User talk:99of9/Archive 1


 * {| class="infobox" width="270px"

!align="center" colspan="2"| 99of9's Archives

Archive 1 Archive 2 Archive 3
 * }

Welcome!
Hello,, and welcome to Wikipedia! Thank you for your contributions. I hope you like the place and decide to stay. Here are a few good links for newcomers: I hope you enjoy editing here and being a Wikipedian! Please sign your name on talk pages using four tildes (~&#126;); this will automatically produce your name and the date. If you need help, check out Where to ask a question, ask me on my talk page, or place  on your talk page and someone will show up shortly to answer your questions. Again, welcome! --PhilipO 21:06, 24 October 2005 (UTC)
 * The five pillars of Wikipedia
 * How to edit a page
 * Help pages
 * Tutorial
 * How to write a great article
 * Manual of Style


 * Thanks Philip. 99of9 01:49, 19 January 2006 (UTC)

Please be careful when you revert
You reverted the Ashfield article to reinstate some notable citizens (I agree with you). However in doing so, you overwrote some changes I'd made more recently to other sections of the article. I don't know what the Wiki-ettiquette is for this, but I personally think you should be more careful, and reinstate anything that you write over. I will put these particular changes back in. Thanks 99of9 06:24, 27 April 2006 (UTC)
 * Ok sorry, I should have looked more carefully. Regards, ßlηguγΣη | Have your say!!! - review me 06:28, 27 April 2006 (UTC)

WikiProject Sydney
Hi there. I think this project may be of interest. It aims to improve coverage of sydney-related matter on wikipedia. Regards, ßlηguγΣη | Have your say!!! - review me 06:28, 27 April 2006 (UTC)


 * Thanks for the link, I'll check it out. 99of9 06:35, 27 April 2006 (UTC)


 * I like your pictures of Ashfield! -- All the best, Nickj (t) 07:57, 4 May 2006 (UTC)


 * Thanks, I'll work on getting some more. 99of9 01:55, 5 May 2006 (UTC)

Knox Grammar School
''I notice you reverted a change to the motto of Knox Grammar School, and called it vandalism. Actually, the school's motto is in Latin, and is commonly translated in both ways (as is discussed later on the page). Therefore I don't see any reason for preferring either translation, so it is probably unfair to call it vandalism. 99of9 05:56, 8 June 2006 (UTC)''

If I see a questionable change from an IP address without an edit summary, I usually revert it as vandalism. If there's an edit summary or it's from a registered editor, that's different. -- Usgnus 13:40, 8 June 2006 (UTC)

Articles you might like to edit, from SuggestBot
SuggestBot predicts that you will enjoy editing some of these articles. Have fun!

SuggestBot picks articles in a number of ways based on other articles you've edited, including straight text similarity, following wikilinks, and matching your editing patterns against those of other Wikipedians. It tries to recommend only articles that other Wikipedians have marked as needing work. Your contributions make Wikipedia better -- thanks for helping.

If you have feedback on how to make SuggestBot better, please tell me on SuggestBot's talk page. Thanks from ForteTuba, SuggestBot's caretaker.

P.S. You received these suggestions because your name was listed on the SuggestBot request page. If this was in error, sorry about the confusion. -- SuggestBot 23:20, 10 June 2006 (UTC)

My Bot
My bot was not incorrectly removing categories, and I have responded to every message that was left on my bots talk page I resond on the users talkpage, the reason that Category:Religion in Sydney does not exist that is why its a red link. Pages should not contain redlink categorys please feel free to do ahead and create it but my bot was only removing redlinks for categories that dont exist. If you have any other issues or comments please feel free to leave a message on my talkpage. Betacommand (talk • contribs • Bot) 13:35, 25 September 2006 (UTC)

The typo you fixed was not a typo; I've reverted
In linear regression you failed to heed the article's careful distinction between the Greek letter &beta;, standing for an unobservable parameters, and b, standing for the observable least-squares estimate of &beta;. Please be more careful. Michael Hardy 01:42, 24 October 2006 (UTC)

Thanks for jumping in
I had previously twice removed the "rejected template" on WP:CONG and did not want to violate the 3RR rule, so it was gratifying to see you jump in spontaneously and remove it again. In the talk page I posted the last month's stats for editors citing the guideline in deletion debated for articles about churches. I noted that sometimes a provision of it had been cited to argue for deleting a church article and other times a provision had been cited as an argument to keep a church article (as when the doctirnes of the church were so notorious they got a lot of press coverage). TMy gut feeling is that this shows the guideline has hope of becoming a consensus for what a church artile needs to include to be "encyclopedic." These church (or congregation)-specific criteria would likely disappear if it were merged with WP:ORG as has been proposed. Regards. Edison 05:11, 21 February 2007 (UTC)
 * There is again a move to label this proposed guideline, to which you contributed,as "rejected." Please add your thoughts to the discussion. Thanks. Edison 05:21, 28 February 2007 (UTC)

Ethnic-group lists deletion discussions
Hi, I noticed you participated in at least one of these three deletion discussions: All three discussions have similar issues but are leaning in different directions, so you may want to participate in the others, if only for the sake of consistencey and to avoid accusations that Wikipedians are being unfair to some group or groups (which is something that concerns me). I'm asking everyone who participated in one discussion to participate in the others. I apologize for bothering you if you already have participated in the others. Best wishes, Noroton 04:38, 9 March 2007 (UTC)
 * Articles for deletion/List of African Americans (3rd nomination),
 * Articles for deletion/List of Chinese Americans
 * Articles for deletion/List of Caucasian Americans (second nomination).

Taj El-Din Hilaly
Hi, 99of9! Just saw your comment about SatyrBot placing WikiProject Judaism on Talk:Taj El-Din Hilaly. The WikiProject asked me to add the banner to all articles within their project-scope - roughly 300 categories - back in August. El-Din Hilaly is in the Category:Antisemitism, which is probably why the project is concerned with the article.

Since that project, I've updated the bot to handle WikiProjectBannerShell much better, so it will place banners *inside* that box, rather than on top.

Hope that explains what the bot did and why. If you have more questions about that particular article being in that particular WikiProject, you might want to bring it up with them. Thanks! -- SatyrTN (talk | contribs) 02:16, 23 November 2007 (UTC)


 * Thanks for the reply. I understand why it happened, but I still think it is overtagging to put a muslim cleric in a Jewish project.  So I've left it reverted.  I'm glad you've sorted out the WikiProjectBannerShell problem. 99of9 (talk) 03:14, 23 November 2007 (UTC)

Rollback
Hello 99of9, I have granted rollback rights to your account; the reason for this is that after a review of some of your contributions, I believe I can trust you to use rollback correctly by using it for its intended usage of reverting vandalism, and that you will not abuse it by reverting good-faith edits or to revert-war. For information on rollback, see New admin school/Rollback and Rollback feature. If you do not want rollback, just let me know, and I'll remove it. Good luck. Acalamari 21:58, 8 February 2008 (UTC)
 * Thanks, that will be useful. 99of9 (talk) 02:17, 9 February 2008 (UTC)
 * You're welcome! Acalamari 17:15, 9 February 2008 (UTC)

Blue Mountains, New Zealand
Hi 99of9 - please check individual country naming conventions before moving articles! I have moved this article back to its correct name of Blue Mountains, New Zealand, as per Naming conventions (New Zealand) - whether or not this is consistent with the naming conventions used in other countries (and therefore the other names listed at Blue Mountains is largely irrelevant - this name is consistent with a far larger group of articles (i.e., those on places in New Zealand) and the general rule in Wikipedia is to use local conventions as applying in different countries where there are conflicts. Grutness...wha?  02:38, 20 June 2008 (UTC)
 * OK thanks.99of9 (talk) 03:27, 20 June 2008 (UTC)

Unblock request
This IP is shared by the entire University of Sydney, please don't block us all because of one user. 99of9 (talk) 00:33, 10 August 2009 (UTC)

Merge of Assuit and Asyut
Would you care to justify your proposed merger of Assuit and Asyut at Talk:Asyut? Thanks, Cnilep (talk) 20:28, 13 August 2009 (UTC)

Removal of PROD from Paul Cesarczyk
Hello 99of9, this is an automated message from SDPatrolBot to inform you the PROD template you added to Paul Cesarczyk has been removed. It was removed by Wilhelm Klave with the following edit summary ' (Removing the deletion tab, due to notability of said article) '. Please consider discussing your concerns with Wilhelm Klave before pursuing deletion further yourself. If you still think the article should be deleted after communicating with the 'dePRODer,' you may want to send the article to AfD for community discussion. Thank you, SDPatrolBot (talk) 01:04, 2 September 2009 (UTC) (Learn how to opt out of these messages)

Philip A. Burrows
Hi 99of9, I've just added the following link to the page from the Nassau Guardian, the leading newspaper in Nassau, Bahamas since 1884: http://www.thenassauguardian.com/social_community/322322929336936.php —Preceding unsigned comment added by Paburrows (talk • contribs) 22:30, 3 September 2009 (UTC)

Blacket
Thank you! That pic is exactly what is needed. Amandajm (talk) 03:23, 16 October 2009 (UTC)


 * The pic is excellent. Your resizing and moving of the images is not. I notice that the few images that you decided to leave at the larger size have been enlarged by a process that I haven't come across. Pictures like the interior of St Andrew's (Blacket's absolute masterpiece of church building) ought not be reduced to "upright". The watercolour of St James's church, on the other hand, if you habd read the caption, in not a work by Blacket, merely a view that he saw, and doesn't need to be that big. There is an ongoing argument between "style police" who have an idea in their heads that every Wikipedia user knows how to enlarge pics, and/or knows how to adjust their viewing options and that "forcing" sizes spoils this option.  As a teacher/art historian I find this belief simplistic and frustrating. As far I I'm concerned, pictures that are important to the text should be sized so that viewers can see them without having to click on the image to enlarge it or need to use some function that they may not know exists.
 * secondly, your caption. Whatever you write on your photo is then repeated by later editors when they use it. You have uploaded a brilliant picture of the Main Building of Sydney University and called it "front lawns". Is this really a picture of the front lawns? Are they really worth a mention at all? Also please don't call it the "Main Quadrangle" building. It might be described as the Quadrangle building by students in order to identify it, but "Main Quadrangle" implies that there is more than one such quadrangle. It's simply the "Main Building". In your description you need to mention that the architect is Edmund Blacket and it would be good to give the date.


 * Also, there is a way of inserting your pic as a panorama, so it can be enlarged, and viewed on any sized screen. I recently did it with a pic of St Peter's Basilica. I'll do it with your pic too. Amandajm (talk) 04:33, 17 October 2009 (UTC)


 * Perhaps I'm a member of the style police, although I've never applied. The trouble is, we need to make everything look nice on every type of screen.  Evidently you have a wide screen with lots of pixels, so a 400px image looks ok.  However, users still exist that only have a 600x800 screen, so an image forced to 400px would be insufferable.  (Small screens are also becoming popular again with the new netbooks.) This is why the scaling method I used is better than size forcing, since if a small screen user wants to adjust their default image size to small, they can, and the multipliers will simply highlight important images, making them not quite so small.  So I'm glad you've adopted this method.
 * Regarding specific images to scale up from the user's chosen image size (or default if they have not chosen), I still think you have chosen far too many, but to an extent that is a matter of taste, so I will choose my battles carefully :). By the way, I had read the entire article before editing, and that includes the caption of the St James watercolour.
 * Regarding moving the hatchet picture. To me that is a no-brainer.  We must find a way to make it fit in where the text is talking about it.  When I first read the text, I thought: "someone should take a pic of that", and then many minutes later I found there was one at the bottom of the page!
 * Thanks for your suggestions on the Sydney Uni picture summary, I've adopted them. Go ahead and change anything I upload that you feel is lacking.  It's a wiki after all.  One thing, there are other quadrangles (some in colleges), though nothing so grand.
 * I'm aware of the panorama option. But I do not feel it is justified in this article (about a person - even if he did design some pretty buildings).  If anyone really wants to know about Sydney Uni, they can click to see it in it's full glory. (We also need to be cautious about requiring users to download large images just to read the main article text.  Many regions of the world still have much lower bandwidth than us. Although admittedly this article will primarily be read by Australians.)
 * Glad to find another passionate Sydney wikipedian! :) 99of9 (talk) 10:32, 17 October 2009 (UTC)
 * I'm very glad to find that there is this alternate way of up-sizing images. I will go through a lot of the larger articles that I have written and change the bigger pics. A lot of important article, particularly generic articles, like Renaissance architecture for example, which attempts to summarise a vast field, are of necessity, very long.
 * The problem that I have in particular is when detailed upright images are downsided to Upright rather than simply left as thumbnails. I think that there is a case for "upright" when the pic doesn't contain much detail, or is very crowded.
 * I'm also currently working on bringing a bit more understanding to the writing of "alt descritpions" which is often done rather badly, because people are not in general accustomed to using their powers of descritption. Alt descriptions, particularly those of people, often require far more interpretative language than is generally permitted in the style manual. I've just added alts to that article, which you can read by hovering over the pics. It's afairly tedious process, but makes a big difference when people are viewing without pics, or hearing the article read.
 * About the size of my screen, yes its wide. But when formatting the pics, I always open the "favourites" box down the side in order to view the screen at the narrowest width (almost square on my computer), as well as the widest, because the effects are quite different and every page needs to be OK on both. (I really don't think we can program specifically for mobile viewing.) People who insert pics on a squarish screen often think there is more room available, because the text extends further down the page. My pet hate is large info boxes. Someone has come up with this dreadful box for cathedrals, which allows your editor to insert the name of every single person who is associated in any way. So one gets all this unnecessary text surrounded by white space, right where one wants to insert a couple of meaningful pictures.
 * Can I encourage you to check out some of the major Sydney buildings and see which ones need good pics? An early morning midsummer shot of (south facing) facade of St Mary's in order to catch it at its best. Late afternoon might be good, but the low sun will prob cast shadows from the taller buildings. Good pics of all the significant College and Macquarie Street buildings would be nice. Do you do stained glass?
 * Amandajm (talk) 04:05, 18 October 2009 (UTC)
 * Could you possibly get a decent picture of that hatchment without the light shining on it? And crop it as square as possible before uploading. My camera simply won't do it. It probably needs a second person to hold something to block out the overhead lights. If anyone asks questions say it's for the wikipedia page. The Cathedral's website links to the article St. Andrew's Cathedral, Sydney which is mostly my work. I also have permission to write up the stained glass windows as a separate article, but haven't got around to it yet. I'm missing one or two in the seies, which didn't come out well. I'd realy like to do a page on Sydney's stained glass, but I'm actually located in Wollongong and haven't got a car to cruise around the churches. The hatchment is located in the south west corner, near the door to the chapter house. Hey, while you're there, a really good shot of the East window would be wonderful. Taken from the gallery. I also don't have a picture of the north transept window, which had piles of junk partly in front of it. They wouldn't let me up there, because of insurance. Ho hum! When I was younger I was in the habit of clambering over church roofs looking for leaks. How things have changed.Amandajm (talk) 04:29, 18 October 2009 (UTC)
 * I also don't get into the city often, but I will try to bring a camera next time I do. Glad to try for these specific requests. If I don't make it, you could try putting the reqeusts on WP:Sydney. I'm going to practice stained glass at St John's (where I have easy access), and once I'm good at it I'll diversify.  99of9 (talk) 10:03, 18 October 2009 (UTC)
 * St John's. Nice pic! Nit-picking...can you possibly tweak your image so that it is as straight as possible. You need to locate the point that is almost straight in front of you (which may not be the centre of the pic). In this case the shadow where the two buttresses meet on the corner of the transept is probably your guide. If you make that vertical, the rest should fall into place. The fact that the building is on rising ground means you can't use that as your horizontal. Amandajm (talk) 04:38, 18 October 2009 (UTC)
 * I plan to retake the St Johns pano sometime without the car or people. Once I've done that I have a straightening program that can straighten all the vertical lines as though I were at an infinite distance. (Looks better than it sounds.) 99of9 (talk) 10:03, 18 October 2009 (UTC)
 * I need a more sophisticated photo editting program than I've got. That program that straightens verticals is very good for stained glass windows because they are nearly always taken up close, and converge at the top. Is there a download that can be used to fix that? Amandajm (talk) 00:31, 19 October 2009 (UTC)
 * I recommend ShiftN for straightening. That's all it does, but it's great. BTW, I'm about to put up a USyd pic with different lighting, see if you like it better.  99of9 (talk) 01:14, 19 October 2009 (UTC)
 * Fantastic shot! Nowhere near as artistical as the one with the clouds though! Howsabout you use them both, one for the Blacket article and t'other for the Uni article.
 * If you watch the light, you could also take one that shows the shadows cast onto the bright masonry by the various projecting features. Next suggestion... St John's, St Pauls, St whatever it's called (Andrew's?) and Women's College are all rather stunning. There's probably a good one of John's already. I'll check out that program. Thanks again for showing me how to adjust pics. I've used it a lot already and I'm about to do another article. Amandajm (talk) 01:29, 19 October 2009 (UTC)

Physics Bldg
Nice photo. __earth (Talk) 12:43, 20 October 2009 (UTC)
 * Thanks, I see you've been taking pics of Sydney Uni over the last few days too. I guess the photo selection on that article will rapidly improve. 99of9 (talk) 21:03, 20 October 2009 (UTC)

Snails?
Hi 9of99, I noticed you made a new gastropod article and that you also added a nice image of yours to a triton article. Thanks on behalf of Project Gastropods! It seems you might have some interest in these creatures, so I am giving you this:

All best wishes and Happy New Year, Invertzoo (talk) 18:20, 3 January 2010 (UTC)


 * Thanks for your message, and thanks also for so rapidly improving the Abalone stub I started. I plan to put in some good photos soon.  I'll look into the wikiproject, but I'm usually a generalist. --99of9 (talk) 21:38, 3 January 2010 (UTC)


 * Thanks for your note. Photos of that abalone would be great, thanks, we always need more good snail and slug images! I absolutely respect your desire to be a generalist, and we certainly are grateful for whatever time and effort you put into any of the gastropod articles. If you ever need to know anything about a snail or slug, please do drop me a line. All good wishes, Invertzoo (talk) 21:45, 3 January 2010 (UTC)

Final discussion for Requests for comment/Biographies of living people
Hello, I note that you have commented on the first phase of Requests for comment/Biographies of living people

As this RFC closes, there are two proposals being considered:
 * 1) Proposal to Close This RfC
 * 2) Alternate proposal to close this RFC: we don't need a whole new layer of bureaucracy

Your opinion on this is welcome. Okip  02:08, 24 February 2010 (UTC)

Syd U
I have some piccies from the mid 70's (sic) but they are locked away at the mo - must do some cf's - I worked in Fisher then. I have also tagged the biota project cats - when creating new cats - it would be great if you could add the wp australia tags at the back - thanks and cheers SatuSuro 01:58, 16 April 2010 (UTC)
 * Thanks for the note. Do scan in some of your old pics, print photos are an under-utilized historical resource for wiki IMO.  I think I'm done creating cats for the moment, but thanks for your help. 99of9 (talk) 02:02, 16 April 2010 (UTC)
 * Hope to do so in the next few months (old pics) - hey good to see someone doing assessment a long lost art in this place :) SatuSuro 02:22, 16 April 2010 (UTC)

TUSC token c1e0daea1f3188a63da125cb96023924
I am now proud owner of a TUSC account!

Talk:John Calvin
Can you comment on this discussion on the John Calvin article-- and placing an Template:Infobox theologian there? Thanks. şṗøʀĸ ɕäɾłäů∂ɛ: τᴀʟĸ 18:35, 22 June 2010 (UTC)

Sydney Meetup :-)
See the meetup page for further information - short version is that we're hoping to meet in a fortnight in the city for a beer and a chat. Minors and Miners are welcome, with a responsible adult and a minimum of coal dust ;-) - do try and get out if you can, it's been a little while since wiki folk met in Sydney :-) cheers, Privatemusings (talk) 05:29, 12 August 2010 (UTC)

Church pix
I saw your message to JBar about church pix, and I have a number of them myself, including St Johns Darlo and St Andrews, and many in my Sydney Architecture gallery at commons. Do you have articles on all these churches? I was thinking of doing one on St Johns Darlo; how's that for synchronicity?

Sardaka (talk) 09:56, 14 September 2010 (UTC)


 * Hardly any of the churches on List of Anglican churches in the Diocese of Sydney have an article (those I know about are linked). I've just been working on St John's Ashfield and am convinced that by the ease of finding references that most churches would meet the notability standards if someone was willing to search the old Sydney Morning Herald archives.  But collecting photos for a list seems like a much more manageable task, so I thought I could attract some attention for that.  I've already got a few of yours on the list (I got them from the relevent commons category), for example File:Glebe_St_Johns_Anglican_Church.jpg, but if there are any of your shots I've missed, feel free to add them.  I'll take a look at the Sydney Architecture gallery. 99of9 (talk) 10:46, 14 September 2010 (UTC)

Collecting photos
Hi J Bar, I hope the semi-retirement is more semi than it is retirement. I appreciate the huge collection of photos you've contributed! I've just started a new list: List of Anglican churches in the Diocese of Sydney. I thought you might be interested because it shows which ones we are missing photos for. Also are you interested in coming to this tomorrow night: w:Wikipedia:Meetup/Sydney‎? I'm keen to meet you if you are. --99of9 (talk) 00:47, 25 August 2010 (UTC)
 * Hello 99of9,
 * I only just saw your message, so sorry for not responding earlier. Unfortunately I am more retired than semi these days and haven't even visited in weeks. I just got frustrated with all the people who were wrecking teh good work on wikipedia and all the power plays and silly games they were involved in as themselves and/or sock puppets. Even when wikipedia exposes these idiots, they really do nothing to stop them continuing. I no longer monitor all the Sydney suburb articles, so I have no idea how much vandalism they may contain now. I might add a photo from time to time or make a correction if I see someone vandalising or being mischievous, but generally I really can't be bothered any more.


 * I'm still taking a lot of photos of Sydney these days but I'm just not posting them on wikipedia. I have my own blog called 'Sydney-City and Suburbs' where I post photos daily and where they are appreciated more.
 * Good luck with your work. Cheers. J Bar (talk) 22:53, 14 September 2010 (UTC)

List of Anglican churches in Sydney
Thanks for your note about this on my discussion page. One thing that did occur to me was that it could be useful to link the names of the churches to their (external) websites. However, I'm not sure if that is really within the remit of the article, and it would be a lot of tedious work. It would also be liable to go out of date as churches re-did their websites (which many do from time to time). Also, I might put some thought into various synonyms for the title that should (or could sensibly) re-direct to the page in question. Ondewelle (talk) 17:41, 11 October 2010 (UTC)
 * There is a column for their web address. I think their name is best linked to the wikipedia article about them (when one is created).  I agree it's a tedious job, but if lots of editors share the load... that's how wikipedia gets written! 99of9 (talk) 22:49, 11 October 2010 (UTC)

Next drive
As you are either a participant of WikiProject or the October wikification drive or have signed up to participate in the planned December drive, this probably concerns you. Discussions that have been inactive for a couple weeks regarding the December drive have been reactivated, and we would like you to participate in these discussions, and also consider joining the December drive. We have taken upon ourselves a massive workload, encompassing a backlog reaching June 2008 and comprising articles. Barnstars will be awarded to participating editors, and also, please invite your friends to join! Please do not reply to this message here. Either reply here, here or here.

For the December Drive Coordinators,.

Delivered by MessageDeliveryBot on behalf of WikiProject Wikify at 23:21, 29 November 2010 (UTC).

Invitation to particpate in the December 2010 Wikification Drive
Delivered by MessageDeliveryBot on behalf of WikiProject Wikify at 01:44, 30 November 2010 (UTC).

Proposed deletion of Gordon Research Conferences


The article Gordon Research Conferences has been proposed for deletion&#32; because of the following concern:
 * no evidence of notability

While all contributions to Wikipedia are appreciated, content or articles may be deleted for any of several reasons.

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

Please consider improving the article to address the issues raised. Removing will stop the proposed deletion process, but other deletion processes exist. The speedy deletion process can result in deletion without discussion, and articles for deletion allows discussion to reach consensus for deletion. &mdash; RHaworth 15:07, 17 December 2010 (UTC)

Please confirm your membership
Delivered by MessageDeliveryBot on behalf of WikiProject Wikify at 19:11, 22 December 2010 (UTC).

Your GA nomination of St John's Ashfield
The article St John's Ashfield you nominated as a good article has passed ; see Talk:St John's Ashfield for eventual comments about the article. Well done! Congratulations on your first GA. Pyrotec (talk) 16:38, 10 January 2011 (UTC)

Rylstone, New South Wales
Thanks for expanding Rylstone so much. It's been on my watchlist for ages, and it's nice to see it active again. --99of9 (talk) 11:08, 13 March 2011 (UTC)
 * thanks, I have some connections with the place so it has some interest, any review comments would be welcome! Geez-oz (talk) 11:17, 13 March 2011 (UTC)
 * I also have a connection, but have never been there. Rather than review, I'll just plunge in and edit when I get around to it. --99of9 (talk) 11:34, 13 March 2011 (UTC)

Oops
Sorry about that. Not at all sure how I did that.  Jujutacular  talk 02:02, 29 March 2011 (UTC)
 * No problem, it looked like an accident. --99of9 (talk) 02:03, 29 March 2011 (UTC)

Planking
I require a source for an inclusion in the See Also section? That is new to me, can you point me to a policy? Are there sources supporting Polesitting or Balconing in the See Also section or is their inclusion OR as well. If so, I propose they should be removed as well. The case for including moral panic is clearly made by the hysterical response to the fad in the Australian press. -- Mattinbgn (talk) 07:22, 19 May 2011 (UTC)
 * Yes, I think your claim that the press response to planking is panicky/hysterical requires a source, otherwise it is just OR/POV. Since there is no other connection between the topic Planking and moral panic than via the press, I don't think it is comparable to the Polesitting link.  This article is not about the press.  Clearly Polesitting is a similar kind of activity, so the two concepts are closely related - readers of one article are likely to be interested in the other.  If we don't keep things tightly associated with the topic, articles like this will end up with lists of the form: Stupidity Australian laziness Teen alcohol abuse Facebook 99of9 (talk) 07:50, 19 May 2011 (UTC)

Circle packing in a circle
This is an automated message from CorenSearchBot. I have performed a web search with the contents of Circle packing in a circle, and it appears to include material copied directly from http://departments.oxy.edu/math/ProblemCompetition/march05.htm.

It is possible that the bot is confused and found similarity where none actually exists. If that is the case, you can remove the tag from the article. The article will be reviewed to determine if there are any copyright issues.

If substantial content is duplicated and it is not public domain or available under a compatible license, it will be deleted. For legal reasons, we cannot accept copyrighted text or images borrowed from other web sites or printed material. You may use such publications as a source of information, but not as a source of sentences. See our copyright policy for further details. (If you own the copyright to the previously published content and wish to donate it, see Donating copyrighted materials for the procedure.) CorenSearchBot (talk) 04:53, 1 June 2011 (UTC)


 * The material was split from Packing problem. It was already on wiki, and bears little similarity to the single sentence definition given on this link.  I don't think there is any copyvio problem here (and I certainly never used that site as a source). --99of9 (talk) 05:01, 1 June 2011 (UTC)

List of circle topics
I've added three articles that you recently created to the list of circle topics. If you know of others that should be there but are not, could you add those too?

Thanks. Michael Hardy (talk) 03:27, 2 June 2011 (UTC)


 * Thanks, sure thing. --99of9 (talk) 03:39, 2 June 2011 (UTC)

Lord Howe
Thanks for noticing the effort on the Lord Howe article- I am there at the moment and treating the article as my homework for the holiday - will end up adding some photo galleries. In real life I'm a botanist at Melbourne Botanic Gardens and really like your list of biota - and your photos are awesome. Being a taxonomist I'm tempted to suggest that in addition to arranging the plants according to your categories you also arrange them by botanical family - that way additions and modifications become easier for outsiders like me. Maybe there is also eventually the chance to add the many different and fascinating rocks and minerals that occur on the island.  Granitethighs  07:07, 8 June 2011 (UTC)


 * Also, thanks for the re-rating to B. I still have a lot of copy-editing to do and need to finish the history section - then I'll submit for a GA. I'd greatly appreciate your comments before I do that.  Granitethighs  12:42, 13 June 2011 (UTC)

Grain or Gram query
Hi There, My source has it in grains 66.5 which is 4.309127515 grams.

BongieB (talk) 04:52, 20 June 2011 (UTC)


 * Ok, thanks. I guess for novices like me it would be helpful to link the first use of that unit to the article Grain (unit). --99of9 (talk) 04:54, 20 June 2011 (UTC)

Electricity supply in SW Queensland
Should one of use move it to mainspace, or should we poke the author and have them do it? When moved, could I suggest a tweaking of the title to History of electricity supply in South West Queensland? -- saberwyn 01:24, 21 June 2011 (UTC)


 * I think we should - moving is not the kind of stuff a new user should get themselves into. I was hesitating for the same reason as you, I'm not sure what the best title is.  It mentions Brisbane, so maybe we should broaden the scope to History of electricity supply in Queensland and let others fill in more detail for the rest of the state (or we could go halfway and limit it to sourthern Queensland)? --99of9 (talk) 01:31, 21 June 2011 (UTC)
 * I think broadening it to Queensland as a whole would be a good idea. I'll make the move momentarily. Any ideas of where to populate links? -- saberwyn 01:42, 21 June 2011 (UTC)
 * Energy in Queensland and History of Queensland? --99of9 (talk) 01:51, 21 June 2011 (UTC)

Lord Howe Again
OK - I've finished tinkering and would appreciate feedback on a submission of the article for GA. I know there are all sorts of tools for checking disambiguations, citations and lots more but I have never really used them much. Do you know about them and do you have any favourites as I should probably be aware of what needs to be done in a final brush-up? Thanks for offering to do this ... and hope you enjoy your holiday its an amazing environment. I'm sure there will be things you can add to the article after your visit.  Granitethighs  23:53, 24 June 2011 (UTC)
 * Thanks for the note, I'll let you know when I've looked through it. I haven't used those tools either. --99of9 (talk) 03:57, 25 June 2011 (UTC)


 * Thanks for all your useful comments, they are all pertinent and I will steadily address all of them. I am not sure how to deal with the common name/scientific name issue. My background has taught me to be cautious of common names for reasons of accuracy. There are unique Lord Howe variants of mainland species for example - currawong, pigeon, bird's nest fern and so on - so using the common name (unless done very carefully) can lead to mistakes. People will prefer the common name but the scientific name gives the precision. Linking does need to be consistent in the article and linking both common and scientific name seems overkill. For accuracy I have hyperlinked only the scientific name. WP may have different policies that will mean an adjustment but I have tried to be consistent through the article. Thanks again.  Granitethighs  02:12, 3 July 2011 (UTC)

A cupcake for you!

 * You're welcome. I'm yet to try it, but I'll get around to it eventually I guess. --99of9 (talk) 12:29, 8 July 2011 (UTC)

The snail
Hi 99of9, Just wanted to let you know that we started to answer your snail question here. Invertzoo (talk) 23:03, 16 August 2011 (UTC)

Lord Howe Edits
Amazing - that's a great improvement - thanks a million.  Granitethighs  10:57, 17 August 2011 (UTC)
 * No problem, I'm glad you're not too disappointed by my reckless destruction of your finely crafted words! If you use IRC, I'm on  at the moment where we could discuss further changes? --99of9 (talk) 11:04, 17 August 2011 (UTC)
 * Thanks for all your patience and effort during the review. I'll do a thorough check for grammar and sourcing issues today and then pass it once finished.  Night w   04:07, 1 September 2011 (UTC)
 * Thanks for reviewing. You invested a lot of effort, and the article has certainly come a long way because of it. --99of9 (talk) 04:25, 1 September 2011 (UTC)
 * Thanks mate, likewise. The credit stays with you and Granitethighs, given the time and effort you both invested. Thanks for sticking with it!  Night w   16:43, 1 September 2011 (UTC)

Sustenance
Not sure what you might need to keep you going - but your hard work is very much appreciated. I'll join in at the weekend but you seem to have done most this by yourself.  Granitethighs  13:03, 19 August 2011 (UTC)
 * Cheers! :-) --99of9 (talk) 13:32, 19 August 2011 (UTC)

Needless to say - the GA would not have happened without your input - many thanks and good luck with the pics when you go to the island... the article could do with a few real quality photos.  Granitethighs  21:57, 1 September 2011 (UTC)

That snail Noctepuna cerea
Hey 99of9, I wanted to say thanks so much for persevering with that snail ID, and then creating the stub, and adding the species and an image to the genus article. Your care and work is much appreciated by Project Gastropods. As I expect you noticed, I was completely wrong with what I thought about the probable ID, but then I know almost nothing about endemic Australian land snails, so I suppose that's not surprising! Thanks again, Invertzoo (talk) 17:52, 3 September 2011 (UTC)

Oh and any other snails or slugs that you come across and are able to photograph, we will be very happy to see them! Invertzoo (talk) 18:12, 3 September 2011 (UTC)

Re:Spilosoma glatignyi
That is because the species was "discovered" several times and described as a new species by various scientists. Many insect species have numerous synonyms. If you are planning to make more moth of butterfly species pages, you might want to check to find synonyms for the species you are writing on. Note that it is not a perfect site though. Not all species are on it and sometimes the info is outdated. Cheers and keep up the good work. Ruigeroeland (talk) 08:09, 5 September 2011 (UTC)


 * Came across your question in Ruigeroeland's talk page. Just want to add some things: see Synonym (taxonomy) for a full description of biological synonyms. Note that only one name can be valid at any time (except in disputed cases, the subjective synonyms). Those 'synonyms' should actually not be used, as they are redundant or incorrect namings by other authorities of a species already described previously. They do not have equal validity. They are merely mentioned as to clarify that these 'species' referred to the same species as the current article is about.--  Obsidi ♠ n   Soul   20:01, 26 September 2011 (UTC)

Speedy deletion nomination of File:StJohnsAshfield.jpg


A tag has been placed on File:StJohnsAshfield.jpg requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section F2 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because it is an image page for a missing or corrupt image or an empty image description page for a Commons-hosted image.

If you think that this notice was placed here in error, contest the deletion by clicking on the button labelled "Click here to contest this speedy deletion". Doing so will take you to the talk page where you will find a pre-formatted place for you to explain why you believe the page should not be deleted. You can also visit the the page's talk page directly to give your reasons, but be aware that once tagged for speedy deletion, if the page meets the criterion, it may be deleted without delay. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag yourself, but don't hesitate to add information to the page that would render it more in conformance with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. Sfan00 IMG (talk) 19:24, 14 September 2011 (UTC)

St James, Sydney
Hi 99of9,

Thanks for your reclassification of the article on St James' Church, Sydney. I have been working on it and hoping that my efforts had made it better. There is still have much to work to do. If you have any suggestions for further improvement, I'll be happy to see them. Whiteghost.ink 06:07, 1 October 2011 (UTC)
 * Yes, you've been doing good work. The only reason I didn't rate it B was that inline citations are still a little sparse. --99of9 (talk) 10:42, 1 October 2011 (UTC)
 * I'm hunting them, I'm hunting them ... Whiteghost.ink 00:46, 3 October 2011 (UTC)

Thank You!
Thank you for helping me fix my source not the quoll entry. I am new at this and it means a lot to me that you helped. I hope we can help each other out as my wikipedia journey continues. PS the fact that you live in Australia is super cool

Savetheoceans (talk) 10:48, 7 October 2011 (UTC) 

ArbCom comments
Thanks for your thoughtful comments at Arbitration/Requests/Case. Kaldari (talk) 02:34, 4 November 2011 (UTC)

Thanks!
Thanks for the invitation to the Sydney meetup. :) Will come along. Whiteghost.ink 02:11, 14 November 2011 (UTC)

Thanks!
Thanks for letting me know. I'll see if I can make it! Amandajm (talk) 02:16, 14 November 2011 (UTC)

Apologies
I'm sorry I didn't make it! I hope that you all had a lovely time, getting to know each other, or renewing acquaintances. I was rather exhausted after going up to Sydney for a reunion of work colleagues, which was most enjoyable. Amandajm (talk) 22:14, 20 November 2011 (UTC)
 * No problem, sorry to miss you. --99of9 (talk) 00:59, 21 November 2011 (UTC)

I'm sorry I didn't see your message sooner. I don't often log in on wikipedia these days. I gave up updating Sydney articles and monitoring for vandalism on all the Sydney suburb articles, following many irrational disputes from other editors and inaction on unruly behaviour by sockpuppets. J Bar (talk) 03:37, 21 November 2011 (UTC)
 * No problem, I didn't give you long. I was hoping your settings were such that a message on your talk page would notify you by email. --99of9 (talk) 03:53, 21 November 2011 (UTC)

Noisy Miner
I'd boosted the ISO to get some flight shots late afternoon, so this is a very noisy Can it be fixed? Marj (talk) 02:16, 30 November 2011 (UTC)
 * Hi Marj! Glad to see you swing by.  I'll have a go at noise reduction.  For next time, I don't think you needed to boost so far, because 1/5000th of a second is overkill for a 500mm lens (unless you or your subject is moving). --99of9 (talk) 02:23, 30 November 2011 (UTC)
 * Yes, it was an error. Would normally bin the mistakes, but I like this guy with his worm. Many thanks, that's an improvement. Marj (talk) 05:48, 30 November 2011 (UTC)

Refs
Hi, the refs you added to the Jesus page were not WP:RS refs but just websites. The statements may be valid, but the refs are not. I did not tag or delete the refs, but you do need better refs that are WP:RS, e.g. actual books by well known authors. Let us wait a few days and hopefully you can find better refs, else will have to delete the refs. Thanks. History2007 (talk) 05:30, 9 December 2011 (UTC)
 * That's not entirely true. Please look again (maybe you saw only the first part of my edit, it took me about three goes overall diff).  It is from a book Zen Flesh Zen Bones: A Collection of Zen and Pre-Zen Writings which is a compilation of writings which include a compilation called 101 Zen Stories, which includes the particular story which is available on the web so I linked for accessibility, but you can look up either of the full books if you prefer. --99of9 (talk) 05:47, 9 December 2011 (UTC)
 * In that case, could you please add the ISBN for the book, the page number, publisher etc. in the usual WP:RS format? Websites come and go and get WP:linkrot, so ISBN is good. The page 101 Zen Stories is already asking for refs as well, so would be good if you could fix the two together Thanks. History2007 (talk) 06:01, 9 December 2011 (UTC)
 * Actually both the ISBN and publisher were already there in the last diff I showed you. I have now added the page number, and given you a Google Books link instead so you can verify from the book. --99of9 (talk) 06:14, 9 December 2011 (UTC)
 * I do not need to verify it. I am sure you found it. The issue is that if we open the door to web site refs on that page that gets many hits a day, it will be an invitation to more website refs all over, and eventually all kinds of non-WP:RS sources will come in. Somehow when all refs are ISBN+pagenumber other websites get avoided and the page keeps its quality refs. Thanks. History2007 (talk) 06:18, 9 December 2011 (UTC)
 * Are you interested in collaborating to bring this up to GA again? It doesn't seem far off to me. --99of9 (talk) 06:27, 9 December 2011 (UTC)
 * As you can see, I have done a lot of edits to that page over the last 10 months. In effect about 80% of the text that refers to the New Testament was rewritten in that period and many, many errors about New Testament references and content were corrected. It was a total mess before, and the GA rating had been rightly revoked. It is in much better shape now, but a highly "emotional" page if you look at the talk page over the last few months. I am not sure what the GA stamp will buy for us, and there are so many pages such as John the Baptist that have been tagged for a rewrite, I wonder if they should not get fixed first. My time allocation is fix those pages such as the Baptism of Jesus and John th Baptist that need help first. Resurrection of Jesus still needs help - I made some fixes this week, but needs more. I am just somewhat overloaded now. History2007 (talk) 06:38, 9 December 2011 (UTC)
 * Sure, concentrate wherever you like. I'm interested in the GA stamp partly because 360k people visit the page every day, and it would be nice to present something recognized by Wikipedians as good. But the GAN process is also a good way to get fresh good encyclopedic eyes across it, which I think it might be ready for soon. --99of9 (talk) 11:44, 9 December 2011 (UTC)
 * As long as I don't have to spend too much effort on it, why not get a GA. What I know for sure is that I have double checked every single fact in the sections: Chronology, Life and teachings in the New Testament, and the subsections Existence of Jesus, Language, race and appearance and Depictions of Jesus and Mythical view. I have not checked the rest. So those sections will not have factual accuracy problems or lack of WP:RS sources. I do not know what the GA deal is, but I guess you do. History2007 (talk) 16:15, 9 December 2011 (UTC)
 * The criteria are here: GACR. Item 1 is close, but it probably needs tightening for conciseness.  Your work means it satisfies item 2 for everything you've checked.  They will probably ask for the citations to be more consistently formatted.  It clearly satisfies 3(a), but probably needs a bit of tightening for 3(b).  I think it's pretty good on 4, which is amazing for such a controversial topic. Item 5 stability?  I'm not sure.  Item 6 images are probably fine, and it's easy to fix if they're not. --99of9 (talk) 20:25, 9 December 2011 (UTC)

I have checked every fact in the sections I mentioned. I am 100% sure. Regarding reference formats, I wonder if there is a tool for that. But that is not my department. Regarding neutrality, there are 1632 people who watch the page and there have been very few arguments about the current content - because as I said on the talk page the text has a Battleship gray tone. Regarding stability, given the large number of page views, and the small number of new edits per month, the article is really stable. I do know a lot about art and images, so I can handle image questions - and I wrote the depictions section from scratch in response to requests - which actually is a little long, but does not bite anyone. So you are right that it is close to GA, but the reference format take work, and is not my domain. Needs a tool. History2007 (talk) 20:40, 9 December 2011 (UTC)

Christmas card
History2007 (talk) 01:54, 24 December 2011 (UTC)


 * Thanks to both of you, and Merry Christmas to any talk page watchers. --99of9 (talk) 03:12, 24 December 2011 (UTC)

article naming and expertise
Hi, good to see you at the meet-up. Being a chemist, you might have an opinion on whether consistency should trump recognisability here. This is something I still haven't formed a proper opinion on. Tony  (talk)  12:50, 30 December 2011 (UTC)
 * Thanks for the note. I've added some input, but I don't have a strong opinion.  To me it's a line ball, because the correct technical term is so arcane that nobody likes it! --99of9 (talk) 23:06, 2 January 2012 (UTC)