User talk:Diverman

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Contents

[edit] WP:AFL

Hi mate, was wondering with your great love of everything footy, you'd like to check out Category:VFL/AFL players - let us know how we can improve them by airing your views at WikiProject AFL. Cheers! Rogerthat Talk 11:45, 27 January 2006 (UTC)

Cheers for you quality work on some of the best and fairest articles - keep it up and be sure to spread the word of WP:AFL Rogerthat Talk 09:11, 22 February 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Deed Poll Name Change

I agree with you totaly, Lennon did change his name by deed poll to John Ono Lennon, but I am unable as yet, to cite a source. I've searched all our papers on the day he died, they only refer to him as John Lennon, so I'm only relying on my memory. One thing puzzles me, which article of English Law did "Crestville" cite to say he would be unable to drop "Winston?" When you change a name by deed poll you can drop, or add anything you wish to! Lion King 03:21, 22 February 2006 (UTC)

[edit] AFL Infobox

Hi mate, thanks for the kind words. Remember we need as many people we can get on WP:AFL so make sure you tell your mates :) With the infobox, I noticed this problem with the Andrew Mackie photo. For some reason it automatically sets the image at 200px. Ask the question with User:The Brain of Morbius, who created the template a long while before I started up WP:AFL. Cheers mate, keep up the good work Rogerthat Talk 12:22, 27 February 2006 (UTC)


[edit] Franz Joseph I of Austria

Could you explain why you deleted the Category:British Field Marshals and Category:Field Marshals of Germany? According to the Almanach de Gotha FJ was a British and Prussian field marshall. Noel S McFerran

Thank you for your quick response. FJ definitely held the rank of a Field Marshall in both the British and Prussian armies. He was not a British subject, but neither were King Alfonso XIII of Spain, King Albert I and King Leopold I of Belgium, King Ernst August I of Hanover, King William II of the Netherlands, King Mahendra of Nepal, or Prince Edward of Saxe-Weimar (all listed in this category). Noel S McFerran 02:37, 16 March 2006 (UTC)

[edit] No image in infobox

Yep I've noticed that problem as well. Have no idea what has happened but I left a message a few days back on the discussion page of {{Infobox_afl_player}} - seems it hasn't been fixed. I'm not sure who removed the image functionality either. Rogerthat Talk 11:31, 19 May 2006 (UTC)

[edit] References

References list the primary and secondary sources that were consulted in the writing of an article. I don't think you should be adding DoAB references to articles that were written without consulting it. At the very least, I hope you're first checking the Wikipedia articles against the DoAB articles. Snottygobble 13:15, 26 July 2006 (UTC)

I do add the DoAB reference and see if there is extra info that could be added. Also, references can be added to verify information in the article, see the Wikipedia:Cite_sources#When you verify content article. Diverman 03:52, 27 July 2006 (UTC)
Okay, that's fine. Keep up the good work. Snottygobble 03:55, 27 July 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Sort by date

I noticed you sorted John Wright by date. Is that the most effective way to have it? I understood that dab pages would have the most likely candidates toward the top and the lesser toward the bottom. For people, i can see this might be useful, but not sure. John (Jwy) 13:57, 28 July 2006 (UTC)

I looked up the Wikipedia:Manual of Style (disambiguation pages)#People, it didn't give a suggestion for sorting. Is there another recommendation somewhere? I just thought it would be handy to sort by date, because you generally know the approximate years a particular person was alive when searching. Also, a people will different ideas on who is the most likely candidate. Maybe this could be voted on? Diverman 02:22, 29 July 2006 (UTC)
Here's the general rule: WP:MOSDAB#Order of entries. I do see that date sorting could be useful - and they allow for chronological (I hadn't seen this before), but sometimes its obvious who the most likely people are. John (Jwy) 03:25, 29 July 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Pipelinks

Please guide me to your MoS section that refers to not pipelinking names on a DAB page as you cite on David Wright.—The preceding unsigned comment was added by D C McJonathan (talk • contribs) .

Allow me: WP:MOSDAB#Piping John (Jwy) 13:28, 4 August 2006 (UTC)
Thanks Doc ♬ talk 01:30, 6 August 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Activate

Thanks for your question and sorry for the delay. There was community consensous somewhere (I can't remember where) to move Activiate on over to Rhodes. >IF< I remember correctly and according to the edit history, the page was actually created twice before but deleted due to A7 a la non-nobility, which I feel is correct. My recommendation to you would be to slip in a section about Activate somewhere appropriate in that article. Maybe bring it up in the talk page? // Pilotguy (Have your say) 18:11, 7 October 2006 (UTC)


[edit] Copyright issue with ADMD

Hello. Concerning your contribution, ADMD, we cannot accept copyrighted text or images borrowed from either web sites or printed material. This article or image appears to be a direct copy from http://www.pcmag.com/encyclopedia_term/0,2542,t=ADMD&i=37536,00.asp/. As a copyright violation, ADMD appears to qualify for speedy deletion under the speedy deletion criteria. ADMD has been tagged for deletion, and may have been deleted by the time you see this message. For text material, please consider rewriting the content and citing the source, provided that it is credible.

If you believe that the article or image is not a copyright violation, or if you have permission from the copyright holder to release the content freely under the GNU Free Documentation License (GFDL) then you should do one of the following:

  • If you have permission from the author leave a message explaining the details at Talk:ADMD and send an email with the message to "permissions-en (at) wikimedia (dot) org". See Wikipedia:Requesting copyright permission for instructions.
  • If a note on the original website states that re-use is permitted under the GFDL or released into the public domain leave a note at Talk:ADMD with a link to where we can find that note.
  • If you own the copyright to the material: send an e-mail from an address associated with the original publication to permissions-en(at)wikimedia(dot)org or a postal message to the Wikimedia Foundation permitting re-use under the GFDL, and note that you have done so on Talk:ADMD.

However, for text content, you may want to consider rewriting the content in your own words. Thank you, and please feel free to continue contributing to Wikipedia. —Carolfrog 01:40, 4 March 2007 (UTC)

[edit] ADB

Ah, I incorrectly assumed that if they were blue they were counted as done. I'll revert. Also, what about using <s>...</s> for completed entries. I also noted that in several letters, there were more articles than the count said. I wonder how that could be? I'm sure that last time I looked (which was a few months ago) they were all OK. I guess someone (I'm happy to do it) needs to go back to ADB and cross reference again. What do you think about adding an ext link to the ADB article next to each of the stubs and redlinks - it might encourage article creation. Waddya think? —Moondyne 06:00, 21 March 2007 (UTC)

Perhaps also link to the the DAB article in the list. —Moondyne 06:29, 21 March 2007 (UTC)
I did intentionally say DAB and not ADB but probably should have said both. My thinking was that both are useful resources for a new article. Sure DAB is not PD but it wouldn't hurt to link to it anyway else you may as well just copy-paste from ADB and it'd be done. But its a moot point anyway as you're right that the time spent could be probably better spent writing the articles. Thanks for listening to my ramblings. —Moondyne 23:48, 21 March 2007 (UTC)
Yes, there are a few blue links that are a couple of lines only, so they shouldn't be counted as complete. We could use strikeout to signify completeness (once all D.A.B text and ref. is in place), I've just been using "good" after the article to signify so far. As for some numbers being a little higher in the section list than in the heading summary, there are a few "see other" entries e.g. M. Blashki - see Miles Evergood - good' so we shouldn't count twice for that on article. I guess adding the ADB link next to reds/stubs could help, but that's a fair bit of work that may be better spent creating the articles themselves. – Diverman 10:10, 21 March 2007 (UTC)

[edit] IP was Spamming

I removed them because they were being spammed onto articles, they werent being utilised as a reference (see the list below). The editor was making no other edits to the articles just adding links. I removed those edit added by the annon IP, these are the only edits the IP made. Gnangarra 02:14, 31 March 2007 (UTC)
  1. 12:05, 30 March 2007 (hist) (diff) Joseph Horrocks (→References)
  2. 12:02, 30 March 2007 (hist) (diff) Joseph Foveaux (→References)
  3. 11:59, 30 March 2007 (hist) (diff) John Septimus Roe (→References)
  4. 11:56, 30 March 2007 (hist) (diff) John Pascoe Fawkner (→External links)
  5. 11:53, 30 March 2007 (hist) (diff) John Hampton (→References)
  6. 11:48, 30 March 2007 (hist) (diff) John Carne Bidwill (→References)
  7. 11:43, 30 March 2007 (hist) (diff) James Stirling (Australian governor) (→External links)
  8. 11:40, 30 March 2007 (hist) (diff) James Simpson (Tasmanian) (→References)
  9. 11:38, 30 March 2007 (hist) (diff) James Scobie (→References)
  10. 11:36, 30 March 2007 (hist) (diff) James Hurtle Fisher (→References)
  11. 11:34, 30 March 2007 (hist) (diff) James Battye (→Works)
  12. 11:26, 30 March 2007 (hist) (diff) Henry James O'Farrell
  13. 11:01, 30 March 2007 (hist) (diff) George Fife Angas (→Publications)
  14. 10:57, 30 March 2007 (hist) (diff) George Augustus Robinson (→External links)
  15. 09:56, 30 March 2007 (hist) (diff) Charles La Trobe (→External links)
  16. 07:08, 30 March 2007 (hist) (diff) Charles Hotham (→References)
  17. 06:55, 30 March 2007 (hist) (diff) Alfred Bussell (→References)
  18. 06:52, 30 March 2007 (hist) (diff) John Bussell (→References)
  19. 06:45, 30 March 2007 (hist) (diff) Anthony O'Grady Lefroy
  20. 06:37, 30 March 2007 (hist) (diff) Alfred Felton (→External links)
  21. 06:32, 30 March 2007 (hist) (diff) Daniel Deniehy (→External links)


[edit] DYK

Updated DYK query On 16 April 2007, Did you know? was updated with a fact from the article John Downer, which you created or substantially expanded. If you know of another interesting fact from a recently created article, then please suggest it on the "Did you know?" talk page.

--Carabinieri 18:10, 16 April 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Barnstar

The Working Man's Barnstar
I hereby award this Barnstar to Diverman for outstanding work in cleaning up disambiguation pages of human names — Chris the speller 04:42, 23 April 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Richard Rawdon Stawell

Another ed. marked the article for speedy deletion as a copy-and-paste. I removed the tag, because I dont think thats a reason for speedy except for copyvio, and I am of the impression that ProjGutenger Au texts are considered PD at WP. But the article really does need some upgrading to make it look like a WP article. I'm sure you would have gotten to it, but at the moment the people on new page patrol are getting a little hyperactive. I have a feeling that it will be no,m. for AfD unless you get to it almost immediately. (and include a ref or two).DGG 07:34, 30 April 2007 (UTC)

Thanks for the warning about this one, DGG. I did edit the article soon as I read your message, I did further wikification and included another reference. I don't know why they think an article should be deleted because it uses public domain text! Do they expect an article to be fully wikified when it is first created? My first edit was clearly labelled with "This article incorporates text from the public domain 1949 edition of Dictionary of Australian Biography..." — Diverman 02:26, 1 May 2007 (UTC)
as you know, WP is the sort of place where anyone can do almost anything, sensible or otherwise. Anybody at all, even an ip address, can put a speedy tag on an article for good reasons or bad. There is at least one person around who has been putting speedies on undeniable US Government PD material because he thinks people should have to explain why they use it, which I think a sure way to discourage newcomers. One of the admins is keeping track of him, and so am I (I'm not quite an admin yet but I'm up for it now). That's not the one who tagged you. I think it was someone who judged by the overall look of the article without even noticing where you got it from. I hang around CAT:CSD looking for things like this, and I got it in time. I put a note on that I hope will discourage the guy who put on the speedy from making further fuss, but without sounding hostile to him. (that's the reason for "poor editing practice to be sure")
However , I notice there's a challenge to your copyright interpretations--IANAL, and I know about US and UK copyright, but not the implications with Australian material. It does sound like the challenger may be correct, and if he is, then it had to be obeyed.
Personally, though, I am not 100% happy with the project as I think that previous efforts back when WP got started have left of with a large mass of relatively low quality 19th century articles from the old E Brittanica and the catholic encyclopedia, etc. If I were doing it I would wikify a good deal immediately, or I would do a stub and give the ref. for further information. (and if it turns out to be under copyright after all, there's no choice but to rewrite. The rewrite doesn't need all the detail, for it will be in the link.) But that is only my opinion, and I may be in a minority,and if the copyright is OK, I would not impose my preferences on anyone else. But if you went half as fast the work would still get done and the articles would be better--its not hard to write fair use abstracts that meet copyright standard-- but that's just my 2 cents.
One particular thing: in wikifying I would always remove the flourishes at the end about how much he is loved by the profession, etc. I would advise you to remove them even you do no other editing, because they are the red flag-- children and grandchildren who put in obituary notices tend to do that, and many people look particularly for that because we get about ten a day & those articles usually are valid speedies It is further necessary to show why the person mets WP standards for N according to the current interpretation, and to say it in the first sentence or two--the older encyclopedias get around to it eventually, but they don't highlight it and for it to work here it has to be put right out front in peoples faces. You did that fine when you wikified. I made a few further edits, explained on the article talk page. I copied some of this to the project talk page. Hope it helps. DGG 16:27, 3 May 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Portrait misspellings

List them in Wikipedia:Lists of common misspellings/For machines and/or Wikipedia:Lists of common misspellings/P. They are used by various folks annd bots, so you won't have to fix them all by hand; other folks and bots will get them if you wait long enough. The first list (For machines) is the one used by the live spellcheck tool; it shows up as a button on the left of your screen if you have navigational popups installed (see WP:POP). Any editor using live spellcheck will see "potrait" highlighted in any page that has any change made to it, so high-profile pages will soon get fixed. Try it and see how long you can keep up with new mistakes being made! Chris the speller 04:22, 4 May 2007 (UTC)

[edit] ADB

I can't see any recent discussion on the ADB project page. If I recall correctly there was some ruling which meant that anything that was PD in Australia was also PD in the US; see Works Published Abroad Before 1978 Without Compliance with US Formalities 1922 - 1973, in the PD in home country. --Peta 06:25, 4 May 2007 (UTC)

[edit] ADB also

Hello Diverman, whay not have Robert Lowe, 1st Viscount Sherbrooke and James George Lee-Steere into the lists? They are DAB articles after all. What am I missing? Regards. —Moondyne 06:43, 7 May 2007 (UTC)

I count 99 "S" entries on [1]. Why not change the section stats from 97 to 99 and the grand total from 1048 to 1050 (assuming 1050 is the correct grand total) and reinstate the two 'missing' articles to make it correct again? —Moondyne 06:52, 7 May 2007 (UTC)
There aren't actually 99 "S" separate entries, 2 are just redirects to other entries. They are in the list, in their respect alphabetic entry. e.g. James George Lee Steere is listed asJames George Lee-Steere in under "L", and Viscount Sherbrooke is also in "L" under Robert Lowe, 1st Viscount Sherbrooke. If there are two entries for the same person in the list, then the overall numbers are out by two, and the subtotal doesn't match with the numbered list. It would be great if the 'see other' entries could be in the list without getting assigned a number; I've tried but I kept finding the list would re-start numbering from 1 again. They are more than just two redirects in the D.A.B. also! — Diverman 07:00, 7 May 2007 (UTC)
Ah, I see the light. Thanks. —Moondyne 07:34, 7 May 2007 (UTC)

[edit] District of Mackenzie & Mackenzie (electoral district)

Would you consider removing the merge tags from these articles? They are totally different things. The first was an administrative district in existance from 1896 until 1999 and covered what is today the Northwest Territories and Nunavut. The second was a electorial district (riding) that was created in 1903 before Saskatchewan became a province. The riding stayed with Saskatchewan when it became a province in 1905 and it remained until 1996. So from 1903 to 1996 there were two seperate Mackenzie arears in different parts of Canada and from 1996 to 1999 there was one Mackenzie area. Cheers. CambridgeBayWeather (Talk) 00:29, 19 July 2007 (UTC)

Thanks for the clarification. I've removed the merge proposals and added an other use reference for both. This should help reduce confusion between them. Any other information you could add to distinguish the two would be helpful too, thanks. I see also a few articles List of Canadian electoral districts 1903-1907 etc. link to Mackenzie - I assume this should be Mackenzie (electoral district), right?? — Diverman 00:56, 19 July 2007 (UTC)
Thanks. And yes you are right about the link. That must be very confusing for people clicking on it. CambridgeBayWeather (Talk) 01:00, 19 July 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Macleay

The article I deleted was one of several hundred completely useless cookie-cutter nanostubs created by the same guy on members of the NSW parliament. Many of them were not even at the right names, and in many more it wasn't even possible to tell who the nanostub was supposed to be referring to. As such, feel free to recreate the article - he's certainly notable! Rebecca 00:02, 24 July 2007 (UTC)

[edit] William Westgarth

This is an automated message from CorenSearchBot. I have perfomed a web search with the contents of William Westgarth, and it appears to be a substantial copy of http://www.electricscotland.com/history/australia/westgarth_william.htm. 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 07:00, 12 August 2007 (UTC)

Both articles used the same public domain resource: the Dictionary of Australian Biography — Diverman 01:34, 13 August 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Oswald Watt Gold Medal

This is an automated message from CorenSearchBot. I have perfomed a web search with the contents of Oswald Watt Gold Medal, and it appears to be a substantial copy of http://www.gfa.org.au/awards/Oswald.php. 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 00:11, 13 August 2007 (UTC)

The partial list of award recipients from the url above was used as a reference (and quoted as such). I don't believe a list of people can be copyrighted, however, I have done further research and added further award winners to the article anyway (with references). — Diverman 01:34, 13 August 2007 (UTC)

Thanks for your message Diverman. It helps that I am in the industry, recognise many of the names on the list, and have a fair idea of why they were nominated. YSSYguy 16:34, 24 August 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Brigadiers

Please see the talk page for John Raymond Broadbent (brigadier). Brigadiers in the British Army and associated Commonwealth armies are not considered to be generals. This is made quite clear in the Brigadier (UK) article. Broadbent was equivalent in rank to a brigadier-general in other armies, but he himself was not a general officer and should not be categorised as such. The external link to an unofficial Danish site does not justify misclassification. Given the scope of his website, I can see why he would include brigadiers since they hold equivalent rank to general officers in other countries, but that does not mean that they should be classified as such under country-specific categories on Wikipedia, which seeks to present the facts. -- Necrothesp 12:29, 9 October 2007 (UTC)


[edit] Copyright violation in Amateur Computer Group of New Jersey

Hello, this is a message from an automated bot. A tag has been placed on Amateur Computer Group of New Jersey, by another Wikipedia user, requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. The tag claims that it should be speedily deleted because Amateur Computer Group of New Jersey is unquestionably copyright infringement, and no assertion of permission has been made.

To contest the tagging and request that administrators wait before possibly deleting Amateur Computer Group of New Jersey, 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. CSDWarnBot 06:30, 11 November 2007 (UTC)

This wasn't a copyvio - the reason given for the deletion: "...was an article about a club that didn't assert the importance or significance of the subject.. using TW". However this was listed as missing article from WP:HOT. I think it's bad form to delete an article that has been requested by others, indeed by a wikiproject. See http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:WikiProject_Missing_encyclopedic_articles/Hot/A&oldid=50597304 - it's there as ACGNJ. - Diverman 11:04, 12 November 2007 (UTC)


A tag has been placed on ACGNJ, requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done for the following reason:

List of external links disguised as a disambiguation page.

Under the criteria for speedy deletion, articles that do not meet basic Wikipedia criteria may be deleted at any time. Please see the guidelines for what is generally accepted as an appropriate article, and if you can indicate why the subject of this article is appropriate, you may contest the tagging. To do this, add {{hangon}} on the top of the page and leave a note on the article's talk page explaining your position. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag yourself, but don't hesitate to add information to the article that would confirm its subject's notability under the 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. Blanchardb-MeMyEarsMyMouth-timed 11:04, 19 November 2007 (UTC)

[edit] RE: Nice work on editing some scientists

Thanks - glad you liked the edits. Hopefully, I'll find time to edit a few more bios soon. Zamphuor (talk) 12:46, 22 November 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Richard Rowe (horse racing)

A proposed deletion template has been added to the article Richard Rowe (horse racing), because another editor is 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. 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. B. Wolterding (talk) 14:39, 22 November 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Request

I request your comment in this discussion for a dispute pertinent Australian rules football as national and most popular sport in Australia. Regards,--PIO (talk) 16:38, 24 January 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Speedy deletion of Andrew Dawson

Please refrain from introducing inappropriate pages such as Andrew Dawson, to Wikipedia. Doing so is not in accordance with our policies. If you would like to experiment, please use the sandbox.

If you think that this notice was placed here in error, you may contest the deletion by adding {{hangon}} to the top of the page that has been nominated for deletion (just below the existing speedy deletion or "db" tag), coupled with adding a note on the 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 would render it more in conformance with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. Lastly, please note that if the article does get deleted, you can contact one of these admins to request that a copy be emailed to you. Ironholds (talk) 23:08, 26 April 2008 (UTC)

I just tagged it for deletion, i dont know who deleted it im afraid. The tool i use is set to inform the page creator, so i guess it must have been you. Ironholds (talk) 15:38, 9 May 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Fixed a 3-month boo-boo

at John Cox Bray... be more careful in future please :-) Timeshift (talk) 04:40, 6 June 2008 (UTC)