User talk:Recurring dreams/Archives/2007/July

AFD

I suspect you did not consider why the article was nominated, or went to it to see the NPOV issues it contains. Please do so, and consider changing your comments, and if you have a legitimate problem with my nominations please raise it on my talk page Sploooshman 09:48, 30 June 2007 (UTC)

please do not feel any real need to answer. Comments on opinions at afd should generally be expressed at afd, not user talk pages. DGG 00:30, 1 July 2007 (UTC)

Actually an answer would be appreciated, all editors are expected to act in good faith, and failing to consider the material in a debate and instead calling for its close based on facts irrelevant to the debate is an issue that can be raised not only on the debate page but also a user talk page (as the comments made can be considered against a particular user rather than for/against an article). I would appreciate it if DGG did not make up policy and leave matters between two users to those two users Sploooshman 10:24, 1 July 2007 (UTC)

rv'ing vandalism

thx for helping me keep wikipedia vandal-free tonite! -Superbeecat 09:42, 3 July 2007 (UTC)

Waverley College

I was just about to say that somebody already reverted his edits. :) Have a nice day Gizza^{Discuss ©} 03:15, 4 July 2007 (UTC)

Hamersley

the Hamersley article I encountered before editing was very excessive in detail containing verbose language, and kind of detail like listing the scientific name of every single bottlebrush found on a plain (I've never ever seen that in a locality article). to be absolutely honest, and I patrol around a lot of locality articles, it should not be a featured article nor good article, because it is not encyclopaedic and written verbosely in parts instead of being concise and to the point and it mixes a lot of very localised non notable information amongst the main text. Michellecrisp 12:14, 5 July 2007 (UTC)

as with most things, if you search long enough you can dig up more information till the cows come home. notability and relevance are primary reasons for including more content. examples like this show unencyclopaedic writing [1] everywhere in Australia uses the same voting system! or do people really care about the scientific name of every plant species in every suburb? I think not. This is verbose too [2] if there is no mention of private schools one can safely assume there aren't any. on the same token, it might as well have said Hamersley has no universities or medical research facilities. Michellecrisp 12:28, 5 July 2007 (UTC)

You said " We can't assume readers will know the systems and practices of Australia" then every locality entry should include that info. or perhaps that people drive on left hand side of the road. my point is that info for a locality should be specific to that locality. Using your argument, I should have not made this delete today [3]. you should see that this line should not be added to every locality in Australia where wool is mentioned. Michellecrisp 13:00, 5 July 2007 (UTC)

A general comment on how an external factor is influencing a local industry is fine. but back to my original point. if someone wanted to know more about the voting system at state level in Hamersley all they needed to do was click on Western Australian Legislative Assembly. that is what links are for. Michellecrisp 13:31, 5 July 2007 (UTC)

Thanks very much for looking out for this one - I've been out of the city and nowhere near internet for days, so it came as a big surprise that these major changes are taking place. Orderinchaos 04:33, 6 July 2007 (UTC)

Article writing

Seeing as you're currently opposing me because of my lack of article writing, I would appreciate if you looked at this. I hope you don't mind me posting this on your talk page, but I know some people probably don't watchlist everything they ever edit. Thanks, R ^ParlateContribs_@ (Let's Go Yankees!) 02:08, 7 July 2007 (UTC)

barnstar

Thanks for my first ever wiki award!! I'll keep on keeping on, same back at ya. -Superbeecat 19:41, 9 July 2007 (UTC)

Thanks for the welcome

I'm fairly new to everything and am looking forward to contributing to Wikipedia. One question I had and was hoping you can answer is how do I get a user page started? Thanks! --Jeffss 07:30, 10 July 2007 (UTC)

Hi! You're user page is here [4]. Or click on your username on the top right hand corner of the screen. It will be blank initially, but you can add material to it. Recurring dreams 07:32, 10 July 2007 (UTC)

Many thanks for the quick response. Much appreciated. --Jeffss 07:38, 10 July 2007 (UTC)

No problem. Recurring dreams 07:39, 10 July 2007 (UTC)

Thanks!

I'm not exactly new, though I haven't made a huge number of changes (editing for some years, actually signed up July 2006). I'm totally embarrassed I forgot to sign my last changes.

Someday I'll have to actually make a home page here. Thanks for the helpful suggestions. See you around the site :-)

alexfiles 01:19, 14 July 2007 (UTC)

Thanks for the welcome; and now, a question...

Hi, I just started on wikipedia a few hours ago because I have a geeky love of editing things and thought I'd help "wikify" a few articles. I was just wondering whether you had much experience doing this and whether you had any comments / thoughts / tips. How do you remove an article from the list of articles that need to be wikified once you think you've fixed it? As I'm still a little unsure what I'm doing is there some way to check that I've done it right? Thanks in advance for your help. --Banny83 14:16, 15 July 2007 (UTC)

Hi! First of all, "wikifying" a page means adding internal links to a page, meaning linking words to other wikipedia pages. Pages needing to be wikified often have a box at the top saying they need to be wikified. Once you believe you've wikified the article, you can remove the {wikify} tag at the top of the page. This will automatically remove the article from the category of articles needing to be wikified. More information can be found here: WP:WFY and Wikipedia:WikiProject Wikify. Recurring dreams 14:23, 15 July 2007 (UTC)

More generally, you can copy edit or cleanup articles. It requires no authorisation or removal or addition to lists. Remember to be bold. Recurring dreams 14:27, 15 July 2007 (UTC)

Some one is deleting my articles!

I also thank you for the welcoming. But, in the Super Smash Bros. Brawl section, someone is deleting my talks and I recently edited part of the article, but some one is deleting that, too! Do you know why? If it is a user, could you please find them? --Pezzar 02:40, 17 July 2007 (UTC)

You can look through the histories of the pages and compare the changes. If someone is deleting your additions, try to discuss the changes on the article's talk page, or on the user's talk page. Happy editing! Recurring dreams 12:54, 17 July 2007 (UTC)

ttn is a news and current affairs program

Given the context of a list of Australian news and current affairs programs, "ttn" fits in perfectly. It's main difference from the others listed is that it is pitched at a much younger audience. The ABC's similar "Behind the News" was once also listed, but as with most of the ABC-TV's news and current affairs programs, was removed for an unstated reason. matturn 11:21, 17 July 2007 (UTC)

I guess I agree with that reasoning. However it is a matter of limits. If ttn is added, then all the news and current affairs programs at ABC News and Current Affairs should be added, along with Behind the News, which is a lot more than there is in the template at the moment. Recurring dreams 12:10, 17 July 2007 (UTC)

Sajeeb Wazed

To be blunt, the answer you're looking for is in the template. It is an article about a person, group of people, band, club, company, or web content that does not assert the importance or significance of the subject. . There is no assertion of notability made in the article. The reviewing admin will probably reject the speedy if there are signs of notability, afterwards it would lead to WP:AFD --L^augh! 02:16, 19 July 2007 (UTC)

The research is yours to do. you are the one who is supposed to establish notability on a subject, not the person who sees that you plainly haven't. The burden of proof here is on you- you allege that the subject is notable, thus you must provide notability. Please see WP:CITE, and feel free to ask me if you have any questions --L^augh! 02:23, 19 July 2007 (UTC)

And what am I supposed to gain from that? Blog posts and an incredibly short article of him complaining about something? The burden of showing notability is on those that intend to prove it, not those that say it does not exist. In addition, the article is overwhelmingly written as a resume. --L^augh! 02:27, 19 July 2007 (UTC)

see this where there is nothing said about showing notability being on the person who claims something unnotable. The article itself also meets WP:A7 - again the one listed on the template, which says that the article asserts no notability. If you disagree with this, you must prevent some real sign of notability, not a link to a list of blogs. It is NOT on the editor who claims something to not meet notability to research anything, let alone spend their time going on a potential wild goose chase to do your work for you. -L^augh! 02:30, 19 July 2007 (UTC)

Simply put, no, it is not. Ask any administrator, I'm done trying to get this into your head. --L^augh! 02:33, 19 July 2007 (UTC)

Wikipedia:Featured article candidates/Age of Mythology

Thanks so much for your comments and advice here! If you're still interested, I've tried to address the concerns raised, so if you'd like to have a look some time it would be appreciated. Happy editing! Giggy _U^CP 00:15, 21 July 2007 (UTC)

Mordy High

Thank you for moving 'Mordialloc secondary college' to Mordialloc Secondary College - I didn't know how to do this. And thanks for your previous reverts of vandalism to this page; I've also added it to my watchlist, as vandalism is an ongoing problem with articles about schools. This page surely was a mess, but I hope it can escape deletion. The question of notability has arisen with many schools articles. DavidCooke 00:12, 25 July 2007 (UTC)

Ken Ticehurst

I have noticed that you have deleted a section of the Ken Ticehurst page that I edited recently. While I respect that you have been here a while, I would have appreciated you pointing the error out to me before simply deleting it. I am intending to work on NSW central Coast MPs, however since starting on the closest one to me I have been discussing content with another user and therefore have not moved on yet. I am happy to correct my oversight by providing source information for these items, however, I believe it is not ethical for me to simply undo your changes without raising this with you first. AusBrian 13:45, 26 July 2007 (UTC)

Point taken, I have copied that section to my own page and will work on it there and copy it back. Thanks for your comments AusBrian 11:52, 28 July 2007 (UTC)

Thanks!

		My RFA
		User:TenPoundHammer and his romp of Wikipedia-editing otters thank you for participating in Hammer's failed request for adminship, and for the helpful tips given to Hammer for his and his otters' next run at gaining the key. Also, Hammer has talked to the otters, and from now on they promise not to leave fish guts and clamshells on the Articles for Deletion pages anymore. Ten Pound Hammer • (((Broken clamshells • Otter chirps))) 17:01, 28 July 2007 (UTC)

Seeking your advice

Being new here I am seeking your advice on this:- As you know I raised the issue of Committees and Patron Associations for parliamentarian's pages on the Australian Politics Discussion page. While there has been a comment on the Patron and I now agree there has been no comment on the committees yet. How long should I leave it:- I have been holding off any other work till I sort out where I have been going wrong, don't want to start creating other MPs if the content is not going to make the grade. For a concensus I have sent this to three people User:Orderinchaos User:Recurring dreams & User:Golden Wattle all of you have guided my Wiki training thus far. AusBrian 06:54, 29 July 2007 (UTC)

My RfA

Hi, Recurring dreams, and thanks for your participation in my RfA. I've withdrawn it, and will be writing up an "analysis" of it, which will soon be available at User:Giggy/RfA/Giggy when it's done. Please come around when you get the chance, and give me feedback on how I can improve. Thanks again, Giggy _U^CP 04:23, 31 July 2007 (UTC)