User talk:Five Years/Archive 12

'''This is Archive #12 for User talk:Five Years

COCB#SMC#A
Congregation of Christian Brothers#Sexual molestation charges#Australia is in a shockingly POV state, full of emotive condemnation, and somewhat short of verifiable facts. If a BLP wonk were to find it, it would probably be erased on the spot. Any interest in straightening it out a bit? Hesperian 23:42, 13 November 2007 (UTC)
 * Thanks for that. Hesperian 02:17, 14 November 2007 (UTC)

Schools importance
Hi, I was wondering why you assessed List of Government schools in New South Wales as edu-importance=mid, and List of non-government schools in New South Wales as edu-importance=low. Was there a rationale or is it an oversight? &mdash;Moondyne 15:03, 14 November 2007 (UTC)
 * Sounds fine. Good work. &mdash;Moondyne 15:08, 14 November 2007 (UTC)
 * Well you better get to bed. Good luck with it -- I'm sure you'll be fine.  I'm off now too. &mdash;Moondyne 15:12, 14 November 2007 (UTC)

Principals
I find your removal of information of principals of schools inappropriate. They are not necessarily non-notable. Can you please point me to the convention or guideline that supports your deletion of this material. I will undo all your recent removal of this material. I am happy to revert my changes though if there is any evidence that this has the concensus of say WikiProject Schools or WikiProject Education in Australia. I will take the issue to those forums also. I note that the School's project recommendation on suggested structure - see link WP:SCH - specifically states: Former headteachers/principals — A list of former headteachers/principals, with a short description of their achievements, is often useful.--Golden Wattle  talk 22:48, 14 November 2007 (UTC)
 * Hmmm - you are quite right that the principal is mentioned in the info box and in the list in each case. I apologise therefore for being intemperate in my comments and I will undo my undoings!  Third mentions in the article lead in each case perhaps are a bit over the top.  I hope you understand that I found delete nn as an edit summary provocative - I realise it was very early this morning that you were doing this and perhaps didn't forsee how easily crabby Canberrans get provoked - my apologies for rising inappropriately to provocation no doubt unintended.--Golden Wattle  talk 02:50, 15 November 2007 (UTC)

Christian Brothers
Hey there, good editing on the Christian Brothers article there, so thanks mate. I've been watching the article for months, and honestly the stuff you edited was very mild compared to some of the emotive ranting I've had to reject off-hand (which was one reason why I hadn't bothered dealing with it before you did). What a mess that article is - I go out of my way to avoid confrontation and arguments on Wikipedia by not dealing with mild POV sections like that (which in this case proves that I'm not being biased towards the CBs!), but geez it's hard with some of the nutters online who will claim anything for the sake of starting an argument, isn't it?

Thanks again. :) Rob Lindsey 23:21, 14 November 2007 (UTC)

Moore College
In regards to this edit, tell me you aren't joking? - Ta bu shi da yu 03:33, 15 November 2007 (UTC)
 * Apologies, misread the diff. Thought you had changed it on the Anglicanism box. - Ta bu shi da yu 12:41, 15 November 2007 (UTC)

Re: Delinquent Tax Organisations (SGCS)
please explain? what is this?

--Dresdener (talk) 05:28, 17 November 2007 (UTC)

My RfA
Hi; thanks for your support to my RfA, which closed successfully at (51/1/2). I'll keep this brief since I don't like spamming anyone: I'll work hard to deserve the trust you placed in me. Thanks again. &mdash; Coren (talk) 23:25, 17 November 2007 (UTC)

Delinquent Tax Organisation
I renamed the SGCS article because it is just that, the principal is a greedy idiot. Now, where is your explanation?

Abuahay,

--Dresdener (talk) 09:02, 18 November 2007 (UTC)

Wesley College
Hey, I realised you edited the Wesley College, Melbourne page back to original figures of enrolment and school size. (Please refer to Wesley's discussion page) I have e-mailed my school and checked up on enrolment and discovered that Wesley is in fact the largest school in Victoria, not the 2nd. The largest claims to be a school Haileybury, which I have discovered only has a population of 2,600, and it wasn't refrenced correctly. Wesley's population exceeds 3,400. After heaps more exam procrastination, I then discovered that this information about Wesley being the 2nd largest school was first written in a book by Helen Primrose on caulfield grammar, where she got (I think) Haileybury's figures wrong, and didn't give the correct figure of Wesley's enrolment. I know it's trivial, but I've spent an hour trying to find this out to avoid study. If you think this isn't true then just let me know :) No problem at all!

58.107.228.3 (talk)

Community care

 * good for you :-) Bemused and helpful is the secret to happy editing. cygnis insignis 14:03, 19 November 2007 (UTC)

Signpost updated for November 19th, 2007.
You are receiving this message because you have signed up for the Signpost spamlist. If you wish to stop receiving these messages, simply remove your name from the list. Ralbot (talk) 10:51, 20 November 2007 (UTC)

Largest schools
Hey Twenty Years, Was just wondering if you have noticed the 'my school is bigger than yours' debate between Haileybury, Melbourne and Wesley College, Melbourne which seems to have led to the creation of List of largest Victorian Schools, and soon after, List of Largest South Australian Schools. In my opinion, these 2 new articles are a bit silly and non-notable, but thought you would have a better idea (don't want my head bitten off if there is nothing wrong with them). I just noticed the South Australian one has had a merge template added. So what do you reckon?? Are they useless or am I just in a bad mood?? Loopla (talk) 14:09, 20 November 2007 (UTC)

Schools
Hey, actually, can you please delete the article I compiled... I now realise it would have limited useage, but thought it may be interesting for people to see. I didn't create it to prove a point, I just thought it may be useful for people to use the information on their webpages. I wasn't trying to find out for personal interest at all, there were just many claims on school pages about being the largest or the second largest, so I thought I should try and identify it. Also, I'd like to point out that the computer in our homestead is SHARED, and I didn't put all the views in the school's discussions, nor did I edit it all those times. Feel free to delete it!

Again, I'm sorry and thankyou.

Jobers (talk) 11:51, 22 November 2007 (UTC)

Hi, Apparently people want to keep the page? I've been in two minds about it. Firstly I thought it may be useful when I posted, then later I thought it wasn't. But I also want to clarify that I actually DIDN'T make the article to prove a point, I just wanted to investigate and fix up schools enrolment information and establishment information, and was thinking of expanding school stub articles. I actually don't care which schools the largest, but so many schools were claiming to be largest or second largest, and there's no point in having "Caulfield is the 2nd largest", if there's no refrence. So while investigating which claims were true, I put it in a table. Anyway, thanks again for your time, and sorry. Jobers (talk) 23:18, 22 November 2007 (UTC)

Richard Alan Fox
A proposed deletion template has been added to the article Richard Alan Fox, because another editor is suggesting that it be deleted according to the proposed deletion process. All contributions are appreciated, but this article may not satisfy Wikipedia's criteria for inclusion, and the deletion notice should explain why (see also "What Wikipedia is not" and Wikipedia's deletion policy). You may prevent the proposed deletion by removing the  notice, but please explain why you disagree with the proposed deletion in your edit summary or on its talk page. Also, please consider improving the article to address the issues raised. Even though removing the deletion notice will prevent deletion through the proposed deletion process, the article may still be deleted if it matches any of the speedy deletion criteria or it can be sent to Articles for Deletion, where it may be deleted if consensus to delete is reached. If you agree with the deletion of the article, and you are the only person who has made substantial edits to the page, please add db-author to the top of the page.

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 (talk) 22:29, 23 November 2007 (UTC)

School consensus
I've created a project page: SCHOOLCONSENSUS, because of a village pump proposal. I thought you might want to participate. --victor falk 05:55, 24 November 2007 (UTC)

Wikipedia:WikiProject school consensus resolution
Hi, just a note to make sure you haven't missed WikiProject school consensus resolution. TerriersFan (talk) 22:40, 24 November 2007 (UTC)

Signpost updated for November 26th, 2007.
You are receiving this message because you have signed up for the Signpost spamlist. If you wish to stop receiving these messages, simply remove your name from the list. Ralbot (talk) 08:48, 27 November 2007 (UTC)

Issues at a Private Christian School:
I am sending you this message in regard of some important issues that have occured at a school.

1. The Management: They have become very greedy and self-centered, and there has been some rumors going around that some sexual problems have occured between senior management and students, but when they have been brought up they have been swept under the carpet to keep the people involved quiet. Also, in an attempt to bring in more students, the principal has been using the local newspaper as a source of posting propaganda.

2. Decreasing Morale of teachers and students: Since the new principal has came in, the teachers have been under a lot of preassure and a heavy workload.

I know these issues don't have much to do with wiki, these issues have been bothering me for a while now, and I have kept them to myself (partially due to my Japanese upbringing), and I thought you could give me some advice to ease to current situation. --767-249ER (talk) 09:22, 27 November 2007 (UTC)

Australian federal election, 2010
I have listed the above article for deletion. You can state your case for keeping the article here. -- Mattinbgn\talk 07:53, 28 November 2007 (UTC)

Barnes
Sure thing. &mdash;Moondyne 02:53, 29 November 2007 (UTC)

Re: Issues
Thanks for the advice that you gave me. I am not sure that I should put that info on the article, because I'm afraid that they will find out who put it up (someone before put controversial info. up and they got brought up in front of the whole school, and I am afraid they will do that to me). Also, is there anything legally they could do, or anything with the cops etc.?

Thankyou for being so supportive and understanding,

--767-249ER (talk) 07:58, 30 November 2007 (UTC)

Once again, thanks for your advice. The things you told me made sense, but the problem is that there isn't any printed or published sources that I am aware of. The things that I know were found out by word of mouth. Is there anything else that I can do?

--767-249ER 02:56, 1 December 2007 (UTC)

Beat me
You beat me to it (collab). Auroranorth (!) 10:33, 30 November 2007 (UTC)
 * I missed this. Did you catch it? Auroranorth (!) 10:34, 30 November 2007 (UTC)

West publication
I'm not sure when, it was published around the 12 (I think) - ill ask my mum - she works there. thanks Talk to symode09's or How's my driving? 12:16, 30 November 2007 (UTC)
 * Guildford's got a subscription to The West and its online archives - I'll take a look for you. Auroranorth (!) 13:05, 30 November 2007 (UTC)
 * Hi again, unfortunately I've got to be on the school's network to access the papers, so I will check on Monday, before the holidays on Tuesday afternoon! And your wikibreak was shortened... why? I am starting to get jumpy myself! Auroranorth (!) 13:48, 30 November 2007 (UTC)
 * OK, I've got your first email but not the second, yet. Auroranorth (!) 13:56, 30 November 2007 (UTC)

Wikipedia Signpost/2007-11-26/WikiProject report
Congratulations on that. Fame at last! &mdash;Moondyne 02:30, 1 December 2007 (UTC)
 * haha! cheers. Twenty Years 15:01, 1 December 2007 (UTC)

Images
Thanks for the heads-up. It appears they were left overs from his previous stint and has not edited since august so there's not much I can do except deleted them as blatant copyvios. By the way, did you know you can link to a image page by prefixing the image name with a colon? eg. enter Image:CBC Plaque.jpg to get Image:CBC Plaque.jpg as a link.

Your category is deleted as requested. &mdash;Moondyne 11:59, 2 December 2007 (UTC)


 * Even if that logo was drwan by a student (which I doubt), assuming its a facsimile of the real thing it'd still be a problem. &mdash;Moondyne 12:09, 2 December 2007 (UTC)

Hesperian
In case you've missed my notices, I've raised it at WP:AN/I. My ASDL line is down I'm operating on a 56k modem so I'll only respond as necessary updating pages take for ever. Gnangarra 14:48, 2 December 2007 (UTC)
 * He's been unblocked, I've had enough this modem thanks for voicing your concerns. Gnangarra 14:57, 2 December 2007 (UTC)

Thanks for speaking up on this last night from me also. Not wanting to play down the seriousness of the matter, don't get too worked up about it though. These things tend to work in patterns and get resolved eventually. And the good guys will generally come out on top as long as we all stay calm. &mdash;Moondyne 01:55, 3 December 2007 (UTC)

cite news
cite news also has a coauthors= parameter. I presume you'd use it in exactly the same way as the example you gave for cite book. &mdash;Moondyne 08:09, 3 December 2007 (UTC)

You reverted my discussion contribtuion
I would like to know why you decided to revert my contribution in relation to the Macgregor State High school discussion. As far as i know there was no reason for you to do so, so if you could please explain to me why you thought you had the right to, i would appreciate it

220.239.85.96 08:35, 3 December 2007 (UTC)

The issue of removing content has been discussed here. I was within my rights to remove content as in my judgment it is in the best intrest of wikipedia for that content to be removed, in order to maintain the integrety of wikipedia. However this is my personal view and may not reflect the view of the greater community as a result a discussion regarding the paragraph is taken place in the discussion page.

It is not appreciated that you reverted a part of this discussion and it is asked that if you wish to contribute to the discussion you do so however it is not appropriate for you to revert edits that you don't agree with. This is against policy and thwill not be tollerated. Thank you!! 220.239.85.96 08:55, 3 December 2007 (UTC)

First of all before you accuse me of vandalisim i would appreciate it if you would do some research on vandalisim. WP:VANDAL "Vandalism is any addition, removal, or change of content made in a deliberate attempt to compromise the integrity of Wikipedia". None of my edits fit into this context and all have been made in good faith.

My editing was in good faith and i did not attempt to compromise the ingetrity of wikipedia. My aim was to improve the quality of the acticle as i did not and still do not believe that the source quoted adequatley establishes the story. The issue of vandalisim has been addressed and i have agreed to discuss rather than revert.

This does not excuse the fact that you reverted a comment that was not vandalisim. You had no right to revert my contribution to the discussion as it was not vandalisim. This contradicts your statment that you revert vandalisim and thats all you did because my contribution to the discussion was not vandalisim.

Once again i believe that you should read up on the issue of vandalisim as clerly my contribution to the talk page of the page in question was not vandalisim. If anything your edit was more vandalisim than my contribution.

Thank you 220.239.85.96 15:25, 3 December 2007 (UTC)