General note: Personal attack directed at a specific editor on User talk:Gnangarra. (TW) |
Mitch Ames (talk | contribs) →December 2016: refutation of accusation of personal attack |
||
Line 341: | Line 341: | ||
[[Image:Information.svg|25px|alt=Information icon]] Hello, I'm [[User:Gnangarra|Gnangarra]]. I noticed that you made a comment on the page [[:User talk:Gnangarra]] that didn't seem very [[Wikipedia:Civility|civil]], so it has been removed. Wikipedia is built on collaboration, so it's one of our core principles to interact with one another in a polite and respectful manner. If you have any questions, you can leave me a message on [[User_talk:Gnangarra|my talk page]]. |
[[Image:Information.svg|25px|alt=Information icon]] Hello, I'm [[User:Gnangarra|Gnangarra]]. I noticed that you made a comment on the page [[:User talk:Gnangarra]] that didn't seem very [[Wikipedia:Civility|civil]], so it has been removed. Wikipedia is built on collaboration, so it's one of our core principles to interact with one another in a polite and respectful manner. If you have any questions, you can leave me a message on [[User_talk:Gnangarra|my talk page]]. |
||
''I have removed your accusations of lying, given your not a member and never have been one of WMAU, I have alsonoted at the link in WP:AWNB of your intent to abuse that I the attack has been removed. Enjoy Christmas'' <!-- Template:uw-npa1 --> [[User:Gnangarra|Gnan]][[User_talk:Gnangarra|garra]] 00:13, 23 December 2016 (UTC) |
''I have removed your accusations of lying, given your not a member and never have been one of WMAU, I have alsonoted at the link in WP:AWNB of your intent to abuse that I the attack has been removed. Enjoy Christmas'' <!-- Template:uw-npa1 --> [[User:Gnangarra|Gnan]][[User_talk:Gnangarra|garra]] 00:13, 23 December 2016 (UTC) |
||
:<small>Diffs, for reference: [https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk:Gnangarra&diff=756155843&oldid=755649314 my post], [https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk:Gnangarra&diff=756253064&oldid=756155843 Gnangarra's reply], [https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk:Gnangarra&diff=next&oldid=756253064 deletion of posts].</small> |
|||
:{{ping|Gnangarra}} I think your accusation of [https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:Australian_Wikipedians%27_notice_board&diff=756253347&oldid=756155954 "personal attack"] is unfounded. I did not accuse you of lying; I pointed out an apparent discrepancy between what you said about WMAU's [https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:Australian_Wikipedians%27_notice_board&diff=prev&oldid=755997918 requirement to represent its members] and [https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:Australian_Wikipedians%27_notice_board&diff=next&oldid=756008720 primary purpose], and what Wikimedia Australia's [https://wikimedia.org.au/wiki/Statement_of_Purpose Statement of Purpose] says, in particular as to whether WMAU requirements, aims and purposes are limited in scope to WMAU members. |
|||
:Whether or I am a member of WMAU is irrelevant to the existence of that discrepancy, or the civility of the wording I used to point out the discrepancy. |
|||
:Per {{section link|WP:NPA|Avoiding personal attacks}}: |
|||
{{talkquote| |
|||
When there are disagreements about ''content'', referring to other editors is not always a personal attack. A posting that says "Your statement about ''X'' is wrong because of information at ''Y''" ... is ''not'' a personal attack. ... |
|||
... The appropriate response to an inflammatory statement is to address the issues of content rather than to accuse the other person of violating this policy. |
|||
}} |
|||
: Please restore the discussion on your talk page and address the issue of content, i.e. whether WMAU acts primarily in its ''members''' interests, or the interests of the wider community, when fulfilling the aim and purpose declared at https://wikimedia.org.au/wiki/Statement_of_Purpose. [[User:Mitch Ames|Mitch Ames]] ([[User talk:Mitch Ames#top|talk]]) 02:51, 23 December 2016 (UTC) |
Revision as of 02:51, 23 December 2016
October Challenge
Take me off your watchlist, start and create an article of your own about something you know about in Perth Western Australia that doesnt involve correcting my edits. I know it will be very very very hard, but it is years now that you have followed my edits, and I am tiring of it, and as I am about to do a very large number of edits to do with western australia, common sense decency would be for you to leave me alone, at least for one month after so many years...let someone else clean the mistakes up, there are enough carrion on this goldfishbowl, and please dont re-post part of this message and pull it apart, thanks JarrahTree 14:14, 1 October 2016 (UTC)
- In all AGF it is just a suggestion, I cannot stop you from trawling through things, and I know there are all the various clauses and claws about such requestes, I just think it would be really great to see your other side, the capacity to create your own articles, surely you can draw that out, rather than piggy backing on others material? JarrahTree 14:36, 1 October 2016 (UTC)
- but please take it in the right spirit - descend on my scrappy stubs and pull them apart piece by piece on the talk pages if you so wish (and as you have done so for almost 5 years or more, who knows), just do not let it be said that I didnt put you up to doing something of your own from your own bat !!! JarrahTree 05:40, 2 October 2016 (UTC)
cleaning up after others
(viz iron ore mine cat/subcat) yup told to cleanup they walk away and dont fix their issues... never ending... sigh JarrahTree 10:25, 6 October 2016 (UTC)
- Just as well we have WikiGnomes, trawling through things, to clean the mistakes up. Mitch Ames (talk) 11:47, 6 October 2016 (UTC)
- sheesh seeing some of the stuff you uncover, I suspect there should be the order of the ferret that over-rides the timidity of the gnome, where no parent child cat combo remain unturned, so to speej JarrahTree 13:16, 6 October 2016 (UTC)
problem
Koolan Island and Koolyanobbing in the iron ore mines in australia main cat are both fictitious as they are redirect to locality articles - what would you do?
- remove the redirect names from the australian iron ore mine - and put the locality articles into the wa cat? just a thought JarrahTree 13:25, 6 October 2016 (UTC)
- Koolan Island mine, Koolyanobbing mine, Category:Iron mines in Australia
- The seem like reasonable examples of 2nd bullet point in Wikipedia:Redirect § Categorizing redirect pages:
... a redirect is placed in an article category because the form of the redirected title is more appropriate to the context of that category
- in particular the island and the town themselves are not mines.
- Possibly the redirects should be categorized to the more specific Category: Iron ore mines in Western Australia - but it's not clear to me what the difference is between an "iron mine" and an "iron ore mine" - surely they don't just dig pure iron out of the ground! Note that iron mine redirects to iron ore so that doesn't help. Maybe it "iron" vs "ore" is a question of percentage of metal vs rock. More research is required, but I have other plans for this evening. Mitch Ames (talk) 12:30, 9 October 2016 (UTC)
- "
Possibly the redirects should be categorized to the more specific Category: Iron ore mines in Western Australia
" – Done. Of course there were more than just the ones you mentioned... See my recent edits for details. Mitch Ames (talk) 03:23, 10 October 2016 (UTC)
- "
- Iron mine and iron ore mine are synonyms - I was thinking if both articles are about towns, prehaps the only way to go is separate stubs about the mines might be the better way to go - because of the likelihood of reliable sources as they both are historic mine sites (and likelihood of trove entries) they are more likely to stand alone as stubs... JarrahTree 13:31, 9 October 2016 (UTC)
Iron mine and iron ore mine are synonyms
– I've requested a speedy rename of the WA category: [1][2]. Mitch Ames (talk) 02:55, 10 October 2016 (UTC)
- oh well you cannot win anything on wikipedia - er hahah gah - Iron ore mines is the common usage in western australia - I would have changed the rest of australian regardless of what the rest of the world does - hahaha - gah JarrahTree 03:15, 10 October 2016 (UTC)
- Feel free to comment at Wikipedia:Categories for discussion/Speedy#Current nominations, if you think others will support your view. Mitch Ames (talk) 03:18, 10 October 2016 (UTC)
- Thanks for that,
- In outer space they cannot hear you scream :) Alien (film) or [3] I am sure good sense will prevail :| JarrahTree 03:32, 10 October 2016 (UTC)
- Feel free to comment at Wikipedia:Categories for discussion/Speedy#Current nominations, if you think others will support your view. Mitch Ames (talk) 03:18, 10 October 2016 (UTC)
- oh well you cannot win anything on wikipedia - er hahah gah - Iron ore mines is the common usage in western australia - I would have changed the rest of australian regardless of what the rest of the world does - hahaha - gah JarrahTree 03:15, 10 October 2016 (UTC)
- imho - the comment by our albany stalwart - means the whole world catgory needs to be changed :) JarrahTree 13:04, 10 October 2016 (UTC)
- Another worm escapes from the can ... Mitch Ames (talk) 14:03, 10 October 2016 (UTC)
- imho - the comment by our albany stalwart - means the whole world catgory needs to be changed :) JarrahTree 13:04, 10 October 2016 (UTC)
- the number of times that I find that categories and things have been created by non native speakers or people not apt with english, I wouldnt be suprised that there are situations like this everywhere... (best ask our albany ed directly I say) JarrahTree 14:08, 10 October 2016 (UTC)
List and category
Nah, its spring the birds are singing the temp is up, best to leap into new forms of thinking, iron mine sounds like a lost genre of nineteenth century gothic music... if the tendency of companies, government and media in western australia is to call them iron ore mines and not iron mines, that for me is better than a google check... as for courtesy - nah, show me courteous editors on this thing - let me offer some reflections on that at the meetup :) JarrahTree 08:47, 11 October 2016 (UTC)
grrrrrrr
this is why i gave you the october challenge to not follow my edits like a rubbish bin fly on a lump of rotting meat on a darwin tip during the buildup
WP:AGF precludes the response I would like to apart from grrr
- Mundaring weir is a locality (as in Lead sentence) and a dam - it does not deserve 2 articles - so that is why they are conflated
- Mundaring weir branch railway - was implicit in the construction of the weir/the goldfields scheme (look at the qualifying statement i put on the category) ((ie the scheme wouldnt have happened if the pwd hadnt made it) - and runs between the two locations Mundaring and Mundaring weir.
This is not for noticeboards - no one else usually ventures into our arguments they just leave them sitting there like unthrown flower bombs in soggy paper, lets just keep it between ourselfs JarrahTree 12:14, 11 October 2016 (UTC)
- OK, Mundaring Weir was a locality/suburb, but is it currently an "official postal subdivision of a city"? Is/Should it be in the List of Perth suburbs? Do/Should we have a list/category of past/historical suburbs, or should the list/cat explicitly state that includes past/historical suburbs as well as current ones? Mitch Ames (talk) 12:33, 11 October 2016 (UTC)
Thanks - A very very good point - there lies the problem of things where localities and historical items or issues/structures get put together because smarties say the items do not deserve a separate article (my favourite in the past was the Cape Sorel Waverider Bouy sheesh there are what shuld be 4 separate articles entrenched in the Cape Sorrel article imho) problem is in the past 'mundaring weir' has been in various ways attributed to:
- historical Locality - now diff on road maps I think - 2013 UBD it is now split between mundaring 6073 and sawyers valley 6074
- the weir itself - the wall
- the water behind the weir - now known as lake c y o'connor
- the railway station/stopping place
But your question raises an important issue - mundaring weir was a historic locality but it no longer exists per se
also - where an article is conflated with different subjects - the potential category is problem - can a suburb/locality be identified as also something like a dam.... JarrahTree 12:55, 11 October 2016 (UTC)
- Mundaring Weir Branch Railway - my edit remove categories in accordance with WP:SUBCAT: "a page ... should rarely be placed in both a category and a subcategory or parent category (supercategory) of that category". If you think I've misinterpreted the policy please say so. If you think I've misunderstood the existing hierarchy, please say so. If you think it meets one of the exception criteria, please say so, and which one. Mitch Ames (talk) 12:40, 11 October 2016 (UTC)
- the problem is that the policy is linear, the subject is multdimensional -
- The PWD constructed it first
- It served (in the phraseology of the most annoying sock) in the construction of' the weir, for the goldfields water scheme
- it was taken over by the wagr
I agree with you wholehartedly about subcats not being in the same place where parent cats exist - it stinks as bad as my analogy at top
but there has to be a way of doing the heriarchy, but I am stuffed that the current form (as you have edited it) makes no sense to me. I plead insanity clause and think about it unless some smart page watcher chirps in and confounds us both. I need to some dumb tagging on talk pages to get me out of the confusion. speak later JarrahTree 13:04, 11 October 2016 (UTC)
- "
the policy is linear, the subject is multdimensional
"
WP:CAT allows for multiple overlapping hierarchies and "an item may belong to several subcategories of a parent category". - "
the current form (as you have edited it) makes no sense to me
So far as I recall, I simply removed redundant categories, without changing the cat hierarchy - on the presumption that existing cat hierarchy was correct. If the hierarchy is wrong, feel free to fix it. (It looks OK on the face of it, but I'm not a subject-matter expert.) - (Of course some times I make mistakes and accidentally remove the wrong category - and someone usually (and rightly) points out my error and I or they fix it. I don't think that's the case here, but link to the specific edit(s) if you think it is.)
- Mitch Ames (talk) 13:29, 11 October 2016 (UTC)
- if you check, most items we discuss have zilch watchers, the question at the weir article about adding a link to a Screenwest joint publication from 2011 which was researched by Barry Strickland is back into the screaming in space stuff, no one gonna reply. : the specific rights to the movie is (C) 2011 National Film and Sound Archive, Prospero Productions and Screenwest - not sure the concern about the copyright of thecontents are relevant - The credits at the rear (53 to 55 minutes) credit the researcher and a range of sources, and even books. I see no particular point in adding it. JarrahTree 13:25, 11 October 2016 (UTC)
this above is why I think about rubbish bin flies in tropical environments - where did all this come from, where did it go, it smells yes, but... 11:43, 12 October 2016 (UTC)
- Well I know where it came from... Mitch Ames (talk) 11:51, 12 October 2016 (UTC)
seasonality
spring events in perth are a very specifically framed set of events - ag shows, and a whole range of events are reliant on milder weather or they fail.. simple as that - it rains people dont go - so there was a good reason for that, rather than reverting my edits, think... thanks JarrahTree 15:22, 16 October 2016 (UTC)
- So add words to that effect to the article, with appropriate references of course. The only mention I could find that explicitly linked spring (the season, not the street) and Perth Heritage Days was ""Government House and its gardens ... annual free spring Open Day in support of Heritage Perth’s ‘Heritage Days’." Mitch Ames (talk) 01:18, 17 October 2016 (UTC)
- well jolly good for that - see the next item :) JarrahTree 01:24, 17 October 2016 (UTC)
- Re: [4] - WP:SEASON still applies. The article needs one or both of:
- an explicit indication of when in the year the days are, because using seasons to refer to a particular time of year is ambiguous.
- an explicit statement that it happens in spring because the weather is nice - given that the season name is not part of a formal or conventional name or designation.
- Mitch Ames (talk) 03:38, 17 October 2016 (UTC)
- I don't think that Adding original research to a footnote is sufficient. It's OR because the ref does not say that events are scheduled to spring season to prevent being washed out by rain or overheated. Note also that the ref says that Govt House Open Day is in support of Heritage Days - not the other way around. Ie Heritage Days are not scheduled to meet Govt House spring Open Days - the ref tells us nothing about why Heritage Days are when they are. (And those not familiar with Perth seasons still don't know what time of the year it is.) Mitch Ames (talk) 07:16, 17 October 2016 (UTC)
- Of course this whole conversation really belongs on the talk page of the article ... Mitch Ames (talk) 07:17, 17 October 2016 (UTC)
- Re: [4] - WP:SEASON still applies. The article needs one or both of:
- well jolly good for that - see the next item :) JarrahTree 01:24, 17 October 2016 (UTC)
this bloody jungle
I simply wanted to work on heritage trails in metro perth and wa
- despite there being in excess of 1,000 articles on wikipedia that mention a 'heritage trail' there was not a single article about what they are
- silly old me then goes and creates and finds things related that are a mess (as usual)
- and I bet even if you were feeling athletic you wouldnt want to link them to the article? (all the articles that use the term heritage trail)
etc etc etc monday morning brr and grr JarrahTree 01:15, 17 October 2016 (UTC)
thanks for that - once again useful stuff :) JarrahTree 03:24, 17 October 2016 (UTC)
TheLongTone
What really makes me mad is that its obvious TheLongTone knows nothing of the cases he nominates - he recently nominated Disappearance of Eloise Worledge, one of Australia's most famous crimes - he just has a grudge against Wikipedia covering disappearances and murders, calling it "guff". Paul Benjamin Austin (talk) 00:59, 19 October 2016 (UTC)
show
I think if you are gong to do that - have a look at a all the wheatbelt articles and categories - in most cases if a named area has a category - it is all included, council, town and related issues. JarrahTree 02:40, 24 October 2016 (UTC).
Hi Mitch
Why not include a ==See also== * Wathaurong Aboriginal Co-operative on the Wathaurung Aboriginal Corporation article? There is some confusion between the two groups.Garyvines (talk) 11:47, 29 October 2016 (UTC)
- Because Wathaurong Aboriginal Co-operative is linked in the body text of the article and WP:NOTSEEALSO says:
... the "See also" section should not repeat links that appear in the article's body...
- Mitch Ames (talk) 11:52, 29 October 2016 (UTC)
historically incorrect
The Playhouse Theatre was in Pier Street before Cathedral Square was known as such.
You got it wrong - so cathedral square needs to be removed and pier street needs to be put back in for historic accuracy JarrahTree 00:09, 31 October 2016 (UTC)
- Hmmmm, I'm off to work in a few minutes - will think about this and look at it later... Mitch Ames (talk) 00:11, 31 October 2016 (UTC)
np - good to here about work ! JarrahTree 00:23, 31 October 2016 (UTC)
@JarrahTree: As is usually the case with my edits to remove parent categories, I assume that the existing categories and hierarchy tree are correct (other than the redundant inclusion in parent and child categories).
According to the text in Category:Cathedral Square, Perth, that category is for "articles about ... structures ... in the city block bounded by St Georges Terrace, Hay Street, Barrack Street and Pier Street ...". It doesn't say that they need to have existed when the block had the name Cathedral Square - should it? If so, I suppose if the Theatre was demolished before the Square was named then one could argue that the Theatre was never in the Square, so should not be in that category (and thus should be in cat:Pier St). According to The Playhouse Theatre (Perth), the theatre was "demolished in in October 2012 as part of a redevelopment of Cathedral Square" - but when precisely was Cathedral Square named? Do we have timeline of the names for the Cathedral and Treasury Precinct, Cathedral Precinct, and Cathedral Square? The article doesn't include the dates for the names, but it should, if we can get them - independently of how we categorise the article. Mitch Ames (talk) 13:09, 31 October 2016 (UTC)
- My understanding that the 'names' are recent as in post 2014 - very unlikely that the names are specifically geographic names committee registered in any way - more like business names if anything - JarrahTree 13:22, 31 October 2016 (UTC)
thanks
Done re the weird and wonderful koongamia sculpture, I do not like it...it is grotesque... JarrahTree 13:33, 3 November 2016 (UTC)
copyvio
which direction though? who copied who?
http://www.york.wa.gov.au/information-services/information-history.aspx https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/York,_Western_Australia
your serve sir... safer than wandering into archaeological ventures.... JarrahTree 09:04, 6 November 2016 (UTC)
- I'd say that http://www.york.wa.gov.au/information-services/information-history.aspx has been copied from Wikipedia. If you look through historical versions of the Wikipedia article (back to 2006) you can see the evolution of the text to the current version. Typically copyvios appear in a single edit (of a few, in a short space of time). Mitch Ames (talk) 12:21, 6 November 2016 (UTC)
hell you are a deviant of the highest order - I ask you to confirm a copyvio and your bloody subcat obsession overr-rides as you pounce on my edits again. show some creativity sir, some capacity to read the web and the wiki versions of york. Leave the bloody heritage stuff alone, please. JarrahTree 10:58, 6 November 2016 (UTC)
W.A. Heritage Trails Network categorization
New section heading inserted for discussing these edits: [5][6][7]. Mitch Ames (talk) 23:16, 6 November 2016 (UTC)
- Negotiation not required in this case - the WA Trails network is a system of trails AND places, if your conception of subcat cannot cope: ? My advice is to leave alone. Policy schmolssy, the end of the world might start on wednesday, enjoy the flowers while you can. I am not shifting from the point that I believe there is a place for subcat to be given the boot and ignored when reality says otherwise JarrahTree 11:08, 6 November 2016 (UTC)
... the WA Trails network is a system of trails AND places ...
— That may be the case, but it does not invalidate my edit. WP:SUBCAT is quite clear: "Apart from certain exceptions ..., an article should be categorised ... without duplication in parent categories above it."- If you think Category:Heritage trails in Western Australia should be a {{Non-diffusing subcategory}}, say so.
- If you think some other exception explicitly stated in WP:SUBCAT applies, say so.
- If you think I've misinterpreted WP:SUBCAT, say so explicitly, and how you interpret it.
- If you think we should WP:Ignore all rules in this case, say so explicitly, and why.
- I'll probably disagree with you, but at least we can then focus on discussing the particular relevant point, instead of vague generalities, and/or ask for opinions from other editors on that point. Mitch Ames (talk) 23:27, 6 November 2016 (UTC)
- Negotiation not required in this case - the WA Trails network is a system of trails AND places, if your conception of subcat cannot cope: ? My advice is to leave alone. Policy schmolssy, the end of the world might start on wednesday, enjoy the flowers while you can. I am not shifting from the point that I believe there is a place for subcat to be given the boot and ignored when reality says otherwise JarrahTree 11:08, 6 November 2016 (UTC)
reply
Heading demoted because this is a continuation of #W.A. Heritage Trails Network categorization, in response to [8] Mitch Ames (talk) 11:52, 10 November 2016 (UTC)
WP:AGF prevents any response JarrahTree 00:00, 10 November 2016 (UTC)
- WP:AGF says, in its first paragraph: "Assuming good faith does not prohibit discussion and criticism." Mitch Ames (talk) 00:20, 10 November 2016 (UTC)
- Maybe, real life prevents me from taking the time to do so, to the extent that it has occurred on this talk page or others, sorry JarrahTree 00:23, 10 November 2016 (UTC)
- I for one see no productive outcome from laying out things like above. My assertion that there are two categories do fit the measure, means whatever can be done to accommodate would be great if it was possible without the case being laid out like a kilomotres washing on the pavement. Simply, just go with the 2 cats and give it a label if that satisfies you. If you revert to to make it nonsense just to satisfy some specified rule, I am not venturing further in discussion. There is so much else out there, other than my edits, that you could fix. JarrahTree 10:03, 10 November 2016 (UTC)
- I've reverted, so that it complies with the accepted-by-consensus guideline WP:SUBCAT. I'm sure that you understand "how wikipedia works in its core category trees to maintain a universally accepted format that editors abide by to sustain a commonly agreed form - consensus built structure", "rather than an assertion of personal belief as opposed to standard practice". Mitch Ames (talk) 12:27, 10 November 2016 (UTC)
- I for one see no productive outcome from laying out things like above. My assertion that there are two categories do fit the measure, means whatever can be done to accommodate would be great if it was possible without the case being laid out like a kilomotres washing on the pavement. Simply, just go with the 2 cats and give it a label if that satisfies you. If you revert to to make it nonsense just to satisfy some specified rule, I am not venturing further in discussion. There is so much else out there, other than my edits, that you could fix. JarrahTree 10:03, 10 November 2016 (UTC)
- Maybe, real life prevents me from taking the time to do so, to the extent that it has occurred on this talk page or others, sorry JarrahTree 00:23, 10 November 2016 (UTC)
Warratyi has been nominated for Did You Know
Hello, Mitch Ames. Warratyi, an article you either created or to which you significantly contributed,has been nominated to appear on Wikipedia's Main Page as part of Did you know. You can see the hook and the discussion here. You are welcome to participate! Thank you. APersonBot (talk!) 12:01, 12 November 2016 (UTC)
because
so many start from us centric basis the whole tourism/tour/walk thing is a veritable mess (take Theater for instance) I have neither the time nor the disposition to even think about heritage place heritage trail distinction that I insist are the same. another life perhaps. not today JarrahTree 00:27, 15 November 2016 (UTC)
- The other thing is that heritage trails lurk in articles that are not identified as such, so you cannot take titles fro granted - just like different terminology in the usa - they may be called other things in europe etc so diligence is trying to extract synonyms from diff countries and cultures to have a proper cross wki appreciation of the subject JarrahTree 00:38, 15 November 2016 (UTC)
- Yes, I know, Wikipedia is a work in progress. Like the allegorical thousand-mile journey, we must take those first steps. We might never get to the end of the journey, but we'll see some worthwhile places along the way. Mitch Ames (talk) 00:51, 15 November 2016 (UTC)
- optimisim will never get you anywhere and doesnt pay the subway fare JarrahTree 00:53, 15 November 2016 (UTC)
- Yes, I know, Wikipedia is a work in progress. Like the allegorical thousand-mile journey, we must take those first steps. We might never get to the end of the journey, but we'll see some worthwhile places along the way. Mitch Ames (talk) 00:51, 15 November 2016 (UTC)
- The other thing is that heritage trails lurk in articles that are not identified as such, so you cannot take titles fro granted - just like different terminology in the usa - they may be called other things in europe etc so diligence is trying to extract synonyms from diff countries and cultures to have a proper cross wki appreciation of the subject JarrahTree 00:38, 15 November 2016 (UTC)
DYK for Warratyi
On 17 November 2016, Did you know was updated with a fact from the article Warratyi, which you recently created, substantially expanded, or brought to good article status. The nomination discussion and review may be seen at Template:Did you know nominations/Warratyi. You are welcome to check how many page hits the article got while on the front page (here's how, Warratyi), and it may be added to the statistics page if the total is over 5,000. Finally, if you know of an interesting fact from another recently created article, then please feel free to suggest it on the Did you know talk page.
Materialscientist (talk) 00:51, 17 November 2016 (UTC)
pity
a range of things and conventions prevent a fairly voluble and vitriolic vent at the wa project... JarrahTree 01:39, 21 November 2016 (UTC)
- Feel free to add polite and civil comments instead, if you think such comments will help us improve Wikipedia, or (Western) Australian articles therein. Mitch Ames (talk) 03:04, 21 November 2016 (UTC)
- bollocks JarrahTree 03:23, 21 November 2016 (UTC)
Scientologists
The only reason I changed the dates is because the article was tagged with 'Use DMY dates', which I now noticed was added by someone after you created the article. Dan arndt (talk) 04:48, 21 November 2016 (UTC)
network
The network is not a heritage trail. JarrahTree 09:44, 21 November 2016 (UTC)
- I suppose you could argue that the network is an abstract concept, and a network of X is not an X, but similarly an island is not a sound, nor is an expedition, a pamphlet, a print, or a barque.
- Also people are not "births" or "deaths", so there's a lot of articles to be removed from subcategories of Category:Births by year and Category:Deaths by year.
- Fortunately topic categories exist to contain articles relating to the topic. Mitch Ames (talk) 11:08, 21 November 2016 (UTC)
- as for the idea of heritage trails being part of culture of wa, bollocks and worse JarrahTree 14:07, 22 November 2016 (UTC)
- also the heritage trails include heritage places. There is nothing linking the re-consistuted arrangement of the heritage trails to the fact they are in some cases also networks of heritage places - not necessarily heritage trails per se... JarrahTree 14:13, 22 November 2016 (UTC)
- done. Mitch Ames (talk) 11:36, 23 November 2016 (UTC)
ArbCom Elections 2016: Voting now open!
Hello, Mitch Ames. Voting in the 2016 Arbitration Committee elections is open from Monday, 00:00, 21 November through Sunday, 23:59, 4 December to all unblocked users who have registered an account before Wednesday, 00:00, 28 October 2016 and have made at least 150 mainspace edits before Sunday, 00:00, 1 November 2016.
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 2016 election, please review the candidates' statements and submit your choices on the voting page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 22:08, 21 November 2016 (UTC)
you have to be kidding
that is feeding a troll, you must have rocks... JarrahTree 08:28, 24 November 2016 (UTC)
Some hintAn explicit link to the diff/post to which you refer would be helpful here. It's not always obvious what you are talking about. Mitch Ames (talk) 08:33, 24 November 2016 (UTC)- I agree JarrahTree 03:48, 3 December 2016 (UTC)
Estuaries and inlets
yup a conundrum - inlets that are estuaries and estuaries that are not inlets, inlets called that that are estuaries, and inlets that are not estuaries. JarrahTree 05:52, 3 December 2016 (UTC)
- any thoughts on this ? JarrahTree 06:17, 3 December 2016 (UTC)
- if you are able - this is it -
- any thoughts on this ? JarrahTree 06:17, 3 December 2016 (UTC)
Turner, Lynne; Tracey, Dieter; Tilden, Jan; Dennison, William (2006), Where River Meets Sea : Exploring Australia's Estuaries, CSIRO Pub, ISBN 978-0-643-10303-0 JarrahTree 06:29, 3 December 2016 (UTC)
- As I mentioned on the phone, geography is not my strong point. However, even if the definition of estuaries and inlets overlap (without one being a subset of the other), it is still reasonable to
- 1 - include both in the single article Estuaries of Western Australia, and
- 2 - categorise them:
- 2.1 - independently as Category:Estuaries of Western Australia and Category:Inlets of Western Australia, or
- 2.2 - collectively as Category:Estuaries and Inlets of Western Australia
- We currently have 1, which could be renamed to Estuaries and Inlets of Western Australia (and the lead sentence reworded accordingly).
- 2.1 could be converted to 2.2 by raising a WP:CFD to merge the two categories.
- For comparison, note that we have Category:Estuaries of Australia (a container category) with subcats for each state, but no other "Estuaries of state" articles. We have Category:Inlets of Australia but no subcats for other states, and no "Inlets of state" articles.
- Does that help, or does it just muddy the waters? Mitch Ames (talk) 07:56, 3 December 2016 (UTC)
- Muddy Waters 1 and 2,2 I think minimizes danger to all... (no animals of any dimension have been destroyed to create this adaption?)
The eventual inclusion of a whole range of inlets/estuaries of other states requires a big search through river and coast articles ...JarrahTree 08:08, 3 December 2016 (UTC)
- I count 6 Xxxx Inlets in Category:Estuaries of Western Australia, suggesting that either they need to be moved, or the categories merged. Some of those are defined in the lead sentence as:
- inlet -- Culham Inlet
- estuarine inlet --Gordon Inlet
- estuarine lagoon -- Leschenault Estuary
- estuarine body of water -- Nornalup Inlet
- estuary -- Walcott Inlet
- This is why I did not like geography at school! Mitch Ames (talk) 08:36, 3 December 2016 (UTC)
- nothing to do with geography - english and shades of ambiguity and subtle expression differences - they are all estuaries - read their lede paras JarrahTree 09:36, 3 December 2016 (UTC)
- But rivers? Mitch Ames (talk) 09:39, 3 December 2016 (UTC)
- at bloody last - OK i got the eureka moment - inlets do not by condition necessarily have inflowing rivers - they can have everything that estuaries have but their condition does not have or necessarily require rivers - they can have them, but...
- But rivers? Mitch Ames (talk) 09:39, 3 December 2016 (UTC)
- nothing to do with geography - english and shades of ambiguity and subtle expression differences - they are all estuaries - read their lede paras JarrahTree 09:36, 3 December 2016 (UTC)
ergo etc
- so that Turner et al title 'where river meets sea' - which means that estuaries by definition must have a contributing river - bugger that took too long to get to - the synonymic character of inlets and estuaries is their condition of 'enclosed body of water' in some way... viz peel inlet and harvey estuary... hmm go figure...
that took too long to get to - JarrahTree 11:03, 3 December 2016 (UTC)
see noticeboard
for my reservations, conditions apply... JarrahTree 23:38, 3 December 2016 (UTC)
disambig
I know some disambig watchers get just a little annoyed by red links at the best of the times. In the case of the SA and Vic setups - both the locations that are identified have links to non existent articles (the link is blue but the end point is a non existent article) - to me that is not on. Even if there are links to the rare usages inside trove, no one has bothered to write articles to substantiate the usage of the term against low level usage or obscure points - I see no reason to leave the links at the disambig putting the red link for the north american term seems also somewhat missing the point - if there is an article or synonymic term - link it! JarrahTree 02:41, 5 December 2016 (UTC)
- bollocks - please do not redistribute or refactor talk page comments that I make - JarrahTree 08:36, 5 December 2016 (UTC)
- Then please put your comments on the appropriate talk page in the first place. Comments address to me on my talk page are fine when it's a discussion between two of us, but we both know perfectly well that this matter concerns other editors, so belongs on the talk page of the article/DAB under discussion (or in the general discussion at WP:AWNB#creeping wheatbelt). Mitch Ames (talk) 13:29, 5 December 2016 (UTC)
- bollocks - please do not redistribute or refactor talk page comments that I make - JarrahTree 08:36, 5 December 2016 (UTC)
- bollocks again - see the vast number of responses (not) at the AWNB - instead of listing things why dont you put the references somewhere, maybe in an article perhaps... JarrahTree 00:46, 11 December 2016 (UTC)
been here before
- Presumed to be about this edit... Mitch Ames (talk) 13:02, 19 December 2016 (UTC)>You are being very erudite yourself when you do that one in between your incisive fremantle edits JarrahTree 13:09, 19 December 2016 (UTC)
Absolute crap - The Eastern Goldfields railway goes from Northam to Kalgoorlie - that is two regions.
Supcat b-s.
removed Category:Goldfields-Esperance using HotCat - supercat of Category:Goldfields Water Supply Scheme - see WP:SUBCAT
holy mackeral and trump pie - goldfields water supply scheme runs from mundaring to kalgoorlie as well as some side lines in the wheateblt - it does not relate to any one region - there are technically three at mimumum
- eastern goldfields railway exists in the wheatbelt and the goldfields
how a railway line, a pipeline and region get caught with you playing with category rules must be some terrible disaster waiting to happen
It is like you get into headbanging level of circular brick wall dicusssions, you sure youre not a recovering or retired punk rocker ? JarrahTree 13:09, 19 December 2016 (UTC)
- So fix whichever one of these things you think is wrong:
- Eastern Goldfields Railway belongs in Category:Goldfields Water Supply Scheme wrong
- Category:Goldfields Water Supply Scheme belongs in Category:Kalgoorlie-Boulder wrong
- Category:Kalgoorlie-Boulder belongs in Category:Goldfields-Esperance
- WP:SUBCAT: "... an article should be categorised as low down in the category hierarchy as possible, without duplication in parent categories above it. ... a page or category should rarely be placed in both a category and a subcategory or parent category (supercategory) of that category..."
crap - there has to be facility for cats that can have more flexibility than abide by such a guideline
So fix ? aha, the death of wikipedia - do it yourself... you would have fun on commons...
- New Years purgatory/resolution for mitch -
- to not edit cats or subcats pertaining to WP:SUBCAT for at least...
- to go to check every edit by User:Wwikix the blocked category fxxxxx / fiddler
JarrahTree 13:24, 19 December 2016 (UTC)
- Wrong? That's what happens when we let anyone edit the articles. Mitch Ames (talk) 11:59, 20 December 2016 (UTC)
"there has to be facility for cats that can have more flexibility than abide by such a guideline"
There are some exceptions, eg WP:EPONYMOUS, WP:DUPCAT, but they do not apply here. Of course you are welcome to propose a change to WP:SUBCAT if you think others will agree with you. Mitch Ames (talk) 11:59, 20 December 2016 (UTC)
- usual go mowhere stuff, how come you arent making sheer terror at my freo edits yet... JarrahTree 12:05, 20 December 2016 (UTC)
"how come you arent making sheer terror at my freo edits yet"
- Because I'm not explicitly following your edits
- Because not every WA article is currently on my watchlist (yet!)
- Because you haven't added the new articles to Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Western Australia so I don't necessary know of their existence
- That being said, I just had a quick look through your recent edit history and see that some of the new articles sorely need copy-editing (please read WP:REFPUNCT when you have a few spare minutes!) so I've bookmarked them for future review.
- If you specifically want me to copy-edit anything, let me know, and/or add new articles to Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Western Australia. Mitch Ames (talk) 13:00, 20 December 2016 (UTC)
- usual go mowhere stuff, how come you arent making sheer terror at my freo edits yet... JarrahTree 12:05, 20 December 2016 (UTC)
- hahaha for most of that, ok for some, .... JarrahTree 14:46, 20 December 2016 (UTC)
oh well
btw have a very safe and multa-nova free christmas and new year and take care! JarrahTree 13:51, 19 December 2016 (UTC)
if
you even think of touching anything to do with the fremantle thing, I will go for you to have a topic ban. seriously. WP:AGF prevents me from responding in the way I would like. Leave your f ing sub cat crap well away from Fremantle. please JarrahTree 12:06, 21 December 2016 (UTC)
- (I presume you're replying to User_talk:JarrahTree#Category:Fremantle_West_End_Heritage_area ...)
- WP:SUBCAT is a well established guideline. I know that you know this. If you don't like the guideline, propose a change to it. Otherwise, follow it.
- As I suggested, Category:Fremantle West End Heritage area looks like an ideal candidate for {{All included}}. Mitch Ames (talk) 12:21, 21 December 2016 (UTC)
December 2016
Hello, I'm Gnangarra. I noticed that you made a comment on the page User talk:Gnangarra that didn't seem very civil, so it has been removed. Wikipedia is built on collaboration, so it's one of our core principles to interact with one another in a polite and respectful manner. If you have any questions, you can leave me a message on my talk page. I have removed your accusations of lying, given your not a member and never have been one of WMAU, I have alsonoted at the link in WP:AWNB of your intent to abuse that I the attack has been removed. Enjoy Christmas Gnangarra 00:13, 23 December 2016 (UTC)
- Diffs, for reference: my post, Gnangarra's reply, deletion of posts.
- @Gnangarra: I think your accusation of "personal attack" is unfounded. I did not accuse you of lying; I pointed out an apparent discrepancy between what you said about WMAU's requirement to represent its members and primary purpose, and what Wikimedia Australia's Statement of Purpose says, in particular as to whether WMAU requirements, aims and purposes are limited in scope to WMAU members.
- Whether or I am a member of WMAU is irrelevant to the existence of that discrepancy, or the civility of the wording I used to point out the discrepancy.
- Per WP:NPA § Avoiding personal attacks:
When there are disagreements about content, referring to other editors is not always a personal attack. A posting that says "Your statement about X is wrong because of information at Y" ... is not a personal attack. ...
... The appropriate response to an inflammatory statement is to address the issues of content rather than to accuse the other person of violating this policy.
- Please restore the discussion on your talk page and address the issue of content, i.e. whether WMAU acts primarily in its members' interests, or the interests of the wider community, when fulfilling the aim and purpose declared at https://wikimedia.org.au/wiki/Statement_of_Purpose. Mitch Ames (talk) 02:51, 23 December 2016 (UTC)