User talk:Privatemusings

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Jump to: navigation, search
This user is sharp as a marble.
Archive 1 | Archive 2 | Archive 3 | Archive 4 | Archive 5| current talk below

Heads up about an RfC[edit]

Please note that there's a new discussion at Wikipedia:Requests for comment/2010 ArbCom election voting procedure in which you may wish to comment. It is expected to close in about a week. You have received this message because you participated in a similar discussion (2009 AC2 RfC) last year.  Roger talk 05:45, 27 October 2010 (UTC)

ArbCom Election RFC courtesy notice[edit]

A request for comment that may interest you is currently in progress at Wikipedia:Requests for comment/2010 ArbCom election voting procedure. If you have already participated, then please disregard this notice and my apologies. A Horse called Man 19:07, 31 October 2010 (UTC)


User_talk:Privatemusings/ArbVotes2010 ++Lar: t/c 07:26, 17 November 2010 (UTC)

ah ha... I'll get on it.... Privatemusings (talk) 22:24, 18 November 2010 (UTC)

Richard Symonds[edit]

The article was created by User:Yeanold Viskersenn, a 'friend' of mine who finds it hilarious that I'm a Wikipedia editor and occasionally jumps in to troll me and my account. I block him on site whenever I come across him now. Originally I didn't read it properly and thought it was good that he was getting involved in Wikipedia, but after it was pointed out to me by a third person I gave it a proper read and panicked. The relevant discussion is at ANI and proof I now block him on site at ANI again. Any other questions please let me know on here, on email, or on IRC (TheCavalry).

heh... well we've all made interesting friend choices, and occasionally they bite us on the bum a bit! - Am I right in thinking that there's a ton of deleted edits on 'that' article then? - I also vaguely recall that, probably as part of your support of your friend in getting involved, that you sort of played along a little with some kinda cheeky edits? - I think a good sense of humour is going to be important if you get near an arb chair, mind :-) cheers, Privatemusings (talk) 23:57, 18 November 2010 (UTC)
I should add that my recollections are often unreliable! - the fact that all the edits are now deleted makes it rather hard for me to remind myself further. cheers, Privatemusings (talk) 00:02, 19 November 2010 (UTC)
I didn't play along, I didn't think. All the vandalistic edits I knew about him making I informed other users about by IRC or email, so they could deal with it rather than disrupting my relationship with him. After a while though, my patience grew thin. I'm all for a sense of humour, but when you take it as far as he did with Stan Shebs (talk · contribs), it's just not cricket, is it? Chase me ladies, I'm the Cavalry (talk) 01:29, 19 November 2010 (UTC)
thanks for the reponse, chase - and good luck! :-) Privatemusings (talk) 23:18, 21 November 2010 (UTC)

Inappropriate content in your voting guide.[edit]

The comment below, in my opinion, is inappropriate for a guide. Yes, it can be seen as humorous, but the point of a guide is to express your opinion and inform voters of your thoughts. "Vote this way" is implied, but actually saying it pushes the boundaries. I am saying this not as a coordinator, but as an individual, and therefore I am making a request that you remove the comment.

"Please feel free to vote exactly as I suggest below - in fact, it's probably for the best;"

Your consideration is appreciated. Sven Manguard Talk 20:34, 20 November 2010 (UTC)

Thanks for the note, Sven - I hope you might understand if I note that your choice of title for this thread is a edgy - I see your point of view that my page pushes the boundaries, but I'm afraid I don't agree that it's over the line, or in fact, inappropriate. Hopefully people will get their brain in gear as they make their decisions, if they do, then I trust nothing but goodness can come from my guide, and if they don't, then I doubt it's my guide that's going to be the problem ;-) thanks for your volunteer efforts around the place in sorting the election out, and I'm happy to talk further as to why I'm respectfully declining your request for me to remove the comment, if you'd like.... cheers, Privatemusings (talk) 23:18, 21 November 2010 (UTC)
If someone can't see it as humourous then there is little prospect they are able to make their own voting decision:). - BorisG (talk)
Fine, fine. I'm pessimistic about the presence of common sense and even occasionally basic intelligence when it comes to human beings, especially when voting. If you want to make me really happy, and don't want to change the message, add a :) at the end. That would make your humorous intentions absolutely clear. If not, fine. At this point, I have far bigger issues to worry about than a few zombies (people that vote without doing research/based on what other people tell them). Cheers, Sven Manguard Talk 02:55, 23 November 2010 (UTC)

Arbcom elections[edit]

Until & unless the Foundation chooses to abolish the ID requirement, Giacomo's candidacy is effectively over. GoodDay (talk) 05:23, 3 December 2010 (UTC)

are you interested in discussing this further? Perhaps you'd like to know why I disagree with you? - either ways, you need to drop the 'oo' from the username, to be replaced with a "'" :-) Privatemusings (talk) 06:08, 3 December 2010 (UTC)
JW's re-clarification has rendered that discussion moot. PS: I prefer my current moniker. GoodDay (talk) 06:15, 3 December 2010 (UTC)
Would you say that statement is a fact, or opinion? (the former, obviously you're wrong on the later ;-) Privatemusings (talk) 06:16, 3 December 2010 (UTC)
The former should be a fact. The latter is personal choice. GoodDay (talk) 06:18, 3 December 2010 (UTC)
'should be' implies (to me) that there's an element of interpretation, and hence opinion - did you intend that? Privatemusings (talk) 06:22, 3 December 2010 (UTC)I like your username, of course! I wonder if MediaWiki will one day be able to re-interpret language colloquially to satisfy my peccadilloes? ;-)
Yep, it's my opinon. GoodDay (talk) 06:27, 3 December 2010 (UTC)
I wonder if you'd agree with me that the confuddling of facts and opinions in wiki discussions is a rather persistent source of disruption (with no blame attached) - I suppose one has to consider whether there are reasonable grounds for differences of opinion when a) making assertions - but more importantly b) before taking active steps to inhibit discussion. In this matter, I think your opinion is entirely reasonable, but I happen to disagree - could you say the same? If not, would you like me to explain further why I feel that way? Privatemusings (talk) 06:32, 3 December 2010 (UTC)
Differing opinons have never bothered me. Wikipedia would be an over-whelmingly boring place, if everybody agreed. GoodDay (talk) 06:34, 3 December 2010 (UTC)
we can go a step further, I reckon, and say that the exploration of differing opinions is vital to the health of a wiki - I wonder if you, like me, feel that things like 'archive boxes' (and to a far lesser degree, assertions such as yours that the discussion is moot) run the risk of squishing dissenting opinions - a bad thing. Privatemusings (talk) 06:37, 3 December 2010 (UTC)
Maybe some other time. GoodDay (talk) 06:41, 3 December 2010 (UTC)


I don't agree with Jimbo here [1] your comment was not trolling, but what I have been saying since Jimbo first permitted negative comment concerning my candidature to remain on his talk page. He either regards hinself as a constitutional monarch (with all that entails) or an autocrat. If he's the latter, then the admins become his private police force and all others shoudld do as they are ordered or go away and we certainly don't requite any elections. I'm unsure if I will get suficient votes, but I am sure that imediatly after this election, a priority must be to clarify his position firmly in definitive policy because at the moment his behaviour and actions are not those of a constiturional monarch or an autocrat, but that of a pretender desperate to claim some authrority and recognition. It's my view, that as a result of his biased interferance the election has been corrupted.  Giacomo  10:51, 3 December 2010 (UTC)

So, it was you who re-opened that poll. Defying JW? Jeepers, you're even braver then Giacomo. GoodDay (talk) 15:28, 3 December 2010 (UTC)

nah, it's not brave - jimmy and I are old wiki buddies :-) - we'll probably laugh about this over a beer or cocktail somewhere beachy soon :-) Privatemusings (talk) 23:19, 5 December 2010 (UTC)

Thank you[edit]

Thank you for your support in your voter guide, which certainly provided a different perspective from many of the others. Regards, Newyorkbrad (talk) 01:54, 10 December 2010 (UTC)

I (finally) replied at brad's page :-) Privatemusings (talk) 23:22, 10 January 2011 (UTC)

Nomination for deletion of Template:Rejectedprettyquick[edit]

Ambox warning pn.svgTemplate:Rejectedprettyquick has been nominated for deletion. You are invited to comment on the discussion at the template's entry on the Templates for discussion page. Thank you. — This, that, and the other (talk) 00:54, 16 January 2011 (UTC)

Proposed deletion of Richard Symonds[edit]

Ambox warning yellow.svg

The article Richard Symonds has been proposed for deletion because of the following concern:

non-notable deceased brit

While all contributions to Wikipedia are appreciated, content or articles may be deleted for any of several reasons.

You may prevent the proposed deletion by removing the {{proposed deletion/dated}} notice, but please explain why in your edit summary or on the article's talk page.

Please consider improving the article to address the issues raised. Removing {{proposed deletion/dated}} will stop the proposed deletion process, but other deletion processes exist. In particular, the speedy deletion process can result in deletion without discussion, and articles for deletion allows discussion to reach consensus for deletion. LiteralKa (talk) 01:05, 29 July 2011 (UTC)

Sydney meetup[edit]

Hi again Peter. There's another Sydney meetup on Wikipedia:Meetup/Sydney/November_2011. Hope to see you there. --99of9 (talk) 01:35, 14 November 2011 (UTC)

dagnammit.. was probably not far away, but never mind.... I might be pulling an arnie soon(ish)..... (arrlllll be bark) Privatemusings (talk) 08:06, 13 December 2011 (UTC)
No problem, I'm sure there'll be another chance. --99of9 (talk) 08:48, 13 December 2011 (UTC)
indeedy - I'll look out for it :-) Privatemusings (talk) 07:36, 21 December 2011 (UTC)

Julian Assange[edit]

I have been working on The Family article and have just found out that Julian Assange spent his first 3 years in this cult (I can provide the ref if you like). However, in the Julian Assange article it says that he "believed" that his new father belonged to this cult. Assuming you wrote the article, can you please elaborate on what "believed" means? I need to clarify this because it is worth putting in The Family. Thanks.

Sardaka (talk) 07:17, 14 December 2011 (UTC)

didn't write that bit, but it sounds rather weaselly to me - otoh, personally I dunno that it's (his relationship to 'The Family') worth anything more than a teeny tiny incidental passing mention for what that's worth Privatemusings (talk) 07:36, 21 December 2011 (UTC)

Speedy deletion nomination of Template:Drowning, not waving[edit]

A tag has been placed on Template:Drowning, not waving requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section T3 of the criteria for speedy deletion because it is a deprecated or orphaned template. After seven days, if it is still unused and the speedy deletion tag has not been removed, the template will be deleted.

If the template is intended to be substituted, please feel free to remove the speedy deletion tag and please consider putting a note on the template's page indicating that it must be substituted so as to avoid any future mistakes (<noinclude>{{substituted}}</noinclude>).

If you think that this notice was placed here in error, contest the deletion by clicking on the button labelled "Click here to contest this speedy deletion". Doing so will take you to the talk page where you will find a pre-formatted place for you to explain why you believe the page should not be deleted. You can also visit the page's talk page directly to give your reasons, but be aware that once tagged for speedy deletion, if the page meets the criterion, it may be deleted without delay. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag yourself, but don't hesitate to add information to the page that would render it more in conformance with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. If the page is deleted, you can contact one of these administrators to request that the administrator userfy the page or email a copy to you. Bulwersator (talk) 09:15, 14 December 2011 (UTC)

this notice generally, but the third para in particular, makes little sense, is confusing, poorly written and offers direction to non-existent or difficult to find buttons and procedures - I'll wonder if I can nominate it for deletion ;-) Privatemusings (talk) 07:34, 21 December 2011 (UTC) ps. please don't delete that template, or please bung it in my userspace, or something Privatemusings (talk) 07:34, 21 December 2011 (UTC)

Sydney Meetup[edit]

This time I'll give you a little extra warning. A meetup will be held on Saturday May 5th at the Alexandria Hotel, further information can be found on the meetup page. We look forward to seeing you there! --99of9 (talk) 14:34, 27 April 2012 (UTC)

clearly not enough warning! - The planets will align before 2020, I'm sure :-) Privatemusings (talk) 06:33, 10 August 2012 (UTC)

There will be another workshop on 10 November looking at disability. Hope you can make it! ;) John Vandenberg (chat) 23:13, 29 October 2012 (UTC)

I might well be able to pop in - depends where it is - I'll ask over at the meetup page :-) Privatemusings (talk) 01:29, 31 October 2012 (UTC)

Tomorrow's Symposium[edit]

Just a quick reminder to everyone who has indicated their interest on-wiki. The Wikimedia in Higher Education symposium at The University of Sydney is on tomorrow. We have a full day of speakers and workshops, and about 45-50 participants. Don't worry if you haven't officially registered, a few extra won't hurt. See you there. --99of9 (talk) 02:43, 4 April 2013 (UTC)


Hello, You've been around long enough to know how seriously WP:BLP is taken, and if you deliberately violate it again it's likely that you will be blocked from editing, so please knock it off. Regards, Nick-D (talk) 11:27, 7 April 2013 (UTC)

G'day Nick - I understand you feel this is a biography of living people violation, but could you explain why? - User:Ghmyrtle mentioned in his edit summary that he didn't think we should link to the sydney morning herald, or twitter on the talk page, but I'm not sure that's sustainable, or really a good idea? I think it's reasonable at this point to actually engage a little on the talk page and establish a consensus as to whether or not material should or shouldn't be in the article - to my mind, that's sort of a better way for the wiki to work, rather than a somewhat unclear interpretation of the biography policy - whaddya reckon? Privatemusings (talk) 11:35, 7 April 2013 (UTC)
ps - should we ask for some more thoughts on this at a noticeboard? I dunno really - but it might help? Privatemusings (talk) 11:39, 7 April 2013 (UTC)
Unless I've missed something, there are no reliable sources which actually name the person in question, and I've read that their name is actually suppressed until they're either charged by the police or choose to self-identify. If you're aware of a reliable source which states a link (naming names explicitly, which the article you provided did not do), please provide it. Otherwise it's a clear BLP breach as it's massively negative material about a person not supported by reliable sources. There's not really much to discuss without explicit sources. Regards, Nick-D (talk) 11:47, 7 April 2013 (UTC)
heh... perhaps our difference of approach here is best illustrated by asking you if you think that Peter F's column might not be referring to RH? - Or perhaps you're saying that unless and until a paper makes the claim in black and white, we can't link to other reliable sources, such as Peter F's column? (which is a good source for what Peter F of the smh thinks, and not much more ;-) - out of interest, is 3aw a reliable source for something along the lines of '3aw reported that... blah blah blah'? - would you mind if I asked for some more eyes on this one over at the blp noticeboard? Privatemusings (talk) 12:02, 7 April 2013 (UTC)
That column obviously doesn't name names - like several other gutless journalists he hints at who the supposed person is, but then pulls back without naming them. Derryn Hinch is clearly not a reliable source. Please drop this - without an explicit and reliable source nothing is going to be added to the article, and raising the profile of this matter in the way you suggest is a really bad idea. Nick-D (talk) 12:10, 7 April 2013 (UTC)

< yeah, this was Rolf Harris related. Sad. Privatemusings (talk) 03:53, 15 January 2014 (UTC)

File:Pathwordle.png missing description details[edit]

Dear uploader: The media file you uploaded as:

is missing a description and/or other details on its image description page. If possible, please add this information. This will help other editors make better use of the image, and it will be more informative to readers.

If you have any questions, please see Help:Image page. Thank you. Message delivered by Theo's Little Bot (opt-out) 16:01, 22 June 2013 (UTC)

Wikis in Australian Aboriginal languages[edit]

Hello, Privatemusings. I just want to tell you, as you were interested in australian aboriginal wikis, that two test wikis of pitjantjatjara language exist and there is also a test in Torres Strait Creole. Here are the links of the aboriginal wikis: Pitjantjatjara Wikipedia, Pitjantjatjara Wiktionary.--Biol. Cons. (talk) 00:47, 23 July 2013 (UTC)

RFAR amendment request[edit]

At [2], I have requested an amendment to a principle involved in your sockpuppetry case. Ponjuseme (talk) 22:34, 26 October 2014 (UTC)

Arbitration amendment request(Privatemusings)[edit]

An arbitration amendment request(Privatemusings), involving you, has been archived, because the request was declined.

The original discussion can be found here. For the arbitration committee --S Philbrick(Talk) 12:50, 4 November 2014 (UTC)

this made me smile. If I'm reasonably careful, all will be well :-) Privatemusings (talk) 23:16, 14 July 2015 (UTC)

Category:Articles containing video clips[edit]

Category:Articles containing video clips, which you created, has been nominated for possible deletion, merging, or renaming. If you would like to participate in the discussion, you are invited to add your comments at the category's entry on the Categories for discussion page. Thank you. — xaosflux Talk 04:01, 19 December 2014 (UTC)

File permission problem with File:Swan family.jpg[edit]

Thanks for uploading File:Swan family.jpg. I noticed that while you provided a valid copyright licensing tag, there is no proof that the creator of the file has agreed to release it under the given license.

If you are the copyright holder for this media entirely yourself but have previously published it elsewhere (especially online), please either

  • make a note permitting reuse under the CC-BY-SA or another acceptable free license (see this list) at the site of the original publication; or
  • Send an email from an address associated with the original publication to, stating your ownership of the material and your intention to publish it under a free license. You can find a sample permission letter here. If you take this step, add {{OTRS pending}} to the file description page to prevent premature deletion.

If you did not create it entirely yourself, please ask the person who created the file to take one of the two steps listed above, or if the owner of the file has already given their permission to you via email, please forward that email to

If you believe the media meets the criteria at Wikipedia:Non-free content, use a tag such as {{non-free fair use}} or one of the other tags listed at Wikipedia:File copyright tags#Fair use, and add a rationale justifying the file's use on the article or articles where it is included. See Wikipedia:File copyright tags for the full list of copyright tags that you can use.

If you have uploaded other files, consider checking that you have provided evidence that their copyright owners have agreed to license their works under the tags you supplied, too. You can find a list of files you have created in your upload log. Files lacking evidence of permission may be deleted one week after they have been tagged, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. You may wish to read Wikipedia's image use policy. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you. Stefan2 (talk) 22:26, 24 September 2015 (UTC)

arrrrrgggghhh!!! Too complicated! Didn't really read - sorry! Privatemusings (talk) 00:01, 8 February 2016 (UTC)

ArbCom elections are now open![edit]

You appear to be eligible to vote in the current Arbitration Committee election. The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to enact binding solutions for disputes between editors, primarily related to serious behavioural issues that the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the ability to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail. If you wish to participate, you are welcome to review the candidates' statements and submit your choices on the voting page. For the Election committee, MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 13:35, 24 November 2015 (UTC)

well thank you for the note, Mdann - I'll see you around :) Privatemusings (talk) 00:01, 8 February 2016 (UTC)


I've been enjoying your "Wikivoices (Not the Wikipedia Weekly)" podcast episodes from years ago. It was some good content. Chris Troutman (talk) 12:53, 5 May 2016 (UTC)

well thankee you, Chris :) - Privatemusings (talk) 00:06, 2 August 2016 (UTC)

MfD nomination of Wikipedia:BLP Summit[edit]

Ambox warning orange.svg Wikipedia:BLP Summit, a page which you created or substantially contributed to (or which is in your userspace), has been nominated for deletion. Your opinions on the matter are welcome; you may participate in the discussion by adding your comments at Wikipedia:Miscellany for deletion/Wikipedia:BLP Summit and please be sure to sign your comments with four tildes (~~~~). You are free to edit the content of Wikipedia:BLP Summit during the discussion but should not remove the miscellany for deletion template from the top of the page; such a removal will not end the deletion discussion. Thank you. Steel1943 (talk) 23:00, 4 October 2016 (UTC)

ArbCom Elections 2016: Voting now open![edit]

Scale of justice 2.svg Hello, Privatemusings. Voting in the 2016 Arbitration Committee elections is open from Monday, 00:00, 21 November through Sunday, 23:59, 4 December to all unblocked users who have registered an account before Wednesday, 00:00, 28 October 2016 and have made at least 150 mainspace edits before Sunday, 00:00, 1 November 2016.

The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail.

If you wish to participate in the 2016 election, please review the candidates' statements and submit your choices on the voting page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 22:08, 21 November 2016 (UTC)

Nomination for deletion of Template:Drowning, not waving[edit]

Ambox warning blue.svgTemplate:Drowning, not waving has been nominated for deletion. You are invited to comment on the discussion at the template's entry on the Templates for discussion page. Ten Pound Hammer(What did I screw up now?) 01:29, 5 June 2017 (UTC)