User talk:Stackja1945

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

Welcome!

Hello, Stackja1945, and welcome to Wikipedia! Thank you for your contributions. I hope you like the place and decide to stay. Here are some pages that you might find helpful:

I hope you enjoy editing here and being a Wikipedian! Please sign your name on talk pages using four tildes (~~~~); this will automatically produce your name and the date. If you need help, check out Wikipedia:Questions, ask me on my talk page, or place {{helpme}} on your talk page and someone will show up shortly to answer your questions. Again, welcome! 

Allied Council for Japan[edit]

This article appears to be copy+pasted from another site, and as such consistitues copyright violation. See WP:COPYVIO. It is likely that the page will be removed. Please don't let this stop you from contributing other, more suitable, content to wikipedia in the future. Regards, --Oscarthecat 10:05, 17 September 2006 (UTC)

Edmund Hoyle Vestey[edit]

Copyright-problem.svg

This is an automated message from CorenSearchBot. I have performed a web search with the contents of Edmund Hoyle Vestey, and it appears to include a substantial copy of http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/main.jhtml?xml=/news/2007/11/28/db2801a.xml. For legal reasons, we cannot accept copyrighted text or images borrowed from other web sites or printed material; such additions will be deleted. You may use external websites as a source of information, but not as a source of sentences.

This message was placed automatically, and it is possible that the bot is confused and found similarity where none actually exists. If that is the case, you can remove the tag from the article and it would be appreciated if you could drop a note on the maintainer's talk page. CorenSearchBot (talk) 04:09, 8 December 2007 (UTC)


Nuvola apps important.svg

A tag has been placed on Edmund Hoyle Vestey requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done because the article appears to be about a person, group of people, band, club, company, or web content, but it does not indicate how or why the subject is notable: that is, why an article about that subject should be included in an encyclopedia. Under the criteria for speedy deletion, articles that do not assert the subject's importance or significance may be deleted at any time. Please see the guidelines for what is generally accepted as notable.

If you think that you can assert the notability of the subject, you may contest the deletion by adding {{hangon}} to the top of the page (just below the existing speedy deletion or "db" tag), coupled with adding a note on the article's talk page explaining your position, but be aware that once tagged for speedy deletion, if the article 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 article that would confirm the subject's notability under Wikipedia guidelines.

For guidelines on specific types of articles, you may want to check out our criteria for biographies, for web sites, for bands, or for companies. Feel free to leave a note on my talk page if you have any questions about this. -- Shadowlynk (Talk) 04:20, 8 December 2007 (UTC)

Information.svg Please refrain from introducing inappropriate pages, such as Edmund Hoyle Vestey, to Wikipedia. Doing so is not in accordance with our policies. If you would like to experiment, please use the sandbox. Thank you. -- Shadowlynk (Talk) 05:17, 8 December 2007 (UTC)

Not a Ruddslide?[edit]

Labor gained a 5.5 percent two-party swing... the only other Labor leader to gain or lose a bigger swing was Gough Whitlam. So Whitlam aside, Rudd gained the biggest two-party swing since two-party records were captured in 1949. Not a Ruddslide? Of course it was. Suck it back :-) Timeshift (talk) 07:02, 8 December 2007 (UTC)

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lies,_damned_lies,_and_statistics

lol ok, you don't believe there was a 5.5% swing. Enjoy your opposition. Timeshift (talk) 03:54, 10 December 2007 (UTC)

http://results.aec.gov.au/13745/website/ Currently 94.52% of the primary vote has been counted.

Your point being? That swing has been stable for ages now, it's not going to change much if at all. :-) Timeshift (talk) 08:54, 10 December 2007 (UTC)

Note that that figure will never reach 100% - it'll stop in the 95-96 region as not everybody actually turned up to vote. So for dramatic changes to occur in the remaining 1% of counting would be just plain odd, esp as many seats have now been officially declared (meaning every last vote has been counted and scrutinised) Orderinchaos 02:17, 11 December 2007 (UTC)

http://www.theaustralian.news.com.au/story/0,25197,22889385-5014046,00.html

The nine most marginal for Labor would all fall to the Coalition with a uniform swing of 2.92 per cent next time.

Yes, and that sort of swing only occurs with the change of government elections anyway. The only time you've got a swing that big is times like 1996, 1983, 1975 etc. Enjoy your opposition :-) Timeshift (talk) 00:53, 11 December 2007 (UTC)

Also there's an assumption here of uniform swing. In 1990 the election that Libs were on track to win was stymied by Victoria not going with the flow. In 1998 that same state caused exactly the opposite situation to occur. In 2004 SA defied the national trend to go towards Labor, as did the seats of Parramatta and Richmond in NSW. In 2007 WA defied the national trend with a much smaller swing to Labor, and two seats going to the Coalition. What I tend to look at is the "natural orientation" for want of a better word of booths and seats - in WA several Labor areas are held by the Liberals, while in QLD several Coalition areas are now held by Labor. In Victoria the balance is almost right, although La Trobe's a strange one (won by Liberal but most of its booths and area went to Labor) Orderinchaos 02:17, 11 December 2007 (UTC)

Labor self destructs anyway http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Joseph_Cook#Nationalist_Party http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/James_Scullin http://www.brisbanetimes.com.au/news/national/the-enemy-within-that-killed-curtin/2007/04/25/1177180661087.html http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/1949_Australian_coal_strike http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/H._V._Evatt#Breakdown_and_retirement http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Loans_Affair http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bob_Hawke#Decline_and_fall http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Paul_Keating#Leadership_rivalry

That leadership rivalry got us a fifth election win and 13 years in power thankyou very much! Unlike four election wins and 11 years. Oh and I love this stat - Australia's last 6 PMs, only two were Liberal. And one hates the other's guts. :D But if we are talking about parties self destructing, we only need look at the repeated failures and self-destruction of the previous conservative parties before the Libs, unlike Labor since 1891. Timeshift (talk) 02:10, 11 December 2007 (UTC)

Spoken like a True Believer http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_True_Believer

Edmund Hoyle Vestey[edit]

Greetings, Stackja1945. Your article, Edmund Hoyle Vestey, has been saved and expanded. It should be stable now but I'll keep an eye on it for a while. --Malcolmxl5 (talk) 12:52, 8 December 2007 (UTC)

Citation Templates[edit]

Hi Stackja1945. I made some changes to an edit you did on the Padraic McGuinness article. The quote needed to be sourced to who made it. Also, the reference needed formatting. I find it useful to use the Wikipedia:Citation_templates, which I copy and paste into articles and then fill in the blanks. Maybe that will be useful to you in future. Cheers, Lester 21:00, 28 January 2008 (UTC)


Malvin Wald[edit]

Information icon.svg

Hello, this is a message from an automated bot. A tag has been placed on Malvin Wald, by another Wikipedia user, requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. The tag claims that it should be speedily deleted because Malvin Wald is a test page.

To contest the tagging and request that administrators wait before possibly deleting Malvin Wald, 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. To see the user who deleted the page, click here CSDWarnBot (talk) 05:30, 15 March 2008 (UTC)

Proposed deletion of Peter Francis Cox[edit]

Ambox warning yellow.svg

A proposed deletion template has been added to the article Peter Francis Cox, suggesting that it be deleted according to the proposed deletion process. All contributions are appreciated, but this article may not satisfy Wikipedia's criteria for inclusion, and the deletion notice should explain why (see also "What Wikipedia is not" and Wikipedia's deletion policy). You may prevent the proposed deletion by removing the {{dated prod}} notice, but please explain why you disagree with the proposed deletion in your edit summary or on its talk page.

Please consider improving the article to address the issues raised because even though removing the deletion notice will prevent deletion through the proposed deletion process, the article may still be deleted if it matches any of the speedy deletion criteria or it can be sent to Articles for Deletion, where it may be deleted if consensus to delete is reached. LAAFansign review 00:39, 13 October 2008 (UTC)

Proposed deletion of Java murder of three Australian officers 17 April 1946[edit]

Ambox warning yellow.svg

The article Java murder of three Australian officers 17 April 1946 has been proposed for deletion because of the following concern:

Minor incident. Article has had no expansion and has been an orphan since its creation 4.5 years ago.

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. The speedy deletion process can result in deletion without discussion, and articles for deletion allows discussion to reach consensus for deletion. howcheng {chat} 22:54, 16 April 2011 (UTC)

Your submission at Articles for creation: TYREE, Sir William (Bill) (October 30)[edit]

AFC-Logo Decline.svg
Thank you for your recent submission to Articles for Creation. Your article submission has been reviewed. Unfortunately, it has not been accepted at this time. Please view your submission to see the comments left by the reviewer. You are welcome to edit the submission to address the issues raised, and resubmit if you feel they have been resolved.


Teahouse logo
Hello! Stackja1945, I noticed your article was declined at Articles for Creation, and that can be disappointing. If you are wondering or curious about why your article submission was declined please post a question at the Articles for creation help desk. If you have any other questions about your editing experience, we'd love to help you at the Teahouse, a friendly space on Wikipedia where experienced editors lend a hand to help new editors like yourself! See you there!

Your draft article, Wikipedia talk:Articles for creation/TYREE, Sir William (Bill)[edit]

Hello Stackja1945. It has been over six months since you last edited your WP:AFC draft article submission, entitled "TYREE, Sir William (Bill)".

The page will shortly be deleted. If you plan on editing the page to address the issues raised when it was declined and resubmit it, simply edit the submission and remove the {{db-afc}} or {{db-g13}} code. Please note that Articles for Creation is not for indefinite hosting of material deemed unsuitable for the encyclopedia mainspace.

If your submission has already been deleted by the time you get there, and you want to retrieve it, copy this code: {{subst:Refund/G13|Wikipedia talk:Articles for creation/TYREE, Sir William (Bill)}}, paste it in the edit box at this link, click "Save page", and an administrator will in most cases undelete the submission.

Thanks for your submission to Wikipedia, and happy editing. Rankersbo (talk) 09:37, 10 June 2014 (UTC)

Wikipedia talk:Articles for creation/TYREE, Sir William (Bill) concern[edit]

Hi there, I'm HasteurBot. I just wanted to let you know that Wikipedia talk:Articles for creation/TYREE, Sir William (Bill), a page you created, has not been edited in 6 months. The Articles for Creation space is not an indefinite storage location for content that is not appropriate for articlespace.

If your submission is not edited soon, it could be nominated for deletion. If you would like to attempt to save it, you will need to improve it.

You may request Userfication of the content if it meets requirements.

If the deletion has already occured, instructions on how you may be able to retrieve it are available at WP:REFUND/G13.

Thank you for your attention. HasteurBot (talk) 01:34, 9 January 2015 (UTC)

Your submission at Articles for creation: William Tyree has been accepted[edit]

AFC-Logo.svg
William Tyree, which you submitted to Articles for creation, has been created.
The article has been assessed as Start-Class, which is recorded on the article's talk page. You may like to take a look at the grading scheme to see how you can improve the article.

You are more than welcome to continue making quality contributions to Wikipedia. Note that because you are a logged-in user, you can create articles yourself, and don't have to post a request. However, you may continue submitting work to Articles for Creation if you prefer.

Thank you for helping improve Wikipedia!

DGG ( talk ) 07:44, 11 January 2015 (UTC)

ArbCom elections are now open![edit]

Hi,
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) 13:46, 23 November 2015 (UTC)

ArbCom Elections 2016: Voting now open![edit]

Scale of justice 2.svg Hello, Stackja1945. 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)