User talk:BarossaV

Mawson Interchange
Hmmmm. My first reaction (to your edit) was a sharp intake of breath. My next reaction was ambivalence to the point of personal confusion. My current reaction is to sit back and watch.

However, the other reason I'm here is to thank you for your recent spate of diligent work. Thank you. I'm sure I'm not the only one who has been impressed, (despite the fact that being an "inclusionist", I'm not always comfortable with your "pruning".) Cheers, Pdfpdf (talk) 18:36, 24 January 2015 (UTC)

Next reaction
I'm not totally convinced that removal of so much information is useful. (One example: Lynton railway station.) I'd be interested to hear your rationale(s) before I choose a course of action. Thanks in advance, Pdfpdf (talk) 18:51, 24 January 2015 (UTC)


 * Also, I'm a bit concerned by the sloppiness of some of your edits. e.g.
 * |platform_arch=1 side 1 usland
 * |liosk = No
 * etc. Pdfpdf (talk) 19:08, 24 January 2015 (UTC)


 * And further: . Neither Lynton, nor Clapham, nor the railway station are 10.7km from Adelaide station. They are, however, 10.7km by railway. Nor am I impressed that you classify such an edit as a "typo". Pdfpdf (talk) 19:23, 24 January 2015 (UTC)


 * Bloody hell! I just looked at Pinera railway station
 * Pinera railway station is located on the Benalta line
 * I am now somewhat unimpressed. Pdfpdf (talk) 19:23, 24 January 2015 (UTC)


 * Obviously they are typos, sorry I'm not perfect. Usual protocol is upon noting is to just fix rather than bleat about it. Although as 2 posts made to this page today had errors, appears I am not alone. Throw mud if you must, but please don't be hypocritical. BarossaV (talk) 19:35, 24 January 2015 (UTC)


 * No, neither of us is perfect, but you don't have to be an arrogant turd, so please cease such behavior.
 * Usual protocol is upon noting is to just fix rather than bleat about it. - I'm neither your mother, nor your maid. It is NOT my job to follow you around and clean up your messes.
 * Although as 2 posts made to this page today had errors, - Huh? Please explain.
 * Throw mud if you must, but please don't be hypocritical. - Your arrogance Chutzpa is amusing, but not useful. (i.e. Huh? Please explain.)
 * Now, getting back on topic, as I said, I'm neither your mother, nor your maid. It is NOT my job to follow you around and clean up your messes. If you do not do so, I will simply revert your edits containing crap, until such time as they no longer contain crap.
 * BTW: Regarding typo, railway distances are always quoted as via the rail line, not as the crow flys or any other methodology - exactly, but if you do not explicitly state that, then readers who are not as clever and knowledgeable as you will ASSUME the it is crow flys, so removing such a clarification is NOT useful. (i.e. Again, if you do not restore the clarifications, I will simply revert your edits containing crap until such time as they no longer contain crap.)
 * I hope you've received the messages that not everyone is as clever as you, and that clarifications are there for a reason - i.e. to help the mere mortals amongst us who, unlike you, don't know everything. Pdfpdf (talk) 10:52, 25 January 2015 (UTC)
 * Please do not resort to abuse, it's pathetic. Describing someone as a 'turd', edits as 'crap' is not really necessary, and not tough, funny or persuasive.
 * Two errors posts as requested. No problem with making errors, we all do it, but if I was going to give a condescending lecture on making errors, I would make sure my own house was in order first. It was an open goal begging to be kicked.
 * You think I'm arrogant, talk about the pot calilng the kettlle black. May I make a suggest you leave your ego at the door?
 * I never asked you to be my maid or mother. Errors happen that's part of editing. When I find one, I fix it.. no hysterics, finger pointing, whinging, I just get it done. Obviously different story if malicious vandalism, but I don't think a few bad keystrokes qualify as this.
 * If you want to get into an edit war, so be it, but most likely result is blocks for one or both of us, so not overly productive. Your 'fix it or else' attempt at intimidation has fallen on deaf ears. But in the interests of good faith, I will seek clarification on the project page.
 * I never claimed to be 'clever', 'know everything' or anything remotely of the sort, where did I make this statement?
 * So in short, we have little regard for one another. I'm not going anywhere and don't expect you are, so we will just have to learn to live with other. I will address your 'polite' post separately. BarossaV (talk) 12:31, 25 January 2015 (UTC)
 * Strangely, I'm quite encouraged by your response. I gather you think I've misinterpreted your attitude. I hope you're right. I look forward to an improved/more productive/etc. level of communication. Should you feel an apology from me is required, I'm willing to consider one. Pdfpdf (talk) 12:58, 25 January 2015 (UTC)

OK, so I've had my dummy spit. Now I'll be polite:

New page
Greetings! I'm concerned by the excessive nature of your pruning, and by the poor quality control of your edits. If you would like to discuss my concerns with me in a non-combative manner, I would see that as a useful way forward. I'm not totally convinced that removal of so much information is useful. I'd be interested to hear your rationale(s). Cheers, Pdfpdf (talk) 11:08, 25 January 2015 (UTC)


 * In short, the biggest problem with the railway stations in Adelaide articles is the lack of cites and if challenged, although notable enough for inclusion, would probably fail an article for deletion challenge for this reason. I have attempted to address, with varying degrees of success, although most are still below what I would call minimum standard.


 * I know there is a theory that bigger is better, the all inclusive theory, but there is a fair bit of information that is better covered in other articles. For example, the Salisbury station article included a breakdown of the demographics of the suburb, this is more appropriate to the suburb article.


 * The Mawson Interchange article included details of trains that run through the station, detail that is best covered off in the line article, that appears the way articles are structured in other states with only stopping trains mentioned. Although notably an article for the Crystal Brook line is notably absent, I have it on my list to establish. Likewise a rundown of how Adelaide's ticketing system works is more appropriate in other places bearing in mind WP:NOTGUIDE policy.


 * If you would like to pick another specific article I will give rationale for the changes. BarossaV (talk) 12:57, 25 January 2015 (UTC)


 * Hmmm. I do not disagree with that rationale, and I agree with the examples you quote. Never-the-less, I still feel uneasy. I'll give the matter more thought before I comment further. Thank you for putting considered effort into your reply. I now have some confidence that we probably agree in general, and that our differences are "noise". Thank you. Pdfpdf (talk) 13:08, 25 January 2015 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for January 27
Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Adelaide-Port Augusta railway line, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Seaford railway station. Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ* Join us at the DPL WikiProject.

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 08:54, 27 January 2015 (UTC)

Goodness gracious!
You are indeed a very busy editor. Good on you! Pdfpdf (talk) 11:09, 27 January 2015 (UTC)

January 2015
Hello, I'm BracketBot. I have automatically detected that [//en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?diff=644676726 your edit] to Adelaide–Darwin railway may have broken the syntax by modifying 3 "[]"s. If you have, don't worry: just [ edit the page] again to fix it. If I misunderstood what happened, or if you have any questions, you can leave a message on [//en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?action=edit&preload=User:A930913/BBpreload&editintro=User:A930913/BBeditintro&minor=&title=User_talk:A930913&preloadtitle=BracketBot%20–%20&section=new my operator's talk page].
 * List of unpaired brackets remaining on the page:

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, BracketBot (talk) 09:25, 29 January 2015 (UTC)
 * Port Augusta]]) to Marree rebuilt and connected to Adelaide
 * [Category:Railway lines in the Northern Territory]

Brown's Well vs Barmera
Thank you for your recent contributions to a similar set of articles to the ones I have been working on. Please be careful with the use of terms correct for the time being discussed. In particular, the Barmera railway line did not exist with that name in the 1910s. Contemporary reports in newspapers and parliament call it the Brown's Well railway line when it was built across the mallee, and appear to still use that term even when it extended to Paringa. Discussion of rail to Barmera in the 1910s would have been to extend the Morgan railway line towards Renmark, so it is confusing to find "Barmera" in articles about towns settled in the Mallee in the 1912-1914 expansion. Thanks. --Scott Davis Talk 00:16, 2 February 2015 (UTC)
 * Please also note WP:NOTBROKEN and WP:NOPIPE --Scott Davis Talk 01:28, 2 February 2015 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for February 3
Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that you've added some links pointing to disambiguation pages. Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ* Join us at the DPL WikiProject.


 * Crystal Brook-Broken Hill railway line
 * added a link pointing to Gladstone railway station


 * Tailem Bend railway station
 * added a link pointing to Pinnaroo railway line

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 09:02, 3 February 2015 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for March 3
Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Dry Creek-Port Adelaide railway line, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Crystal Brook. Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ* Join us at the DPL WikiProject.

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 08:56, 3 March 2015 (UTC)

O-Bahn Busway
Thank you for your help on O-Bahn Busway. I have made comments at Talk:O-Bahn Busway and Featured article review/O-Bahn Busway/archive1 noting that we have done some work and asking for more specific advice, but I suspect we're too late to save the FA star for now :-( --Scott Davis Talk 09:37, 10 April 2015 (UTC)

Broken Hill changes
Thanks you for updating the cite in Broken Hill railway station this morning. However I have since reverted that change as we now have a template Template:Cite New South Wales transport timetables in which we keep all New South Wales timetable URL's as well as timetable dates so that only one change is required which then automatically flows on to all stations or other locations which link to that template. NSW Trainlink has been making a number of software changes in the past week in which the URL's for their timetables have changed twice in five days. This template has made any resultant changes so much easier as all changes can be made in one place instead of having to change up to about 100 stations/locations each time a URL is changed. I had not been aware that they made this second change last night.Fleet Lists (talk) 05:30, 30 June 2015 (UTC)

Darwin railway station
Hi BarossaV. Thanks for your contributions. I notice in March you made some "copyedits" to the article Darwin railway station. I note that while there were some positive changes, the overall result left the article looking incomplete and removed information that had been contributed by several editors without consensus or rationale. I have made another edit, keeping some of your changes and restored some of the information you removed. If you are unhappy with the changes I have made, or indeed any article that you feel warrants major changes/omissions, please feel free to discuss on the article's talk page. Like many in the Wikipedia community, I respect the pillar WP:BOLD, but like others, I also favour consensus and inclusion when removing sourced information. It seems we share an interest in railway articles, and I would be happy to collaborate in the future. But can I ask if you could leave a description of the rationale in the edit summary when making changes, so other editors get an idea of where you are coming from? Dfadden (talk) 14:01, 2 July 2015 (UTC)
 * Your point has been noted. Nonetheless the whole reason for the WP:BOLD process is to allow editors to get on with it. The idea that editors should consult before making changes is impractical. If committee approach of vetting every change before it was made was followed, nothing would ever get done. But in the interests of harmony I will explain my posts step by step in this article. BarossaV (talk) 01:48, 7 July 2015 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for July 7
Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Darwin railway station, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Darwin. Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ* Join us at the DPL WikiProject.

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 09:06, 7 July 2015 (UTC)