User talk:CJ/Archive 16

Add topic
Active discussions


Thanks CJ for the welcome, whilst ive edited and added to the Communications in Australia page this is only the second page ive written, as it is its a work in progress, just awaiting more from Nextgen on further info and permission to add the logo and pic which I want to use.

Im very much a newbie at writing in wikipedia but enjoy researching to put it together

Thanks Again ---Darren Stephens 23:35, 12 April 2007 (ACST)

Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/South Australian general election campaign, 2006

i've done some more work on this and i think you should look at it again before letting it get deleted. at least can the deletion be on hold until the future of South Australian general election, 2006 is sorted?? ChampagneComedy 17:33, 12 April 2007 (UTC)

I see ChampagneComedy has beaten me to the punch. Without seeking to change your view that the original South Australian general election campaign, 2006 article was a duplicate fork (it was), I would ask, in fairness, that you look again at the article before allowing your initial 'delete' recommendation to stand. A couple of editors (myself included) have completely rewritten and expanded the article in question.Joestella 06:32, 14 April 2007 (UTC)

Townsville rating

Thanks for that clarification Cyberjunkie, I thought that would be the case and started on it last night, however couldn't access wikipedia all of a sudden so left it. WikiTownsvillian 07:03, 14 April 2007 (UTC)


It was my pleasure. Cheers. —Moondyne 11:57, 15 April 2007 (UTC)

Move function

I don't mean to be stupid, but how do I use the move function? Carl Kenner 16:53, 15 April 2007 (UTC)

Adelaide meetup

Hi Cj,

Can I come along to the Adelaide meetup? I didn't have {{User South Australia}} on my userpage when you sent out the invitations.

Adrian J. Hunter(talkcontribs) 14:50, 17 April 2007 (UTC)

Replied at user's talk page.--cj | talk 15:07, 17 April 2007 (UTC)

Block on vandal of Black bear

Thanks for that. You may want to look at as it is similar and does the same kind of nonsense edits. Regards, Nashville Monkey 16:06, 17 April 2007 (UTC)

Duly swatted. Thanks,--cj | talk 16:08, 17 April 2007 (UTC)


Thanks again for the tip on the comment box when rating an article. I meant to check with someone if they thought my estimation of the quality was reasonable?

BTW: I went to put this under my last comment, but it seems to be missing. No matter, just advising you in case there is something wrong with your archiving thingamajig. Regards, Fred 15:34, 17 April 2007 (UTC)

From what I can see, your assessments are in line with the scales. Keep up the good work – the backlog's nearing 11,000 pages!
Oh, and no, nothing's wrong. I'd just directed the thingamajig to do its thing after 4 days. Your prior comment is found here.--cj | talk 15:42, 17 April 2007 (UTC)

Thanks cj. Some pages may be better than B but that requires consensus, nu? I'm going to steal your page design one day, it is neat! Regarding archives, a tiny edit for people who believe everything they read might be needed ;-)

... archived by Werdnabot. Any sections older than 10 days are automatically archived ...

Cheers, Fred 14:05, 18 April 2007 (UTC)

Ack. Thanks for pointing it out. As for higher-than-"B" ratings, only GA and FA require reaching a consensus through their respective processes; "A" can be accorded just as any other rating, but you may like to discuss it first – in any event, such articles are few and far between. By the way, you might want to check out User talk:Outriggr/metadatatest.js. It makes assessments a sinch!--cj | talk 14:21, 18 April 2007 (UTC)

Thank for clearing that up for me, without my having to plough through the everchanging help pages. I will try out that script on my next run at it, a brilliant idea. Your distance from WA (my usual scope) may help me in assessing articles regarding A (or nay!) quality , if you want a go at it one day. Best regards Fred 14:50, 18 April 2007 (UTC)

Narooma Revert

I know that the first link was more or less advertising, but what is wrong with the other two links? One is to a local history museum and the other to a guide to local events, if memory serves. WookMuff 10:44, 18 April 2007 (UTC)

Of the links, I would only call the Lighthouse Museum appropriate. The other two were commercial and are normally avoided per our external links guidelines.--cj | talk 10:47, 18 April 2007 (UTC)


Hello CJ. Thankyou for supporting my campaign for getting a WP:AUS qxz-ad. Have you got any ideas regarding the banner for the ad? Harrison-HB4026 07:00, 16 April 2007 (UTC)

  • Ok thanks for the ideas. I think that we should start finalising this so we should start getting the ideas that would really work. Harrison-HB4026 23:48, 18 April 2007 (UTC)
  • Thanks for all of your suggestions. Without everyone helping out, my campaign would have not been as successful. Thanks Harrison-HB4026 03:37, 19 April 2007 (UTC)

Bec Hewitt

Fair enough! --Steve (Stephen) talk 02:50, 19 April 2007 (UTC)


Thanks for, well, acknowledging my unblock (I'd forgotten in my shock that admins can actually unblock themselves... ) Cheers mate! Hope to see you Monday :) – Riana 11:56, 19 April 2007 (UTC)

St. Mark's College

Hi Cyberjunkie, I noticed you protected page Aquinas College, Adelaide due to random and senseless vandalism. Is there any chance you can do the same to St. Mark's College (University of Adelaide) too, for much the same reason? Cheers, ABVS1936 04:36, 20 April 2007 (UTC)

I don't think protection is yet necessary, but I'm watching to see if the situation worsens. Regards, --cj | talk 12:43, 22 April 2007 (UTC)

re: Meetup

If you're in bed now, you might not sleep through it - you'd better be in bed now! :p – Riana 15:26, 22 April 2007 (UTC) I'm not awake, either...

Hey, it was nice to finally meet you! Enjoyed it, we should do one of these again sometime at a decent hour :) Take care, – Riana 01:16, 23 April 2007 (UTC)
It was lovely to see all the Adelaidean folk! It's nice to have faces to put to usernames. I look forward to the next rendezvous – so long as it's not a morning. Happy editing, --cj | talk 01:32, 23 April 2007 (UTC)
Nice meeting you, cj. Daniel Bryant 01:57, 23 April 2007 (UTC)
And likewise. It was good to see that your Wikipedia eloquence is just as noticeable in the real world. Cheers, michael talk 10:40, 24 April 2007 (UTC)
Just realised I forgot about the meetup today. Monday morning are like that -- too bad... Hope it went well! Donama 23:45, 22 April 2007 (UTC)

Thank you

Point taken - it should all be at Politics project talk page not mine - I just couldnt bear watching all that high importance summaries fly through my watch list when i knew they were not happening :) SatuSuro 13:20, 23 April 2007 (UTC)

Now copied to thought I should let you know - cheers SatuSuro 13:26, 23 April 2007 (UTC)
(posted to here also) Again as I said before I am just in on the periphery of this (politics is not my interest in terms of assesment) but it is obviously important for me to confirm again that the part that CJ indicates above as superflous is most definitely not (I have learned via errors that are caused particularly with the script that he and I are both using from Outriggr) The break created by the comment allows the script to separate its taks and if not included the Outriggr script adjusts the importance for both the parent and the child project.--VS talk 13:36, 23 April 2007 (UTC)

Greets cj

Breakfast was interesting. I have written notes from the edu event and will type them up and blog them. Would be nice to do something where Adelaide's leaders in wp and wm are more visible as technology leaders/participants to the edu sector. Perhpas opportunities to show what you do in schools or at local community computing events? Do you think Adelaide wm folks would be interested in doing that kind of thing. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Lucychili (talkcontribs) 23:44, 23 April 2007 (UTC).

Thanks cj understood re speaking at edu sector stuff.
I will blog the stuff that was said at the Adelaide seminar. (my notes are a bit scetchy near the questions but the main bit I did get some notes for.) JW's general gist was changing the education sector's reliance on 'gatekeepers' and learning how to use 'accountability' as a means of structuring information and activities. This means participation is the bottomline and good community practice is important. I'm hoping to follow up with talks or projects re wikithinking in schools so they can see why read write culture is useful/important to them. I also have a card game I have been working on to model copyleft/copyright. [[1]] Lucychili 03:30, 26 April 2007 (UTC)

Indonesia articles...

Thanks for your attention paid to Indonesia articles today. Even if it is 'just' vandalism or inappropriate edit reversion, it is great to see others involved. --Merbabu 13:22, 26 April 2007 (UTC) I'll second that! SatuSuro 13:28, 26 April 2007 (UTC)

Ps, nice gallery too. I want to add to mine too. --Merbabu 13:24, 26 April 2007 (UTC)
Thanks!--cj | talk 13:24, 26 April 2007 (UTC)

Your edits to Nowra, New South Wales

Thanks for deleting all that useless information on the Nowra page. That page needed a good cleanup and I'd been meaning to do it for a while. JRG 13:27, 26 April 2007 (UTC)

No worries! Regards, --cj | talk 13:29, 26 April 2007 (UTC)


heheh userpage b-----d by another b----y sock all in five minutes - thanks :) SatuSuro 15:02, 26 April 2007 (UTC)

Great Barrier Reef

I was wondering why the Great Barrier Reef article was sprotected for so long? Vandalism is common on this high profile article, but is reverted by several editors frequently who have it on their watch list. Was there a high profile threat to it until May 6 or was this action requested for some other reason? Thanks. --MattWright (talk) 16:11, 26 April 2007 (UTC)

With articles with a consistent history of vandalism, it is sometimes useful to have a period of protection so as to dissuade recurrent vandals. The expiry date is completely arbitrary, and I'm happy to shorten it if you are bothered.--cj | talk 16:15, 26 April 2007 (UTC)


Is there any - in creating a sub page of the main australian project page as a sort of media diary/gallery of Jimbo's visit and also wikipedia in oz media - what do you think? SatuSuro 05:27, 27 April 2007 (UTC)

I'll respond at WP:AWNB. Cheers,--cj | talk 06:27, 27 April 2007 (UTC)


Not that it's a big deal but the script rating also appears to automaticly remove the talk page heading which I thought would be a good thing to have where possible on the political talk pages because their subject matter can be contentious. Thanks, WikiTownsvillian 15:43, 27 April 2007 (UTC)

Nah, that's cool, I don't feel strongly enough about it to start defending its vertues from criminal wanton destruction from the likes of junkies :) WikiTownsvillian 02:31, 28 April 2007 (UTC)
Oh noes, I've been found out! --cj | talk 07:57, 28 April 2007 (UTC)


Hey CJ, do you Gtalk? I have a problem which might require another admin's help. You don't have to if you're busy/don't want to :) Cheers, – Riana 15:20, 28 April 2007 (UTC)

Never mind. Problem appears to be solved. Regards, – Riana 15:23, 28 April 2007 (UTC)
I do now  ;) --cj | talk 15:30, 28 April 2007 (UTC)

Crash on Portal Australia?

Sorry I'd be happy to fix these but not sure what is wrong - just noticed that Portal:Australia has redlinks at Featured Article and Featured Picture. Thought you might be on-line, available and knowledgable?--VS talk 01:04, 30 April 2007 (UTC)

Fixed. Regards,--cj | talk 02:06, 30 April 2007 (UTC)

Skeleton NT project

Wondering your opinion/advice otherwise on starting a skeleton NT project - no frills no expectations no expected fancy stuff SatuSuro 02:02, 30 April 2007 (UTC)

I suppose it might be useful from a categorisation standpoint (as in, tagging articles as NT so we can reckon the scope of NT coverage), but I don't think it would sustain active participation. I'm not aware of any regular NT editors (there was one, but he's long since edited).--cj | talk 02:05, 30 April 2007 (UTC)
Just had a wa project guy show interest - thought just a skeleton project for tagging purposes alone would be worth it and if some bright spark turns up great otherwise no problems if it lies as a tagging haven alone
do I just start it up do you think or do i need a whizz like you to enable any aspects of it? SatuSuro 02:08, 30 April 2007 (UTC)
If you're happy to set up the project page, I'm happy to add a capability to {{WP Australia}} for tagging.--cj | talk 02:10, 30 April 2007 (UTC)
Do I hear something about an NT project? I'd be interested - I lived there for 5 years and have a bit of a feel for the place :) If you guys need a hand, let me know. – Riana 02:17, 30 April 2007 (UTC)
OK youre both on -Done - I have no pretensions beyond the horrible example of the dead in the stocks victoria project (Adelaide and Perth sure show those victorians what they are missing) - will start now SatuSuro 02:19, 30 April 2007 (UTC)
Yes, the fate of WP:VIC and others is best avoided. Once the project page is set-up, the appropriate parameter can be added to the banner.--cj | talk 02:25, 30 April 2007 (UTC)
WikiProject Northern Territory - do we work from this? SatuSuro 02:29, 30 April 2007 (UTC)
I have to step out - so the gruelling construction will continue tonight - cheers - any help advice or clues appreciated! SatuSuro 02:46, 30 April 2007 (UTC)

Back again

I figured if I make enough edits now, I'll somehow be able to turn back time and attend the breakfast with that other Jim. But seriously, I mostly only stopped by to fix some vandalism on a semi-protected page. Collaborative editing usually isn't, we're long past the stage where any given edit is more likely to improve a page than make it worse, and it's just not worth the stress—ooh! the French Wiki doesn't have a page on the Australian Greens, really need to fix that . . . ;o) ~J.K. 14:41, 1 May 2007 (UTC)

Your opinion - 1st Viscount William Self

Hey Cyber, just after your opinion on this article and whether material should be included:

Another editor and I have disagreed on whether material regarding sexual abuse allegations against William Self should be included in the article. I can understand that the allegations are upsetting but the other user is requiring "proof"... as a matter of reality, I can't see how that could occur. The material I've tried including (but I've been reverted) merely stated that the allegations are being reported (which is true, and I've included citations accordingly.)

Basically, given WP:BIO (I note that BLP doesn't apply, he's dead) and the obvious concerns about slandering a person's good name (justified or otherwise), what's your opinion? As I've said on the article talk page, I'm happy to conceed to community opinion on this.

Thanks for your attention, MojoTas 03:56, 3 May 2007 (UTC)

Replied at talk page. --cj | talk 13:09, 3 May 2007 (UTC)

List of Australian Leaders of the Opposition FLC

Just letting you know that I have addressed your concerns at FLC and if you could give it your support or a further reason to oppose, I would appreciate it. Todd661 09:06, 3 May 2007 (UTC)

If you're about?

Hi CJ - Can you give us a hand with a block on this IP I tried to get user:Longhair because he knows her history but he's out - I have also posted the following to WP:AIV. She has vandalised about 10 times in the past 2 hours. For your info... * (talk • contribs • deleted contribs • nuke contribs • logs • filter log • block user • block log) - This IP is in fact a sockpuppet of User:Rosinaharris (aka Banned Gundagai Editor) and commenced vandalising again at Coolac, New South Wales--VS talk 12:12, 3 May 2007 (UTC)

Seems like a sock to me. Duly whacked.--cj | talk 12:47, 3 May 2007 (UTC)
Ta muchly--VS talk 12:57, 3 May 2007 (UTC)

Edit request

Link: Template:WP Australia

Hey CJ :) I have a request - could you please work your magic on the template to add in a nonarticle parameter for WikiProject Northern Territory? I would, but I have no idea how to (all that code gave me the heeby jeebies). If you could add the parameter I will create the category it's meant to go into. Thanks, – Riana 13:44, 3 May 2007 (UTC)

Hi Riana. If I understand what you're wanting – separate categories for article and non-article pages – I need to do some testing first, because at present all subproject parameters automatically categorise all tagged pages as articles (even when also categorised as non-article pages). In any event, to categorise NT pages as non-articles, I'll need to add assessment code to the NT parameter – which will require the creation of at least 9 categories (another 5 if importance rankings are enabled).--cj | talk 14:11, 3 May 2007 (UTC)
OK. What would you like me to do? Specifics for the WikiProject noob, please :)Riana 14:12, 3 May 2007 (UTC)
My apologies for being a nuisance here! Blame the bloody category trawler  :( SatuSuro 14:20, 3 May 2007 (UTC)
No worries Satu. The following need creating:
They can be created using this robotic tool, but they'll still need to be formatted/categorised in the fashion of the other subproject categories.--cj | talk 14:31, 3 May 2007 (UTC)
Oh hell theyre going blue while I watch thisis like being outside a pub while there's a brawl! um - thanks for the info - is there any hole grail site/page for foobar usage? SatuSuro 14:38, 3 May 2007 (UTC)
OK, I've added the code to the banner. If you're eager, and once the categories are fully set up and few articles are tagged, you can use this web form to force the bot to run through NT assessments before the scheduled update. See here for all details. Anyway all, I'm off to bed ;).--cj | talk 15:04, 3 May 2007 (UTC)
Thanks for all the help CJ! I'm off to bed now too, but hopefully I've done it right so far. 'Night, – Riana 15:05, 3 May 2007 (UTC)
Glad to think the mid australian eds actually do sleep - cheers and thanks fo revealing the deep dark secrets of project formation - bit like some rite of passage from one terrible part of adolescence to another like - thanks SatuSuro 15:11, 3 May 2007 (UTC)
You might wonder about me -heheh - - I'll allow you to judge me anything more than crazy, less you might not be accurate :) SatuSuro 14:59, 6 May 2007 (UTC)
FYI I have copied part of this talk over to Baby_ifritah's sub page- but I think I will still need help for the behind the scenes work at OZ template - and a few other bits -hope you dont mind SatuSuro 00:25, 7 May 2007 (UTC)
OK Satu. Let me know when you're ready to 'go live', and I'll fix up the banner.--cj | talk 02:44, 7 May 2007 (UTC)
Noticed youre on dunno what Baby ifritah is up to say but I say we lift it our of her sub page as soon as you are ready and we do our best - i like your usurpation - I think I might try to trim mine too soon bit like a needed aircut SatuSuro 02:50, 7 May 2007 (UTC)
Its up and out there - whenever you are available to tweak the main oz project thingos to be able to include it - please - and thanks again- as always SatuSuro 03:51, 7 May 2007 (UTC)

Question re nav template

Is there a way to default a navigation template to auto-collapse? I've tried a number of parameters in the "class" field with absolutely no success, and I'm guessing it's something really obvious that just hasn't occurred to me yet. Thanks Orderinchaos 17:04, 3 May 2007 (UTC)

Wikipedia:NavFrame should explain it. The collapsible class attributes are autocollapse or collapsed. In the {{Navigation}} type templates, there's usually a state= parameter in which to insert the attibute. --cj | talk 07:55, 5 May 2007 (UTC)

Question on the failure of Portal: Graffiti

Hi Cyberjunkie, I'm unsure as to why this portal failed, I see one Support, and one Oppose. Is not the objective to reach a consensus? It was clear that whilst there were a few extremely helpful comments, no one wanted to voice their opinion, so the Portal could not move forward due to lack of consensus. What am I even asking? Cheers, Dfrg.msc 00:22, 6 May 2007 (UTC)

Huh?--cj | talk 12:06, 6 May 2007 (UTC)
Ok, right. Why is it that you failed Portal: Graffiti when when the result was "No Consensus"? Would it not have been beter to just leave it until a consensus was reached? Cheers, Dfrg.msc 05:43, 7 May 2007 (UTC)
I don't think that would be practical for the process overall. After several weeks being open, the discussion had gone stale – it had lost impetus, something which you could perhaps regain with a fresh nomination.--cj | talk 06:06, 7 May 2007 (UTC)


Regarding the above page; could you please justify why you blank reverted my edit to the above page. Granted, it was out of the ordinary, but the blank revert was unjustified and gives an impression of hostility.

Furthermore, you reverted by notification of the resolution of concerns raised by an editor in the latest post to the page, which has resulted in yet another editor contacting the other co-author, Daniel.Bryant (talk · contribs · logs), asking if the concerns should be dealt with.

Feel free to contact me at my talk page or via email; otherwise, I'll request you to revert yourself with regards to the replies at the bottom of the page (as for the refactoring and archiving, I'm fully prepared to ignore that ... it was controversial, and I've got no problem with its removal).

Kindest regards,
Anthony 00:21, 7 May 2007 (UTC)

I think it's quite a stretch to consider my revert hostile. I explained my reasoning both in my edit summary and on the talk page. It was not my intention to remove your responses to comments; I did not notice them, and I have now returned them per your notice.--cj | talk 02:43, 7 May 2007 (UTC)
Is this ready to close, do you think? Daniel Bryant 06:39, 8 May 2007 (UTC)

oz lit

would appreciate when you are back on if you could pop into the oz thingo that fixes the link with the OZ LIT project - cheersSatuSuro 12:42, 7 May 2007 (UTC)

It should be out there on its ownsome - not sure what you have to do and what i can do - would appreciated some clue as will be very scattered on and off tonight - cheers SatuSuro 11:30, 8 May 2007 (UTC)
I've added the basic parameter for literature: literature=yes.--cj | talk 11:46, 8 May 2007 (UTC)
Butyeahbut it dosnt show up here? - (sorry to be nuisance) SatuSuro 13:53, 8 May 2007 (UTC)
Fixed.--cj | talk 14:03, 8 May 2007 (UTC)
Thanks I owe! SatuSuro 14:19, 8 May 2007 (UTC)
I think I missed a bit of what to do with the enacting/activating the assessment pages - please consider me dumb - could you please remind me is there is anything I need to do with OZ lit assessment pages apart from lifting text from other projects for the front of the pages? Sorry to bother SatuSuro 11:32, 10 May 2007 (UTC)
This might have to wait a couple days, I'm sorry (unless you can get Longhair to do it in the meantime). I haven't added the assessment code to the AUSLIT parameter yet. --cj | talk 01:25, 11 May 2007 (UTC)
Thank you very much for letting me know - I think hes been off for a while (Longhair) - I'll see if I can rouse him to do it. Thanks for all your help project setup wise so far - it is appreciated SatuSuro 08:08, 11 May 2007 (UTC)


Sorry and thanks for returning the French version—slip of the mouse. Tony 09:15, 9 May 2007 (UTC)

No worries. It reminded me to pop over there and update the link on Wikipédia française. Thanks for the copyedit by the way.--cj | talk 09:17, 9 May 2007 (UTC)

Aussie Opposition Leaders FLC

I just wanted to know if you had any more concerns re the FLC nom. I know you disagree with the way the pictures are set out. Thats ok. I am too stubborn - that is why I won't change it...and concensus seems to be that it doesn't matter whether they are there or not, so I don't think it is worth changing. Todd661 09:46, 9 May 2007 (UTC)

I'm not concerned enough about it to oppose, but I don't particularly feel inclined to support. I do, however, thank you for the terrific work you've put into the list, and I hope that similar Australian politics lists might also benefit from your efforts.--cj | talk 09:58, 9 May 2007 (UTC)

Request to be unblocked

Cyber, this morning I was blocked and the reason given was promotion of something (I forget the exact wording). I am not, nor do I represent any profit-making organisation and I do not engage in promotion of a product.

I was also blocked for creating articles about nobodies (I forget the wording in the block, because it has taken quite a deal of time navigating to work out where and how one requests to be unblocked). The inference being, I assume, was that I was attempting to make someone up or to promote some private unimportant individual. The four names I was attempting to start article on ARE the stars of Billy Elliot the Musical which will commence in Sydney in December. These are the four young lads who will play Billy Elliot - they are far from nobodies. They will join the ranks fo Liam Mower, George McGuire, James Lomas, Leon Cooke, Colin Bates, Layton Williams, Corey Snide, Matthew Koon and Dean McCarthy (all London Billy Elliots).

Currently there are no articles on these lads, and soon thousands of people will be seeking to find out more about them.

I am the Site Administrator for a Fan Forum of the production and I do have access to some privileged information.

It would certainly be beneficial for Wikipedia to have access to this information and I would like to be able to set up the articles so I, and others, can input information about these talented young Australians.

Just back to the promotion issue. Our Forum is not a profit-making business, so we have nothing to promote. It seems a touch strange that both the UK and Australian Fan Forum's have been removed from the Billy Elliot the Musical article, but the official site (which sells tickets, and makes MONEY from the show) link remains. That seems rather hypocritical given the reason our link was removed ie Wikipedia is not about promotion ??????

I do not mean to sound rude, I am highly annoyed and would appreciate a fair hearing in this forum.

Regards, BETM Oz Fan Forum —The preceding unsigned comment was added by BETM (talkcontribs) 15:05, 9 May 2007 (UTC).

The block I placed on your account was 3 hours only and has now expired, as evidenced by your editing of my talk page. The details of how to respond to the block were contained within my message on your talk page, so you should not have had to go looking. The reason I blocked you was so that you would take heed of my warnings, which you apparently still have not, considering your edits following the block's expiration. It is irrelevant whether your site is for-profit, not-for-profit, or for pygmy hippopotamuses — the fact of the matter is you are misusing Wikipedia to promote your site in contravention of our external links guideline. In other words, you hold a conflict of interest and are spamming Wikipedia.
As for the biographies you have posted, these articles have been again speedily deleted under criterion A7: Unremarkable people, groups, companies and websites. It is important that you be aware that Wikipedia has a basic notability threshold and policies requiring all articles be verifiable and written in a neutral point of view. Please edit Wikipedia constructively, specifically in an area outside your conflict of interest. Thanks,--cj | talk 15:39, 9 May 2007 (UTC)
Why do you keep treating me like a jerk - I am real and expect a decent response. I am going to a higher authority if you continue to block me without even botjhering to say why. It is the height of rudeness!—The preceding unsigned comment was added by BETM (talkcontribs) 09:39, 10 May 2007.
Please do not top post and sign your comments with four tildes ( ~~~~ ) or by clicking signature button   located above the edit window.
I have not re-blocked you. I have, however, provided you a decent response, pointing out that your edits are in violation of Wikipedia policy and requesting you desist. --cj | talk 01:41, 10 May 2007 (UTC)

Thanks for being so totoally unreasonable, rude and ignorant !—The preceding unsigned comment was added by BETM (talkcontribs) 06:54, 11 May 2007 (ACST).

Says you whilst shouting incivilities. --cj | talk 01:25, 11 May 2007 (UTC)
Thank you for your response, it was very much appreciated.
I still have a bone to pick though on two counts, and I'm not sure you have understood my initial objection.
1. Why is a link to a profit-making official web-site that SELLS tikcets not considered promotion ?? Seem hypocritical in the extreme. Does multi-millionaire status give some special privilege to companies, ot do they pay for advertising here ???
2. I wish to add the articles on the 4 lads who are NOT nobodies. They will be announced on national television on Sunday and will appear live on Sunrise (Seven Network Australia) on Monday morning. Will be again remove their articles once they ARE announced. I hope not, this is an opportunity of a life-time for these boys. I have no connection to these boys, I am based in London (though I am Australian). I do not know them or their families and I do not work for any organisation that makes money from the show. There is no self-promotion involved in creating articles on these lads. I created the articles and did not mention they would be Billy Ellliot, because the official announcement has not been made and it is not my place to 'steal the thunder' of the production company. However, once the announcement is public these details and a little more can be added. Including their image if this site allows for that.
Are you able to help me resolve this problem CJ. Please don't just quote the self-promotion rule, I am not self-promoting when it comes to the 4 lads.—The preceding unsigned comment was added by BETM (talkcontribs) 15:44, 16 May 2007 (ACST).

The Portuguese Discover Australia

I understand that the Portuguese discovering Austalia is at this point a claim, not a proven fact, I feel it's valid information for the Australia article as long as it is presented as a claim. More and more information is being found to support this claimRead [[2]] for more.

Cheers, Murraybuckley 18:29, 10 May 2007 (UTC)

Didn't the dutch discover australia (not those wacky proto-aboriginals at least 40,000 years ago, they didn't wear pants OR hats) I thought they had the earliest claims... I am not involed in any debate, i just saw this edit. WookMuff 21:43, 10 May 2007 (UTC)
WookMuff, there are few (pseudo)historians who theorise that the first European discovery of Australia was by the Portuguese. We have article on the theory in fact: theory of Portuguese discovery of Australia.
Murraybuckley, I disagree that the claim is pertinent to the Australia article. That article is written in summary style and more specific details, such as the claim of Portuguese discovery, are covered within daughter articles — the history of Australia series.--cj | talk 01:25, 11 May 2007 (UTC)
Thanks for your time —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Murraybuckley (talkcontribs) 02:50, 11 May 2007 (UTC).
Oh, I don't think I had heard those CJ... unless... is it something to do with the Mahogany Ship? WookMuff 02:39, 20 May 2007 (UTC)


Would semi protection be possible on the Adelaide article? We seem to spend more time reverting edits on it than anything else. ...maelgwntalk 07:05, 11 May 2007 (UTC)

It wouldn't seem to be necessary at the moment, though if the vandal onslaught restarts please do request protection at WP:RFPP or give Riana or Daniel a buzz – I probably won't be back online until Sunday. --cj | talk 11:05, 11 May 2007 (UTC)
It's not really an onslaught, its more of a annoying repetition. But yeah - will keep an eye on it ...maelgwntalk 11:15, 11 May 2007 (UTC)


Hey, thanks for reminding me. I swear it was an accident! =D Taylor 14:43, 12 May 2007 (UTC)

Australian literature is new ACOTF

Hi. You voted to support Australian literature as the new Australian collaboration. Please help to improve it in any way you can. Thanks. Scott Davis Talk 14:22, 13 May 2007 (UTC)

My RfA

Thank you for participating in my RFA, which passed with 53-1-0. I will put myself into the various tasks of a administrator immediately, and if I make any mistakes, feel free to shout at me or smack me in my head. Aquarius • talk 17:33, 15 May 2007 (UTC)


For pointing that out  :) SatuSuro 23:36, 15 May 2007 (UTC)

re: Wikibirthday

It does, yeah! My absurd mathematical mind is very pleased that I've had exactly 20 talk archives in 1 year, for some reason :) I'm surprised I got hooked enough to stick around for a year. Ah, and thanks for the welcome all those months ago - I didn't get welcomed until about 3 weeks in, which is quite good, actually :) – Riana 10:05, 16 May 2007 (UTC)

  Cheers! And thank you for all your guidance and encouragement over the past year, I appreciate it :) Take care, – Riana 10:28, 16 May 2007 (UTC)

WikiProject Cities

Articles are allowed to belong to more than one project. Also, decentralisation of city article guidelines is not a good idea. Epbr123 00:45, 17 May 2007 (UTC)

You've got the wrong idea here, IMO. This really ought to be discussed now, but I haven't really the time. I'll try to come back to it in the next couple weeks.--cj | talk 08:54, 18 May 2007 (UTC)


Hi CJ A user by the name of Grinning Idiot, who has only been editing for a month or so, has made substantial changes to the WorkChoices article. While I do not have any problems with correcting the grammar, punctuation, elimination of 'weasal' words or perceived bias in the article from this user, they have deleted rather large sections of referenced text about the campaign against Workchoices. Can you have a look at these edits? I don't want to launch into a revert war, and I'd like a second opinion. Thanks --Takver 04:34, 17 May 2007 (UTC)

I've returned some obvious parts, but I don't really have time just now to come to a conclusion about the rest. I would think, however, that the "Debate and reaction" has a legitimate place in the article. Regards, --cj | talk 12:31, 17 May 2007 (UTC)

tagging of Palm

Hi CJ, while I agree with you that Palm is obviously not a city, it does say in the Wikiproject Cities description that they consider anything down to a settlement to be within their scope, while I don't really care much either way I would also point out that the person was not tagging the article but bringing it under the umbrella of another wikiproject which can only be good in bringing it to the attention of more wikipeadia editors also I think it is only for members of that wikiproject to determine if the articles falls within their scope or not as it is not a category but a indication that a collaboration wishes to include this article in their collaboration. WikiTownsvillian 04:44, 17 May 2007 (UTC)

I am a member of that WikiProject, IIRC. What we have here is a duplication of efforts with the result of clutter, contrary to the emerging consensus at WP:COUNCIL and WP:WPREF As I've mentioned to Epbr123, I don't really have time to mount an argument now, but I'll try to return to it later. Thanks,--cj | talk 08:54, 18 May 2007 (UTC)

To do list at Oz lit

I've queried longhair (hes back) and he seemed to thing something to do with the == inside - I would appreciae your opinion on the issue as it is preventing editing of the to do page and by the size of the list there is interest - you might want to see my comments at longhair- and the error message I got - I still think its soemthing to do with the to do thing doobie do (god I cannot get the frank sinatra joke out of my head when I type to do) SatuSuro 11:56, 17 May 2007 (UTC)

Thank you for that! I owe. (its off to work we go) - cripes my kids are teenagers, it must be the soup or something SatuSuro 12:14, 17 May 2007 (UTC)

New name

Nice! Now your signature is more accurate... Daniel 09:18, 19 May 2007 (UTC)

Re: Welcome

Hi CJ.
Thank you for your welcome and your extremely polite comments and suggestions. It's nice to be appreciated.
Some questions:

  • I assume this was triggered by my changes to the Fairbairn site?
  • Why are you "assuming" I'm an Adelaidean? (My User page is quite explicit. Or are you just being polite?)
  • Similarly, why do you mention the four tildes? (I've always signed all my comments with four tildes - I thought. Did I miss one somewhere?)

Again, thank you for your welcome and expression of appreciation. Pdfpdf 12:39, 19 May 2007 (UTC)
P.S. CJ is a much cooler usename than pdfpdf!!

Thanks CJ Pdfpdf 12:57, 19 May 2007 (UTC)

Re Attack Site

I disagree that: "it actually quite narrowly defines an "attack site" as that which (maliciously) publishes private information of a Wikipedians' identity. Kelly's blog clearly not such a site"

I won't quote all the text, but it give some examples in NPA: "There is no bright-line rule about what constitutes a personal attack as opposed to constructive discussion, but some types of comments are never acceptable:"

Then concludes: "These examples are not inclusive. Insulting or disparaging an editor is a personal attack regardless of the manner in which it is done."

And at the RFA

Harrassment 1) It is unacceptable to harass another user.

Pass 6-0 at 02:08, 20 October 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Combatting harassment 2) Any user, including an administrator using administrative powers, may remove or otherwise defeat attempts at harassment of a user. This includes harassment directed at the user themselves.

Pass 6-0 at 02:08, 20 October 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Links to attack site 3) Links to attack sites may be removed by any user; such removals are exempt from 3RR. Deliberately linking to an attack site may be grounds for blocking.

Pass 5-0-1 at 02:08, 20 October 2006 (UTC)

It gives a definition for sufficient conditions for a definition of an Attack Site, but I believe it is incorrect to infer that ONLY those conditions count when determining if a site is as an attack site.

I left the text unchanged, it continued to say: "For more righteous indignation, see my blog", I removed only the link.

It seems unreasonable that there is a Wikipedia rule which says:

"In order to create and distribute a multilingual free encyclopedia of the highest quality to every single person on the planet in their own language, we have implemented User pages. These pages are appropriate for posting blog links to your own personal blog where you may post attacks on other users, and although the encyclopedia is created through consensus, links to your own personal blog may not be removed"

I'll think more on the matter. Uncle uncle uncle 21:08, 19 May 2007 (UTC)

It's a nonsense to suggest that there's such a rule. The issue here is simply what constitutes an "attack site". Because the relevant section is in dispute, it is necessary to consider an attack site within the bounds of the ArbCom's ruling and aside from the rest of the policy:

The ArbCom has ruled that "[a] website that engages in the practice of publishing private information concerning the identities of Wikipedia participants will be regarded as an attack site whose pages should not be linked to from Wikipedia pages under any circumstances," [2] and that "[l]inks to attack sites may be removed by any user; such removals are exempt from 3RR. Deliberately linking to an attack site may be grounds for blocking.

It is fine that you consider an attack site to constitute anything containing what normally would be considered a personal attack on-wiki, but at the present time, the only clear-cut definition is the ArbCom's ruling. It is inappropriate, IMV, to enforce anything else. --cj | talk 23:01, 19 May 2007 (UTC)

Aussie Barnstar

Aussie Barnstar!!

Hey CJ, I've finished the Barnstar but it's in low quality. If you have any more ideas or you can make it look more neat, please do so. And should I publish it yet? Thanks for the ideas also. Cheers. Chicken7 04:15, 20 May 2007 (UTC)


Please check my changes to the Politics section. In particular, I added a clause to convey the right sense about compulsory voting to foreigners. Without it, I think some readers will think that voting is optional after all. (Is it really optional—via non-enrolment—for South Australians to vote in federal elections, then?) Tony 00:19, 22 May 2007 (UTC) Oh, and the Aussi Barnstar: yucky in concept and it's visually kitsch and cluttered to boot. Sorry. Tony 00:21, 22 May 2007 (UTC)


Thanks for blockin' User:; cleaning up his mess didn't leave much time for reporting his actions and I was afraid if something wasn't done soon it would get worse. Keep up the god work! TomStar81 (Talk) 09:18, 22 May 2007 (UTC)

Gleeson College and Talk:Gleeson College

  • Someone speedy-delete-tagged Gleeson College, for reasons which will be apparent on reading its old edit as at 11:35, 3 May 2007 at this link: , or some of the edits below (= older than) it in Gleeson College's edit history.

When I deleted it, its talk page Talk:Gleeson College went along with it.
I have now restored Talk:Gleeson College.
This is Gleeson College's delete and undelete log:-

Deletion log

  • 13:28, 3 May 2007 RHaworth (Talk | contribs | block) restored "Gleeson College" (204 revisions restored)
  • 13:27, 3 May 2007 RHaworth (Talk | contribs | block) restored "Gleeson College" (1 revisions restored)
  • 13:25, 3 May 2007 RHaworth (Talk | contribs | block) deleted "Gleeson College" (reposted nonsense / attack) (Restore)
  • 11:37, 3 May 2007 Anthony Appleyard (Talk | contribs | block) deleted "Gleeson College" (WP:CSD#G1 - Nonsense page.) (Restore)
It seems that when User:RHaworth restored Gleeson College, he did not think to also restore Talk:Gleeson College.

Anthony Appleyard 16:24, 22 May 2007 (UTC)

My RfA

Hi CJ. I'd like to thank you for your support of my RfA. It was closed at surprising 75/0/0, so I'm an admin now. MaxSem 22:28, 25 May 2007 (UTC)