User talk:Paul foord/Archive 4

Archives 1 (Apr 05-Mar 06) | 2 (Apr 06-Sep 07) | 3 (Oct 07-Mar 08) | 4 (Apr 08-Mar 10) | 5 (Apr 10-Dec 12) | 6 (Jun 13-Nov 16) |

Category:Ballets Russes and descendants
This is what we've come up with (that's not the royal "we"; it's been a collaborative effort.) Robert Greer (talk)


 * P.S. I trust you're aware of Wikipedia's automatically generated Category:WikiProject Ballet articles.


 * Anything with an old or your new and improved  tag shows up here.)


 * Robert Greer (talk) 20:19, 3 April 2008 (UTC)

Dance and health
Glad to see that you consider dance and health important! I've put in headings and added a small bit to the article - would you consider it start class now? Dmcq (talk) 11:04, 24 February 2008 (UTC)

Maralinga, South Australia
Thanks for your very prompt support for my edits. I could not believe how the whole mess had been whitewashed! I worked for many years in Central Australia and have had the privilege of hearing first-hand many horrific stories from survivors of the Maralinga tests - both Aboriginal and non-Aboriginal, and this rewrite of history really angered me. All best wishes. John Hill (talk) 02:33, 9 March 2008 (UTC)

WikiProject Indigenous people of Australia
No problems. Let me know if there's anything else required. Cheers. -- Longhair\talk 09:19, 10 March 2008 (UTC)

CfD nomination of Category:Psychological conditions
I have nominated psychological conditions for deletion. Your opinions on the matter are welcome; please participate in the discussion by adding your comments at the discussion page. Thank you. Mattisse (Talk) 23:20, 11 March 2008 (UTC)

communities peoples
''The move of Australian Aboriginal tribes to Indigenous Australian communities creates an issue for Category:Indigenous Australian communities. That category, following the ABS uses communities in terms of towns, outstations, etc. such as Mutitjulu, Mimili, Wadeye. See also the discussion on the talk page -- Paul foord (talk) 06:55, 15 March 2008 (UTC)''
 * I'm not sure I see a problem, I'll try to explain my thinking and you can let me know what I'm missing. The term 'community' is appropriate, I expect that different org.s and govt. bodies - other than ABS - use it different ways. Any person would belong to several communities, even by the stricter definitions of the aforementioned. One 'belongs' to these communities (is included within), but reside in only one town or place. Community does not equal locality, it it would embrace these groups more accurately. I could produce a more coherent definition, I suppose we should look into the various 'official' ones. cygnis insignis 07:31, 15 March 2008 (UTC)
 * An alternative would be to rename it as Indigenous peoples of Australia (as in Category:Indigenous peoples of Australia to match that category, avoiding the ambiguity re locations. Paul foord (talk) 07:48, 15 March 2008 (UTC)
 * I considered 'peoples' as a substitute and I use it in articles, but there is little difference between that and the 'main' article, Indigenous Australians, a designation that is very general and not very useful. (Perhaps we should move the article?) Self identification is a way of determining a community's members, and I think that is the most frequently used term. cygnis insignis 08:45, 15 March 2008 (UTC)


 * Working through the articles for the WikiProject Indigenous peoples of Australia articles it seems that Indigenous peoples of Australia probably would be the best article title. Paul foord (talk) 12:45, 21 March 2008 (UTC)


 * Which article!? ;-) I'm still undecided on the issue, if some documention turns up to consolidate the nomenclature, I'll let you and the project know. I went with my own reasons and sources, but the instinct derived from your great labor overrules this. I willing to bet you have a lot of ideas for improvements after all that work on the current articles. If you want to start by moving this article again, its okay with me. Cheers, cygnis insignis 13:31, 21 March 2008 (UTC)

Thanks, article I will move is Indigenous Australian communities. Paul foord (talk) 13:35, 21 March 2008 (UTC)

In the future, please bring stub categories that you wish to change the name of to Stub types for deletion, rather than attempting to do so out of process. Had you done that, you would have discovered that the existing follows the naming guidelines for stub categories and was not in need of having an extra "s" added. I presume you were trying to fix the redlink on WikiProject Deletion sorting/Organizations, but that was fixable by providing a parameter to the topic template. Caerwine Caer’s whines 02:17, 17 March 2008 (UTC)
 * I was trying to fix it, I am not familiar with the intricacies of wiki coding. Paul foord (talk) 03:21, 17 March 2008 (UTC)

Indigenous

 * Thanks Paul foord (talk) 04:30, 20 March 2008 (UTC)

Wangle people => Wangal people
Yeah SatuSuro for awarding the barnstar above! It is certainly well deserved!!

Regarding the Indigneous Australian's WikiProject's 'open task' note you posted .. plus the associated 'prod' regarding Wangle people ..

.. it seems to have been a legit. article (if very very minimal) slightly mispelt ... I have now moved to Wangal people, slightly upgraded the original .. and removed your prod..

Not sure if you wish to remove note from the Wikiproject page?! Bruceanthro (talk) 16:28, 20 March 2008 (UTC)


 * Have done so, thanks. Paul foord (talk) 00:50, 21 March 2008 (UTC)

Ratings
Thanks, actually I thought I might have been going to far.--Grahame (talk) 01:23, 23 March 2008 (UTC)

Arrernte
Hi, I saw you added some unsourced information in the Australian Indigenous people related article Arrernte. Pease see Citing sources, Reliable sources and verifiability. If you want to add more information in the article, that's fine, but please follow WP:V. Thanks.  Otolemur crassicaudatus  (talk) 09:50, 23 March 2008 (UTC)


 * I am puzzled by your deletion of material within minutes of its creation. Have you looked at my contributions before deciding to delete most of the material at Arrernte.
 * If you are working on the article, then use an "underconstruction" template so that other users can understand that the article is under major rework.  Otolemur crassicaudatus  (talk) 10:03, 23 March 2008 (UTC)
 * Same happened to me on Utrecht (city), incremental expansion of a section is hardly major revamping of an article, but if allowing that tag up buys me the time to get the refs in place, so be it... Arnoutf (talk) 11:08, 23 March 2008 (UTC)
 * Well, as some sections are under major rework in the article Utrecht (city), hence the "underconstruction" template should be used in that sections.  Otolemur crassicaudatus  (talk) 11:13, 23 March 2008 (UTC)

Mix of names
I know of the talk at the project page - but the mix of the problem of the language group, the 'people' arts and even further again divisions - it looks as though one of the arrente arts should end up as a half disambig/half link to the subsidiary arts if they are likely to be expanded ever - otherwise perhaps a big mere of the lot in th eone art perhaps? anyways just an idea - cheers SatuSuro 10:59, 23 March 2008 (UTC)
 * Three article probably, ppl/lang/ccl, although it appears the groups are trying to separately identify themselves. Paul foord (talk) 11:08, 23 March 2008 (UTC)
 * Must drop off an email sometime about how this makes our tasks even worse in some parts of the country than others - btw have you seen the new book on daisy bates? the article on wiki hasnt a single inline cite and smells of a lift from it :| SatuSuro 11:11, 23 March 2008 (UTC)
 * Substantial parts of Daisy Bates (Australia) have not changed since I last edited it on 16 November 2006.


 * There are lots of microstubs for named peoples, they should probably be deleted rather than moved and create new articles from the lists. Paul foord (talk) 11:18, 23 March 2008 (UTC)


 * gawd my sincerest apologies i hadnt looked at the edit history (humbarrassed) - its uncanny de vries work (only out the lat month or so) touches on considerabley similar stuff with the art - oh well back in my hole over there by the nullabor dingo (shuffle shuffle...) SatuSuro 11:41, 23 March 2008 (UTC)


 * Easy enough conclusion, maybe the influence went the other way! Unfortunately jumping to conclusions is not good exercise - for that i do aerobics, dance or yoga. Paul foord (talk) 12:00, 23 March 2008 (UTC)
 * Heheh - must re-read art and book for all that :( - i have an underexercised jack russell terrier when the real stuff starts SatuSuro 12:03, 23 March 2008 (UTC)

Why?
Is there any specific reason you are reverting my edits? 124.171.30.172 (talk) 13:25, 23 March 2008 (UTC)
 * Responded at User talk:124.171.30.172 Paul foord (talk) 13:38, 23 March 2008 (UTC)

Template change
IMHO the Indig OZ template needs a separate section for state histories - and the tas and west oz starts as they are need to go in (other states and territories as red links for incentives?)- the random non alpha aspect of the current history part of the template is a bit misleading - what do you think - alpha order? SatuSuro 08:21, 24 March 2008 (UTC)
 * Template:Indigenous Australians is very dense/unfriendly at present. Not having an article on 'Australian Aborigines' (not preferred by many) or 'Indigenous peoples of mainland Australia' (clumsy but maybe better) doesn't help - the old peoples/people confusion is evident on the template also - the first group should be | mainland peoples | Tasmanian Aborigines | Torres Strait Islanders (| maybe Tiwi people). Agree something needs to be done. Maybe need to move further discussion to the WP talk page. Paul foord (talk) 09:55, 24 March 2008 (UTC)

OK - will do later - cheers SatuSuro

UWAP QP MUP etc
The stubs are inadequate and there have been more (presses that is) - somewhere down the line at thread 459,812,736 (heheh) will do something maybe :| SatuSuro 06:28, 29 March 2008 (UTC)

AfD nomination of Eskaravelho
I have nominated Eskaravelho, an article you created, for deletion. I do not feel that this article satisfies Wikipedia's criteria for inclusion, and have explained why at Articles for deletion/Eskaravelho. Your opinions on the matter are welcome at that same discussion page; also, you are welcome to edit the article to address these concerns. Thank you for your time. B. Wolterding (talk) 19:27, 30 March 2008 (UTC)

Opera project category changes
Hi. I see you are changing the project categories connected to opera but I am unable to understand why. Can you possibly explain what you have been doing? Thanks. --Kleinzach (talk) 13:38, 2 April 2008 (UTC)


 * As noted here there is no WikiProject Performing arts, The other change included WP Opera in WP Theatre. It is useful being able to see such relationships in the WP cats. Paul foord (talk) 13:50, 2 April 2008 (UTC)


 * Right, now I understand the Performing Arts Project is defunct, but what does  "The other change included WP Opera in WP Theatre"  mean? Opera is not part of 'theatre' in any WP structures and with good reason - it's one of the performing arts, even if a WP Performing Arts Project no longer exists. Also Richard Wagner and Gilbert and Sullivan are descendant projects of Opera. --Kleinzach (talk) 14:06, 2 April 2008 (UTC)


 * There never was a WP PA as far as I can see - re the other thing, apologies if I got it wrong, from the outside it seems Opera, Musical theatre & G&S would logically come under music & theatre. Paul foord (talk) 14:10, 2 April 2008 (UTC)


 * OK, I think I am beginning to understand. It seems we all assumed the existence of WP PA. It's fine to list Opera with both Music and Theatre but I've also restored it at the Arts level with the other performing arts. I think that's OK now. I am not sure how Musical theatre fits into the structure - maybe under Theatre - but I'm not involved in that project. Thanks. --Kleinzach (talk) 14:25, 2 April 2008 (UTC)

class=redirect and class=Dab etc.
Thank you! Robert Greer (talk) 13:49, 8 April 2008 (UTC)

Might you have a look at this?
I've posted a topic here [] and was wondering what you thought?Smatprt (talk) 03:55, 15 April 2008 (UTC)

Child life specialist page
Paul, I noticed your work on the Child development page and I value your insight! I'm a relatively new user, and I just created a Child life specialist page. I'm wondering if you would check it out and possible give me a bit of feedback on the page? Thanks for your help! Carleyj (talk) 01:16, 29 April 2008 (UTC)carleyj

Ballet portal
Thank you for the contributions to the ballet portal; so far it's just you and me and hasn't been announced. Do you know any other Wiki. balletomanes who'd be good editors? — Robert Greer 18:12, 29 April 2008 (UTC)

nested=yes
P.S. We must have a browser update because nested=yes is finally doing what it's supposed to! — Robert Greer (talk) 22:13, 30 April 2008 (UTC)

Invention in the Arts
Hi, Please take a look at the section: Invention in the Arts on the Invention page at http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Invention. I hope you can contribute some information. Thanks! --Sara USA (talk) 21:44, 2 May 2008 (UTC)

Category:Ballet Russe de Monte Carlo vs. Category: Ballets Russes and descendants
I moved the few entries in Category:Ballet Russe de Monte Carlo into the more general Category: Ballets Russes and descendants, of which the former is a sub-category (I moved two categories, Category:Ballet Russe de Monte Carlo dancers‎ and Category:Ballet Russe de Monte Carlo choreographers‎, and two pages, Wassily de Basil‎ and René Blum, to be exact; almost everybody who was in one of the three companies was in at least one of the other two.) Do you object to my asking for deletion of Category:Ballet Russe de Monte Carlo as it is now empty? We are the only two people who've ever so much as touched it. — Robert Greer (talk) 23:16, 7 May 2008 (UTC)

Revision history of Historical revisionism
Work with me please. --Ludvikus (talk) 14:58, 13 May 2008 (UTC)

Ondine
May I alert you to a discussion on merging Ondine (Sir Frederick Ashton ballet) into Ondine (Henze)! — Robert Greer (talk) 18:41, 5 May 2008 (UTC)


 * Thank you! — Robert Greer (talk) 18:47, 6 May 2008 (UTC)

Ashton / Henze / Ondine / Undine
I regret to inform you that the party who wanted to merge Ondine (Ashton) into Undine (Henze) has been unable to accept Wiki. administrator DGG's determination that the two articles should remain seperate. Your comments on Talk:Ondine (Ashton) would be welcome! — Robert Greer (talk) 16:46, 13 May 2008 (UTC)

Proposed deletion of List of early emo groups
A proposed deletion template has been added to the article List of early emo groups, 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.

Please consider improving the article to address the issues raised because 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. Do you want to opt out of receiving this notice? neon white user page talk 15:47, 14 May 2008 (UTC)

Office of the Registrar of Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander Corporations
why is it in the cat Category:Federal law enforcement agencies of Australia? ninety:one 19:04, 14 May 2008 (UTC)
 * My bad, i guess because of the powers it enjoys similar to ASIC.ninety:one

Updating WikiProject Dance
Hi there! Of course I'd be delighted to help you with - it looks like a fairly standard banner. I would like to know before I try anything, however: how many of the banner's parameters does WikiProject Dance actually use? small, nested, class, importance are all obviously vital, but you also have functionality for attention, portal, needs-image, orphan, dykdate, peer-review and old-peer-review, as well as Ballet. How many of these features are actually used by the project? Any that are unused should be removed to reduce load time and improve the durability of the template. Many thanks, Happy‑melon 18:32, 16 May 2008 (UTC)


 * I use Balletyes together with nestedyes extensively to avoid having to put two seperate templates, WikiProject Dance and WikiProject Ballet. Doing so saves screen space and produces a banner giving both WikiProjects' names. — Robert Greer (talk) 19:44, 16 May 2008 (UTC)


 * That's good to know; what I was actually asking is, for how many of these features does the relevant infrastructure actually exist? For instance, the banner has code for yes, but does WikiProject Dance actually have a peer review department? Does anyone ever patrol the category associated with needs-image? The text snipppet which is displayed with orphan ("This article is not assigned to a WikiProject or workgroup") makes no sense to me whatsoever, and not being familiar with WikiProject Dance, I don't know if you have any articles where the dykdate would be appropriate and useful. These are the details I really need to be able to clean up the banner. Happy‑melon 21:02, 16 May 2008 (UTC)

Student Christian Movement of Canada
A tag has been placed on Student Christian Movement of Canada, requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under the criteria for speedy deletion, because the article seems to be blatant advertising that only promotes a company, product, group, service or person and would need to be fundamentally rewritten in order to become an encyclopedia article. Please read the general criteria for speedy deletion, particularly item 11, as well as the guidelines on spam.

If you can indicate why the subject of this article is not blatant advertising, you may contest the tagging. To do this, please add  on the top of Student Christian Movement of Canada and leave a note on the article's talk page explaining your position. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag yourself, but don't hesitate to add information to the article that would help make it encyclopedic, as well as adding any citations from reliable sources to ensure that the article will be verifiable. Feel free to leave a note on my talk page if you have any questions about this. GreenJoe 23:48, 22 May 2008 (UTC)

agreed
I'm glad anybody has taken it upon themself to help! — Robert Greer (talk) 12:35, 10 June 2008 (UTC)

National Museum of Dance
PS I got to the National Museum of Dance in Saratoga Springs; it's a lovely building with two wings. One has the Dance Hall of Fame, the other temporary exhibitions, but there is — alas — no permanent collection. — Robert Greer (talk) 02:11, 16 June 2008 (UTC)

AfD nomination of List of Brazilian punk and hardcore groups
I have nominated List of Brazilian punk and hardcore groups, an article you created, for deletion. I do not feel that this article satisfies Wikipedia's criteria for inclusion, and have explained why at Articles for deletion/List of Brazilian punk and hardcore groups. Your opinions on the matter are welcome at that same discussion page; also, you are welcome to edit the article to address these concerns. Thank you for your time. Do you want to opt out of receiving this notice? &#9775; Zenwhat (talk) 19:26, 26 June 2008 (UTC)

WikiProject Australia newsletter,December 2008
The December 2008 issue of the WikiProject Australia newsletter has been published. You may read the newsletter, change the format in which future issues will be delivered to you, or unsubscribe from this notification by following the link. This message was delivered by TinucherianBot (talk) 07:39, 17 December 2008 (UTC)

Happy New Year!
Hope all is well? Another exciting year in Adelaide no doubt?  YellowMonkey  ( bananabucket ) 04:47, 2 January 2009 (UTC)

No content in Category:WikiProject Ballet categories
Hello, this is a message from an automated bot. A tag has been placed on Category:WikiProject Ballet categories, by another Wikipedia user, requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. The tag claims that it should be speedily deleted because Category:WikiProject Ballet categories has been empty for at least four days, and its only content has been links to parent categories. (CSD C1). To contest the tagging and request that administrators wait before possibly deleting Category:WikiProject Ballet categories, please affix the template to the page, and put a note on its talk page. If the article has already been deleted, see the advice and instructions at WP:WMD. Feel free to contact the bot operator if you have any questions about this or any problems with this bot, bearing in mind that '''this bot is only informing you of the nomination for speedy deletion; it does not perform any nominations or deletions itself. To see the user who deleted the page, click here''' CSDWarnBot (talk) 00:02, 24 January 2009 (UTC)

Category:Open Dance peer reviews
I notice that this category you created is unpopulated (empty). In other words, no Wikipedia pages belong to it. If it remains unpopulated for four days, it may be deleted, without discussion, in accordance with Criteria for speedy deletion. I'm notifying you in case you wish to (re-)populate it by adding to articles/categories that belong in it.

I blanked the category page. This will not, in itself, cause the category to be deleted. It serves to document (in the page history) that the category was empty at the time of blanking and also to alert other watchers that the category is in jeopardy. You are welcome to revert the blanking if you wish. However, doing so will not prevent deletion if the category remains empty.

If you created the category in error, or it is no longer needed, you can speed up the deletion process by tagging it with db-author.

Best regards,--Stepheng3 (talk) 21:15, 12 February 2009 (UTC)


 * I'm sure it's an administrative category, not part of the encyclopedia. Unless it gets regular use, C1 still applies, so I'll tag it for deletion after the waiting period has elapsed. --Stepheng3 (talk) 00:19, 15 February 2009 (UTC)

Speedy deletion of Evergreen Terrace (band)
A tag has been placed on Evergreen Terrace (band) requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section A7 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because the article appears to be about a band or musician, but it does not indicate how or why the subject is important or significant: that is, why an article about that subject should be included in an encyclopedia. Under the criteria for speedy deletion, such articles may be deleted at any time. Please see the guidelines for what is generally accepted as notable, as well as our subject-specific notability guideline for musical topics.

If you think that this notice was placed here in error, you may contest the deletion by adding  to the top of the page that has been nominated for deletion (just below the existing speedy deletion or "db" tag), coupled with adding a note on the talk page explaining your position, 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 would render it more in conformance with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. Lastly, please note that if the page does get deleted, you can contact one of these admins to request that they userfy the page or have a copy emailed to you. --Dynaflow  babble  01:13, 16 February 2009 (UTC)

Evergreen Terrace (band)
You speeedied Evergreen Terrace (band), before I got a chance to look at it. Anyway there is a category with Maybe they should have been merged into the article or also should be speedied. The band would appear to meet Notability (music) #5.
 * At Our Worst
 * Burned Alive by Time
 * Losing All Hope Is Freedom
 * Sincerity Is an Easy Disguise in This Business
 * Wolfbiker
 * Writer's Block (Evergreen Terrace album)
 * plus others

Labels include Indianola Records, Indianola Record, Eulogy Recordings and Metal Blade Records.

I am not interested in working on this further. Paul foord (talk) 11:17, 16 February 2009 (UTC)


 * Unless I was grossly mistaken (I occasionally am, but I usually catch my errors quickly), Evergreen Terrace (band) would have been so scanty on verifiable assertions of notability that it didn't even seem worthwhile to give the article a trial by fire at WP:AFD (for comparison, the articles I did feel needed to be vetted by AFD rather than summarily deleted yesterday included Articles for deletion/Sydney the Bowl Cut Sloth)., who carried out the actual deletion, seems to have agreed with me.  Those peripheral album articles, however, have the kind of citations that could have easily established the notability of the subject of the band's main article.  I'll propose the article for a deletion review if you'd be willing to bring the article up to the minimal WP:V and WP:N (actually WP:BAND in this case) standards once it's been undeleted.  What do you say?  --Dynaflow   babble  11:37, 16 February 2009 (UTC)

Dances and styles
Hello - how do you see the relationship between Category:Dances and Category:Dance styles ? I am trying to sort out "dance-oriented music genres" and I notice that articles are being classed haphazardly under either or both, particularly where post-disco and electronic styles are concerned. I am happy to do donkeywork but do not want to start unilaterally recategorising dance per se. I left another note at the dance portal. Please contact me on my talk and let me know where you would like to discuss. Thx. Redheylin (talk) 22:13, 14 April 2009 (UTC)

Link title== Category:WikiProject Circus categories == I notice that this category you created is unpopulated (empty). In other words, no Wikipedia pages belong to it. If it remains unpopulated for four days, it may be deleted without discussion, in accordance with Criteria for speedy deletion. I'm notifying you in case you wish to (re-)populate it by adding to pages that belong in it.

I tagged the category. This will not, in itself, cause the category to be deleted. It serves to document (in the page history) that the category was empty at the time of tagging and also to alert other watchers that the category is in jeopardy. You are welcome to remove the tag if you wish. However, doing so will not prevent deletion of the category if it remains empty.

If you created the category in error, or it is no longer needed, you can speed up the deletion process by tagging it with db-author.

I am a human being, not a bot, so you can contact me if you have questions about this. Best regards, --Stepheng3 (talk) 02:35, 15 April 2009 (UTC)

Theatrical Page
Hello Paul. I am very sorry if this is not the correct way to contact you. I am just writing to say that your suggestion for a page on Australian or South Australian theatre is an excellent one. I would suggest a page that lists the really strong professional companies that deserve recognition. I am thinking most of all of the State Theatre Company of South Australia, Brink Productions, Australian Dance Theatre, Restless Dance, Windmill Performing Arts and The Border Project. You could also mention the Adelaide Festival Centre as our premiere venue and such arts organizations as Arts SA, South Australian Youth Arts Board (SAYAB) and Carclew Youth Arts. Also our premiere drama schools for professional training such as the Flinders University Drama Centre and AC Arts. If you were to expand it to include Australia as a whole, then you have major companies such as Griffin Theatre and Australian Theatre for Young People (ATYP) in Sydney and the Malthouse in Melbourne, and training institutions such as National Institute of Dramatic Art (NIDA) and Victoria College of the Arts (VCA). There's so much truly vibrant, exciting, innovative theatre in Australia and some really hardworking, professional companies that welcome new talent that it's a real shame to miss them out and concentrate on amateur theatre, which is at the opposite end of the spectrum both in terms of notability and quality. I noticed on the deletion discussion page, there was this comment: 'There seems to be a movement to delete the page about the Adelaide Repertory Theatre. This seems unjust to to the long history that this company has had in Australian Theatre. This company has been a breeding ground for major professional actors and technicians.' That just isn't true. The professional actors and technicians are part of a really strong, professional movement that involves the organizations listed above, and many more, and this where you want students and researchers to concentrate their efforts. Amateur theatre, particularly in South Australia, has a history of actively dismissing the professionals or lying to blur the distinction between amateurism and professionalism. This is why you're getting strangers to wikipedia commenting so passionately on this article. It's part of a very unfair trend of amateurs denying the skill and dedication of professionals, to promote themselves. So the comments may seem agreesive, but there is a long history of frustration. As you say, the context is important. You're exactly right when you say the best way to deliver this point is to create a situation where it is all in the correct context. If you were to create such a page, it would quickly develop. Wow, I am sorry this is so long. Perhaps, if you create the page in the appropriate format with some internal and external links, and some dead links to be filled in, then students and practitioners of professional drama can edit and build it out. I would list both Professional Theatre Companies and Professional Training Institutions. You may have to create a seperate section for Amateur Theatre Companies, but as long as the distinction and context are clear, that should please everybody. Superb idea!(123.2.53.91 (talk) 23:29, 19 April 2009 (UTC))


 * Also, Leigh Warren & Dancers is an example of a superb professional company so you know exactly what we're talking about! (123.2.53.91 (talk) 23:33, 19 April 2009 (UTC))


 * Just been shown the existing page on Theatre of Australia and tried to add some links to AusStage, the performing arts database (a really useful resource for researchers) and added a few companies. I also moved professional companies to the top of the list, where they belong. I expect there will be some argument from the amateurs about that, but surely it makes much more sense than having amateurs, and specifically Adelaide Repertory Theatre, top of the page (as a sidenote, Stepehen Dean also attempted to create a page on himself for wikipedia, doesn't this tell you something?) I'd still suggest links to each state listing - in alphabetical order - Professional Companies, Professional Training/Teaching Institutions, Professional Venues through to Amateur Companies and Amateur Venues. This isn't elitism (and I sincerely hope it doesn't come across that way) or censorship. It is about providing the accurate, unbiased truth so that researchers can use wikipedia as a correct and helpful resource, and young people interested in the arts can access clear career pathways and undoctored information. Because wikipedia is such a strong, prominent website it is important that it is as accurate as possible. I do not agree with Stephen Dean when he says wikipedia's value is "yet to be proven" and I think many of his comments are subtle distortions of fact in order to promote the organization on which he is a board member. Anyhow, that's all from me. I'm signing off this website for the time being and wish you the best of luck in your Australian edits. Best wishes. (123.2.53.91 (talk) 01:22, 20 April 2009 (UTC))


 * I think you will find that all theatre companies amateur or professional have something to offer to the theatre going public and therefore they are all worthy of inclusion in wikipedia. Wikipedia needs to be an open and full knowledge of all things. The only concern is how easy it is to edit. So someone with bias can alter it and people will get the wrong info. As long as the information is verifiable it should be included. Cheers S.D. p.s. This is what I mean I can edit without being logged in. :) —Preceding unsigned comment added by 124.189.230.100 (talk) 12:41, 24 April 2009 (UTC)

I am not doing a lot on Wikipedia at present, mostly keeping an eye on a too long watchlist and tidying stuff as it comes to my notice. Paul foord (talk) 13:24, 24 April 2009 (UTC)

Article Assessment
Hi there. This probably sounds like a stupid question as I've been on Wikipedia for quite some time and should really know that answer, but how do I request a wikiproject article assessment? I did a major revamp of the article on the Royal Ballet months ago and am continually tweaking and adding to it, but still nobody has got round to assessing it. Crazy-dancing (talk) 21:00, 6 August 2009 (UTC)

Ondine
Important! - Round up what few ballet enthusiasts you know on Wikipedia and get them to vote on the proposed merging of the Ondine articles that would see the article about Frederick Ashton's production of the actual ballet, being merged into one about the music.

See here: - Wikipedia_talk:WikiProject_Classical_music

And please vote to oppose this change, as this music would not have been written had it not been for Ashton's ballet!!!

Thank You

Crazy-dancing (talk) 20:16, 6 November 2009 (UTC)

Polite Notice - Possible solution to Ondine merging
I am creating this notice to invite all interested parties to vote on the proposal to merge Undine (ballet) and Ondine (Ashton) to a new article at Ondine (ballet). You can read the discussion and add your vote to the poll at:


 * Discussion
 * Poll

Look forward to seeing you there to help resolve this situation, thanks! Crazy-dancing (talk) 11:27, 10 November 2009 (UTC)

Unreferenced BLPs
Hello Paul foord! Thank you for your contributions. I am a bot alerting you that 1 of the articles that you created  is tagged as an Unreferenced Biography of a Living Person. The biographies of living persons policy requires that all personal or potentially controversial information be sourced. In addition, to ensure verifiability, all biographies should be based on reliable sources. If you were to bring this article up to standards, it would greatly help us with the current Category:All_unreferenced_BLPs article backlog. Once the article is adequately referenced, please remove the unreferencedBLP tag. Here is the article:

Thanks!--DASHBot (talk) 00:32, 18 January 2010 (UTC)
 * 1) Patrick McClure -