User talk:Gareth Aus
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
 Archives |
|---|
[edit] AfD nomination of Westfield North Rocks
An editor has nominated Westfield North Rocks, an article on which you have worked or that you created, for deletion. We appreciate your contributions, but the nominator doesn't believe that the article satisfies Wikipedia's criteria for inclusion and has explained why in his/her nomination (see also "What Wikipedia is not"). Your opinions on whether the article meets inclusion criteria and what should be done with the article are welcome; please participate in the discussion by adding your comments at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Westfield North Rocks and please be sure to sign your comments with four tildes (~~~~). You may also edit the article during the discussion to improve it but should not remove the articles for deletion template from the top of the article; such removal will not end the deletion debate. Thank you. Please note: This is an automatic notification by a bot. I have nothing to do with this article or the deletion nomination, and can't do anything about it. Jayden54Bot 10:05, 5 February 2007 (UTC)
[edit] Template:Help contents back
I've reverted this template back to how it was in November. The positioning in the top right was ok for the monobook skin, but messes up other skins such as classic, as it appears over the top of other links. – Tivedshambo (talk) 07:56, 2 March 2007 (UTC)
[edit] Template:Active Wiki Fixup Projects
Do you have a rational for undoing my revisions? Jeepday 14:07, 5 March 2007 (UTC)
[edit] Delnav
Are you aware that {{deletiondebates}} already fulfills that function? >Radiant< 08:12, 13 March 2007 (UTC)
Yes but this is more comprehensive. -Gareth Aus 08:21, 13 March 2007 (UTC)
As a matter of fact we're trying to clarify the deletion system by merging and combingin the relevant instructions, thus reducing the overall verbiage. See Wikipedia:Deletion policy/Draft for details. >Radiant< 08:59, 13 March 2007 (UTC)
Ah excellent. -Gareth Aus 09:07, 13 March 2007 (UTC)
[edit] Help desk header redesign
You probably didn't mean it to happen, but your redesign of the help desk header caused the section edit links on the help desk to point to the wrong questions (probably because your edit introduced two sections in the header itself somehow). I've reverted your change, so the help desk can continue to function without any issues. If you want to re-establish your changes, please use a way that does not break the section editing of the help desk and test it before implementation. - Mgm|(talk) 08:26, 2 April 2007 (UTC)
[edit] Jimbo is coming to Sydney
Sorry to spam you if you aren't interested. See Wikipedia:Meetup/Sydney#April 25th for more info if you are interested. - Ta bu shi da yu 08:24, 10 April 2007 (UTC)
[edit] help box
Howdy. The {{helpbox}} has a weird layout problem that I cannot diagnose. The first and last entry in each "list#" section are followed/preceded (respectively) by too much leading. Screenshot example from {{Guideline list}} showing too much space below "Autobiography" and above "User page". It is the same in firefox/opera. --Quiddity 18:06, 3 September 2007 (UTC)
[edit] CityRail Platforms/Service section
Can you please leave the colours the way they are? They've been left that way for ages and no one has had a problem with them just on the platform markings. I'm happy to change the style elsewhere, but simply for those sections the coloured text is better. JRG 04:26, 11 November 2007 (UTC)
[edit] Template:Phh:Talk page
A template you created, Template:Phh:Talk page, has been marked for deletion as a deprecated and orphaned template. If, after 14 days, there has been no objection, the template will be deleted. If you wish to object to its deletion, please list your objection here and feel free to remove the {{deprecated}} tag from the template. If you feel the deletion is appropriate, no further action is necessary. Thanks for your attention. Bryan Derksen (talk) 21:17, 14 April 2008 (UTC)
[edit] Cityrail trains
With locomotives the usual naming convention seems to be {original operator} {class}. Dunno how named trains fit into that, and things get tricky as different trains were ordered and delivered under different operators. You can leave what you have done so far, but if you want to do the same thing elsewhere then we should try to dig up some other opinions on what way to go. I think the Perth and Brisbane networks use the same {current operator} {class} naming format you have though. Wongm (talk) 07:37, 8 May 2008 (UTC)
[edit] Wikipedia talk:Article series#Merge proposals
Could you take a look at Wikipedia talk:Article series#Merge proposals? Essentially, I think that "article series" is somewhat different entity than WP:Summary style article groups. --Kubanczyk (talk) 11:43, 26 May 2008 (UTC)
