User talk:Frickeg/Archive 1

Welcome! (We can't say that loudly enough!)
Here are a few links you might find helpful:


 * Be Bold!
 * Don't let grumpy users scare you off
 * Meet other new users
 * Learn from others
 * Play nicely with others
 * Contribute, Contribute, Contribute!
 * Tell us about you

You can sign your name on talk pages and votes by typing &#126;&#126;&#126;&#126;; our software automatically converts it to your username and the date.

If you have any questions or problems, no matter what they are, leave me a message on my talk page. Or, please come to the new contributors' help page, where experienced Wikipedians can answer any queries you have! Or, you can just type   on your user page, and someone will show up shortly to answer your questions.

We're so glad you're here! --Simonkoldyk 05:18, 2 December 2006 (UTC)

Copyright issues
This is in responce to your question which you posted on the following webpage: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia_talk:Tutorial_%28Wrap-up_and_more_info%29#Translation_of_articles

I am unsure from this tutorial as to the specifics of copywright, eg. how to find out if something is copywright, whether there are instances that you can use copywright information with a citation, whether you need to ask permission for everything from a certain web page individually, etc. Also regarding books - how do you reference them, request permission for use, or do you even need to request if you reference properly? Frickeg 05:46, 2 December 2006 (UTC)

(1) The copyright laws to be abided by must be US copyright laws, because the WIkipedia server is located in the USA. Copyright laws vary drastically from state to state. (2) How you find out if something is copyright? Generally, copyright subsists in ANYTHING written: published or unpublished. Copyright basically means that you cannot: (1) Copy (2) reproduce in any material form (e.g. from text to sound, from DVD to CD etc. etc.) a substantial portion of any written work. Basically, you are not allowed to COPY anything unless you have permission. BUT, you can state the same things others have written etc. in your own words. FOr example, say you have read about the theory of relativity, nothing can stop you from writing about it in Wikipedia, so long as you don't COPY (i.e. use the exact same words Einstein used in his explanations). You most certainly can explain relativity in your own words. Technicially you CAN copy PROVIDED you don't copy a SUBSTANTIAL part of the original material? Now what exactly is a substantial part - this is an issue that courts define - use your commonsense, if you quote one or two words from the text of a newspaper e.g. 'this is a day that will live in infamy' - that should not be all that bad; but you cannot cut and paste whole articles and paragraphs from other sources without getting people's permission. (3) whether there are instances that you can use copywright information with a citation??? I think you may be confusing copyright violations with plagiarism. Plagiarism refers to the world of academics. There, you MUST cite otherwise you will be guilty of academic misconduct. With copyright, if you breach it by copying a substantial part of someone else's work without their permission, it doesn't matter whether you cited or gave acknowledgement of their work or not. Copyright would have been breached because you have copied. But, for copyright to ahve been breached, you must have copied a substantial part. (4) For webpages, you definitely need to ask permission if you are copying their specific words. Don't do this. You are allowed to rehash their wording and put it into your own words - in the end, whatever you do, so long as you: (1) haven't copied and (2) haven't copied a substantial part, you should be fine and there will not be any breach in copyright. Note, if you re-hash people's words and don't give proper acknowledgement you will be guilty of academic misconduct though.

(5) No need to reference. Just don't copy the specific words. You can restate the information contained therein (there is no copyright in ideas, but only copyright in expression), but you can't copy the words, sentence structures etc. You need permission from teh publishers of each book if you seek to copy substantial parts of it.

(6) Wikipedia is an encyclopedia. Nobody can copyrgiht information. So if the newspapers write about, for example, shane warne's retirement today, you too can add that information into SK Warne's page, so long as you don't copy the specific words of the paper. No need for referencing to protect yourself from copyright, but you should reference for the benefit of readers. hoep this helps. --ToyotaPanasonic 14:52, 22 December 2006 (UTC)

marsupials
I've take the liberty of moving some of the articles to the names proscribed by Colin Groves in MSW3. I've also editted the references into the article text. - 20:26, 9 December 2006 (UTC)

Wow! Keep going! :) - UtherSRG (talk) 01:38, 28 December 2006 (UTC)

*laughs* Yeah, I figured you didn't have a copy of MSW3. Just let me know if I make some edits but miss an article.... there might be some I don't have on my watch list. - UtherSRG (talk) 04:59, 31 December 2006 (UTC)

Fixed Bettongia. Long-footed Potoroo was good. - UtherSRG (talk) 06:31, 1 January 2007 (UTC)

Are pademelons solitary?
May I direct your attention to the discussion I started? Both the Red-legged Pademelons we observed in Queensland and the Tasmanian Pademelons seem to live in female groups, which are visited by solitary males, when one or more of the females get in heat... пан Бостон-Київський 11:19, 23 January 2007 (UTC)

Abbe condenser marked for cleanup
Please elaborate about why you think the Abbe condenser article needs cleanup. --Gerry Ashton 05:53, 2 February 2007 (UTC)


 * (Copying from Gerry Ashton's talk page to put discussion in one place) I'm fairly new at this, but it didn't look like a completely proper article to me, and knowing nothing about the subject I wasn't confident to clean it up. Would Wikify be better? Frickeg 06:20, 2 February 2007 (UTC)


 * Are you perhaps concerned that the article uses Harvard referencing rather than footnotes? If so, Citing sources explains that this system is just as acceptable as footnotes. --Gerry Ashton 19:06, 2 February 2007 (UTC)


 * Apologies for my inexperience. I have added bullet points before the references and removed the wikify template. If there are any other things wrong I've done then I apologise! Frickeg 21:58, 2 February 2007 (UTC)


 * Trying to improve the encyclopedia is noting to apologize for. --Gerry Ashton 00:05, 3 February 2007 (UTC)

Clifton Dawson
Clifton Dawson clearly passes WP:BIO. He holds both school and conference records. The article alredy has 2 verifiable reliable sources. Please either remove the template you placed or state your specific concern on the article's talk page. Thank you, Johntex\talk 04:36, 3 February 2007 (UTC)
 * No worries. Friday night new pages patrol is a fast and furious job, I know.  :-)  Thanks very much. Johntex\talk 04:40, 3 February 2007 (UTC)
 * A barn star is never over-the-top! Thank you very very much.  I had a rough day today myself so your barnstar is a really nice treat for me.  I really appreciate it. Please let me know if I can ever be of any help and I will do my best. Johntex\talk 04:48, 3 February 2007 (UTC)

Leonardo
New page- because there is a huge amount of information available about Leonardo as a scientist. In fact, previously the main article talked about his science, inventions and sex life to the exclusion of any discuussion of his painting, for which he is most famous and was knownn (almost exclusively) for 400 years. I amm not planning on removing all the science-related material from the main article, but just giving a chance for others to expand those biits that really interest them.

It allows mme to write in detail about Leonardo's light, perspective drawing, botany and geology which I can't do on the main page. Other people are fascinated by the machines which are on display at the British Museum, Castel Montelupo annd Close Luce. There are lots of photos and nowhere to put them.

I'm sure someone out there (my son for example) knows every TV program that's ever featured the inventions and would love to write about them.

Currently, every one of Leonardo's best known ppaintings (and some that are only attributes) has its own page.

I don't consider it too much. If you want to know what constitutes a lot of articles on the same subject try Honey bee.

--Amandajm 05:32, 3 February 2007 (UTC)

Pademelons
I'm glad someone's writing about the poor little buggers! Take a look at the page Eucalyptus regnans. My photo gallery is aimed at making a point, while not actually making a statement.... I took the last good photo of "El Grande" before they destroyed it, and have another good one of timber for burning stacked up against a V.T.Tree. --Amandajm 06:00, 3 February 2007 (UTC)

Bob Adamson
I have added a "" template to the article Bob Adamson, suggesting that it be deleted according to the proposed deletion process. All contributions are appreciated, but I don't believe it satisfies Wikipedia's criteria for inclusion, and I've explained why in the deletion notice (see also "What Wikipedia is not" and Wikipedia's deletion policy). You may contest 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. cleanup seems hopeless. DGG 04:06, 12 March 2007 (UTC)
 * Er, thanks for letting me know, but I only corrected some typos a while back, so it's not really that important. You didn't think I was the author, did you? Frickeg 06:06, 16 March 2007 (UTC)

Re: List of introduced birds species
You're probably right. I was just doing the Psittacidae section at the time, and it seemed there was an awful lot of repetition (esp. USA, Florida, Hawaiian Islands), and that all of those secondary links were distracting. But I could how the inconvenience of having to scroll up for the first usage might be a bigger problem. I don't feel strongly about it either way, so go ahead and put the links back if you like. Fredwerner 20:36, 4 May 2007 (UTC)

Colours in the electorate tables
I'm not sure these really add much to the tables; they make it harder on the eye, and the party differences are already illustrated in the party column. It hasn't been done on any other electorate articles (at least in Australia) - I think it might be an idea to discuss this somewhere if you're going to keep doing it. Rebecca 13:47, 22 June 2007 (UTC)


 * Similarly, I'm not sure the infoboxes add much to the article. The area, establishment date and number of electors are usually prominently featured in the lead section (or should be), the information on the current member is prominent anyway, and I'm not sure that it's very necessary to have the adjacent electoral divisions table; really, they just seem to take up space. Can you hold off on this until you get a consensus to do it? Rebecca 01:34, 10 July 2007 (UTC)


 * I realise that there a few of these lying around, but they are non-standard (they're not used in any other electorate articles, either at Australian state-level or in any other country), and I'm really not sure they actually improve the article in any way. I suspect they've just been missed thusfar because whoever created them did not add them to very many articles. As such, please refrain from adding any more until there is actually a consensus that they are helpful. A better use for your time (and one which is not likely to get reverted) might be to go around adding the area and the number of electors to federal electorate articles, as this information is already in most of our articles on state electorates. Rebecca 01:45, 10 July 2007 (UTC)


 * Thanks. :) Rebecca 02:20, 10 July 2007 (UTC)

electorate maps
Hi, I noticed you removed all the NSW electoral maps. Technically they are not out of date until after the election. Anyway, maybe they could be used in the 2004 section of the article. Nice job expanding the articles by the way --Astrokey 44 06:22, 30 June 2007 (UTC)

Michael Corner
Hey Frickeg, you said that official merchandise for Harry Potter and the Order of the Phoenix identifies Ryan Nelson's character as Michael Corner. Could you provide a citation for this? Is it in a poster book? Or somewhere else? That would be greatly appreciated! --Fbv65 e del / ☑t / ☛c || 03:00, 29 July 2007 (UTC)

List of Tasmanian Mammals
Hi Frickeg. I was wondering if you could look over the List of Tasmanian mammals I just added. I'm not a taxonomist, and this is my first attempt at such a list so I really need some skilled readers. If you don't want to do it, or feel it's too big a task, then maybe you could recommend someone else look at it. Thanks KeresH 02:36, 4 August 2007 (UTC)

Electoral divisions
I see that you've gone and changed all the member boxes on the federal electoral division articles. While this isn't necessarily a bad change, can you please reinstate the full terms served by the individual members? Putting only the year they were elected is confusing, and makes the table less readable for no apparent reason. Rebecca 01:47, 12 August 2007 (UTC)


 * They're still, I think, a lot less readable, and again I don't really see the reason why. What's wrong with the format we've used for the state electorates (example: electoral district of Hammond?

In their current form I think they are excellent. Had a look at my home division of Sturt, love the new table. Well done. Timeshift 13:24, 23 August 2007 (UTC)


 * I agree I think you have done a good job Muzzamo 01:37, 24 August 2007 (UTC)


 * The South Australian electorates need re-doing which I may get around to at some point, if I do i'll certainly be basing them on your design... however, in the meantime:

The Tireless Contributor Barnstar, for your tireless efforts in implementing a fully detailed yet minimalist results table for all 150 federal divisions (the fact I cannot be bothered checking each and every one goes to show what a monsterous task it would be). I think everyone appreciates the work you've put in to WikiProject Australian politics so far, there's far too few of them these days! Timeshift 05:28, 1 September 2007 (UTC)

Plan to update all 150 again once results are finalised? :P Timeshift 06:16, 2 December 2007 (UTC)

NSW electorates
I got this info mainly from an appendix to Talk:New South Wales Legislative Assembly electoral districts (marked accessible here), put together by User:Newhoggy, which claims as its source: Parliamentary Record (Volume VII). I don't warrant any of the info and I suggest you feel free to change party designations, not that the party designations before the payment of members (from about 1900) were all that meaningful.--Grahamec 01:40, 26 August 2007 (UTC)
 * By the way I like the work your doing on biographies: see new ADB template, eg: , used in John Dedman.--Grahamec 03:03, 26 August 2007 (UTC)
 * You can use templates either as you are behind arterisks in the refs, as you are using them: eg * etc (see Aubrey Abbott) or in in-line cites, eg In line cites are much preferred, but seem a little pointless if you are using one source.  Ideally articles should have multiple-sources, which is a consideration in giving B ratings (although personally I think it is better to get these articles started rather than worry about multiple sources, but this is the reason I'm mainly giving them start ratings).Grahamec 06:03, 26 August 2007 (UTC)
 * also better to use as in William Webster (Australian politician), it not only saves time, it allows other editors to add cats easily.--Grahamec 03:49, 26 August 2007 (UTC)

Chanter
The Chanter article is excellent - nice work! My previous deletion wasn't a reflection on his notability, but rather because it was a mass cookie-cutter substub - some guy had gone around and created absolutely useless pages on every member ever of the NSW Legislative Assembly, often at the wrong names, and containing no useful information. Any chance we might see some more of this sort of thing? Rebecca 01:12, 27 August 2007 (UTC)


 * Hello Frickeg. I have replied to the message you left on my Talk page at Talk:John Chanter.  &mdash;gorgan_almighty 11:07, 31 August 2007 (UTC)

Election infoboxes
Re your question on WT:AUSPOL, good luck :) The main issue as far as I could tell at the time was the inclusion of and reference to the leaders, for which there does appear to be consensus. If a solution could be determined that incorporated both the leaders (and photos where available) with the results I think this would be a considerable improvement on where things are at right now. I guess I have an interest in the outcome as I'll have to implement whatever solution is adopted to a dozen or so WA articles that have yet to be created, for which I'm presently researching. Orderinchaos 04:16, 15 September 2007 (UTC)
 * Good work on the byelections, Vic Park popped up on my watchlist. :) Quick question - you were talking about some sort of standard election infobox earlier, if you want to use Western Australian general election, 2001 as a trial base for that, we here in the West would be most obliged. I'm about to start a series on historic elections in WA and it would be nice if we could get a standard template happening. (BTW nothing on that page is sacred, it's been a post-stub since creation) Data is from here if you need it. Orderinchaos 19:03, 19 September 2007 (UTC)

DLP
I replied at Wikipedia_talk:WikiProject_Australian_politics. Thanks! — Nightstallion 00:50, 16 September 2007 (UTC)

Thanks!
...for filling in the Greatorex by-election table. I'd been meaning to grab the figures, but I got distracted and hadn't gotten around to getting back to it. Rebecca 09:27, 19 September 2007 (UTC)

Brand candidates
Sorry, pal. Wikipedia is not the place for announcing electoral candidates. Since 2007 is not over, Beazley is still the incumbent in my edit. When the election is announced, he will cease to be of much interest to Brand. (Though anything irrelevant to Brand may be less so in the Beazley article. Maybe you could try including Gray there. I won't interfere.) But I live in the Brand electorate and will fight hard to keep the motley crew of 2007 election candidates out of this one! Cheers Bjenks 13:37, 23 September 2007 (UTC)


 * While acknowledging your most civil reply, I can't accept the argument that candidate listing in one or more other Wikipedia electorate articles establishes the practice as OK in principle. (Nor will I be bothered attempting to re-edit any of those which lie outside my interests.) On the other hand, it is clearly acceptable to have a specific article on the 2007 election candidates rather than several hundred articles and cross-references elsewhere. That, then, is the place to which we can all turn for standardised candidate information and for further details on those who may already enjoy some noteworthiness. It is just not the proper function of an encyclopedia to present transient news which has to be updated or discarded from one month to the next, nor to relay electoral info/advertising which, in this case will be outmoded within three months. Gary Gray (or possibly Phil Edman) will achieve notability in the Brand electorate when he is chosen as the member --not before. There have been occasions (as I'm sure you are aware) when minor-party or independent candidates have got up against the odds. Likewise, their encyclopedic notability properly commences after their electoral success. If I were to agree with Gary Gray's previous career being fit content for Brand, I might find it equally appropriate to note that (unlike his Liberal opponent) Gary resides in a distant suburb north of the Swan River and was not chosen by party members in Brand.  Undoubtedly, a number of other editors could similarly weigh in with their own factually-oriented impressions--to the detriment of what the general (long-term) reader really wants to know about the electorate. Incidentally, the previous election statistics included in the article gives sufficient indication that Brand is a fairly safe Labor seat, notwithstanding the need for a goodly share of second preferences. Cheers Bjenks 08:28, 25 September 2007 (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 05:36, 30 September 2007 (UTC)

Cunningham by-election, 2002
Thanks, I got the figures from an AEC page, but they had no swing figures so I just worked out what I thought they were! I have copied the table from the Division of Cunningham page. --Canley (talk) 08:26, 19 November 2007 (UTC)

Electorate Template
It was a template to begin with - Template:Infobox Australian Electorate - was meaning to do the rest (ie VIC, NSW, QLD) before the election, but got busy at work and didn't have the time, then I figured it would be just as easy to wait for the 2007 results to be declared, and add the infoboxes according to the new results. I see someone has started to do the NSW ones already, and i will keep going with them once more seats are declared. Do you know if the maps are all uploaded? I used the overall maps (ie ones with every electorate) for WA and SA but the ones such as the Sydney ones already uploaded, and the Tassie ones (ie Division of Franklin look much neater for the infoboxes... Rac fleming (talk) 14:53, 8 December 2007 (UTC)

Good stuff with the boxes, yeah they look good now. Sorry I didn't get back to it to help out, but I had a few other things on my plate. Anyway, they look good now - I will go back to what I do best, (History articles), and leave the politcal stuff to those who know! Rac fleming (talk) 10:10, 24 December 2007 (UTC)

WikiProject Australia newsletter
WikiProject Australia publishes a newsletter informing Australian Wikipedians of ongoing events and happenings within the community and the project. This month's newsletter has been published. If you wish to unsubscribe from these messages, or prefer to have the newsletter delivered in full to your talk page, see our subscription page. This notice delivered by BrownBot (talk), at 21:36, 11 December 2007 (UTC).

Your efforts
I must say that I admire and applaud your efforts in recording the individual election results for the many Divisions you have updated recently. Fantastic effort. Albatross2147 (talk) 11:44, 21 December 2007 (UTC)

December 2007
Welcome to Wikipedia. Although everyone is welcome to make constructive contributions to Wikipedia, at least one of your recent edits, such as the one you made to Division of Goldstein, did not appear to be constructive and has been reverted or removed. Please use the sandbox for any test edits you would like to make, and take a look at the welcome page to learn more about contributing to this encyclopedia. Thank you. Thedjatclubrock :) (T/C) 22:30, 21 December 2007 (UTC)

SA
It wasn't the Liberal Party until the 1970s in SA... all federal members were part of the LCL. Remember that federal parties are a collection of their state branches... Timeshift (talk) 05:20, 3 January 2008 (UTC)
 * Incidentally between 1949 and 1968 the WA party was also called the LCL. Some federal MPs separately identified as "Liberal" though which makes the whole thing confusing. Orderinchaos 01:19, 1 April 2008 (UTC)

WikiProject Australia newsletter
WikiProject Australia publishes a newsletter informing Australian Wikipedians of ongoing events and happenings within the community and the project. This month's newsletter has been published. If you wish to unsubscribe from these messages, or prefer to have the newsletter delivered in full to your talk page, see our subscription page. This notice delivered by BrownBot (talk), at 21:37, 3 January 2008 (UTC).

Colours
I'd have no particular objection to returning it to its old colour - it seemed quite dark considering it wasn't a party designation, and at the time looked very similar to the Greens colour. I ended up modifying the Greens colour a bit so this might not be a problem now - don't know. Orderinchaos 07:28, 19 January 2008 (UTC)

Division of Swan
Sorry, for some reason did not notice your comment - apologies for delay in replying. The source I read, which was in Australian Journal of Politics and History (will have to dig up year and ref) which documents the 1906 election generally suggests that John Forrest never joined the WAP. The story went not unlike the New Country Party if you remember that - they needed a figurehead, they sort of got one (Bob Katter) but he never really committed, and the whole thing was a bit of a disaster that fell apart straight after the election. Will look in the next couple of days for the cite Orderinchaos 01:17, 1 April 2008 (UTC)
 * Finally found it. is the full cite. Can delete the text when you've read it, but this is what it says:

''The leading liberals of West Australia sought to turn to their advantage in the federal elections this widespread feeling that West Australian interests had been neglected. They accordingly planned for an independent West Australian party to put forward West Australian interests properly in the federal parliament. The liberal organisers hoped that a majority of indignant West Australians would vote for liberals who promised staunchly to defend the rights of their state, and that thereby the labor candidates would be defeated. The one necessary condition for the successful inauguration of the party was for Sir John Forrest, with his enormous prestige as federal treasurer, to take the leadership. Forrest, after he returned from Melbourne in October, agreed to accept the position. (cite: The West Australian, 19 Oct 1906, p.5) With leader and policy thus determined, the Liberal League of West Australia began to endorse candidates who declared themselves wiling to defend the interests of the state on behalf of the Western Australian party. By 16 November candidates were endorsed for the senate and for all electorates in the state.''

[...] ''Sir John Forrest’s attitude of indifference to the party was typical; he practically dissociated himself from all its works and did not run under its banner. He was not present at the one and only party meeting, at Perth on 13 November, and he barely spoke outside his own electorate. He left the candidates to form their own policies according to their own convictions. [...] Sir John Forrest continued to be treasurer in the protectionist ministry. The Western Australian party ceased to exist even in name directly the votes had been counted. It was not to be heard of again.''


 * It appears from the article that W.N. Hedges successfully won Fremantle under the party banner, but abandoned the party once elected and sat as an independent alongside Labor in opposition (although seems to have joined Fusion/Liberals at a later point). Other definite candidates include C. Clarke, E.P. Thurstan (Perth) and J. Archibald (Coolgardie). Another candidate, W.R. Burton (Kalgoorlie) actually fell out with the party before the election. Orderinchaos 10:47, 7 April 2008 (UTC)

Timeline of country and capital changes
Thanks for putting in the tables, but instead of doing save page every single time you change something every few minutes, try using "show preview" to see how it all looks beforehand. Then once you're satisfied with all the needed edits/changes, then use save page in the end. Seeing the history would make it all easier for everyone to see. Thanks That-Vela-Fella (talk) 20:29, 3 April 2008 (UTC)

Mountain Brushtail Possum
I took a stab at cleaning this up a bit. Wanna take another look? - UtherSRG (talk) 23:38, 5 April 2008 (UTC)

Division of Melbourne
Is it possible with the way the table is formatted to add two party preferred as well as two candidate preferred, to add 72.27 +1.13 ALP/LIB? Timeshift (talk) 07:40, 23 April 2008 (UTC)

CLP
Is there another similar hue of blue but differential enough? Timeshift (talk) 06:23, 27 April 2008 (UTC)
 * Ok. Timeshift (talk) 06:26, 27 April 2008 (UTC)
 * The difference between the blues on the 07 election page is far less now. Is it possible if you could swap the UAP and CLP colours? Timeshift (talk) 06:35, 27 April 2008 (UTC)

Why the change? Rebecca (talk) 08:28, 27 April 2008 (UTC)

Division of Bonython
Sorry mate, I realised what I did wrong. I have since rectivied the issue and learn't a valuable Wiki-lesson. I will only make minor changes in future without first seeking a second opinion. (Runger 999 (talk) 08:55, 5 May 2008 (UTC))

Thats alright I understand the frustration you must feel with some of us newbies. I realise I have a lot to learn, but I'm getting there. If managed to update a few South Australian Political pages with out an major stuff ups, until now. Im going to try and tidy up some more info and info boxes (where suited) in the coming weeks. (Runger 999 (talk) 09:24, 5 May 2008 (UTC))

Australian House of Representatives members templates
Hi. To reduce clutter, I guess. Also, if they are renamed again someday, I guess there'd be less chance of double redirects. Sardanaphalus (talk) 09:33, 8 May 2008 (UTC)

1943 election
I wouldn't have added her without seeing a source for it because i'm certainly not personally familiar with the 1943 election as you might have guessed! Unfortunately I don't have time to look now but will do so. Timeshift (talk) 05:06, 9 May 2008 (UTC)


 * Pulled. I'd be fascinated to know what source made me think it was originally the case... Timeshift (talk) 05:11, 9 May 2008 (UTC)