User talk:SimonLyall/archive2

"spam"

Hi Simon

I have a hobby site which contains a large number of CI postcard images, including early images of Alderney, and added a link to this site a few days ago. I note that you have edited this out, together with other similar links added to the Sark, Guernsey, and Jersey sections at the same time.

Could you please advise why you felt it necessary to do this? I know of other excellent Alderney-related sites, including one relating to the natural history of Alderney, which is maintained by another gentleman who has also strong links to the island: I was thinking of suggesting to him that he might also add a link to his site, as I did, for the benefit of those interested. I can see no obvious reason why (say) the "States of Alderney" or "Alderney Tourism" links, which are essentially commercial, should be allowed in while a link to my postcard site, which is a labour of love and a gift to that part of the community which is interested, should be excluded. The postcard images are all out of copyright and the text content of my pages is entirely my own.

An insight into your thinking would be greatly appreciated. I understood, perhaps incorrectly, that this was a collaborative exercise: While I accept that this necessary implies that any contributor can remove any other contributor's content, I would expect that the power to do so would not be exercised in an arbitrary way.

I look forward to your reply.

The way I see things is that for a link to be kept then the questions "Is this one of the top half dozen sites about Alderney?" (or whereever) has to be "yes". I don't really think your site qualifies as such for any of the articles you put links from especially "New Zealand" where I first saw it. It doesn't matter if the sites are commercial or not. If you link to your site from a more "postcardy" article then it might be on better footing. The links are there to enhance the article. An link to a site on the "natural history of Alderney" is much more likely to be accepted attached to the main Alderney article, actually it would prbably push a couple of the current ones off the bottom. - SimonLyall 10:18, 12 January 2006 (UTC)

I fail to see why space or stratafication is the measurement for judgement on the rightful existence of links, while the head of wiki had expoused a flatter society. My understanding is that we should be more impressed by what people do than their credentials ie letters after their name, but as usual I stand to be corrected. I think editors have too much time on their hands with the surgical knife, and that there is HUGE opportunity to go building and fixing broken sites without being bulls in china shops. This is a new age of anyone can edit at any time, and discussion on the talk pages is supossed to be where it takes place before unilateral action. I suggest that the links are restored, and the people best placed to judge their merit have discussed their existence and formed a consensus. But then what do i know about anything...moza 08:52, 8 March 2006 (UTC)

All Blacks choking comment - Thanks for reverting

Hey bro, Thanks for changing the comments back to original on the All Blacks page. I was getting so sick the number of people changing it back to the chokers tag.

So cheers Lummie 06:12, 21 January 2006 (UTC)

A question...

Hi Simon - I keep noticing you doing a lot of anti-vandalism work (most recently, the anon "Welsh mountain railway" edits to Dunedin and Invercargill). I know you don't do as much editing on Wikipedia as a lot of other people, but it seems to me that admin tools would be useful to you - have you ever considered standing for RFA? If you like, I'd gladly nominate you... Grutness...wha? 22:49, 20 February 2006 (UTC)

I thought about it a while back but I'd prefer to keep my wikipedia involvement casual for now. If I am an Admin then I would have to put in a lot more work whereas right now I don't feel too guilty if I miss a few days or leave a stub for a few months. Thanks for the offer though, I might change my mind again further down the track. - SimonLyall 08:05, 21 February 2006 (UTC)

Fair enough. if you change your mind, drop me a note :) Grutness...wha? 08:44, 21 February 2006 (UTC)

cleaning my page

thanks Simon, I never originated that link, and you are correct, and I would very much appreciate any further edits such as that that you make, I overlooked stuff in my transfers. yeah roger the comments on usenet. I think i'll start a blog on my authentic .org page. Paul Moss 02:01, 26 February 2006 (UTC)

I deleted the re-direct and placed a prod notice on both holding articles, that seems to be the correct path, otherwise it would wait another 5 days after decision time.. and then only if nobody objected.. moza 14:55, 28 February 2006 (UTC)

Ichthys

I realise that this is an anonymous user (on a proxy) but my recent edit to Ichthys wasn't vandalism, although I'll readily accept that what I added was incorrect if that's the case. 82.198.250.72 10:53, 27 February 2006 (UTC)

Hongi Hika

Hi Simon. A few days ago I removed Hongi Hika from the Māori category, assuming it was covered by Māori people, but today noticed your comment in the log about the article also applying to a place. I can’t find this from a quick skim of the article. Can we leave it out the category or create a section for the place name? Barefootguru 04:40, 3 March 2006 (UTC)

I think my comment was cut. I should have been "place in Maori history" or something like that. A bit like how the article is in the NZ history catagory as well. - SimonLyall 05:16, 3 March 2006 (UTC)

Oh, OK. Still best left out of the Māori category I think, but we can discuss on the talk page if you want… Barefootguru 06:32, 3 March 2006 (UTC)

Year in New Zealand

I hope you're planning on going back and fixing up these articles. I understand why you created them all at once with only boilerplate text, but at the moment they are completely inaccurate. The Government and Opposition Leaders have a number of inappropriate items, and some of the music, film and sporting awards don't go back as far as you seem to imply. I'm surprised that you link to Tui award winners 1923 for example; not only were the Tui awards not around then, but I thought the idea was to incorporate some of these small pages for music awards into the year in New Zealand articles.-gadfium 18:55, 3 March 2006 (UTC)

Yep, I was planning on going back and starting the work. Currently the only different between any of them is the year numbers and the "head of state" (this might be wrong in the early 1950s, and 1900 - 1902). This weekend I planned to edit most and update the basic government details (parliment, mayors, GG, etc) and maybe cut out some extra sections. But obviously there is a lot more additional work on top of that. - SimonLyall 23:07, 3 March 2006 (UTC)

someone might use them to wag the tail of the tiger... how tedious that would be, dont worry its certainly not gonna be me. But i know of a vandal from another city that has done it previously. I cant remember who and why anymore but a lot of pages got threatened with removal for insufficient and/or inaccurate information, otherwise i would be creating several series myself. I'm waiting for when i have enough time to create and defend them. moza 09:00, 8 March 2006 (UTC)

Need any help in going back and fixing some up? I might start this weekend and do some governments Brian | (Talk) 09:19, 8 March 2006 (UTC)

Wouldn't mind any real help. I found last weekend it was easier to do one fact on each year rather than fully update a year with several details. At least as far as things like Mayors and the like go. Feel free to update bits you want to do. I was going to concentrate mostly on 1950 onwards. - SimonLyall 09:48, 8 March 2006 (UTC)

theres a lot of untrue spam content in the 1925 and related articles. why stop at 1925, what about back to Cook or Tasman, or Kupe. you have supported non-spam views in the past, how come different rules exist for differnet users. we see the good intent, but it defies the generally accepted behaviour in this environment, that I have been exposed to. consensus would suggest that the pages are at least TRUE at time of creation. FFS!!! triple J hot 100? look its one of the best radio stations on the planet, but FM didnt exist as an entertainment medium in nz prior to the early 80's, and in Australia, a short period before that. It certainly cannot travel across the Tasman except under extremely rare conditions, that i have never heard of actually happening specifically to that station and transmission path. I was immersed in professional radio communications in the 60's and 70's and the internet didn't transport radio stations for a long time after I built an internet in Sydney in 1986/7/8. YES i got the dates correct, it was Racal Guardall encrypted internet over 1200 baud leased lines, beginning with 5 nodes, expanding to about 50 by the time i walked away, with a target of 200 nationally, for the first client. verifiable, but not to you, its secure information and requires appropriate clearance. yeah I am an iceberg with not much sticking out. A more positive approach would evoke a more positive collaborative effort all around. oh and for the record i was the first to technically investigate the highest value crime ever in Australasia, possibly top ten for the planet. verifiable but i choose not to, mostly for reasons of national security, but also a point of honour, a resource in short supply in this place. Yes i am still unhappy about my callous treatment, but thats another issue. I am prepared to help as well, but not yet. If i wrote a bot that created articles for every airstrip/facilty in nz, would you help? or would you afd it rather than transwikify it in some way. This encyclopedia exists because of NEW possibilities EMERGING, often AFTER the fact, and that excites the IMAGINATION of many, and powers the surge toward the widespread individual and collective goals. a small plea for incusionism i guess, but perhaps some faith and positivity, allowing or assisting articles to EVOLVE into their acceptable form, rather than, if in doubt cut it out.. or I dont like it, i'll remove it, or that doesnt comply with my interpretation of the rules/policy so i'll just kill it dead before it can take shape. Hope is often more appropriate than belief, and I too, hope that we can put all the history under the bridge and find some common joy in what we do. That to me transcends even wikipedia, its a spirit of community, spreading out to encompass all humans.

just so people know what we are referring to: 1925_in_New_Zealand

1925_in_New_Zealand

===Music===

See: 1925 in music , Triple J Hottest 100, 1925 , New Zealand Top 50 Albums of 1925 , Tui award winners 1925 , ARIA Music Awards of 1925 ,

moza

I hate to nag, but the last edit you made to the "19xx in New Zealand articles" was in mid-March. Some of these articles are an embarrassment at the moment. You don't appear to have them on your watchlist, so I direct your attention to Talk:1901 in New Zealand.-gadfium 04:55, 8 April 2006 (UTC)

I was checking Special:Recentchangeslinked/Category:Years_in_New_Zealand but this doesn't seem to show up talk pages, I've added them all to my watchlist directly now. Things are a little busy so I've not had time to fix most of them up and I was tending to concentrate on post-1950 years. - SimonLyall 07:11, 8 April 2006 (UTC)

Yes, unfortunately Recentchangeslinked doesn't apply to talk pages unless they are explicitly linked to. I appreciate you have a huge task ahead of you, and I'd help if I wasn't snowed under with University work at the moment. I'll keep the pages on my watchlist anyway, just so we can get a reasonably quick response to any vandalism.-gadfium 08:49, 8 April 2006 (UTC)

yes and not my shoe size... lol. just checking your quality process and you passed 100%. I'll help with the year pages when my work load and circumstances allow, but i thought a little fun was in order after reading gadfiums note. At least my edit was true and verifiable, but how ironic that that doesnt count in this environment, or dont you see that. I find that in itself to be enormously curious. My google responses and ALEXA are rising, and of course i'm gonna publish a book and a record.... just as well there is life outside wiki dont ya think. Incidentally, being in touch with my inner child is a highly rewarding way to spend a life, that is finite in length, with the world arould extolling the virtues of "growing up". meanwhile, chillin on a sat nite..moza 12:49, 8 April 2006 (UTC)

[1950_in_New_Zealand] I do think that I deserve an explanation as to how you can edit my TRUE fact added to 1951 when you have left your FALSE facts in 1950. that to me indicates a very distorted sense of justice, priority, lack of loyalty, etc etc.. WTF? is THAT about. Open and honest fun is to be stamped on immediately but massive false information is to be left for weeks? Now i might be childish but thats downright weird, in my POV of course. I want to have good faith, but that kinda makes it hard. I figured you were busy and I was tolerating the false "spam" info on all those articles, but now the only logic is that you dont even know its there. Maybe i will put an image of my passport on that page to verify that both 1951 and NZ actually exist. lol... and then more lols.moza 13:11, 8 April 2006 (UTC)

I think its a bit sad that you probably believe all that stuff that you wrote, but i would refer that you didnt communicate, like you said you wont, if thats all this is to you. Its still incredible that you can go to those articles and edit my true facts, and leave your false ones, after having it pointed out numerous times, and requested to clean them up by an admin. lets just stick to one point at a time.moza 15:08, 9 April 2006 (UTC)

Invercargill streets

My apologies, I didn't read the sentence properly.-gadfium 07:51, 8 March 2006 (UTC)

No worry, sorry if my edit comment seemed a little rough - SimonLyall 11:01, 8 March 2006 (UTC)

speedy delete and delete protocol etc

the KCC 2006 can be speedy deleted, any admin can do it if i clean the page and request it, th e rules are if no one else has edited it. Youre afd is a HUGE sledge hammer to crack a nut. I only just discovered the spam allegation and surrounding history of that supposed organisation. moza 09:05, 12 March 2006 (UTC)

If you submit a speedy delete then the AFD I've submitted won't block it. Are you going to do one for Scott L. Montgomery as well? - SimonLyall 09:09, 12 March 2006 (UTC)

whats wrong with Scott Montgomery? didnt he write enough books? or doesnt communication of science count? he claims it is AS important... is he a spam as well that i dont know about? the world is getting weird-er by the day.. he seemed to be fair to me.. I do look and listen here, and i am open to notification of such things, but i'm not going to participate in challenges until i'm ready. the future is open, and I'm moving house, so i'm taking care of priorities.. moza 09:37, 12 March 2006 (UTC)

Paul, a Speedy delete is different from a proposed delete which is what you did. Please read the pages to learn the difference and perhaps substitute a speedy delete nomination. Can you please update the Scott L. Montgomery page with a bit more information (cats perhaps)? He seems a sitting duck to fail the professor test. - SimonLyall 10:26, 12 March 2006 (UTC)

You sir

Take this Wikipedia thing way too seriously.--Matt von Furrie 05:54, 16 March 2006 (UTC)

You mean the Year in NZ stuff? It's just something needed to be done and doing it at the same time as the one million article gave me a chance to get my name in the paper. Of course now I've got 6 months of work cleaning up the articles ahead of me. - SimonLyall 06:52, 16 March 2006 (UTC)

my sloppy edits, sorry

thanks for the positivity, I will commit to fixing my mess, its a bit hard to understand how it all works but i'll get there. I just started in last night to do some tidying and it went on endlessly for about 10 hours, trying to make it all work correctly. So yes i guess i'm just needing a little slack from time to time to sort it out. I very much appreciate the advice, please understand that, i just want a bit of moderation and of course i have to learn to give that as well.. the main thing is to improve it for the users. and yes i accept the minor edit switched on has made some lies out there, and i'll go and switch it off right now! I just forget to click it when i get to fatigue zone, which is often. I meant to say that i was thinking of building a hierachy of geographic boundaries for wiki, I built one about 3 years ago to understand GIS in NZ and will go looking for it. I need it to understand the category system as well for geographic articles. moza 07:28, 18 March 2006 (UTC)

You could have initiated the discussion yourself Simon

Hey Simon. I am a little worried by your edit to New Zealand where you removed an external link added by User: 202.49.134.74. Your edit summary suggested (1) discussing the addition of her website on the talk page and (2) stated you were not sure it makes the grade. Regarding (1), perhaps you could have initiated the discussion yourself. Regarding (2) you would need to outline why you think a website created by such an expert would not make the grade. I guess you mean relevance, not content. Yes? Moriori 08:11, 25 April 2006 (UTC)

The edit is my standard reply to people who add new links to the list, I've done it about 5 times in the last 500 edits from a quick count. I don't want to reject them out of hand so I suggest they discuss it on the talk page. Usually I leave "(2)" unsaid however. I looked at the page before I removed it, the actual information isn't that great, just paragraph each on a dozen topics plus a few links. Most of the time these ones are drive-by spammers who have no real interest in discussing if their link (ie their website) will actually improve the article. Hmm just looked at the other contibutions from that IP, I think I made the right decission.

PS Going to come to the meetup? - SimonLyall 08:39, 25 April 2006 (UTC)

Well I think you are wrong in your approach (not necessarily wrong for removing it) but wrong for not setting out your objections for the editor to discuss. Just my five cents. And oh yes, at this stage I hope to make the Ellerslie meetup, health permitting. My body doesn't always want to do what my brain says it should do. Cheers. Moriori 09:04, 25 April 2006 (UTC)

1900 NZ births and deaths

Hi Simon - the dnzb site has an "advanced search" that lets you select decade of birth/decade of death. That simply lists the names of those who were born/died in a decade plus their years of birth and death. From there it was a case of going to each article to check the actual day. It was a bit of a slow job picking through the 300 or so 1900-1909 ones, but it did get a reasonable (if overly-thorough) list. There are definitely some that are essential in there that I wouldn't have thought of (Porritt, for instance). Grutness...wha? 10:26, 25 May 2006 (UTC)

re: Your Copyrightvio

Thanks, Did not know that! :)

All Blacks

Cheers. Dweller 10:29, 12 June 2006 (UTC)

Year in New Zealand #2

Simon, those boilerplate pages still bug me, and I bet a few others too. Can you come up with a very basic boilerplate to replace the text on all of those pages (the ones without entries so far. It should be prominent and say something simple like Check 1907 in New Zealand for guidance on style. I've produced that page as a guide. Moriori 08:52, 18 June 2006 (UTC)

Wikipedia:Meetup/Auckland

Thanks for the writeup: great summary of the discussion. And no, you didn't talk too much—or if you did, then I did too! GeorgeStepanek\^talk 08:22, 25 June 2006 (UTC)

Good point about the photo. I've updated the tag to make it clear that I took the photo and have made it public domain. -- Avenue 08:45, 25 June 2006 (UTC)

Thanks for updating that, I'm not actually sure who has copyright but if both of us release it's pretty safe. - SimonLyall 09:23, 26 June 2006 (UTC)

Did you by any chance end up with the pen I was using in the pub? I've put an advert up for it at Wikipedia talk:Meetup/Auckland.-gadfium 08:43, 26 June 2006 (UTC)

Yes I have the pen, we found it afterwards. Suggested way to get it back to you? - SimonLyall 09:23, 26 June 2006 (UTC)

We have both pen and blank labels. If you put your house number here, I'll drop it off at some point. I remember the street name (Just to check, it is the one that starts with E and is off Dom Rd - right?) Linnah 09:31, 26 June 2006 (UTC)

Wonderful, thank you. You remember my street correctly, I'm at number 9.-gadfium 09:41, 26 June 2006 (UTC)

Auckland climate

You're right, that sort of thing does need some citations. I recall reading that the maximum Auckland temperature ever recorded was 32°C, although it was a while ago that I read it. I'll have a look around. -- Avenue 10:22, 27 July 2006 (UTC)

USB hubs

Hi. If you think what I added shouldn't be there, please remove it. I just thought it was usefull to know. Also, I didn't put it there again, I only added it once. I must have been someone else who put it there before. Sorry for the confusion. Do what you think is best. Laurence 1

Your edits on USB flash drive

I noticed that you made so many edits on USB flash drive one after the other, you might want to try the preview button, I some times get the same problem that you might have when it is all perfect, checked but something is just missed, you still might just want to use it just one mroe time each edit just to be safe. --Adam1213 Talk + 12:46, 1 August 2006 (UTC)

I have split the edits a little since I don't like to make huge changes to a large article all at once, better to fix one thing at a time so I can make it tidy and others can follow what I am doing. Especially the case where I don't know everything about the article and are going though it section by section. - SimonLyall 11:35, 2 August 2006 (UTC)

Mini cleanup Feedback

Also on Talk:USB flash drive

Removing brand names was needed, however it would be good if they are put onto another page with a link. [1]

However "512s are almost the same price as smaller models" needs citation, does not appear to be factual, 2-4 gigs are pretty common, is not true. [2]. All your edits before the last one were good. In this case the many edits you made spliting it up were useful. --Adam1213 Talk + 12:31, 7 August 2006 (UTC)

Thanks forthe link

Will keep it in mind. I did not start out with any plan -just started editing the Ratana page and one thing led to another.. Herne nz 08:56, 16 August 2006 (UTC)

Re: Bad Blood (1981 film)

While some of the material was copied, I was actually in the process of editing this and writing my own version, based on the site you mentioned above and various other websites. There was a lot of material too that was not copied, and I find it disheartening and frustrating that you have removed the majority of the article - I spent a lot of time learning how to format the article correctly etc only to have you remove it, for what I believe to be a uninformed judgement. Perhaps you could have added a tag or suggested to me personally that the copyrighted material needed to be removed. Jnimmo 11:00, 23 August 2006 (UTC)

Aussie Rules in New Zealand

Considering NZ's size I think 500+ senior players and 15,000+ junior players warrants a mention, albeit a small one. The New Zealand Falcons were the winners of the 2005 International Cup and third in 2002. If nothing else, expand your sports section and mention it - on the main page.

The sports section is already pretty big. It is pretty obvious the Aussie rules (at least for now) is a much smaller sport in NZ than the likes of Hockey, Golf, League, Running, Cricket, Netball, Tennis, Bowls, Union, Basketball, Soccer, Softball. In most of those NZ has won the world champs at least once or had world champions. The best place to discuss it is the talk page for the main NZ article. But I seriously think the sport is currently too small for now - SimonLyall 09:57, 31 October 2006 (UTC)

Plagiarism report

As I tried to make clear in the article, it was a plagiarism report, not a copyright report. I can't link to it because the site it's on is blacklisted; the site used to be set up to redirect requests coming from Wikipedia so they landed on a different site (whether that's still the case I don't know, since I can't check). --Michael Snow 17:07, 31 October 2006 (UTC)

Okay found it at www.wikipedia-watch.org/psamples.html . I think a just publishing the URL not as a link would work since if people had to cut-and-paste it in it would set off and redirects based on source. Sorry about being a little sloppy on plagiarism vs copyright . - SimonLyall 20:16, 31 October 2006 (UTC)

Re:Latest entry on Wikipedia:New articles (New Zealand)

FWIW, I nearly AFD'd it myself! :) Grutness...wha? 08:37, 4 November 2006 (UTC)

"photo spam"

Hi Simon,

I see you were very quick at removing a link I added this morning regarding New Zealand photos, a link I added after feeling compelled to share the hundreds of photos depicting NZ's stunning beauty with others.

It's fine if you believe the link is seriously spam. But how can you judge this if all you did was take a look at only one page of my photos website?

I appreciate the fact you are moderating this article on New Zealand closely. But from what I read in this discussion thread, you seem to be a little too restrictive. Surely this goes against what Wikipedia stands for.

Alex

Scott Peterson

Hi thanks for your help on the article. But at this point I am trying to keep the section you cut, that is, the psuedo-screen shot. If you can get a real screen shot, I consider removing the section you cut. As such, and as I've pointed out, it's diffcult to convince people that the point of trivia exists. Thanks, and of course, mediation should help resolve this last point. --meatclerk 17:22, 5 November 2006 (UTC)

Re:Deletion sorting NZ

Just a small comment - if your last edit summary was aimed at my putting the Kahui artiocle there I did note it in my edit summary, but I did a minor edit after that to fix a link (see [3]). Grutness...wha? 11:22, 16 November 2006 (UTC)

No, not aimed at you at or or anyone else specificly (or I would have said on the person's talk page). Just a general thing to remind people. I can easily go 24 hours between wikip reads if I am running late in the morning. Perhaps closed RFDs could be moved to a closed section for a few days. - SimonLyall 11:35, 16 November 2006 (UTC)

Fair enough - I thought I'd ask since mine was the previous edit and was simply marked as minor with no edit summary. BTW, FWIW the article on me that someone else decided to put into article space was deleted (vote was 4-2). Bit of a relief in a way, but sad in others :) Grutness...wha? 11:42, 16 November 2006 (UTC)

Image:7797DonBrash.jpg

I have removed this from the Don Brash page since it appears that Par Services copyright will not allow us to use it. See Template talk:NZCrownCopyright . I am working on some solutions in this area - SimonLyall 03:22, 25 November 2006 (UTC)

Oh, whoops. That was my very thorough search of the we cannot use part... but can't get to the legal notices page. Is there one? If there is no page do we just assume that we cannot use it? That old Don Brash pic is shocking, really doesn't look like him now...--Taitey 00:46, 27 November 2006 (UTC)

Ive got an email in the cycle asing them for an update to their notice, it's being forwarded via the webmaster person. If there is not page then it has to be assumed to be under very restrictive copyright sorry. Working on a Don Brash photo, gotan address to email - SimonLyall 09:20, 27 November 2006 (UTC)

Spelling

Thanks for the update. I will try to keep that in mind when I edit from now on. Thanks a lot. Tcpekin 03:39, 30 November 2006 (UTC)

Re - Photo Gallery Links

Hi Simon, I thought the links I placed were to galleries that were not overtly commercial, unlike many of the remaining links on the same pages. Additionally they were to galleries that give a far better idea of places (i.e. over 1000 images of Dunedin) compared to the very mediocre photo galleries that you have let remain on virtually every article.

I certainly think the articles benefit a lot more by the links I provided compared to some of the remaining ones (whose pictures have either no captions at all, or totally irrelevant ones that add nothing). I realise there are a large number of photo sites on the internet, but 99.9% of them have little of relevance to to articles I linked to. Take Getty for example (the worlds most dominant photo library) and check their Dunedin selection. Every link I placed was to a gallery that had a large coverage of the topic - including aerial overviews of every region linked to.

Surely if you are going to remove links to photo galleries, you should not just remove the ones that have high quality, accurately captioned images, with an in depth coverage of the topic - you should also remove the ones that are poorly captioned, with low quality images, with little coverage of the subject. Did you even check them against the existing links at all?

I don't know of any commercial photo buyers who would ever go to wikipedia to look for images. However our website is used all the time by schools and students as one of the best resources of images of the areas we cover. We put a lot of effort into accurately captioning and keywording our images - more time than we do taking them.

So I beleive the few links I added would have benefited the articles and added to the total sum of knowledge - far more than virtually every one of the photo gallery links on the very same pages that you didn't remove. Cheers, David

Re: New NZ related articles

Whoops, sorry about that. I did wonder if there was a running list of new articles somewhere. Anyway, I've added the stubbs I've created to the list and stuck the page on my watch list :) Thanks, Malathos 18:02, 16 December 2006 (UTC)

Ivan Mauger

Thanks for adding more info to his page. --Pontsticill 17:44, 20 December 2006 (UTC)

Meetup

Any objection to my inviting former user Konstable to the meetup, once the details are finalised? I have his email address. He's an active user at Citizendium. I feel that Citizendium editors have enough in common with Wikipedia editors that the meetup should include both. It is not my intention that the meetup discuss the circumstances of his leaving Wikipedia.-gadfium 04:11, 29 December 2006 (UTC)

Should be no problem and provide some interest. We might also get some of the people from The Maori Wikipedia to come especially in light of things like this which looks interesting. I'll see if I can post an invite there once we are finalised - SimonLyall 04:18, 29 December 2006 (UTC)

All Blacks article

Hi, was wondering if you could take a look at All Blacks and give some feedback on the article, particularly the lead section. Thanks. - Shudda ^talk 05:11, 31 December 2006 (UTC)

Jubilee Locos

Simon. Point taken. I have deleted the entries. Peter I. Vardy 13:01, 31 December 2006 (UTC)