This page is an archive of past discussions. Do not edit the contents of this page. If you wish to start a new discussion or revive an old one, please do so on the current talk page. |
2010 · 2011 · 2012 · 2013 · 2014 · 2015 · 2016 · 2017 · 2018 · 2019 · 2020 · 2021 · 2022 · 2023 |
Actually I added the sentence about rain throughout December. I also added the sentence about the monsoon trough. I was trying to fix the sentence "They resulted from heavy precipitation caused by Tropical Cyclone Tasha" written by someone else, which was in the lead, by combining it with the causes mentioned in Bureau believes worst is over, because it was incorrectly attributing the cyclone as the sole cause. - Shiftchange ( talk) 14:10, 7 January 2011 (UTC)
Hi, I have raised some concerns about your expansion of Ben Roberts-Smith at Talk:Ben Roberts-Smith#Concerns with text. Hopefully, you can put my concerns to rest. Many thanks, Mattinbgn ( talk) 22:47, 23 January 2011 (UTC)
On 30 January 2011, Did you know? was updated with a fact from the article Ben Roberts-Smith, which you created or substantially expanded. The fact was ... that Ben Roberts-Smith's receipt of the Victoria Cross for Australia for gallantry in Afghanistan, makes him the most highly decorated service person currently in the Australian Defence Force? You are welcome to check how many hits the article got while on the front page ( here's how, quick check) and add it to DYKSTATS if it got over 5,000. If you know of another interesting fact from a recently created article, then please suggest it on the Did you know? talk page. |
— HJ Mitchell | Penny for your thoughts? 18:03, 30 January 2011 (UTC)
No objection at all to that. Cheers. Rebecca ( talk) 11:02, 9 February 2011 (UTC)
Hi. I was just going through your new template for all the nsw ministries and i could not help but notice that it was different to the method used for federal ministries here: Template:Australian federal ministries. Would it not be better to have them organised in that manner, showing a distinct ministry for each parliament instead of having one for each premier/non-consecutive term and just showing the changes in there? That way it is more linear and easier to understand. Your thoughts... Siegfried Nugent ( talk) 12:00, 13 February 2011 (UTC)
Hi. Keep up the good work. What I was saying was that in regards to the federal ministry templates, when you get past the relatively unstable pre-federation era in NSW and you get into several-term governments like with Bob Askin, Bill McKell, Neville Wran, Bertram Stevens etc. We will need to list the ministries numerically. For example: Bob Askin won four elections and, consequently had four distinct cabinets. Does that make any sense? Probably not, In any case I shall help compile some ministry lists as well. I have already done the Willis Ministry. Cheers. Siegfried Nugent ( talk) 11:53, 14 February 2011 (UTC)
Just wanted to say that you're doing a heck of a job getting these articles in shape! Rebecca ( talk) 07:42, 26 April 2011 (UTC)
It wasn't deleted for lack of notability - we had some dropkick a few years back who created a few hundred pages consisting solely of "Joe Bloggs was an Australian politician", a whole bunch of which were at the wrong names, and generally created a heck of a mess. Feel free to recreate it at any time. :) Rebecca ( talk) 06:25, 16 July 2011 (UTC)
On 8 August 2011, Did you know? was updated with a fact from the article Parkes ministry (1878–1883), which you created or substantially expanded. The fact was ... that despite New South Wales having no political party system at the time, the Third Parkes ministry was a coalition government from 1878 to 1883 between former Premiers Henry Parkes and John Robertson? You are welcome to check how many hits the article got while on the front page ( here's how, quick check) and add it to DYKSTATS if it got over 5,000. If you know of another interesting fact from a recently created article, then please suggest it on the Did you know? talk page. |
Materialscientist ( talk) 00:03, 8 August 2011 (UTC)
G'day,
You don't need to leave a talkback on someone's userpage if you're posting to their talkpage. It'll show up (like this edit did) next time they log in.
You only need to use it when you're responding to them on another talkpage (and in those cases, you leave it on their talk page). ˜ danjel[ talk | contribs ] 14:13, 4 September 2011 (UTC)
Jhershel: take a look at what I did on Andrew Chan. MOS:QUOTATION MARK says don't use quotemarks in block quotes. While you used a colon indent for the quotes, it had the same effect as blockquoting. Also, don't use italics for entire quotes. Without looking at your other GANs, I bet they have the same problem of style. So I leave it up to you to make the corrections. (I like to use the quote template.) Otherwise I think Chan is a good article. (But I'm not experienced enough in this area to do a GA review.) Regards. -- S. Rich ( talk) 00:59, 15 November 2011 (UTC)
A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Andrew Chan is suitable for inclusion in Wikipedia according to Wikipedia's policies and guidelines or whether it should be deleted.
The article will be discussed at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Andrew Chan until a consensus is reached, and anyone is welcome to contribute to the discussion. The nomination will explain the policies and guidelines which are of concern. The discussion focuses on good quality evidence, and our policies and guidelines.
Users may edit the article during the discussion, including to improve the article to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the article-for-deletion template from the top of the article.
The article Andrew Chan you nominated as a good article has failed ; see Talk:Andrew Chan for reasons why the nomination failed. If or when these points have been taken care of, you may apply for a new nomination of the article. Jezhotwells ( talk) 13:13, 5 December 2011 (UTC)
Hi Rangasyd, thank you for nominating this article for GA status. I'm sorry to say that it has failed the GA criteria. If you like, you can do further work on it an resubmit it later. Please see the article talk page for comments and a to do list. Thank you for all your hard work on this article and for all your good efforts on Wikipedia. Cheers! -- — Keithbob • Talk • 19:35, 7 December 2011 (UTC)
The article Myuran Sukumaran you nominated as a good article has failed ; see Talk:Myuran Sukumaran for reasons why the nomination failed. If or when these points have been taken care of, you may apply for a new nomination of the article.
The Foley link was not the right one - most of the WA bishops info is short of the full dollar - cheers Satu Suro 12:21, 21 December 2011 (UTC)
Those messages thingoes go at the bottom of the page - talk page - not the top.. I am a very erratic and formerly very heavy/large eit editor - sorry not very active on in depth work at the moment due to strictures on time.. a bit of this and that Satu Suro 12:51, 21 December 2011 (UTC)
I've been meaning to do this for a while-he'd make an interesting article. Got into bigtime trouble with Rome and remains dug up reburied last year at St Mary's.
Moondyne (
talk)
02:46, 22 December 2011 (UTC)
This page is an archive of past discussions. Do not edit the contents of this page. If you wish to start a new discussion or revive an old one, please do so on the current talk page. |