User talk:Crico
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Welcome!
Hello, Crico, 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:
- The five pillars of Wikipedia
- How to edit a page
- Help pages
- Tutorial
- How to write a great article
- Manual of Style
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! -- I@n ≡ talk 16:23, 12 July 2006 (UTC)
Contents |
[edit] Welcome
I just stumbled across your articles on Cricket Rating Systems and comments at Talk:Herman's Cricket Ratings. In case you're unaware, Wikipedia has an active group of like-minded editors who have formed a project at Wikipedia:WikiProject Cricket which you may wish to join - participants normally just add their name to Wikipedia:WikiProject Cricket/Participants. I hope you don't mind, but I've mentioned your rating systems articles at Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Cricket. -- I@n ≡ talk 16:22, 12 July 2006 (UTC)
[edit] Image tagging for Image:JerseyBlackWhiteVee.JPG
Thanks for uploading Image:JerseyBlackWhiteVee.JPG. The image has been identified as not specifying the source and creator of the image, which is required by Wikipedia's policy on images. If you don't indicate the source and creator of the image on the image's description page, it may be deleted some time in the next seven days. If you have uploaded other images, please verify that you have provided source information for them as well.
For more information on using images, see the following pages:
This is an automated notice by OrphanBot. For assistance on the image use policy, see Wikipedia:Media copyright questions. 04:15, 31 October 2006 (UTC)
[edit] WPRL Article Improvement Drive
Hey I've noticed you're a regular on rugby league articles, particulary NRL ones. I need your advice on something I'm thinking of starting up on the project. Many WikiProjects have Article Improvement Drives which have different levels of success. I'm thinking of starting one up for this one too, but instead of voting on an article I would rather strive to improve one NRL club every fortnight and bring it up very close to featured status. Now it seems as though there'd be a lot of work involved, but there are also a lot of club fans out there who'd probably be willing to participate. Basically there are 30 weeks in the NRL season and there are 15 club pages that are not yet featured. I propose that we all have a schedule to work on one new article every second round, in alphabetical order. By the end of the season hopefully we will have 15 near-complete, if not complete articles. My only concern at this stage is the dedication of editors to help out other team pages that they are not interested in. Basically in order to get the support of editors like these, we need a few leaders in the project. If you are willing to dedicate a bit of your time every week into this and if you have any further suggestions, could you let me know at Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Rugby league/Article improvement drive? Thanks, --05:57, 20 February 2007 (UTC)
[edit] Sandbox
Map of Ashfield
[edit] Ashfield
I have pasted a copy of my response to Eyedubya regarding his posting on my talk page here for your attention... (I would tend to ignore him at this stage as he was probably showing some slight churlishness related to my conversation with him over an article he is editing)....
- Crico at best Eyedubya is being cheeky - he has enough work to do in his own articles. At worst he is being rude using my talk page as his soapbox - I am going to assume that his edits are the former under WP:AGF but my discussions with you are private on this page and if he wants to discuss with you your edits then he should do so on your talk page. (PS Keep up the good work on raising the standard of the Ashfield page).--VS talk 06:16, 26 April 2007 (UTC)
-
- I'm genuinely interested in what residents of Ashfield think of where they live and will follow up the reference when it is posted. Cheers, Eyedubya 07:10, 26 April 2007 (UTC)
-
-
- I have no intention of speaking for all the residents of Ashfield but the census does record the percentage of people living at the same address one year ago and five years ago. PS I had a squizz at Brunswick. Looks pretty good to me :) Crico 23:36, 26 April 2007 (UTC)
-
Thanks for your message. I should be able to get to it later today (this afternoon).--VS talk 21:55, 30 April 2007 (UTC)
- Okay I have had a glimpse through and noted that you have adjusted references and images etc. The article generally looks pretty schmick. I think a full review should now be undertaken for either GA or A classification. That will take a few days (given real-life commitments) and the fact that I check every reference and note - and also put notations where further citations are required. If you are happy to wait I will do it for you by the weekend - if not that's fine and you should put it up for GA review at WP:GA/R (I am not sure if you will get a faster response or not). Let me know.--VS talk 08:12, 1 May 2007 (UTC)
- No rush. :)
Okay being busy wasn't a good enough reason - so I have just say down for a while to finalise my next assessment. You have gotten the article much, much further (and it is always damn difficult if you are the only one actually putting in the work - mainly because you get no feedback as you go) - well done! I have provided a critique with bullet points. I suggest you stay on track with it and you will get there. I will be more than happy to keep assisting with critique so that I do not have remove myself from the final assessment. Please ask any questions you need to and I will try to assist as promptly as possible. Best wishes. --VS talk 11:40, 8 May 2007 (UTC)
[edit] Anesbury
Yes, I changed it. The reference is The Heritage of Australia, published by Macmillan, 1981. You should find it in a library somewhere. The page is NSW 2/11. Have you done articles on any other areas? I've been contributing my shots to a lot of them lately. Nice to have an outlet for the damn things.
Sardaka 12:31, 13 July 2007 (UTC)
As noted on your talk page, I have changed it back to Amesbury. I had thought that, since it is now a Buddhist retreat and you appear to have an interest in that area, you may have been there and known for sure what the spelling was. My feeling is the Amesbury references are stronger.
References to Amesbury include:
- Three documents from Ashfield Council [1] [2] [3]
- The NSW Heritage OFfice Register [4]
- The Royal Australian Historical Society's profile of Norman Selfe (builder of Amesbury) [5]
References to Anesbury include:
Crico 00:23, 6 August 2007 (UTC)
[edit] WikiProject Rugby league
PLEASE CONRIBUTE and PARTICIPATE WikiProject Rugby league THE CURRENT MISSION OF WIKIPROJECT RUGBY LEAGUE IS TAG ALL RUGBY LEAGUE RELATED ARTICLES WITH {{WikiProject Rugby league|class=|importance=}} You do not have to participate, If you are unsure how to help contact SpecialWindler. |
---|
SpecialWindler 06:24, 23 May 2007 (UTC)
WikiProject Rugby league |
---|
In an attempt to find active or inactive members on this WikiProject, I (SpecialWindler) am calling a roll call for all users. If you are an active/semi-active contributor add this userbox to your page {{User WikiProject Rugby league}} to your page If you do not use userboxes, then add the category Category:WikiProject Rugby league members to your page. Then go to this page and add your name to the list |
You have been listed as inactive on the Rugby league WikiProject | ||
You have been listed as inactive by the Rugby league WikiProject because you have either (1) not responded to our roll call. (2) not edited Wikipedia at all in 3 months. (3) have not edited rugby league related articles with in three months. If you feel that you are still are contributing member to rugby league articles please remove yourself from the inactive list and place yourself on the active list. Thankyou, SpecialWindler as part of the Rugby league WikiProject. |
SpecialWindler talk 07:33, 4 July 2007 (UTC)
[edit] Amul World Cricket Ratings
A proposed deletion template has been added to the article Amul World Cricket Ratings, 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 explains why (see also "What Wikipedia is not" and Wikipedia's deletion policy). You may contest 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. Also, please consider improving the article to address the issues raised. 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. If you endorse deletion of the article, and you are the only person who has made substantial edits to the page, please add {{db-author}} to the top of the page. Pastordavid 16:32, 15 November 2007 (UTC)
[edit] Macquarie Fields
Crico, I have decided to respond individually to the various statements within your rantings.
Okay, these anti-aboriginal edits are starting to get annoying.
My edits are not anti-Aboriginal they are anti-poor-sourcing.
I don't have a problem with you removing blatantly biased or incorrect material or correcting poor writing.
Good. Then why did you mind the removal I made? This seems a little incongruous, don’t you think?
That makes articles better. But deleting factually correct material without attempting to make worthwhile additions or corrections only makes it worse.
The information may be factually correct for the Darug people. However the referenced article from which it is obvious these “facts” come from does not refer to the Macquarie Fields area or its pre-settlement inhabitants. Remember the article is about Macquarie Fields, not the Darug people.
Further the referenced source is hardly of the quality from which an encyclopaedia should source its information from. Nor can one guarantee it is factual since that article is written by a member of an Aboriginal Hippie Comune Art Workshop and is posted on that same Art Workshop’s website without references for it. It is not published by a reliable source, and it is not about Macquarie Fields.
If I posted an article on a Young Liberal Right Wing Thinktank website that described how one-eyed one-horned flying purple people eaters lived in the western sydnedy area before settlement and that they scared the Darug people off from hunting at night, and the article provided no references or any indication that it is factual, would you (or anyone else) extract information from it? I do not think so.
If you want to write a good Macquarie Fields article, do it. I won't mind if it makes no reference to the original inhabitants of the area if it's substantially better than the current job.
That is nice that you won’t mind, however as an editor of Wikipedia articles I am not here to satisfy your personal tastes.
For example: • The opening paragraph of the history section says James Meehan named it Macquarie Fields while a later paragraph states it was Jason Snowden. Don't you find that incongruous?
Thankyou for pointing this out. That does sound incongruous, why don’t you remove whichever of the two has not been sourced properly? (like I was doing to other wishy washy statements). Please note, this point is of no relevance to the issue of the poorly referenced material I deleted.
• The transport section, which you did some editing on, could be better written and had no references until I added one for the bus routes. Surely if you were concerned about all the aboriginal facts, you would want that properly referenced too.
Firstly, I think you mean Aboriginal (with the capital A). I believe my editing was of a gramatical or sentence structure fixing nature. I do believe it ought to be correctly referenced also, but since you did such a good job with that I thought I would leave it. :) Please note, this point is of no relevance to the issue of the poorly referenced material I deleted.
• The schools section just lists a few schools as bullet points with no reference. A better schools section would give some idea of when the schools were established, whether they're public or private etc.
It might, but since I was in a ‘correcting badly referenced waffle’ type of mood I was not so concerenced. Most Sydney suburb articles only contain a short list of schools in the suburb. Also, the name of Macquarie Fields, Guise and Curran PUBLIC Schools kind of gives away whether they are PUBLIC or private. Please note, this point is of no relevance to the issue of the poorly referenced material I deleted.
• The Sport & Recreation section offers a vague and grammatically awkward "There is also a number of sporting fields in the town." Again there are no references.
It may be grammatically awkward, but less so than before my edit to that section. This point is of no relevance to the poorly referenced material I deleted.
• There is no description of the commercial area.
How observant of you. I could add that there is MacDonalds, and shopping centre known as Glenquarie, however that would be original research. If you so wish to reference and add that, please do.
Now, getting back to your points about the aboriginal history, you're right that reference doesn't mention Macquarie Fields. I have found no good references for the aboriginal history of the greater Campbelltown area but I have included a reference from Liverpool Council stating that the Georges River was considered the boundary between the Darug and Tharawal which then means Macquarie Fields is in Darug land. I don't consider that original research. The other reference describes the huts the Darug built, the tools they used, etc. which were the facts you previously questioned in that section. The references together support what is written
Yes, as I said, and as you agreed “that reference doesn’t mention Macquarie Fields”. If you lived here you would realise that Macquarie Fields is on ONE side of the Georges River. Which side the Tharawal and which side the Darug inhabited is not known from what you have said. Also since you have found no good references, in the words of Jimmy Wales, "Zero information is preferred to misleading or false information".
I have reverted your deletion and if you continue making destructive rather constructive edits, I will just revert them without attempting to accommodate your views. I would rather accommodate you but you're not helping your cause by being so narrow minded on this issue. Crico (talk) 11:08, 26 February 2008 (UTC) Retrieved from "http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User_talk:OzWoden"
My edit was constructive since it removed unsubstatiated waffle. I am not being narrow minded. I am simply identifying wishy washy statements without references or without correct references, and in this case information irrelevant to the article at hand.
If you so desparately need to include a section about the pre-settlement, Aboriginal history of Macquarie Fields please go ahead and find real references about the Aboriginal history of Macquarie Fields and include the information that you find there. OzWoden (talk) 04:08, 29 February 2008 (UTC) Retrieved from "http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Talk:Macquarie_Fields%2C_New_South_Wales#Poor_referencing_and_original_research"
[edit] Sydney Suburbs
It seems clear that you are very interested in the history of and culture of Aboriginal people in the Sydney area.
Could you please however direct your efforts perhaps at creating or updating articles of this nature. eg. Tharawal, Australian Aboriginal History, etc.
The information (mostly unreferenced) which you provide in so many Sydney suburb articles is not relevant to those articles. The history of suburbs in Sydney begins with the settlement and establishing of the suburbs.
It may be an interesting side note to mention that previous inhabitants of what is now "Suburb X" were the "XYZ people" but really any more depth than that is becoming off topic.
As I said, I'm sure you would best devote your time to creating and updating individual articles for these topics which you are so obviously keen about. OzWoden (talk) 00:54, 4 April 2008 (UTC)
I think you misunderstand me. I am mainly interested in improving the pages related to the suburbs of Sydney and in particular western Sydney. Much of what you have been deleting and I reinstating wasn't written by me in the first place. I merely searched out references for what you had tagged as unreferenced. When all's said and done, I don't mind if a suburb article has a one sentence description of the area's original inhabitants, a one paragraph description or no mention at all. If you look at the History section I added to Rosemeadow, New South Wales recently, there is no reference to the indigenous people. When I rewrote the History section of Leumeah, New South Wales, I though the indigenous history was relevant because of the origin of the name and the relationship between John Warby and the Tharawal. I understand you have a point of view that this isn't relevant to the suburb. I disagree but, if you were prepared to be sensible, I wouldn't object to a private agreement between us where I wouldn't revert your deletions on certain suburbs if you agreed not to delete material from others. In all honesty, the material in Ambarvale, Blair Athol, Blairmount, Claymore, Eschol Park and Kentlyn doesn't really appear to be specific to the suburbs in question but the material in Bow Bowing, Ingleburn, Leumeah and Minto Heights appears relevant to me. I am intending to rewrite Menangle Park in the near future and I think its indigenous history is relevant because of the name. I thought my revised version of Campbelltown was fine before someone else added the Aboriginal History section back in. Which brings me to my final point. Even if you were amenable to this as a solution, there are plenty of other people with differing points of view out there in wikiland. It's up to you. Crico (talk) 05:15, 4 April 2008 (UTC)
- I also do not mind what is mentioned in the article if it is relevant to the article at hand. I do not think however think that an article about SuburbXYZ ought to give details and ramblings about the culture and so fourth of previous occupants of the land which has since become a suburb.
- As I'm sure I've mentioned previously, a sentence or two briefly mentioning that the ABC people used to live in the area or that the name of the suburb comes from the name the previous inhabitants called the area is fine, but diverging off into details about their diet, art, customs, etc is not. That information belongs in another article.OzWoden (talk) 12:50, 11 April 2008 (UTC)
[edit] Maps for suburbs
Nice maps you added for Fairfiled, Bankstown etc... If it's possible, can you do the same for Hurstville, Bondi Junction, Hornsby and Penrith? Cheers J Bar (talk) 04:16, 21 May 2008 (UTC)
[edit] Camden
G'day, I just noticed that the population figure in the infobox for Camden got changed at some time from that for the suburb (about 3000) to that for the council area (about 45,000). I was going to change it back but noticed you'd changed the infobox from a suburb to a town. If you think Camden is a town rather than a suburb, do you think the population should be the larger figure as you would with a country town with suburbs like Wagga or the smaller GNB definition of Camden the suburb? Personally, I think Camden is part of Sydney's suburban sprawl and should be considered a suburb but I accept it has a long history as a separate town so I'm open to other people's opinions on the matter. Crico (talk) 01:13, 6 June 2008 (UTC)
- I saw this message, and thought I might give my two cents. We tend to use "official" designations whenever we can. Sometimes this involves information from the GNB (in determining if things are suburbs or not), other times from the ABS (in determining if something is "part of Sydney"). In this case, Camden is described by GNB as being a County of Shoalhaven, a parish of the Camden LGA, and a suburb of the Camden LGA. We cover the Camden LGA in Camden Council, so I think regardless of whether or not Camden is part of Sydney, this article should be considered a suburb (of either Sydney or Camden LGA - not sure which) -- Mark Chovain 01:24, 6 June 2008 (UTC)
-
-
- For the record, GNB consideres Camden (suburb) to be a suburb of Camden (town).[8] It doesn't define "Camden (town)", but the only thing I can find called "Camden" that contains "suburbs" is Camden LGA.[9]. I suspect we should be treating Camden LGA as the town. Perhaps we need three articles here: Camden, New South Wales for the suburb, Camden Council for the local council organisation, and Camden Local Government Area (or something else?) for the area covered by the town.-- Mark Chovain 01:31, 6 June 2008 (UTC)
-
-
With the urban sprawl of our cities extending to these towns on the outskirts, it's difficult sometimes to determine whether a place is still considred a town in its own right or whether it has become an outlying suburb of the city. I'm hesitant to agree with the idea of having three articles for Camden. As you guys suggest, I always follow what appears GNB too because that's the official designation. From what I see there, it looks like we should be treating Camden, New South Wales as a suburb in the local government of Camden Council. I don't think it's a good idea to have a separate town article as well. It will just complicate things and cause more confusion. Chances are that Camden Council will eventually be declared a city, like many councils in Sydney and that might then be less confusing. Cheers. J Bar (talk) 05:49, 6 June 2008 (UTC)