User talk:Xtra/Archive4

Education in Melbourne

Melbourne Grammar may not be public but does have an entrance examination (my brother goes there and he had to pass it). I used to "team teach" with Dr, Jon Carnegie and he has met some famous people such as Nelson Mandela and the Dalai Lama, he has even been featured in Educational headlines, more than any other Trinity Staff in the school's history. The sentence about Co-ordiante education is also important, as it 'is' unique in the world (as far as I know). In terms of accepting students with "disabilities," I'm told that Trinity is more tollerant than, for example, Melbourne Grammar (the latter is sometimes dismissed as "too English").Myrtone (the strict Australian wikipedian):-(

"But the sentence refers specifically to "public schools"" I was edting it to make that clear, until I edited it, the statement was not strictly correct (and in theory, nonsense, something wikipedia is not meant for), because it stated the they were only selectric entry schools in Melbourne, whereas they are the only selective entry public schools, Melbourne Grammar is the only independent school that has accademic entry requirements.Myrtone (the strict Australian wikipedian):-(

"Please stop adding nonsense to Wikipedia. It is considered vandalism." That's not what I was in thoery doing, I know my information about entrance exams is correct and you were in theory "adding nonsense" by reverting my edits.Myrtone (the strict Australian wikipedian):-(

Re: Australian Soccer

Why are you reverting my changes. I have put a lot of effort into trying to get a uniformity in Australian football disambiguations so that the average person who clicks on it (who is australia) gets where they want faster and better understands where they have ended up. I do not understand your mentality in this. Xtra 12:34, 5 April 2006 (UTC)

The redirect was decided and left, unchanged for at least two months after the issue was resolved. My motives for reversion are transparent – the page was there with no problems and then it was changed and caused problems, that is no coincidence. It is there for the same reason that a page about AFL is at Australian Football Hall of Fame. That is the official name of the hall of fame, even though there is another Australian Football Hall of Fame run by Football Federation Australia. There is a lengthy discussion at WP:AWNB (Australians!) from a while ago about this exact point - and it was decided that the hall of fame with the exact official name should take precedence. Similarly, there is only one Australian national football team, and it is definitely distinct from the two others (three if you include the All-Australian "team"). The qualifier "(soccer)" was added as a compromise in order for Australians who might have a 'double-take' when they saw the title of the page. The issue was decided (and precedents set in regards to other places where this occurs), there was no need for you to change it. AlbinoMonkey ^(Talk) 12:53, 5 April 2006 (UTC)

I hope you do not intend to replace the content of the page with what you have got in your sandbox. Even if I were to accept your page move, I would never accept you relegating the far more popular codes of football to the background in the national team disambiguation. Xtra 12:49, 5 April 2006 (UTC)

Haha no just an experiment on POV. AlbinoMonkey ^(Talk) 13:03, 5 April 2006 (UTC)

OK if that was your reason. However, I do not appreciate you treating my edits as bad faith. If you had a real reason then why were you attacking my motives? Xtra 12:55, 5 April 2006 (UTC)

I'm sorry if you took it this way but I assumed you were aware of the previous discussion about the page naming. There were several page moves and arguments that did not help the article, and it just irked me to see it had been moved again after the situation had settled down. Again sorry if I acted too strongly towards your edits. Thanks. AlbinoMonkey ^(Talk) 13:03, 5 April 2006 (UTC)

*sigh*

You, apparently, are a homophobe Sceptre ^(Talk) 13:53, 5 April 2006 (UTC)

That is nice to know. Seriously, why perpetuate this moron's nonsense here? Xtra 14:07, 5 April 2006 (UTC)

Well, as it's directed to you, so it'd be nice to know why he's saying this Sceptre ^(Talk) 14:12, 5 April 2006 (UTC)

And he can spell too! You are, after all, "SUK A PRICK"....It's amazing that with spelling like that he can use a PC. -- Mkamensek ^(talk) -The LeftOverChef 14:16, 5 April 2006 (UTC)

Here's some more. Must be school time in AU right now. — nathanrdotcom ^{(T • C • W)} 10:12, 7 April 2006 (UTC)

Also see the discussion here. Not sure if you've already seen this. See you around. --LV ^{(Dark Mark)} 01:42, 8 April 2006 (UTC)

No problem. I think we all like to know when we are being talked about. See ya. --LV ^{(Dark Mark)} 02:20, 8 April 2006 (UTC)

Ruddock

Would you like me to delete from the article history those revisions with abusive edit summaries? Snottygobble 11:57, 7 April 2006 (UTC)

[1]. Snottygobble 05:40, 10 April 2006 (UTC)

No worries. I've only deleted the revisions where the edit summaries themselves were obscene/libellous. Removal of edits with benign summaries but nasty content would have required me to look at every revision, and this would have taken absolutely ages. If you want to do the work of identifying other libellous revisions you'd like removed, I'll be happy to carry them out. Snottygobble 07:32, 10 April 2006 (UTC)

User checks

Has there been a check to see if these IPs are associated with users who have been abusive towards Xtra? Andjam 12:47, 7 April 2006 (UTC)

It's getting much worse very quickly. I think it may be related to this: Wikipedia:Requests for arbitration/PSYCH (I've posted a note at Wikipedia talk:Requests for arbitration/PSYCH. --Evan C (Talk) 05:51, 8 April 2006 (UTC)

Re: Arbitration

Fair enough, but someone really hates you, mate! Whoever is doing this (be it person or persons) has also committed to vandalising every page you edit ([2]) - I personally don't want that! --Evan C (Talk) 05:59, 8 April 2006 (UTC)

"I think this is a good reason to support the idea of only letting registered users edit."

Agreed! --Evan C (Talk) 05:59, 8 April 2006 (UTC)

Xtra, do you intend to do something about the constant vandalism you are suffering from? Judging from what I've read, someone has set up a site to give away free gmail accounts if they knock you down a peg. Who, oh who, could this be? Why are they not being dealt with accordingly? I wish some users (not yourself) would stop being so blind. michael ^talk 07:04, 9 April 2006 (UTC)

Vandalism

FWIW - I usually seem to be on the other side of political issues from you, and on occasion I've thought your comments were more abrasive than necessary. (Same could no doubt be said for me.) But since it came up on the Aus board and I hadn't commented on this before, I'm happy to go on record saying that the stalking is completely unacceptable. --Calair 12:01, 10 April 2006 (UTC) (Ed: Decided to remove the name; I doubt I've unjustly accused anybody, but I suppose I ought to set a good example. The stalking, OTOH, is objectionable regardless of what name the culprit/s might answer to.--Calair 14:11, 11 April 2006 (UTC))

Yeah, that's how I see it. I'd rather deal with a good-faith editor with differing views than a bad-faith one who happens to agree with me. --Calair 23:14, 10 April 2006 (UTC)

I'm going to leave it up for now. He made a complaint about this over at Wikipedia:Wikiquette_alerts#10_April_2006, and if any poor soul who read that has wandered over trying to figure out what's going on, I imagine the existing reversions & deletions would make things confusing enough without me adding to them. I think the record (including a long string of deleted defamatory edits by somebody with rather familiar activity patterns) will bear me out.

I suspect sooner or later this sort of nonsense will lead to semi-protection for the entire project, which will be a pity, but there doesn't seem to be much alternative. --Calair 12:21, 11 April 2006 (UTC)

Abuse

I've been called stuff like that by him. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Sliat 1981 (talk • contribs)

Really? Could you please show us?Tancred 09:16, 11 April 2006 (UTC)

Please don't drag this onto my user page. Try and sort it out without name calling. Xtra 09:17, 11 April 2006 (UTC)

Heads Up

It appears you've been targeted at the following site: http://www.revolutionaryleft.com/index.php?showtopic=48464

Be on the look out for vandalism that might occur on your user page. --Jelligraze 04:43, 12 April 2006 (UTC)

Why did you delete my vote?

Why did you delete my vote on Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Bush Crimes Commission (2nd nomination) [3]? --rogerd 02:32, 14 April 2006 (UTC)

Cognition's user page

Thanks, Xtra. I've removed the attacks and the promotion of LaRouche. Cheers, SlimVirgin ^(talk) 03:19, 17 April 2006 (UTC)

misidentifying vandal / getting confused on football page

Very sorry about that! Either had too many tabs open or clicked on "older edit" instead of version link. --Cedders 13:01, 21 April 2006 (UTC) I still haven't worked out quite what happened; must have misread diffs at least once, unless the edits were almost simultaneous. --Cedders 13:26, 21 April 2006 (UTC)

John Howard

If you think it misrepresents the laws, then feel free to write a more accurate summary based on the actual provisions of said laws, not rhetoric from either side. If you're unwilling to do that, please don't remove the otherwise perfectly true material that's there, and please don't editorialise. Ambi 11:57, 22 April 2006 (UTC)

That's a very biased explanation of it. If I added the ACTU's version as fact, you'd be screaming blue murder. So let us just concentrate on what the laws actually propose. Ambi 12:10, 22 April 2006 (UTC)

Block of User:Adam Carr

I believe my block is adequate and acceptable. He was calling people "commies" and "fidelists" on the page and has, quite unfortunately, been blocked for personal attacks before. During his block, and becuase he will not be editing for the duration of the block, the entire talk page can calm down. I am not taking sides on the talk page. One user asked me to do something about his abuse. I responded, but then I realised that he was also being slightly brash, I decided to warn him/her also. I think I will still keep the block in place for the small amount of time. Kilo-Lima|^(talk) 13:29, 23 April 2006 (UTC)

If you want me to unblock him, then I will; however I will be watching his edits on Talk:Cuba. Very well. Kilo-Lima|^(talk) 13:38, 23 April 2006 (UTC)

Stewart McArthur

Unfortunately, he's my local member back home (where, because I only live here during the uni term, I'm also still enrolled to vote AFAIK).

As Corangamite is traditionally a very safe Liberal seat, it's had a history of high-profile ministers, but for the last twenty years, we've been stuck with McArthur, who has never done anything in parliament apart from ask the occasional Dorothy Dixer and never will. The vandalism I just reverted that said that there were rumors that McArthur was actually dead isn't far off. On the other hand, Nockles, from what I've read, had the potential to at least do something as an MP. As the Labor candidate, Peter McMullin, is an ambitious turd who used his party connections to install himself as Geelong mayor, I'd have been heavily tempted to vote for Nockles. McArthur, on the other hand, makes McMullin look enticing. Ambi 00:27, 24 April 2006 (UTC)

I think you'll find that even in Geelong people can't just install themselves as mayor. You Western District folk may not like it, but the yokels have had the vote for some time now, and they sometimes use it to elect Labor candidates, egad! Adam 10:43, 30 April 2006 (UTC)

Pnatt

Thanks for the note. Let me know if he does anything block-worthy in the future. --Fang Aili ^說嗎? 02:48, 24 April 2006 (UTC)

If he vandalizes again after this block expires, I'll block him for 1 week. --Fang Aili ^說嗎? 15:13, 26 April 2006 (UTC)

I was about to block him but User:Jtdirl beat me to it. Pnatt is blocked for 1 week. Please feel free to contact me again should you need assistance. --Fang Aili ^說嗎? 23:28, 27 April 2006 (UTC)

Review

Just wondering if you might be able to take a look at History of Burnside for me and offer any advice on how to improve it before I put it up as a featured article candidate! Thanks, michael ^talk 11:31, 26 April 2006 (UTC)

Thankyou. michael ^talk 11:43, 26 April 2006 (UTC)

User:Pnatt

You were right when you said you were not making personal attacks against him (which means I was wrong in what I said, so I do apoligize), but I hope you see things from his vantage point. It seems you have scrutinized him; I'm not sure if that's because of his vandalistic edits having a direct effect on you personally, but he does feel intimitated. I haven't been made light of this sitaution until recently, so I don't know your side of the story (other than the fact that you are probably understandably upset), but perhaps you could be less scrutinizing towards him? That's just my advice. Please note that the CVU, which I am a part of, reverts vandalism almost immediately, so should anything come up we will take the appropriate action in the future. I hope you understand. Regards, --Pilot|guy 02:47, 28 April 2006 (UTC)

Cognition

I don't care what he puts at his user page, but I will rvt all his edits to articles on my watchlist. Adam 10:38, 30 April 2006 (UTC)

Rogerthat ^Talk 10:16, 3 May 2006 (UTC)

paypal link

I removed the paypal link from Pnatt's page. I know of no particular policy against such links (though it may exist), but common sense tells me this is not appropriate. --Fang Aili ^說嗎? 05:07, 5 May 2006 (UTC)

Common sense says that you shouldn't be concerned about what's on other people's user page. Pnatt 05:26, 5 May 2006 (UTC)

Common sense says that you should not be soliciting for donations. It also says that you should listen to the advice people give you. Xtra 05:45, 5 May 2006 (UTC)

Steven Baker

To claim that Steven Baker deserved to be rewarded with a 50 metre penalty is absurd. Pnatt 05:48, 5 May 2006 (UTC)

Being hit after kicking absurd? Swearing at the umpire absurd? If you wish to raise an issue about something that is in an article or that you want in an article, write it on that article's talk page. Bringing up edits that are no longer live is not helpfull to the project. Xtra 05:50, 5 May 2006 (UTC)

Get over yourself

• A. It is one "attack", as the grammar was wrong on the original entry. You should know that, as you have obviously gone through the edit history.
• B. Expressing an opinion on someone and how they feel about a particular article is hardly a personal attack. Calling someone a moron is a personal attack. (NB I am not calling you a moron, just making a point). Hence, I don't have to explain myself as I was not personally attacking you.
• C. If you had a gripe about what I thought about John Howard to another person then I really couldn't care less. If you started calling me a dickhead on other people's pages then I would have a problem with you.Dankru 08:49, 7 May 2006 (UTC)

Whatever. Dankru 09:10, 7 May 2006 (UTC)

Translizate 'welcome'

How do you like this? Welcome!

Hizzle Xtrizzle n thizzanx fo` yo contribizzles fo' real. I hope you like tha place n decide ta stay fo' sheezy.

Was "translizated" at gizoogle.

Myrtone (the strict Australian wikipedian)

POV

Your insertion is clearly POV in context. I suggest you review Wikipedia's neutrality policy for further detail to gain a better understanding of this. Aside from that, your attempted insertion is irrelevant and entirely beside the point, as I've already pointed out several times on the talk page. --Centauri 03:52, 11 May 2006 (UTC)

It is not irrelevant, it goes to the reliability of the POV poster. Xtra 03:53, 11 May 2006 (UTC)

I can't argue with you if you don't wish to apply basic standards of logic. --Centauri 04:00, 11 May 2006 (UTC)

3RR

I only reverted twice. Also the user who added the tag reverted 3 times and removed the warning from his page when I added it. Xtra 08:22, 11 May 2006 (UTC)

Don't post further nonsense on my talk page. --Centauri 08:23, 11 May 2006 (UTC)

Warning deleted per comments elsewhere. --Centauri 08:40, 11 May 2006 (UTC)

Patience

I agree, in theory. Perhaps we should have an article called List of users banned after prolonged edit wars with Adam Carr - sttarring Herschelkrustofsky, Skyring, Ruy Lopez and now Cognition - pour décourager les autres. Adam 05:40, 16 May 2006 (UTC)

Re:my talk page

Done. Cheers. enochlau (talk) 14:24, 20 May 2006 (UTC)

That might well be a solution. One problem there however is that then if he tries bypassing blocks by using other IPs and you block them, you get endless messages from other users saying "why are you blocking IP.xxxxx and you spend your time repeating ad nausaum the explanation. Having the account there but blocked means you can simply say "this is user x. See the background". It is often better to keep a user live at the account simply so that they can be kept an eye on rather than trying to keep an eye out for suspicious new users and new IPs. But it might as well come to that. He really is one prize asshole. FearÉIREANN\^{(caint) 04:30, 21 May 2006 (UTC)}

Brackswatch (again)

Could you take a look at the Steve Bracks page? I think that it was agreed a while ago that Brackswatch was wikisuitable. Thanks--schgooda 07:27, 5 June 2006 (UTC)

program vs programme

Program is the preferred Australian spelling and requesting a block for my edits is absurd. Pnatt 12:41, 5 June 2006 (UTC)

bastardisation of English

I figure you don't like American English much? —Preceding unsigned comment added by Pnatt (talk • contribs)

No, it cheapens the language and takes it away from its roots. Xtra 13:48, 5 June 2006 (UTC)

Pnatt has now been blocked for 5 weeks for disruption, one week more than the last time. His behaviour really is the pits. FearÉIREANN\^{(caint) 15:53, 5 June 2006 (UTC)}

Changing "programme" to "program" is a minor point and in line with current Australian usage, as listed in the Commonwealth's Style Manual and the Macquarie Dictionary. Please, can we treat this as something requiring a discussion on consensus, rather than escalating it? --Jumbo 22:35, 5 June 2006 (UTC)

I cannot find anything that indicates that "programme" remains current Australian usage. I appreciate the point about roots and origins, but as an encyclopaedia, we should keep up to date, and using words that have passed out of current use should be reserved for historical-type articles. Do you have any source indicating that "programme" is still in wide use? When even the ABC chooses the "program" spelling, then we really should accept it! --Jumbo 00:38, 6 June 2006 (UTC)

Psphos

• I have no objection to my place of employment being mentioned at the Psephos article.
• I hope you enjoyed Melbourne v St Kilda.

Adam 04:06, 6 June 2006 (UTC)

Legal help

Thanks for the reply. So many law students about the place, I forget who does what. I got what I needed. :) -- Longhair 04:56, 8 June 2006 (UTC)

Australian Workplace Agreement

Thanks for going through the Australian Workplace Agreement article noting where relevant citations should be. I have added all citations requested and a few more which I thought were required by the article. I have removed the check-NPOV from the article, but would welcome any extra feedback.--Takver 16:07, 11 June 2006 (UTC)

Costello

You know for a fact that he was never a member of Young Labor? Your evidence for this? (I don't have hard evidence at present that he was a member, but I know where to look). —Preceding unsigned comment added by Adam Carr (talk • contribs)

No-one has claimed he was an ALP member. The question is whether he joined the Young Labor group at Monash, and then the inter-uni Young Labor group. I think the photo is clear evidence that he did. I will ask some prople this week. Adam 06:25, 12 June 2006 (UTC)

I don't accept that he joined anything "out of expediency" - I give him credit for usually acting on principle, and even moreso then than now. He joined Young Labor at Monash because he was then a socially liberal Christian activist who disliked much about the Fraser government. He then moved to the right and joined the Liberals as his views changed. In both cases I think he acted on priciple - I would not at all bracket him with an opportunist slimeball like Brendan Nelson. Adam 05:12, 13 June 2006 (UTC)

Wikipedia talk:Articles for deletion/2006 FIFA World Cup - Group A

I can see why your user page has been vandalized so often. Kingjeff 13:57, 17 June 2006 (UTC)

You claim I'm making the personal attack when you're the one who called several users "Morons"? Kingjeff 14:23, 17 June 2006 (UTC)

Hun article

I am not going to be drawn into editing on this, but the comment at the Danby article needs to be changed. The expression "blacken the names" is not used in the Hun article. Nor is Jennie George directly quoted - it is only reported that she said certain things to Roger Price. Adam 06:36, 18 June 2006 (UTC)

OK will look into it. Xtra 06:37, 18 June 2006 (UTC)

Pnatt

Can I ask for your help in finding a satisfactory way out of this, please? I really really wish everyone would just sit on their hands re Pnatt until his block expires. It would be great if we could lead by example. --Jumbo 08:53, 18 June 2006 (UTC)