User talk:Aaroncrick

Userpage	Talk	Awards	Userboxes	Contribs	Aussie Weather [1]	Cricket [2]	Launceston [3]	Sandbox	Stories

edit navbar

Sydney

One time was a minor physical assault in George Street, the other was a stolen camera in Broadway. Orderinchaos 12:54, 6 June 2009 (UTC)

Nah Melbourne is great, never had a problem there. People are unexpectedly friendly for a city of its size and the public transport system, apart from the slowness of the trains, is really good. The CBD is well lit and you can walk just about anywhere freely, even at 1am. Perth - not a high crime place at all (my suburb is one of the lowest even in a Perth context, I can go out walking any time of the day or night and be completely safe) but I've noticed in recent years people about have become quite unfriendly and have no idea whatsoever where they are walking or going, and Murphy's Law tends to dictate it'll be between you and where you want to go :) Orderinchaos 15:12, 6 June 2009 (UTC)

Welcome to WikiProject Netherlands

Hi Aaroncrick, welcome to WikiProject Netherlands for Netherlands-related content on Wikipedia!

• Follow the general discussion on Wikipedia Talk:WikiProject Netherlands (watch it)
• Create, improve, and assess articles, see Wikipedia:WikiProject_Netherlands#What you can do
• Associate articles related to the Netherlands by adding {{WikiProject Netherlands|class=}} to their talk pages

If you have any questions related to the project, feel free to ask them. Rubenescio (talk) 08:19, 7 June 2009 (UTC)

York Park GA review

How are you getting on with this article? I've been waiting for you to shout, as my next pass through will be the final one either way. But it is time we wrapped this up. --Philcha (talk) 06:33, 9 June 2009 (UTC)

I hope your search succeeds. However I expect to be unavailable for a few days from 20 June onwards, so we should wrap up the review before then. --Philcha (talk) 10:38, 9 June 2009 (UTC)

So long as "your" book has no editorial or financial input from you - otherwise it's WP:SPS and possibly WP:COI. Don't you just love Teh Roolz :-) --Philcha (talk) 10:59, 9 June 2009 (UTC)

I admire your determination in writing to Robert Groenewegen! Unfortunately his letter is not a published source, so can't be cited. The trouble is most people outside WP are unaware of WP:V, so you have to explain it, e.g. "To stop contributors from making things up or passing on urban myths, Wikipedia requires statements to be supported by references to published sources, usually articles or books, or the web sites of organisations that are known to be careful about getting the facts right." Perhaps you should try someone who isn't quite so close to it and doesn't have all the info in his / her head. How about the Examiner? You cite several of its articles, which is a small contribution to getting it more widely known, so they might be happy to help. --Philcha (talk) 07:41, 13 June 2009 (UTC)

I'm moving house on Friday 26 June, and may be off WP from 23 June to 3 July. We can try to finish the review before 23 June, continue after 3 July, or you can ask for someone else to take over the review - I shan't be offended. --Philcha (talk) 19:01, 18 June 2009 (UTC)

OK, leave me message when you're ready for me to resume. --Philcha (talk) 04:28, 20 June 2009 (UTC)

I don't think you need to mention naming rights explicitly - the name change and sponsorship (w/o "naming rights") are both sourced, and readers will draw the conclusion. --Philcha (talk) 06:23, 20 June 2009 (UTC)

Checked though main text again, flagged issues that need attention.

Also checked images, they're OK.

Remaining checks (lead, externa links, wikilinks) need to wait until main text all OK. --Philcha (talk) 07:08, 20 June 2009 (UTC)

Thanks, fix soon Aaroncrick^{(Tassie Boy talk)} 07:14, 20 June 2009 (UTC)

I'm back. Let me know when you're ready. --Philcha (talk) 12:13, 4 July 2009 (UTC)

The issues are unresolved:

• Statements not covered by citations. Read WP:V thoroughly.
• Some dubious English, including yet another "It's". I stronlgy suggest you get a friend who's good at written English to look it over onece you've dealt with the referencing issues.
• When you've done all that, check the lead:
  • It must summarise the most important points of the main text.
  • It must not contain any points not in the main text.

I'm formally placing this on hold - meaning you have 7 days. --Philcha (talk) 12:11, 6 July 2009 (UTC)

Don't template the regulars

What is this about? WP:DTTR. -- samj _in^out 11:14, 10 June 2009 (UTC)

Sorry didn't look at your userpage and because of your talkpage, I was under the assumption you were a newbie. Anyway saying "please Read The Fucking Manual (RTFM)" because I selected the wrong tag is not assuming good faith. Have a nice day ;) Aaroncrick^{(Tassie Boy talk)} 11:29, 10 June 2009 (UTC)

AFD

See my talk page YellowMonkey (cricket calendar poll!) 07:57, 11 June 2009 (UTC)

Am I missing something? What do you want me to see?? sorry Aaroncrick^{(Tassie Boy talk)} 08:07, 11 June 2009 (UTC)

You mean AFC? Aaroncrick^{(Tassie Boy talk)} 08:54, 11 June 2009 (UTC)

Brad Sugars

Not a problem, I have extensive experience in AfDs and a lot of arguments pop up again and again (the reason for the page listing them all). I thought it would be helpful for you to know the list as I can see this AfD getting a lot of attention and other editors would have pointed it out eventually. Darrenhusted (talk) 09:42, 11 June 2009 (UTC)

Shucks

I am sure there are some who feel good riddance what a relief :) - oh well its not to say that I wont drop in now and then - but there could be some very big gaps in time between edits drinks SatuSuro 05:05, 15 June 2009 (UTC)

York Park

On track? YellowMonkey (cricket calendar poll!) paid editing=POV 07:28, 16 June 2009 (UTC)

The crowd figure for Billy Graham event is quoted on page 1 of The Examiner issue - 18 March 1959. Read it at local library which has practically full set of paper on micro-film.

RossRSmith (talk) 14:41, 7 July 2009 (UTC)

June 2009

You currently appear to be engaged in an edit war according to the reverts you have made on Melbourne Airport. Note that the three-revert rule prohibits making more than three reversions on a single page within a 24 hour period. Additionally, users who perform a large number of reversions in content disputes may be blocked for edit warring, even if they do not technically violate the three-revert rule. If you continue, you may be blocked from editing. Please do not repeatedly revert edits, but use the talk page to work towards wording and content that gains a consensus among editors. If necessary, pursue dispute resolution. I know you are well aware of WP:3RR, and allow me to apologize for this crude template in advance. :) No matter how consensual the text is, don't continually revert back claiming consensus, especially if the other party is unresponsive. This can give the impression there is an edit war occuring. Leave a note about consensus on the IP's talk page, leave the edits made for a few days if needed, and only revert after consensus has been demonstrated. Sorry again for the template, I know this probably seems a bit condescending but it is in the interest of treating both sides equally. :| \ Backslash Forwardslash / {talk} 10:13, 16 June 2009 (UTC)

Oh so sorry completely slipped my mind. Just doing a bit of patrolling and saw vandalism on the page and have been reverting it. Didn't seem to notice it was the same IP each time. Yeah I know your just doing your job! ;) Sorry again, didn't even think about about what I was doing. Aaroncrick^{(Tassie Boy talk)} 10:20, 16 June 2009 (UTC)

Sure no problem. Just keep your eyes out next time. :) \ Backslash Forwardslash / {talk} 10:22, 16 June 2009 (UTC)

Yeah we aren't supposed to template people unless they don't know anything or are driveby spammers etc. Yeah I left Philip a manual comment as he's here to stay YellowMonkey (cricket calendar poll!) paid editing=POV 07:45, 18 June 2009 (UTC)

Teh FAR is legit, yes. YellowMonkey (cricket calendar poll!) paid editing=POV 05:22, 19 June 2009 (UTC)

Welcome

Thanks for the welcome - trying v hard to create pages that Wikipedia colleagues will be happy with regards Neil

Anments (talk) 10:02, 20 June 2009 (UTC)

No problem, keep up the good work on SS Chauncy Maples! Great to see it well referenced. Aaroncrick^{(Tassie Boy talk)} 10:03, 20 June 2009 (UTC)

Re: 50 Cent

Hmm, looks like it's been fixed actually! –Juliancolton | ^Talk 01:44, 21 June 2009 (UTC)

re User:MasterShake1000

No worries, thanks for thanking me! ;) Cirt (talk) 05:49, 21 June 2009 (UTC)

True, true. Cirt (talk) 05:53, 21 June 2009 (UTC)

User talk:John1abbes

Defamatory edits about living people only get one warning in my book and the edit to Joe Hockey was certainly that. If they continue and their edit history is mainly vandalism, then an indefinite block is the next step. No point pussy-footing around trolls. -- Mattinbgn\^talk 11:14, 23 June 2009 (UTC)

Talk:Michael Jackson#Wording: "Movie" versus "film"

Took it to there. Flyer22 (talk) 10:19, 28 June 2009 (UTC)

Alright, I'm not really fussed. Aaroncrick^{(Tassie Boy talk)} 10:25, 28 June 2009 (UTC)

LOL. No problem, and thanks for keeping an open mind for discussion about that. I, of course, also appreciate your changing your initial stance to agreeing with me.

I have to remember how fast that Michael Jackson talk page moves, though. I mean, whoa. Though edits to that article move fast as well. I just got back on Wikipedia this moment, and a new thread of sections is there; it is understandable, however, considering how many sections were there already when I made the above section. Flyer22 (talk) 17:51, 28 June 2009 (UTC)

Yeah it's going off at the moment. I wouldn't be surprised if there will be a lot of jargon added over the next couple of weeks. Aaroncrick^{(Tassie Boy talk)} 08:57, 29 June 2009 (UTC)

I'll check

They should be working. I'll check it up now. Aditya ^α _ß 09:47, 29 June 2009 (UTC)

Done (by the original author). Aditya ^α _ß 09:50, 29 June 2009 (UTC)

Thankyou. Aaroncrick^{(Tassie Boy talk)} 09:52, 29 June 2009 (UTC)

Woodfull

We don't know where the photo was taken. If it was UK, then it would still be copyright unless the photographer was an old man who died soon after in 1939. Also Abidreh is back can you keep an eye on him please YellowMonkey (cricket calendar poll!) paid editing=POV 08:20, 30 June 2009 (UTC)

I've run out of reverts on Behbudi. So has he, incidentally, he's done 4 YellowMonkey (cricket calendar poll!) paid editing=POV 08:32, 30 June 2009 (UTC)

Joel Selwood

Hey there,

Just thought I'd pitch in with a thanks for contributing to the Selwood article. Hopefully we can get it to a FA standard soon enough! Cheers, Boomtish (talk) 10:56, 30 June 2009 (UTC)

Yes, unfortunately WP:AFL seems way backward compared to AUS articles in CRIC despite it supposed to be more popular. Maybe an off-wiki recruitment campaign is needed YellowMonkey (cricket calendar poll!) paid editing=POV 07:00, 1 July 2009 (UTC)

Hawkins looks lucky to be a GA, and in general, there isn't any equivalent of Cricinfo or Swiminfo; a lot of those websites look questionable as RS. Also, yes, the use of "superstar" is used far too often in non-international sports. There are at least 50 players in the AFL who get such language used on them, especially the top 25 or so who get all-Australian. Imagine Krejza or Hauritz being labelled superstars lol. Only Ponting is among current Australian cricketers! YellowMonkey (cricket calendar poll!) paid editing=POV 07:29, 1 July 2009 (UTC)

And Ponting's form is giving me the shits... Hawkins is lucky to be in a side as good as Geelong. The only reason is that Geelong have a week forward link compared to their mids/defenders. Anyone with can review a GA. Some with very little edits review an art which they are a fan of and practically pass it without giving a good review like Philcha. Aaroncrick^{(Tassie Boy talk)} 07:36, 1 July 2009 (UTC)

Hi, it might be useful to look over previous reviews of the article before making edits. There are alot of edits being made over previous corrections to the article from the article's past 2 FAC reviews. Boomtish (talk) 07:10, 21 July 2009 (UTC)

I'm inclined to think that perhaps we should refrain from adding in information such as the Round 17 rematch to the article at this point in time. I understand the slight significance of it seeing Selwood achieve a career-high in disposals, but for stability-sake perhaps we should leave additions to the 2009 till at least the end of the regular season. For all we know, Selwood could achieve a new career-high next week, thereby making the Round 17 statement unnecessary. Boomtish (talk) 06:49, 5 August 2009 (UTC)

It's not a problem. Stability is about edit wars and things changing constantly. For a footballer it only changes once a week in routine types of ways and nothing non-normal has happened like a drugs/sex/racism scandal, defection/contract breaking, serious car crash etc that would change anything here. YellowMonkey (cricket photo poll!) paid editing=POV 06:58, 5 August 2009 (UTC)

York Park still rumbling.... YellowMonkey (cricket photo poll!) paid editing=POV 06:58, 5 August 2009 (UTC)

Cheers mate, thanks for the helpful editing along the way, really appreciated. Third time's the charm! Hopefully this is just the beginning of many more AFL articles. Good luck with any future articles Boomtish (talk) 11:24, 9 August 2009 (UTC)

The Great Wall of Launceston

Well may way of calling a levee but I'm just wondering if you have any photographs of it? I've got some photos of Wagga's (yet to be uploaded). Just would be good to have some Aussie levee's on Commons. Bidgee (talk) 12:40, 3 July 2009 (UTC)

No rush. Just thought I'll ask to see if you had any photos. :) Bidgee (talk) 13:17, 3 July 2009 (UTC)

Wagga's levee was built during the 1960's and I think it came over budget (From what I've read as it was before my time!) but this only protected Wagga Wagga itself and not the suburb (village back then) north of the Bidgee, North Wagga and the outer village of Gumly Gumly (in the Kyeamba Shire back then as it amalgamation with the City of Wagga Wagga and Mitchell Shire in 1981 which formed the Wagga Wagga City Council). The 1974 flood (10.74 m) showed some weakness within the levee (further work was done after the floods) but after the protests from North Wagga (back then the Council wanted to move the then village) which the residences put up a sign that "We shall not be moved" (Original sign has been removed or was damaged) a levee was built but on a smaller scale then other levee on the otherside of the river in 1991. Wagga is almost a twin of Launceston (although Launceston was founded about 40 years before Wagga and Launceston has double the population). Sorry to bore you with my mumbling! Bidgee (talk) 04:18, 4 July 2009 (UTC)

Roland Perry

Sure thing, if a Wikipedia user looks up Playboy writer to use as a source to prove how good a certain cricket writer is, then the user is probably the subject himself who kept news/mag cuttings of praise of himself in a folder. Who else would look up playboy and porn magazines to find out information about cricket history? And if the original motive was an interest in pornography, I doubt it would suddenly motivate them to look up and write a 100k cricket history article. Personally I also wonder what inside knowledge they would need to know the subject's university results. Who else would use and search for an ancient playboy magazine as a source. The user must know that a certain playboy magazine praised Perry, so it is probably Perry himself who kept a cutting of Playboy praising him. What kind of a cricket researcher would look up playboy for info? YellowMonkey (cricket calendar poll!) paid editing=POV 01:29, 7 July 2009 (UTC)

A little bird has informed the monkey that this editor's computer is in Melbourne YellowMonkey (cricket calendar poll!) paid editing=POV 02:18, 7 July 2009 (UTC)

Fixed the userpage YellowMonkey (cricket calendar poll!) paid editing=POV 05:08, 8 July 2009 (UTC)

Appalling gifting of wickets YellowMonkey (cricket calendar poll!) paid editing=POV 15:58, 8 July 2009 (UTC)

Pity the ABC

They left all the gooduns in Aus: Roebuck, Lawson and Kerry and instead we have Maxwell and Gillespie. Pity the lack of scholarly commentators, yes Skull is scholarly despite his style. Boycott's entertaining. We just need Bishen Bedi to complete the ideal sardonic and politically incorrect acerbic troupe. YellowMonkey (cricket calendar poll!) paid editing=POV 01:01, 9 July 2009 (UTC)

Kerry is a jet. Boycott and Chappell were on at one stage, lol! Aaroncrick^{(Tassie Boy talk)} 05:43, 9 July 2009 (UTC)

Oh, Brian popped onto Selwood YellowMonkey (cricket calendar poll!) paid editing=POV 06:43, 9 July 2009 (UTC)

I'll get on to Selwood as soon as possible (I'm trying to help solve the backlog problem at peer review, so time is scarce). I did some work on an Australian rugby league article a few months back Adelaide Rams but I've not tried Rules before. I'll do my best. Brianboulton (talk) 09:00, 9 July 2009 (UTC)

Replied about decayed FAs YellowMonkey (cricket calendar poll!) paid editing=POV 03:16, 10 July 2009 (UTC)

Launnie

Oh, I knew that, I was just reverting a bot because it screwed up a couple of things :) I knew you'd get around to it at some point. Orderinchaos 10:54, 10 July 2009 (UTC)

You have no idea how weird it got when 3/4 of the Queensland LGAs ceased to exist overnight on 15 March 2008 and the new ones didn't even have web pages yet. Or WA's own Department of Lands and Surveys / Department of Lands / Department of Land Information / Western Australian Land Information Authority / Landgate which changed name 4 times in 2 years and moved all its pages accordingly. The other annoying one is the Australian Electoral Commission who put their pages for the most recent election in one spot then move them overnight to another one and you literally have to guess the location as it's not linked initially from the front page. The joys of Wikimaintenance :P Orderinchaos 11:04, 10 July 2009 (UTC)

Yeah all the News Ltd papers do the same thing. If that ever happens, let me or someone with Factiva access know so we can get the actual paper cite so the ref can be maintained (although the link gets removed). If you have student access to a university computer system you may even have Factiva access yourself in the library's databases section. Orderinchaos 11:35, 10 July 2009 (UTC)

Selwood

I've copyedited down to the end of the "2009" section. I'm leaving a few notes on the PR page, for you to consider. Brianboulton (talk) 17:19, 10 July 2009 (UTC)

I've had a final readthrough, fixing a few no-break spaces on the way. I've also used "convert" templates in the lead for your height and weight measurements, to ensure accuracy. As to whether the article is ready for FAC, well, there is only one sure way of finding out! My own view is that the Personal Life section might still be considered somewhat trivial. However, I don't think there is anything in the article that couldn't be fixed during its FAC exposure. It's up to you if you feel ready for it. Brianboulton (talk) 23:38, 13 July 2009 (UTC)

Mashrafe Mortaza

Hi, I noticed your edits to the above article, most of all the final edit summary! I'm the one responsible for most of the article's content and it's maintenance so any pointers or help would be gratefully accepted, especially as it's the only article about a Bangladesh player that's of even a half-decent standard. I freely admit that when it comes to writing cricket articles I struggle with the amount of jargon – I find it much harder to avoid jargon than in any other type of article. Nev1 (talk) 17:17, 12 July 2009 (UTC)

Go ahead and edit away :-) Not many people are interested because Bangladesh are such minnows. Just look at articles on West Indies players and to a lesser extent New Zealand players to see how lack of success drains editors. Especially when compared to developed Australian and South African articles. If Bangladesh managed to cause an upset in Tests against someone like Australia I'm sure the Bangladesh player articles would receive a lot more attention from both WP:CRIC's regulars and new editors; I think that helped drive up the quality of a lot of South African articles. Not going to happen though, realistically. The article is at least pretty stable as Bangladesh haven't had much cricket recently. Nev1 (talk) 21:54, 12 July 2009 (UTC)

I like an underdog so I occasionally follow the Bangladesh national side, but I don't know who to support in this match! They have a lot of talent but none of the discipline to use it. Ashraful is the best example; his innovative shots in the inaugural T20 World Cup were captivating but he has consistently failed to produce runs when his team desperately need him too. Hasan may not be the most talented player, but he is disciplined and has got a lot of success from it. They're still an incredibly young side (I think the average age is about 22) and could mature if given the chance, but I fear that they may be exiled from Test cricket before that happens.

I like Mortaza, he's a whole hearted player and a real scrapper. He's the best pace bowler Bangladesh has, and I think he is a good bowler but can't handle the pressure (his performance in one match in the IPL showed that). So I'm not sure he's the best choice as captain. A victory against the West Indies would be hollow, but at a defeat would be catastrophic If anything I think a draw is most likely, and it would seem appropriate. Nev1 (talk) 22:07, 12 July 2009 (UTC)

Thanks very much. Don't work too hard though, "good enough" really is good enough and I don't see the point of trying to make an article about a current player a Featured Article. My point of view is that current players need their articles updating, and after a productive season the article should have changed so much that it can no longer be considered the article that was cleared to be FA. FAs on people such as Bradman and to some extent Gilchrist and Trescothick I can understand, but someone like Pietersen has a long career ahead of him and the article will undergo a lot of changes. Nev1 (talk) 23:02, 12 July 2009 (UTC)

Skull and Shakib

I'm pretty sure Skull implied that Shakib chucked YellowMonkey (cricket calendar poll!) paid editing=POV 02:44, 14 July 2009 (UTC)

Happy Bastille Day!

Dear fellow Wikipedian, on behalf of the Kindness campaign, I just want to wish you a Happy Bastille Day, whether you are French, Republican or not!  :) Happy Editing! Sincerely, --A Nobody^{My talk} 18:32, 14 July 2009 (UTC)

Thanks, Happy Happy Bastille Day to you as well. Aaroncrick (talk) 20:02, 14 July 2009 (UTC)

FAR

Another one... No limit YellowMonkey (cricket calendar poll!) paid editing=POV 07:09, 20 July 2009 (UTC)

I've got ten up lol. Ah, replied and done for selwood. Also, Perry is blocked, but for how long? I think I need a few more agreers on the talk page. When is YP going to finish? Philcha would be better off at FAC/FAR. Not much point making a minority of GAs better than most FAs YellowMonkey (cricket calendar poll!) paid editing=POV 07:28, 21 July 2009 (UTC)

Replied on ur talk. No problem with that :) At least something is happening with Vancouver. York Park is referenced better than City of Manchester Stadium though. Aaroncrick (talk) 07:39, 21 July 2009 (UTC)

York Park again

Updated Talk:York Park/GA3. I'm afraid I've just noticed a structure issue, but I think that's a fairly simple rearrangement. You've done a great job of getting good refs for this, and I think after a couple more checks (which need to wait until the content is stable) and making sure the lead summarises the content this will be a GA. --Philcha (talk) 05:56, 23 July 2009 (UTC)

Re FAC / FAR see Talk:Jim Baxter/GA1. I disagree with large chunks of MOS, and FAC interprets WP:RS too literally. WP:RS' assumption that certain management overheads confer reliability is generally false. It works OK in academic subjects, but only by coincidence. In computer games the big name mags have systemic weaknesses (tight deadlines; pressure from advertisers) that make them erratic sources, and the best blogs are more reliable, but you have to know the subject in order to identify them. Likewise in chess history a lot of the big names (mostly ex-players whose books sell well by chess standards) are seriously unreliable and most work by genuine chess historians is published via channels that WP:RS disdains. --Philcha (talk) 06:16, 23 July 2009 (UTC)

Yes, I think "History" shouldn't be the first section. Why is it notable now? --Philcha (talk) 06:44, 23 July 2009 (UTC)

All other stadium articles seem to have history first. but oh well, Aaroncrick (talk) 06:49, 23 July 2009 (UTC)

There's a strong tendency for editors to run on autopilot (nothing personal). For subjects entirely in the past, history is often the best start. But for subjects that are still live, as I reader I'd want to know why they're important to-day. --Philcha (talk) 06:52, 23 July 2009 (UTC)

The main text is all clear except for a few relatively new items that I've just found on a complete run-through. In addition I have a couple of comments about the lead. There are also a few links issues, and one check I could not run because of a tech hitch. Bottom line: these should be easy to fix, let's make it a real GA tomorrow, if you're around. --Philcha (talk) 18:37, 1 August 2009 (UTC)

It's a GA! Thanks for your determination to put on the map a ground and sport you obviously love. --Philcha (talk) 13:15, 7 August 2009 (UTC)

Just 1 DAB link and a couple of points in the lead to go, then it's a GA. --Philcha (talk) 11:39, 7 August 2009 (UTC)

Don Bradman

Re the para about his final Test average: The last sentence is messy and I've tidied it up without change of meaning. The comment that he was "bowled between bat and pad" is factually true but misleading since he stated (in Farewell to Cricket) that he got an inside edge - definitely worth mentioning. As for the story of his almost-100 average, it is the thing for which cricketers will remember him two hundred years from now, and I believe it is worth explaining a bit more fully - Wikipedia is read by more than cricket experts. So I've not reverted exactly, but I've made concise changes consistent with these comments. If you wish to revert, please would you (1) compare the two versions without consideration of their relative timing; (2) explain your reasoning? Many thanks - AG, Stockport, UK. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 86.53.69.150 (talk • contribs) 11:26, 23 July 2009 (UTC)

Gluebot

Hi Aarincrixk, it appear GlueBot is he vandal.. however by saying that against GlueBot who is effectively GOD, I may be banned for life by ClueBot. Johnreid09 (talk) 13:59, 26 July 2009 (UTC)

I can safely say you won't be blocked by Cluebot. Aaroncrick (talk) 05:43, 27 July 2009 (UTC)

Deleted and blocked YellowMonkey (cricket photo poll!) paid editing=POV 07:19, 27 July 2009 (UTC)

Australia-India relations: I think the cricket section might need its own article eventually. What do yo think. Also an eye is needed there for POV pushing YellowMonkey (cricket photo poll!) paid editing=POV 03:06, 30 July 2009 (UTC)

The whole sport section is on cricket so it may be justified. Aaroncrick (talk) 07:30, 30 July 2009 (UTC)

City of Clarence

Thanks for the feedback - and the reminder about City of Clarence. I have been away from editing for a while, and had meant to get back to that, but forgot about it. I will try to tidy up the referencing as you have suggested, and try to get it up to GA status. Regarding the Colony of Tasmania debate I seem to have started unintentionally, I also intend to try to improve the current Tasmania article as well as the Colony of Tasmania article. 42° South (talk) 15:02, 27 July 2009 (UTC)

Milburn

Yes I did see that article today, and I have even already added it as a reference to Milburn's article! It's going to be a useful referemce to expand Milburn's article further, as it's looking pretty dismal for a player who's played 250 games! Btw, good luck on your FA nomination of Selwood, I hope it passes! - Allied45 (talk) 03:23, 1 August 2009 (UTC)

Re

Replied on my talk. Orderinchaos 20:46, 6 August 2009 (UTC)

Congrats

Congratulations on the successful nomination of Joel Selwood as a FA! It's great to finally have an AFL FA, well done! - Allied45 (talk) 01:34, 9 August 2009 (UTC)

Good weekend for the project, firstly York Park and now Selwood. Aaroncrick (talk) 01:38, 9 August 2009 (UTC)

Well, good job for both of you, and it's going to be great for the project. - Allied45 (talk) 01:43, 9 August 2009 (UTC)

That's great news! Good job mate! - Allied45 (talk) 01:46, 9 August 2009 (UTC)

Well good luck to whatever projects your working on. – Allied45 (talk) 01:51, 9 August 2009 (UTC)

Yeah that was disappointing - and I was there... – Allied45 (talk) 01:54, 9 August 2009 (UTC)

Yeah, I think they're just cruising until the finals, and not worrying too much about the matches before then. Although, the amount of injuries are concerning, and yes, some players are just not playing their best. It's still disappointing for the fans, but if it works out to be a better September, I won't be complaining! – Allied45 (talk) 02:04, 9 August 2009 (UTC)

Well done. Although I don't think Geelong will be doing so well in September YellowMonkey (cricket photo poll!) paid editing=POV 01:39, 10 August 2009 (UTC)

Benaud book

Was it really made in 1987? M Waugh didn't make his int debut until 1988 YellowMonkey (click here to vote for world cycling's #1 model!) 08:08, 11 August 2009 (UTC)

Yep I was wrong... watching bits and pieces of the 1987 world cup (cricket in the 80's) and seems to have got stuck in my head. Well spotted BL, Aaroncrick (talk) 11:31, 11 August 2009 (UTC)

Down's syndrome discussion pages

Hey Aaroncrick, I was wondering why the deletion of these recent (albeit derogatory) comments from the Down's syndrome discussion pages? Okay, these are silly comments, but I thought contributions toward the discussion pages should only get deleted (or edited by others) in very rare circumstances? Wouldn't it have been better to address the issue discussed, rather than delete it? Assuming good faith on the part of the editor who uttered the comments, they reflect a particular interpretation of the article and so might be considered worthy of inclusion on the discussion page. By removing the comments, other editors are made less aware of the prejudice and discrimination that is directed against people with Down's syndrome. Just a thought --Nicholas (talk) 11:24, 11 August 2009 (UTC)

I don't mind if you revert my edits. Although I've seen how silly comments like those are often reverted. I doubt this editor will even come back to check the page anyhow. But I suppose It doesn't matter, all the best. Aaroncrick (talk) 11:28, 11 August 2009 (UTC)

Lillee

See MOS:APPENDIX for the hierarchy of sections. Cheers. –Moondyne 09:12, 12 August 2009 (UTC)

Ponting

Hadn't bothered checking your edits because I knew you wouldn't stuff up the article, so I didn't notice you were expanding it. Well done YellowMonkey (cricket photo poll!) paid editing=POV 07:24, 13 August 2009 (UTC)

Still a mess but I'll continue slowing cleaning things up. Then I'll start refing. Aaroncrick (talk) 07:30, 13 August 2009 (UTC)

Left messages on talk about expanding O'Reilly and Gilly YellowMonkey (cricket photo poll!) paid editing=POV 07:32, 14 August 2009 (UTC)

Edit conflict perhaps? Yep good to see them being worked upon. Aaroncrick (talk) 07:37, 14 August 2009 (UTC)

Did Gilly, although there were probably some significant innings I didn't explain... YellowMonkey (cricket photo poll!) paid editing=POV 03:52, 19 August 2009 (UTC)

Re:Reference spam

You added a reference to the Peter FitzSimons book Great Australian Sports Champions to 17 articles in the space of 20 minutes. You did not add any in-line references, in the articles, to this book. It looked to me that the purpose of the citations was to promote the book. There are probably 30 to 40 books which have been written about the subject of the article Phar Lap, which would be a better citation source than the FitzSimons book. The same probably applies to all the other articles where you added the reference. It looked like you were spamming the book which is why I deleted the reference in the Phar Lap article. Regards. Cuddy Wifter (talk) 01:48, 15 August 2009 (UTC)

Yes I don't have a problem with reverting the edit on B-class articles but many articles barely have any refs. It would have been better to add an in-line ref but we do use External Links don't we? Also I don't see why you'd think I was promoting the book. You were a long way off the mark there. Like the majority of cricket article use Cricinfo as a source and that doesn't mean the editor was 'spamming' or 'promoting' the website. Thankyou. Aaroncrick (talk) 06:14, 15 August 2009 (UTC)

York Park history

Hi.

Second paragraph of article starts: "York Park has been used as an international sports venue since 2001. Beforehand, only North Launceston and state games were played."

First sentence - do you mean matches between two international teams, and not matches like the soccer Tas v English FA XI in 1951 ?

Not sure why the second sentence is there - accidentally left from another edit perhaps ?

Presume you are aware that major mainland clubs or representative sides regularly played first-class matches there from 1923 to late 1950s, and 1960s to 1980s less frequently but still every now and then.

If you weren't aware and would like to consider using material, I can guide you to a comprehensive list.

RossRSmith (talk) 12:40, 15 August 2009 (UTC)

thorpey

Yes, it was crusty YellowMonkey (cricket photo poll!) paid editing=POV 07:48, 17 August 2009 (UTC)

Pakistani bowlers would also probably need an article in the future. No point creating stubs though. As the editors at AFD will have a field day. Even Langer/Hayden but let's go one at a time. Aaroncrick (talk) 08:04, 17 August 2009 (UTC)

Wikipedia:Featured article review/Sheffield/archive1

Care to revisit? Dabomb87 (talk) 15:53, 17 August 2009 (UTC)

Yep sure no problem. Will do Aaroncrick (talk) 21:34, 17 August 2009 (UTC)

AFL biogs

They seem to be unattended. A lot of cruft on the Crows and Pies, by anon fans I suppose YellowMonkey (cricket photo poll!) paid editing=POV 05:29, 18 August 2009 (UTC)

RE: Boycott

Good point, I shall tweak. SGGH ^ping! 10:11, 18 August 2009 (UTC)

Thanks

Thanks for your participation in my recent RfA. I will do my very best not to betray the confidence you have shown me. If you ever have any questions or suggestions about my conduct as an administrator or as an editor please don't hesitate to contact me. Once again, thanks. ·Maunus·ƛ· 04:40, 19 August 2009 (UTC)