User talk:Bidgee/Archive 32

Archive 25

←

Archive 30

Archive 31

Archive 32

Archive 33

Archive 34

Archive 35

Telstra

Mate, Telstra being Australia's largest telco and media company is not a POV. it's a fact. use revenue, or whatever metric you need. but dont just claim POV. thanks 101.164.50.161 (talk) 11:20, 16 October 2013 (UTC)

You clearly have a Telstra point of view. Being paid much? Bidgee (talk) 11:27, 16 October 2013 (UTC)

For info, above IP blocked as a sock by Nyttend. Also the Jimbob account that lodged the AN report. Euryalus (talk) 03:08, 20 October 2013 (UTC)

Aviation Heritage Museum of Western Australia

G'day Bidgee! You had a hand in fine-tuning the title for Aviation Heritage Museum of Western Australia. You may not be aware of a discussion on the Talk page to move this article to a new title of either "Aviation Heritage Museum" or "Aviation Heritage Museum (Western Australia)". See Talk:Aviation Heritage Museum of Western Australia. Cheers. Dolphin (t) 23:06, 24 October 2013 (UTC)

Sydney Opera House

I just saw an edit of yours so I thought I'd pop by and say Hi. and..... if you have a few minutes, could you have a quick scan of the discussion at Talk:Sydney Opera House#Recent revert - 3 December 2012. Nobody else seems interested. --AussieLegend (✉) 11:38, 25 October 2013 (UTC)

Climate of Sydney

I see that this was removed/reverted on the climate of Sydney page:

Within the city and surrounds, rainfall varies, from around 640 millimetres (25 in) at Badgery's Creek (in the west) to 1,215 millimetres (48 in) on the Sydney Observatory (the east).

It had an interesting, informative and rather trivial content accompanied by a SOURCE. Can I add it back? (Meganesia) 11:10PM, 25 October 2013 (AEST)

No, it's pure original research. The source only supports the data, not the view point. Bidgee (talk) 12:14, 25 October 2013 (UTC)

Odd, because Melbourne has it under its 'climate' section (and, worse, there is NO source supporting it - check it yourself). I've come across other pages that have this certain 'rainfall variation' info. Anyway, it's still what it is; an area here is drier compared to an area over there (which both are in the same basin or region) - how specific should the source be? I believe the 'view point' is how a Wikipedian puts it, basing it on the source. I still based it on the source; the source tells us that this area is wetter and the other is drier - I basically showcased that in the article. I really don't see how it's 'original research'. If that's so, then over half of the content on Wikipedia is 'original research', no? (Meganesia) 25 October 2013 —Preceding undated comment added 12:53, 25 October 2013 (UTC)

So? You're trying an other stuff exists argument but the burden is up to the person adding or reinserting the content. Also cease stealing copyrighted content, that includes close paraphrasing. Bidgee (talk) 12:57, 25 October 2013 (UTC)

Other stuff exists? Never knew Wikipedia would allow copyright content or original research on one page, but totally oversee this in other pages. This isn't fair and rather bias in nature - I thought Wikipedia had a one rule set. Anyway, I had the source, most importantly. The source said that this area is dry and the other is wet. How specific should the source be? About the 'copyright content', I'll try writing it with my own words basing it on the sources, but then again, god forbid, you'll tell me that it's original research and that "the source would support the data, but not the view point" or something yet again. (Meganesia) 11:43, 26 October 2013 (AEST)

Books and Bytes: The Wikipedia Library Newsletter

Books and Bytes

Volume 1, Issue 1, October 2013

by The Interior (talk · contribs), Ocaasi (talk · contribs)

Greetings Wikipedia Library members! Welcome to the inaugural edition of Books and Bytes, TWL’s monthly newsletter. We're sending you the first edition of this opt-in newsletter, because you signed up, or applied for a free research account: HighBeam, Credo, Questia, JSTOR, or Cochrane. To receive future updates of Books and Bytes, please add your name to the subscriber's list. There's lots of news this month for the Wikipedia Library, including new accounts, upcoming events, and new ways to get involved...

New positions: Sign up to be a Wikipedia Visiting Scholar, or a Volunteer Wikipedia Librarian

Wikipedia Loves Libraries: Off to a roaring start this fall in the United States: 29 events are planned or have been hosted.

New subscription donations: Cochrane round 2; HighBeam round 8; Questia round 4... Can we partner with NY Times and Lexis-Nexis??

New ideas: OCLC innovations in the works; VisualEditor Reference Dialog Workshop; a photo contest idea emerges

News from the library world: Wikipedian joins the National Archives full time; the Getty Museum releases 4,500 images; CERN goes CC-BY

Announcing WikiProject Open: WikiProject Open kicked off in October, with several brainstorming and co-working sessions

New ways to get involved: Visiting scholar requirements; subject guides; room for library expansion and exploration

Read the full newsletter

Thanks for reading! All future newsletters will be opt-in only. Have an item for the next issue? Leave a note for the editor on the Suggestions page. --The Interior 21:53, 27 October 2013 (UTC)

Nathan Rees

Saw your reversion at this article. While you'll find no more fervent believer in the utter worthlessness of the Daily Tele than me, given that this has led to Rees's resignation from the frontbench it's going to need some mention. Obviously BLP will need to be born in mind. Frickeg (talk) 11:51, 23 November 2013 (UTC)

The Wikipedia Library Survey

As a subscriber to one of The Wikipedia Library's programs, we'd like to hear your thoughts about future donations and project activities in this brief survey. Thanks and cheers, Ocaasi ^{t | c} 15:55, 9 December 2013 (UTC)

Season's Greetings

Merry Xmas!

Best wishes for a great Christmas, and for a happy, healthy and prosperous 2014! Pdfpdf (talk) 13:06, 24 December 2013 (UTC)