Digestible

Welcome

Hello Digestible, and welcome to Wikipedia! Thank you for your contributions, they have helped improve Wikipedia and make it more informative. I hope you enjoy using Wikipedia and decide to make additional contributions. Some resources to help new Wikipedians include:

How to edit a page

Editing tutorial

Picture tutorial

How to write a great article

Naming conventions

Manual of Style

As a contributor to Australian articles, you may like to connect with other Australian Wikipedians through the Australian Wikipedians' notice board and take a look at the activities in Wikipedia:WikiProject Australia and associated sub-projects.

Please sign your name on talk pages using four tildes ~~~~; this will automatically produce your name and the date.

If you have any questions, please see Wikipedia:Where to ask a question, try the Wikipedia:Help desk, or ask me on my talk page. Or you can just type {{helpme}} on your user page, and someone will show up shortly to answer your questions.

I hope you enjoy editing here and being a Wikipedian! Thank you for signing up! Orderinchaos 15:19, 19 December 2008 (UTC)

(I have a feeling you're another user who lost their password - if so, welcome back :))

Anna Bligh

What exactly does make this person controversial or not?? I find that a pretty questionable undo. The poll results show clearly that the premiere of Queensland is at the very least quite unpopular and that her decisions as such are seen as controversial for example the removal of the petrol excise in Queensland and the privatisation of the freight arm of QR. These decisions have created a backlash and as a leader of the Labor party in Queensland they are quite controversial/unexpected for a leader of the Labor party and are more so representative of actions that should be taken by the LNP. Even as there are factions in the Labor party the decisions made by the Bligh government go beyond what would be considered a traditional position of a Labor party government. If these decisions are not controversial and if the link provided does not highlight this then I'm sorry but as per usual the editing standards of wikipedia are fairly odd. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 124.177.110.15 (talk) 11:27, 14 February 2010 (UTC)

Barnstar

In recognition of your work in cleaning up/adding to the Western Australian political topics - the assistance is much appreciated! :) Orderinchaos 20:52, 15 March 2009 (UTC)

Dean Wells (politician)

Hi there. I'm not disputing your move as it does seem to be indisputable that Wells is "Dean". I'm just wondering if you can throw any light on why every single reference (including Psephos and the Parliamentary Handbook) concerning his federal career as Member for Petrie, spells him as "Deane". Thanks. Frickeg (talk) 12:05, 21 March 2009 (UTC)

I know Psephos sometimes has mistakes, but rarely consistently whenever the name appears. Parl Handbook: [1] (you'll have to scroll down a little). Psephos: [2], [3]. Frickeg (talk) 12:16, 21 March 2009 (UTC)

It's possible, I guess, but on a quick Google search I can't find anything to suggest it. I guess he must have, though. (Interestingly, Psephos and the PH also give "McMillan" as Wells's middle name; Queensland Parliament says "MacMillan". He seems to be a troublesome one.) I'll leave a note on the talk page so that if anyone finds anything they'll know where to put it. Frickeg (talk) 12:27, 21 March 2009 (UTC)

By the way, nice work with Queensland - you've been very comprehensive! Normally we're all going around for months after an election fixing up all the out-of-date things, but you seem to have caught virtually all of them in a night. And writing an article on Peter Pyke just takes the cake - fantastic! Frickeg (talk) 02:32, 22 March 2009 (UTC)

With this one, I've found there tends to be about an even split of sources for "Dean" and "Deane". The difference, I found, was that the sources for "Dean" tended to be more recent; the others were often older, or referring to his academic career - this is why I'd stuck with "Dean" in the past. Rebecca (talk) 13:15, 22 March 2009 (UTC)

Also the ministry lists refer to Dean. See [4] Orderinchaos 01:44, 24 March 2009 (UTC)

Member list move

Crap, thanks for spotting that - I redirected the wrong page.

While I'm here, I wanted to say - you're doing a damn good job with all these new articles. It's really good to see more editors getting into areas like these. Rebecca (talk) 13:15, 22 March 2009 (UTC)

Charles Harper

[5] I think that Charles Harper (newspaper owner) and Charles Harper (politician) are the same person. Waddya reckon? Djanga 06:30, 25 March 2009 (UTC)

Frank Brennan

My apologies for the mix-up with the Frank Brennan disambiguation page. I was going through the edits of another user to clean up some naming issues and saw that she had moved the previous article; I did not check to see if anyone else had gone through and done some of the cleanup, so I missed the disambig page. I think I've put everything back the way it should be, and I will be more careful in the future. Karanacs (talk) 15:56, 26 March 2009 (UTC)

Note

Hope you don't mind, I edited your comment as it revealed a bit more than I was intending to (although my editing history kind of gives it away anyway.) If you know what you're looking for on the WAEC website you can even find my real name somewhere. Orderinchaos 00:21, 27 March 2009 (UTC)

Recent-ish. Unfortunately, a lot of other people had the same idea, and the electorate as a whole concluded that the result was a foregone conclusion and stayed away... *sigh* I also put in a submission about the boundaries and persuaded a party to take up my case as well. Orderinchaos 00:28, 27 March 2009 (UTC)

As an unrelated note - the size of the swing here was utterly avoidable. Lessons in how not to campaign #1: suburb residents did not take well to him sending out a full colour brochure illustrating, on a map, all the things he was doing for the electorate, carefully leaving out our suburb (even greying us out). The MP for the other side of the split was neither seen nor heard anywhere nearby for the duration. The Greens, who were getting their volunteers organised on the *very last day* of the campaign (they even phoned *me*, I'm not even a member and my only link to them was having once attended a Bob Brown speech in Fitzgerald Street somewhere in, like, 2003) managed to get double digit figures on both sides despite not bothering to do anything at all besides a basic maildrop - although at a State level I must admit the Greens finally got their act together with having Giz Watson on the radio and TV and stuff, they spent the entire 2005 election complaining that the media wouldn't talk to them.

When I did my campaign, the Greens with a very experienced former Senator who lived in the local area (and in my opinion a pretty good candidate, I met her at debates and at the draw of the ballot) failed to make any traction at all - they had 4 press releases compared to my 11, and just one handout to letterboxes considering they had 6 times the money I did (according to the disclosures) and an army of volunteers from all over the metro area. They didn't really address any local issues (save the pubs?) and in the last 2 days, instead of focussing on the real prize (Labor), in between telling people they would get 21% and achieve the balance of power in the LA, focussed on spreading lies about myself and the Socialist Alliance candidate instead, ironically probably helping each of us in several key booths by showing a style of politics the voters didn't want. Meanwhile, I got the public transport fixed by sufficiently and publicly embarrassing the government who'd wanted to run on a law and order platform. The Libs had (I'll take them on good faith) a bungle with their photocopier and enraged residents by sending out a "crime survey" which was actually a volunteer form for manning booths for the party. Funny times. Orderinchaos 00:49, 27 March 2009 (UTC)

Independent to Independent

Mmm, this is a bit of a grey area, isn't it? I would say the Dubbo state by-election, 2004 was also an Independent hold, partly because "Independent gain from Independent" sounds a little silly. I generally tend to treat "Independent" as a party, even though I know it's not, for the sake of consistency across the board. For example, I would consider North Sydney in 1996 to be a Liberal gain from Independent, despite the fact that Ted Mack retired. In both Port Macquarie and Dubbo, the subsequent independent had the support of the previous one, so "Independent hold" seems to make sense to me. Frickeg (talk) 00:29, 1 April 2009 (UTC)

Of course - silly me! But didn't she work for him or was associated with him or something previously? Although looking around I can't find much evidence for it. Maybe it was just a preconception I had. Frickeg (talk) 00:58, 1 April 2009 (UTC)

Independent isn't a party, it's an identification. Reminds me of Monty Python, "We are all individuals!" As I see it the person themselves holds the seat and anyone else gaining it is a gain, odd as it looks. It's actually "Independent gain from (another) Independent", whereas where a party holds the seat, the party holds it. Orderinchaos 10:09, 1 April 2009 (UTC)

SA electorates

Hi - nice work on these. Just to let you know, the Liberal and Country League has a colour template of its own: Template:Australian politics/party colours/LCL. Frickeg (talk) 22:37, 4 April 2009 (UTC)

Category:Members of the Queensland Legislative Assembly

Mate, it says right there in the category, "Current Parliamentarians of the 52nd Legislative Assembly of Queensland." While we're now up to the 53rd assembly, Caltabiano was a member of the 51st only, before being replaced by Chris Bombolas in the 52nd. Lankiveil ^{(speak to me)} 21:59, 6 April 2009 (UTC).

1983-1989 by-elections

Due to offline priorities I have pretty much no time to work on Queensland stuff at the present, but if you like I could send you (or put up in a sandbox) the published stats for the by-elections for that period which I have in paper form from the actual electoral returns. Only downside is any by-elections between 83 and 86 I don't have the 83 figures for for comparison. Would you be interested? Orderinchaos 18:37, 10 April 2009 (UTC)

User:Orderinchaos/QE_83-89 Orderinchaos 20:08, 10 April 2009 (UTC)

Finished, but with some cleanup from deadwood sources etc to do (see Notes at bottom). Orderinchaos 23:09, 11 April 2009 (UTC)

A right wingnut who is almost certainly notable in his own right. Gold Coast based guy according to an API essay: "[was] the convenor of Heart of [the] Nation, went on to gain some notoriety in the 1990s for his anti-Asian views, unsuccessfully standing for election based on a succession of far-right fringe platforms [including the Confederate Action Party] before finally forming the Pauline Hanson Support Movement in Queensland." He was reported on extensively (and favourably) in 88 and 89 by the Gold Coast Bulletin in his attempt to champion opposition to Japanese investment and land ownership in SEQ. Also appeared on ACA back in the Wendt days. I've linked him but with no intention to write an article, it'd be better for someone with more access to QLD resources (say the State Library there) to make an attempt at, as I only have a few essays and non-RS's. Orderinchaos 13:33, 12 April 2009 (UTC)

Succession box headers

I'll ask you this one more time. Please stop undoing my edits to the Attorney Generals. If you actually read the guidelines page i linked you to, you would see this.

vii. Legal offices (s-legal) These include positions of power, whose common element is that they deal with the legal system of their respective countries. Such offices include:

Solicitors general
Attorneys general
District attorneys
Chief judges and justices

I don't know how much more clearly it can be stated. I had to go and undo all the edits you made. Thismightbezach (talk) 15:47, 18 April 2009 (UTC)

I don't care. Whether he or she is elected or not, makes no difference. It's not a minister... it's an ATTORNEY GENERAL. You can clear this up with an administrator if you'd like, i'm changing them back. You're disrupting. Thismightbezach (talk) 16:48, 18 April 2009 (UTC)

You're ignoring the fact that it is written in the guidelines. If there were exceptions to change it as a Political office in which countries elected the AG then it would be stated in the guidelines page.Thismightbezach (talk) 17:24, 18 April 2009 (UTC)

If you don't want to follow the rules, please don't post here. I'm contacting an administrator.Thismightbezach (talk) 17:29, 18 April 2009 (UTC)

When something is written in the guidelines, it's the rules to which it should be done. Thismightbezach (talk) 17:32, 18 April 2009 (UTC)

You appear to be engaged in a number of edit wars re Attorneys General succession boxes. Please stop it - you have long ago breached 3RR and will (regrettably) be blocked if it continues. You've expressed your point of view at WT:WikiProject Australian politics - please wait until others have had a chance to weigh in. Euryalus (talk) 22:04, 18 April 2009 (UTC)

Hi Digestible: I see that you may be correct according to the Wikipedia article on Attorney Generals.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Attorney_General

Try to resolve this issue on that article first and then take the fight to all the other articles. Establish that you are correct and that the other guy is wrong. I also wonder if perhaps these categories are too simple to be broadly applied across all nations? The Wurdalak (talk) 22:56, 18 April 2009 (UTC)

The adherence to rules that are incorrect is a problem. Try to explain that these rules manifest an oversimplification of what an Attorney General is around the world. The Wurdalak (talk) 22:58, 18 April 2009 (UTC)

Electoral district of Spence

Are you sure it was based in the northern suburbs? The 1997 map shows it is much like the current Croydon, inner north-west. Timeshift (talk) 12:25, 1 May 2009 (UTC)

I didn't want to change it in case it was wrong, ie: it started off northern, and moved progressively north-west, which is why I decided to run it by you - were you using a source of some sort? Timeshift (talk) 14:29, 4 May 2009 (UTC)

bligh succession boxes

bligh is pres 09-10, not 10-11, also aren't they supposed to go top to bottom earliest to latest? Timeshift (talk) 03:08, 31 July 2009 (UTC)

Can you show me where williamson rather than bligh is the 09-10 president? Timeshift (talk) 03:14, 31 July 2009 (UTC)

Thanks. Timeshift (talk) 03:37, 31 July 2009 (UTC)

File copyright problem with File:Jeannie Ferris.jpg

File Copyright problem

Thank you for uploading File:Jeannie Ferris.jpg. However, it currently is missing information on its copyright status. Wikipedia takes copyright very seriously. It may be deleted soon, unless we can determine the license and the source of the file. If you know this information, then you can add a copyright tag to the image description page.

If you have uploaded other files, consider checking that you have specified their license and tagged them, too. You can find a list of files you have uploaded by following this link.

If you have any questions, please feel free to ask them at the media copyright questions page. Thanks again for your cooperation. ww2censor (talk) 04:41, 12 October 2009 (UTC)

Gerick

Nice work on Jane Gerick – great to see some expanded information here too. It would be lovely to have access to parliamentary photos going further back, but for some reason they don't seem to be anywhere online. Maybe one day. Frickeg (talk) 01:58, 13 October 2009 (UTC)

No idea on Gerick's place of death. They don't seem to disclose it these days. On backdated terms - I tend to ignore them. They're a convention, but the fact is that Cook, for example, was most definitely not a Senator in 1982, no matter how much the Handbook might want him to be. In my userspace list of Senators I've gone without them, because they create contradictions. In the infobox case though ... maybe the actual date of sitting, and the backdated one in brackets or something? Frickeg (talk) 02:35, 13 October 2009 (UTC)

List of Roman Catholic United States Supreme Court justices

They are trying to delete this. Please comment. 13:38, 21 October 2009 (UTC) Stan

Verifiability

Hi. May I suggest (in the light of your challenged Beazley-Brand deletion, and your statements in justification thereof) a careful look at the two opening paragraphs of WP:V? I will certainly be relying on it when I get round to editing that article again. Cheers Bjenks (talk) 07:50, 19 November 2009 (UTC)

Capitalisation

Sorry, but you are wrong about cap, inits for 'leader of the opposition', 'prime minister', etc. I cite New Oxford Dictionary for Writers, Printers and Editors (2005) at page 302:

prime minister cap. in titles (Prime Minister Tony Blair, but the prime minister of Italy); abbrev. PM

If you wish to take up this or any other matter, pov or otherwise, with me, please state your source and not just your personal opinion, which (no less than my own) is a little too insubstantial for Wikipedia. Cheers Bjenks (talk) 08:11, 20 November 2009 (UTC)

Fair enough. I'll concede that one. Digestible (talk) 09:37, 20 November 2009 (UTC)

William Marmion

Just a note in appreciation of your picking up the baton on this one. Jan1naD ^{(talk • contrib)} 21:00, 19 December 2009 (UTC)

The Last Lion: Winston Spencer Churchill

I created a page for the series The Last Lion: Winston Spencer Churchill. The three individual volumes now redirect there. TuckerResearch (talk) 01:23, 13 January 2010 (UTC)

File source problem with File:Peter Andren.jpg

Thank you for uploading File:Peter Andren.jpg. I noticed that the file's description page currently doesn't specify who created the content, so the copyright status is unclear. If you did not create this file yourself, you will need to specify the owner of the copyright. If you obtained it from a website, please add a link to the page from which it was taken, together with a brief restatement of the website's terms of use of its content. If the original copyright holder is a party unaffiliated with the website, that author should also be credited. Please add this information by editing the image description page.

If the necessary information is not added within the next days, the image will be deleted. If the file is already gone, you can still make a request for undeletion and ask for a chance to fix the problem.

Please refer to the image use policy to learn what images you can or cannot upload on Wikipedia. Please also check any other files you have uploaded to make sure they are correctly tagged. Here is a list of your uploads. If you have any questions or are in need of assistance please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you. damiens.rf 15:01, 20 July 2011 (UTC)

ArbCom elections are now open!

Hi,
You appear to be eligible to vote in the current Arbitration Committee election. The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to enact binding solutions for disputes between editors, primarily related to serious behavioural issues that the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the ability to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail. If you wish to participate, you are welcome to review the candidates' statements and submit your choices on the voting page. For the Election committee, MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 13:57, 24 November 2015 (UTC)

Proposed deletion of Judy Gamin

The article Judy Gamin has been proposed for deletion because it appears to have no references. Under Wikipedia policy, this biography of a living person will be deleted after seven days unless it has at least one reference to a reliable source that directly supports material in the article.

If you created the article, please don't be offended. Instead, consider improving the article. For help on inserting references, see Referencing for beginners, or ask at the help desk. Once you have provided at least one reliable source, you may remove the {{prod blp/dated}} tag. Please do not remove the tag unless the article is sourced. If you cannot provide such a source within seven days, the article may be deleted, but you can request that it be undeleted when you are ready to add one. Natureium (talk) 23:35, 30 August 2018 (UTC)

Proposed deletion of File:Division of Gippsland 2007.gif

The file File:Division of Gippsland 2007.gif has been proposed for deletion because of the following concern:

unused, low-res, no obvious use

While all constructive contributions to Wikipedia are appreciated, pages may be deleted for any of several reasons.

You may prevent the proposed deletion by removing the {{proposed deletion/dated files}} notice, but please explain why in your edit summary or on the file's talk page.

Please consider addressing the issues raised. Removing {{proposed deletion/dated files}} will stop the proposed deletion process, but other deletion processes exist. In particular, the speedy deletion process can result in deletion without discussion, and files for discussion allows discussion to reach consensus for deletion.

This bot DID NOT nominate any file(s) for deletion; please refer to the page history of each individual file for details. Thanks, FastilyBot (talk) 01:01, 14 November 2019 (UTC)

Proposed deletion of File:Division of Higgins 2007.gif

The file File:Division of Higgins 2007.gif has been proposed for deletion because of the following concern:

unused, low-res, no obvious use

While all constructive contributions to Wikipedia are appreciated, pages may be deleted for any of several reasons.

You may prevent the proposed deletion by removing the {{proposed deletion/dated files}} notice, but please explain why in your edit summary or on the file's talk page.

Please consider addressing the issues raised. Removing {{proposed deletion/dated files}} will stop the proposed deletion process, but other deletion processes exist. In particular, the speedy deletion process can result in deletion without discussion, and files for discussion allows discussion to reach consensus for deletion.

This bot DID NOT nominate any file(s) for deletion; please refer to the page history of each individual file for details. Thanks, FastilyBot (talk) 01:01, 16 November 2019 (UTC)

Proposed deletion of File:Division of Mayo 2007.gif

The file File:Division of Mayo 2007.gif has been proposed for deletion because of the following concern:

unused, low-res, no obvious use

While all constructive contributions to Wikipedia are appreciated, pages may be deleted for any of several reasons.

You may prevent the proposed deletion by removing the {{proposed deletion/dated files}} notice, but please explain why in your edit summary or on the file's talk page.

Please consider addressing the issues raised. Removing {{proposed deletion/dated files}} will stop the proposed deletion process, but other deletion processes exist. In particular, the speedy deletion process can result in deletion without discussion, and files for discussion allows discussion to reach consensus for deletion.

This bot DID NOT nominate any file(s) for deletion; please refer to the page history of each individual file for details. Thanks, FastilyBot (talk) 01:02, 26 November 2019 (UTC)

Proposed deletion of File:Division of Lyne 2007.gif

The file File:Division of Lyne 2007.gif has been proposed for deletion because of the following concern:

unused, low-res, no obvious use

While all constructive contributions to Wikipedia are appreciated, pages may be deleted for any of several reasons.

You may prevent the proposed deletion by removing the {{proposed deletion/dated files}} notice, but please explain why in your edit summary or on the file's talk page.

Please consider addressing the issues raised. Removing {{proposed deletion/dated files}} will stop the proposed deletion process, but other deletion processes exist. In particular, the speedy deletion process can result in deletion without discussion, and files for discussion allows discussion to reach consensus for deletion.

This bot DID NOT nominate any file(s) for deletion; please refer to the page history of each individual file for details. Thanks, FastilyBot (talk) 01:01, 2 December 2019 (UTC)

Proposed deletion of File:Division of Bradfield 2007.gif

The file File:Division of Bradfield 2007.gif has been proposed for deletion because of the following concern:

unused, low-res, no obvious use

While all constructive contributions to Wikipedia are appreciated, pages may be deleted for any of several reasons.

You may prevent the proposed deletion by removing the {{proposed deletion/dated files}} notice, but please explain why in your edit summary or on the file's talk page.

Please consider addressing the issues raised. Removing {{proposed deletion/dated files}} will stop the proposed deletion process, but other deletion processes exist. In particular, the speedy deletion process can result in deletion without discussion, and files for discussion allows discussion to reach consensus for deletion.

This bot DID NOT nominate any file(s) for deletion; please refer to the page history of each individual file for details. Thanks, FastilyBot (talk) 01:01, 4 December 2019 (UTC)

History

Positive impact of the battle of tarawa to America 103.250.2.45 (talk) 23:53, 26 June 2022 (UTC)

Orphaned non-free image File:Robert Lindsay Collins.jpg

⚠

Thanks for uploading File:Robert Lindsay Collins.jpg. 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 section F5 of the criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. --B-bot (talk) 18:30, 10 January 2024 (UTC)

Proposed deletion of Brian Deegan (disambiguation)

The article Brian Deegan (disambiguation) has been proposed for deletion because of the following concern:

Invalid and unnecessary disambiguation page that contains the primary topic and only one other topic.

While all constructive contributions to Wikipedia are appreciated, pages may be deleted for any of several reasons.

You may prevent the proposed deletion by removing the {{proposed deletion/dated}} notice, but please explain why in your edit summary or on the article's talk page.

Please consider improving the page to address the issues raised. Removing {{proposed deletion/dated}} will stop the proposed deletion process, but other deletion processes exist. In particular, the speedy deletion process can result in deletion without discussion, and articles for deletion allows discussion to reach consensus for deletion. AllTheUsernamesAreInUse (talk) 21:31, 31 January 2024 (UTC)