User talk:Rakkar

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Archive
Archives
User talk:Rakkar/Archive 1

Contents

[edit] Welcome to the Social work Wikiproject

Do you think you could write an article (even a stub) on the Australian Association of Social Workers? Any contributions to social work articles are very appreciated. Ursasapien (talk) 08:57, 7 April 2008 (UTC)


I could have a stab. I'm up to my eyeballs in assessments at the moment, so for the next week, anything I add will be a result of my studies, but after that, who knows! =) --rakkar (talk) 09:09, 7 April 2008 (UTC)

[edit] OAP

Hi Rakkar. I noticed in the O.A.P article you deleted the commentary taken from this article in the Canadian National Post newspaper. I felt it was good to have some international perspective on the policy, which the Canadian newspaper quote provided. Was the paper's assertion that it was a popular policy an embarrassment to Australians? (I'm wondering if that was the problem.) Would it aleviate that if the line in the article said "Canada's National Post claimed that..." ? Thanks, Lester 23:44, 28 April 2008 (UTC)

Hey Lester, I agree the article would definitely benefit from some more international perspectives. Racism/immigration/multiculturalism are fairly divisive issues in Australia. Some people are for it, some are against, and for the paper to say that the OAP was popular with "ordinary" Aussies is a bit unqualified.
By ordinary, I assume the paper refers to everyone who is not a left wing pinko greenie bleeding heart "elite". But many working class Australians who were born overseas probably wouldn't support it, many employers looking for cheap labour wouldn't support it, many "ordinary" urban working class european Australians who live in multicultural areas wouldn't support it.
I agree that some of the electorate supported the policy, just that it's NNPOV & bad journalism to claim that they are "ordinary" aussies. So, I feel that it should removed from the article, but international perspectives are definitely welcome. And even as a left wing pinko greenie bleeding heart "elite" australian =) I don't mind if they are supportive of this policy (which I dislike). I'll stick a copy of this on the talk page so other people can weigh in. --rakkar (talk) 01:01, 29 April 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Talk:Life support

Originally you nominated the talk page Talk:Life support for deletion. I assumed that you meant to nominate Life support itself for deletion and made the necessary changes. See Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Life support. If you really want to nominate the talk page instead of the article page, you would have to use Wikipedia:Miscellany for deletion rather than Wikipedia:Articles for deletion anyway. --Metropolitan90 (talk) 13:44, 9 May 2008 (UTC)

Yeah, my bad, I wasnt sure where to put the tags! Thanks for moving it.--rakkar (talk) 13:47, 9 May 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Message about "unconstructive"edit

Hi, you sent me a recent message stating:

"at least one of your recent edits, such as the one you made to Heroin, did not appear to be constructive and has been reverted or removed. Please use the sandbox for any test edits you would like to make, and take a look at the welcome page to learn more about contributing to this encyclopedia. Thank you. Changing minor details is petty. Please dont do it again. rakkar (talk) 14:51, 11 May 2008 (UTC)"

If you notice, I undid a vandalism where someone went and changed "1874" to "1774". Bayer, the pharmaceutical company, were only formed in the mid 19th century, and the chemist who synthesized it for them did so 25 years after the original synthesis, making 1874 the consistent date. Please look up the facts before you jump accusing others of being unconstructive.

[edit] Drug Policy Welcome

Thanks for your recent work in the Wikipedia:WikiProject Drug Policy. I appreciate your coming onboard and look forward to working with you. If you can think of others to invite, please feel free, and keep up the good work! Shamanchill (talk) 04:11, 13 May 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Israel

Hi, I deleted your recent addition to the Israel article. The article is already quite long, so any addition the main article should be really notable and important. Given that this is just a recent news story we cannot really say yet whether this is notable or not, after all there have been many similar stories of peace negoations that ultimately failed. So these were my reasons for removing this addition. Novidmarana (talk) 10:49, 21 May 2008 (UTC)

Good point, it is a massive article. I just re entered a shortened version, do you think that it was too long? Thw whole article needs condensing IMO. We can put the edit in the sub article perhaps.

[edit] Please do NOT add block notices to user talk pages

Hi Rakkar. Edits such as this one are, I'm afraid, inappropriate. That IP address was not indefinitely blocked, so your notice was highly inappropriate and misleading. Additionally, you are not an admin here, so acting as if you were one is also inappropriate and misleading. Please don't add block notices o user talk pages again. Thanks, Gwernol 14:44, 31 May 2008 (UTC)

[edit] John Howard - racism in Australia category

Hi Rakkar, I just removed the "Racism in Australia" category from the John Howard article, which you have added twice now. That article is a BLP, and including the category implies he is racist. Please leave the category out of the article. --Surturz (talk) 05:37, 5 June 2008 (UTC)

Note WP:BLP you will be blocked if you continue to add the category to the JH article. Gnangarra 05:57, 5 June 2008 (UTC)
Hi Rakkar, just friendly advice: Even if John Howard really is a heinous racist (as many commentators have implied), you should stop adding it to the article, otherwise Administrators may block you for a WP:3RR penalty. Then, you have a block to your name, which is the Wikipedia equivalent to a criminal record, which some people will refer to for years to come. I also ask Administrators to not immediately block user:Rakkar, as he may not be yet familiar with such penalties. Better to engage in dialogue first. Thanks, Lester 06:08, 5 June 2008 (UTC)
Hi all. I didn't say he was racist. I included him in a category about racism, as over his years in parliament, he had a lot to say on issues on race and immigration. It could be added to a wide rage of articles without implying that the subject racist, for instance it could apply to anti-racist groups. That is my justification for adding it, what do people think? Also, Gnan, your comment seemed a little harsh. My edit was removed with no justification, so I re-added it. Don't threaten people. --rakkar (talk) 03:28, 7 June 2008 (UTC)
You are always free to bring up the subject of the tag on the article Talk page, and see what the response is. Regards, Lester 03:54, 7 June 2008 (UTC)