User talk:Bidgee/Archive 22

Orphaned non-free image File:Actewagl logo.svg
 Thanks for uploading File:Actewagl logo.svg. 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 the criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. Skier Dude ( talk ) 05:14, 4 October 2011 (UTC)


 * The replacement for this, File:ActewAGL-logo-3icon.gif, was uploaded to commons. Since it's obviously non-free I've tagged it there and restored File:Actewagl logo.svg to the article. --AussieLegend (talk) 06:23, 4 October 2011 (UTC)


 * They seem to be only doing it as the "mouse" icon is no longer part of ACTEWAGL logo. Just updated the logo and hope that keeps them happy. Bidgee (talk) 06:59, 4 October 2011 (UTC)

tiger quoll
Bidgee, I'm the one who added the text to the article and did some word-forword copying of the sources. This violates Wikipedia:Copyrights WP:COPY. Please stop changing it back. LittleJerry (talk) 11:39, 7 October 2011 (UTC)

The Gundagai site is a complete mess
Bidgee I note that your name was on the discussion page for Gundagai a few years ago. I am interested in the Gundagai site as my grandparents were from there (although I live in Queensland). I have recently looked at this site, as my wife and I are planning a vsit to Gundagai in the next few months, and I was refreshing my historical knowledge of the town. This site is now a complete mess because some person called *Name removed per WP:OUTING Bidgee (talk) 05:28, 12 October 2011 (UTC)* (?) has put all this what I consider to be rubbish about Greek and Roman mythology, ghosts, spirits etc. As you seem to be more knowledgable than I could you please look at this site and tell if my opinion has any basis? I am not very computer literate (being an old guy) so I would hesitate to make any changes myself. Is it just me, or has this site been shanghied by this person. The discussion page is full of stuff which does not seem quite sane. Perhaps it is me. Greame Healy. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 203.168.63.180 (talk) 04:21, 11 October 2011 (UTC)
 * I have noticed the article has gone from bad to worse, I have given up since no matter how many blocked they get they always return. The editor is in fact banned from Wikipedia and shouldn't be editing however a lot of the other editors who use to keep the article in check when I gave-up or couldn't are no longer editors here as they have since retired from Wikipedia. If you are willing to fix the article that would be great. Bidgee (talk) 05:28, 12 October 2011 (UTC)

Australian spelling?
Hi Bidgee, thanks for updating the dead link on Casuarina equisetifolia. Just wondering, what did you mean by 'Australian spelling' (since I didn't actually write anything at all)? Cheers, Rainbowwrasse (talk) 11:50, 12 October 2011 (UTC)
 * I suspect he was referring to the other changes that he made in the reversion ("northeastern" to "north-eastern", "Southeast" to "South-east" and "windbreaking" to "wind breaking"). --AussieLegend (talk) 15:59, 12 October 2011 (UTC)
 * Right, didn't see those changes, thought it was just a revert. Thanks. Rainbowwrasse (talk) 17:56, 12 October 2011 (UTC)
 * Nope it wasn't a revert, I was fixing the issues with the article. Edit summary is limited with the amount of text you can write and I was also limited on time. Bidgee (talk) 01:10, 14 October 2011 (UTC)

Another Crazy Entry in the Gundagai Page
Bidgee, thanks for your reply. This person has put another entry in the discussion page for Gundagai. - MINERVA AND DIANA AND THE GOLDEN APPLES - This whole entry reads as completely crazy and senseless. You have probably already seen this entry. She also has had a go at me. Apparently I am a troll! (whatever that is). Thanks for your invitation to edit the page, but no thanks. I am not confident enough. I am interested in Gundagai history, but am no expert. One thing this person has wrong. Hume and Hovel came no where near Gundagai in 1824. They went through what is now the site of Blowering Dam, near Tumut. Although it can probably be said that their expedition influenced future settlement in the Gundagai area. That is, I think the incorrect Hume and Hovel entry is still on the Gundagai page, unless it has been amended. At one stage the Gundagai page was really good a year or so ago, and I enjoyed reading it, and printed it out at different times. But now I wouldn't bother. It is not even worth reading, which de-values Wikipedia. This will be my last post and for the sake of my sanity and blood pressure, I will never visit the Gundagai page again. Thanks for all your valuable work for Wikipedia. regards, Graeme. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 203.168.62.193 (talk) 07:26, 13 October 2011 (UTC)

Ignazwrobel (talk) 13:49, 22 October 2011 (UTC)== Highlighting outdated quotation contents with decorative quotation marks ==

Updating format
Decorative quotation marks.

Hi Bidgee Question: If any WP:MOS guideline is subject to personal point of view - then anybody can classify anything "acceptable". Pls explain "acceptable" in this case.

It is 1. a quotation referring to an up-to-the-minute issue nearly ten years ago - why still highlighting it as if it where up-to-date-information of A importance 2. it is not a theorem of the subject which would explain highlighting according to it´s degree of importance 3. the form of the big decorative quotation marks gives this section an A importance that is outdated. Osama Bin Laden is dead on May 11, 2011.

Do formal aspects rule necessary content updates, in this particular case visually downgrading the quoted contents by formatting it less eye catching if it refers to activies nearly ten years ago? Does this have political reasons? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Ignazwrobel (talk • contribs) 13:42, 22 October 2011 (UTC)


 * Well it is a pull quote (since it is pulling it from the source), but feel free to change it using the quote tag or using the "", just make sure you follow MOS as it will help you on how it should be done. Using just "" is something that is no longer being done unless it is quoting a single word or three. Bidgee (talk) 23:36, 22 October 2011 (UTC)

Youtube as a non reliable source. Bidgee, if the youtube vid shows the subject itself, the person, actor, singer, talking him/herself- isn´t this is a first tier source? Youtube in this particular case shows the source itself generating contents without any (UTC) transcription or reporting as intermediate facilitator of what the person says.Ignazwrobel (talk) 13:55, 22 October 2011


 * Youtube, Facebook, Myspace, Twitter and any other social websites are deemed as unsuitable as reliable sources but can be used as external links however extreme care needs to be taken to make sure it is official and make sure it doesn't contain copyrighted content (see WP:COPYLINK and WP:EL). Bidgee (talk) 23:36, 22 October 2011 (UTC)

a last question two hours later: isn´t the article on Marlon Brando another candidate for WP:MOS? still starting with Marlon in the first section...I do not understand the logic matrix. Why don´t you change it here according to WP:MOS?Ignazwrobel (talk) 15:33, 22 October 2011 (UTC)

..don´t know if you´ll answer me, you don´t have to, you´re not a wikipedia teacher. Obviously this is a game with many many rules, played by a bunch of pro´s. There are many guards to the rules - isn´t this extremely discouraging for editor´s - lucky me you didn´t revert completely my efforts on the D. Spencer article. Ignazwrobel (talk) 14:09, 22 October 2011 (UTC)


 * I don't have much time to comment but I'll give you some quick replies. The lead section (the start of the article) as we call it, does seem to be rather long (see: MOS:LEAD which has more about what a lead is and how it should be done). We do have editors here that are happy to help, you can get help by helpme with the question on your user talk page or you can have a editor who can help you out (see: Adopt-a-user). The way policies and guidelines are do seem rather tough on new editors but once you start learning then and editing, you start to understand why they are in place but they could be redone as some of the policies and guidelines have not had any major changes for sometime. I'm sorry that my replies are brief, however I'm in the middle of moving house and studying. Bidgee (talk) 23:36, 22 October 2011 (UTC)

Dear Bidgee. Thank you for your friendly and patient answers. Cheers! Ignazwrobel (talk) 07:55, 23 October 2011 (UTC)

Commons question - derivative works
An editor has been uploading TV program logos at commons, licensing them with but they are generally derivative works from copyrighted logos and title cards. For example, File:TBBT logo.svg has been lifted from File:BigBangTheoryTitleCard.png while File:Terra Nova logo.svg has been lifted from File:2010terranova2.jpg. File:Terra Nova logo.svg even includes the map icon that formst part of the Terra Nova logo. Since the map is clearly noy a simple geometric shape, doesn't apply. There are numerous other examples. Is this permitted at commons or has the editor crossed the line? --AussieLegend (talk) 16:14, 22 October 2011 (UTC)
 * There is nothing wrong with recreating what was an unfree logo (such as The Big Bang Theory) to a free text logo, however the Terra Nova logo is a no go since it is still a copyrighted logo (text logo doesn't apply). Even the stargates they have uploaded as own work are copyrighted. Bidgee (talk) 23:09, 22 October 2011 (UTC)
 * Fair enough. The Stargate glyphs were going to be my next question. I've seen them discussed previously, but I can't remember where. --AussieLegend (talk) 09:17, 23 October 2011 (UTC)

Rex Saabs
G'day, you might have noticed on your watchlist that I edited the Rex article to reflect the fact that one of them is now back on the register. You have my sympathies regarding your move - I once stayed in a shithole for a couple of years simply because I didn't want all the hassle and grief of moving house. Cheers. YSSYguy (talk) 13:56, 26 October 2011 (UTC)

Gundagai
I just spent 10 minutes scanning through this page. I hope to be feeling better again by tomorrow. Rumiton (talk) 11:16, 30 October 2011 (UTC)

Hi
Hi. I just wanted to say thanks for telling me to use Edit Summaries when i edited NSW, it seemed to have got me into the habit of doing so. Thanks! 11coolguy12 (talk) 09:54, 5 November 2011 (UTC)

Sydney
If you get a chance, could you have a look at Talk:Sydney? I can't help feeling that the edits are similar to somebody else. Maybe it's just my paranoia, I have a strong suspicion of anyone with "729" in their username. --AussieLegend (talk) 08:40, 21 November 2011 (UTC)
 * They do seem a little suspect but I would have thought past check user's on the socks would have picked this one up. Don't worry there is another "new" editor who is rather suspect at a few other article's I've edited. Bidgee (talk) 10:19, 21 November 2011 (UTC)

A kitten for you!
For the research done on User_talk:Frisch1.

LauraHale (talk) 20:54, 27 November 2011 (UTC) 
 * Thanks Laura. :) Bidgee (talk) 23:47, 3 December 2011 (UTC)

Why did you remove it?
Ronald McDonald House did do that you erased!!!!

Bob herry    talk    -- Hi!! 17:23, 3 December 2011 (UTC)
 * Because it was an unconstructive edit were you changed the wording and added uncited content which was poorly worded. Bidgee (talk) 23:47, 3 December 2011 (UTC)

How do we go about 'unblacklisting' AusBT?
Hi Bidgee – how do we go about removing AusBT (Australian Business Traveller) from your blacklist? AusBT is independent, run by professional journalists, quick to move on the major stories and also breaks many stories ahead of the mainstream media (or includes information not in those stories, due to their more mainstream audience). Being able to include this information in Wikipedia articles with appropriate citations would seem to make sense, so I'd appreciate your advice as to what is needed to remove AusBT from the 'blacklist'. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 101.169.188.250 (talk) 07:19, 5 December 2011 (UTC)

bump - Hey Bidgee, can you offer your thoughts on the above? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Djsflynn (talk • contribs) 09:58, 19 December 2011 (UTC)

Hi Bidgee - can you offer any advice on the above? Really keen to get this sorted, with your help. :) — Preceding unsigned comment added by Djsflynn (talk • contribs) 11:13, 29 December 2011 (UTC)

bump Hi Bidgee - can you offer any advice on the above? I'm still keen to get this sorted, with your help and guidance :) Djsflynn (talk) 01:14, 4 January 2012 (UTC)

Re:121.220.45.16
I just noticed the first few edits they made. Yes, definately trolling. If S/he continues AIV will do the trick. "and one of your editors appears to be attacking me.... corruption?" - Person attacking is claiming someone is attacking them - that's different ;) -- MST  ☆  R   (Chat Me!) 09:48, 12 December 2011 (UTC)

Your username
Time you did something about it!! Every bloody Budgie I have ever seen has a U in it!! all the best for the Feustive Season. Cheers Crusoe8181 (talk) 10:10, 12 December 2011 (UTC)

3RR report
Rusted AutoParts has now reverted 4 times at Russell Crowe so I've opened a report at WP:3RRN. You may wish to comment as I had to mention you because of his incorrect allegation that you had breached 3RR. The report may be found here. --AussieLegend (talk) 04:26, 21 December 2011 (UTC)
 * Seems the only policy he understands is the 3RR, he doesn't seem to take note that WP:FUTURE is policy itself, and he also uses he POV as to way it should remain on the article! Bidgee (talk) 08:01, 22 December 2011 (UTC)

Fina
Since it looks like Fina maybe over shadowed by 04U - can you please keep an eye out for an impact reports over the next few days as it looks like your gonna get some waves (swells) from Fina. Cheers.Jason Rees (talk) 07:46, 22 December 2011 (UTC)
 * Well I live along way south and inland so she isn't going to bother me! :D Though I love to be back in the Top End of the Territory (Northern Territory), ocean up there is a hot soup (though I think ocean temps are about 30-31c off the Top End's coast ATM) this time of the year, so any low which moves/develops into a good favourable region (low to bugger all shear, away from land, on or close to the monsoon trough ect) is going to be feed with heat and moisture without any issues. Bidgee (talk) 07:58, 22 December 2011 (UTC)

Merry Xmas!
Take it easy, and enjoy. Cheers, Pdfpdf (talk) 11:35, 22 December 2011 (UTC)

Cane Toad Times
Thanks for your notes on the images uploaded in support of the article on Cane Toad Times. I have added a License: CC BY 3.0 to each of the pages you seem concerned about. However I would point out (... text removed Robertwhyteus (talk) 21:59, 22 December 2011 (UTC)) the pages were already marked © ToadShow and therefore since uploaded by rob@toadshow.com.au, an owner and principal of this entity, they were in fact uploaded by the person owning the copyright and free to license it under the terms already specified in the original upload. Robertwhyteus (talk) 12:19, 22 December 2011 (UTC)


 * It's just that if they were uploaded to Wikimedia Commons (whether by you or another contributor), the files would be deleted (since anyone could create a Wikipedia account using your name). This isn't an attack on you or your uploads. Please send the permissions to the Volunteer Response Team (Known as OTRS), there is an example of a email permission on Wikimedia Commons. Example of OTRS permission is the Australian Paralympic Committee collection. Bidgee (talk) 13:11, 22 December 2011 (UTC)


 * I'm still not getting it. The OTRS stuff is confusing, and seems unnecesarry as it seems I can and should provide a link to a web page containing explicit permission and then remove the permission template you put on the image page. For example I did that here: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Warts_and_all_best_of_ctt_c04_218.jpg Is this correct? Should I do this for each of the images you referred to on my talk page? Robertwhyteus (talk) 21:59, 22 December 2011 (UTC)


 * I have no issue on what you have done here but it isn't seen as the preferred way since if the website goes down, so does the permission. With OTRS all you have to do is, if you want, use the email template from Commons and email it to . Bidgee (talk) 22:10, 22 December 2011 (UTC)


 * Oh, OK, I think I get it. Can you help me with this? I think I have now figured it out. It's a bit trickier than I imagined. The licensing is clear cut in the cases of the pages of the Cane Toad Times, since ToadShow (as Cane Toad Times) made those and I am the copyright owner. I can leave those as is, with evidence of permissions, and also write to . I have done this. The situation for the other images is different. I believe http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Cttsql.jpg qualifies as fair use, the rationale being supplied on the page. Can you check? The Cane Toad Times Mayday photo http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Cttmayday.jpg was owned by the LHMU, and now is owned by us. The photographer is unknown. For them to have it suggests (but does not prove) it was taken by someone at the LHMU as part of their LHMU activities and is therefore copyright LHMU. I can get an explicit permission to use it. Is that the best course of action? Are they able to give permission, or would it be better to include such information in a fair use rationale? The remaining photo of me, by Mark Crocker, I have permission, but I need to supply proof to so i will get that organised. Thanks for your help. PS - I send the Mark Crocker permission.


 * I got the permissions for the photos in question and sent them to permissions but one of the other editors deleted them. I have reuploaded. You might have a think about tagging photos for which the permissions email will be a non-solution for the uploader due to the time frames concerned. Robertwhyteus (talk) 08:54, 1 January 2012 (UTC)


 * Best to ask the Admin who deleted the images, I'm sure they would understand and would restore the images. You could remove the deletion tag and replace with OTRS pending. Wiki has a set time limit which is something I can't change (I wish I could). Bidgee (talk) 11:45, 1 January 2012 (UTC)


 * Thanks! Progress is being made ;-) Robertwhyteus (talk) 05:06, 9 January 2012 (UTC)

Season's tidings!
FWiW Bzuk (talk) 02:16, 25 December 2011 (UTC).

Season's tidings!
FWiW Bzuk (talk) 02:30, 25 December 2011 (UTC).