User talk:Paul foord/Archive 3

Archive 1

Archive 2

Archive 3

Archive 4

Archive 5

Archive 6

Archives
1 (Apr 05-Mar 06) | 2 (Apr 06-Sep 07) | 3 (Oct 07-Mar 08) | 4 (Apr 08-Mar 10) | 5 (Apr 10-Dec 12) | 6 (Jun 13-Nov 16) |

Civilty, please

Paul, you may wish to look over your comments to Orderinchaos, you have assumed no good faith, and some would argue that you have made a blaitant personal attack on him. Im not going to give you the whole template stuff, but i will remind you of this: "comment on the content/topic at hand, not the user involved". Cheers. Twenty Years 12:08, 7 October 2007 (UTC)

I have replied to your comments on AWNB. Twenty Years 08:41, 9 October 2007 (UTC)

Luck of seven

Hello Paul Noel Hidalgo is coming to Adelaide on Friday October 12 He will be at the Central Market for breakfast at Lucias 8am He is doing the http://luckofseven.com tour. He is interested in meeting open source and free culture folk around the world. Feel free to email me to check up about other times. eg. Perhaps the Richmnd Hotel upstairs after 5pm on Friday evening for coffee drinks chat kinds of things. Cheers Lucychili 20:54, 10 October 2007 (UTC)

Redirect of Somatic techniques

Hello, this is a message from an automated bot. A tag has been placed on Somatic techniques, by another Wikipedia user, requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. The tag claims that it should be speedily deleted because Somatic techniques is a redirect to a non-existent page (CSD R1).

To contest the tagging and request that administrators wait before possibly deleting Somatic techniques, please affix the template {{hangon}} to the page, and put a note on its talk page. If the article has already been deleted, see the advice and instructions at WP:WMD. Feel free to contact the bot operator if you have any questions about this or any problems with this bot, bearing in mind that this bot is only informing you of the nomination for speedy deletion; it does not perform any nominations or deletions itself. CSDWarnBot 09:15, 16 October 2007 (UTC)

History wars

Hi please explain Y U removed the template. Cheers. Paki.tv 03:47, 18 October 2007 (UTC)

Hey sorry about the mistake and thanks for that! Paki.tv 00:46, 23 October 2007 (UTC)

WikiProject Australia newsletter

WikiProject Australia publishes a newsletter informing Australian Wikipedians of ongoing events and happenings within the community and the project. This month's newsletter has been published. If you wish to unsubscribe from these messages, or prefer to have the newsletter delivered in full to your talk page, see our subscription page. This notice delivered by BrownBot (talk), at 21:56, 11 December 2007 (UTC).

punny

Another layer a multileveled pun ;-) Anyway, mate, I knew little of this 'Port Power', so I looked it up [1] :O cygnis insignis 08:12, 30 December 2007 (UTC)

Happy New Year

Hello Paul, I hope you had a wonderful New Year's Day, and that 2008 brings further success, health and happiness! ...and further nationalist conquests and Adelaide meetups ;) All the best!.... ~ Blnguyen (bananabucket) 06:44, 2 January 2008 (UTC)

WikiProject Australia newsletter

WikiProject Australia publishes a newsletter informing Australian Wikipedians of ongoing events and happenings within the community and the project. This month's newsletter has been published. If you wish to unsubscribe from these messages, or prefer to have the newsletter delivered in full to your talk page, see our subscription page. This notice delivered by BrownBot (talk), at 22:05, 3 January 2008 (UTC).

Thanks!

Thanks for fixing the messed up revert on Early Christianity. Twinkle must have had a hiccup. Thanks again! Vassyana (talk) 07:27, 6 January 2008 (UTC)

Adelaide Wikimeetup 3

Adelaide Meetup Next: 15 November 2024 Last: 6 March 2020

Hi Paul - we're planning a third meetup in Adelaide sometime in the coming weeks, and would love to have you there. If you can, please help decide a location, a date and a time here. Thanks! ~ Riana ⁂ 12:41, 16 January 2008 (UTC)
You are receiving this message because you are listed at Wikipedia:ADEL#Participants. If you do not live in Adelaide/South Australia and cannot make it to the meetup, please accept my apologies!

Rios Montt, YWAM, etc.

Thanks for touching base. I hope the firefox concerns you had are resolved, tho I didn't quite understand them. How is the article coming along (besides the obvious segregation of points of view)? Do you have questions about the notability of any sources? About the tone of any critical statements? Trying to give bias a backseat so I can write a good article about Youth With A Mission... any help you can offer would be most appreciated. Also, going to cleanup tag it for merging critical views so it can be as NPoV as possible. Cheers. ClaudeReigns (talk) 06:02, 3 February 2008 (UTC)

Adelaide Wikimeetup 3

Adelaide Meetup Next: 15 November 2024 Last: 6 March 2020

Hi Paul foord - after some planning we've decided to hold the third Adelaide Wikimeetup on Sunday, 17th February, 2008. The meeting will be held at Billy Baxter's in Rundle Mall at 11:30AM. Further details and directions are available on the meetup page. Please RSVP here by 20:00UTC on 15th February 2008 (that's 6AM Saturday for our time zone) so that we can inform the restaurant about numbers. Hope to see you there!

You are receiving this message because you are in Category:Wikipedians in South Australia or are listed at WP:ADEL#Participants. If this has been sent in error, please accept our apologies!

On behalf of Riana ⁂, 11:34, 5 February 2008 (UTC)

National Museum of Dance (cross posted from User talk:Robertgreer)

If you are familiar with the National Museum of Dance in Saratoga, NY would you have a look at expanding it. Thanks Paul foord (talk) 12:33, 8 February 2008 (UTC)

I will be attending a dance conference in Saratoga late Spring and plan to look in, thank you! Robert Greer (talk) 15:42, 8 February 2008 (UTC)

The very very quiet

History project - good on you! needs a kick in the ever silent posterior it needs to get a bit of wind :| SatuSuro 11:04, 15 February 2008 (UTC)

But one very curious issue is the project is subsidiary to the australian project - not the history project - I am sorry to break it to you i think you are wrong :( SatuSuro 11:07, 15 February 2008 (UTC)

Unless you can show me a very similar precedent where a subsidiary project such as Australian History is tied into another project like history - rather than simply remaining linked within the bounds of the Australian project - we have a problem! SatuSuro 11:12, 15 February 2008 (UTC)

Why a problem? I thought Australian history was both Australian and history. Or are we all delusional? Can't it be both? It is a matrix! Paul foord (talk) 11:15, 15 February 2008 (UTC)

Should History of Australia be double tagged to both (as it is)? But all the subsidary articles need to be tagged likewise. Does the Bot double count? Is that a better solution for you? Incorporating the category saves doing that. Although the importance rating does complicate it. The quality rating is not an issue. Paul foord (talk) 11:20, 15 February 2008 (UTC)

Blooody edit conflict continual - Its not my problem - it is a project wide problem - check other projects look at other categories - does australian tv get tied in like that to the major tv project - i dont think so. I would strongless suggest you look around and check with others - other people other projects - i strongly suggest double tagging does not happen SatuSuro 11:26, 15 February 2008 (UTC)

I would strongly suggest even if you do find double tagging somewhere it is wrong - if you havent had much to do with cats - very very best leave alone i Have about 300 + cats i made a mistake on last year i havent lceaned up (unless longhair or somone with a bot has claned up) - cats need very careful thinking - and not doubling SatuSuro 11:28, 15 February 2008 (UTC)

BTW categories and category trees are neither delusional or matrix related - see http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Categorization - cheers SatuSuro 11:31, 15 February 2008 (UTC)

Ditto: Blooody edit conflict continual -

I am referring to article talk pages.

Assuming I understand what you are writing, sorry, I disagree. WP:OWN probably refers, with reference to WPs. Multiple tagging is exceedingly common. One article may be relevant to a number of WikiProjects - there is even a template to cater for it - I think the most WikiProjects I have seen on a article talk page is 5. Should I remove Dance in Australia from the Dance or Australian WikiProject? {{WikiProject Dance}}/{{WP Australia}}. My preference would be to keep it in dance. Paul foord (talk) 11:42, 15 February 2008 (UTC)

Having tagged and worked with cats for a few months i disagree with you - this now goes to Aust Noticeboard - this is not the place for it here -cheers SatuSuro 11:47, 15 February 2008 (UTC)

Oh bugger - you are doing it in category pages - always where people add larger outside cats in articles they are ingoring the process of how categories work - but I have had it for the night - I'll put something on the noticeboard and have a look again tommorow - sorry - I simply dont have the energy to go through this any further at the moment - cheers SatuSuro 11:50, 15 February 2008 (UTC)

It has absolutely nothing to do with WP:OWN - if you double tag assessment pages - you have the very very few individuals in any one project (in some cases none - they have to be cajoled from other areas) who have the capacity to tweak the bots and the collation of assessment who know what can or cannot happen - please see my comment at the noticeboard and lets keep it there and not here - thanks - cheers - SatuSuro 12:02, 15 February 2008 (UTC)

I have been trying to deal with a serious computer problem on one of my families other computers - and other unrelated issues while I have tried to remember the larger number of categories that I have done - there should never be the need for a larger category and subsisidary category to be included on a page for either a project or article - the subsidiary category should be a subcategory of the larger - and there is no reason why the larger and its own subsidiary appear on the same article - If I am thinking right on this - hope someone comes in on this SatuSuro 12:41, 15 February 2008 (UTC)

I just want it sorted - no particular problem with whatever the resolution. Thanks for raising the issue. :) Paul foord (talk) 12:46, 15 February 2008 (UTC)

Yeah i think we might need buckets of agf on this - i cannot work out if i am very wrong or not - the computer problem got in my way of thinking about this - sorry about the verbiage SatuSuro 12:50, 15 February 2008 (UTC)

Prognosis from the two who do know something about it all seem to think there is no problem with what you did, so my apologies. It will be interesting to see if anybody else joins in or that is it. cheers SatuSuro 15:29, 15 February 2008 (UTC)

Categorization (cross posted from User talk:Robertgreer)

Robert, please have a look at this guideline Wikipedia:Categorization and subcategories, my understanding is that the Category:Ballet should go in Category:Dance styles, the Ballet article should be in Category:Ballet with a forced sort as the first article, so [[Category:Ballet| ]] placed in the article. If the article omits the self named category then the category is not shown on the article page, so use of {{catmore}} in the category still requires eponymous categorization of the article. The wonders of Wiki :) Paul foord (talk) 14:51, 15 February 2008 (UTC)

Category Dance vs. Dance Styles

I've had seveal chats (with a Wiki. admin. who's a professional libarian among others) about ballet, modern dance, categorization etc. What it finally came down to was that Wiki. guidelines are general recommendations, not binding; and, depending on the subject matter, may be downright counterproductive.

My reasoning concerning where the category ballet belongs with respect to categories dance and dance styles has to do with its size (and potential size) relative to other dance styles. It could easily become bigger than the entire remainder of the dance style category.

If not the remainder of the entire dance category! Though even if that were the case, ballet should logically still be a sub-category of dance.

A little logic, a little common sense; and, in truth, I will almost always defer to someone else if they really want it the other way.

My Wiki. coding habits are the deritrus of having learned ALGOL at a summer course for high school students (I still pay the rent by teaching in a college computer department despite [1] having done all my grad. study in theatre and Scandinavian studies and [2] holding only an undergraduate degree in E.E. — despite which I received tenure; I'm sure they regret that to this very day.)

So I code consistently — give a child a hammer and the whole world looks like a nail — and catmore is a marvelous hammer, to get the prima ballerina assolutas category to find the ballerina article and so on. So I use it automatically, whether needed or not.

I've learned far too many programming languages to have any desire to learn any more about Wiki's underpinnings than I need to. I'm grateful somebody else built it and am delighted to use it, but what I really do is direct and sometimes translate Scandinavian plays.

Theatre is my wife, ballet my mistress (and I cheat on both once a week and go to a flamenco club, strictly as audience.) Robert Greer (talk) 04:24, 18 February 2008 (UTC)

Theatre Merger

Hi there.

My skills on this site are novice at best. I'll try to lay out my thoughts and suggestions as best I can.

My suggestion would be to merge the Adelaide Rep article with a new and improved amateur theatre article and also, perhaps, include these two - Beeston Musical Theatre Group and Windmill Theatre Company. A user called Robhar174 has also suggested merging amateur theatre with community theatre, though there are notable differences between the two.

Perhaps a detailed page describing amateur and community theatre and listing the various companies would be ideal. I think a heading on the "debate" between the value of such theatre could be interesting. As I work in a theatrical library, I can tell you that amateur theatre in Australia and the UK is regarded academically and by professional artists as low-grade. Indeed the most insulting thing one professional actor or director can say to another is "you're behaving like an amateur!". Amateur theatre is charactorized by hammy, self-important types (with no recognized skills or qualifications) performing badly and for their own ego. The majority of third party material supports this view. On the whole, it is felt that the movement is damaging and counter-productive to professional, hardworking artists and that amateurs devalue the artforms and the industry. However, amateur "artists" themselves would debate this. The "debate" should ne noted.

Additionally I think a sub-heading marked "parody" could highlight the depiction of amateur theatre in such films as "Hot Fuzz" (where the main characters sit through an awful performance of Romeo and Juliet) or "Along Came Polly" where Phillip Seymour Hoffmann portrays a stereotypical amateur actor. This isn't to say that the page should pick on amateur performers, but that there should be some realistic sense of where there work is classed.

Wikipedia is particularly upside down in this regard. For example, we do not have articles on the leading professional artists and productions! We have no article on the State Theatre Company of South Australia - the state's premiere PROFESSIONAL acting company - or on Windmill Performing Arts (or Windmill Theatre), which is a professional company in Adelaide that tours nationally and is government funded. I refer you to their sites - http://www.statetheatrecompany.com.au/Default.aspx?p=1 (State Theatre) http://www.windmill.org.au/ (Windmill). Patch Theatre Company is another one!

I think to expand the database in relation to Australian theatre, we need to put emphasis on the recognized, professional, productive companies and place amateur companies in a more honest context. The list on Category:Australian theatre companies should be sorted accordingly.

I myself created articles on Brink Productions, actress Bridget Walters and writer Caleb Lewis in an attempt to steer Wikipedia back on course towards promoting the actual arts industry, of which we should be proud. Unfortunately my efforts in this regard have been met with opposition and it is with frustration that I have noted articles on professional companies and productions being unfairly deleted on grounds of notability, whilst the amateur articles are protected. This makes zero sense and ultimately puts Wikipedia badly out of step with other credible information sources.

Anyhow, I hope I haven't bored you to death with that flow of information. I am unable to implement these changes myself owing to a back-log of work, but if you have an interest on the subject I am happy to talk further.(Moviefreak26 (talk) 07:51, 18 February 2008 (UTC))

Best wishes

One point, regarding the attitudes of professionals to amateurs - maybe thee is a parallel between Encyclopædia Britannica and Wikipedia Paul foord (talk) 11:24, 18 February 2008 (UTC)

Yes, agreed. Would you be willing to help work on some of this stuff or are your interests elsewhere? I think we could tidy a lot of this stuff up. Moviefreak. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Moviefreak26 (talk • contribs) 07:07, 20 February 2008 (UTC)

My main focus has been on dance, I will certainly pick up on theatre stuff as I come across it. WP tends to be weaker on the arts. Paul foord (talk) 06:58, 24 February 2008 (UTC)

Ballets Russes, Ballet Russe de Monte Carlo etc.

I'd like to come up with a sub-category (similar to Ballet companies in Canada, in the US, etc.) for Ballets Russes and Ballet Russe de Monte Carlo -- and perhaps any other "legacy" companies as the computer people would call them -- but genuinely cannot come up with a name that sounds right for ballet. Ideas? Robert Greer (talk) 22:34, 21 February 2008 (UTC)

It is a hard one maybe "Ballets Russes related companies". But their influence went beyond the successor companies, certainly not pretty. Paul foord (talk) 06:56, 24 February 2008 (UTC)

Very hard, many of the South American dancers who now dominate at A.B.T. were trained by folk who hopped off one or other of the Ballet(s) Russe(s) tours or their immediate disciples. Robert Greer (talk) 19:03, 24 February 2008 (UTC)

{{WikiProject Dance|Ballet=yes|nested=yes}}

PS Thank you for using — and thereby making me aware of — the Ballet=yes and nested=yes tags for Wiki Project Dance!

Robert Greer (talk) 19:04, 24 February 2008 (UTC)

PPS WikiProject Dance ratings: Mea maxima culpa; give a child a hammer … Robert Greer (talk) 17:34, 28 February 2008 (UTC)

Problem with nested=yes

Is there a problem with the nested=yes tag? It doesn't seem to be nesting on my recent edits!

It also appears to be broken on Talk:Windmill Theatre Company, which contains:

{{WP Australia|a&e=yes|Melbourne=yes|class=start|importance=low|Melbourne-importance=low|a&e-importance=|nested=yes}}

and:

{{WikiProject Theatre|class=start|importance=low|nested=yes}}

Robert Greer (talk) 00:29, 12 March 2008 (UTC)

Sometimes these problems relate to the software used to view the page. There may have been a problem. Not evident when I view the talk pages. Paul foord (talk) 13:13, 12 March 2008 (UTC)

browser related

Thank you! I feared as much (and would've mentioned it but wanted to get an unbiased report that I can wave under our data center's collective nose.) 21:54, 12 March 2008 (UTC)