I included this. Would you perhaps like to upload your portrait, so we can put a sample of his work in the article. I have one somewhere, but it's rather bland. I wish we had a notable and distinctive pic like Bob Hope or Elvis Presley! Amandajm ( talk) 11:46, 9 November 2010 (UTC)
Bonne Année 2011 ! -- Frania W. ( talk) 22:17, 1 January 2011 (UTC)
Et meilleurs vœux, également, Frania - de l'Australie!! Feux d'artifice à Sydney-- Wikiain ( talk) 22:59, 1 January 2011 (UTC)
Hi Wikiain, I've left a reply to your message on my talk page -- Marek. 69 talk 00:07, 21 May 2011 (UTC)
Wikiain, I've left you another reply Marek. 69 talk 00:24, 21 May 2011 (UTC)
You may (or may not) find Talk:List of Companions of the Order of Australia#Australian Defence Force Rank abbreviations of interest. Cheers, Pdfpdf ( talk) 02:01, 18 June 2011 (UTC)
Just to let you know they are currently moving the Lewers fountain with work in progress. Foofbun ( talk) 07:03, 19 September 2011 (UTC)
Hi! Let's examine http://en.wikipedia.org/?title=Napoleonic_code&diff=452717051&oldid=452660440
Firstly this is the English Wikipedia so we use names as stated in English. Please do not put an acute accent on "Napoleon" on EN - it's not necessary. Secondly, I understand that his title is "Napoleon I" - But unless there's a possibility that people may be confused, we generally go by the common name. I.E. Napoleon I redirects to "Napoleon" So in Wikipedia articles you don't need his title. Just say "Napoleon" and that's it WhisperToMe ( talk) 17:31, 27 September 2011 (UTC)
Could I bother you to clarify this edit? How was correcting that link not constructive? Swarm 20:58, 18 October 2011 (UTC)
Hey; re your edit here, I see no problem with including a redlink in that form. Wikipedia was built on the things, and it might be an idea to give the guy time to write such an article before deciding it wasn't needed. Ironholds ( talk) 03:44, 5 November 2011 (UTC)
Hi Wikiain, in the edit summary you wrote "Not usually italicised", but I've followed other examples like this one. Could you please explain me the difference or redirect me where I can read and learn the rule to be used in such cases? Thanks a lot. -- Mauro Lanari ( talk) 23:17, 28 August 2012 (UTC)
Hi wikiain, thanks for pointing that out. I was trying to make the lead section consistent with later usage in the article where the term was used with no explanation. Have now removed it throughout. Melcous ( talk) 00:32, 9 January 2014 (UTC)
Thansk for pointing out the discussion over at the manual of style page. I was inclined to make some corrections on that, where i see the uncapitalised "indigenous"- so glad i dodged that one! (Just a little shocked that there was any discussion to be had- seems pretty common to capitalise wherever i see it). WotherspoonSmith ( talk) 13:33, 5 May 2014 (UTC)
Thanks for uploading File:Macquarie University logo 2014.png. The image description page currently specifies that the image is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, the image is currently not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the image was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that images for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).
Note that any non-free images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described in the criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. Stefan2 ( talk) 18:32, 21 June 2014 (UTC)
It is interesting that there was silence in the Hall during the flypast. I was outside under the sun and the sound was heard in the middle of Jerusalem, drowning it out. I looked up into a bright blue sky and saw the unexpected planes flying beyond the spires of the cathedral and beyond the purple haze of jacarandas in full bloom. It scattered the birds which flew out of the plane trees and away in their own formation just as the "missing man" peeled off. It was extremely moving. Whiteghost.ink ( talk) 05:32, 7 November 2014 (UTC)
Hi Wikiain,
There is a draft on the Bail Act 2013 that was developed following the 2014 Sydney hostage crisis. Its author is trying to get it up to publishing standard. I realise this is not specifically your area, but if you had some time, you might be able to check its readiness and perhaps improve it a bit. Cheers, Whiteghost.ink ( talk) 02:20, 27 December 2014 (UTC)
Thank you for the read-through and edits to the article! -- 110.20.234.69 ( talk) 09:01, 28 December 2014 (UTC)
While I don't disagree with this edit, I do disagree massively with the edit summary. As a fellow Australian and frequent Oxford comma user: what is this based on? Frickeg ( talk) 23:54, 3 March 2015 (UTC)
Re your query here: Have we forgotten Sir Douglas Nicholls? -- Jack of Oz [pleasantries] 01:40, 30 March 2015 (UTC)
No problem about your style-improving edits, but perhaps something out of order "advice -> advise". I don'to know, but... It's up to you. Good edits. E. Feld talk 06:38, 24 April 2015 (UTC)
The Technical Barnstar | |
For improving Theory of Legal Norms E. Feld talk 06:38, 24 April 2015 (UTC) |
Ouch, you pinged me ;) I've been watching the ongoing infobox discussion, but have chosen to no longer post there as my concerns & proposals are already well known. Also, I was growing tired of being accused of pushing a republican Pov (by one of the participants) at that article & discussion. I'm a Canadian republican, but I don't push it on Wikipedia :) GoodDay ( talk) 01:17, 9 December 2015 (UTC)
Hi Wikiain,
In case you are interested and able to come, there will be a presentation at the State Library of New South Wales on 12 February at 2.30 on Wikidata, given by a visiting Wikipedian User:Pigsonthewing, who is also working at ORCID. Whiteghost.ink ( talk) 05:53, 22 January 2016 (UTC)
Hello, I'm ReferenceBot. I have automatically detected that an edit performed by you may have introduced errors in referencing. It is as follows:
Please check this page and fix the errors highlighted. If you think this is a false positive, you can report it to my operator. Thanks, ReferenceBot ( talk) 00:19, 24 January 2016 (UTC)
Thank you. I added 51,000 years (Haaretz, respectable newspaper, free access actually). But following your edit, I added 60,000 years (Australian source, free access) instead. Is that ok? 125,000 is misleading. I am new to Wiki. SAOTY ( talk) 03:58, 1 September 2016 (UTC)
No worries, mate. Could you perhaps modify the "125,000 years" statement in your own way, adding whichever link you believe is acceptable? The only point at stake from my perspective is that 125,000 is inflated. SAOTY ( talk) 05:39, 1 September 2016 (UTC)
Wikiain I added a scientific reference of "61,000-52,000 years ago" (using Thermoluminescence dating): http://austhrutime.com/malakunanja.htm. Please let me know what you think. Thanks. SAOTY ( talk) 09:59, 2 September 2016 (UTC):
No worries, mate. SAOTY ( talk) 02:49, 3 September 2016 (UTC)
Hi Wikiain. You have referenced the wrong case in this edit. Paragraph 4 of that is rather bland. I'm not sure the blockquote is needed, but the reference needs to be right anyway. Cheers. -- Scott Davis Talk 14:10, 4 February 2017 (UTC)
Hi Wikiain. I can accept the revert, if rather than simply reverting my edit, you fix the paragraph so that it doesn't so severely misrepresent the truth of what occurred. Since you are a legal scholar, I am assuming that you can add the information for the missing premises that currently imply something else than what did occur, with the appropriate specificity. Regards. Stevenmitchell ( talk) 22:18, 24 February 2017 (UTC)
Hi!
We are students writing an article on Mario Álvarez Ledesma as part of our Class Academic Course and Writing at Tec de Monterrey. Since you are an experienced Wikipedian and have an interest in this kinds of topics, we would like to know if you could take a few moments to take a look at the article and give us feedback. Thank you for your time. -- Mikel Engel Dz ( talk) 21:17, 23 March 2017 (UTC)
Hi! Thanks for your feedback, I really appreciate your time and your suggestions, it means a lot for us that you help us during our process. I would like you to take one final see to our article and give us feedback , we had made corrections throughout the month, could you please help us? Here is the link: Mario Álvarez Ledesma
Thank you again for your time — Preceding unsigned comment added by Mikel Engel Dz ( talk • contribs) 21:27, 30 March 2017 (UTC)
@ IgnorantArmies, Jack Upland, The Drover's Wife, WWGB, and ScottDavis: In case you don't have Bob Day in your watchlist, I've just added to it the High Court's notification today that judgement in the Senate's referral to the High Court as Court of Disputed Returns will be delivered on 5 April. Wikiain ( talk) 03:08, 31 March 2017 (UTC)
Thanks for your edits tidying up this article, especially fixing my mistake in referring to the judgment summary. I will check to see if I have made the same error elsewhere Find bruce ( talk) 09:10, 11 April 2017 (UTC)
It is impossible for a source published many months before the Searle scandal came to light to be a valid source for a sentence about what the Searle scandal was seen as. Nobody in the earlier source saw the Searle scandal as anything, at least for all the source tells us. See WP:BLPGOSSIP and in particular what it says about "whether, even if true, it is relevant to a disinterested article about the subject". There is enough appearance of an actual problem with Searle that we shouldn't be trying to dilute it with irrelevancies, and it's also against our policies about biographies of living people and original research by synthesis to try to collect unrelated stories to create the appearance that Searle is part of a bigger pattern using sources that don't actually explicitly say so mentioning him by name. — David Eppstein ( talk) 02:23, 16 April 2017 (UTC)
Thanks for uploading
File:Yes-No Reid.jpg. The image has been identified as not specifying the copyright status of the image, which is required by Wikipedia's policy on images. Even if you created the image yourself, you still need to release it so Wikipedia can use it. If you don't indicate the copyright status of the image on the image's description page, using an appropriate
copyright tag, it may be deleted some time in the next seven days. If you made this image yourself, you can use copyright tags like {{
PD-self}} (to release all rights), {{
self|CC-by-sa-3.0|GFDL}}
(to require that you be credited), or any tag
here - just go to the image, click edit, and add one of those. If you have uploaded other images, please verify that you have provided copyright information for them as well.
For more information on using images, see the following pages:
This is an automated notice by MifterBot. For assistance on the image use policy, see Wikipedia:Media copyright questions. NOTE: once you correct this, please remove the tag from the image's page. -- MifterBot ( Talk • Contribs • Owner) 01:45, 14 May 2017 (UTC)
First of all, the band is Australian. Second, it was a short clip so it wasn't copyvio. — Preceding unsigned comment added by LandDownUnder ( talk • contribs) 07:33, 14 May 2017 (UTC)
Please see my reply to your comment at Talk:Titanic_II. Blue Riband► 04:57, 31 May 2017 (UTC)
Re Three ministers and contempt of court (2017). I agree that the issue is noteworthy, but I am not convinced that section 44 is the best place for it. None of the references make any reference to section 44 & I am not aware of any article that has made the connection. An article that goes into detail on the issue makes no mention of section 44 - "Fact check: Can you criticise the conduct of the courts or of a judge?". ABC online. 29 June 2017. Find bruce ( talk) 21:57, 28 June 2017 (UTC)
Thanks for improving the lead in R v Kirby; Ex parte Boilermakers' Society of Australia - there are still a bunch of improvements to make to the article, but I haven't got around to them - mostly this month I am trying to help the Wikipedia:WikiProject Women in Red/The World Contest. I should however have enough time to split the R v Canarvan decision out into a separate page from 2017 Australian parliamentary eligibility crisis which will give us an opportunity to knock it into shape. Find bruce ( talk) 21:44, 1 November 2017 (UTC)
Hi Wikiain. If Ludlam, Waters, Roberts and Nash are all reported as "former politician" in their respective articles, then why not Parry? Regards, WWGB ( talk) 02:12, 11 November 2017 (UTC)
hi Wikiain, sorry about my edits deleting "religion" from the infobox of Michael Kirby (judge) and Ronald Wilson, its just that infobox judge no longer recognises the "religion" paramater (see the discussion here) so it doesn't appear to readers, it may be appropriate to enter it in the infobox under the "footnotes" paramater?
Coolabahapple (
talk) 06:57, 13 November 2017 (UTC)
The Barnstar of Diplomacy | |
For your grace, diligence and raising of questions at 2017 Australian parliamentary eligibility crisis: thank you. hamiltonstone ( talk) 10:34, 14 November 2017 (UTC) |
Moving this to your talk page, since it doesn't seem specifically relevant to Talk:2017 Australian parliamentary eligibility crisis.
I'm not entirely sure what you mean by "Please so sign your contributions." The MediaWiki software automatically provides a link to my user page, talk page, and contributions page in page histories next to any edits I make. If you're referring to comments I leave on talk pages, my signature includes a link to both my user page (which does not currently exist) and my talk page.
If there are any specific issues you have with my edits (such as to Australian Senate, which you rolled back so weren't able to provide an explanation), I'd be happy to discuss them on my talk page or the talk page of the relevant article. -- Snorlax Monster 12:12, 16 November 2017 (UTC)
Hey, thanks for letting me know. I've undone you too, though: the website is probably being slow to update over the summer break, but there is no question that Molan is officially now a senator and has been since 22 December. Being sworn in has no effect on one's membership of the Senate (indeed several senators have never been sworn in, like Lionel Courtenay). Frickeg ( talk) 01:25, 13 January 2018 (UTC)
You currently appear to be engaged in an
edit war according to the reverts you have made on
James Cook. Users are expected to
collaborate with others, to avoid editing
disruptively, and to
try to reach a consensus rather than repeatedly undoing other users' edits once it is known that there is a disagreement.
Please be particularly aware that Wikipedia's policy on edit warring states:
If you find yourself in an editing dispute, use the article's talk page to discuss controversial changes; work towards a version that represents consensus among editors. You can post a request for help at an appropriate noticeboard or seek dispute resolution. In some cases it may be appropriate to request temporary page protection. If you engage in an edit war, you may be blocked from editing.- gadfium 21:31, 11 April 2018 (UTC)
Wikian could you please check this source. [1] Thanks. Dr Silverstein ( talk) 04:30, 5 December 2018 (UTC)
all that is solid melts into air | |
thank you! gorgeous! Holaholahulahop ( talk) 23:23, 17 December 2018 (UTC) |
Please stop edit warring to enforce inclusion of your own work at Ballade des dames du temps jadis. This may be considered contrary to Wikipedia's policy on self-promotion. Thank you. Mathglot ( talk) 01:07, 25 January 2019 (UTC)
The name "Austrialia" was used for the first time by Quiros – on 1 May 1606( Philip III's name day)
is outlined here -> A key phrase in the passage from the memorial is Quirós’ statement that “because on your day I took possession of it.” What did he mean by that? Collingridge (1895, 248) took it to mean “the anniversary of your birth”. However, it was not the King’s birthday, which had passed weeks before, on 14 April. Instead it most likely was referring to King Philip III’s name day, the feast day for the saint after whom an individual is named. Quirós expedition encountered Espíritu Santo in late April 1606, and on 1 May first entered a bay, which was subsequently named La Gran Baya de S. Philippe yS. Santiago, it being, as de Leza recorded, “the day of those apostles” (Markham 1904, 2:370). In the Tridentine Calendar,2 1 May was the feast day of St. Philip and St. Santiago (i.e. St. James). This simple phrase not only alludes directly to Philip but also to his position, as St. Santiago is the patron saint of Spain. Consequently it provides an additional layer of meaning by reinforcing the association between the name of the new land and the Spanish crown. Although the formal ceremony and proclamation claiming possession took place on the Pentecost, 14 May 1606 (Zaragoza 1876, 1:311-17; Markham 1904, 2:24852), I would suggest what Quirós meant in this instance was that effective possession commenced with his discovery of this new land, on the King’s name day.
which is from here -> http://rupertgerritsen.tripod.com/pdf/published/Austrialia_Globe_72_2013_pp23-30.pdf
May I put "Philip III's name day" back? LawrieM ( talk) 08:45, 26 January 2019 (UTC)
Thanks for that. I might wait and include it with material from Gerritsen which as you point out is interesting material. As regards the Holy-Order-in-the-name business. At risk of sounding cynical it may have been a good move on Quirós's part, as King Philip III was also known as Philip the Pious - and the Inquisition was still in full swing! LawrieM ( talk) 05:39, 6 February 2019 (UTC)
Hi, I noticed you reverted a category change on 2017–18 Australian parliamentary eligibility crisis. I am not familiar with the two categories, but you may want to look at Category:Political controversies in Australia as the same user has also changed the category to a redirect & removed it from the various parent categories. I would expect any such change to be taken through the WP:CfD process. Find bruce ( talk) 22:37, 25 July 2019 (UTC)
I included this. Would you perhaps like to upload your portrait, so we can put a sample of his work in the article. I have one somewhere, but it's rather bland. I wish we had a notable and distinctive pic like Bob Hope or Elvis Presley! Amandajm ( talk) 11:46, 9 November 2010 (UTC)
Bonne Année 2011 ! -- Frania W. ( talk) 22:17, 1 January 2011 (UTC)
Et meilleurs vœux, également, Frania - de l'Australie!! Feux d'artifice à Sydney-- Wikiain ( talk) 22:59, 1 January 2011 (UTC)
Hi Wikiain, I've left a reply to your message on my talk page -- Marek. 69 talk 00:07, 21 May 2011 (UTC)
Wikiain, I've left you another reply Marek. 69 talk 00:24, 21 May 2011 (UTC)
You may (or may not) find Talk:List of Companions of the Order of Australia#Australian Defence Force Rank abbreviations of interest. Cheers, Pdfpdf ( talk) 02:01, 18 June 2011 (UTC)
Just to let you know they are currently moving the Lewers fountain with work in progress. Foofbun ( talk) 07:03, 19 September 2011 (UTC)
Hi! Let's examine http://en.wikipedia.org/?title=Napoleonic_code&diff=452717051&oldid=452660440
Firstly this is the English Wikipedia so we use names as stated in English. Please do not put an acute accent on "Napoleon" on EN - it's not necessary. Secondly, I understand that his title is "Napoleon I" - But unless there's a possibility that people may be confused, we generally go by the common name. I.E. Napoleon I redirects to "Napoleon" So in Wikipedia articles you don't need his title. Just say "Napoleon" and that's it WhisperToMe ( talk) 17:31, 27 September 2011 (UTC)
Could I bother you to clarify this edit? How was correcting that link not constructive? Swarm 20:58, 18 October 2011 (UTC)
Hey; re your edit here, I see no problem with including a redlink in that form. Wikipedia was built on the things, and it might be an idea to give the guy time to write such an article before deciding it wasn't needed. Ironholds ( talk) 03:44, 5 November 2011 (UTC)
Hi Wikiain, in the edit summary you wrote "Not usually italicised", but I've followed other examples like this one. Could you please explain me the difference or redirect me where I can read and learn the rule to be used in such cases? Thanks a lot. -- Mauro Lanari ( talk) 23:17, 28 August 2012 (UTC)
Hi wikiain, thanks for pointing that out. I was trying to make the lead section consistent with later usage in the article where the term was used with no explanation. Have now removed it throughout. Melcous ( talk) 00:32, 9 January 2014 (UTC)
Thansk for pointing out the discussion over at the manual of style page. I was inclined to make some corrections on that, where i see the uncapitalised "indigenous"- so glad i dodged that one! (Just a little shocked that there was any discussion to be had- seems pretty common to capitalise wherever i see it). WotherspoonSmith ( talk) 13:33, 5 May 2014 (UTC)
Thanks for uploading File:Macquarie University logo 2014.png. The image description page currently specifies that the image is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, the image is currently not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the image was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that images for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).
Note that any non-free images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described in the criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. Stefan2 ( talk) 18:32, 21 June 2014 (UTC)
It is interesting that there was silence in the Hall during the flypast. I was outside under the sun and the sound was heard in the middle of Jerusalem, drowning it out. I looked up into a bright blue sky and saw the unexpected planes flying beyond the spires of the cathedral and beyond the purple haze of jacarandas in full bloom. It scattered the birds which flew out of the plane trees and away in their own formation just as the "missing man" peeled off. It was extremely moving. Whiteghost.ink ( talk) 05:32, 7 November 2014 (UTC)
Hi Wikiain,
There is a draft on the Bail Act 2013 that was developed following the 2014 Sydney hostage crisis. Its author is trying to get it up to publishing standard. I realise this is not specifically your area, but if you had some time, you might be able to check its readiness and perhaps improve it a bit. Cheers, Whiteghost.ink ( talk) 02:20, 27 December 2014 (UTC)
Thank you for the read-through and edits to the article! -- 110.20.234.69 ( talk) 09:01, 28 December 2014 (UTC)
While I don't disagree with this edit, I do disagree massively with the edit summary. As a fellow Australian and frequent Oxford comma user: what is this based on? Frickeg ( talk) 23:54, 3 March 2015 (UTC)
Re your query here: Have we forgotten Sir Douglas Nicholls? -- Jack of Oz [pleasantries] 01:40, 30 March 2015 (UTC)
No problem about your style-improving edits, but perhaps something out of order "advice -> advise". I don'to know, but... It's up to you. Good edits. E. Feld talk 06:38, 24 April 2015 (UTC)
The Technical Barnstar | |
For improving Theory of Legal Norms E. Feld talk 06:38, 24 April 2015 (UTC) |
Ouch, you pinged me ;) I've been watching the ongoing infobox discussion, but have chosen to no longer post there as my concerns & proposals are already well known. Also, I was growing tired of being accused of pushing a republican Pov (by one of the participants) at that article & discussion. I'm a Canadian republican, but I don't push it on Wikipedia :) GoodDay ( talk) 01:17, 9 December 2015 (UTC)
Hi Wikiain,
In case you are interested and able to come, there will be a presentation at the State Library of New South Wales on 12 February at 2.30 on Wikidata, given by a visiting Wikipedian User:Pigsonthewing, who is also working at ORCID. Whiteghost.ink ( talk) 05:53, 22 January 2016 (UTC)
Hello, I'm ReferenceBot. I have automatically detected that an edit performed by you may have introduced errors in referencing. It is as follows:
Please check this page and fix the errors highlighted. If you think this is a false positive, you can report it to my operator. Thanks, ReferenceBot ( talk) 00:19, 24 January 2016 (UTC)
Thank you. I added 51,000 years (Haaretz, respectable newspaper, free access actually). But following your edit, I added 60,000 years (Australian source, free access) instead. Is that ok? 125,000 is misleading. I am new to Wiki. SAOTY ( talk) 03:58, 1 September 2016 (UTC)
No worries, mate. Could you perhaps modify the "125,000 years" statement in your own way, adding whichever link you believe is acceptable? The only point at stake from my perspective is that 125,000 is inflated. SAOTY ( talk) 05:39, 1 September 2016 (UTC)
Wikiain I added a scientific reference of "61,000-52,000 years ago" (using Thermoluminescence dating): http://austhrutime.com/malakunanja.htm. Please let me know what you think. Thanks. SAOTY ( talk) 09:59, 2 September 2016 (UTC):
No worries, mate. SAOTY ( talk) 02:49, 3 September 2016 (UTC)
Hi Wikiain. You have referenced the wrong case in this edit. Paragraph 4 of that is rather bland. I'm not sure the blockquote is needed, but the reference needs to be right anyway. Cheers. -- Scott Davis Talk 14:10, 4 February 2017 (UTC)
Hi Wikiain. I can accept the revert, if rather than simply reverting my edit, you fix the paragraph so that it doesn't so severely misrepresent the truth of what occurred. Since you are a legal scholar, I am assuming that you can add the information for the missing premises that currently imply something else than what did occur, with the appropriate specificity. Regards. Stevenmitchell ( talk) 22:18, 24 February 2017 (UTC)
Hi!
We are students writing an article on Mario Álvarez Ledesma as part of our Class Academic Course and Writing at Tec de Monterrey. Since you are an experienced Wikipedian and have an interest in this kinds of topics, we would like to know if you could take a few moments to take a look at the article and give us feedback. Thank you for your time. -- Mikel Engel Dz ( talk) 21:17, 23 March 2017 (UTC)
Hi! Thanks for your feedback, I really appreciate your time and your suggestions, it means a lot for us that you help us during our process. I would like you to take one final see to our article and give us feedback , we had made corrections throughout the month, could you please help us? Here is the link: Mario Álvarez Ledesma
Thank you again for your time — Preceding unsigned comment added by Mikel Engel Dz ( talk • contribs) 21:27, 30 March 2017 (UTC)
@ IgnorantArmies, Jack Upland, The Drover's Wife, WWGB, and ScottDavis: In case you don't have Bob Day in your watchlist, I've just added to it the High Court's notification today that judgement in the Senate's referral to the High Court as Court of Disputed Returns will be delivered on 5 April. Wikiain ( talk) 03:08, 31 March 2017 (UTC)
Thanks for your edits tidying up this article, especially fixing my mistake in referring to the judgment summary. I will check to see if I have made the same error elsewhere Find bruce ( talk) 09:10, 11 April 2017 (UTC)
It is impossible for a source published many months before the Searle scandal came to light to be a valid source for a sentence about what the Searle scandal was seen as. Nobody in the earlier source saw the Searle scandal as anything, at least for all the source tells us. See WP:BLPGOSSIP and in particular what it says about "whether, even if true, it is relevant to a disinterested article about the subject". There is enough appearance of an actual problem with Searle that we shouldn't be trying to dilute it with irrelevancies, and it's also against our policies about biographies of living people and original research by synthesis to try to collect unrelated stories to create the appearance that Searle is part of a bigger pattern using sources that don't actually explicitly say so mentioning him by name. — David Eppstein ( talk) 02:23, 16 April 2017 (UTC)
Thanks for uploading
File:Yes-No Reid.jpg. The image has been identified as not specifying the copyright status of the image, which is required by Wikipedia's policy on images. Even if you created the image yourself, you still need to release it so Wikipedia can use it. If you don't indicate the copyright status of the image on the image's description page, using an appropriate
copyright tag, it may be deleted some time in the next seven days. If you made this image yourself, you can use copyright tags like {{
PD-self}} (to release all rights), {{
self|CC-by-sa-3.0|GFDL}}
(to require that you be credited), or any tag
here - just go to the image, click edit, and add one of those. If you have uploaded other images, please verify that you have provided copyright information for them as well.
For more information on using images, see the following pages:
This is an automated notice by MifterBot. For assistance on the image use policy, see Wikipedia:Media copyright questions. NOTE: once you correct this, please remove the tag from the image's page. -- MifterBot ( Talk • Contribs • Owner) 01:45, 14 May 2017 (UTC)
First of all, the band is Australian. Second, it was a short clip so it wasn't copyvio. — Preceding unsigned comment added by LandDownUnder ( talk • contribs) 07:33, 14 May 2017 (UTC)
Please see my reply to your comment at Talk:Titanic_II. Blue Riband► 04:57, 31 May 2017 (UTC)
Re Three ministers and contempt of court (2017). I agree that the issue is noteworthy, but I am not convinced that section 44 is the best place for it. None of the references make any reference to section 44 & I am not aware of any article that has made the connection. An article that goes into detail on the issue makes no mention of section 44 - "Fact check: Can you criticise the conduct of the courts or of a judge?". ABC online. 29 June 2017. Find bruce ( talk) 21:57, 28 June 2017 (UTC)
Thanks for improving the lead in R v Kirby; Ex parte Boilermakers' Society of Australia - there are still a bunch of improvements to make to the article, but I haven't got around to them - mostly this month I am trying to help the Wikipedia:WikiProject Women in Red/The World Contest. I should however have enough time to split the R v Canarvan decision out into a separate page from 2017 Australian parliamentary eligibility crisis which will give us an opportunity to knock it into shape. Find bruce ( talk) 21:44, 1 November 2017 (UTC)
Hi Wikiain. If Ludlam, Waters, Roberts and Nash are all reported as "former politician" in their respective articles, then why not Parry? Regards, WWGB ( talk) 02:12, 11 November 2017 (UTC)
hi Wikiain, sorry about my edits deleting "religion" from the infobox of Michael Kirby (judge) and Ronald Wilson, its just that infobox judge no longer recognises the "religion" paramater (see the discussion here) so it doesn't appear to readers, it may be appropriate to enter it in the infobox under the "footnotes" paramater?
Coolabahapple (
talk) 06:57, 13 November 2017 (UTC)
The Barnstar of Diplomacy | |
For your grace, diligence and raising of questions at 2017 Australian parliamentary eligibility crisis: thank you. hamiltonstone ( talk) 10:34, 14 November 2017 (UTC) |
Moving this to your talk page, since it doesn't seem specifically relevant to Talk:2017 Australian parliamentary eligibility crisis.
I'm not entirely sure what you mean by "Please so sign your contributions." The MediaWiki software automatically provides a link to my user page, talk page, and contributions page in page histories next to any edits I make. If you're referring to comments I leave on talk pages, my signature includes a link to both my user page (which does not currently exist) and my talk page.
If there are any specific issues you have with my edits (such as to Australian Senate, which you rolled back so weren't able to provide an explanation), I'd be happy to discuss them on my talk page or the talk page of the relevant article. -- Snorlax Monster 12:12, 16 November 2017 (UTC)
Hey, thanks for letting me know. I've undone you too, though: the website is probably being slow to update over the summer break, but there is no question that Molan is officially now a senator and has been since 22 December. Being sworn in has no effect on one's membership of the Senate (indeed several senators have never been sworn in, like Lionel Courtenay). Frickeg ( talk) 01:25, 13 January 2018 (UTC)
You currently appear to be engaged in an
edit war according to the reverts you have made on
James Cook. Users are expected to
collaborate with others, to avoid editing
disruptively, and to
try to reach a consensus rather than repeatedly undoing other users' edits once it is known that there is a disagreement.
Please be particularly aware that Wikipedia's policy on edit warring states:
If you find yourself in an editing dispute, use the article's talk page to discuss controversial changes; work towards a version that represents consensus among editors. You can post a request for help at an appropriate noticeboard or seek dispute resolution. In some cases it may be appropriate to request temporary page protection. If you engage in an edit war, you may be blocked from editing.- gadfium 21:31, 11 April 2018 (UTC)
Wikian could you please check this source. [1] Thanks. Dr Silverstein ( talk) 04:30, 5 December 2018 (UTC)
all that is solid melts into air | |
thank you! gorgeous! Holaholahulahop ( talk) 23:23, 17 December 2018 (UTC) |
Please stop edit warring to enforce inclusion of your own work at Ballade des dames du temps jadis. This may be considered contrary to Wikipedia's policy on self-promotion. Thank you. Mathglot ( talk) 01:07, 25 January 2019 (UTC)
The name "Austrialia" was used for the first time by Quiros – on 1 May 1606( Philip III's name day)
is outlined here -> A key phrase in the passage from the memorial is Quirós’ statement that “because on your day I took possession of it.” What did he mean by that? Collingridge (1895, 248) took it to mean “the anniversary of your birth”. However, it was not the King’s birthday, which had passed weeks before, on 14 April. Instead it most likely was referring to King Philip III’s name day, the feast day for the saint after whom an individual is named. Quirós expedition encountered Espíritu Santo in late April 1606, and on 1 May first entered a bay, which was subsequently named La Gran Baya de S. Philippe yS. Santiago, it being, as de Leza recorded, “the day of those apostles” (Markham 1904, 2:370). In the Tridentine Calendar,2 1 May was the feast day of St. Philip and St. Santiago (i.e. St. James). This simple phrase not only alludes directly to Philip but also to his position, as St. Santiago is the patron saint of Spain. Consequently it provides an additional layer of meaning by reinforcing the association between the name of the new land and the Spanish crown. Although the formal ceremony and proclamation claiming possession took place on the Pentecost, 14 May 1606 (Zaragoza 1876, 1:311-17; Markham 1904, 2:24852), I would suggest what Quirós meant in this instance was that effective possession commenced with his discovery of this new land, on the King’s name day.
which is from here -> http://rupertgerritsen.tripod.com/pdf/published/Austrialia_Globe_72_2013_pp23-30.pdf
May I put "Philip III's name day" back? LawrieM ( talk) 08:45, 26 January 2019 (UTC)
Thanks for that. I might wait and include it with material from Gerritsen which as you point out is interesting material. As regards the Holy-Order-in-the-name business. At risk of sounding cynical it may have been a good move on Quirós's part, as King Philip III was also known as Philip the Pious - and the Inquisition was still in full swing! LawrieM ( talk) 05:39, 6 February 2019 (UTC)
Hi, I noticed you reverted a category change on 2017–18 Australian parliamentary eligibility crisis. I am not familiar with the two categories, but you may want to look at Category:Political controversies in Australia as the same user has also changed the category to a redirect & removed it from the various parent categories. I would expect any such change to be taken through the WP:CfD process. Find bruce ( talk) 22:37, 25 July 2019 (UTC)