User talk:Andjam/Archive1

User talk:Andjam/Speedy1 - Messages speedily archived, on the grounds they were abusive, mis-spelled or I just didn't like them.

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
• Help pages
• Tutorial
• How to write a great article
• Manual of Style

I hope you enjoy editing here and being a Wikipedian! By the way, please be sure to sign your name on talk pages using four tildes (~~~~) to produce your name and the current date, or three tildes (~~~) for just your name. If you have any questions, you can post to the help desk or ask me on my talk page. Again, welcome! - BanyanTree 05:03, 20 August 2005 (UTC)

To do list

Things to do

Specific

• Add to Fatwa the fatwa against the Nigerian journalist who made a "What would Mohammed do?"-style comment about the beauty contest being held there. Added to List of famous fatwas, but Isioma Daniel deserves a page. 03:42, 7 October 2005 (UTC)
• Try to find out if "dog whistle politics" originated in Australia, and provide a link from the "wedge politics" article to the "dog whistle politics" article.
• In the list of overseas Aussie detainees, clarify what happened with David Hicks. He was not captured as an alleged war criminal, but as an enemy combatant, who was later on charged with war crimes.
• The French article on Xena Warrior Princess gives a hyperlink to the wrong Kevin Smith. 13:16, 13 October 2005 (UTC) (Fixed as of 10:59, 15 October 2005 (UTC))
• Propose an update of the logarithmic graph in Wikipedia:Modelling Wikipedia's growth#10 biggest Wikipedias 14:18, 10 December 2005 (UTC)
• Introduce an image of a modern bobsleigh to the article, and create a link to commons. 13:51, 23 February 2006 (UTC)
• See if Infernal Method (band) has anything notable not mentioned elsewhere, and then prod it.

Long term

• The Australian women's skeleton team is definitely worth working on! Created skeleton sport in Australia (not perfect, but a start) 10:49, 11 December 2005 (UTC)
• Make Made Australia at the Winter Olympics a featured article. 03:44, 7 October 2005 (UTC) (Pages of interest: [1], [2], [3] , [4] , [5] , [6] , [7] , [8], [9] )

Your suggestions

• Got a suggestion? Write it in here!

Yom Kippur War

You might be interested in the debate at Talk:Yom Kippur War. Jayjg ^(talk) 22:53, 6 October 2005 (UTC)

Heh. By abstaining, I provided the most pro-Grace Note vote there. Andjam 01:21, 7 October 2005 (UTC)

Kuril Islands

Hi. You reverted an edit to Declaration of war#Current declarations about Japan and Russia still technically being at war. As a result, I had a look at the history of the page, and I noticed that someone else had stated that the two were at war - but I wasn't knowingly restoring what they had said. I first heard of the dispute in a tv program last Tuesday (Foreign Correspondent: Kurils - Islands of Discontent).

The CIA world factbook for Japan and Russia describe them as technically at war with each other.

There may be the argument that Russia isn't the same as the USSR (was that your argument?), but as far as I know, it regards itself as the successor of the latter.

Thanks, Andjam 12:47, 9 October 2005 (UTC)

Hmm. I guess my argument is that, while they may not have ever signed a peace treaty, in reality, they aren't in a state of war anymore; a political/diplomatic land dispute over some islands isn't a war. I don't know if the countries themselves consider themselves in a state of war (although I would suppose not); if they don't, I don't think there should be any mention of them as a "Current declaration." Do you agree? I'm not sure where to find that information, though. —Cleared as filed. 12:55, 9 October 2005 (UTC)

Anonymous editor

I'll get in touch with him, and try to ameliorate the situation. Jayjg ^(talk) 21:57, 20 October 2005 (UTC)

Talk:List of Australians in international prisons

I have edited the discussion at Talk:List of Australians in international prisons as some of it was getting out of hand. Some of your comments may have been removed too. My edits were not directed at your comments and I apologise if I inadvertantly removed anything you feel should stay on the page. --User:AYArktos | Talk 21:19, 24 October 2005 (UTC)

E-mail

Andjam, could you possibly e-mail me, or send me an e-mail address where I could contact you? I'd appreciate it. Jayjg ^(talk) 03:00, 27 October 2005 (UTC)

Sources

Andjam, bouncing off your query to me the other day about sources, no, I don't know of anywhere on WP you can note a dodgy (or good) source, but it's a great idea, and a discussion about it has just started here. Cheers, SlimVirgin ^(talk) 21:35, 6 November 2005 (UTC)

Australia at the Winter Olympics

I honestly don't know. It's not an obvious one to be a featured article, but there's no inherent reason why not if it's good enough. It's a question of whether you can dig up enough material to make it an interesting read. If you feel you can, go for it. SlimVirgin ^(talk) 03:05, 8 November 2005 (UTC)

Islam and Slavery

Is: Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Islam and Slavery Would you care to vote? Thx.--The Brain 10:46, 14 November 2005 (UTC)

Sooceroos

Ah, glad to see it hadn't been there too long, then. I very much appreciate that you went and found it--I wasn't really expecting anyone to do it, just musing out loud. Thanks a lot! - 211.28.82.103 08:02, 17 November 2005 (UTC)

vandal

User:Andjam and User:Olorin28 -- thank you for keeping an eye on vandalism recently on CAIR; much appriciated. All the best, Sdedeo 05:20, 22 November 2005 (UTC)

Australia at the 2006 Winter Olympics

According to Special:Undelete/Australia at the 2006 Winter Olympics, the content of the article was "ggggg". I trust that there will be much more than that to say about Australia's performance at Torino when the time comes. Good luck with your work on Australia at the Winter Olympics, by the way. NatusRoma 06:42, 22 November 2005 (UTC)

You too?

hey there Andjam,

yes it's weird however I think the one who vandalised my page did not do anything to you, as far as I know... but it was my first time! I just read the vandalisation in the history, that is just outrageous. Well forget those people, let's thank El C for keeping an eye for us :-)) cheers Gryffindor 13:17, 29 November 2005 (UTC)

Channel 31

Hey Andjam, I noticed you reverted my edits to the Channel 31 page, claiming that I removed some relevant information. The only information I could find that was not replicated locally was either totally unverifiable or outdated. If there's some info in the history that you think could be salvaged, pls copy it into the relevant page. It's hard enough to work out which channel was being discussed -- which illustrates beautifully why the channels must be split into their own pages, as they are independent entities.

Again, if there's something I've overlooked, pls pull it out of history and dump it into the relevant page. (and, if possible, find a verifiable source). If you've got any concerns about this, pls contact me befor reverting.

Cheers mate, Jackk 03:12, 5 December 2005 (UTC)

That information wasn't particularly accurate: as far as I'm aware, the ABA never cited any infringements by CTS. They did, however, receive a complaint from CTA in regards to CTS' conduct. As to whether that resulted in the license suspension was not asserted. The only source listed was "media watch", although the only story Media Watch ran in regards to CTS was about the original CTA complaint, which was made in late November, 2002. The actual decision to revoke CTS' temporary license was made in March 2004. The link between the two is tenuous at best: the previous statment on the Channel 31 page indicated some kind of causal relationship.

So, I've added a little background on the Television Sydney page, including a link to the ABA press release.

Hope that suffices.

Cheers, Jackk 17:06, 5 December 2005 (UTC)

Thanks!

Andjam is hereby awarded the Minor Barnstar for his ability to spot bad grammar and correct it.

!מזל טוב

from Izehar

Thanks for pointing out that "apostrophe mistake" :-) Take a Barnstar! Izehar (talk) 22:06, 6 December 2005 (UTC)

Thanks! Wow, I've recently had my first user page vandalism, and now a barnstar! I'm so proud! BTW, what does the Hebrew translate to? Andjam 22:29, 6 December 2005 (UTC)

I can translate that for you...it says "Mazel Tov" (literally "good luck" but you know, means congratulations). --MPerel ^{( talk | contrib)} 01:23, 9 December 2005 (UTC)

English translation from Italian

Andjam - I've now done about three quarters of the article Magnetotactic bacteria - and to be honest, I've almost had enough of it. It was an absolutely crazy thing to undertake - anyway, how about having a read of what's there - do whatever you think is correct - I need a long break from it and my colleagues in scn.wiki are probably wondering where the hell I ended up. Let me know how you get on - ciao and thanks again (in anticipation). ρ¡ρρµ δ→θ∑ - (waarom? jus'b'coz!) 11:44, 20 December 2005 (UTC)

• Thanks for that! I also left a message on the Italian Village Pump, needless to say there have been no takers to date. I figure that someone who knows something about it will eventually stumble across it and can double check some of the technical aspects (or more accurately, my inept translations of some of the technical aspects). ρ¡ρρµ δ→θ∑ - (waarom? jus'b'coz!) 21:49, 20 December 2005 (UTC)

RfAr for AustinKnight

Your input would be appreciated.[10]Cognos 14:57, 21 December 2005 (UTC)

Oops...

... sorry about that Andjam! - Ta bu shi da yu 13:25, 22 December 2005 (UTC)

Kerry Packer

I do actually. The concern is that people will view him with rose coloured glasses, just like they did with Joh Bjelke-Petersen. The fact is that he did do good things but in part this was at the expense of the Australian taxpayer. And, why do you care anyway? Dankru 02:19, 27 December 2005 (UTC)

I note what you're saying. I am being quite restrained in all honesty! If it was on his article page then obviously it should be removed but talk pages are more liberal to me. Dankru 03:05, 27 December 2005 (UTC)

Solifugae edit added to BJAODN

why can't all vandals be so entertaining? :) --Duk 16:13, 30 December 2005 (UTC)

Janine Shepherd

No clue, I'm sorry. I had quite a bit of trouble putting that together, as so much of the search results are crap produced either by people trying to sell her books or people trying to sell tickets to her public speaking engagements. I'll have a look on Factiva in a minute, but I doubt I'll turn up any results, as the depth of articles gets a bit thin before about 1990. It may be worth trying to get your hands on her books - I'm sure Never Tell Me Never would have at least something about her prior career, which is more than we'll find online. Ambi 09:04, 1 January 2006 (UTC)

Gah. I was right about Factiva - nothing at all before 1988, and nothing I could see giving any details about her competitions beforehand. Ambi 09:30, 1 January 2006 (UTC)

Womens Marathon pic

The womens marathon pic is I believe in the common domain. The pic was taken in 2002. Does this help? Rhyddfrydol 15:35, 2 January 2006 (UTC)

OpenBSD

I replied to, and made some changes to the article based on, your comments on the talk page . Please let me know if they resolve your problems or if you have any further comments. NicM 11:56, 7 January 2006 (UTC).

Re:Lake Jindabyne

I live in Sydney, so I can't help you there. Just post it up onto Wikipedia:Australian Wikipedians' notice board - I'm sure someone there will be able to help you. enochlau (talk) 08:12, 15 January 2006 (UTC)

re: John Howard

I noticed you reverted the citation needed thingo which is fair enough. Given that to prove the somewhat bleeding obvious is nearly as hard as proving a negative can you wait a bit before striking out the alleged PoV statement?

Also at the risk of entering into a bitter ploemic (which I certainly don't want to do) I would be interested to know exactly what your objection is to the statement that in the 1960s he was a supporter of both NS and Aust's participation in the Vn War. I don't see how it could have been otherwise. Albatross2147 05:24, 27 January 2006 (UTC)

• • I can see what you are getting at. You are probably being overly sensitive on this point but I agree that erring on the side of caution in all such matters benefits Wp generally. Would I be right that an acceptable citation would be enough to let the statement stand? Albatross2147 07:21, 27 January 2006 (UTC)

re John Howard Talk

I take it that it was you that inserted "—The preceding unsigned comment was added by Albatross2147 (talk • contribs)" into the midst of my comment of 10th July 2006. Everything from "This topic has been extensively" through to "some military experience" was entered at the same time AND signed by me. The gap in the test seems to have come from the fact that there was a hard return in the indented comment. Please remove the insertion as it implies I was trying to hide something - and I know you would not wish to imply something incorrectly. I also have replied to your query about citable evidence. I really wonder why you are so defensive on this point. The little bugger was up to his eyeballs in hard right politics being as he was a chip off old Athol's New Guard block. (BTW it was me that did the section on the 2GB show that was quite complimentary).

Incidentally I thought talk was exempt from citation but I could be wrong about that.

Cheers

Albatross2147 14:25, 14 July 2006 (UTC)

Re:Winter Olympics

User talk:Sam Vimes#Comment_on_.28Country_XXXX.29_at_the_2006_Winter_Olympics

I'm a bit worried that some layouts you created for Country XXXX at the 2006 Winter Olympics may have to be changed a bit to add results. Oh well - lay-outs are flexible enough to be edited. Especially the columns side-by-side can just be made into one big list and the results can be stated there. I think it's better to do it the way I've done because I usually can't verify what distances/events each athlete can take part in. Thanks for noticing my work, anyhow (and for liking cross country skiing) :) Sam Vimes 07:38, 27 January 2006 (UTC)

James Cole

But how will voters be able to know if an article they haven't seen should be on Wikipedia? Articles should be debated before removal, not removed before debate. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Pacificarms (talk • contribs).

Kirstie Marshall

She hasn't really done anything notable apart from the breastfeeding incident, as far as I know. If you've got access to Factiva, you should be able to get access to any newspaper articles ever written about her as a politician - if you don't and need it, I could send you a batch of newspaper articles. Ambi 10:37, 28 January 2006 (UTC)

FAC Australia at the Winter Olympics

I have just answered the question you left on my talk page on the Talk:Australia at the Winter Olympics page, as you probably noticed already. Cheers, Schutz 00:05, 29 January 2006 (UTC)

Wikipedia:Meetup/Sydney

Hey, just checking that you can still make it to the Feb 5 meetup. If you've got ideas for time/duration/location, please note it there. Thanks! enochlau (talk) 04:17, 1 February 2006 (UTC)

Linkspam?

Why are you accusing me of link spamming? CuriousOliver 16:53, 1 February 2006 (UTC)

Thanks for the correction

Thanks for noting the correction on Ice hockey at the 1960 Winter Olympics. The hockey encyclopedia I was using for the standings had incorrectly marked that Austria was the competing team. Upon further review, I realize that my change was wrong. Thecrookedcap 18:39, 4 February 2006 (UTC)

Question

G'day Andrew, quick question for you, does mogul skiing come under freestyle skiing or is it classed in its own category? Thanks mate -- Ianblair23 (talk) 03:33, 16 February 2006 (UTC)

Dale Begg-Smith

Hi, my addition to that page was not vandalism, it may be slightly NPOV wording but it was factual. As for the citation, I have no idea how I ended up with the wrong link in the citation (probably paste buffer overwritten) but it was meant to be [11] —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Shogun (talk • contribs).

Hi Andjam, thanks for your good work on this article in trying to maintain its integrity. Can the second paragraph be improved?

• There are countless different news articles on the web with differing takes on what the business actually does. Should only one of these be printed here or none at all? Is internet business or advertising business sufficient enough?
• I am only fairly new to WP and haven't yet seen an article actually publish the names of the businesses an individual is affiliated with. Yet this article does. Admittedly it is his 'alleged' business associations! Is this permitted?
• Does WP permit most of these claims about browser hijackers/spyware etc that aren’t neutral and even worse, unreferenced?

Cheers, BrightLights 04:16, 17 February 2006 (UTC)

Fine Cotton/Fine Cotton ring-in

Thanks for bringing the Fine Cotton article to my attention. I will merge my Fine Cotton ring-in article with it in the next few days. Cuddy Wifter 05:50, 22 February 2006 (UTC)

Reply on my talk page

Thanks, Andrwsc 23:34, 9 March 2006 (UTC)

Lefty on campus

Lefty on campus has accused me of being your sockpuppet as well as numerous other things which are not true. Xtra 02:34, 10 March 2006 (UTC)

It is here. I discontinued the link from my page and blanked it 6 months ago. Xtra 02:49, 10 March 2006 (UTC)

The thought did cross my mind, but you would need a developer to check that. Xtra 03:11, 10 March 2006 (UTC)

Look at when PSYCH stopped editing [12] and Lefty on Campus started [13]. 3 days later. That appears to be quite a coincidence. Xtra 04:05, 10 March 2006 (UTC)

What is your motivation behind this? I have given up on taking action after the numerous breaches in the past and the unwillingness of admins to step in and permablock IPs and Users. Xtra 04:08, 10 March 2006 (UTC)

The arbitration took too much effort to justify starting one up again and I only took it to arbitration because admins refused to step in other than to do short temp bans and warn both of us, but admins were reluctant to ban PSYCH once he registered. Xtra 04:16, 10 March 2006 (UTC)

I just thought of a difference. From memory, I think PSYCH claimed to be a law student and Lefty claims to be a psych student. Xtra 04:20, 10 March 2006 (UTC)

No. That is the right way. Xtra 04:45, 10 March 2006 (UTC)

Articles you might like to edit, from SuggestBot

SuggestBot predicts that you will enjoy editing some of these articles. Have fun!

Stubs Australian Olympic Committee Tulloch AMP Limited Pat Welsh Cool Runnings Cricket Australia Honkawane, Shizuoka France at the 2006 Winter Olympics Torah Bright Joanne Carter Alpha carbon Demonstration sport Daniel Franck Sankeien Macquarie Park, New South Wales RAF Wombleton Cheryl Kernot USSR at the Winter Olympics Goods and Services Tax (Australia)

Cleanup United States at the Olympics University of New South Wales Victoria Police Merge Greg Haughton Leb Mandatory detention in Australia Add Sources Tom Sandberg Cheltenham Ladies' College National Organisation of Labor Students Wikify Selective High Schools Test Tobias Moretti Derartu Tulu Expand Church service Special Olympic Games Geopolitics

SuggestBot picks articles in a number of ways, from comparing articles that need work to other articles you've edited, to choosing articles randomly (ensuring that all articles with cleanup tags get a chance to be cleaned up). It tries to recommend only articles that other Wikipedians have marked as needing work. Your contributions make Wikipedia better -- thanks for helping.

If you have feedback on how to make SuggestBot better, please tell me on SuggestBot's talk page. Thanks from ForteTuba, SuggestBot's caretaker.

P.S. You received these suggestions because your name was listed on the SuggestBot request page. If this was in error, sorry about the confusion. -- SuggestBot 23:52, 14 March 2006 (UTC)

I liked your post in User talk:195.70.32.136

Hello,.

I noticed your post in User talk:195.70.32.136, regarding that writer's post in Talk:Dale Begg-Smith. Thanks for that. It seems you're not the only one this writer's getting to, as a few others have also advisd him or her to "tone it down." A few days ago, I responded to his or her inflammatory post in Talk:Spree killer, and today I slammed him in User talk:195.70.32.136.

I'm new to Wikipedia. Is there anything we can do about chronic pests like this? Is it possible to report him or her?

All the best,

Jay Black - Vancouver, Canada

Gay rights

I reverted the rest of it purposely. Firstly, to my knowledge, the Red Cross policy applies nationally. It would be better to have it being ambiguous, as before, than as now to state something which is probably false (that it only applies in some states). Secondly, the other text you removed was hardly biased. It simply pointed out that the transmission risks are not greater for gay people - the core reason why this policy is seen as so discriminatory and is so controversial. Ambi 03:53, 19 March 2006 (UTC)

Ick - that much was accidental. Ambi 03:59, 19 March 2006 (UTC)

Wikipedia:Featured article candidates/AIDS

I've answered some of the points you raised. Is there anything else I can do to swing your vote? --Bob 21:30, 27 March 2006 (UTC)

Spelling

Sadly it is not a clever pun... Thanks. Rich Farmbrough 01:23 1 April 2006 (UTC).

Australia at the Winter Olympics

Just thought I'd say congrats for a great read. Excellent work! michael ^talk 05:04, 1 April 2006 (UTC)

Ditto. Congratulations, Andjam. SlimVirgin ^(talk) 06:28, 9 April 2006 (UTC)

I can only join the cheering crowd and congratulate you warmly for getting this article to featured status — especially given the perseverance required to go through several peer reviews and featured article candidate stages. Excellent job ! Schutz 08:54, 9 April 2006 (UTC)

Usercheck

Not that I am aware of. One anon vandal said that they were told to vandalise my page on some message board. And you know the funny thing. When the last PSYCH episode happened a year ago (before the arbitration) and I had anon vandals then too, one said exactly the same thing. Coincidence? I think not. Xtra 13:26, 7 April 2006 (UTC)

Deleted

I deleted this talk page and restored it without the libellous (and obscene) edit summaries made against Xtra, per Wikipedia's libel policy. Sorry for not asking; you weren't around to ask, and I was certain you wouldn't mind, and even if you did, policy is policy. Snottygobble 04:54, 10 April 2006 (UTC)

Welcome. Snottygobble 12:06, 10 April 2006 (UTC)

Alan Jones

OK, I'm interested - I'm aware that Marr is extremely unfond of Jones and may well have been trying to put his words in a bad light. But even allowing for that, it's hard for me to read those "Good on you"s any other way. It's not like Jones is shy about telling people when he disagrees with them. --Calair 12:26, 11 April 2006 (UTC)

Fair enough. I'm still of the opinion that Jones did mean it approvingly, but I guess it could be taken that way too. I probably would've been readier to see the other side of things if the anon hadn't started by deleting the paragraph altogether; that didn't make a good first impression on me, and I may have dug my heels in a bit too hard as a result. So thanks for offering some perspective. --Calair 13:50, 11 April 2006 (UTC)

It'd certainly be more notable to me, anyway :-) --Calair 12:50, 18 April 2006 (UTC)

Dark Side of the Moon

I removed a section from Dark Side of the Moon (documentary) after reading your comment and I noticed you speak some Norwegian. Funny, I'm from Norway. "Hei på deg!" :-) --Gosub 15:30, 15 April 2006 (UTC)

WP1.0 and upgraded articles

Hi Andjam,

Thanks for letting us know about the new FA, congratulations on that achievement! I think now we have a complete set of lists put together, we want to encourage WikiProjects to edit their own table. Some projects are already doing this, and some have even set up their own worklists, which we simply link to. There are now 700 WikiProjects, and it would be impossible for us to track every article from every project ourselves, but it is feasible for each project to track 5-10 articles listed with us. For example you should feel free to add and edit the listing for your project as you see fit - your assessments will be much better than ours!

One check with FAs is that another WP1.0 project (FAs first) is tracking the FAs and will be involved in making sure those get into WP1.0. Coming down the road (probably very soon) we have "Release Version Qualifying", where people can nominate articles for inclusion in WP1.0. Thanks, Walkerma 16:03, 17 April 2006 (UTC)

Re: Australian Wikipedians' notice board

It's finished now. It took a while to go through - the interface isn't really helpful for selective deletions; you have to check each individual edit you want restored. And there were nearly 4000 edits to AWNB. Thanks, --cj | talk 07:22, 18 April 2006 (UTC)

Response

Just to let you know, I have responded to your query on my talk page. - D-Katana 00:59, 19 April 2006 (UTC)

66.109.218.95

I have removed the extra warning. I think we both posted our warnings around the same time. Thanks, ¡Dustimagic! ^(T/C) 02:53, 19 April 2006 (UTC)

Your note

I've left a warning on 195.70's talk page. An RfC would be overkill, I think; I'll block if it continues. Cheers, SlimVirgin ^(talk) 03:59, 22 April 2006 (UTC)

Open Hand palaver

Greetings.

I have added an infobox to Open Hand's first album plus some recording info sourced from Trustkill's website...I always thought the album had a distinctly late 1990's feel about it. Another wikipedian has infoboxed their second. However their parent page is still in need of information. I will commence adding some information regards the members, the founding, and also their past tour dates. I'd appreciate any suggestions - a picture would also be useful, however I can only find a fairly dorky one...Myspace or a similar social enclave might have some tour pictures. Though the quality is likely to be dubious...hmm...a tough cookie. - D-Katana 07:14, 22 April 2006 (UTC)

Mosque FAC Comment

I have responded to your comments on the Mosque FAC; I hope I have addressed your concerns sufficiently. Feel free to comment more on issues with the article on the FAC page. joturner 07:42, 23 April 2006 (UTC)

My warning to 152.163.100.201

Hi Joturner, I suspect you've given an erroneous warning (using vandalproof) against User:152.163.100.201. [14]. Please see Talk:Council_on_American-Islamic_Relations#removal_of_links for my reasoning. Thanks, Andjam 04:29, 25 April 2006 (UTC)

Given the user's history of warning (although the AOL account complicates matters), the IP, and the fact that the edit summary (revert previous blanking AGAIN!) seemed to indicate that the content had been removed before, I determined the edit to be vandalism. It appears from the talk discussion that the edit was in fact legitimate. joturner 04:56, 25 April 2006 (UTC)

Thanks for log graph

Thanks for updating the log graph of wikipedia's English growth. I'm amazed at how straight the line is! Andjam 00:26, 25 April 2006 (UTC)

You are very welcome! How wonderful to talk to a person all the way from Australia! If this line stays strait it implies that Wikipedia's growth is driven by the total number of articles, not just the efforts of a few editors. I would like to write an article on the forces behind Wikipedia's growth and forecasting trends but I am not sure where to put the article. The potential of the Wikipedia knowledge base is incredible. Are you familiar with the semantic wikis, Cyc or the MIT START system?--Dan 12:09, 25 April 2006 (UTC)

Re: Michael Milton

It was all over the news. For example, see, [15]. DHN 01:37, 28 April 2006 (UTC)

I monitor Google news for certain keywords (RSS feed), and one day that news was overwhelming all the other news of the day. Google News didn't care that I don't live in Australia :-). DHN 01:45, 28 April 2006 (UTC)

re: Xena episodes category?

Hey, Andjam. It doesn't look like there's such a category. I guess we could just make one. Mind you, I've never tried to create a category before; I'm not sure what's involved. Man, you've done a hell of a lot more with the Wikipedia in your time than I have in mine. Wow.

Eric Moussambani

Hi Andjam - I had a look at the Italian version and it seems to be intact with no evidence of tampering. Anyway, what you quoted is actually spanish, meaning something like "Who is this prawn"? (to confuse things even more, gambero is Italian for prawn). When I went to the Spanish page, there was nothing there - so maybe it was the one that you were referring to? Maybe they took a vote and deemed it not notable (although seeing its in a few major languages already, I'm not sure how they could come to that conclusion). I hope I wasn't too late responding. ρ¡ρρµ δ→θ∑ - (waarom? jus'b'coz!) 12:12, 2 May 2006 (UTC)

Open Day

Thanks for pointing this out - I hadn't heard about it at all. The netball doesn't seem to start until midday, so unless I'm really hungover (two birthdays and an engagement party the night before!), I think I'll have to go. I just wish my camera hadn't died. :/ Ambi 00:15, 4 May 2006 (UTC)

The sandbox revert

I reverted the IP's edits back to the revision by Sandbot, so it was almost like resetting the sandbox, and then I welcomed the IP to Wikipedia, so if the contributor from that IP thinks his edit was vandalism, just copy this message into his talk page. Brendenhull 10:43, 5 May 2006 (UTC)

Surf lifesaving is ACOTF

Hi. You voted for Surf lifesaving as Australian collaboration of the fortnight. It has now been selected, so please help to improve it in any way you can. Thanks. Scott Davis ^Talk 13:16, 7 May 2006 (UTC)

Apologies

I received the email, but I've been really busy all weekend and hadn't seen your message on my talk page until this morning. I didn't end up making it to the AIS day, as I drank rather more than expected on Saturday night and was very hungover, and the weather was so dismal I decided to stay home and watch Veronica Mars episodes all afternoon. Did you have fun/get the chance to take any photos or such? Ambi 04:15, 8 May 2006 (UTC)

French military history

The article is not supposed to cover popular conceptions of French military history, in America or any other nation. I think the article you created is misguided, but nevertheless I'll pay a visit to it once or twice. Thank you.UberCryxic 02:20, 12 May 2006 (UTC)

Would you be interested in working together to develop the article you created? I think it will be a nice learning experience. I supported you against merging btw.UberCryxic 04:25, 12 May 2006 (UTC)

The Age of reason

Andjam did you really read this message to the end?:

There have been two articles that have appeared in the sports section of The Age newspaper over the last two days that are of great interest to us. In yesterday's edition, I read that Australia Post is about to release a series of stamps to celebrate the Socceroos' attempt to embark on the impossible dream (not meaning to be disrespectful, simply an honest assessment). This new series of stamps is entitled "Soccer in Australia". When the General Manager of Australia Post was asked why use the term "soccer", he simply said that it was Australia Post's view that that is the name used by the majority of Australians, and that the word football is saved for the more dominant code of a particular area, i.e. aussie rules or league.

In today's edition, there was a great article about the proposal to heritage list the Melbourne Football Club, the oldest football club in Australia (in any code) and the third oldest in the world (in any code). It was formed in 1858, the year in which we have the first recorded game of aussie rules, the game being codified in the following year, making the game older than Association Football. Interestingly, it was once thought that the Geelong Football Club was the second oldest club in Australia (formed in July 1859), but there is now new evidence indicating that the Castlemaine Football Club was in fact formed in June 1859. That makes it the 5th oldest club in the world, and Geelong the 6th oldest club in the world. I thought to myself as I read this: How appropriate that a club evocatively called "Castlemaine" (part of a gold mining region in central Victoria) should have such an honour. It is possible that the Football article may need to be reviewed, but I mention it here just in case: 1. I run into difficulties (as I undoubtedly will), and 2. Someone out there has access to a better (or simply another) reference than this Age article.

If you had, you would have noticed that in fact it is about wikipedia. I refer to an article, and I make a direct request for further references on top of the one I had just mentioned. Now you may not like the fact that I took a long time to get there, or you might find the whole subject boring, all points with which I might be able to agree - but the reasoning you gave in the edit summary was in fact false - it seems a shabby way to treat someone fast approaching 20,000 wiki edits. Do you prefer only those part of your cosy club to form part of the notice board? Is it more a question of style? Of not fitting a certain mould? You may have thought the title of the section was not appropriate, which is fair enough, but you should then provide a more accurate description of your motivation in the edit summary. Or is it simply a case of: "I didn't like it, and that will suffice"? It would be appreciated if you could provide me with the real reason why you deleted the section. ρ¡ρρµ δ→θ∑ - (waarom? jus'b'coz!) 04:03, 18 May 2006 (UTC)

Double Voting

Hi Andjam: Thanks for your comment. It says at the top of the page that this is not a voting procedure. The second "keep" was for an entirely new point. My understanding is, that it is the points made for and against the deletion proposal that count, not the number of people who make them. Perhaps you should remove the message you placed under my "keep", because it may mislead others into thinking that this is a ballot system. --PureLogic 16:46, 25 May 2006 (UTC)

Hi Andjam, thanks for asking me. I suggest you leave it in. It might not be a vote, however, it is consensus, and double voting, double commenting, or however you describe it, is wrong if the person making such a comment highlights both comments with a bolded Keep. If PureLogic wants to make an additional comment, he is well within his rights to do so, however, he should preface such additional comments with Comment: or with no heading at all. Having a duplicate heading is deceptive. Wikilawyering aside, seeing two comments with the same heading can lead to AfD closers to misinterpret the consensus. I found your comment useful, because most of us go through dozens of AfDs, and don't have time to mark down the unique users making comments on these things. Keep on doing what you're doing. Thanks, Deathphoenix ʕ 17:14, 25 May 2006 (UTC)

Oh, and if we want to get technical about it, AfD is not a vote, however, for convenience, we often call comments that request an action (for example, Keep, Delete, Merge and redirect, Redirect, etc.) "votes" for convenience. They are still not "votes" in the strictest sense of the word. ;-) --Deathphoenix ʕ 17:18, 25 May 2006 (UTC)

Malcolm Andrews - Australia at the Olympics

There is a pre-Atlanta version. I have the pre-Sydney version by ABC books. ISBN 0 7333 0884 8. The picture on the cover is of Susie O'Neill doing butterfly. There is an article on every Olympics which Australia has attended, but the winter ones are only two paragraphs each as Australia didn't win any medals until 1994. The bios are usually only medallists + some notable/ununusual non-medalists. I was thinking of Jacqui Cooper and Kirstie Marshall, but they don't even have entries. Probably Australia and the Olympic Games by Harry Gordon is a better bet. At the moment there are only six missing in the Australian Olympic medalists in Swimming and I've added about 90-100 of them so I was hoping to finish it off. I think I made a bit of a premature FLC nom for it and didn't anticipate being swamped with about 15-20 messages and some help requests everyday since becoming an admin, so I apologize for the delay. I've actually nominated quite a few (about 11 swimmers?) of the more historical bios for WP:DYK as there are a lot of unusual things in the old days, so you might want to try for a run on the front page sometime. Blnguyen | Have your say!!! 02:24, 1 June 2006 (UTC)

My homepage

Do you mean the tripod one? I haven't updated it in years, and I didn't put any ads in it. It's the free hosting company that hosts it, that is responsible for ads. When I visited my page with Firefox everything seemed ok, but then I tested it with Internet Explorer and indeed, there is a nasty pop-up ad. I can't really do anything with it.  Grue  08:05, 1 June 2006 (UTC)

Hello

{{Smile}}

Bhadani has smiled at you! Smiles promote WikiLove and hopefully this one has made your day better. Spread the WikiLove by smiling to someone else, whether it be someone you have had disagreements with in the past or a good friend. Smile to others by adding {{subst:smile}}, {{subst:smile2}} or {{subst:smile3}} to their talk pages. Happy editing!

--Bhadani 14:22, 2 June 2006 (UTC)

Nalliah

Please spare the rude and condescending rhetoric. If you had bothered to check the talk page before reverting my edit, you would have noticed a response from me there. As such, I'll have to re-revert if you decide to revert without discussion. Rebecca 06:04, 7 June 2006 (UTC)

I initially inadvertently removed the references tag while reverting your edit. I did not, however, do that this time. Rebecca 06:16, 7 June 2006 (UTC)

Strange nudity

As per your question on the talk page of Naked Came the Stranger, the reason there's a link to the IMdb is that the novel was adapted into a movie. A porn movie, yes, but still a movie. DS 18:58, 9 June 2006 (UTC)

AFD

Please review Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/List of relationships with age disparity and please take a side.

ICC / invasion of Iraq

I note you've turned the article The International Criminal Court and the 2003 invasion of Iraq into a redirect saying it is an essay not an encyclopedia entry.

I dont understand your reasoning - could you explain? The article was part of the article Cases before the International Criminal Court and most of the material has been lost by the redirect. In effect you have done an AfD without going through the process. Please explain. AndrewRT 00:39, 17 June 2006 (UTC)

Thanks for replying. i'm still relatively new to WP and I did much of the writing of the article. You say it felt it read like an essay, rather than an article. Forgive me for being stupid but I still don't understand. What wikipedia policies did it breach? All the info was verifiable, factual, NPOV and encyclopaedic. I noted your comment on the talk page but took it as meaning improve the article not I'm about to delete it AndrewRT 11:25, 17 June 2006 (UTC)

Response

I'm getting rather frustrated at your new tendency of popping up on articles where there has never been any issue before and making allegations of bad faith. The post at list of bisexual people is a prime example - you immediately assumed that it was there as part of someone staking a claim on the article, instead of a little bit of good faith and realising that it was probably a matter of oversight.

While I'm not accusing you of being a homophobe as such, you have made persistently biased edits on the topic, often without checking your facts (the blood bank issue at Gay rights in Australia being a prime example). On other occasions, it feels to me like you're just being downright provocative, as with your latest edits to Danny Nalliah. Rebecca 11:22, 17 June 2006 (UTC)

The article about McCosker is not about the courtcase. It barely mentions it at all, and doesn't do so by name, mentioning only that it was overturned on "constitutional grounds". While there may be a case for notability here, the article as it stands seems to exist only because someone found him being a gay pedophile very interesting. I'll let it stand for the moment because AYArktos agreed that he was notable, but if the article isn't fixed up to make a more compelling case for notability soon, I'll nominate it for AfD.

More broadly, however, I've been thinking about the Nalliah disputes. It seems to me that you've come to the conclusion somehow that because I identify as queer, I must be rabidly anti-conservative. Yet this is simply not true - up until the civil union override, I was very seriously considering joining the Liberal Party, and I'll still be voting for them in November. This is why I get very frustrated when you read everything I write about conservative people in a confrontational light, and consistently read implications into my prose that either a) aren't there, or b) that I didn't intend to be there. Last night was a good example of this - you seemed to be suggesting that, by mentioning the National Party, I was trying to make some reflection on them, when I was simply trying to point out where Joyce was coming from for anyone who doesn't already know who he is. I realise that I've been quite brusque with this, and I apologise for that, but I'd really appreciate a few more assumptions of good faith. Rebecca 02:09, 18 June 2006 (UTC)

Based on that, it does sound like there could be a good case for notability, but the article doesn't make it particularly well. Could it be possible to focus it more on the twin issues of the lack of government support and the legal action?

Please don't insult my intelligence. Your edits at Danny Nalliah have not been limited to the word "conservative", so I'm still wondering what the motivation is behind your assumptions of an ulterior motive with the rest of the issues raised there. Rebecca 02:56, 18 June 2006 (UTC)

Oh, that's really rich. I try to reach out an olive branch to end this, and you not only burn it, but paste a vandal template on my talk page and threaten to block me. Charming. Rebecca 02:59, 18 June 2006 (UTC)

I'm not a fan of many of the people I write about, but that doesn't mean what I write is biased. I'm tired of being jumped on for having allegedly implied things that just aren't there, or that I didn't intend to be there, simply because I don't actually like Nalliah. Rebecca 03:17, 18 June 2006 (UTC)

Indeed. I should be more careful in future.

As for the other issue, I fixed it as soon as you brought it up. Sometimes things really are just oversight. Rebecca 03:38, 18 June 2006 (UTC)

CAIR again

Hi Nloth, Yahnatan, Andjam, PeruvianLlama,

There's another POV pusher on the CAIR article; I'm contacting you because you've recently been involved in maintaining the article. I've tried to talk things out with the guy, but he remains dedicated to removing important information from the article, and I don't have the time to deal with his long screeds and shifting rationales. Could you maybe help out here? I confess I've lost my patience with him, but would be happy to help if you could join in the discussion and brewing edit war.

Thanks,

Sdedeo (tips) 19:28, 19 June 2006 (UTC)

I see you and Sdedeo are "forming an alliance" to resist any additonal changes to the article on CAIR. This is intellectual dishonesty.

Not only are you offering excuses but accusing me of "removing important information." I did not remove any info. only edited some parts to which you are accusing me of not following "NPOV." Please stop making excuses and threatening to block me. Those are bullying tactics. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 24.225.226.57 (talk • contribs)

If this is not blanking, I don't know what is. Andjam 16:25, 25 June 2006 (UTC)

I told you that was done out of mistake, not out of malicious intent. What's malicious is you and Sdedeo trying to team up to prevent any reasonable improvements to the article. Like I said, prove to me where my entire edits have NPOV, that would justify you from removing it.

My removal of your report from AIAV

I didn't say the vandalism was "not recent", but that both of them had "stopped vandalising" by the time final warnings were issued to them. We don't need to block if the vandal has stopped after the last warning. Regards, Kimchi.sg 17:17, 25 June 2006 (UTC)

No, it doesn't. The removal of warnings on his own talk page occurred after I removed the report from AIV. The report was there for a good 12 minutes. At the worst if he insists on removing warnings his talk page may be protected, but the fact is, he was warned only 3 times for vandalism recently (including blanking his talk page). That is insufficient warning to merit a block. Kimchi.sg 17:32, 25 June 2006 (UTC)

Partisan editing

I don't have any problems with people editing articles about matters in which they are involved, or even articles about themselves, provided they declare their interest. I edit the article on the ALP even though I am an ALP member, but everyone knows I am a member so I couldn't get away with partisan editing even if I was minded to do it. Adam 13:28, 27 June 2006 (UTC)

I would appreciate it if you don't go around accusing people of doing partisan editing. I find you are the POV party restricting me from editing CAIR from a neutral perspective, including black listing me as a "sock puppet." Please stop trying everything in your book to prevent me from contributing to Wikipedia. That's taking a page from Daniel Pipes work. Tyruler 23:54, 28 June 2006 (UTC)

Please stop posting useless comments on my talk page

I would appreciate if you stop posting your partisan advice on my user talk page including instructions on editing. Thanks! Tyruler 01:47, 30 June 2006 (UTC)

Your only warning

You are not empowered to speak for other people on their user pages, and certainly not for the purpose of embarrassment or mud slinging. If you make another edit like the one I just reverted you'll be blocked from editing. --Duk 00:45, 7 July 2006 (UTC)

someone else's user page + the serious subject matter => you shouldn't have to be told not to do it. --Duk 05:33, 7 July 2006 (UTC)

OK, sorry to put you in the same category as those other idiots. --Duk 02:33, 8 July 2006 (UTC)

== How did this Start? ==

How did this meme start? Was there any particular reason the Reichstag and Spider-Man were chosen? Is this page in blatant violation of WP:BEANS? Andjam 03:04, 9 July 2006 (UTC)

I've been in this from the very start so.. This be the Legend:

Ok, so, one sunny day long, long ago (11:43, 26 June 2006), I posted the article Trigger Happy (Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Archive47#Trigger Happy ) on the WP:VPP page and also on the Administrators' noticeboard. Little did I know the response that I would get. At the end of my article I wrote: If I don't cop flack for this one, I will climb the Reichtag Bulding in a Spiderman outfit. This was the response:

• Please provide a photo of your climbing the Reichstag in a Spiderman outfit. Proto///type

• When will you be climbing the Reichstag? I'll try to be around.(and could provide the photo then) Lectonar

We are the rouge admin cabal and will block you indefinitely for violating the Wikipedia:No climbing the Reichstag dressed as Spiderman. Also, we will extend this block to everybody you have ever met because you violated Wikipedia:Don't post incidents without giving people the faintest clue what the f**k you're on about, which is definitely policy. Just zis Guy you know? 12:21, 26 June 2006 (UTC)

At this stage Wikipedia:No climbing the Reichstag dressed as Spiderman was just a link to the Hoax page. I decided then to indulge User:Proto and actualy digitaly edited a photo of myself climbing the Reichtag Bulding in a Spiderman outfit. I then posted this on the same page with the remark "Ok, but you forced me into this. Scaling a major landmark is harder than it looks". The original image has since been deleted as it violates copyright.

File:ReichstagClimb.jpg

It was at this stage that Just zis Guy you know? took it to a new level. Gone was the re-direct and those considering climbing the Reichstag in a Spiderman outfit could only tremble in fear in the shadow of the New Wikipedia:No climbing the Reichstag dressed as Spiderman page. People started going there, mainly out of curiosity, and we soon realized that we had created a monster.

I was then indefinitely bollocked for violating policy (Wikipedia:No climbing the Reichstag dressed as Spiderman). Just zis Guy you know? 10:25, 27 June 2006 (UTC)

A long battle ensued as to wheter we should keep the page on this fine website. With the help of countless people and of course the Rouge Admin and their mighty Cabal we won and here it is. The offical score was 13 points and a log to 27 points a brused backside and 3 ripped dresses.

And that, my children is how a rag-tag group of Wikipedeians got together and formed the Wikipedia:No climbing the Reichstag dressed as Spiderman page. There has been countless contributors and the battle still rages on many fronts but in the end, I think it is worth it to keep the Reichstag Spider-man free.

WP:NCR History

Dfrg.msc 09:31, 10 July 2006 (UTC)

Gay and Lesbian Kingdom of the Coral Sea Islands

Hello! Please do not remove the external links in the article - they are essential for the understanding of the history of the entity. We already have had our battles over this issue on the discussion page of the article, no need to bring it up again upon the contrahents have agreed on one version of the article. Greetings, --Vanrozenheim 23:00, 10 July 2006 (UTC)

No response to discussion

Why did you start a discussion on the David Hicks "commentary" section if you are not willing to respond to what I have said? I have made the point that removing the links removed a source of information about recent events that is not otherwise yet availaible in the article. You did not reply to this but instead have now expanded your original deletion by leaving only "official" (i.e. U.S. Military) external links. How do you justify that external links regarding Hicks should be exclusive to those linking to U.S. Military sites? --Wm 14:04, 13 July 2006 (UTC)

Re: revert

Yes, On looking thru the page i do believe they were. My apoligies, as soon as i saw the swearing i just reverted. Matthew Fenton (contribs) 07:45, 14 July 2006 (UTC)

Oops, apologies

Sorry about the lack of signature on talk pages, totally my own fault. I've rectified that. Thanks for adding the other signatures! Congirl 14:38, 30 July 2006 (UTC) Congirl

Fixing Wikipedia

• One problem I find with wikipedia is when it does not cite its references. What is your attitude towards uncited content?

Real encyclopaedias do not provide references: they are references. They do not need references because readers trust their reputation for accuracy. If Wikipedia had a reputation for accuracy it wouldn't need references. Sadly, it does not. Until it does, references will be needed for matters about which there is disagreement. If I write "Jacques Chirac is the President of France" this does not need a reference, because it is not in dispute. If I write "Jacques Chirac is a corrupt treacherous old scumbag," this does need a reference, despite being a perfectly true statement, because some people may doubt its truth.

• Some people have pretty much stopped using ISP-based email these days outside of work, since most web accounts are large enough for all they need. There would be work-related email addresses, but that would bring with it the disadvantages of using a real name. An insistance on using real names would be a problem. Some people who edit on perfectly innocent topics prefer using pseudonyms, as have historically many respectable authors of fiction. If they prefer anonymity, what about those writing about national socialism or Islamism?

Everybody editing Wikipedia should be required to provide their real name in a veriable form. I'm not a techhead so I don't have a proposal on how to do this, but it must be done if Wikipedia is to be saved from cranks and cultists. It will be objected that this will deter many people from editing. Too bad. There are 6 billion people in the world. I'm sure we can find enough of them who are willing to edit under their real names to produce a very nice encyclopaedia. The rest can go edit Whackopedia and good luck to them.

• One thing I would be interested in is for admins to have an option to ban mildly troublesome anon IPs editing articles but still being allowed to edit talk pages. (Yes, banning them altogther would be your preference, but in the meantime...)

I don't see the point in half-measures or "in the meantimes". Wikipedia should be a gated community of people with both the desire and the ability to make a useful contribution to creating an encyclopaedia, whether by writing 10,000 word articles or by correcting one semi-colon. People who have neither the desire nor the ability should be got rid of as quickly and as politely as possible.

Yours for world peace through the targetted application of overwhelming force, Adam 11:23, 1 August 2006 (UTC)

(PS Please archive this page)