User talk:ScottDavis/Archive 8

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Archive This is an archive of past discussions. Do not edit the contents of this page. If you wish to start a new discussion or revive an old one, please do so on the current talk page.
Talk archives for User:ScottDavis (current talk page)
<< 1 < Archive 7 Archive 8 Archive 9 > 11 >>

Contents

Grahamstown

I didn't realise that there was a town in Aus with the name Grahamstown. I got quite confused when on checking the Ght entry to spot a disambiguation link (that at the time was a red link), so I was looking up to check if it was vandalism - based on the admin account that theory went down. (but by then I'd already hunted down the user page and now feel obliged to at least leave a message)

Anyway owing to the fact that I don't know how big the Australian Ght is Im not sure whether the South African article shouldn't be renamed to 'Grahamstown (South Africa)' or such? (I think not but then again Ght is partly home) —Preceding unsigned comment added by Paul Hjul (talk • contribs)

The Australian Grahamstown is tiny. The Grahamstown Dam appears to be noteworthy. I live almost 2000 km away, so visiting is a little out of the question, but Google found some interesting pages. I created the {{otheruses}} and Grahamstown (disambiguation) pages just so there was somewhere to hang the links in case someone wants to link there for some other reason. Thanks for checking. Sorry I confused you by saving the main Grahamstown page before the dab page. If the South African Grahamstown were to be moved, it should be to Grahamstown, Eastern Cape, I think. --Scott Davis Talk 12:21, 3 November 2006 (UTC)

Thanks - I confuse myself frequently so ja. I agree that if SA Grahamstown were to be moved it would to Grahamstown, Eastern Cape, although I suspect that making Grahamstown, South Africa and Grahamstown, Eastern Cape both re-direct simply to Grahamstown is acceptable, as South Africa's Grahamstown seems far better known. This seems to be the case so all is good. Except that the Ausies stole our name :p —Preceding unsigned comment added by Paul Hjul (talk • contribs) 3 November 2006

Nathan

Hey Scott, I just noticed your comment on Chacor's talk page. Cheers mate, Sarah Ewart (Talk) 05:05, 29 October 2006 (UTC)

I suspect he was the main subject of the departure lounge photo too (he has never confirmed that), which showed a person around that age. I just hope he learns to accept advice and criticism better. --Scott Davis Talk 11:21, 29 October 2006 (UTC)
I agree with you re the pic. He has just self-nom'd (for the fourth time) for RfA. I hope a 'crat will snowball it soon. I, too, hope he learns to accept advice but it sadly doesn't look like that will happen anytime soon. Cheers, Sarah Ewart (Talk) 10:43, 4 November 2006 (UTC)
I just saw that, but decided that since I'm mentioned, and it's going to fail again, I'm better not commenting. --Scott Davis Talk 10:51, 4 November 2006 (UTC)

Augusta, Georgia suburbs

Scott, I reverted your edit at Georgia (U.S. state) because Aiken, South Carolina and North Augusta, South Carolina are in fact suburbs of Augusta. View at Google maps. Many U.S. cities sit on or near state lines and have suburbs in adjacent states. AUTiger ʃ talk/work 06:39, 3 November 2006 (UTC)

Thankyou for letting me know, and sorry for stuffing it up - perhaps there needs to be some extra info in that list to explain why two places in North Carolina are considered important cities or towns to Georgia. --Scott Davis Talk 06:54, 3 November 2006 (UTC)
No worries. I'll see about adding a notation about that. AUTiger ʃ talk/work 05:36, 4 November 2006 (UTC)
Perhaps drop them from the present list and put at the bottom something like "in addition, Aiken and North Augusta in South Carolina are also suburbs of Augusta." Does that sound right? The meaning of "suburb" is a bit different in Australia than the USA. --Scott Davis Talk 05:52, 4 November 2006 (UTC)
The more I've thought about it and looking at what that section implies, I think it's just more appropriate to delete the two SC cities from the list. Suburbs here are related to the proximity and economic relationship between a major city and surrounding less-dense cities/towns; there's no formal governmental connection or jurisdictional requirement for the term to be applied.AUTiger ʃ talk/work 23:58, 5 November 2006 (UTC)
Thanks. I notice that neither of them are actually linked from Augusta, Georgia, either. Aiken is mentioned but not linked. I've demonstrated my ignorance of the area enough that I don't plan on adding anything there. Thanks again. Perhaps one day I'll visit the area and learn something about it. --Scott Davis Talk 00:21, 6 November 2006 (UTC)

Motorshots pictures

HI Scott, I just replied by email. Feel free to use the free pictures for illustrating wikipedia articles related to A1GP. We are looking at offering free pictures to all wikipedia users interest in A1GP. Having said that,n we might not have used the best approcah to date... apologies! —Preceding unsigned comment added by Motorshots (talk • contribs) 10:55, 5 November 2006 (UTC)

Responded by email - permission appears to still be insufficient as it prohibits sale. --Scott Davis Talk 10:55, 5 November 2006 (UTC)

Rubbish

That Hist of Tas stuff is complete crap - the user shouldve been jumped on as the other edits by the user are typical of dags (sic!) SatuSuro 01:11, 6 November 2006 (UTC)

Are we thinking of the same thing? My edit to remove a hoax entry? The older contributions by that IP number appear to be proper grammar and punctuation fixes (and a self-reverted test). I can't tell if it's the same person behind the IP though - they were months earlier. The IP number belongs to the Australian Maritime College. --Scott Davis Talk 03:40, 6 November 2006 (UTC)
Northerner jealousy that the south produces royalty in hamlets realm probably... SatuSuro 14:04, 6 November 2006 (UTC)
??? (I don't think I've ever read/seen Hamlet) --Scott Davis Talk 22:04, 6 November 2006 (UTC)

capital AND largest

Since the capital of most states is rarely the largest in population, your suggested criteria, though clearly objective, would hardly address the issue. In particular, it would not even include the current exceptions (including New York City) because none of them are the capitals of their states. In fact, only about a dozen cities would qualify, and most of them being relatively obscure compared to those on the AP list. See italicized cities in the first column of this table. Would you support criteria such as the following?

  1. the capital of its state, or
  2. the largest city of its state, or
  3. the second largest city of any of the 25 largest states, or
  4. the third largest city of any of the 10 largest states

--Serge 23:50, 8 November 2006 (UTC)

I thought I had already noted that these criteria would select the "wrong set". I was responding to the claim that nobody had offered any objective solutions. I think your list above selects a lot of barely-known cities. I'd be surprised if the "average American" could find half of them on a map. --Scott Davis Talk 05:26, 9 November 2006 (UTC)

Simon Hackett and Internode

Not trolling Scott. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 59.167.63.34 (talk • contribs)

This relates to me removing claims of slow rollout of new technology by Internode Systems from the Simon Hackett page. --Scott Davis Talk 08:41, 9 November 2006 (UTC)

Removal of additions to Internode Systems and Simon Hackett

Scott,

I fail to see how my contributions to Internode Systems and Simon Hackett regarding perceived slowness with the ADSL2+ rollout by some Internode customers are incorrect. This is consistently debated on Whirlpool. Why do you continue to remove them?

Cheers, Martin —Preceding unsigned comment added by 59.167.63.34 (talk • contribs)

  1. It's a perceived slowness - i.e. opinion. See Wikipedia:Verifiability and Wikipedia:No original research
  2. Whirlpool forums are not a reliable source.
  3. The way your comments are presented make them look like the thoughts of a disgruntled customer who wants to upgrade to ADSL2+ but it's not available to you.
  4. As of right now, your comments have been added 4 times in less than 24 hours to Simon Hackett and 5 times in 26 hours to Internode Systems, violating WP:3RR. These have been removed by three different editors, clearly showing consensus is currently against that sentence. Discuss it on the talk page.
  5. The three big reference links are clearly an attempt to justify your case, but they are ugly as positioned, and don't readily back up your claim. The one called "Part 1" is Hackett himself announcing that Internode turned on ADSL2+ on all their DSLAMs as soon as the standard was ratified. Perhaps you could cite a newspaper article that Internode are dragging their feet at installing ADSL2+ capability. If so, I'd leave that in, but I doubt you'll find one.
--Scott Davis Talk 11:44, 9 November 2006 (UTC)

FYI, see Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents#that guy with a grudge against Chuq and Longhair. Cheers. -- Longhair\talk 03:35, 11 November 2006 (UTC)


Thanks

For watching the west tas bits SatuSuro 11:31, 11 November 2006 (UTC)

No problems - makes a pleasant change from hunting block evaders. The guy may have had a point, but he's gone beyond trying to make it to vandalising whatever he can find relating to Chuq, Longhair, Me, ... --Scott Davis Talk 11:43, 11 November 2006 (UTC)
Thanks for the red link on Melba Flats- I jumped for it (better than my 100 undone projeccts lying incomplete) geeze I hope you guys nail the pest!!!SatuSuro 14:15, 11 November 2006 (UTC)

Survey Q

Have you ever been to the southern hemisphere? Respond here Deadline for entries is December 15th, PST. AstroBoy 03:34, 12 November 2006 (UTC)

Spalding (disambiguation)

Thanks. Each occasion that I venture into editing a new type of page and it gets corrected, I learn more about contributing to WP. I appreciate the tutoring. ,:) David Spalding 17:42, 12 November 2006 (UTC)

No problems - I keep finding disambig pages I edited when I was new, and cringing at how far off the WP:MOSDAB style they are now. --Scott Davis Talk 21:53, 12 November 2006 (UTC)

ACOTF question

Hey Scott, just wondering where I would post the {{to do}} list for the United States-Australia relations article. Thanks! Sharkface217 04:05, 13 November 2006 (UTC)

answered on User talk:Sharkface217#Australian collaboration of the fortnight. --Scott Davis Talk 09:21, 13 November 2006 (UTC)

Re

Thanks for the invitation to participate in WP:ACOTF. But do I need to be Australian for this? I know that I could definitely help in the article since I'm American.

Also, thanks for the support you gave me during my Wikibreak. And no, you're none of the admins who caused me problems. =) In appreciation, I give you the kindness award of the cabbage.--Ed ¿Cómo estás? 03:39, 14 November 2006 (UTC)

The Kindness Award of Ed
This Wikipedian has received the Kindness Award from Ed for going the extra mile to be kind to another person. Kindness is important so that there may be an improved sense of community here on Wikipedia. As a reward, I offer this user a random piece of food. (I will never give the same food item out twice, so don't be jealous.) You may read a nice story on kindness over here.

Request

Hiya Scott. If you get the time, could you remind User:Biatch of WP:NPA and like policies with regards to this comment at Talk:Melbourne city centre. Considering the spray was directed at me, a caution from another user would carry more weight. Thanks, --cj | talk 07:08, 15 November 2006 (UTC)

DNA newspaper

Hi Scott,

I deleted text from the DNA newspaper page. Most of the content I deleted was promoting the newspaper without authentication. Some text also ridiculed rival newspapers. For ex: Another publication was called 'hastily put together'. I felt this was not needed.

Now, the page is looking much better but there is still a lot of content that promotes the product without authentication. Also, there have been major changes in the editorial board of this paper since its inception a year ago. Khalid Mohamed is no longer working with this paper.

Such changes in personell are bound to occur. Therefore, I suggest that the names of section heads and editors (except for the editor-in-chief) be removed

Peace,

RB

Wow - some people have long memories. This appears to be a reference to a comment about edits on DNA (newspaper) that I left on User talk:Rohitbhatia back in May! Thanks for explaining, but it looks like you or other editors have already moved the article on beyond this. Thankyou. --Scott Davis Talk 14:10, 16 November 2006 (UTC)

Hi

Just incase you're still on- to me (I could be very wrong) there's something fishy on Longhairs talk page - if I'm wrong please let me know! SatuSuro 14:13, 16 November 2006 (UTC)

I went to bed straight after the last reply - sorry. I can't see anything odd this morning. He's been stalked by a fairly clever vandal for the last week though. --Scott Davis Talk 22:16, 16 November 2006 (UTC)
Which makes me think that those book covers were loaded by the vandal SatuSuro 22:45, 16 November 2006 (UTC)
I'd guess Longhair uploaded them himself last March - they're games from my childhood, and I think he's a similar age. The requirements for documenting fair use keep getting higher, and those image pages no longer quite meet it. Combination seems to have marked quite a few game images in the last week. While it's a pain for the contributors, it probably helps Wikipedia in the long run. --Scott Davis Talk 23:46, 16 November 2006 (UTC)
Thanks for that, I didnt read details although I do have popups avilable - it just looked odd - and seeing he's off a lot at the moment I thought I'd alert someone like you just incase it was a devious act. Thanks - BTW thanks for the new arts prod - I'm getting them up for the stubs! SatuSuro 03:35, 17 November 2006 (UTC)

Emu Bay Railway

Thanks as always - I think there's heap more that can go into the EBR article - havent even got to lou rae's book yet! SatuSuro 09:21, 17 November 2006 (UTC)
Is Renison Bell just a mine, or a town as well? I notice it appears in List of postcodes in Tasmania, Australia, but the article is presently about the mine. If it's a town, it should probably be moved to match the town naming convention, and have the towns category added. --Scott Davis Talk 09:27, 17 November 2006 (UTC)

In my memory from the old times :) it did have a few houses - but most of the miners were living in zeehan - geosciences have it as a locality - Nat Lib have the two west coast historians with their good ref - Renison : the slumbering giant / Kerry Pink and Patsy Crawford. Zeehan, Tas. : Renison Limited, 1996. ISBN 0646283561 Available from: Renison Limited, PO Box 20, Zeehan, Tas. 7469.Subjects: Renison Limited--History. I would say locality SatuSuro 10:07, 17 November 2006 (UTC)

So should Renison Bell, Tasmania be a redirect to Renison Bell, or should we move the article and have them both point to Renison Bell Mine? I've expanded Mount Bischoff a bit, too. --Scott Davis Talk 10:30, 17 November 2006 (UTC)

I think Renison Bell should be made the main art and have the other two point to it. The Bischoff one is looking good! Hope you have the opportunity to do do a perm block on the apparation SatuSuro 11:08, 17 November 2006 (UTC)

My big struggle (some on new arts list) is to get the right stubs for the pieman catchment places - and make sure that there is a good overview art (ie the river, hydro things, tullah, rosebery and all the lakes) etc. SatuSuro 12:00, 17 November 2006 (UTC)

I don't think I know enough to be at all helpful there. Sorry. --Scott Davis Talk 12:09, 17 November 2006 (UTC)
No problems - when I was running the west coast miner I got to know the cheif hydro engineer on the pieman scheme (he was later on the king scheme) - he cracks a mention in crawfords book on the king river...also - I cannot remember if I told you I have heygarths book on philosopher smith in other words the whole bischoff story - simply havent had time to go through it for info yet... SatuSuro 12:13, 17 November 2006 (UTC)

"Village"

Hi Scott Davis,

re Towns vs Villages, Australia.

Links: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User_talk:Grahamec

       http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ben_Lomond%2C_New_South_Wales

Very impressed with your contributions. I am new to Wiki, so appolgies. Think I have found the best way to respond to the query re use of the term "village".

My first project has been to add edits to the entry of Ben Lomond, New South Wales, Australia apparently stimulating this question re the term Villages.

"Village" is a commonly used term distinct from "Town". I would suggest village is typically less than 100 population, with an upper limit of about 500 people before transitioning to "Town" status. The defining characterisitc of a village vs town however is the human experience of the "feel" of a place where a group of humans choose to reside in a cluster.


The difference between Village and Town is as distinct as Town and City.

Take the village for example where I reside. It has about 10 to 15 houses scattered over a few square km's, with a population of about 30 individuals (including babies & children) in the village zone. The word "Town" is clearly not an appropriate descriptor. It is distinctly in appearance, ambience, quiet locality, and experience of social culture a "village". Also under local government it is classified, and operates under the legislative defined zone of 2v (Village Zone). Hence village in this regard is official recognised status within New South Wales (State Government) land zoning legislation.


There is also one other term of relevence. Smaller than "Village" is "Hamlet".

Hamlets are referred often on topographical and road maps as "locality". Hamlet is perhaps 2 to 4 farms houses clustered at an intersection of roads. There will be no infrastracture such as a school or general store or roadhouse. Just a few dwellings.


In summary:

"Dwelling" - single farm house, property, family residence.

"Hamlet" - a few dwellings, less than 10, clustered near or around an intersection of transport pathways of some description (walk paths, laneways, roads, rail stop). Usually no communal infrastructure.

"Village" - tens of dwellings, some communal structures eg (one or more of) general store, primary school, petrol or gas station, village hall, church, pub. Evidence of coordinated community cooperation and activity in some form.

"Town" - hundreds to thousands of dwellings, identifiable commercial hub eg main street. Local government buildings and other infrastructure - eg court house, police, library, swimming pool, high school, etc.

"City" - more than tens of thousands of dwellings, clear defined Central Business District, suburbs, etc (needs no explanation here).



Hope this helps with definition query. I imagine different cultures will have different words for similar categories of human settlements. Perhaps a Wiki page?

Over to you.

Cameron.

—Preceding unsigned comment added by Citizenofearth001 (talk • contribs) 19 November 2006

Hi Cameron. Thankyou for you comments. In this case, the question dated from about 6 months ago, and was resolved to merge the Category:Villages in New South Wales or Category:New South Wales villages into the Category:Towns in New South Wales. There is more of the archived discussion at Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Australian places/Archive 1#Villages and Wikipedia:Categories for deletion/Log/2006 August 18#Category:New South Wales villages. The final decision was made at Wikipedia:Categories for deletion/Log/2006 September 21#Category:Villages in New South Wales.
The consensus at that time was that there is no objective and reliable source to differentiate between "town" and "village" in Australia. The legislation you mention was not found when we were discussing it. If you think there is a useable list somewhere that would assist in splitting Category:Towns in New South Wales into two or three categories, then the right place to raise a new discussion now is probably at Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Australian places. It is possible that the rest of Australia bullied the New South Wales editors if your law and language does distinguish them. --Scott Davis Talk 03:58, 19 November 2006 (UTC)


Scott,

Thanks. Now I understand the context of the question concerning "village". I think the consensus decision made as you outline was a good one. I am thinking from a user of Wikipedia point of view ... want to learn about places in Australia - putting all under Category:Towns in New South Wales is best. This can include villages and hamlets. In the context you outline, "Towns in New South Wales" translates to "settlements" of any size. Good to keep it simple.

Thanks also for your welcome.


As an experienced participant of Wikipedia, would like to ask a question on a matter that I imagine has been discussed at length. I have spent a day or so reading lots of the background notes on Wikipedia for new participants.

I understand the purpose of Wikipedia is to document factual entries from established verifiable sources. That is, to in effect, record established knowledge. A human knowledge base. Integrity of information is paramount for this project to achieve it goals.

It would appear to me that in this task there is still some constructive function in the documenting of things not previously documented, and of recognising the need for new terms.

Given the unigue nature of this collaborative effort from such a diverse range of human beings, there will be areas of culture, social practices, etc that till now have not been previously formerly studied, yet exists as common experience and knowledge within certain groups of people. Hence there must be some role for new knowledge within Wikipedia.

Also, as civilisation develops new terms and knowledge happens naturally. For example "computer" or "internet" did not exist 100 years ago and at some point these concepts and terms, and hence new entries in an encyclopedia, needed to be constructed.

It would seem to me that it is a natural consequence of the process of gathering a knowledge base, as is being done with Wikipedia, that some new knowledge will be found (not referenced in current formal literature) as well as some instances where processing and clarify that body of knowledge into usable logical form dictates the need for new concepts and terms that did not previously exist.

Please note the quality of entries I suggest is not the same as personal biographies of anyone, or ego driven speculations and theorising for its own sake.

I note, for example, with Wikidictionary there is a list of new proposed words that people think should be in existence, as there are currently no English word labels for clearly recogised phenonema (eg behaviour, experience, new object, practice, etc).

My question: Given your experience, can you point me in the right direction to understand this issue better. For instance, I am not sure of this aspect of the work of Wikipedia gets resolved in the normal course of "Talk" pages concerning entries. Or perhaps prior to now there has been a defining forum discussing clarifying thoughts around this issue of new knowledge or terms.

Thanks.

CofE001 03:26, 20 November 2006 (UTC)

—The preceding unsigned comment was added by Citizenofearth001 (talk • contribs) 13:56, 20 November 2006. Please sign talk page posts with ~~~~ as it creates clickable links. You can customise the text in your preferences.

The Wikipedia policy no original research means that this "new knowledge" must not be first published in Wikipedia. It must be published somewhere else first - either a news paper or a scientific journal usually. The rules for Wiktionary and Wikinews are different as they serve different needs. There is also a Wikiversity which is new and I know nothing about. --Scott Davis Talk 03:56, 20 November 2006 (UTC)

tassie ext link fever

Hi Scott - i've just been watching a number of tassie pages and noticed an increase in links etc (Maria Isalnd being the pinnacle of ext links...sigh) is there a convention or policy re these? probably end of school/uni/etc andd they go for it i suppose, sigh SatuSuro 00:56, 21 November 2006 (UTC)

The guideline is at Wikipedia:External links. --Scott Davis Talk 01:04, 21 November 2006 (UTC)
Try to avoid linking to multiple pages from the same website; instead, try to find an appropriate linking page within the site. is of particular relevance here. --Scott Davis Talk 01:09, 21 November 2006 (UTC)
Thanks for that I could see that on your cleanup edit - cheers! SatuSuro 15:08, 21 November 2006 (UTC)
Sigh - another one who blanked their talkpage when challenged (yawn) User:Cedventure I honestly wonder... maybe you might need to know about this considering the issues from some of its contribs. I'll let chuq know as well - sorry to bother SatuSuro 13:38, 22 November 2006 (UTC)
Thanks for looking. SatuSuro 13:54, 22 November 2006 (UTC)
I think it's unclear whether blanking a talk page is bad, if the user was new and has learned their lesson. In this case, I haven't tried to work out the sequences of warnings and edits to see if it was a newby mistake from a future good editor, or an attempt to conceal prior warnings while continuing to add spam. While he's adding good photos to the articles, I'm inclined to be tolerant ;-) I had a similar case where an adventure travel company was adding photos of central Australia - I was happy to go and remove the spam while he was happy to keep adding excellent photos. The Sweetwater Fishing links are more annoying, but some of his pages have good info and maps, so they need individually checking. --Scott Davis Talk 13:59, 22 November 2006 (UTC)
I'm pursuing it no further at this stage - I'm almost delightfully away from it all - offline from Friday - here in WA (secret hideaway with no computer access) - for a week. I have alerted my Perth admin friends that their talk pages will now be down to a reasonable size again for a week with no crazy messages, and it looks like we got a new one - User:Gnangarra from his vote so far... SatuSuro 14:05, 22 November 2006 (UTC)
Thanks for the headsup - I have been struggling to keep up with my watchlist lately, and not paying enough attention to the noticeboards. Scott Davis Talk 14:36, 22 November 2006 (UTC)
Gawd if I could keep up with anything at this stage - thanks for that - I have met him and weighed down his talk pages and email and he's still friendly - so I think he deserves it for just that !  :) SatuSuro 14:43, 22 November 2006 (UTC)

Cork poll

Scott, I am happy to take part in a poll. Personally I don't think Cork (city) is very good, but it seems to comply with the guidelines and no one has anything better to offer. My problem with a poll is that there seemed to be a "consensus" against polls. I still believe that Cork vs cork is a precedent setting example. It is certainly the most contested. My preference would be to add to WP:D and/or WP:NC to cope with situations like this. I feel that if they have fixed case-sensitive selection and addressing in Wiktionary, the will probably do so here soon. I don't know if that is 1 month, 12 months or 36 months, but I bet it will be fixed. And we will all be heading for Cork and cork. We could all be doing something far more constructive than this. Anyhow I will not object to an WP:RM, but I'm not sure it will solve anything. Frelke 15:24, 24 November 2006 (UTC)

It looks like events overtook us both, but I don't think the eventual outcome would have been much different. --Scott Davis Talk 00:44, 25 November 2006 (UTC)

Pictures

No problems. I keep finding all these people that deserve far more impressive biographies but for the moment adding an image will have to suffice. I should also add a "well done" for the great work you are doing on South Australian issues. --Roisterer 03:52, 25 November 2006 (UTC)

RfA thanks

 I would like to express my appreciation of the time you spent considering my successful RfA. Thankyou Gnangarra 13:19, 26 November 2006 (UTC)

{{Current Australian COTF}}

I have a question about the above template. Wouldn't placing the template on top of the current ACOTF be a violation of WP:ASR?--Ed ¿Cómo estás? 03:33, 27 November 2006 (UTC)

The short answer is "that's the way it's always been". Wikipedia:Collaborations says the template for the current collaboration should be small, tasteful, and on the article page. Candidate templates should be on the talk page (in WP:ACOTF case, it's part of {{WP Australia}} ). --Scott Davis Talk 05:28, 27 November 2006 (UTC)

Pitt Water

Hi Scott,

I just checked a street atlas I have nearby, and it tells me "Pitt Water". Clarence City Council and Sorell Council's sites also both use this so I would say it is the correct name. Also, I notice you have been fixing up a few links after my LGA page moves/splits. Thanks for that - I am going to get around to doing it myself, but I wanted to move *all* the council pages first so I wouldn't have to go back and fix articles twice! -- Chuq 08:44, 2 December 2006 (UTC)

questions on possible new sections and whole articles

I have questions about adding a section and whole article - see Talk:Religion_in_Australia#interfaith_respect, but also note Australasian Police Multicultural Advisory Bureau which may need more to fit into the scheme of australian pages you are helping herd.--Smkolins 11:33, 5 December 2006 (UTC)

The sound like good ideas - go ahead. --Scott Davis Talk 14:35, 7 December 2006 (UTC)
I'll post further questions near the Talk:Religion_in_Australia#interfaith_respect section. Need some help with copyright issues. --Smkolins 01:58, 8 December 2006 (UTC)

Agile Communications

Excellent referencing here Scott. The article on Agile Communications has now moved from a borderline vanity-type article into a well referenced subject. If we aim high with our standards in regards to referencing outside credible sources, the end result can only be better and far more credible than what's already there for most of the Australian content :) Thanks... -- Longhair\talk 04:36, 11 December 2006 (UTC)

Whadya mean ?

http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Joanne_Lees&diff=91577351&oldid=91146726

You are kidding about the not "mentioned in the media" bit aren't you ?

Wikipedia contains references to things I have been trying to get the media to acknowledge for years. The project for a New American Century is just one.

also... http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Toby_Rogers Why does a "journalist" from a now non existant magazine get to publish unsubstantiated accusations about the George Bush's grandfather, yet someone who makes a claim which brings them no financial reward is slipped down the memory hole ?

I'll await your response before reposting :) —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 203.122.80.196 (talk) 15:10, 12 December 2006 (UTC).

Re Joanne Lees: I mean exactly what I said. Please read Wikipedia policies on Verifiability, Reliable sources and living people. There must be reliable reports of this sort of material before it may be added to Wikipedia. I am not kidding about "mentioned in the media".
Re Toby Rogers: Just because one article doesn't meet Wikipedia's standards should not lead to bringing all the others down to the same level. We should try to improve the poor articles instead. --Scott Davis Talk 22:06, 12 December 2006 (UTC)

Dolly (trailer)

  1. I.T.E.C. C-Dolly
  2. I.T.E.C. H-Dolly or tandem dolly

Why do you consider links to manufacturers inappropriate, especially if the second link is now about the only way to identify or show which is an H-Dolly? For example in Rail tracks the link to Table of North American tee rail (flat bottom) sections provides info on railsizes not easely found otherwise.

Peter Horn 00:31, 17 December 2006 (UTC) —Preceding unsigned comment added by Peter Horn (talk • contribs)

Replied on Talk:Dolly (trailer)#I.T.E.C. H-dolly. --Scott Davis Talk 03:16, 17 December 2006 (UTC)

SA election FA

G'day Scott. The article on the recent election is up for FA status and I'm wondering if you might be able to offer any comments or votes on it's nomination page. Thanks, michael talk 14:44, 14 December 2006 (UTC)

Hi there, i've acted upon suggestions and was hoping for a second look at it. Also, if you're able to make a suggestion for the citation issue im having as per my comment on the above linked page, that would help out as well. Thanks for your input! Timeshift 16:23, 15 December 2006 (UTC)
Howdy again, anything else you can see that would prevent the article from becoming featured? Timeshift 09:00, 16 December 2006 (UTC)
Sorry - I've been doing various things today and haven't actually read the whole article today. I did read it all the first time round and was surprised it didn't get featured after the mods that time. As a some-time editor of the article, am I allowed to vote for it's FA? --Scott Davis Talk 10:25, 16 December 2006 (UTC)
Sorry I didn't reply, forgot to check this page as I am used to getting a reply on mine, but i'm a bit guilty of that at times :) It seems some of the people reviewing it have been somewhat harsh so far, and I don't really see any bold support comments yet... not sure why. I don't see any reason why you cannot vote... what is the harm? :) Timeshift 18:27, 19 December 2006 (UTC)

Tony has said "Why does "Sovereign" link to "Queen of Australia". The states are sovereign entities themselves, and for many decades now, Elizabeth Windsor has been Queen of South Australia. It's a serious constitutional matter." in the FA candidate talk. I'm not sure what to try and fix it with as that is not a strong point of mine. If you can reply to him or make a change, I think that's the only thing i've left unfixed on all FAC pages apart from the total redraw of results tables that one user wanted but nobody else mentioned... the only thing is, how do I go from having completed all suggestions to getting approvals happening! Timeshift 08:01, 21 December 2006 (UTC)

I responded. As far as I can tell, the Queen of Australia acts as "Queen in right of South Australia", but it's the Queen of Australia, not a "separate" Queen of South Australia. Adam is the expert on this sort of stuff if we need one. --Scott Davis Talk 11:45, 21 December 2006 (UTC)

For a laugh

you might want to watch Orangutan I was desperately trawling for an admin a few minutes ago as I though there was going to be war... seemed to have settled. SatuSuro 14:02, 19 December 2006 (UTC)

Thank god I went to bed they kept at it! SatuSuro 22:14, 19 December 2006 (UTC)
So did I - I think one has breached 3RR, but I don't really want to block one and not the other. They seem to be slowly working toward a compromise, I think. --Scott Davis Talk 22:19, 19 December 2006 (UTC)
Then this am I saw cj on and as I was asking for a watch michael went and accidentally reverted the whole article! I think I better go and do some gardening - its muggy and overcast in Perth at the moment. sigh :) SatuSuro 23:09, 19 December 2006 (UTC)
He's back. could you do a favour and watch - I am about to go off soon.? SatuSuro 08:31, 20 December 2006 (UTC)
I'll look in a few times throughout the evening. Do you have an opinion on whether the section should be in or out? --Scott Davis Talk 09:28, 20 December 2006 (UTC)
Thanks for your edit, appreciated. I think Sarah has solved the issue, bless her! SatuSuro 11:58, 21 December 2006 (UTC)
No point me watching an article if I'm not prepared to fix what problems I can see. --Scott Davis Talk 12:27, 21 December 2006 (UTC)
The revert war has continued - and I must say I am less certain - after having a convincing item from Hesperian for including the item. However to reduce the warring - I think either another article completely - or a vote on the talk page... I have sent a comment to bananbucket to see what he thinks. Another eye on the subject I say - in case another might offer a comment. Thanks for what you have done so far - still trying to think a way around all this. sigh. SatuSuro 07:46, 22 December 2006 (UTC)

Thanks for comments

Hi Scott-- Thanks for you comments. I did understand that you and I were "pretty close" in positions. After thinking about it some more, I should have emphasized how little certain people have done to explore and elaborate upon their own proposals! Instead, others' comments are merely dismissed. If you are so inclined, you might wish to point this out and encourage development of a substantive critique of the status quo, which I have yet to see. I am going to make good on my promise (mostly to myself) to stay away for a while. Cheers, Ishu 16:23, 21 December 2006 (UTC)

A temple for your template

I should have noted how good I think it is! Perhaps slight border on bottom and right would silence critics. My prescription for 'shrinking' is this: do what I did - create WikiProject:Your overlooked state and move all (including previous) material there. You seem much more qualified to do so. Be safe or be careful during the silly season. Regards: Fred.e 16:34, 21 December 2006 (UTC)

Also {{Australian crime}} seems neat. Fred.e

queenie

Scott—No, it's worse than that: I was relying on my recollection of what happened in the seventies, when the state governments, starting with Bjelke's in Qld, formally made her sovereign of their own states. Perhaps I'm wrong. But the states are sovereign entities, unlike the Canadian provinces, I think. Tony 13:35, 22 December 2006 (UTC)

I think it's purely symbolic, and weak at that. The Canadian federation, IMV, is significantly looser than its Australian counterpart because of Quebec. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Tony1 (talk • contribs) 15:18, 22 December 2006 (UTC).

emerik fejes

Scott,

forgive me, I'm just starting to figure out wikipedia. Emerik Fejes also used magazines to inspire his paintings. As I think I added to his bio, he preferred to paint with his cat under his arm. I have paintings of his I'm not sure what I am going to do with, and am trying to figure out his origins; he is referred to as both a Serb and a Croat. I don't want to offend either country. He is also referred to as Hungarian. Are you aware of his pseudonym? —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Rvwheeler (talk • contribs) 04:16, 25 December 2006 (UTC).

Nick Vujicic

Hey This guy seems to be from Australia. If you have any idea then please do the necessary edits.I hope you can do it. There is also a tag to it.Thanks.rencin24 Nick Vujicic

Chattanooga

I'm sorry you got caught in the crossfire of my tirade. I was very frustrated when the eighth "oppose" vote came in, and none of them were from regular editors of the page. I do feel like the system is "gamed", especially since there is no move tag for placement on the article. There are tags for most other processes that I perform regularly, including merges and splits. I have perfomed successful moves recently using the prescribed process, but in the majority of the cases they were "no contests", as no one seemed to even notice the issue was being discussed. Granted, some of these were low-traffic aircraft articles, but was was fairly notable.

With regard to the moratorium on moving city pages, I seriously was not aware of it, or I would not have proposed the move. That, and the overwhelming opposition, were my primary reason for withdrawing my requests (and the fact I didnt want to see the No votes top 30!) :) As to how I could have been aware of it, I don't know. I did search out other moves, and found no mention of it. Maybe I just missed it, I don't know. What I resented was the implication by another user that I should have somehow known about, in spite of the fact that I have YET to have found it! Even that user did not provide a direct link to it.

You can rest assured I won't be proposing any more city moves, regardless of any changes in policy. When I run head on into a buruecratic mess such as this, I leave it alone. I don't warn anon vandals for the same reason; as long as registrations isn't required, anon vandalism will continue. Almost ALL vandalism I have seen comes from anons, yet for whatever reason the higher-ups have not made registration mandatory. So I just stay out of the process altogether, just fix whatever mess they make on pages I edit, and move on.

Regarding the move process, the only thing that I can see could be changed is to to have a move tag for the aritcle itself (if there is one, I have not seen it used). I don't know why it's placed on the Talk Page instead, but as mentioned other tags are placed there.

As fas as coming down hard on my proposal, all you did was agree with the other reasons given. There were a lot more biting comments addressed towards me, and it was toward them that my anger was directed. Thanks for being the only one to bother to "reach out". It is much appreciated. - BillCJ 18:35, 28 December 2006 (UTC)

Tassie

If we had room for it I'd probably put you up as patron saint (guardian angel) - a couple of us are about to start a Wiki Project Tasmania this weekend. I thought I'd alert yourself and a number of other admins in case we dig a hole on the mania that needs help to get out of - so that sort of makes me stretching across 4 projects for a while... doh! Anyways have a good new year whatever happens, and thank you so much for your help on west coast tas stuff - and latterly my orangutan hysteria. Best wishes SatuSuro 01:21, 29 December 2006 (UTC)

Inland Railway

Some time ago you put an unref and future infrastucture item with this grimy little infant stub - Ive just put the ext link and 6 year old pollies speeches as refs - (with about 4 other threads that I should deal with instead...) I think the art could be expanded from items between 8 to six years old - which would sort of negate the infrastructure tag - but I am not going to move it until I've populated the art at some later time. Thought I'd let you know. The Tas startup seems to be going ok so far. SatuSuro 12:04, 3 January 2007 (UTC)

Thanks for making a start. Wikipedia will be in front of the project itself soon :-) Please put a link in messages on this page that are about a particular article (in the title like I have now or in the text). --Scott Davis Talk 12:37, 3 January 2007 (UTC)
Yup I understand - I have just been having a good time with the incorrect isbn on the charles whitham western tasmania book - the isbn patrols are the night riders in this parish at the moment! SatuSuro 12:40, 3 January 2007 (UTC)

Your advice needed

Scott, I've done considerable work on Afro-Latin American and am wondering if there is any way in which a section of a page can be frozen from having changed made to it without some prior approval or consultation.

The issue is this: I added informnation which was extracted from an IDB report and is more or less "official". A couple of users, surely well intentioned, have made changes to the information without realizing that they are changing text which is, in essence, a quotation which would thus make the change incorrect.

If it were possible to restrict changes just to this one section so that another person, who was aware of the need to preserve the integrity of the quoted material, could verify that the change was indeed a valid statement of the IDB it would help.

Can you offer any solution? user:Jaxhere 00:01, 1 January 2007 (UTC)

Scott, you haven't responded to this. Did you miss it or do you not have any suggestion? --JAXHERE | Talk 14:26, 5 January 2007 (UTC)

Ummm, missed it I think - sorry. It's bedtime here now, but I'll try to look in the morning. Quick answer is that only a whole page can be protected, not part of a page. If the "extracts" are direct quotes, I think you can either mark them as such to make it obvious, or put them in Wikisource if their copyright allows. --Scott Davis Talk 14:35, 5 January 2007 (UTC)

Boilerplate text

Thanks for your comments at the Aust History project. If you want to see some bad boilerplate text check this out:

The Utah Army National Guard is composed of approximately ____ soldiers, and maintains 30 armories in 27 communities

Text like this is repeated verbatim, with the _____ placeholder on a lot of state-based US National Guard units. I dropped by thier project talk page suggesting it's not the best look and the article would be better without it (if details aren't know) and I got asked how many featured articles I'd written (implied, by myself)... So I can see where your preference to avoid boilerplate text comes in!Garrie 00:28, 5 January 2007 (UTC)

This relates to a comment at Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Australian history#Request for comment
Ouch! For the record, I haven't written any Featured Articles either, but have copyedited a few FA candidates, generally receiving positive feedback for it. Not that it should be relevant for trying to double the information in stubs that will likely never be featured articles. --Scott Davis Talk 00:42, 5 January 2007 (UTC)

Woorinen South

Hi! I saw your edits to Woorinen South. The new wikipedian User:Lyndon patterson is really new in Wikipedia, and could really use your help and guidance in this his very first article. Please collaborate with him. Thank you. --Pinay (talk•email) 21:58, 5 January 2007 (UTC)

Thank you so much. I really really appreciate it. --Pinay (talk•email) 00:33, 6 January 2007 (UTC)
Important: don't 4get to advice him re DYK, too... okey?--Pinay (talk•email) 10:52, 6 January 2007 (UTC)
You better give that advice yourself, as I've never had anything featured in that. --Scott Davis Talk 10:54, 6 January 2007 (UTC)

Truck project

Hi! I see you're a busy wikipedian already, concerning projects, but nevertheless I'll invite you to check the startup of another one. User:Rotten Stone suggested a truck project to put those to a standard like automobiles etc. Please feel free to check User:Rotten Stone/WikiProject Trucks and Wikipedia:WikiProject_Council/Proposals#Trucks. So far we are only 3 europeans and an invitation to a US contributor, but to make a world wide project work, it would be nice to get world wide contributors :-) --G®iffen 13:09, 6 January 2007 (UTC)

Sounds like a good idea, but I'm afraid it would get at best into my "I also support..." list. I just don't have any detailed knowledge. I've chipped into a few articles with some obviously wrong or misleading info, is all. AtholM is likely to be a useful Australian to get on board. I had been thinking of an article Road transport in Australia to pull together and provide a structure for info scattered around highways, various truck and freight articles and passenger and private transport, parallel to Rail transport in Australia. Do you know if this is done for other countries? Would it be in or out of scope for your wikiproject? Even Road transport is pretty much just a history of roads, not what they are used for. Perhaps an opportunity to broaden the scope? --Scott Davis Talk 13:33, 6 January 2007 (UTC)
I didn't go that far into categories, but Category:Transportation by country might be a good place to start looking for road articles.
As long as only 3 people entered the list, I think road transport in general will be a bit of way down the list of "to do's" for a truck group, but naturally it's familiar to the subject. Personally I intend to write some things about how the load part of the trucks are constructed and used, like I extended the Waste collection vehicle and translated it to danish. The use of a truck is partly closer to road transport than the history of a brand or model, so I might be interested in looking "over the shoulder" if you get that project going. Maybe you should concider entering the subject at the project council and eventually look at transportation related talkpages for names. That's how I found you :-) --G®iffen 14:34, 6 January 2007 (UTC)

Dolly (trailer)

Hi. I notice that you previously took part in discussions at talk:Dolly (trailer). I'm wondering if you could take another look at that talk page and the link that Peter Horn insists on adding to Dolly (trailer). --Athol Mullen 02:11, 7 January 2007 (UTC)

Looked, removed the link again, and asked for an explanation. Peter appears to be a reasonable person on every other issue. --Scott Davis Talk 03:55, 7 January 2007 (UTC)

Hello Scott

Copy and paste from Athol Mullen:

Hello again,

Other articles such as trucks and more do include links to manufacturers, so why not the Dolly (trailer) article? Peter Horn 17:05, 1 January 2007 (UTC)

Hello once again,

Add to that Fifth wheel coupling, Semi-trailer, Semi-trailer truck, Coupling (railway), Variable gauge axles, Automobile and many more which all have internal links to Wiki articles about manufacturers as well as links to manufacturers web sites. With these innumerable precedents, I don't see why Dolly (trailer) should be an exception. Peter Horn 01:29, 7 January 2007 (UTC)

As I mentioned, "External links" to manufacturers are featured in numerous articles including, but not limited to, the ones mentioned above. Many manufacturers are featured as Wiki articles, e.g. Construcciones y Auxiliar de Ferrocarriles to mention only one. So, if you happen to know of any other outfits that build dollies, just add them like it was done in Coupling (railway) and elsewhere.

Cherio from Laval, Peter Horn 23:52, 7 January 2007 (UTC)

Hi Peter. As I've already said, just because there are other articles that are not up to standard doesn't mean we should strive to create more substandard articles. Perhaps the proposed Trucks Wikiproject can improve them all.
Internal wikilinks to other articles (including manufacturers) are OK if they retain a neutral point of view. The existence of those articles suggests that the manufacturer is notable (else the article would be deleted).
Thankyou for pointing out the problems with external links in other articles - I deleted about 8 from truck and might get to look at others some time.
Your example of Construcciones y Auxiliar de Ferrocarriles is not a featured article, but is currently rated as "start-class" by WikiProject Trains (see it's talk page). Coupling (railway) is cuurently a Good article, but appears to be getting reviewed and might lose that status. It's not clear that the external links belong there, either.
Again I ask why do you care so much about that link being included? --Scott Davis Talk 03:17, 8 January 2007 (UTC)
Hello Scott,
I could be wrong, but the external links to manufacturers would be there to show who makes what and, to those interested, a quick way to find additional info without having to surf the web. That a manufacturer be partial is somewhat inevitable. Those who are not inerested nor curious can just skip those links (not open them). Peter Horn 03:53, 8 January 2007 (UTC)
This is an encyclopaedia, not a link farm. I would accept links to the Wikipedia articles for (all of) the major manufacturers. Any subset (other than a ranking threshold) is not WP:NPOV. A wikipedia article about an organisation can (and should) have an external link to the website of that organisation, but also information on criticism and negative stuff, not just a positive advertising page. People don't look at an encyclopaedia when what they want to find is a vendor - they look in the yellow pages or a business directory. --Scott Davis Talk 04:48, 8 January 2007 (UTC)

NCYC

We were working on the National Christian Youth Convention article at the same time, I tried to ensure I kept your edits Paul foord 13:26, 9 January 2007 (UTC)

Looks good to me - thanks. --Scott Davis Talk 13:30, 9 January 2007 (UTC)

Chile naming conventions

(Copy of item from my talk page)

Hello Scott, I've made a reply on the Wikipedia talk:Naming conventions (settlements)#Chile page. I'd only like to clarify that I don't think the term "impose" is quite the right one for what I was attempting. I was trying to establish a guideline where nothing exists so that people who seek out some direction at least have some idea of what to do. I view my actions as taking a bold step to put in something which wasn't there and, frankly, felt that the user who simply removed the edit without even waiting for any discussion was being rather autocratic and certainly wasn't assuming good faith on my part.

I see that maybe I should have prefaced my addition with a notation that it was a proposal (as is done in a couple of other sections) but I still don't think that my not having done so is justification for simply wiping out what I'd offered. --JAXHERE | Talk 22:31, 26 December 2006 (UTC)

I'd like to ensure it is noted it was not me who wiped it out - I raised it for discussion/clarification. My deepest concern is simply a lack of discussion for a proposal which would rename nearly every article about towns in Chile, at a time of year when some regular editors may not be watching much. --Scott Davis Talk 12:32, 27 December 2006 (UTC)
Yes, Scott, I was aware that it was not you who deleted the addition, and I appreciate your restraint in that regard. It was the second commentator who I felt was trigger happy.
I'd like to thank you for your guideance on how to proceed with adding this to the conventions.JAXHERE | Talk 15:49, 27 December 2006 (UTC)

Scott, I see you contacted some other Chilean editors to try to raise their views on the proposal. I was going to inquire if there were any way that a blanket message might be sent out to all Chilean editors to notify them of the creation of the Notice Page which Jespinos created. That would be an excellent tool for editors interested in that topic to keep on top of things.--JAXHERE | Talk 15:18, 28 December 2006 (UTC)

I'm not doing a mass move; just a couple which seemed particularly unreasonable. Septentrionalis PMAnderson 19:27, 28 December 2006 (UTC)

Hello Scott, Thank you for your note on Chile naming conventions. I will take a look at the sites you mentioned and will let you know of my views on this matter. -- Eguirald 18:33, 29 December 2006 (UTC)

  • Hello Scott, Thank you, again, for inviting me to comment. I have left a few comments on the new discussion page of Chile settlement naming conventions. I do hope I didn't overstay my welcome! --User:EguiraldTalk22:56, 30 December 2006 (UTC)

Hi again, Scott. It looks like there's no opposition to the settlement naming standard which I proposed, or simply no interest. I've made queite a few more moves to conform to the standard -- all with edit summaries which link to the standard proposal and no one has come forward with any comments.

What do we do now? Would it be appropriate to remove the "proposal" notification from the standard and elevate it to a guideline? --JAXHERE | Talk 14:24, 9 January 2007 (UTC)

It looks accepted to me. Well done. I've removed "proposed". --Scott Davis Talk 22:05, 9 January 2007 (UTC)

Thanks

Good to see that really great missing ship orphan article into maritime and our road problem - trust all is well! SatuSuro 01:27, 16 January 2007 (UTC)

Actually - I dont know whether the debate that is currently happening at Malay would interest you or not. I wouldnt be bothered if you werent - but I'll probable be letting a few know...SatuSuro 01:27, 16 January 2007 (UTC)
To be honest, I never read the ship article - I was browsing the Australia articles without a WikiProject and it looked like it didn't belong, so I skimmed enough to check where it fitted. There are enough orphans now to start noticing trends of missing projects: Television/acting/culture, economics/industry, transport/trains.
If you think I'd be interested in a debate, please provide a link - I'm in too many to guess where to find another. --Scott Davis Talk 01:56, 16 January 2007 (UTC)
There in lies the rub - I sometimes wonder whether its better to leave some go and not even bother... Malay -  :( SatuSuro 02:03, 16 January 2007 (UTC)
Nah - I wouldnt recommend it a debate worth entering - unless one of our oz eds got too far into the PA issues - thanks for the clue about the articles without a project - the article you didnt read is excellent! SatuSuro 02:10, 16 January 2007 (UTC)
Being a founding member of the tws - i was at bobs house - and all - I find the nt stuff out of reach (i lived in darwin 92-3 i think it was) there are some v gd eds with knw on this stuff but theyre once a weekers or more - not the daily like ourselves :) - and they are shy as well... :( SatuSuro 14:16, 16 January 2007 (UTC)
I've put em on watch -I'm more a historian/anthropologist/west coast tas/javanist than I am geologist - although I was a gfa for a while (haha geological field assistant) I noticed a large amount of Victorian railway stations in that Oz arts without a WP - seems the vic project is slow to start! SatuSuro 14:33, 16 January 2007 (UTC)
Oh hell - my weak underbelly - I have just started Charles Whitham to try to get around issues with the isbn people (what a merry crew they are) and because i dont have access to the kids pc - (imac that i have) I suspect that awb - would be the easiest - so I have a bit of a trawl with them - I will need to get the refs/further reading in the west tas arts that I have it in - prune it - to refer to the charles whitham for full publication details... and the lake jukes should really include mount darwin sites as well...SatuSuro 12:41, 18 January 2007 (UTC)

Rod Nash Racing and Autobarn Racing pages

Hi Scott,

I've found that both V8 Supercar pages Rod Nash Racing and Autobarn Racing are about the same topic of the Autobarn V8 Supercar team. I've tried dismissing the Rod Nash Racing page but I don't know how to get rid of it. Do you know how to get rid of it?

If you're not sure or don't want to do it straight away, use {{mergeto}} and {{mergefrom}} templates at the top of the page. If you're sure and want to do it straight away, just merge all the info from one to the other and make sure both edit comments clearly say what you did. I've merged these two now, as they were almost copies anyway. Thanks. --Scott Davis Talk 01:27, 18 January 2007 (UTC)

Move relisted

Sorry to drag this out, but the requested move at Basel earthquake was deemed malformed, so I had to relist it. As you participated in the previous discussion, please add your opinion at Talk:Basel_earthquake#Requested_move. Thanks. Carcharoth 13:59, 18 January 2007 (UTC)

Using English

Hello - I'm contacting you because of your involvement with using English instead of foreign terms in articles. A few are trying to "Anglicise" French terms in Wiki articles according to current guidelines but there is some resistance (eg/: "Région => Region"; "Département => Departement"). Your input would be appreciated here. Thankyou. --Bob 16:12, 18 January 2007 (UTC)

Hobart Fire

The second one I would suggest - we get plenty of small fires each year - but I would suggest that article be merged with 1967 Tasmanian fires ? -- Chuq 12:54, 20 January 2007 (UTC)

Hell - the work by Jamie Kirkpatrick and fellow researchers at UTas have extensive research work in the perpetual firing of the tassie landscape - you passed through some of the most over fired river catchments in the state (King River) when you were there last year - and most button grass plains are the default landscape from burning of more advanced stages of the ecology... my favourite small hills just east of mount owen - the thureau hills have been burnt so much that even the msall patches of reovering bush/trees from the 1970s (of which I have photos) are still regularly fired. I need to find more reffs on the subject for my west tas arts anyways...SatuSuro 13:39, 20 January 2007 (UTC)

Brudenell White

In answer to the question on the Brudenell White discussion page: Yes, White was CGS twice. He was recalled from retirement on the death of General Squires. The entry's assertion that he would have become the CinC AMF in 1942 instead of General Blamey is hard to believe, as White would have been 65 years old. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Hawkeye7 (talk • contribs) 20:05, 23 January 2007 (UTC).

Thankyou. --Scott Davis Talk 21:05, 23 January 2007 (UTC)

Somerset

It [ Bath - Scott] hasn't been in Somerset since 1889, and was in Avon from 1974 until the establishment of the unitary authority. See http://www.somersetgateway.com/places/index.htm —Preceding unsigned comment added by Jooler (talk • contribs) 04:48, 28 December 2006