User talk:Beneaththelandslide

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Please leave comments below! If writing a message on a new topic, please start it beneath other topics at the bottom of the page and use a tier two heading (==text==). If you are elaborating on one already listed, please leave your message there. Don't forget to sign your comments with four tildes (~~~~). I'll reply on your talk page. Cheers! :)

Contents 1 Hispanics in World War II FAC 2 Blocked for 48 hours 3 Kevin Rudd 4 I hate to be a pedant, but... 5 FA ideas 6 Alexander Downer's Wikipedia comments 7 Election boxes 8 Good News 9 Talk:Christopher Pyne 10 St Mark's College 11 lol 12 Waterfall Gully 13 Don Dunstan 14 Peirs Akerman 15 Relevance of content 16 Duff 17 MIA? 18 Christmas 19 Happy New Year 20 A picture tells a thousand words 21 Real names 22 Adelaide Wikimeetup 3 23 Adelaide Wikimeetup 3 23.1 :( 23.2 Reminder 24 Disputed fair use rationale for Image:Felicia.jpg 25 3RR stolen generations 26 Stolen generations Nelson response 27 Wikimedia Australia incorporation meeting 28 International Democrat Union 29 Demographics of Australia 30 Talk:Playmander

[edit] Hispanics in World War II FAC

Your comments at Wikipedia:Featured article candidates/Hispanic Americans in World War II have been habitually incivil and comments such as these violate WP:AGF. Further such commentaries will result in a block for violations of these aforementioned policies. Thank you.--Jersey Devil 22:34, 15 August 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Blocked for 48 hours

You have been blocked from editing for violating Wikipedia policy, by continuing to violate WP:CIVIL and WP:NPA after warning. The duration of the block is 48 hours. If you believe this block is unjustified you may contest this block by replying here on your talk page by adding the text {{unblock|your reason here}}. You may also email the blocking administrator or any administrator from this list instead, or mail unblock-en-l@mail.wikimedia.org. [1]--Jersey Devil 23:19, 15 August 2007 (UTC)

Someone's not gonna be happy when he reads this... Timeshift 23:32, 15 August 2007 (UTC)

After having read the contributions, I want to place on the record my distain at this block. Timeshift 23:39, 15 August 2007 (UTC)

Wait--I'm blocked for pointing out the obvious? (and not my other comments) You should be de-sysoped, and blocked for wasting my time. Michael ^talk 23:51, 15 August 2007 (UTC)

Seems regardless of their ethnicity or political orientation, [some most touchy] Americans are indeed fools. Michael ^talk 02:14, 16 August 2007 (UTC)

Not a constructive comment given the circumstances BTL :P Timeshift 02:23, 16 August 2007 (UTC)

Ehhhh it's only 48 hours. I think I can get away with it. Michael ^talk 04:55, 16 August 2007 (UTC)

For the record this block seems a bit over the top. Firstly, I don't see more than one attempt to resolve the issue by other means, and secondly, 48 hours implies an earlier 24 hour has been exhausted and, while you got blocked way back in February over what one could argue are similar issues, that block got lifted per consensus as the unblock reason stated. If that block had been last month and not lifted, I would consider differently. Also, while there's nothing against the same admin warning and then blocking, it would have seemed more reasonable to involve a second person. I'm going to take a WP:BOLD decision and reduce it to 24 hours per the above reasoning. Orderinchaos 07:13, 16 August 2007 (UTC)

Note that my reset of the block does not constitute acceptance of the block, but the decision to unblock entirely is not mine to make. I've lodged a request for review in the appropriate place. Orderinchaos 07:19, 16 August 2007 (UTC)

• I've lifted the block now after discussion at WP:ANI ([2]). Fut.Perf. ☼ 09:33, 16 August 2007 (UTC)

If anyone's watching:

• Cheers to my support squad, and admins who deserve their sys-op functions;
• My criticism of the ethnic / cultural / whatever bandwagon has not been attended to, neither the defects with the article itself;
• I am lax to attend to them due to my previous involvement.

Ta ta. Michael ^talk 01:56, 17 August 2007 (UTC)

I can't believe that the article is getting so many votes. Having said that you should keep an eye on the basketball articles being put on FAC and GAC with lots of hyperbole. On another note, I was surprised to check Ahmedabad and find that it had passed so easily despite a lot of the info not actually all being in the footnote. Since I didn't look too carefully at most of the stuff I didn't understand, I just honed into teh cricket and sport section. It was totally unsourced. To describe a player who played only 7 Tests (Jasu Patel) as a "legend" is out of order imho, and to say that Parthiv Patel (remember the Indian gloveman who toured Australia last time and dropped catches on a routine basis) as a "star" seems not right either. Especially when teh para cited those two as evidence of A'bad's rich sporting tradition. Blnguyen (bananabucket) 05:27, 20 August 2007 (UTC)

Well Sandy and Tony are the tough ones but they only seem to check the MOS and prose. You can pass heaps of things with black holes. Even with the Ahmedabad one heaps of the Indian FA writers (some with multiple and 10+ FAs) let the unsourced bits through anyway. As far as the content goes, it's possible to pass almost anything....(or lack thereof). Adam Gilchrist was passing rather handsomely until I stepped in and insisted that a few black holes be rectified. Blnguyen (bananabucket) 08:25, 20 August 2007 (UTC)

Unfortunately even the most experienced FA writers seem to put too much emphasis on prose and MOS imho. Although even if you have a strong writing contingent, there will always be some project members who don't write so much themselves and thus tend to support very liberally as they don't put such a high price on an FA. Blnguyen (bananabucket) 08:41, 20 August 2007 (UTC)

Well let me compare:Gilchrist Bill O'Reilly and Harbhajan FAs., Both are similar and both were copyedited by ALoan

Gilchrist (14 votes: 8 project supports: 1 Australian vote: not WProj member)

Harbhajan (18 votes: 9 project supports. 5 Indian votes, 3 of which are not Wikiproject members)

O'Reilly (12 votes: 10 project supports: 2 Aus votes, both project members)

We aren't patriotic enough. lol. Blnguyen (bananabucket) 06:22, 24 August 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Kevin Rudd

I noticed you reverted some material on the Kevin Rudd article. If you're interested, I've started a thread on the Talk page regarding those allegations, and you'd be welcome to join in the consensus-hashing there. BigHaz - Schreit mich an 11:29, 19 August 2007 (UTC)

[edit] I hate to be a pedant, but...

It's der Fuhrer, not das Fuhrer. German is a language with almost as many articles as Wikipedia, so it's easy enough to get confused. --Pete 23:31, 20 August 2007 (UTC)

[edit] FA ideas

Looking for an FA idea? How about Archibald Peake? He seems like your kinda guy, and had one of the more successful premier-ships in SA history... (needs fixing too, After Price's death, the Labor Party demanded the Premier position for its new leader John Verran. Price refused and was able to form a Government which lasted for a year makes no sense... Timeshift 19:21, 22 August 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Alexander Downer's Wikipedia comments

What do want to do about these comments? [3] I think they are relevant to this website and can be quoted without bias. Do you want them out altogether or will you approve a reference? —Preceding unsigned comment added by Cjblair (talk • contribs) 11:22, August 24, 2007 (UTC)

Sigh..no matter how much you want to spin it, Alexander Downer's ignorance concerning Wikipedia IS notable. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Pastormaker (talk • contribs) 14:31, August 24, 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Election boxes

Hi there. I see you've added an election box for the 2001 election on Division of Sturt. This is great! (I'm glad to see I'm not the only one doing these!) The only thing is, your one is in the order of the candidate with the most votes, whereas all the others are in ballot paper order. I've been struck by this recently, and I started a discussion on it here. Hope to hear from you soon. Frickeg 07:46, 29 August 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Good News

My "puff piece", "garbage" and "trash" article will now accompany your FA "puff pieces", "garbage" and "trash". No, really I'm only joking. There are no hard feelings on my part and as far as I'm concerned it is water under the bridge. Take care and keep up your good work. Tony the Marine 03:57, 31 August 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Talk:Christopher Pyne

I realise you only mentioned it to deride it as a joke that it be included in the article, however in mentioning the specific rumour on the talk page you have left an openly available reference to the rumour on the talk page which Wikipedia could be liable for, just as liable as it would be if it was on the mainspace page. I would suggest an easy fix would be to delete the reference you have made to the specific rumour and replace it with a series of dashes (----). Cheers, WikiTownsvillian 09:10, 24 September 2007 (UTC)

yeah thanks, I looked up the link from the history of the article and have been reading through the material, and I must agree with the blogger that the person who looks the worst from this is the journalist involved for using such nonsense as the basis for a story, throw sex into the mix and all ethics go out the door for some journo's. That's why I think there should be no reference to it on our pages, otherwise we're no better. Cheers, WikiTownsvillian 09:23, 24 September 2007 (UTC)

I almost suggested the same thing, but tried to find the relevant policy first, but I can't see anything at WP:BLP about removal of material from the history, but I'm sure I read something at some point about admins permanently deleting very controversial content. WikiTownsvillian 09:34, 24 September 2007 (UTC)

[edit] St Mark's College

Hi Beneaththelandslide, I'm currently in a discussion involving St Mark's College in North Adelaide and I wanted to get your opinion on it because I know you have contributed a lot to some featured articles related to South Australia. I have suggested including this paragraph in the article's history section:

In March 1991, The Advertiser reported student claims of sexual harassment and initiations at the college. It was claimed that male students forced female students to perform domestic tasks and that senior students initiated first year students by urinating and spitting on them. The then acting master of the college, Professor David Nicholas refuted the claims.

Other editors of the article want to use this paragraph instead because they say my version has undue weight:

In March 1991, The Advertiser reported student claims of sexual harassment and initiations at the college. The then acting master of the college, Professor David Nicholas refuted the claims.

I think the event is significant enough to have an extra sentence. My basis for thinking that is the event had two articles in The Advertiser, only one other event has had more in the last 20 years (the library database could only search back 20 years). What are your thoughts on the matter? Cheers, Username nought 11:17, 29 September 2007 (UTC)

Thanks for your comments. Username nought 05:10, 30 September 2007 (UTC)

[edit] lol

http://nla.gov.au/nla.pic-an23162467 Timeshift 04:50, 8 October 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Waterfall Gully

Hi Michael. I was wondering if there was any possiblity of getting more inline refs for this thing... I did a survey of Australian FAs: User:Blnguyen/AusFA and this was only of the more thinly referenced FAs. A ref drive could avert the possibility of more work down the track from FAR paperwork and so forth. I could do it myself but I tried to get ABS stats before and could never find them :(.... Plus I would be more efficient at reffing those cricket articles. Thanks, Blnguyen (bananabucket) 03:26, 9 October 2007 (UTC)

WOW! I was just looking at this article... and came to your talk page to discuss it! I know it was about 2 years ago but do you remember your sources for the information on the flooding? The two notes attatched to the info are related to the topic in a general way but don't seem to specifically include the facts claimed. The quote by Bob Stevenson in particular I couldn't find anywhere using Google. Do you have any suggestions on where I should start looking? Froggyjimmy 03:58, 11 October 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Don Dunstan

Just wondering about your thoughts on the latest edits as well as the interestingly named editor. I'll leave for you to revert (or not revert). Timeshift 19:46, 10 October 2007 (UTC)

"minor idiot festival" - LOL! Timeshift 05:00, 12 October 2007 (UTC)

as for the types of comments I make, sometimes I just, By God, get carried away with my own eloquence - oratory in motion Michael. North Terrace in 20 years, watch out!! Timeshift 07:00, 18 October 2007 (UTC)

dunstan comments... lololol... get on msn :P Timeshift 09:24, 19 October 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Peirs Akerman

If you find the facts of his life unbalanced in presentation, put in the positive side of the story, but do not delete data on the POV basis when we are using Hansard, simply because it does dovetail with your conservative leanings.   Skopp   11:30, 16 October 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Relevance of content

Hi Beneaththelandslide, I was wondering if you could take a look at a relevance of content issue for me. In 1991 there was a murder at St Mark's College and I wanted to include this paragraph in the college's article:

In September 1991, college student Alister Thompson strangled fellow student Allison Nitschke in her bedroom after a Prosh party held at the college. Nitschke's body was found by police in the Adelaide Hills. Thompson pleaded guilty to murdering Nitschke and was sentenced to 18 years in prison.

Other editors of the article want to use this paragraph:

In September 1991, college student Alister Thompson strangled fellow student Allison Nitschke in her bedroom after a Prosh party held at the college. Thompson pleaded guilty to murdering Nitschke and was sentenced to 18 years in prison.

Their arguement is that the sentence about where the body was found is not directly related to the college and therefore should not be included. My arguement is that the sentence provides the reader with some important information about the event in a concise sentence and therefore should be included. Also, the murder has had more media coverage than any other event in the college's history, so I don't think undue weight is an issue. What are your thoughts on the matter? Cheers. Username nought 09:28, 31 October 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Duff

Lol, I didn't know you would like that stuff!Blnguyen (bananabucket) 00:01, 6 November 2007 (UTC)

[edit] MIA?

Where are you? We need you back. WP:AUS just set a new record of 7 FAs in teh month. Blnguyen (bananabucket) 02:52, 30 November 2007 (UTC)

$130 owing to the UNISA library, and $100 owing to the Burnside one. Michael ^talk 02:33, 3 December 2007 (UTC)

So you've been grounded? or ran out of money for internet connection? Did you just decide to unofficially "buy" the books by not returning tem? Blnguyen (bananabucket) 02:45, 3 December 2007 (UTC)

Oh no. I've returned the books. These are just late fees that I'm too lazy to repay, but give it a bit, I'll be back. After all BL, I'm enjoying watching all the hi-jinks when I get the chance ;)! Michael ^talk 02:47, 3 December 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Christmas

[edit] Happy New Year

Hello Michael, I hope you had a pleasant New Year's Day, and that 2008 brings further success, health and happiness! ~ Blnguyen (bananabucket) 07:40, 2 January 2008 (UTC)

[edit] A picture tells a thousand words

Finding good quality images is not an "irrational addiction", what is irrational is the way in which you think images added are irrational. Everyone seems to like my image contributions except you? I will refer to the summaries you leave per your contributions page and move on I think. Timeshift (talk) 01:57, 30 December 2007 (UTC)

I don't think anyone will care that i've taken a few sentences from a e-book hundreds of pages long and re-written them. Your edit summaries continue to gain in hostility and rudeness, not to mention feeling the need to address people by name. May I suggest taking a wikibreak if you feel you can no longer contribute constructively to Wikipedia. Thankyou. Timeshift (talk) 07:11, 10 January 2008 (UTC)

I'm happy with my contribution to the page. All you appear to be able to do is insult my text and image contributions. Perhaps it indicates a distinct lack of your own of late. Timeshift (talk) 07:26, 10 January 2008 (UTC)

I might have believed you if you didn't continue with your "revert rather than improve" attitude. Timeshift (talk) 07:31, 10 January 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Real names

Please don't refer to other users if they are editing anonymously by their real names. Fred Bauder (talk) 13:38, 10 January 2008 (UTC)

Three seperate times now. Next time, he gets his full name and suburb revealed. The choice is his. Respect privacy. Timeshift (talk) 14:10, 10 January 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Adelaide Wikimeetup 3

Adelaide Meetup Next: TBA Last: 20 Apr 2008 This box: view • talk • edit

Hi Michael - 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 ⁂ 11:54, 16 January 2008 (UTC)

Hope to see you at this one! :) ~ Riana ⁂ 11:54, 16 January 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Adelaide Wikimeetup 3

Adelaide Meetup Next: TBA Last: 20 Apr 2008 This box: view • talk • edit

Hi Beneaththelandslide - 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 ⁂, 11:23, 5 February 2008 (UTC)

[edit] :(

You sure you can't make it? It's so hard to find a day to suit everyone :/ ~ Riana ⁂ 13:44, 7 February 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Reminder

Just a gentle nudge towards the meetup page, hoping you can confirm your attendance before the day is out. We'd love you to be there. :) ~ Riana ⁂ 18:27, 14 February 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Disputed fair use rationale for Image:Felicia.jpg

Thanks for uploading Image:Felicia.jpg. However, there is a concern that the rationale you have provided for using this image under "fair use" may be invalid. Please read the instructions at Wikipedia:Non-free content carefully, then go to the image description page and clarify why you think the image qualifies for fair use. Using one of the templates at Wikipedia:Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to ensure that your image is in compliance with Wikipedia policy, but remember that you must complete the template. Do not simply insert a blank template on an image page.

If it is determined that the image does not qualify under fair use, it will be deleted within a couple of days according to our criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the media copyright questions page. Thank you.BetacommandBot (talk) 21:48, 13 February 2008 (UTC)

[edit] 3RR stolen generations

I did not revert three times. I removed original research, uncited material and opinion which could consitute vandalism.

The first time I removed the mentioned information was at 4:28. I posted a message explaining my removal of original research on the discussion page at 4:51. The second time was at 4:52. The third time was at 6:16, after a consensus had been reached that his edit contained non-NPOV, opinionated, unreferenced original research.

The 3RR says that users "must not perform more than three reverts on a single page within a 24 hour period". I made only three, not more than three.

Secondly, according to the 3RR page there are exceptions for:

reverts to remove clearly libelous material, or unsourced or poorly sourced controversial material about living persons (see Wikipedia:Biographies of living persons);

In this case, the unsourced controversial material was about Dr Brendan Nelson - who is a living person.

If you still think I have breached the 3RR rule then please let me know before you report me and I will undo the last reversion as per http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:3RR#I_have_violated_3RR._What_do_I_do.3F OzWoden (talk) 06:42, 18 February 2008 (UTC)

It was unsourced, or at the very least poorly sourced. He said that many Australians believed Nelson's speech was overly negative because blah blah blah etc. And he cited a news story which only outlined Nelson's speech and did not mention about Australians thinking the speech was negative for any reasons. Therefore it was poorly sourced. OzWoden (talk) 06:59, 18 February 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Stolen generations Nelson response

Please explain why the section you removed is not important to the documentation of the event. I do not support the Liberals in any way, am interested in a fair, neutral representation of the historical record.--Funkarama (talk) 01:03, 19 February 2008 (UTC)

It wasn't my own commentary, it was based on extensive observation of media coverage. Understand still not comprehensive enough, but enough of a trend.--Funkarama (talk) 01:31, 19 February 2008 (UTC)

Ironically, choosing not be leftish, as I see you have that concern.--Funkarama (talk) 01:34, 19 February 2008 (UTC)

oh i see, well one could argue all research and writing is same--Funkarama (talk) 01:37, 19 February 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Wikimedia Australia incorporation meeting

Hi there Beneaththelandslide! As you may know, the Wikimedia Foundation has recently approved Wikimedia Australia as an official chapter. In order to acknowledge this, and to appoint an interim committee, approve our statement of purpose and our rules, and appoint a Public Officer, Wikimedia Australia will be having a meeting at Computerbank in Melbourne. For those of us who are located in other cities, we shall be holding conference calls to the main meeting. The meeting will be held at 2:30PM on Sunday, 20th April 2008, Adelaide time. In order for us to organise this meeting, we need your help! Please drop by at our meta subpage with suggestions as to venues, conference calling services, etc. It will be at 2:30 so we can meet up for lunch beforehand if anyone's open for that! Hoping to see you there! ~ Riana ⁂ 01:48, 20 March 2008 (UTC) You are receiving this message because you are an active Wikimedian in Adelaide and are on this list. If you think I've missed anyone out, please feel free to copy-paste this and send it to them too!

[edit] International Democrat Union

Theres a lot of parties there. Only one Liberal Party. Timeshift (talk) 03:23, 29 April 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Demographics of Australia

Hi, you reverted my edits with the reason what a fallacy to perpetuate. this is not a debate, and it should not become one, over "australian" meaning "anglo-celtic australia". this australian category is due to dem history, mostly a-c a..

I admit that I fail to follow your logic. There were two problems with the link you are referring to (I have since reapplied the other edits, but not this one). How come the "Australian" category links to "Anglo-celtic Australian", and how is this number calculated? I removed this link because there isn't an "Anglo-celtic Australian" category available on the census. I thought that by removing the link, it would better reflect the census stats. --Bardcom (talk) 22:26, 7 May 2008 (UTC)

I apologise for the poor wording of the explanation (logging onto Wikipedia after breakfast and before the morning walk). I looked at your original edits in confusion as the category "Australian" was simply withdrawn, leaving a massive 30%+ ancestry gap in the list, which would lead readers astray.

My explanation was due to a common Australian misconception of Australian meaning white, Anglo-Celtic, British, Irish, etc, rather than anyone brought up as an Aussie, and my initial thought was that someone was just getting a bit touchy with Australian being linked to Anglo-Celtic Australian. (A quick visit to your user page, identifying you as an Irishman, showed otherwise in hindsight.)

Australian, in the context of the census, needs to be included, and perhaps not linked to Anglo-Celtic Australian, but explained that, due to historic migration (already mentioned), it is most likely to be composed of those of British and Irish ancestry.

Kind regards, Michael ^talk 22:46, 7 May 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Talk:Playmander

Could you clear up the issues on the talk page for us? Timeshift (talk) 06:01, 6 June 2008 (UTC)

Had a bit of a redistribution in Bragg I see? I don't suspect the margin will change much, but the electorate has basically doubled or tripled in geographical size. Timeshift (talk) 00:43, 10 June 2008 (UTC)

You're saying Bannon's electoral laws are loopy? You say that single member constituencies are bad, then mention the Playmander. Very amusing! What I need to know and what readers of the article need to know is who was the brainchild of the change in electoral laws in 1936? Butler? Playford? The article seems to gloss over who did the deed of removing multi member to replace with single member, implemented a 2:1 ratio, and reduced to 39 seats? A deed which has left a lasting legacy that you today are complaining about! Timeshift (talk) 02:59, 10 June 2008 (UTC)