User talk:Porturology

'ello

Welcome!

Hello, and welcome to Wikipedia. Thank you for your contributions. I hope you like the place and decide to stay. Here are a few good links for newcomers:

The Five Pillars of Wikipedia
How to edit a page
Editing, policy, conduct, and structure tutorial
Picture tutorial
How to write a great article
Naming conventions
Manual of Style
If you're ready for the complete list of Wikipedia documentation, there's also Wikipedia:Topical index.

I hope you enjoy editing here and being a Wikipedian! By the way, you can sign your name on Talk and vote pages using three tildes, like this: ~~~. Four tildes (~~~~) produces your name and the current date. If you have any questions, see the help pages, add a question to the village pump or ask me on my Talk page. Again, welcome! --bainer (talk) 12:47, 31 May 2005 (UTC) hello i dont know how to send messege please tell sorry for the vandilsm[reply]

White Australia Policy

Hi, I just wanted to ask you why you deleted the reference to the White Aust Policy in the Dubbo page. I don't object to removing the reference per se, but I wanted to know your reasoning before doing anything else. Cheers! Andrew Kay 03:47, 15 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for your response. I tend to agree with you that bringing in thw White Australia Policy could muddy things a bit and am happy to leave it out. In practice though, the WAP was specifically used to target indigenous australians - I remember an illustration from a school textbook that showed WAP propaganda including aborigines with foreigners (the justification was along the lines of "they don't deserve the country" - it went hand in hand with the concept of Terra Nullius) The closest illustration to show this idea I could find online was at http://www.slv.vic.gov.au/pictoria/b/1/3/doc/b13818.shtml (this is all just an illustration of my OCD tendencies, not an attempt to get you to change your mind Andrew Kay 00:56, 16 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Blackbirding

Hi Bainer, I am new to Wikipedia and don't know the protocols. I think the amount of blackbirding is controversial amongst historians. Windschuttle (the WAP 2004) denies it happened at all. The main referenced claims of blackbirding come from Peter Corris' Passage, Port and Plantation MUP 1973. Historians such as Henry Reynolds (who is usually diametrically opposed to Windschuttle) also tend to believe blackbirding was not common. In WAP, Windschuttle does not deny that blackbirding (ie recruitment by force, by kidnapping, by trickery) happened. He argues that there were a very limited number of instances of such criminal behaviour and that the recruitment of South Sea islander labour wound up being tightly regulated by the colonial governments (particularly Queensland) to prevent it. He argues that most recruitment was voluntary as evidenced by the fact that the same ships were able to keep visiting and recruiting at the same islands over and over again (if they'd behaved criminally on a previous visit wouldn't the locals have remembered?). Also there is evidence that particular islanders signed up for more than one 'tour of duty', ie they went one time, made some money, came home and later went back to make some more money.

I am interested that you were taught that blackbirding was common - who was the lecturer? in any case I think the case for blackbirding is overdone in the WAP article. This article has already resulted in much argy-bargy but I feel it should be changed slightly - how do you do this? porturology@bigpond.com.--Porturology 12:14, 31 May 2005 (UTC)[reply]

We looked at it in a subject taught by Keir Reeves, Anna Clark (Manning's granddaughter) and Pat Grimshaw at Melbourne Uni. We looked at the Windschuttle/Reynolds business aswell (Anna co-wrote the book on the History Wars). I'd have to dig up the materials to check out figures, but Pat Grimshaw has done a fair bit of work in this area, you might want to check out some of her writings.

If you think that something needs changing, then you can go ahead and change it, just click the "edit this page" link at the top of the page. Wikipedia encourages people to be bold. The issue would be that for a controversial topic, it's probably best to discuss any changes you want to make on the talk page first. You've already started doing that anyway, so that's good! I've put the standard welcome message above, you might like to read some of the tutorials and rules, they're quite useful. --bainer (talk) 13:02, 31 May 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Australian electoral divisions

Hello, I "copied" the format of other Australian electoral division pages to create the Division of Throsby page, so don't feel bad about copying me too. :-) --Humehwy 09:04, Jun 22, 2005 (UTC)

VFD

Deletion of Ferguson Cannon Lawyers

Hi I am just wondering why it is going to be deleted? I have put some solid effort in with citing and referencing and think it's worthy of being there to let people know what is happening in the community and what Billy Moore is also up to. I also think it adds value to people who would like to know more about the Sunshine Coast, Gold Coast, Brisbane and Queensland community. --ashplatz —Preceding undated comment added 08:11, 17 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]

I've expanded the article Grafton Bus Crash that you voted to delete. Please look again and consider changing your vote. Thanks. --ScottDavis 6 July 2005 14:55 (UTC)

VFD

I've expanded the article Grafton Bus Crash that you voted to delete. Please look again and consider changing your vote. Thanks. --ScottDavis 6 July 2005 14:56 (UTC)

Wikipedia:Criteria_for_speedy_deletion/Proposal/3-C

Hello! Sorry to bother you, but since you voted on the earlier CSD proposal about unremarkable bands, it would be appreciated if you cast your vote for this version. It has been reworded to address concerns raised against the earlier wording. Please take a look at it and consider if you support or oppose it. Yours, R adiant _>|< 08:21, July 15, 2005 (UTC)

Beecroft Peninsula

I've undone your speedy nomination and expanded the article a little bit with info I got from a Clusty search. Apparently this area has a high biodiversity and there's also support to make this area a national park. I hope you find the current state of the article acceptable. (If you know the code for an Australian geo-stub, feel free to replace my notice.) - Mgm|^(talk) 12:18, 25 September 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Hi

Hello- , the ISIBL is one of the major school basketball leagues in Singapore. Featuring the biggest schools, good teams and attendents in their hundreds. Everyone associated with an international school knows about this which is 12,000+, possibly even more. Please let me keep it. Thanks. --Sand-Bar 12:52, 25 September 2005 (UTC)[reply]

AFD

If you want to renominate an article for AfD, you must create a new page. Read the instructions at the top of the archive page. Thanks. Christopher Parham (talk) 06:31, 11 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Done it for you, here. Christopher Parham (talk) 06:36, 11 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Christine Fitzgerald

I removed the speedy tag from Christine Fitzgerald, because the article isn't nonsense, at least not in the speedyable sense. Take a look at David Icke, which the article links to. Icke has claimed that Fitzgerald told him that the Royal Family were reptilian aliens. - it sounds like he's, eh, quite a character. Whether or not Fitzgerald is notable enough for an article is debatable, although I think she is, but that would be a matter for AFD, not speedying or proding. Just thought I ought to explain why I took Vary | Talk 02:01, 27 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Valley book shop

I see that you prodded Valley book shop, but this had already been prodded. Twice in fact. Prod should only be used once, because it is for uncontroversial deletions only. Please check the page history when proposing articles for deletion.

Please also use edit summaries, so that later people can see that you proposed it for deletion, or that people with the article on their watchlist can see that you're making a major change to the article.

I moved it to AfD. NickelShoe 16:30, 4 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Edit summaries again

I see you have been asked before, but it's obvously necessary to remind you again. Do not add tags which can get an article deleted (PROD, AFD) without mentioning this fact in the edit summary. Thanks. Kappa 00:49, 8 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for fixing the mistake

I know its easy to forget the redirect, thanks for fixing it :) -- Tawker 05:37, 8 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Ronald Collé

Why did you copyvio the entire article? I didn't see any reason to think the opening paragraph was a problem. Thatcher131 23:50, 14 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

The instructions are not entirely clear, however they do say to revert to a previous non-copyvio verison if possible. There is a question in the WP:CV talk page about sections but it isn't answered yet. (Last month I blanked a section in Beverley Knight but left the rest of the article and no one complained.) To be on the safe side I reverted to a version from before the copied text was added.Thatcher131 00:17, 15 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

AfD on Manchester councillor

Hi, I've brought up this AfD: Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Abid Chohan, which you had previously commented on a batch of Manchester councillors including Mr Chohan. I think he is one of the least notable entries. Perhaps you feel like commenting? JASpencer 14:11, 24 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Copyright violation in Old Government House, Parramatta

I edited Old Government House, Parramatta to remove the copyvio, and therefore removed the speedy delete tag. You may want to take a look at the current version of the article. -- Eastmain (talk) 12:34, 29 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Your comment on Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Redemptorists of Australia and New Zealand

Hi Porturology. Please note that your comment on the above-captioned AfD discussion was made after the entire discussion was already archived, resulting in a misleading impression of the state of the discussion at the time of closure. Rgds, Bongo matic 01:59, 28 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

How Much Do You Love Your Kid

A tag has been placed on How Much Do You Love Your Kid, requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under the criteria for speedy deletion, because it is a very short article providing little or no context to the reader. Please see Wikipedia:Stub for our minimum information standards for short articles. Also please note that articles must be on notable subjects and should provide references to reliable sources that verify their content.

Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag yourself. If you plan to expand the article, you can request that administrators wait a while for you to add contextual material. To do this, affix the template {{hangon}} to the article and state your intention on the article's talk page. Feel free to leave a note on my talk page if you have any questions about this. De728631 (talk) 22:37, 15 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

AfD nomination of Ginger Snaps (band)

An article that you have been involved in editing, Ginger Snaps (band), has been listed for deletion. If you are interested in the deletion discussion, please participate by adding your comments at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Ginger Snaps (band). Thank you.

Please contact me if you're unsure why you received this message. FingersOnRoids 03:06, 25 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

CSD tagging problems

I see you recently came back to work on speedy deletion tagging after a long absense; welcome back. One thing people mentioned before you left that's still true: always make an edit summary saying that you're proposing that the article be deleted, and don't tag an article for speedy deletion without warning the most recent author. You can find the CSD user warning templates at WP:WARN, in the column called "Deletion notifications". Thanks. - Dan Dank55 (push to talk) 03:05, 26 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Automatic patrolling of tagged pages at New Page patrol

Hi there. There is a suggestion to get a bot to patrol any New Page that an editor has tagged for CSD, AfD, etc. As someone who patrols a lot, your opinion is particularly welcomed. --Ged UK 10:08, 27 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Akoustic Odyssey

Hi there! Could you please tell me how you can tag a good looking and well formatted article about a band with 1400 Ghits for speedy deletion within only THREE minutes? --Avant-garde a clue-hexa Chord ² 07:42, 8 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

The article does not claim wp:band notability. AFD in progress Porturology (talk) 11:26, 8 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

And all of that did you find out in three minutes, incl. a little own research? You must be really fast! I'd like to point you to an interesting read at WP:ANI#Need help with article patrollers. --Avant-garde a clue-hexa Chord ² 19:07, 8 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Please also see WT:NPP#Cautious approach. --Avant-garde a clue-hexa Chord ² 23:42, 8 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Re: Prod

You didn't have to post the notice on my page, I just removed the speedy as A7 applies only to persons, websites and organizations, not their work (such as albums). You might also want to check out Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/In Love & War (band) and WP:CSD A9. Admiral Norton ^(talk) 23:20, 8 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

No harm done and a little zealousness won't hurt anyone. :-) Admiral Norton ^(talk) 23:22, 8 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Re: Aren Ober (formerly Savalan)

Thanks for letting me know. I put in a vote.--CyberGhostface (talk) 13:23, 18 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Deletion of my article on A. H. Ahlbrand

My bad. I understand. I was trying to publish this in my sandbox, but, I guess I inadvertantly selected the incorrect location. There is historical merit to this article, but, I obviously need to include that proof "up front". Someone else stepped in and saved it to my sandbox which I greatly appreciate, otherwise I would have lost the contents. Jeff.mcginley.indy (talk) 12:10, 11 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

AfD: Lil Henchmen

The AfD process seems a little confusing to me, can you tell me what happened with this article vs what should have happened? I would have taken it to the AfD process once the speedy deletion was yanked, but wasn't sure how to do it. (Yes. I've read the instructions, but those seem unclear.) Any help would be appreciated since I don't want to get into another tug of war like yesterday. JustAKnowItAll (talk) 01:19, 13 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Re: Kenneth J. Kremer, RN, CCRN .....speedy deletion?

Porturology:

I thought this was notable as there is not much support of Men in Nursing on the prominent nurses wikipedia. Kenneth J. Kremer, RN, CCRN is a modern day role model for men in nursing. He also is receiving a "Stars of Life Award" by the American Ambulance Association for critical care nursing above and beyond the call of duty while providing life changing , life saving interventions over the road in an ambulance on a 40 mile + run to a higher level of care hospital that turned this patient around. The patient went from near death to being discharged home a few weeks later. The award is being presented by Bruce Jenner in Washington DC on May 3 2009.

This was a guideline that I followed.

Any biography

   * The person has received a notable award or honor, or has been often nominated for them.
   * The person has made a widely recognized contribution that is part of the enduring historical record in his or her specific field.[7]

(Joules360 (talk) 19:08, 13 April 2009 (UTC)). Joules360[reply]

Kenneth J. Kremer, RN, CCRN....speedy deletion...

Porturology:

I understand your reasoning for deletion. I am the person in this autobiography....as you are well versed on the Joules360 nick as being the highest setting on the monophasic defibrillator. I understand that there is no "Stars of Life" noted in wikipedia. I wonder if I could do a write up on that and then just reference Kenneth J. Kremer, RN, CCRN as a recipient. What would I need to do that? The actual awards are not being presented until next month.

Thanks, (Joules360 (talk) 04:12, 14 April 2009 (UTC)). Joules360[reply]

that vandalism page

Hi Porturology, I've just deleted a bio that you nominated for deletion, but can I just make two little points? Firstly when there are negative things in a bio please don't quote them when you warn the author as the warning itself is publicly on the Internet. Secondly attack pages are worth tagging as {{db-attack}} that way they get deleted quicker as they go to the front of the queue, and also a more serious warning is generated. Thanks and once again good call on wanting it speedy deleted. Ϣere SpielChequers 11:53, 14 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

No probs, if you have similar buried attacks in future you can replace them with {{courtesy}} that way the diff shows the admin exactly what the attack was, and if anyone else wanders by before the page is deleted they won't see the attack. PS When you go back and sign your comment on mytalk page you might want to reconsider the template you left there;-) Ϣere SpielChequers 15:46, 14 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Spark (Keenen Davis)

Hi, recently you added a delete think onto one of my pages. I don't really care; but if you'd like to read the book, I encourage you to; my friends think it's awesome! Don't worry, I'm not mad! I'll delete the page until I get it published. Bye!

- Ikorinthian (talk) 06:34, 19 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Stop Drop N Skank

Hi, I just wanted to ask why you added the speedy deletion tag to the Stop Drop N Skank page? They are a major band within the Toronto ska scene quickly rising to the top recently becoming acquainted with Stomp Records and regularly opening for bigger bands such as Mustard Plug, Planet Smashers and the Creepshow. They have been continuously active since 2005 and created one album so far. The second album is to be released the summer of 2009 with Stomp Records. What is your reasoning for adding the speedy deletion tag onto this page? Also, if possible, please assist me in creating the talk page as i do not have much experience editing. Thanks! (Saib0tx (talk) 23:55, 2 May 2009 (UTC))[reply]

I have answered this on your talk page Porturology (talk) 02:21, 3 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Redirect of KIIT Group of Institutions

I don't know why you redirected the article KIIT Group of Institutions to KIIT University. But for information the KIIT Group of Institutions is a educational trust which runs a lot of institutions and KIIT University is a part of the group. So, the group can have a separate article. I am already editing the article, so that it becomes clear. Already explanation has been given at Talk:Kalinga_Institute_of_Industrial_Technology_University#It_is_KIIT_University_not_just_KIIT. Pls, kindly give the feedback at the before mentioned talk page. Amartyabag ^TALK2ME 08:59, 5 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Tagging for speedy deletion

Hi Porturology. Thank you for your work on patrolling pages and tagging for speedy deletion. I just wanted to inform you that I declined to delete Pisasu, a page that you tagged for speedy deletion under criterion A3 because of the following concern: A3 only applies if there really is no content or the only content is chat-like, external links etc. If the problem with the content is that it fails WP:NOT (like here WP:NOTDIC), A3 cannot be applied. Please review the criteria for speedy deletion and especially what is considered Non-criteria. In future you should rather tag such pages for proposed deletion or start an appropriate deletion discussion. Regards So Why 09:13, 5 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Talk Page

Don't mean to sound pushy and all, or rude, but I don in fact have the right to remove message from my talk page. A pplet on 01:54, 10 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Signing warnings

Hi. Thanks for the vandal patrolling. It is really helpful to admins like myself when following up on WP:AIV reports if when folks leave u3, u4, and u4im messages like you did on [[ User talk:Porturology ]] that there be a signature with a timestamp (~~~~) after the warning so we can easily see when the last warning was left. This is especially important on IP editors. Otherwise we have to match the warning to the history and compare that to the last edit, with is about twice as complex. That being said, thanks for the warnings being issued. Most folks like you tend to use Twinkle to add such warnings. It almost automates the issuing of warnings and such, and it ensures that you sign. Check it out. Please keep up the great work. Toddst1 (talk) 02:17, 10 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Twinkle rocks, doesn't it? Toddst1 (talk) 05:27, 10 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

May 2009

You currently appear to be engaged in an edit war according to the reverts you have made on User talk:Appleton1324. Note that the three-revert rule prohibits making more than three reversions on a single page within a 24 hour period. Additionally, users who perform a large number of reversions in content disputes may be blocked for edit warring, even if they do not technically violate the three-revert rule. If you continue, you may be blocked from editing. Please do not repeatedly revert edits, but use the talk page to work towards wording and content that gains a consensus among editors. If necessary, pursue dispute resolution. Toddst1 (talk) 02:18, 10 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Users are allowed to remove warnings from their talk pages. Doing so is considered acknowledgement of them. Users are not allowed to remove declined {{unblock}} templates during a block, sharedIP templates or confirmed sockpuppet tags. Hopes this clarifies. Toddst1 (talk) 02:20, 10 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Speedy deletion of albums

Hi. You tagged Proudly Dressed with a {{db-band}} template. But as an album, this article is not eligible for speedy deletion under the A7 criterion. It was under the A9 criterion that this article should have been tagged with a {{db-album}} or {{db-song}} template. -- Blanchardb -^{Me•MyEars•MyMouth}- timed 12:40, 22 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Speedy deletion nomination of Florida State Board of Administration

A tag has been placed on Florida State Board of Administration requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section G12 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because the article appears to be a blatant copyright infringement. For legal reasons, we cannot accept copyrighted text or images borrowed from other web sites or printed material, and as a consequence, your addition will most likely be deleted. You may use external websites as a source of information, but not as a source of sentences. This part is crucial: say it in your own words.

If the external website belongs to you, and you want to allow Wikipedia to use the text — which means allowing other people to modify it — then you must verify that externally by one of the processes explained at Wikipedia:Donating copyrighted materials. If you are not the owner of the external website but have permission from that owner, see Wikipedia:Requesting copyright permission. You might want to look at Wikipedia's policies and guidelines for more details, or ask a question here.

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 page 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 page that would render it more in conformance with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. Porturology (talk) 02:40, 3 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]

George Foreman III

He is officially a pro boxer and should have his own page. If that doesn't deserve to be an article I don't know what does anymore. You may not follow boxing, but people who do would be outraged that he doesn't have an article. I was going to add more to the article today, but SOMEONE had to delete it. And come on he's following in his fathers footsteps and is going to get huge publicity.--Fire 55 (talk) 21:08, 8 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]

SupJustin.com

SupJustin.com is a website that publishes content that is exclusive to itself. It is a reliable source that is covered by MTV and Alternative Press. - Varsityhero (talk) 1:13 14 June 2009

I see what you mean.

Man, there's nothing worse on this site than a guy like that who just keeps on keeping on without the slightest acknowledgement of other editors. Are all those redirects you had to make necessary? I'm only asking as someone completely unfamiliar with Krishna Consciousness and whether all thos "HH" prefixes are important. Glad to have been of service. :) --PMDrive1061 (talk) 06:04, 20 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Reported Gunter for vandal

Made a vandal report on the above. 13:52, 28 June 2009 (UTC)

Speedy Deletion Converted to PROD: Skiing (sex)

Hello Porturology, and thanks for your work patrolling new changes. I am just informing you that I have changed a page you tagged (Skiing (sex)) from being tagged for speedy deletion to being tagged for proposed deletion. The speedy deletion criteria are very narrow to protect the encyclopedia, and do not fit the page in question. Please review the criteria for speedy deletion before tagging further pages. If you have any questions or problems, please let me know. Thanks again! So Why 12:59, 1 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Steve Goff

I'm not questioning your judgment, so please do not think that, however, I am curious as to what it is in this article that is negative. Thanks, Javért | ^Talk 13:37, 17 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Pokemon Indigo

I have given references and external links then why is it being deleted. It is being used by +500, 000 trainers are you are deleting it.--TZX Master (talk) 12:19, 21 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]

..

It is not a personal attack, he was in on the joke too so hush ya gumsz. Delete it if you want I dont care really its only wikipedia nothing important really. Haaaaarry (talk) 12:52, 21 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Speedy Deletion for Wild Soosh

Hello, thank you for your concern about this page, however, The Wild Soosh I am referring to is actually myself. I am in no way demeaning or threatening or poking fun at anybody, not even myself. I think if the page was re-read that would be clear. Can you please let me know what I can do to fix this page so that it does not get deleted?--Narvekar (talk) 10:25, 28 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]

dead irrelevant senator vs. current alive musician

Porturology, can you check out my talk page? HooshArted (talk) 03:21, 1 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Hi

This is my first time to make my work.please let me copy a photo so i can finish my work. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Thezygs1 (talk • contribs) 04:33, 17 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Speedy deletion declined: Miguel cagigas

Hello Porturology, and thanks for your work patrolling new changes. I am just informing you that I declined the speedy deletion of Miguel cagigas - a page you tagged - because: The article makes a credible assertion of importance or significance, sufficient to pass A7. Please review the criteria for speedy deletion before tagging further pages. If you have any questions or problems, please let me know. decltype (talk) 10:30, 17 August 2009 (UTC) [reply]

Hello, Porturology. You have new messages at Decltype's talk page.
You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.

NSW Labor leader

why would you link to a non existant page? Timeshift (talk) 04:07, 29 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Again, why would you link to a non existant page? Timeshift (talk) 05:29, 29 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Why would you link to a page that does not yet exist? Timeshift (talk) 05:40, 29 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I'm happy now that it exists. WWGB (talk) 08:52, 29 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Member lists

Bravo! This is a wonderful thing to see! Frickeg (talk) 04:01, 4 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

They're huge, aren't they? Yeah, that's the way I understand it. Plus people were always being appointed to the Legislative Council, and that necessitated by-elections too. When I was making the first couple I intended to include ministerial by-elections too, but that would have been just too monstrous! Frickeg (talk) 04:07, 4 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Wow! Keep it up! Frickeg (talk) 02:08, 23 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Hey

Hey Porturology, no need to be over state your curiouisim we're human beings, but we are very sociologically curoius beings. I was born in the States but when I was young... very young... my father had to move us all to Australia for 5 years. I was 7 but have always had a keen intrest in politics, particularly Austral-American relations and politics (Im currently studying Political Science and American/ Australian relations throughtout the 20th/ 21st century at OSU. I was surfing the net after studying and came accross List of leaders of the Liberal Party of Australia (New South Wales Division) and saw that Pat Morton and Vernon Treatt didn't have articles in an article that I for goodness sake came accross (I go deep into the unknown). So I haven't been at this long but it is prety simple just copy and paste from the parliamentary website. But I got carried away and went into successors and predessessors. My brother also competed against Robyn Parker son at paper airoplane olympics and we keep in touch. I was also in Australia three weeks ago and am yet to upload all the pictures I have taken, but that is besides the point, Im rambling now. I thought it was just a little slack to see that those articles didn't exist, especially Vernon Treatt so I went ahead. If you would like me to stop that's not a problem. Or, if you would like to throw me a bone and give me some work that would be much appreciated. (Just if you would like the help). Thanking you Mruserbox (talk) 12:23, 22 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Just clarify, Im not Kristina Keneally, I go to Ohio University and we were pretty stoked to see one of us go so far, so far away Mruserbox (talk) 12:23, 22 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I was just about to start on Athol Richardson, have you any plans for that article? Mruserbox (talk) 12:28, 22 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I was nine when we came home. Athol Richardson is causing me a lot a problems now, he wasn't just the Minister for Health, but also Social services, Labour and Industry, Colonial Treasurer and Deputy Leader of the Opposition. How the heck do I put them all into the info box? Or should I just put Deputy Leader and seat and explain the rest in the body of his political carrer? Mruserbox (talk) 02:47, 23 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Do you know much about copyrights? If there is a picture of a member of parliament who died before 1950, and it is on the parliment website, is it okay to upload it to wikipedia if the person was deceased long before the copyright expired? Mruserbox (talk) 10:18, 23 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

As an aside you might want to look at the history/contribs on the above user's userpage. The user lives in Australia. Kudos definitely due to them for constructing such an *elaborate* block-evading sockpuppet, mind you... Orderinchaos 14:10, 24 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Barnstar

		The Tireless Contributor Barnstar
		Congratulations on finishing the NSW member lists - an outstanding job on an absolutely enormous task. The lists are a fantastic resource and are a great addition, especially considering the currently impoverished state of NSW political articles. Exemplary work. Frickeg (talk) 11:33, 3 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Table

Fair question :) Two options to solve it:

1. Break the table and create a new one at that point. (That would be my preferred solution though it doesn't look as pretty) 2. Use colspan=2 on the two relevant fields to make them fit. This looks better but is less technically sound and may not work on some platforms. Orderinchaos 04:03, 14 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I agree with Orderinchaos above - the two separate tables is fine. Frickeg (talk) 04:10, 14 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

The WA one for example has a separate table per decade. (I do intend to combine at least some of them at some point, but the handy thing about doing it that way is that one can have notes underneath.) So there is precedent for it having been done elsewhere. Orderinchaos 04:15, 14 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Brookfield in your by-election table

Just a heads-up - your description of the Brookfield casual vacancy in your by-election table is incorrect. Brookfield had two running mates from his rebel Labor party, one of whom would have been easily elected had a countback been held, and the other which would have been elected had the government followed the letter of the quirky casual vacancies legislation at the time.

The Storey government realised that under said quirky legislation, because Brookfield had supported Labor in confidence votes, they could ignore the existence of his running-mates altogether and nominate Jabez Wright, the defeated Official Labor member and a bitter opponent of Brookfield.

I have no idea how to explain that succinctly, though I'll probably write a couple of articles on the whole mess soon. Any idea how to incorporate that into the article? Rebecca (talk) 11:37, 15 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

That sounds like a good way of doing it for now. Ta :) Rebecca (talk) 12:55, 15 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Talkback

Hello, Porturology. You have new messages at Narutolovehinata5's talk page.
Message added 10:20, 4 April 2010 (UTC). You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.[reply]

Narutolovehinata5 ^tccsdnew 10:20, 4 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Note

Hello I noticed that you tagged some articles with "db-person" and then placed at the bottom you place "courtesy blank". I would just like to remind you that you can use db-attack for that purpose. Not trying to be offensive, just trying to remind you. Happy editing! Narutolovehinata5 ^tccsdnew 11:40, 4 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Reverting vandalism

In case you didn't see it before the bot cleared it: Re: 3rr Cheers —DoRD (talk) 02:48, 1 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

- Many thanks for the explanation Porturology (talk) 02:50, 1 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Lang Labor at state level

Hi - saw your change to Electoral district of Phillip. I've been uncertain about how to handle Lang Labor at state level for a while (apart from the very limited 1940s version, which is easy). As I understand it, all NSW Labor MPs were "Lang Labor" between 1931 and 1936. I don't know how we should show this, seeing as NSW Labor was the main Labor party in NSW and "Federal Labor" (which won no seats) was the breakaway. As such I've been leaving them as Labor. Thoughts? Frickeg (talk) 04:46, 14 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Sounds good - I'll let you raise it at WT:AUP, since you've been doing a lot of work on NSW politics lately. And yes, I reckon there are only three or four really active editors on Australian politics at the moment, which means we'll have our work cut out for us once the federal election starts and we get bombarded with POV from left, right and centre (literally). Hopefully we'll get some new faces soon, or some old ones back on board. Frickeg (talk) 06:11, 14 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]

By the way, regarding colours: there is a template for the ALP (NSW): Template:Australian politics/party colours/Labor (NSW), although it uses the same colour as the Lang Labor and Non-Communist Labor ones, since they are broadly affiliated. Frickeg (talk) 00:18, 15 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]

1950 election

I think there's a slight error in the results table - independent Labor and Lang Labor are listed as having exactly the same number of votes, with different percentages of the vote.

Congratulations on getting every bio in the 1950-1953 parliament done, as well - that's a phenomenal effort, and I've been watching your progress and watchlisting them as they come along. It's fantastic now to see a page of blue links where you wouldn't expect it. Rebecca (talk) 17:46, 16 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]

What she said. Bravo! Frickeg (talk) 02:28, 17 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Wow - that's a big task; good luck! I got them back to 1988 myself, and I may try and go back a bit further to help you out, although my current pressing task is to get federal election results done before the federal election. I think we've both got uphill battles ahead of us, but here's hoping we can get there! Frickeg (talk) 03:55, 17 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I'll also try and help out a bit on this front, but am mad busy at the moment - hence my lack of activity lately. Rebecca (talk) 03:58, 17 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Ultra-minor quibble - don't forget succession boxes! I'll try and help out adding them to the existing articles. Frickeg (talk) 04:15, 17 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Looks like I was premature here - you've got most of them. By the way, any objections to moving Tom Armstrong (1903-1957) to Tom Armstrong (Australian politician)? Frickeg (talk) 04:36, 17 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Ooh, tough one. (Hadn't seen the other Armstrong.) The first thing is to definitely have a disambiguation page at the (Australian politician) version. There's nothing wrong with having birth dates in this situation, although my personal preference would be for (Australian Liberal politician) and (Australian Independent politician), which I admit is a little unwieldy. Frickeg (talk) 05:54, 17 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Sounds like a plan (although we'll still overlap now and again, since some people served for ages). And by the way - any idea where we can get good lists for the Leg Council? (Or, even better, Leg Council election results/candidates?) Frickeg (talk) 06:36, 18 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]

OK. I'll try and get some done when I'm tired of doing election results and need a break. (And the LC was indeed frustratingly vague before direct election - I remember a blog post from Antony a while ago that made it seem as though he was still working on the LC elections (including pre-1978), but I guess it's a big task and he's not publishing it until he finishes. On a side note, aren't his Assembly pages at the NSW Parliament website fantastic? They often have interesting tidbits for bios that the Member register ignores, too.) Frickeg (talk) 09:10, 18 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Just noticed this - NSW LC results prior to 1978 are a colossal pain in the butt to assemble, because there's indirect elections at random times, and I barely got further than a term before deciding it was all too hard and giving up. The big statistical register PDF should be enough to actually compile them if you work out all the details of whose term expired when, but it's going to be a nuisance. It's a shame that Antony Green's results page never arrived - considering that there's three elections in the next few months I dare say it won't be coming soon. Rebecca (talk) 14:30, 18 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]

And speaking of NSW politics, feel like getting involved in a terribly silly discussion going on here? Frickeg (talk) 03:56, 17 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Would be grand if you could repeat what you wrote on my talk page - should hopefully end this breathtakingly stupid argument. Rebecca (talk) 03:58, 17 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]

MPs

Sure, would be happy to! Will probably wait a few days - my computer is stuffed and I'm on an antique old Mac that's a pain in the butt to use, but once I have it back, I'll get stuck into it. Rebecca (talk) 14:27, 18 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Heh! You and Frickeg are the two writing regular contributions to my areas of interest, so I keep a pretty close watch on your contributions list. Noticed that you beat me to Ian Griffith - so I guess it's on to Nick Kearns... Rebecca (talk) 22:05, 27 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Sounds fine by me. Rebecca (talk) 02:40, 28 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Heh, thanks. You two have done an amazing job too - it's been pretty light going in the 80s. Sorry I'm taking so long ... I'm trying to do MLCs as well, which is slowing me down a bit. By all means start going back before 1950 - I was going to suggest that next anyway! (As to election results - it's up to you, of course. I've already done NSW, which is probably your main area of interest ... and, having come so far, it would be nice to get them done myself. But by all means join in if you enjoy results. I mean, unlike most people, I do actually enjoy them - you find the strangest results here and there (the Greens topped 10% in Capricornia in 1990!). Sounds like you've got your work cut out with NSW MPs anyway though ... hey, once all NSW MPs are done, feel like moving on to Victoria? ;) Frickeg (talk) 02:46, 28 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Page titles

Hi, and thank you for your contributions to Wikipedia. It appears that you recently tried to give Kenneth McCaw a different title by copying its content and pasting either the same content, or an edited version of it, into Ken McCaw. This is known as a "cut and paste move", and it is undesirable because it splits the page history, which is needed for attribution and various other purposes. Instead, the software used by Wikipedia has a feature that allows pages to be moved to a new title together with their edit history.

In most cases, once your account is four days old and has ten edits, you should be able to move an article yourself using the "Move" tab at the top of the page. This both preserves the page history intact and automatically creates a redirect from the old title to the new. If you cannot perform a particular page move yourself this way (e.g. because a page already exists at the target title), please follow the instructions at requested moves to have it moved by someone else. Also, if there are any other pages that you moved by copying and pasting, even if it was a long time ago, please list them at Wikipedia:Cut and paste move repair holding pen. Thank you. R'n'B (call me Russ) 09:42, 20 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Reviewer Right Granted

Hello. Your account has been granted the "reviewer" userright, allowing you to review other users' edits on certain flagged pages. Pending changes, also known as flagged protection, is currently undergoing a two-month trial scheduled to end 15 August 2010.

Reviewers can review edits made by users who are not autoconfirmed to articles placed under pending changes. Pending changes is applied to only a small number of articles, similarly to how semi-protection is applied but in a more controlled way for the trial. The list of articles with pending changes awaiting review is located at Special:OldReviewedPages.

For the guideline on reviewing, see Wikipedia:Reviewing. Being granted reviewer rights doesn't change how you can edit articles even with pending changes. The general help page on pending changes can be found here, and the general policy for the trial can be found here.

If you do not want this userright, you may ask any administrator to remove it for you at any time. The Helpful One 14:37, 26 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Politicians

Tell me about it! There's just one left there - Albert Sloss - I'm going to write up a proper article on him because he's such a famously dodgy figure.

If it's alright with you, I'm next going to start from 1930 and work back towards where you are, since I'm particularly interested in the Lang era. Is that okay? Rebecca (talk) 09:32, 4 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Quick question - where did you source the common names for some of these 1930s-era MPs? There's some, like Wilf Ratcliffe, that I can't find any sources for. Rebecca (talk) 16:31, 4 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Doesn't it feel great to have achieved this? Just goes to show, I guess. I might start at 1900 and move forwards - that way I shouldn't run into either of you too much. Frickeg (talk) 21:49, 4 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Well, considering how quickly the three of us knocked over 1950-present, I reckon 1856 should be doable! (Although we should start including MLCs in there somehow, if we can ever work out the lists for them ...) Frickeg (talk) 22:01, 4 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]

By all means go ahead with elections ... ANU has both the 1856-1901 and the 1901-1970 registers in reference, so when I'm back there in a week or so I'll have a look at them. A great source for the elections is The People's Choice, three volumes of NSW electoral history from 1901 to 1999, edited by Michael Hogan and David Clune - definitely worth a look if you haven't seen them already. Frickeg (talk) 22:12, 4 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]

No worries - will do them as I go. And yes, by all means go ahead with elections - bit strange if we have articles on all the MLAs but not the elections. Rebecca (talk) 03:16, 5 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]

One other thing I wanted to ask - I notice for some of the early parliaments you've switched the footnotes over to a table system. I'm not opposed to using that; it's more sortable, for one; but in its current form it doesn't work with the automated footnotes, and also seems to struggle to explain some of the more complex events (like that parliament where there was a chain reaction of about six changes) - anyway, whichever system would we use, it'd be good to get things consistent across the pages. Rebecca (talk) 04:17, 5 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Hey, if you're disambiguating articles, you might want to check the main article - Lewis Martin is an American politician, so the Australian guy should be at Lewis Martin (Australian politician). Cheers :) Rebecca (talk) 11:12, 8 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Footnotes

Manual labor, I'm afraid. The footnotes are pretty easy - just a matter of copy/paste. The disambiguation's a bit more of a pain. I'm sure there's an automated tool out there somewhere, but I do things old school - trying to work out how to use the tools is confusing enough that I just figure it's easier to do the whole lot manually. Rebecca (talk) 01:39, 9 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Going well!

Nice one! Not to mention this. Any chance that source of yours could help buff up Liberal Democrat Party (Australia)? (I created it ages ago basically from a tiny note on Psephos.) By the way, I'm thinking the LDP should be moved to Liberal Democratic Party (New South Wales), per one of my offline sources - does your source agree?

By the way, I've found in the past that it's a good idea to add the WikiProject tags (generally {{WPBiography}} and {{WP Australia}}) to the talkpages of articles you create (without rating them, of course, unless they're lists). Makes it a bit easier for the tireless people like Grahamec who do heaps of work with article ratings (it puts them in all the categories of unassessed etc., not to mention the living= parameter in WPBio which categorises them into living or non-living people). Frickeg (talk) 07:55, 11 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]

The guy was called Eric White, I remember ... it sounds like the People's Choice books might be the best source after all. Hopefully I can get at them here as well (as I have shifted locations since we last spoke).

For biographical articles, I generally add {{WPBiography|living=yes/no|politician-work-group=yes|listas=Lastname, Firstname}} and {{WP Australia|politics=yes|NSW=yes}}, which seems to cover it pretty well. Frickeg (talk) 02:05, 12 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]

That's interesting about the two E Whites (I didn't get the links - I'd need to be logged on - but I got the drift, thanks anyway). My source only mentioned Eric, so it may be in error. I've had a look through the LDP's results in the 1943 federal election, where they contested nine seats, and it's really interesting in that they're a completely mixed bag. The best result is Eden-Monaro, where Denzil Macarthur-Onslow got 21.7% and came second (beating the sitting UAP member), and they also reached double figures in Parkes and Parramatta. The rest of the results are below 6% (some even below 2%), with no apparent geographic correlation, which makes me think that a great deal depended on the candidate. (WP:OR, but interesting anyway!) Frickeg (talk) 05:13, 12 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Nice work! Caution needs to be taken using the SMH as a source though - the book I used said that it was ferociously aggressive towards the LDP and came close to running a vendetta against it. Frickeg (talk) 07:34, 13 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Yes - hard to imagine the SMH as a bastion of staunch conservatism, but so it once was. I figured that was what had happened with the copyedits (just minor grammatical stuff anyway) - should be sorted now. And yes, the LC lists are arduous indeed. I've compiled a Word document listing them all chronologically - which took ages in itself - and am now going through the process of transforming them into lists. The NSW Parliament site's inconsistencies make it harder sometimes, too, plus occasionally they just forget to mention which party an MP was from and I have to assume they were an independent (any independents in the tables should therefore be taken with a grain of salt). Should be easy enough back to 1934, though - before that there were no fixed terms, so it'll be chaos. Still a way off though! Frickeg (talk) 07:43, 13 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]

New South Wales state election, 1968

Nice work with this article! I'm not sure about certain parts of the formatting (table form for the redistribution for example), but it's great to see this serious gap in NSW politics articles being filled! Anyway, this is just a quick note to let you know that there are CSD templates for deleting your subpages when you're done with them, since I saw you'd blanked your draft page in your contribs. Frickeg (talk) 10:50, 6 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, I've left NSW politics aside to focus on federal at the moment - but I'll be back to it! As for redistributions ... I wonder if prose is not the best way to go. I know that NSW redistributions tend to be rather more sweeping than federal ones, but I find the summary at Australian federal election, 2010 quite helpful. I get the feeling that redistribution tables are just one too many - we've already got the infobox, the results tables, the seats changing hands, the pendulums ... we need to get some text in there, or these articles will never be more than a collection of raw facts. Frickeg (talk) 00:56, 7 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

RE the Independent Liberal colour - I'd be much happier with it the same as the normal Independent colour. Giving them a colour of their own implies that they're a party, when actually they're still independents, just using a slightly more specific term. Thoughts? Frickeg (talk) 03:39, 7 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I think you make very valid points, especially considering the way they have often aligned themselves, but I'd personally rather show that by linking them (to Independent (politician) or perhaps as Independent Liberal) but keeping them grey. I know what you mean about the tables - they require all that coding, and I don't know how to test it in the sandbox either - but I don't think having a couple of grey ones is a problem. As far as I am aware (and correct me if I'm wrong here) the "Independent Liberal" or "Independent Labor" terms have never appeared on ballot papers (I know, of course, that no party names would have appeared until relatively recently), and I don't think that the parliaments have ever formally recognised them as anything other than Independents. Having said that, it is undoubtedly true that convention is to give them the Ind Lib or Ind Lab designation. I think we've got two different, valid approaches here, and I agree that we're unlikely to get too much response from WT:AUP - Rebecca would probably have an opinion, though. Although, thinking further on it, this does affect non-NSW areas as well, so perhaps it might get some interest. Frickeg (talk) 04:53, 7 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

NSWLC

What a great resource! Thanks for letting me know. I'll try and get back to the LC lists when the federal results are finalised (they're the most pressing task!) - and those lists should help with the early Council enormously. Frickeg (talk) 04:12, 22 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Hawkins

Eck. Might have been an error - feel free to move it back! Rebecca (talk) 13:03, 22 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Laura Massey

I am new to Wikipedia and have created a page for Laura Massey that you tagged for speedy deletion. Can you please provide me with an explanation as to why I am not allowed to create this page? The message I got referred to an earlier deletion debate/discussion that took place -- would I be able to view this discussion to find out why the article is being deleted? Thanks! — Preceding unsigned comment added by Agentostrich (talk • contribs) 18:41, 21 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for the reply! I have read through the deletion discussion and have tried to frame my arguments to contest the speedy deletion with reference to the moderator's complaint re: notability. It seems like a long shot, but I figure this is a good way to learn more about how Wikipedia works and get involved in the community. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Agentostrich (talk • contribs) 19:07, 21 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Speedy deletion nomination of Tom Dalton

Please do not make statements attacking people or groups of people. Wikipedia has a strict policy against personal attacks. Attack pages and images are not tolerated by Wikipedia and are speedily deleted. Users who continue to create or repost such pages and images in violation of our biographies of living persons policy will be blocked from editing Wikipedia. Thank you.

If you think that this notice was placed here in error, contest the deletion by clicking on the button labelled "Click here to contest this speedy deletion," which appears inside of the speedy deletion ({{db-...}}) tag (if no such tag exists, the page is no longer a speedy delete candidate). Doing so will take you to the talk page where you will find a pre-formatted place for you to explain why you believe the page should not be deleted. You can also visit the the page's talk page directly to give your reasons, but be aware that once tagged for speedy deletion, if the page 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 page that would render it more in conformance with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. Porturology (talk) 12:20, 28 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Evulsion

No problems - you're not the first! Best Wishes S a g a C i t y (talk) 13:15, 4 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Disputed Speedy Deletion of Biddle v. Perovich

Hi Porturology! I wanted to let you know that although I agree Biddle v. Perovich should be deleted in its current format (hence my PROD), I have disputed your speedy deletion tag of Biddle v. Perovich. That is because my understanding is case law itself is considered public domain, and not subject to copyright infrinments. In any case, even if there is copyright on case law (which some jursidictions are still trying to figure out), this case is from 1927 and the copyright would have expired. The problem in this case is it is just a copypaste of a primary source, and hence deletable, but not under any of the speedy deletion criteria. Singularity42 (talk) 13:52, 25 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Altered speedy deletion rationale: How to add new information

Hello Porturology. I am just letting you know that I deleted How to add new information, a page you tagged for speedy deletion, under a different criterion from the one you provided, which doesn't fit the page in question. Thank you. Salvio ^{Let's talk about it!} 13:04, 28 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]

BLP prod

Hi there, regarding your BLP prod of Charles Luney, I've removed that again. He died in 2006, and it quite clearly says that in the article. Schwede 66 12:09, 5 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Your Suggested Deletions

I am puzzled by the disproportional efforts by you to suggest deletions of different pages in Wikipedia, which I feel is in sharp contradistinction to the very spirit of Wikipedia. I looked at the list of your prior deletions contributions and feel that many of them were quite useful if they had remained in Wikipedia. Not withstanding the likelihood of my own personal bias against your agenda upon suggestion to delete burnt-out diabetes mellitus, I feel that in the arena of science and art we would exercise higher level of tolerance for new ideas and that we need to be more forthcoming and open minded, rather than attacking new pages and themes that are not consistent with the traditional way of thinking and flag them for deletions. History has shown that paradigm shifting ideas encounter resistance by traditionalists and conservatives. Whereas we should all agree that conservatives should be free to exert their rights and freedom as they see fit, we should also hope that this is not at the expense of slowing down the process of advancement of science and art under the flag of "suggested for deletion". In my opinion, and I may be biased, such efforts are not very different from traditional vandalism and, hence, can be referred to as ""regulated vandalism"" or neovandalism. I welcome civil and non-hostile discussions on this subject. burntout123.burntout123].--To_Expand_Tolerance_ 17:53, 5 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, Porturology. You have new messages at C.Fred's talk page.
Message added 06:38, 6 June 2011 (UTC). You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.[reply]

Alana Maddox BLPPROD

I've had to decline the BLPPROD here because of the strict letter of WP:BLPPROD#Nominating, but you're welcome to take this to PROD or AfD if you believe they are appropriate. Best, --joe decker ^{talk to me} 01:24, 30 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Eyyub Yagubov

I really don't see why you put a speedy deletion up. I just started working on it. A person who has been editing Wikipedia since October 28, 2010. (talk) 02:14, 6 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, Porturology. You have new messages at Since 10.28.2010's talk page.
You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.

Moving article to user space

I see that you moved Eyyub Yagubov to User:Since 10.28.2010/Eyyub Yagubov. For future reference, when you do this you should then tag the resulting redirect at Eyyub Yagubov with {{Db-r2}} or {{db-rediruser}} to request deletion of the redirect. This is because it is not acceptable for a page in main article space to redirect to a userspace page. JamesBWatson (talk) 09:58, 6 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Point noted - many thanks Porturology (talk) 12:11, 6 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]

thanks

Hello! Since 10.28.2010 has given you some cookies. Cookies promote WikiLove and hopefully these have made your day better. Happy munching!

Spread the goodness of cookies by adding {{subst:plate}} to someone's talk page, or eat these cookies on the giver's talk page with {{subst:munchplate}}.

A person who has been editing Wikipedia since October 28, 2010. (talk) 22:14, 6 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Speedy deletion converted to PROD: Cerno LLC

Hello Porturology. I am just letting you know that I have converted the speedy deletion tag that you placed on Cerno LLC to a proposed deletion tag, because I do not believe CSD applies to the page in question. Thank you. Danger (talk) 09:34, 9 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]

About Penrith National Park

Hi Porturology!
Apologies if this appears to be treading on your toes, but I've WP:AfD'd Penrith National Park. I agree with your WP:CSD tagging, but I think this is the best way to avoid teh unnecessary dramahz. Hope this is OK with you.
--Shirt58 (talk) 11:01, 25 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Your article has been moved to AfC space

Hi! I would like to inform you that the Articles for Creation submission which was previously located here: User:Porturology/Anxious Nation has been moved to Wikipedia talk:Articles for creation/Anxious Nation, this move was made automatically and doesn't affect your article, if you have any questions please ask on my talk page! Have a nice day. ArticlesForCreationBot (talk) 06:55, 18 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Your submission at Articles for creation

You recently made a submission to Articles for Creation. Your article has been reviewed and because some issues were found, it could not be accepted in its current form; it is now located at Wikipedia talk:Articles for creation/Anxious Nation. Please view your submission to see the comments left by the reviewer. Feel free to edit the submission to address the issues raised, and resubmit once you feel they have been resolved. (You can do this by adding the text {{subst:AFC submission/submit}} to the top of the article.) Thank you for your contributions to Wikipedia! Alpha_Quadrant ^(talk) 18:09, 19 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]

New Page Patrol survey

New page patrol – Survey Invitation

Hello Porturology! The WMF is currently developing new tools to make new page patrolling much easier. Whether you have patrolled many pages or only a few, we now need to know about your experience. The survey takes only 6 minutes, and the information you provide will not be shared with third parties other than to assist us in analyzing the results of the survey; the WMF will not use the information to identify you.

If this invitation also appears on other accounts you may have, please complete the survey once only.
If this has been sent to you in error and you have never patrolled new pages, please ignore it.

Please click HERE to take part.
Many thanks in advance for providing this essential feedback.

You are receiving this invitation because you have patrolled new pages. For more information, please see NPP Survey. Global message delivery 12:50, 26 October 2011 (UTC)

Speedy deletion converted to PROD: Fly Away (Blackfoot album)

Hello Porturology. I am just letting you know that I have converted the speedy deletion tag that you placed on Fly Away (Blackfoot album) to a proposed deletion tag, because I do not believe CSD applies to the page in question. Thank you. JohnCD (talk) 15:21, 7 November 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Orphaned non-free media (File:Cover of Anxious Nation.jpg)

Thanks for uploading File:Cover of Anxious Nation.jpg. The media description page currently specifies that it is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, it is currently orphaned, meaning that it is not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the media was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that media for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).

If you have uploaded other unlicensed media, please check whether they're used in any articles or not. You can find a list of 'file' pages you have edited by clicking on the "my contributions" link (it is located at the very top of any Wikipedia page when you are logged in), and then selecting "File" from the dropdown box. Note that all non-free media not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. Hazard-Bot (talk) 04:44, 3 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Articles for deletion

Feel free to tell me about your relationship with John. Castlemate (talk) 11:12, 1 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you for explaining your relationship with John. None of what you said seemed particularly relevant to the article or its deletion but it did convince me that your initial comment on the deletion page was rude and disrespectful. I also have a view of him personally but know that has no bearing on his inclusion on Wikipedia.

"... feel free to delete this message if you wish"

I did remove your comments as some of them weren't sentiments that I would want to remain on my page and I would be happy if you also removed my comments from your page.

"... it is a maxim that you should not speak ill of the dead but that probably does not apply when putting together an encyclopaedia article"

When discussing someone's suitability for exclusion in Wikipedia it is only appropriate to discuss facts, not your view of their personality, dead or alive.

"To me he was a complex and in many ways a lonely and quite difficult man."

If these personality traits were reasons for deletion, most of the world's great leaders would have their articles deleted from Wikipedia.

"To be frank he was not a particularly notable surgeon"

I have spent my life listening to surgeons criticise the surgical prowess of other surgeons. If it was left to surgeons to chose surgeons for inclusion in Wikipedia I doubt we would have a surgeon listed - the same could of course be said for barristers and architects.

"Rugby was ... amateur and very much an old boys’ network. The team doctor was an honorary position and I doubt if it was put out to tender."

Yes it was amateur and an old boys' network because most sport was amateur until recently and it was a boys sport until recently as well. If you are referring to an old boys' network in the sense of some elite and rarefied GPS/CAS clique then you are misguided. Rugby in NSW is, and has for most of its history been, a very "broad church". The Ella brothers and many other state-educated players from varying ethnic, faith and socio-economic backgrounds can attest to that. I suspect you are right when you say the position wasn't put out to tender but all the Sydney clubs at the time had doctors and all would have been possible contenders for the role that John undertook so the pool of talent available for selection would have been considerable. He was appointed and undertook the job with distinction.

"John had the connections, interest and available time to be the Wallabies doctor"

Malcolm Faser had the connections, interest and available time to be the Prime Minister of Australia.

"he would have been the first to admit that he had no particular skills in sports medicine ( which itself was very much an amateur speciality in those days)"

So let us celebrate him as a pioneer of a medical speciality especially given his founding chairmanship of the institute at Concord Hospital and for which he was honoured by his nation as read in his OAM citation.

"As for the OA, as you know it is chosen by a committee after a person is nominated."

That committee reporting to the Governor-General based on a community nomination seems to be a far superior award system to a party political leader nominating his mates to the G-G. Irrespective of your view, or my view, of the system, it is the national award process in Australia.

"As far as I am aware John was nominated by a particularly sycophantic registrar who had a habit of making AO nominations (he had successfully named his own mother-in-law and father-in-law, who were country GPS, the previous year).

Nominations for awards within the Order of Australia require a nominator and seven other referees. Those nominations are not made public and so I have no interest in idle gossip or one medico's opinion of another medico's personality. I would say in relation to this gossip that one nomination might appear to be an accident but three is definitely careless. If through this carelessness two hapless rural practitioners were honoured, then I am thrilled because I'm sure they are involved in their community in many ways over and above swiping a Medicare card.

"For these reasons I don’t think being the Wallaby’s doctor in the amateur era or an OA are automatically criteria for inclusion in Wikipedia."

For these reasons I couldn't disagree with you more and hope that others will see sense and support a Keep vote.

Cheers Castlemate (talk) 03:41, 2 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]

John Moulton

Hello again. In reference to the deleted article John Moulton (medical practitioner) I'm wondering if you might reconsider your opposition to this article. I have recently read WP:NRU and feel that it conclusively proves Moulton's notability for inclusion in Wikipedia. I hope you will agree and assist me in it being reinstated irrespective of your personal view of the subject. As a team official for a "High Performance Union" for a long period and particularly at the time of winning the Rugby World Cup he is clearly deemed notable by current standards. Castlemate (talk) 04:00, 9 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Wikipedia talk:Articles for creation/Anxious Nation concern

Hi there, I'm HasteurBot. I just wanted to let you know that Wikipedia talk:Articles for creation/Anxious Nation, a page you created has not been edited in at least 180 days. The Articles for Creation space is not an indefinite storage location for content that is not appropriate for articlespace. If your submission is not edited soon, it could be nominated for deletion. If you would like to attempt to save it, you will need to improve it. You may request Userfication of the content if it meets requirements. If the deletion has already occured, instructions on how you may be able to retrieve it are available at WP:REFUND/G13. Thank you for your attention. HasteurBot (talk) 12:54, 13 August 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Your article submission Anxious Nation

Hello Porturology. It has been over six months since you last edited your article submission, entitled Anxious Nation.

The page will shortly be deleted. If you plan on editing the page to address the issues raised when it was declined and resubmit it, simply edit the submission and remove the {{db-afc}} or {{db-g13}} code. Please note, however, that Articles for Creation is not for the indefinite hosting of material deemed unsuitable for the encyclopedia mainspace.

If your submission has already been deleted by the time you get there, and you want to retrieve it, copy this code: {{subst:Refund/G13|Wikipedia talk:Articles for creation/Anxious Nation}}, paste it in the edit box at this link, click "Save", and an administrator will in most cases undelete the submission.

Thanks for your submission to Wikipedia, and happy editing. HasteurBot (talk) 14:01, 19 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]

ArbCom elections are now open!

Hi,
You appear to be eligible to vote in the current Arbitration Committee election. The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to enact binding solutions for disputes between editors, primarily related to serious behavioural issues that the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the ability to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail. If you wish to participate, you are welcome to review the candidates' statements and submit your choices on the voting page. For the Election committee, MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 13:04, 23 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]

ArbCom 2017 election voter message

Hello, Porturology. Voting in the 2017 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23.59 on Sunday, 10 December. All users who registered an account before Saturday, 28 October 2017, made at least 150 mainspace edits before Wednesday, 1 November 2017 and are not currently blocked are eligible to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once.

The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail.

If you wish to participate in the 2017 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 18:42, 3 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]

ArbCom 2018 election voter message

Hello, Porturology. Voting in the 2018 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23.59 on Sunday, 3 December. All users who registered an account before Sunday, 28 October 2018, made at least 150 mainspace edits before Thursday, 1 November 2018 and are not currently blocked are eligible to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once.

The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail.

If you wish to participate in the 2018 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 18:42, 19 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]

ArbCom 2019 election voter message

Hello! Voting in the 2019 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23:59 on Monday, 2 December 2019. All eligible users are allowed to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once.

The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail.

If you wish to participate in the 2019 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. If you no longer wish to receive these messages, you may add {{NoACEMM}} to your user talk page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 00:04, 19 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Hunter 1960

Hi, long time no see! This comes from Psephos, but I'm inclined to agree it is probably an error. This gives the 1960 Brown's middle initial as L, which wouldn't match (although newspapers did get this kind of thing wrong sometimes). The official records would have a full middle name, which would hopefully put the issue beyond doubt (although if it does say James that wouldn't settle the matter - after all there have been two Robert James Browns in the federal parliament - but if it doesn't). Frickeg (talk) 05:36, 16 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]

ArbCom 2021 Elections voter message

Hello! Voting in the 2021 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23:59 (UTC) on Monday, 6 December 2021. All eligible users are allowed to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once.

The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail.

If you wish to participate in the 2021 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. If you no longer wish to receive these messages, you may add {{NoACEMM}} to your user talk page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 00:01, 23 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]

ArbCom 2022 Elections voter message

Hello! Voting in the 2022 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23:59 (UTC) on Monday, 12 December 2022. All eligible users are allowed to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once.

The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail.

If you wish to participate in the 2022 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. If you no longer wish to receive these messages, you may add {{NoACEMM}} to your user talk page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 00:20, 29 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]