User talk:Bjenks

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Jump to: navigation, search

Archive 1 2 3 4

Disambiguation link notification for January 25[edit]

...when you edited Caldicot Castle, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Norman...DPL bot (talk) 08:54, 25 January 2014 (UTC)

Thanks, now fixed Bjenks (talk) 09:04, 25 January 2014 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for February 1[edit]

...when you edited Hanno the Elder, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Marcus Silanus ... DPL bot (talk) 09:01, 1 February 2014 (UTC)

Thanks, that's now fixed. Bjenks (talk) 09:59, 5 March 2014 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for March 5[edit]

...when you edited Edward Thomas Heron, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Queens Park ... DPL bot (talk) 09:03, 5 March 2014 (UTC)

Thanks, that's now fixed. Bjenks (talk) 09:59, 5 March 2014 (UTC)

Curtain the novel by Agatha Christie[edit]

Bjenks, I reverted one change you made to the lead (lede) for the article on the novel Curtain by Agathe Christie. There is a sort of consistency to the leads for her novels, to include the first UK and first US publication dates. Some of her novels were first published in the US. The price in the UK and in the US are also included. This is not something I started, to be sure, but encountered when I began to read these articles on her novels. It seems fine enough information to include, when her stories were first published and by whom, no harm done. The source for the American editions shows a photo of the first edition cover and includes the price in the US, and is on line. The source for the prices in the UK seems to be a printed book, one I have not seen, so I cannot fill in missing UK prices. One good thing about it is the extra documentation of the first edition and first publication from this approach to introducing the articles. Unlike the translated titles, which anyone can toss in, with no source or ISBN number or other proof of the translation. Hope that is okay with you. --Prairieplant (talk) 03:58, 13 March 2014 (UTC)

Thanks for the communication. Not being a habitual contributor to this sort of 'owned' biblio tradition, I noted that the information was appropriately spelled out in a following section (but without the price). I took the view that such trivia (however much valued by an enthusiastic minority) does not help the lead para, which is encyclopedically aimed at the general reader. I won't be changing my view, but nor will I interfere with your good-faith reversion. There are more important things to do elsewhere! Cheers, Bjenks (talk) 04:55, 13 March 2014 (UTC)
I agree that plot information is a bit more interesting in the lead for a novel. I do not know how the tradition got started for Agatha Christie novels. Someone prior to me had the lead very long, trying to put the whole story of the novel being written during WWII, put in a bank vault, published in the 1970s, and meant to close the Poirot series, with lots of books being written after the war and before Curtain was released for publication. My effort was to get that out, make a new section in the article to discuss that situation, and the speculation of what year is the story set? Usually her books are set when published, or soon before (one notable exception). So I wanted the lead to look more like the other Agatha Christie novels. So far, no one reverted my new section on when it was written versus when it was published. BTW, thanks for showing me that whole huge article on the television adaptations. I was not aware of it, and will make more links to it now I know it exists. --Prairieplant (talk) 10:57, 13 March 2014 (UTC)

Notification of automated file description generation[edit]

Your upload of File:Catalp1152 lg.JPG or contribution to its description is noted, and thanks (even if belatedly) for your contribution. In order to help make better use of the media, an attempt has been made by an automated process to identify and add certain information to the media's description page.

This notification is placed on your talk page because a bot has identified you either as the uploader of the file, or as a contributor to its metadata. It would be appreciated if you could carefully review the information the bot added. To opt out of these notifications, please follow the instructions here. Thanks! Message delivered by Theo's Little Bot (opt-out) 15:08, 17 March 2014 (UTC)

The file has been uploaded to Commons, but with a different name because I stuffed up on entering the description info! Bjenks (talk) 01:54, 26 March 2014 (UTC)

Sydney Opera House[edit]

Thanks for your edits to Sydney Opera House. One edit that I don't agree with though is the section heading change from "1990s–2000s: Reconciliation with Utzon and building refurbishment" to "Reconciliation with Utzon". The heading was changed because Pigsonthewing just won't accept that the section is about the 1990s reconciliation in the leadup to the internal reconstructions. We shouldn't have to make the heading so verbose but, as you can see by his restoration of the tag, the short heading is problematic. --AussieLegend () 17:42, 25 March 2014 (UTC)

Hi, AussieLegend. I noted the over-lengthy squabble on the talk page but could not see how any one person's pov could justify perpetuation of an unacceptable edit war and unnecessary fact tag. So I'll be happy enough if my contribution contributes to a circuit break. If not, I would be arguing for admin intervention. The 1990s and later dates are clearly specified in the section's text, therefore don't need to be re-emphasised in the section head. What I saw developing was a series of dated headings which could progress as a mechanical timelist into the indefinite future, whereas it is surely more encyclopedic to limit section heads to matters of substance. Anyway, I've given my considered input and do not intend to enlist in a tit-for-tat exchange. Cheers, Bjenks (talk) 01:24, 26 March 2014 (UTC)
I don't disagree with you about the heading. I always thought it was obvious until Pigsonthewing restored the irrelevant edits and then just would not get the point. I thought changing the heading would help him get the point. --AussieLegend () 04:18, 26 March 2014 (UTC)
It's been four days since last comment. I'm tempted to remove the tag again but, in the event that it's restored, I'm not sure of the best way forward. ANI seems to be the best place as it's not really a content dispute, it's really more the disruptive addition of a tag with no reasonable attempt to resolve the issue. --AussieLegend () 03:59, 31 March 2014 (UTC)
I think enough time has expired. What about removing the tag together with a talk-page warning that its restoration will result in a request for admin. intervention aimed at ending the disruptive, unconstructive behaviour. There's now more than ample justification. Bjenks (talk) 08:24, 31 March 2014 (UTC)
I decided to give Pigsonthewing some more time but I have now removed the tag, after leaving an appropriate note on the talk page.[1] We'll see what happens next. --AussieLegend () 14:58, 3 April 2014 (UTC)
I fully support your action. Bjenks (talk) 15:05, 3 April 2014 (UTC)
He's reverted the removal.[2] --AussieLegend () 16:13, 3 April 2014 (UTC)
OK, I have commenced action here and here. Bjenks (talk) 02:28, 4 April 2014 (UTC)
I've drafted an ANI report. --AussieLegend () 05:16, 4 April 2014 (UTC)


Information icon There is currently a discussion at Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents regarding an issue with which you may have been involved. The thread is Disruptive editing at Sydney Opera House. Thank you. AussieLegend () 15:27, 4 April 2014 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for June 6[edit]

...when you edited Stamford Raffles, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Kraton. DPL bot (talk) 08:53, 6 June 2014 (UTC)

Thanks, that's now fixed. Bjenks (talk) 14:59, 6 June 2014 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for June 25[edit]

...when you edited Western Australia Police, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page AAP. DPL bot (talk), 08:51, 25 June 2014 (UTC)

Thanks, now fixed.

Bob R., Catherine B. Ron B. and John S. territory[edit]

The crappy little stub is still small and under-explored... but a small start. satusuro 15:20, 6 July 2014 (UTC)

Bravo—it's starting to shape up. I dipped into some anthrop in the dark past, and in Sydney; and one of my daughters is a UWA graduate in anthrop, but I really knew nothing of the Berndts. Became curious when a lost MS about Rev John Smithies hit my coffee table, with impressive foreword by Prof Berndt. Be good to do 'em some justice. Cheers, Bjenks (talk) 16:18, 6 July 2014 (UTC)
Wife and I before our meeting each other had been doing anthro under both of em them... They are mountains on which their followers hardly get to first camp. satusuro 02:25, 7 July 2014 (UTC)

Orphaned non-free image File:2 Kinnaird Street 1960.jpg[edit]


Thanks for uploading File:2 Kinnaird Street 1960.jpg. The image description page currently specifies that the image is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, the image is currently not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the image was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that images for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).

Note that any non-free images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described in the criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. Stefan2 (talk) 21:34, 12 July 2014 (UTC)

The image was uploaded and posted here for only short-term discussion purposes. Therefore there is no objection to its deletion after 7 days. Bjenks (talk) 02:58, 13 July 2014 (UTC)

Mitchell House (Melbourne, Victoria)[edit]

Hello. Thank you for creating Mitchell House (Melbourne, Victoria). I have added an infobox and category. I was wondering if you would consider expanding the page please? It may also be good to know who the former and current tenants have been. Please reply on my talkpage. Thank you.Zigzig20s (talk) 21:10, 13 July 2014 (UTC)

Thanks for your interest. I'm a non-Melbournian decophile without access to the details you mention, though I created the Mitchell House stub using my opportunistic 2013 photograph. It's now up to other interested editors to carry the ball further, eh? Bjenks (talk) 04:06, 14 July 2014 (UTC)
OK. Let me know if you come across some good books about the architecture of Melbourne--there may be some. Is there another city where you'd be able to focus on buildings more?Zigzig20s (talk) 06:23, 14 July 2014 (UTC)
Not really. I prefer to spend time on other interests. Bjenks (talk) 08:36, 14 July 2014 (UTC)


It's obviously verifiable that the motto is in the book, but I accept that it's no more than an interesting factoid, so no big deal, thanks (talk) 06:10, 14 July 2014 (UTC)


Hello! You have received preliminary approval for access to Credo. Please fill out this short form so that your access can be processed. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 22:50, 16 July 2014 (UTC)

Done last week. Bjenks (talk) 01:01, 27 July 2014 (UTC)

Your revert of my edit on John Anderson[edit]

Hello Bjenk,

this message concerns a revert you've made to a "good faith" edit of mine in the article on the philosopher John Anderson.

The sentence in question, as it appeared originally in the article, reads:

"He asserted that there is no supernatural god and that there are no non-natural realms along the lines of Platonic ideals".

In other words, Anderson was both an Atheist and a Nominalist.

However, the sentence contains an unfortunate typo which I corrected, namely "Platonic ideals" instead of "Platonic ideas".

"Platonic ideas" is a technical term philosophers use for what are otherwise ("in North America", as David Armstrong, a student of Anderson's, jokingly liked to say) also called Abstract Entities. Examples are things like Justice or Roundness, considered as distinct from the particular objects which are just or round. In full-blown Platonism, Platonic ideas are supposed to exist seperately in a non-natural realm, as rightly said in the sentence in question.

For more about Platonic ideas, see here:

It is true, however, that a subset of Platonic ideas are also what one might call "ideals" (e.g., Courage, Democracy, etc) but this is irrelevant to the philosophical position of nominalism as attributed to Anderson. Best wishes, Collini (talk) 20:39, 12 August 2014 (UTC)

Hi, Collini. Yes, your edit appeared to me to be an arbitrary wording change from the previous 'ideals' to 'ideas'. However, no citation has been provided for either version. I take it that your justification of 'ideas' rests upon a North American usage which, you say, was jokingly referred to by Armstrong. Personally, I prefer 'ideals' as an English transcript for (Platonic) forms, and understand that term to be more in accord with Australian (and Andersonian) usage than 'ideas'. However, the point seems to be a fine one. The way to settle it is to find a reliable citation, and perhaps we could both try to do that. Bjenks (talk) 01:16, 13 August 2014 (UTC)

Sorry for shouting[edit]

Sorry about that. I always try to follow the rules and follow the sources. In the case of cricket's name, perhaps all the Middle Dutch sentences could be consolidated next to each other? Abductive (reasoning) 15:36, 1 November 2014 (UTC)

Pls relax—we all get worked up ocasionally! By all means roll the three MDutches together (and avoid the two successive sentences beginning "Another poss..."). I promise to stay away.(:)) Bjenks (talk) 01:01, 2 November 2014 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for November 5[edit]

When you edited William Hosking, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Victorian. DPL bot (talk) 15:10, 5 November 2014 (UTC)

Thanks, that's now fixed.

BNA access[edit]

Hello, Bjenks. Please check your email – you've got mail!
It may take a few minutes from the time the email is sent for it to show up in your inbox. You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{You've got mail}} or {{YGM}} template.

Chris Troutman (talk) 19:23, 8 November 2014 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for November 19[edit]

...When you edited Scrotal Recall, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Chlamydia. DPL bot (talk) 12:20, 19 November 2014 (UTC)

OK, now fixed, thanks

Disambiguation link notification for December 8[edit]

When you edited Maida Vale, you added links pointing to the disambiguation pages VC and Dam Busters. DPL bot (talk) 09:09, 8 December 2014 (UTC)

Thks. Now fixed. Bjenks (talk) 14:21, 8 December 2014 (UTC)

Lightoller cotton mills[edit]


Hello. I responded to your message on my talk page (here). Additional comments encouraged.  ~Eric, aka: (talk) 08:06, 9 December 2014 (UTC)

My reply.  ~E: (talk) 01:34, 10 December 2014 (UTC)
Thanks; looks fine now.  ~E: (talk) 05:58, 11 December 2014 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for December 15[edit]

..when you edited First Contact (SBS), you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Aboriginal. DPL bot (talk) 09:52, 15 December 2014 (UTC)

Thanks, it's now fixed. Bjenks (talk) 16:21, 15 December 2014 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for December 23[edit]

...when you edited St John's Wood, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Dam Busters. ...DPL bot (talk) 08:59, 23 December 2014 (UTC)

Thanks, now fixed. Bjenks (talk) 17:54, 23 December 2014 (UTC)


anecdotally the uni admin has been/was quite sensistive about having museums - the geology and other internal departmental collections gave the slash and burn heads in the senate quite a hiccup when it came to what to do with collections - the unique and important map library was just partially emptied one day by some appartchik throwing maps into a skip bin. As to what they might do with the Berndt collection, best not to believe a word you see anywhere. The money they spend on marketing and PR these days probably means truth is the first of many casualties. satusuro 03:56, 8 January 2015 (UTC)

In my PR days, truth always came first, even to the point of proactively announcing bad stuff before it could be triumphantly paraded by media! I also fought a losing battle to preserve an important museum and relevant public-sector antiquities—all about budget-slashing. Does UWA not realise the value of maps? The Welsh National Library has spent a fortune on security measures after losing maps to theft. Cheers Bjenks (talk) 04:26, 8 January 2015 (UTC)

Methinks that uwa senate likes to think of itself as an opaque or translucent figurine that sits in the winthrop tower with a sign, do not feed the turkeys.... I suspect that the former map librarian who should have retired due to ill health some years ago, is part of the legacy of a smaller less key perfomance indicator geared institution when the lesser departments had their own branch librarians... there is no doubt, if you scan the reid library bookshelves, that whole areas of knowledge are now no longer on shelf... they sit in annexes if they still exist. satusuro 04:58, 8 January 2015 (UTC)

Word Usage[edit]

It is well established here on wikipedia that in the range of terms related to first australians - that Indigenous Australians was the agreed term of usage, and trying to invoke new discussions onthe matter is probably not a good idea. I will shout you beer or coffee in real life if you want a real life explanation of the importance of consistency and the issues of 'claim to authority' that come from isolated claims that are not part of the larger picture, otherwise, please undersztand that Indigenous is the term that is least problematic for all concerned. satusuro 07:49, 9 January 2015 (UTC)

Having looked at the conversation where all this started - you and the other editor or whatever both need to have a close read of satusuro 08:16, 9 January 2015 (UTC)
Thanks for the advice, mate. I hear you well and will avoid that controversy in future for a number of reasons. In my working lifetime there have been at least four distinct changes in what is "correct" within Australia (or parts thereof). In terms of global readership there are other considerations. Let us expect to see more changes of such etiquette and semantics in future, but for parochial WP purposes I will not be touching these petty politics with a barge pole! In actual life, of course, "je suis Charlie". Cheers, Bjenks (talk) 14:45, 9 January 2015 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for January 19[edit]

...when you edited Dallas Dempster, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page West Australian. DPL bot (talk) 09:06, 19 January 2015 (UTC)

Thanks, that's now fixed. Bjenks (talk) 01:38, 20 January 2015 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for January 31[edit]

...when you edited Amores perros, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Arriaga. DPL bot (talk) 08:56, 31 January 2015 (UTC)

Thanks—now fixed. Bjenks (talk) 14:44, 31 January 2015 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for April 1[edit]

...when you edited James Reyne, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Little Shop of HorrorsDPL bot (talk) 09:15, 1 April 2015 (UTC)

Thks—now fixed. Bjenks (talk) 03:36, 2 April 2015 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for April 8[edit]

...when you edited Ceylonese Mudaliyars, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Thomas Maitland... DPL bot (talk) 08:57, 8 April 2015 (UTC)

Thks, it's fixed now. Bjenks (talk) 13:57, 8 April 2015 (UTC)

Runabout carriage[edit]

Dear Mr. Jenkins:

In September 2008, you started the article Runabout (carriage) and included in it: "Sometimes called a "driving wagon", it is essentially very light in order to be easily hitched by one person, and easily pulled over long distances by a single horse."

Could you please let me know where I may find evidence of this? I have not been able to find documents that will support this statement.

Sincerely, SamBlob (talk) 16:38, 16 April 2015 (UTC)

Thanks for pointing out this omission. From today's search it appears that I relied on the Carriage Museum at Historic Washington, Kentucky, a source which I will now add to the article. However, I now also see that the statement refers specifically to one of the runabout examples and is not necessarily true of all. Regards, Bjenks (talk) 01:09, 17 April 2015 (UTC)
Thank you for your swift and cordial response. Sincerely, SamBlob (talk) 01:55, 17 April 2015 (UTC)

Alan Bond (businessman)[edit]

Well, he was extremely unwell, as now he is an 'ex'-Alan Bond. Died a few hours ago. [3] 220 of Borg 05:04, 5 June 2015 (UTC)

That's why breaking news is a waste of time. All that's needed (at the right time) is to add the date of death. Unwellness is not at all notable in most cases. Bjenks (talk) 05:28, 5 June 2015 (UTC)

The Killing Season[edit]

I moved the page. The convention is "TV series", you had named it at "TV Series", I fixed the error. The Drover's Wife (talk) 04:54, 11 June 2015 (UTC)

Ah! My mistake--many thanks (cleaning specs). Cheers, Bjenks (talk) 05:01, 11 June 2015 (UTC)

The Wikipedia Library needs you![edit]

Wikipedia Library owl.svg

We hope The Wikipedia Library has been a useful resource for your work. TWL is expanding rapidly and we need your help!

With only a couple hours per week, you can make a big difference for sharing knowledge. Please sign up and help us in one of these ways:

  • Account coordinators: help distribute free research access
  • Partner coordinators: seek new donations from partners
  • Communications coordinators: share updates in blogs, social media, newsletters and notices
  • Technical coordinators: advise on building tools to support the library's work
  • Outreach coordinators: connect to university libraries, archives, and other GLAMs
  • Research coordinators: run reference services

Sign up now

Send on behalf of The Wikipedia Library using MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 04:31, 7 July 2015 (UTC)

Rootes Group[edit]

Hi B Jenks, Back near the beginning of time, around August 2012, you put a template on this article about original research. It has changed some and I wondered if you would mind now pointing to some of the sections you find to be breaking the rules. Thanks, Eddaido (talk) 06:33, 8 August 2015 (UTC)

Though I'm the proud owner of a Rootes Group Humber, I have not given that particular article much attention over the years. Now, giving it a quick copyedit, I perceive that there are quite a few problems. Without looking back for my former reasons, I find there is a need for verification of much of the info, to which I have now attached a few cn tags. As you know, verifiability is essential for claims in Wikipedia. "Even if you're sure something is true, it must be verifiable before you can add it." If not verified, the content should either be tagged, deleted or labelled OR. It definitely does not help to use unreliable sources like Everything. Bjenks (talk) 17:05, 8 August 2015 (UTC)
Please note that I fully support your work here and intend to make some time to help out with the citations in a cooperative spirit. Bjenks (talk) 09:04, 9 August 2015 (UTC)