain, but for Flickr users sticking with Creative Commons licenses is probably simplest.) See Wikipedia:Image use policy and Wikipedia:Image copyright tags and Wikipedia:Requesting copyright permission for more info.
Technical issues: Wikinews and the English Wikipedia (indeed, all the language versions of all the projects) are contained in separate databases, so they can't link directly to each other's photos. To solve that, a picture with a free license can be uploaded to the Wikimedia Commons database, which is especially set up to allow all the Wikimedia sister projects to use images stored there. However, they won't accept CC-ND images. So if you can get the contributor to change the license, then the technical issue can be solved by uploading the images to Commons and you'll be able to link them here.
Hope that's not too muddy, — Catherine\talk 01:15, 30 September 2006 (UTC)
Mountain height reference
It would be great to have more info on the heights. There seems to be a lot of differences of opinion on the net about some of the heights, even when looking at what one would expect to to reliable sources. You can get an email to me on my user page... --Bcsr4ever 09:09, 7 November 2006 (UTC)