User talk:CJ/Archive 18

Add topic
Active discussions

Block of Elvisandhismagicpelvis

Do you really think one week is an appropriate block length? This is his first block and that seems kind of excessive. -- John Reaves 02:11, 31 July 2007 (UTC).

It is one of the harsher blocks I've given, but I don't feel that it is inappropriate. Looking at Elvisandhismagicpelvis' contribution history and the interaction he has had with others, I felt that a longer block was necessary to dissuade him from edit warring. His subsequent comments, however, do not instil with me with any confidence that even the longer block will end his disruption.--cj | talk 11:21, 31 July 2007 (UTC)


Can I also pls get you to unlock this page to non-anon only edits? :-) Ta. Timeshift 11:17, 31 July 2007 (UTC)

Done.--cj | talk 11:21, 31 July 2007 (UTC)

Please review edits to Family First Party and my talk page, this user needs dealing with. Timeshift 10:51, 31 July 2007 (UTC)

I'm watching, but I'm restricted in what I can do now that I'm technically involved.--cj | talk 11:21, 31 July 2007 (UTC)
You where always involved, First you came and deleted my comment that Family First was a christian party. I then put in that Family Family was not christian as stated on their website, which people need to know since most people think they are, but you deleted it twice why? why not join the discussion? Why did you delete the fact and refernece for it? -- 12:34, 31 July 2007 (UTC)
Honestly, I am beginning to see some trolling tendencies here. If I am mistaken, and you are simply unaware, allow me to clarify. I, and several others, reverted your addition claiming that FFP are a Christian party because it was un-attributed bias. I further reverted your addition of "(Not Christian)" in the lead because was blatantly pointed. I hope this clarification helps. --cj | talk 13:15, 31 July 2007 (UTC)

Please review edits to Magic the Gathering and my talk page, this user needs dealing with. AldaronT/C 13:16, 31 July 2007 (UTC)

As much as I agree with you that this user should be blocked for disruption, I'm pretty sure you're not supposed to indef-block IPs. Someone else unrelated could end up with that IP and be unable to edit wikipedia because of it. I think you should change the indef block to a month or so, so it doesn't permanently block anyone who may use that IP from editing. Thanks!! Gscshoyru 12:19, 3 August 2007 (UTC)
I blocked indefinitely, not forever. I intend on returning to unblock at some point in the near future (but not at a date known to the user). If there are any problems in the interim, I'll deal with them as they occur.--cj | talk 12:24, 3 August 2007 (UTC)
Ah. Gotcha. Ok. Gscshoyru 12:26, 3 August 2007 (UTC)


Yeah I've appologise, think I'll grab the camera on go enjoy the sunshine today, and let it all unfold . Gnangarra 04:37, 3 August 2007 (UTC)

Geotagging around Adelaide - advice

Hi CJ, I'm looking to contribute to Adelaide suburbs in the form of adding co-ordinates where appropriate. I've tried googling on the subject but was unable to cut through all the options and figure out what is easiest. What is the easiest and quickest way to do this, what do you recommend, in particular for Adelaide locations? thanks! Muzzamo 00:26, 3 August 2007 (UTC)

Do you mean to find co-ordinates? If so, I typically just use Geoscience Australia's place name search. I went though most of the Adelaide suburb articles that existed at the time about a year or so ago and introduced {{geolinks-AUS-suburbscale}}. If you are planning on running through Adelaide suburb articles, it might be a good idea to make sure they have that template.--cj | talk 02:00, 3 August 2007 (UTC)
Yep that was pretty much what I was after. Not just suburbs, other places in Adelaide/SA where appropriate too. Thanks Muzzamo 03:50, 3 August 2007 (UTC)
What would be the easiest/quickest way of getting co-ordinates for other locations (train stations for instance), by point or clicking on a map or otherwise? Muzzamo 03:34, 4 August 2007 (UTC)
Using place names search, as above. For instance, searching "Brighton railway station" in South Australia returns this.--cj | talk 03:46, 4 August 2007 (UTC)


I can do one better. User:AoG The One Ture Church is User:Richard Marsland is User:Tony F Martin is User:Ed Kavalee. This person is also User:The Get This Gimp, User:Ursa's Son and User:Ed&tonys love child, as well as the anon who has been ranting at Family First Party forever. Rebecca 05:27, 3 August 2007 (UTC)

Ah, very good. Another troll bites the dust. Thanks, --cj | talk 05:29, 3 August 2007 (UTC)
I changed the indefinite block on the IP to 6 months. We don't usually block IP's indefinitely unless they're open proxies; after all, people move, change ISP's, etc. Does that sound good? I assume you've already blocked all the named sockpuppet accounts... MastCell Talk 17:31, 3 August 2007 (UTC)
That's fine, but see my response to Gscshoyru above. And yes, they're all blocked.--cj | talk 03:13, 4 August 2007 (UTC)
Good news. It's sad how much disruption a single person can cause. Glad to see that this ended well (for now). AldaronT/C 17:38, 3 August 2007 (UTC)

Wikipedia:Requests for adminship/Elonka 2

Thank you for taking the time to participate at the discussion in my Request for Adminship. Unfortunately the nomination did not succeed, but please rest assured that I am still in full support of the Wikipedia project. I listened carefully to all concerns, and will do my best to incorporate all of the constructive advice that I received, into my future actions on Wikipedia. If you can think of any other ways that I can further improve, please let me know. Best wishes, Elonka 03:45, 5 August 2007 (UTC)


In the spirit of WP:IAR, this should not be deleted and I would appreciate any assistance you can offer. Timeshift 21:22, 8 August 2007 (UTC)

Thanks for fixing my userpage

I missed the inappropriate edit, so thanks for reverting it.JQ 11:25, 8 August 2007 (UTC)

No worries.--cj | talk 02:05, 10 August 2007 (UTC)

Just a quick one

Would you please, if you know how, advise me on how to move my userboxes up on User:Timeshift9 as right now the text is keeping the boxes horizontally below the text. Thanks. Timeshift 00:32, 10 August 2007 (UTC)

Some quick, crude code later, and I think you've the result you want. :)--cj | talk 02:03, 10 August 2007 (UTC)
Cheers :D Timeshift 02:14, 10 August 2007 (UTC)

Final question if I may, i've tried adding the bullet points with an asterisk however it's just added an asterisk instead of the bullet point. Sorry to be difficult. Timeshift 02:17, 10 August 2007 (UTC)

Done.--cj | talk 02:34, 10 August 2007 (UTC)
Legend. Thanks. :-) Timeshift 02:48, 10 August 2007 (UTC)

AWNB Tools Page

I think the header link should stay unless the page is deleted. Put it through MfD and have it deleted that way; only then will it be appropriate to delete the link. JRG 00:02, 10 August 2007 (UTC)

This strikes me as reverting just for its own sake. What reason have you to keep it? --cj | talk 01:53, 10 August 2007 (UTC)
Someone might find it useful. Put it up for MfD and see what people think first. I'm happy to get rid of it if that's the consensus. JRG 02:24, 10 August 2007 (UTC)
"Someone might find it useful"? Please come up with a better reason than that. I'm not going to trouble MFD with simple WikiProject maintenance I'm more than capable of handling. I'm gearing up to give the noticeboard and project a makeover, as I have done several times in the past without incidence. I'm sure you have better things to be doing than making a pain of my effort.--cj | talk 02:31, 10 August 2007 (UTC)
Yeah, looks like a G6 issue to me. Orderinchaos 08:33, 11 August 2007 (UTC)

usa has more external territorial claim than alaska and Hawaii

You are saying that the us gets away with alaska and Hawaii, these are however us states, just like queensland and WA, the reason Australia doesn't include external territories such as Norfolk island is the same reason the US doesn't include external territories such as puerto rico, which has it's own constitution (which must not override the Us constitution) but doesn't have equal represantion in congress, however everyone from puerto rico is a us citizen and a us passport holder. Also why should australia consider territories such as norfolk island when australian citizens require a passport to enter what is technially federal territory? Same reason British nationals are only granted immigration clearance to the Falklands subject to having sufficient funds, accomadation, and an onward ticket, the same as is required by a foreigner, Just because a government annexes and external territory doesn't constitute the right to free, unrestricted travel for citizens of it's country., guitar3000Guitar3000 14:14, 10 August 2007 (UTC)

I'm sorry, what? --cj | talk 14:24, 10 August 2007 (UTC)
I get the impression someone is arguing about the land area of Australia vs the US, either that or something to do with external territories which was lost on me. The fact you can't travel to Alaska without flying over somebody else's territory always gets them in the end. Orderinchaos 08:36, 11 August 2007 (UTC)

John Howard

Hi CJ, can this article be re-protected from anon vandals, it is obviously being vandalised enough to warrant it. Cheers, WikiTownsvillian 10:42, 8 August 2007 (UTC)

Done.--cj | talk 01:04, 12 August 2007 (UTC)

Hi, I agree with the protecting - however, don't we need to set an end-date to this protection? Say - set a time after the election? or switch to semi-protection, with a high vandal-watch in place?—The preceding unsigned comment was added by (talkcontribs) 10:10, 12 August 2007.

It is only semi-protected. As for a date, I don't think it's necessary.--cj | talk 01:04, 12 August 2007 (UTC)

Cleft Rock

My removal of the {{db-copyvio}} tag (with the edit summary the reworked text differs sufficiently from the source as no longer to present a copyvio problem [there remain some similarities, but there are only so many ways to assemble so few basic facts]; you should feel free, of course, to disagree with this analysis, but I don't imagine that you thought this G12able) from the instant article edit-conflicted with your A7 deletion. Although I don't see any suggestion that the park is notable (I was indeed inclined myself to {{prod}}, although not without a bit more investigation), but I think I must observe that parks (at least, I suppose, those that aren't commercial in nature) or physical features situated therein do not fall within the scope of A7. If you'd be inclined to undelete (and, of course, at your discretion, to PROD or AfD), I should be much appreciative; if you'd prefer that I take the issue to DRV, please drop me a line to that effect at your leisure. Cheers, Joe 02:20, 12 August 2007 (UTC)

No, it wasn't at all 'G12able', but I don't feel that speedy deletion due to notability concerns was entirely inappropriate. Nevertheless, I've restored and proded per your suggestion. Thanks, --cj | talk 02:25, 12 August 2007 (UTC)

John Howard

Page has been locked - as the only real place to report issues the government experiences is on the Prime Minister of the time's page, I find it quite simply a 'whitewash' to have the AWB/cole enquiry section on his page, there since it happened, removed a few months before the election. Your views? Timeshift 23:39, 12 August 2007 (UTC)

Fair compromise? I don't think its appropriate to remove any reference to the cole enquiry/awb, as they arent on the election pages and should be mentioned somewhere. I think it's appropriate under Iraq on JH's page. Timeshift 03:02, 13 August 2007 (UTC)
Other countries deal with it by having pages for the governmental term - eg 4th Howard Ministry or some such. However this would be very difficult in the Australian context where there seems to be an endless game of musical chairs. Orderinchaos 17:33, 13 August 2007 (UTC)
Interesting point. We do have articles on Australian ministries, although I don't think these really correspond to equivalent overseas articles. For one thing, I've always found it curious that we separate ministry articles by term whereas the Brits and Canucks separate by PM. So while we have 1, 2, 3, 4 Howard ministry articles, there's a sole Blair Ministry. But that's another matter... Back to the issue, I suppose these articles could utilised for coverage of Government happenings.--cj | talk 04:26, 14 August 2007 (UTC)


Hello and thank you for your message. I believe that both the block and duration were justified as the user was properly warned to cease incivil commentaries, has been blocked in the past for such commentaries and proceeded to continue directly after his warning. If you do feel strongly enough however that his block should either be removed or reduced then I suggest you comment on WP:AN/I to get the opinions of other administrators and contributors. Thank you.--Jersey Devil 00:16, 16 August 2007 (UTC)


Hi! I reverted an edit of yours and took it to the discussion page for consensus. I agree there is an issue of confusion with the content you removed, but I think the solution may me more complex than simply content deletion. I would appreciate your input into discussion on this. Cheers! aliasd·U·T 20:01, 16 August 2007 (UTC)

Replied there.--cj | talk 01:26, 17 August 2007 (UTC)

Parliamentary Chamber infobox

I see a disagreement between CJ and Lockesdonkey about creation of a new infobox in the Australian Senate article. I thought the infobox was quite a good assembly of information dispersed throughout the article (some of it not easily found). I note Lockesdonkey's observation that these are used in other legislature pages, though the format is not always standard (compare Bundestag with Scottish Parliament for example). Unless WP has a policy that an infobox should not duplicate information in an article in any way (in which case, there seem to be a lot of info boxes that need removing!), i would favour its retention. I am posting this to both user pages, reverting the removal of the box for now, and await discussion at the Senate talkpage. User:hamiltonstone 23:25, 19 August 2007 (UTC)


Thank you for promoting this portal to featured portal! You deserve a big hug! OhanaUnitedTalk page 00:36, 23 August 2007 (UTC)

Image copyright status

Hi - could you please advise on this picture, if it's valid and if so inform me how to go about doing it the way this user has done. Timeshift 10:17, 24 August 2007 (UTC)


What does this edit summary refer to which you left earlier at the Rove McManus article? Further vandalism on the horizon? -- Longhair\talk 11:36, 26 August 2007 (UTC)

I suspected as much. What I meant to ask was 'what was said', and 'what should we be looking out for'? -- Longhair\talk 00:01, 27 August 2007 (UTC)

Kevin Andrews

I was disappointed to read your edit summary : attempt to neutralise; remove WP:BLP concerns, original research and false Kelly reference.

Unfortunately when attempting to clean up the extremely poorly formatted references I assumed two references from The Australian were one - The Australian's web page links are hard to distinguish from each other - see my edits [1] and [2]. The correct references should have read,25197,22185125-28737,00.html should have been referenced {{cite news | first= Paul | last= Kelly | authorlink= Paul Kelly (journalist) | url=,25197,22185125-28737,00.html | title= Crisis of trust | work= Features | publisher= [[The Australian]] | date= 4 August 2007| accessdate= 2007-08-22 }} to give Kelly, Paul (4 August 2007). "Crisis of trust". Features. The Australian. Retrieved 2007-08-22.

and,25197,22153989-7583,00.html should have been referenced as {{cite news | first= William | last= Maley| authorlink= | url=,25197,22153989-7583,00.html | title= Minister needs a character test | work= | publisher= [[The Australian]] | date= 30 July 2007| accessdate= 2007-08-29 }} to read Maley, William (30 July 2007). "Minister needs a character test". The Australian. Retrieved 2007-08-29.

It seems unfortunate that there should be such a breach of AGF implicit in the edit summary.

I think both the Kelly and Maley pieces were useful citations as citing a variety of publications gives credence that it is not just one subset of journalists attacking Andrews but in fact widespread concern or at least commentary on his actions. --Golden Wattle talk 00:25, 29 August 2007 (UTC)

I'm sorry you feel I assumed bad intent; I did not. In fact, it upsets me that you think I would. I simply made a bad choice of word in "false", the pejorative connotations of which escaped me at quarter past one in the morning. To assure you, I was just editing the text as it was, without knowledge of whomever added it, and the reference provided did not support the text. Before I realised the reference was not correct, I actually redrafted the text in an attempt to include it, as as far Australian journalists go, Kelly is fairly noteworthy.
Irrespective of this issue, I do hope you agree that my edit was on-the-whole a good one, going a significant way, in my opinion, to redirect the article from an inappropriate direction.--cj | talk 00:45, 29 August 2007 (UTC)
I thought your susbtantial edit to the article was indeed useful and cleaned up the text substantially. --Golden Wattle talk 00:52, 29 August 2007 (UTC)

AU sports WikiProjects

Way back then [3] you proosed that the AFL project come under the umbrella of Wikipedia:WikiProject Australian sports. This seems to me to be a sensible idea but I notice that a few other other Aussie sports projects have since appeared. See Wikipedia:WikiProject_Council/Directory/Culture/Sports#Australian_sports. Is this worth pursuing or has too much water passed under the bridge? And what are the arguments for doing such a move? —Moondyne 00:48, 29 August 2007 (UTC)

Incorrectly labelled close

I believe the intention of this edit was to promote Portal:Illinois. However, the discussion page is unclosed and the star does not appear on the page. The talk page indicates a promotion, however.--TonyTheTiger (t/c/bio/tcfkaWCDbwincowtchatlotpsoplrttaDCLaM) 19:31, 30 August 2007 (UTC)

I'm not sure what you mean? The portal has been promoted in the usual manner, and the star was added.--cj | talk 00:39, 31 August 2007 (UTC)


Hi, on the off chance you're around could you take a look at immigration to Australia; there is someone with an axe to grind about migration agents - a topic which is only peripherally relevant. There seems to be a bunch of socks reverting the editor, and I've made 3 reverts too, but I can't be bothered making a 3RR report. Thanks --Peta 11:18, 31 August 2007 (UTC)

Territorial evolution of Australia

Hi, CJ. I do not want to edit war with you, but I do not understand your removal of the link to this article in NSW. It gives so much more useful information on the change in boundaries than the paragraph in the NSW article. I have added it as a "See also". Maybe I'm being thick this morning and missing something. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Bduke (talkcontribs) 22:47, 1 September 2007 (UTC)

I wasn't removing the link specifically, but rather the way in which it had been introduced, which was inappropriate and redundant. I agree the link itself has some value, but I couldn't figure a way to integrate it acceptably. I'm happy with its addition to the See also section.--cj | talk 03:23, 2 September 2007 (UTC)

Immigration to Australia

I don't think this page needs to be protected forever. I would like to have another chance at reasonable editing, along the lines of my last attempt. If there is a resumption of the edit warring, I would be grateful for any help in resolving the issue. jbdelaporte 22:12, 2 September 2007 (UTC)

Images over 50 years old of Prime Ministers

I'm looking at adding them to wikimedia commons, however I just want to check your opinion on how well the Images over 50 years old of Prime Ministers thus copyright-free line will hold up over there. Timeshift 00:03, 3 September 2007 (UTC)

Your recent edit summary in an edit of the Pablo Ganguli article

As the person who created the (existing) article (which went through a deletion review before it was allowed to be moved to mainspace), I would be more than happy to discuss the concerns you noted about WP:AUTO and WP:COI, since I have absolutely no connection with the subject of the article. Please post a note on my user talk page with any details that cause you concerns regarding my creation of and contributions to the article.

As for WP:NN (I believe you actually meant WP:BIO), I would have hoped that nineteen sources cited in the References section, all meeting WP:RS standards, would suffice. If, upon review, you still consider the criteria of WP:BIO to have not been met, I invite you to post at Talk:Pablo Ganguli to explain why. -- John Broughton (♫♫) 01:44, 3 September 2007 (UTC)


Thankyou. Timeshift 15:26, 5 September 2007 (UTC)

feel free not to vandalise my user page. add whatever you want to my talk page though. what was that about etiquette? ChampagneComedy 16:05, 5 September 2007 (UTC)
I just read your userpage - you vandalised it yourself. You obviously have no real interest in genuine constructive contributions. Timeshift 16:08, 5 September 2007 (UTC)

Just so you're aware I've restored and move-protected the page in question - more to restore sanity than for any other reason. Should you or any other admin wish to review my action, feel free. Orderinchaos 18:19, 5 September 2007 (UTC)

I'm fine with that. :)--cj | talk 09:12, 6 September 2007 (UTC)
Cool :) Check your email. Orderinchaos 21:49, 6 September 2007 (UTC)


Any particular reason? Timeshift 14:37, 9 September 2007 (UTC)

Several. I'll just say that I've other things to be doing.--cj | talk 14:40, 9 September 2007 (UTC)
Will you be around (or plan to be) during the election campaign? I'd hate to think we'd lose another experienced hand, especially an administrator. Timeshift 16:09, 9 September 2007 (UTC)
I probably won't be able to resist, especially with the way things are going...--cj | talk 16:11, 9 September 2007 (UTC)
Nice :-) Anything to say on the latest? RM 60, Np 59, ACN 57, Gxy 57, and it's mid-september... per this, this is extremely dangerous for the coalition. Timeshift 16:14, 9 September 2007 (UTC)
Perhaps, but I still haven't shaken my pessimism from four consecutive failures.--cj | talk 15:25, 12 September 2007 (UTC)

Mike Rann

It's not PD but it's close enough ;-) Timeshift 07:24, 12 September 2007 (UTC)

In fact, since it's specified non-comercial, it's not even copyleft and requires a rationale...--cj | talk 15:24, 12 September 2007 (UTC)
Ta. Fixed. Timeshift 15:36, 12 September 2007 (UTC)


Based on the recent WP:AN thread I'm going to go ahead and rename the MOS to something less official-sounding; several people pointed out that it possibly won't help, but nobody has made any big objections or allusions that it would be harmful. Please keep an eye out, it is possible that some wonks will vehemently object to this on bureaucratic grounds. >Radiant< 13:27, 17 September 2007 (UTC)

Enjoy your time off :)

Hey, hope it isn't for good or anything, it's always good to see you around. Quick question that I was asked to pass on to you - since you're our unofficial (?) featured portal director, will you still come around to take care of the promotions etc occasionally? Take care, ~ Riana 16:32, 21 September 2007 (UTC)

Yes, will try. Since you've poked me now, I've done a round of closures ;) --cj | talk 03:31, 22 September 2007 (UTC)
Ahh, wasn't expecting you to do that straightaway, but thanks! :) Hope the break is just normal 'too busy for WP' reasons and not something bad. Take care of yourself :) ~ Riana 04:28, 22 September 2007 (UTC)
Mostly busyness, though the fact Wikipedia isn't as attractive a place to spend my time as it once was is also a factor... Take care also :)--cj | talk 04:46, 22 September 2007 (UTC)

Welcome (hopefully) back :) Dihydrogen Monoxide (H2O) (Drought) 03:15, 22 September 2007 (UTC)

Thanks, though I haven't really left yet, nor am I returning :)--cj | talk 03:31, 22 September 2007 (UTC)
Erm...OK. Suits me :) Dihydrogen Monoxide (H2O) 03:37, 22 September 2007 (UTC)
Thanks :) Daniel 05:10, 22 September 2007 (UTC)
Can I solicit your fly-by thoughts on the IAP model I've played with at User talk:Orderinchaos/IAP? (That goes for anyone reading here too.) It's not a proposal so much as an idea. Thanks :) Orderinchaos 06:48, 23 September 2007 (UTC)

Advice sought

Talk:Leanne Clare RE: →Chris Hurley - remove hopelessly POV commentary, how did all this get by without my noticing?

Hi Bec, OIC, VS and CJ (Aussie Admins that I know of); wow Jb3 can go on! I think we have a wikilawyer-in-training, although he/she only seems to ever focus on this one issue.

If you're interested I'd like to know your opinion, the section seemed pretty blatant POV to me, the neutrality of the sources themselves could also be questioned. His analysis is flawed but I think it would be counterproductive for me to get into a whole point by point technical argument for pages and pages, I didn't have the page on my watchlist otherwise I would have been on to this long ago. So your third opinion is sought on how much I should engage/disengage on this issue, or if you might like to come in as a non-involved party. Cheers, WikiTownsvillian 11:55, 24 September 2007 (UTC)


now whats the problem with you. why did you reverted the edits. please be reasonable. thanks, Sushant gupta 12:31, 26 September 2007 (UTC)

Oh, come now. Your changes are misguided.--cj | talk 12:40, 26 September 2007 (UTC)
sorry dude, explain in detail. whats the problem. what do you mean by "misguided". Sushant gupta 12:49, 26 September 2007 (UTC)
See Template talk:Browsebar. Your edits go against consensus.--cj | talk 13:28, 26 September 2007 (UTC)


Sorry to bother you, but I was wondering why Portal:United States was demoted without a WP:FPRC sub-page? Sorry for seeming ignorant, I wasn't active in Featured Portal discussions back then. Cheers. - Mtmelendez (Talk|UB|Home) 03:28, 28 September 2007 (UTC)

It was summarily demoted per criterion 3(4).--cj | talk 04:35, 28 September 2007 (UTC)
Thanks. I was updating the Wikipedia:Featured portal removal candidates page and noticed that P:USA didn't have a sub-page. I just wanted to make sure it didn't exist.
I also wanted to tell you I went bold and created an archive template for closing Wikipedia:Featured portal removal candidates discussions. There are at {{FPRC top}} and {{FPRC bottom}}. The reason I made them was that there was closed discussions in the main page which were actually closed, so I archived them and templated them to avoid possible confusion. I also expanded the instructions in case other users want to participate in the process. I hope you don't mind. - Mtmelendez (Talk|UB|Home) 15:33, 28 September 2007 (UTC)
I noticed. Thanks for your efforts.--cj | talk 15:37, 28 September 2007 (UTC)

Wikipedia:Featured portal candidates/Portal:Africa

Hi. Portal:Africa has been updated substantially since you commented at Wikipedia:Featured portal candidates/Portal:Africa. Specifically, the tab system has been completed; it no longer contains redlinks and doesn't redirect to another portal. Would you please take another look? Thank you, Black Falcon (Talk) 03:06, 29 September 2007 (UTC)

FYI, I believe I've addressed your objection at the FPoC. Could you please take another look? CloudNine 11:31, 4 October 2007 (UTC)

Hello. Since you are on semi-wikibreak, I decide to volunteer myself to help at featured portal candidates. Do you want me to help close the nominations if there's strong consensus? Or do you still want to close them yourself? OhanaUnitedTalk page 21:40, 5 October 2007 (UTC)


Hey, I took the liberty of closing Wikipedia:Featured portal candidates/Portal:Africa, I did eveything except update Wikipedia:Featured content/Portals. Wasn't sure exactly how to do that. Hopefully I got everything else correct. Joe I 01:29, 6 October 2007 (UTC)

Everything should be done for it. Joe I 17:44, 6 October 2007 (UTC)

Luck of seven

Hello cj Noel Hidalgo is coming to Adelaide on Friday October 12 He will be at the Central Market for breakfast at Lucias 8am He is doing the tour. He is interested in meeting open source and free culture folk around the world. Feel free to email me to check up about other times. eg. Perhaps the Richmnd Hotel upstairs after 5pm on Friday evening for coffee drinks chat kinds of things. Cheers Lucychili 20:44, 10 October 2007 (UTC)

Sorry to hear you're not up to editing. Hope everything's okay! Anthøny 19:11, 6 November 2007 (UTC)


Hi CJ, do you have any thoughts on the latest Browsebar discussion (Template talk:Browsebar#This Browse Bar is All Wrong)? I added a suggestion for a relatively simple upgrade. ;-) RichardF (talk) 16:58, 24 November 2007 (UTC)


CJ, I am pleased to issue you with the Drover's Award. The Award is to be given to Australian Wikipedians who work tirelessly behind the scenes, especially on WikiProject maintenance tasks. Thanks for your contributions which help build a better encyclopedia. —Moondyne 23:19, 3 December 2007 (UTC)

Hello, I have created an article about the UN Parliamentary Assembly, a proposed world body that would be similar to Europarl. Please review and vote on the WP:FAC nomination. Thanks, Sarsaparilla (talk) 01:27, 8 December 2007 (UTC)

WikiProject Australia newsletter

WikiProject Australia publishes a newsletter informing Australian Wikipedians of ongoing events and happenings within the community and the project. This month's newsletter has been published. If you wish to unsubscribe from these messages, or prefer to have the newsletter delivered in full to your talk page, see our subscription page. This notice delivered by BrownBot (talk), at 21:30, 11 December 2007 (UTC).


Hey CJ, hope you're well! I've been considering starting a WikiProject related to Indigenous Australian topics. They're mostly kinda shabby on WP and perhaps if one could get a project and likeminded people together, they could be improved. At least, I hope so :) I've just started something very vague here. I'm contacting you because you did that cool category creating thing for WP:NT and I've completely forgotten how to :( Can you give me a pointer in that direction?

Oh and hey, check out Portal:South Australia, Daniel and I put some work into it :) Take care, ~ Riana 03:58, 26 December 2007 (UTC)

Portuguese discovery of Australiia

Our old friend Jazzper would be so proud of me.[4] Hesperian 05:02, 29 December 2007 (UTC)

Happy New Year!


Dear friend, I hope you had a wonderful New Year's Eve, and that 2008 is your best year yet! ~ Riana 02:12, 2 January 2008 (UTC)


WikiProject Australia newsletter

WikiProject Australia publishes a newsletter informing Australian Wikipedians of ongoing events and happenings within the community and the project. This month's newsletter has been published. If you wish to unsubscribe from these messages, or prefer to have the newsletter delivered in full to your talk page, see our subscription page. This notice delivered by BrownBot (talk), at 21:29, 3 January 2008 (UTC).