User talk:Peter Campbell/Archive2

Hi Philip, Thanks for the feedback!

FF and Greens
The point was that Bob Brown got elected when the Greens got only 1% more the FF got for Fielding's election, also from the flow of ALP preferences, yet there is no similar type of analysis there. If you do a preference deal which backfires, you can't go crying on about it. Both sides in the deal gained preferences, but only one could get the seat. Xtra 05:40, 26 December 2005 (UTC)


 * Bob Brown has always got a lot more votes than Stephen Fielding in every election he has contested, so your comparison is not appropriate. More analyis can be added, I don't see this as a reason for excluding any information sourced from Antony Green. Who is crying about preference deals?  I don't think emotive language like that is appropriate. Peter Campbell 05:52, 26 December 2005 (UTC)


 * In the 2001 Federal Election, Bob Brown got 8.68% of the Senate primary votes in Tasmania. Stephen Fielding got 1.77% in 2004! Peter Campbell 06:00, 26 December 2005 (UTC)

OK. Xtra 06:17, 26 December 2005 (UTC)

Do you have data on the Seantor elected with the smallest primary vote in Australia's history? Xtra 06:21, 26 December 2005 (UTC)

A good question. I don't have the data, but will look into it. Peter Campbell 10:30, 26 December 2005 (UTC)

Tasmanian forests
Please don't take me for a fool, Peter. Your addition about the Tasmanian forests issue was referenced, but the two references had absolutely nothing to do with your spurious claim that the seats would have fallen anyway. You cite no evidence for that - which goes against the opinions of just about every political commentator that I've read.

Not only that, but your assumptions don't necessarily add up. Firstly, you're assuming that there was a universal swing across the country, which was far from the case, as shown by the several seats that fell to the ALP. Secondly, you're not taking into account that both O'Byrne and Sidebottom were reasonably popular members; O'Byrne is widely considered a near-shoo-in for the 2006 state election for that reason. Thirdly, you're not taking into account any of the opinion polls that suggested that both were set to hold their seats right up until the last minute (when the forests policy was announced). Your assumption that the seats would have fallen anyway thus seems to be baseless - or at least not based on any actual evidence that I can see, apart from looking at the margin and assuming that it must instantly have been in danger. That is the reason why your edits were reverted. Ambi 12:51, 28 December 2005 (UTC)


 * Ambi, I don't take you for a fool. Regarding the loss of Bass and Braddon, here is a poll that predicted this prior to Latham's forest policy announcement, so I don't think your claim that all polls showed Labor winning Bass & Braddon prior to their forest policy launch is accurate. Peter Campbell 10:58, 29 December 2005 (UTC)


 * The APH source makes for interesting reading; had you cited this with the edit, I mightn't have been so quick to revert. Nevertheless, there is quite a bit in the way of contrary views, so both should really be represented there; your version comes fairly close to stating the APH summary as the definitive account. The Examiner poll is fairly worthless, though; even the people who did it admit that the sample size was small enough to question its accuracy. Ambi 11:26, 29 December 2005 (UTC)

Articles for deletion/Peter Campbell
Hi, Peter. Per the results of the AFD discussion, I've moved the article in question into your userspace; you can now edit it at User:Peter Campbell/article. If you have any questions, please ask me. —Cleared as filed. 21:57, 28 December 2005 (UTC)

Meetup in March
I see that you are listed as a participant in the WikiProject Melbourne. If you are a Melbourne resident I would appreciate your views on the suggested Meetup in March. Please give some indication of your interest, or otherwise, in the idea. Even a simple "No thanks" with your user name would be welcome and assist in assessing the level of support for a meetup. Thank you.. Cuddy Wifter 06:30, 28 February 2006 (UTC)

Tasmanian Election
You removed the statement. 'The Liberals gained a 4.5% swing, despite making no real gains in the election'. Why was that? There is a minor chance the liberals could pick up the last seat in Franklin and a very small but (possible) chance they could take Tim Morris's seat in Lyons but overall it seems the status quo is likely. So the liberals have increased their popular vote, but haven't made much difference in the election. They would still need a 15% swing at the next election to govern in majority, which would take a very large effort. I'm not disputing your removing the statement, but am interested to the reason why you believed it should be removed. Kyle sb 13:40, 20 March 2006 (UTC)


 * Kyle, I removed that statement because the Liberals did make a "real gain" in the election - their primary vote increase. The amount of swing they got is specified elsewhere in the sentence "The Liberal primary vote rose by 4.5% to 32%." so it did not need to be stated twice.  Also, speculation about them possibly picking up a seat (slim chance) could conflict with the "no real gain statement".  Peter C Talk! 06:23, 21 March 2006 (UTC)


 * Thats fair I just wanted to see what your point of view was. It might sound weird but I just wanted to make sure, you weren't trying to push an oppinion that the Liberals have had a succesful election. And I think it was right to remove 'no real gain'. Thanks Kyle sb 06:37, 21 March 2006 (UTC)

Greens categories
I've got no objection to re-merging the Greens WA members if you want, although it isn't technically correct with regard to Chamarette and Vallentine, seeing as they never represented the Australian Greens. Like Xtra, I really don't think there's a need to split them into states, but if you must, please make sure the category makes grammatical sense. Ambi 06:52, 7 April 2006 (UTC)

Thanks!!!
Peter, thanks. As you can probably tell, I go for tables, graphics and then some. I think they aid understanding so much. I'm thinking we need a little introduction on how the Victorian electoral system works, plus about the reforms to the upper house. Maybe we can cut and paste the government section from the Victoria article, which I wrote?? Artemus Jones 12:24, 2 May 2006 (UTC)

Victorian legislative election, 2006
I think it should be split. Put all the districts in a separate article and only have a general overview in the article proper. Xtra 12:35, 2 May 2006 (UTC)


 * I would have to disagree. If I arrived at a site about an election and then had to go to another site for the results, it would seem to be a little illogical. In any case, this is not a results list. We can remove the retain/gain section from the table and then create another site for detailed results, if that is your intention. I don't think it should be cluttered with specific results. But this district list contains the members of parliament. Pretty essential information I would have thought. Artemus Jones 13:44, 2 May 2006 (UTC)


 * Maybe we should keep the maps in the main article, and shift the full district list to the results article. This seemed to work OK for the Tasmanian legislative election, 2006.  Suggest shifting this discussion to the article talk page. Peter C Talk! 13:48, 2 May 2006 (UTC)
 * There is currently an information overload on that page. I am not suggesting that no results go on the main page, but I am suggesting that the detailed district by district results, etc be moved. The page also generally needs to be drastically curtailed. Xtra 13:52, 2 May 2006 (UTC)
 * I agree with shifting the districts & their results. I don't agree with drastic curtailing - if the article ends up the same length as Australian federal election, 2004 that will surely be OK?
 * I understand where you are coming from Xtra. We have put a lot of information on this page but I think it's essential information. Overloaded, no - comprehensive, yes. I totally agree with you that specific results should not go on this page. Therefore, the site you created is a great idea. My only quibble was the removal of the district list and the maps. The district list really only contains the incumbents' names, their party, district and margin. All bare bones sort of stuff. Therefore, I don't see how you can remove the "detailed district by district results", as you call it, because one doesn't exist yet. Detailed results, for me, would be all the candidates for each district, votes, margins, swings et cetera. Certainly - a table/list of that nature should not be on this page but on your results page. Artemus Jones 05:08, 4 May 2006 (UTC)

I wouldn't split it either. It's a fantastic article - particularly so far out from the election - and most other election articles this length aren't split (though this may be different if things like a candidates list are added later). A couple of things, though - firstly, would it be possible to have information on preselection challenges (as with the 2007 election)? Secondly, it could be useful to have an expanded Legislative Council section, covering the new provinces and likely results. Apart from that, this is one of the best election articles I've ever seen. Ambi 01:13, 3 May 2006 (UTC)

Robert Doyle
Semi-protected. :) Ambi 04:15, 8 May 2006 (UTC)

Upper house candidates tables
Peter, I knock up the tables using the Wikipedia table language. It is sometimes cumbersome and arduous (especially when I wrote the Legislative Assembly table for the main article) but it does turn out visually appealing, which is where I am coming from. I think there is nothing wrong with the table you added to the new article, save perhaps Liberals getting upset that you've put them at the bottom :). People could also assume it's modelled on some ballot paper and that the order is of particular relevance.

I wouldn't mind seeing this article based on the eight regions rather than candidates. That way you could explain which party is likely to claim the region's seats and so forth, rather than the other way round. That would also allow you discuss the communities that come under the regions, the nuances of the campaign in each region (i.e. Liberals vs Nationals in the three country regions), and maybe criticism expressed in submissions to the VEC about region borders. I'll leave it up to you.

In terms of the existing table, I could just add formatting to make it more colourful and that would be great. Artemus Jones 07:55, 8 May 2006 (UTC)

Please do not delete any of the other candidates running for the upper house - it took me 1/2 hour to put them on. If you have a problem - pls email me catonbishop@lycos.com 136.186.1.193


 * I'm not sure what you are referring to - I did not delete any of the candidates Peter Campbell Talk! 06:30, 7 June 2006 (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 04:43, 20 June 2006 (UTC)

Candidates of the Queensland legislative election, 2006
Check out Candidates of the Quuensland legislative election, 2006 (made a spelling mistake - don't know how to change it)

It's a WIP

Pls assist - you're good at this stuff

Cheers CatonB 08:20, 15 August 2006 (UTC)


 * Hi Caton,
 * I don't see a spelling mistake on this article. You can edit the article by clicking on the "edit this page" tab at the tab of the article. Otherwise, let me know which part needs fixing. Peter Campbell Talk! 10:35, 15 August 2006 (UTC)

Is there any chance you'd be able to update the campaign section for the Victorian election article? It seems to have fallen a few weeks behind. It might also be an idea to start summarising some of the older material, as the section is getting pretty long. Rebecca 10:04, 22 August 2006 (UTC)


 * I have saved several recent articles on the election and will add more content soon. The 100 days to go milestone has attracted some attention, and the campaign is new moving into a more active phase.  --Peter Campbell Talk! 12:22, 22 August 2006 (UTC)

Hi Peter Trying to upload pictures of pollies and candidates and it is displaying no copyright. But I've put the source of photos. Please assist Scorpio80 23:55, 8 September 2006 (UTC)


 * Scorpio, I don't have much experience uploading images. Check out WP:Image and WP:Uploading images for more information on policies and procedures. You could also add    to your user page to get assistance. Peter Campbell Talk! 11:26, 10 September 2006 (UTC)`

Mary Wooldridge - political candidate article
Rebecca, Mary Wooldridge looks to me like a recently created article profiling a "not notable" political candidate. I am considering nominating it for deletion. What do you think?

Also, I have added some recent content to the Vic state election article. --Peter Campbell Talk! 12:59, 27 August 2006 (UTC)


 * I wouldn't delete Mary Wooldridge on the basis that she's near-certain to be elected in November. It's already not a bad start to an article, and I think we'd be better off making sure we have a useful article for when she is elected. Thanks for updating the election article, anyway. Rebecca 23:21, 27 August 2006 (UTC)


 * The issue is she is not currently notable. There is no certainty she will be elected - but it would be appropriate to have an article if she is. In the meanwhile, the article is fairly clearly an attempt to build her profile during the campaign. I understand that political candidates are generally not considered worthy of articles (with very few exceptions). Peter Campbell Talk! 23:51, 27 August 2006 (UTC)

G4
Recreation of deleted material.:

WP:CSD.Geni 12:46, 12 September 2006 (UTC)

Web 3.0 article
That's a good question. I tagged it for merging with another article, but that article looks like it's gone too. Someone mentioned merging it with Semantic Web. Maybe that's where it went, but the old articles should have remained as redirects. I don't know what happened exactly. --Cswrye 13:55, 12 September 2006 (UTC)


 * I checked the deletion logs - its was a speedy delete. I have requested that this be reconsidered here. You may wish add your opinion Peter Campbell Talk! 22:17, 12 September 2006 (UTC)


 * Per the request at WP:DRV, I've copied the deleted content to User:Peter Campbell/Web 3.0. Thryduulf 17:32, 13 September 2006 (UTC)


 * Thanks, I will add some of this content to the Semantic web article --Peter Campbell Talk! 21:02, 13 September 2006 (UTC)


 * The history of the article has also been restored. I take it that covers your request and I'm closing the nomination now. Best, trialsanderrors 05:35, 14 September 2006 (UTC)


 * Thanks again, this is all I need --Peter Campbell 05:39, 14 September 2006 (UTC)

Hi Peter, I noticed you are into cycling. I've just invested in a Cannondale Rush 800 mountain bike and got rid of my car to force myself to bike to work (and for fun) for better health.


 * Good move. I mainly road race these days (with the Southern Veterans Cycling Club (Melbourne, Australia)) on my Look KG381 which has been a fantastic bike.  My MTB doesn't see much use at present.  I commute into Melbourne about 3 days a week on my old MTB

As far as the Web 3.0 article, I believe strongly that without the Wikipedia 3.0 vision (and the blog reference, which has been quoted by over 750 sources, including Wikipedia's own Signpost) that it will lose a key part of its purpose (or soul), at least for me. Regardless of the how many logically inhibited, primally driven arguments others make, there will always be a sufficient number of logical thinkers who would support the inclusion of the Wikipedia 3.0 blog article as a reference. It was added a few months ago by someone to the Semantic Web entry and no one has objected to it in that camp.


 * There seems to a negative vibe coming from a number of the participants in the AFD debate for Web 3.0. I think the AFD process attracts some people who spend a lot of time criticing and trying to shut things down, rather than just getting on with adding good content.

Feel free to chat on email if you have any feedback or questions (marc.fawzi @ gmail.com)


 * Will do.

Enjoy the cycling


 * I did a 210K ride today down to Sorrento and back (informal participant in Melbourne's "Ride around the Bay". Over 15,000 participants this year, and some idiots throwing drawing pins on the road (I got 2 flats). Eddy Merckx was in Melbourne yesterday - I took some photos when he visited a cycling shop and spoke to him.  He is a great guy and very friendly.

Marc fawzi 05:20, 15 October 2006 (UTC)

Indented responses added by Peter Campbell 08:36, 15 October 2006 (UTC)

I'm sure the Wikipedia 3.o article will be added to that page again by another person since it shows up in all search results for Web 3.0 on Google and other places. Marc fawzi 22:48, 20 October 2006 (UTC)

Chris Gymer
There's a AfD nomination for Chris Gymer (which is the correct procedure for article deletion; admins will not use a talk page vote to keep or delete an article). Also note that Mary Woolridge has been speedily deleted under the A7 criteria. Please feel free to comment on there. ColourBurst 02:50, 6 October 2006 (UTC)


 * Thanks for this information. I have voted to keep this article unless the Mary Wooldridge article is also deleted - it has recently been "unspeedily deleted". In the interests of balance and fairness, either they both stay, or they both go. Peter Campbell 08:44, 6 October 2006 (UTC)

80.75.34.13 IP address edits
Dear Mr. Campbell, I recieved a message from you at User talk:80.75.34.13, requesting me not to post nonsense on Wikipedia. Since I have never edited or posted anything, I would be very interested to know what inspired you to send me this message. Thank you, K. Knaus


 * There have been recent edits from the 80.75.34.13 IP address that have added dubious content, hence my message. Unfortunately, you appear to be sharing this IP address with the person who has made these edits - which can happen when IP addresses are allocated to users in blocks by their ISP. The way around this is to open up a Wikipedia account to edit or access Wikipedia with. Peter Campbell 08:35, 20 October 2006 (UTC)

Melbourne meetup in planning
Hello, you've indicated that you're interested in future Meetups in Melbourne on this list, so I'm giving you this message to remind you that Melbounre meetup number four is currently in planning. If you haven't already, please go to Meetup/Melbourne to suggest possible dates, times and locations. Thanks --Michael Billington (talk • contribs) 02:51, 3 December 2006 (UTC)

Melbourne meetup
Greetings, person who is listed as being interested in future meetups in Melbourne. The fourth meetup will be held on 18 December, at Lower House in Fed Square (in the Alfred Deaking building, Flinders Street end near the Atrium: map), starting from 7pm. We don't currently have a separate location for discussion beforehand, but there'll be plenty of time to talk wiki over dinner. --bainer (talk) 14:59, 16 December 2006 (UTC)

Colleen Hartland
There is a speedy deletion criterion dedicated solely to obviously plagiarised material for good reason, and I used it accordingly. I'm frankly gobsmacked that someone who has been around as long as you would so blatantly plagiarise - I really hope this hasn't been a regular habit of yours. If you want to write something that wasn't plagiarised, feel free - you're welcome to use the notes I've compiled if you want. I will not, however, undelete an article that was virtually entirely someone else's work. I'm also a bit surprised that someone who's been around for so long doesn't know basic naming conventions - for starters, that any article should be at Colleen Hartland. Rebecca 04:55, 22 December 2006 (UTC)


 * The material was referenced and used as a source, not directly plagiarised. I am gobsmacked that you would make this accusation. Other editors had contributed to the article as well, but you have now deleted their work too. How about reinstating the article and getting some other opinions on it?  I think you are displaying considerable bias and hostility on this matter, which really suprises me.  As you are refusing to reinstate the article I would like to lodge a complaint about this deletion - how should I do this?.  Peter Campbell 05:04, 22 December 2006 (UTC)


 * While there was a link at the bottom of the page, this does not give you the right to add that copyrighted text to Wikipedia. All of that text was taken, mostly directly, but in a couple of cases with one or two words changed from the original, not "referenced and used as a source". And contrary to your claims, there was only one other edit to the article - a minor edit by an anon. I have no idea what bias you're accusing me of demonstrating (you - or at least I thought you were - a good editor), but I'm amazed that you're trying to justify what is blatant plagiarism. Let me ask you bluntly - have you "written" any other articles by this "referencing and sourcing" method? Rebecca 07:46, 22 December 2006 (UTC)


 * Let me ask you bluntly whether you understand what "plagiarism" means. Here is a definition from :


 * Literary theft. Plagiarism occurs when a writer duplicates another writer's language or ideas and then calls the work his or her own. Copyright laws protect writers' words as their legal property. To avoid the charge of plagiarism, writers take care to credit those from whom they borrow and quote.


 * In the Colleen Hartland article I used some of the provided reference as the basis for some of the article. Since you have deleted the article, this is now a mute point.  I would like to get a second admin opinion on this or put the article through AfD process.


 * You can review all my edits if you wish at . If you have any further concerns with my editing then please advise me. Otherwise, I ask to to please refrain from making accusations. I feel you are being belligerent. And you have not advised me how I can get this matter resolved. Peter Campbell 09:19, 22 December 2006 (UTC)

Okay, I'll go through the two versions of this article, and highlight just how much you copied from the other site without permission.

"She and has lived in Footscray for over twenty years and represented Yarraville and Seddon residents as one of the first Greens to be elected to the Maribyrnong Council (Sheoak Ward) from 2003 to 2005."

"Colleen has lived in Footscray for over twenty years. She has a solid track-record in local government, having represented Yarraville and Seddon residents as one of the first Greens to be elected to the Maribyrnong Council (Sheoak Ward) from 2003 to 2005."

"She is a public housing support worker employed by the Western Region Health Centre."

Colleen is a public housing support worker employed by the Western Region Health Centre.

She is a founding member of the Hazardous Materials Action Group (HAZMAG), which has been fighting for the past fifteen years to have the chemical storage facilities on Coode Island relocated. She has been a vocal critic of the EPA and Victorian Government for their neglect of the western suburbs, and was a member of Environment Effects Committees on West Point Wilson, Point Lillias and the proposed toxic dump at Werribee.

"She is a founding member of the Hazardous Materials Action Group (HAZMAG), which has been fighting for the past fifteen years to have the chemical storage facilities on Coode Island relocated. She has been a vocal critic of the EPA and Victorian Government for their neglect of the western suburbs, and was a member of Environment Effects Committees on West Point Wilson, Point Lillias and the proposed toxic dump at Werribee."

She chaired the Maribyrnong Drug Strategy Committee for three years and is currently campaigning for improved train services across the entire Western Metropolitan Region after initial campaigns at the Yarraville and Seddon stations indicated that the problem was not limited to those areas.

Colleen chaired the Maribyrnong Drug Strategy Committee for three years and is currently campaigning for improved train services across the entire Western Metropolitan Region after initial campaigns at the Yarraville and Seddon stations indicated that the problem was not limited to those areas.

This covers almost the entire article, apart from the two sentences of updates at the end. You copied someone else's work, word for word, and claimed that it was your own work, with the copied work "only used as a reference". This is pure and utter plagiarism. As for deleting the article, I speedy deleted it, as per policy, as a blatant violation of copyright. Why would I want to AfD it when Hartland is clearly notable, should someone write their own work about her? Rebecca 20:25, 22 December 2006 (UTC)

In light of the above, I went through the other articles you lay claim to having written, and discovered four more examples of blatant plagiarism - Clean Ocean Foundation, ERA School, Victoria, Sue Pennicuik, and approximately half of Marsannay-la-Côte. I strongly suggest you teach yourself about plagiarism before trying to write any more articles, as repeated posting of copyrighted material is grounds for blocking. Rebecca 20:50, 22 December 2006 (UTC)


 * Whew. This feels like a full on attack to me. I am of course happy to receive feedback, but not the way you provide it.  Also note that Marsannay-la-Côte includes content that was copyedited from the French Wikipedia site. I suggest another approach - how about removing the content you object to, rather than just deleting the articles, as per WP:Resolving disputes.  I don't understand why you refuse to answer my questions about how I can get this matter resolved and get second opinions.   Wikipedia operates on a consensus model, not on admins taking unilateral action without any consultation. I don't feel that further dialogue with you on this is will be productive.  Peter Campbell 23:08, 22 December 2006 (UTC)


 * You are welcome to read Wikipedia's page on dealing with copyright violations, Copyright violations. You're also welcome to take it to Requests for undeletion if you want, but don't expect any sympathy - this is about as clear as it comes. I did simply remove the content in the case of Marsannay-la-Côte, because it was only one section (at least that I could find), that was plagiarised (and thus didn't warrant the trouble to remove the copyrighted material from the article history), but in the case of Hartland, Pennecuik, the COF and the ERA School, the plagiarised material consisted of virtually all of the article, so it was deleted. I have no idea why you think I'm somehow personally targeting you - I was surprised to find an editor I respected engaging in blatant plagiarism, and I acted as any other admin would in the circumstances. Rebecca 01:06, 23 December 2006 (UTC)


 * I have reviewed Copyright violations and suggest you read it again yourself. Here are the policies/actions that I don't think you are adhering to:


 * "If you suspect a copyright violation, you should at least bring up the issue on that page's talk page. Others can then examine the situation and take action if needed. The most helpful piece of information you can provide is a URL or other reference to what you believe may be the source of the text." (Your first action was to delete an entire article without any discussion).


 * "Some cases will be false alarms. For example, if the contributor was in fact the author of the text that is published elsewhere under different terms, that does not affect their right to post it here under the GFDL. Also, sometimes you will find text elsewhere on the Web that was copied from Wikipedia. In both of these cases, it is a good idea to make a note in the talk page to discourage such false alarms in the future." (The Era School article was published with the consent and review of the source author).


 * "If some of the content of a page really is an infringement, then the infringing content should be removed, and a note to that effect should be made on the talk page, along with the original source. If the author's permission is obtained later, the text can be restored." (Your deletion of the articles makes this more difficult).


 * "If all of the content of a page is a suspected copyright infringement, then the page should be lised on Wikipedia:Copyright problems and the content of the page replaced by the standard notice which you can find there. If, after a week, the page still appears to be a copyright infringement, then it may be deleted following the procedures on the votes page." (This is the deletion process. There is no mention of pre-emptive deletion by adminstrators based solely on one person's judgement.)


 * "In extreme cases of contributors continuing to post copyrighted material after appropriate warnings, such users may be blocked from editing to protect the project." (You did not raise your concerns - you deleted an article, and are continuing to do so).


 * In summary, I have no problem with anyone querying content and copyright matters in a reasonable and considered manner. I think that pre-emptive deletion of articles is not appropriate.  But we clearly differ on this point. I have recreated the articles in question from scratch. It would be much easier to just edit out any contentious content. Peter Campbell 02:09, 23 December 2006 (UTC)


 * Please don't be ridiculous. You query copyright infringement where the situation is unclear for some reason. In each of these four cases, you had simply cut-and-pasted copied material from some other site without permission, which is very much banned here, not to mention illegal. You were clearly not the author, the material was clearly not from Wikipedia to begin with, and you made no claim of permission - I hardly think striking ERA School in those circumstances was unreasonable considering the history of prior plagiarism. I pointed you in the direction of the speedy deletion criteria above, of which blatant plagiarism is one. Moreover, I'm bemused as to why you're still trying to justify your word-for-word copying without permission - do you think getting second, third, or tenth opinions is going to magically make you the original author of this work? Just don't do it again - and then there will be no issue. Rebecca 02:38, 23 December 2006 (UTC)


 * Again, your opinion. And another accusation! I am not trying to justify anything. Please be civil. I don't think there is any point in continuing this discussion. Peter Campbell 02:47, 23 December 2006 (UTC)


 * But be forwarned, as what Rebecca said, even if you stick a link or two to the bottom of the article, if the article is just a copy and paste job from the links below, that is considered copyright infringment on Wikipedia. When pages are created from copyright violations, they are removed, either by article deletion or reverting. No, do not do this again; copyright violations are a offense that can result in blocking. User:Zscout370 (Return Fire) 03:01, 23 December 2006 (UTC)


 * See my response below. I am committed to adhering to (and sorting out) any copyright issues - as demonstrated by the recreated articles. My point is that due process is not being followed. I have now been been threatened twice with blocking, apparently for trying to point this out. Peter Campbell 03:18, 23 December 2006 (UTC)

Another administrator's view
Peter, I regretfully must concur with Rebecca. These articles are far too close to copyright infringement for comfort. I'll allow that you did not do that deliberately, but the articles cannot stay as such. I'm sorry. DS 02:59, 23 December 2006 (UTC)


 * Thanks for the additional feedback. I understand the copyright issue and will edit accordingly. However, the Criteria for speedy deletion is not being following fully either. Specifically,  this paramater is not being followed: "There is no non-infringing content in the page history worth saving" (clearly there was), and the page's creator is not being notified using  or a similar message. Following these steps would make things a lot clearer and could stop articles being trashed. Peter Campbell 03:10, 23 December 2006 (UTC)

Quiting Wikipedia
Hi Peter. Thanks for your email. No need to worry as I am quitting writing articles for Wikipedia, because I am constantly bullied by that horrible Adam Carr. But please you continue to write articles for Wikipedia and get up the good job. CheersScorpio80 05:57, 27 December 2006 (UTC)


 * Sorry to hear you are going. Some people appear to 'come on strong' when they post messages online, so try not to get upset if this happens (if you are going to stick around, and I hope you do). Peter Campbell 12:25, 27 December 2006 (UTC)

Hi Peter
Than's for the tip and the hello... I've been around since the bicycle pages were just little blurbes of text. Got busy with riding more than editing when they really started to take off... Though I'll stick to a style that I see I'm more one for getting the content structured and accurate rather than styled (consider that secondary...) Appreciate some of the help on the randonneuring pages as looks like the discussions turned stale a year ago...  And there is a lot of confusion about the more popular allure libre style and the rigid Audax (cycling) style...  I appreaciate the look over the shoulder as I fill these pages in but they will have a LONG way to go to get it right...  References and such "are" coming as I have the time to fill them in.... At least until someone else takes over (grin)... Prestonjb 18:16, 7 January 2007 (UTC)


 * Thanks for your feedback. References will hopefully sort out the inconsistincies and confusion with the article content for Audax (cycling) and Randonneuring. I think they are one and the same. I will put further comments and information on Talk:Audax (cycling)     Peter Campbell 22:12, 7 January 2007 (UTC)

Event Driven Architecture
Hi, please see the talk page at http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Talk:Event_Driven_Architecture for my comments. Antgel 02:49, 16 January 2007 (UTC)

Major Party Leader tables used in Vic and other elections in Aus
If you don't mind lodging your opinion at Talk:New South Wales legislative election, 2007 regarding a dispute over the removal of the MPL table, that would be appreciated. Thanks. Timeshift 17:05, 1 February 2007 (UTC)


 * I have added my opinion in favour of the status quo - and dealing with the table format issue at WikiProject Australian politics. Keep up the good work Peter Campbell 00:50, 3 February 2007 (UTC)

AFD 2006 Victorian election campaign
Articles for deletion/2006 Victorian election campaign. Grumpyyoungman01 04:01, 17 February 2007 (UTC)


 * Thanks for the notification. I don't think it is appropriate to delete the article as the it meets notability, NPOV and source criteria.  I could do with a tidy up though, and the last two weeks of the campaign needs to be added.  Peter Campbell 07:37, 17 February 2007 (UTC)


 * Hi Peter, you should make this comment on the deletion discussion page iteself. And thanks for notifying more users. Grumpyyoungman01 01:56, 18 February 2007 (UTC)

web 3.0 again
I see you are one of the folks pressing for this article's inclusion and survival. I'm interested in reviving it. I mistakenly directed one of my friends to wikipedia to get details of web 3.0 and was surprised and dissapointed to see it deleted and blocked. There are some strange dynameics at play when stuff like this happens. IMHOP, it's a valid, if somewhat contentious term, that enjoys relatively widespread use in the technical community and that means a specific set of things. By those standards it is notable and encyclopedic. Numskll 18:15, 19 February 2007 (UTC)


 * Yes, it is very strange that it ended up block. There was a group of people very hostile to its inclusion, some of whom are active editors on Web 2.0, others who seem to spend a lot of effort opposing content creation rather than allowing it.  I don't see the way forward on this one, given the degree of hostility expressed, unless another consensus process is started to reopen the article.  Peter Campbell 20:24, 19 February 2007 (UTC)
 * I see what you mean. I've been reading some of article's history here on Wikipedia. Frankly, I don't get the rancor (or their judgement that the term is purely meaningless or a Neologism in the violation of wiki policy sense, but whatever. I've contacted the involved admins and will look into what seems to be a re-review process for deleted and salted articles. Take care. Numskll 22:27, 19 February 2007 (UTC)
 * The last text of the article (which was unspeedily deleted prior to the block to the namespace) is preservedhere. There are now numerous articles that discuss Web 3.0 and some that provide definitions for it (e.g. Web 3.0), so I think it is worth getting the situation reviewed. Let me know if you need any assistance. Peter Campbell 23:44, 19 February 2007 (UTC)

Commons picture of the year 2006
I assert to have voted for picture 10 (dragonflies mating) Peter Campbell 11:34, 20 February 2007 (UTC)

Mountain Biking on Mount Tamalpais
Hello, An article that I created as a part of Wikiproject Cycling called Mountain Biking on Mount Tamalpais and linked to the Mount Tamalpais article, has been listed for deletion. If you are interested in the deletion discussion, please participate by adding your comments at Articles for deletion/Mountain Biking on Mount Tamalpais. Thank you, Bob in Las Vegas - uriel8   (talk)  09:59, 17 February 2007 (UTC)


 * Bob, I have contributed to the deletion discussion if favour of retaining the article, but I feel it does need to be rewritten to encylopaedic style with citations. Peter Campbell 22:06, 20 February 2007 (UTC)

Re: Web 3.0
Most of the deletions of this article were from before I was an admin, so I can't really help you at all except to recommend going to WP:DRV. --Core desat  14:03, 20 February 2007 (UTC)


 * OK, thanks for your getting back to me on this --Peter Campbell 22:09, 20 February 2007 (UTC)

Kitesurfing locations
I have nominated Category:Kitesurfing locations for deletion. Please see the link to the discussion from the top of the category page. -- Donald Albury 23:05, 17 January 2007 (UTC)


 * I think the deletion of the category has decreased the quality of information provided by Wikipedia with respect to kitesurfing. I don't agree with the outcome here. --Peter Campbell 22:04, 20 February 2007 (UTC)

Thanks for all the comments on my talk, as for the references for the locations how many are needed before the removal of the wikipedia notice about references/citations? - Regards, Richard Thompson 14:40, 6 March 2007 (UTC)


 * I am not too sure. We could pose this question on the article talk page to see what others think. Peter Campbell 20:39, 6 March 2007 (UTC)


 * Sounds good to me - Richard Thompson 10:32, 7 March 2007 (UTC)

World Heritage template
Hi! I created a template for World Heritage Sites: Infobox World Heritage Site. Since many of the protected areas are also recognized as World Heritage Sites, I thought that it will be appropriate to forward this template here, and hopefully, for the community to help improve the template. Someone mentioned that the footnotes are unclear (i.e. why the need to emphasize "official" there). It's because the official name (or the name as inscribed on the List) is different from what we usually know. And the Region also has footnote to tackle specifically the classification of those regions which may fall ambiguously between two continents (e.g. those in Russia, Turkey, Cyprus, etc.). In addition, I think that the info provided in the template is much like a jargon for most readers since it box is more of use for internal references in the World Heritage program. I hope that the community will help improve the template and make it more relevant to the readers of wikipedia in general. Thanks. Joey80 13:38, 20 March 2007 (UTC)

Re: Reversion templates
Hi. Thanks for your recent reversion to the vandalism on Kitesurfing. Is there a template you use for the vandalism warning you put on User_talk:Chrisx12345? Regards, Peter Campbell 11:19, 25 March 2007 (UTC)
 * Hi. I do use templates, warning templates, on user talk pages- a list of these can be found at WP:VANDALISM. Other messages for talk pages can be found at Template messages/User talk namespace. I hope that helped-  Cat tleG irl  '' talk 22:14, 25 March 2007 (UTC)
 * There are also a couple of automated systems like WP:TWINKLE that can go a long way to making the vandalism fight easier. Simple add the scripts to your monobook.js and refresh your cache, then when you see vandalism click the button, select the warning level and your done.  Regards,  Richard Thompson  (Talk! | Contribs) 08:30, 26 March 2007 (UTC)

Web 3.0 is back! Yes, WTG!
I noticed that the Web 3.0 article has been unblocked and currently being created anew.

It seems you have done quite a bit of leg work on this one and I'd like to commend you for your efforts.

I'm sure I'm but one of the many eagerly watching this article evolve after the recent salting debacle.

Your contributions to the topic (both new and old) and attention provided to the current article is very appreciated.

Thank you Peter! 74.97.109.162


 * Thanks, I think it is a good outcome after the frustrations of the early and rapid salting. There were several others working on the restoration too, such as Jumping cheese, Angelo, Numskll and the 20 odd editors who supported its restoration.  Peter Campbell 10:27, 7 March 2007 (UTC)


 * Good job on improving the article. I'm still kind of skeptical about having a Web 3.0 namespace, for reasons I've mentioned elsewhere, but you are doing an awesome job of making it a wikiworthy article and keeping it that way. Artw 21:19, 7 March 2007 (UTC)


 * BTW You may find recent edits on Web 2.0 and it's associated talk page of interest. Artw 23:24, 26 March 2007 (UTC)


 * Thanks. Yes I had noticed some of the activity there too. I just found this little gem: Don't be a dick which is interesting reading. Peter Campbell 23:31, 26 March 2007 (UTC)

Kitesurfing Userbox
Thank you very much for your efforts in creating the kitesurfing userbox. I have recently been working on a few SVG files, for article like Bow kite. The files came out looking not too bad. Because of this I have adapted your userbox and created  . Just thought I would let you know, as I didn't want to tread on anyone's toes. Richard Thompson (Talk! | Contribs) 10:17, 23 March 2007 (UTC)


 * Richard, I like the graphic in your version of the userbox - good work. I don't think having two similar is a problem. Regards, Peter Campbell 11:13, 25 March 2007 (UTC)

I have made a very small change to your userbox, by putting the Category in includeonly tags it doesnt show the userbox on the category page. Hope that is ok - Richard Thompson  (Talk! | Contribs) 13:32, 26 March 2007 (UTC)


 * No problems. Peter Campbell 22:57, 26 March 2007 (UTC)

Fifth Melbourne meetup
The fifth meetup of Melbourne Wikipedians is being planned as a breakfast meeting in the city with Jimbo Wales (at a venue to be arranged) on Friday, 27 April 2007.

Jimbo has proposed breakfast as the one real window of opportunity during his tightly scheduled stay in Melbourne. Tbe precise time has to be sorted out with Jimbo, but the arrangements for the equivalent Adelaide meetup a few days before may give a good idea.

Feel free to edit the relevant page in any way that might be helpful. I feel like a bit of an interloper, not having attended previous meetups. If there's anything you can do to help, I'll be grateful. Please think about whether you'll be able to make it, assuming the arrangements are similar to those Adelaide is adopting (i.e. a block of time with people being fairly free to arrive when it suits them). Some indication on the page of your possible participation would be really helpful. Metamagician3000 06:28, 29 March 2007 (UTC)

User box creator with template
I noticed you made a userbox here are two useful userbox creators you might be interested in
 * Userbox Creator with template - designed to easily generate Userboxes and has builtin template.
 * Userbox Creator with template has religious image database - designed to easily generate Religious Userboxes and has builtin template.

Java7837 20:16, 8 April 2007 (UTC)

Your work on Kitesurfing

 * Thanks Richard, much appreciated. Your contributions have been excellent as well. If you visit Australia (for kitesurfing or otherwise) be sure to look me up. Peter Campbell 08:34, 24 April 2007 (UTC)
 * Ha, you never know. My wife and I have friends in Sydney and Victoria so will be coming over one day, we were going to be over this year but have a kid on the way now!  Richard Thompson  (Talk! | Contribs) 08:43, 24 April 2007 (UTC)
 * Definately let me know if/when you visit so we can do some local kitesurfing. My kitesurfing blog has some local information and photos.  Things a bit slow at present as the Summer sea breezes have gone for now Peter Campbell 08:52, 24 April 2007 (UTC)
 * I love summer, the thermals are so much better than what we get all winter. I bought a 16meter c last year and have only been able to use it once, I am normally on an 8meter c and that is often too big, but don't want to get any smaller find they are too quick which isn't good for my level.  Need to invest in a nice bow I think, then the 35mph winds won't seem as bad. What do you normally ride? Oh, thanks for your details, didn't realise you were from Victoria.  Richard Thompson  (Talk! | Contribs) 09:10, 24 April 2007 (UTC)


 * I have 12m Crossbow - good for 17 to 25 knots, and a 7m Crossbow for when it is nuking - 25 to 35+ knots (only used this once). Apparently the Switchblade is a better allround kite due to less bar pressure. Peter Campbell 09:37, 24 April 2007 (UTC)


 * Yeah a friend who got me into kitesurfing has got a 9m Naish Shockwave but the bar pressure on that is quite high. I know someone else who had a shockwave and they just bought a cabrinha because of the bar pressure and says it is so much better as it doesn't have a pulley system.  Richard Thompson  (Talk! | Contribs) 12:37, 24 April 2007 (UTC)

Meetup 5
G'day - I remembered you wrote down the name of the book about the OED which was mentioned. You can find its article at The Professor and the Madman :) Enjoy Leon 10:52, 28 April 2007 (UTC)


 * Thanks Leon, I will check this out. I also have some photos of the meetup which I will put on the meetup page next week.  --Peter Campbell 04:05, 29 April 2007 (UTC)

Melbourne meetup 6
Hi. This is a reminder to people on the Melbourne meetup participation list that the next meetup has been arranged for 19 June. Could you indicate on the meetup page your likely attendence, or otherwise. Regards. - Cuddy Wifter 23:22, 7 June 2007 (UTC)

Cooktown panorama
Great panorama from Grassy Hill! Thanks so much, Peter! Cheers, John Hill 04:29, 9 July 2007 (UTC)


 * Cheers. I am quite happy with how the shots & merge came out. I have a few more photos from my recent visit that could go up too. The Cooktown article is good.  Keep up the good work John.  Peter Campbell 04:39, 9 July 2007 (UTC)

Yoga poll
Hi! There's some discussion on whether using "asana", "yogasana" or "yoga asana" as the article title. If you are acquainted with the subject, you are invited to drop your opinion at Talk:Yogasana. Davin7 10:33, 30 August 2007 (UTC)
 * Thanks for the invitation. However I am no expert on yoga so I will refrain from comment on this. Peter Campbell 07:25, 31 August 2007 (UTC)

Your panoramas
Hi there. I removed your panorama from the Melbourne article as it didn't really illustrate the city very well (you could barely make out anything other than the outer most suburbs, and even then there wasn't much to see), but also because the blending between the frames was, to be honest, quite awful. You might want to look into better software to do the blending. I use a commercial product called PTGui which is excellent, but there are free alternatives such as Hugin that do a much better job. All of your panoramas suffer the same blending problem to the point where they are quite aesthetically ugly, although the views are very nice, so it would be a shame not to do them justice. Perhaps you might consider re-processing them and uploading? Let me know if you need any advice or assistance if you do decide to re-upload them. Diliff  | (Talk)   (Contribs) 17:41, 19 September 2007 (UTC)


 * Thanks for your feedback. I disagree with your comments about whether the panoroma from the Dandenongs illustrates the city well, I think it does. This vantage point shows a view across the eastern suburbs (outer and inner) to downtown, and it shows the bay.  It would be better to check for consensus and/or other editors opinions on this rather than removing it without consultation.  I take your point about the blending issue and am looking into this, but I think your "ugly" reference is a bit over the top.  I have had some very positive feedback about other panoramas. Peter Campbell 22:35, 19 September 2007 (UTC)


 * Well, I still stand by what I said about it not really illustrating the city. It does indeed show the view to 'downtown' and the bay, but you can barely make out any detail whatsoever, as it is so hazy from the sunset light. Anything beyond perhaps 5kms is just a sea of speckled blue-grey. Sunset really isn't the right time to photograph the city from Mt Dandenong if you want an encyclopaedic image, although from my experience, it tends to be quite hazy most of the time.. I do think that poor stitching lines does make it aesthetically ugly - not the view, just the image that the panorama software generates. I'd be happy to re-stitch some of them for you if you were able to provide the original images. Of course, that would be a bit of an effort by email but there may be other options (hosting them on an FTP, etc). Up to you. Diliff  | (Talk)   (Contribs) 22:48, 19 September 2007 (UTC)


 * I understand your opinion, we can agree to differ on whether the image adds to the Melbourne article. Sunsets usually don't have a lot of detail. I think it is important to consult other contributors about this too. I am having a look at Hugin and will get back to you if I need help with the stitching.  Taking the shots at the same camera settings would remove the variability in exposure. I will experiment with this too.  Peter Campbell 23:00, 19 September 2007 (UTC)

SOMOS UNOS
Hello Peter

I'm trying to create and article about the SOMOS UNOS (www.somosunos.com) But was deleted, What I need to do? Can you help me with this? I'm a volunteer in the campaign

The text is this. SOMOS UNOS, a political campaign, and THE FAIRNESS ACT PAC, a political action committee, were founded in 2006 by lobbyist and political fundraiser, ANTHONY E. RAMOS, to address the domestic immigration problem through the U.S. Congress. The stated purpose of the campaign is to introduce and pass legislation that will provide for basic visa rights for undocumented aliens now living in the United States. A core premise is that the American people will continue to reject any law that provides for citizenship or 'amnesty' for undocumented aliens. Yet the American people would support a law that documents illegal aliens, allowing them to live in the United States legally. MR. RAMOS was the principal organizer of the campaign and serves as the campaign lobbyist and principal fundraiser.

www.somosunos.com.

I appreciate your help,

Thank you —Preceding unsigned comment added by Oubelha (talk • contribs) 16:20, 26 October 2007 (UTC)


 * Oubelha, you need to ensure that the article meets WP:Notability and WP:Source criteria. Typically, you need to provide external sources to validate the article content and its notabilty.  The external sources are referenced within the article using   markup tags and the   tag at the end of the article.  I hope this helps. Peter Campbell 10:30, 28 October 2007 (UTC)

Melbourne Meetup
Hello! The Melburnians are having another meet-up! Please consult this page if you are interested to participate in the discussion! Thanks! Phgao 03:29, 2 November 2007 (UTC)

Greenlivingpedia now at Wikipedia:GNU Free Documentation License resources WP:FDLR
I thought you might like to know that Greenlivingpedia is now on the above Wikipedia page. I have also posted a message at your Greenlivingpedia Userpage. Kathleen.wright5 13:50, 18 November 2007 (UTC)

When I told you about linking to Enviroweb I meant a link on the Navigation Bar on the left of the page. Kathleen.wright5 19:40, 18 November 2007 (UTC)


 * Thanks Kathleen, much appreciated. I will add the Enviroweb link to the GLP navbar. Peter Campbell 04:08, 21 November 2007 (UTC)

AfD nomination of 2004 Australian Greens candidates
An article that you have been involved in editing, 2004 Australian Greens candidates, has been listed for deletion. If you are interested in the deletion discussion, please participate by adding your comments at Articles for deletion/. Thank you. Frickeg (talk) 08:08, 6 December 2007 (UTC)
 * Thanks for the notification. I find it quite a surprise that the article is nominated for deletion as it has been a useful reference for me on several occasions, and the aggregated information is not available in this format elsewhere.  Peter Campbell 10:49, 6 December 2007 (UTC)


 * And so now it is deleted. This is a sad day for me for Wikipedia.  The information in this articles is NOT available elsewhere in Wikipedia, contrary to those who stated it was on the deletion discussion.  So this knowledge is now lost.  Why expend so much effort deleting articles that clearly have merit, rather than creating and refining more content?  You (Frickeg) probably even used the article to create that all candidates article too.  I find the deletionist cabal to be a most unpleasant and very negative gang. Peter Campbell 22:05, 14 December 2007 (UTC)
 * Wow, I only just saw this. I'm sorry if you disagreed with the decision, but to me all of that information could have been included on the other page. I certainly don't identify as a deletionist. Also, I used the SMH's election liftout (I kept it, a little sad I know) to make the candidates page. All of the information about the Greens candidates polling information can be found on the individual electorate pages. Frickeg (talk) 02:37, 30 March 2008 (UTC)