User talk:Bidgee

No cookies from me

That whole concept sucks.

Your heart's in the right place; ignore Abd - just assume tl;dr for his screeds. If you let him drive you off, you let bullying win. Minkythecat (talk) 16:34, 6 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Section review on an Article

Retiring again? My god... just ignore the obvious problems I say :) It IS possible. Anyway, to reply to your earlier question, I don't really have an opinion either way I'm afraid. The content is sourced and factual, but whether or not it belongs in an encyclopedia entry I don't know at this stage. Sorry I can't be of more help in this matter. -- Longhair\^talk 07:12, 7 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Hmmm - I am sorry and disappointed to see you have been harrassed. I haven't been around for a couple of days and have only just got your message. I think the section is OK as it is supported by some reliable references. It may have been improved since you wrote to me. Best wishes --Matilda ^talk 07:41, 8 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

duplicate image

I deleted Image:QVMAG.JPG as it was a dup of Image:Queen Victoria Museum and Art Gallery.jpg, now on Commons. I assume this was your intention—if not yell out and I'll restore it. And don't be silly about retiring—don't let ppl push you around. Moondyne 01:02, 8 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Quentin Bryce

You're welcome. It could probably have languished in the backwaters of WP, but it is certainly not a good look for ACOTF (or our new GG). Regards, WWGB (talk) 15:28, 14 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Image deleted against consensus

Unless there is some sourced commentary on how this image is important, the image is not significant to the article and fails NFCC8. A logo over an aerial shot of a town does not help understand the article. The text explains it sufficiently. The arguments presented in the discussion did not substantiate the significance of the image. Wikipedia:Deletion Review is an available forum if you are certain that I have made a procedural mistake here. -Regards Nv8200p talk 00:04, 15 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Country Club Tasmania

Why has this been deleted? It's Australia's only Country Club Casino and one of the first casino's to be built in Australia. So it get's deleted? Makes no sense. Country Club Tasmania also recently won the Best Entertainment Venue in Australia at the 2008 Australian Hotel Association National Awards for Excellence. It includes a; 18 hole championship golf course, Driving range (the only one in Launceston), Health Centre, Tennis and squash Courts, trout fishing, Horse Riding and Wildlife. Not to mention it also hosts major events in Launceston. By the way it also won Tasmania's Best Entertainment Venue at the AHA Awards for Excellence, 2007. Beating Wrest Point Casino in Hobart. Aaroncrick (talk) 22:47, 19 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

G'day

		The Barnstar of National Merit
		I hereby award you this Barnstar (my first) in recognition of your efforts in contributing to Australia-themed articles. YSSYguy (talk) 01:05, 21 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]
		_{this WikiAward was given to Bidgee by YSSYguy (talk) on 01:05, 21 September 2008 (UTC)}[reply]

G'day Bidgee, our paths have been crossing for quite some time now, and I was rather dismayed to see your "retired" notice the other day. It's good to see that you have decided to not let a couple of deadsh1ts get to you. I have had a couple of issues with other editors - for example I got into an edit war over several articles at one stage, with a guy (I think in PNG) insistent that the television series "Mayday" should be "Air Crash Investigation" because that was the title when he watched it (have a look at my talk page, I have kept some amusing rants from him there) - and I have found that eventually you can see them off if you persist and your edits are sound. Take it easy. YSSYguy (talk) 01:05, 21 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Right Now (Van Halen song)

Hey Bidgee, I'm not sure you know this, but you were editing a reverted page. I have reverted back to the original as most of the info that you tagged with a {{fact}} tag was removed already... can you have a look at the revision that we were all working on and comment? Sorry for the inconvienence, but the anon is quite insistent on reverting the page, which gets in everyone's way and makes editing extremely difficult. - Tbsdy lives (talk) 08:07, 21 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks Bidgee :-) I appreciate your help and efforts... the latest revision is a lot more reasonable. However, if you have a moment, could you have a look and see if there are any problems? - Tbsdy lives (talk) 08:47, 21 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Take Care

hey, cant believe youre leaving because of them. Its okay, we've all been there, im heading to leave soon, too. Anyways, good luck. And thanks for all youre vandal fighting, you we're the best :P II MusLiM HyBRiD II 00:14, 24 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

you have

gmail Satu Suro 04:45, 24 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Re your msg on my talk page - Neither do I. "Of" means "belongs to". "In" merely means "located within". Protected areas clearly should be an "of" as they pertain to the state or territory in which they are located and usually are created under some piece of state/territory legislation. If it was an "in" but not an "of", then it wouldn't legally speaking *be* a protected area. (Hesperian's message on my talk page is also instructive.) Orderinchaos 05:36, 24 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

You know, I can't even find the CfD for the NT one. The only one I can find is a May one which failed. Certainly whichever proposal it was did not link or name the category. Orderinchaos 05:28, 24 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Trina

Interesting edit in terms of my history - I knew Trina well many years ago. BTW - very nice to see you still on board. Cheers--VS ^talk 08:08, 24 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Old pictures

Pictures taken before 1955 are public domain according to {{PD-Australia}}. The source for that view is in the template and we reviewed it pretty thoroughly. They should be fine. Good to hear from you again :-) Regards --Matilda ^talk 01:30, 25 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

PS - they are fine for Commons too - same template applies for permission. I am spending a fair bit of time at Simple English wikipedia now and have an interest in things being on Commons so they can be used there too :-) --Matilda ^talk 01:32, 25 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Remember to include the source of the image within the image description so one can verify the authenticity of the licence applied and you should be fine with uploading them. An example I've used from the NLA is Image:OldSouthGeelongGaol.jpg (original is here) which has happily existed on the Wikimedia servers since I uploaded it over 2 years ago. I note that image isn't yet at Commons so feel free to move it over. I don't login there anywhere near enough these days. -- Longhair\^talk 05:54, 25 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Category discussion

I replied to a comment you referenced at Wikipedia:Categories for discussion/Log/2008 September 22#Category:Intermodal transportation authorities. --NE2 07:11, 25 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

You

May talk about quitting every week - but hey that is a nice defuser for my embarassment - stay around bit longer, or at least retire only once every month or something :) thanks Satu Suro 11:06, 25 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Not worried

I wasn't worried but I just thought I would call it as I saw it :-) --Matilda ^talk 01:58, 26 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Tasmania Population

I recently found the population of 497,312 on the Mercury Website. http://www.news.com.au/mercury/story/0,22884,24399940-3462,00.html sportsdude (talk) 06:49, 26 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Dont believe it - most tasmanians live in Melbourne :| Satu Suro 12:23, 26 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Correct re Casuarina

It is indeed a suburb. I have a directory here (c) 2006 with a delineated suburb of Casuarina - it only seems to include the shopping centre, a school, a park, a Bunnings, a library and post office, and a small residential strip between Dripstone Road and Rowling Street. Orderinchaos 07:15, 29 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Because this threat by email also seems to extend to you ...

... I am notifying you of these details at my talk page.--VS ^talk 07:45, 29 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

You might want to look at this edit concerning you. Michellecrisp (talk) 06:47, 30 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Agreed, all this because of one article. Michellecrisp (talk) 06:56, 30 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Poor chap is pathetic - he called me a SPA and said my nomination for deletion the first time was spurious - retracted the first but not the second. He thought (and has persisted in thinking) the sources are OK despite all evidence to the contrary. He isn't prepared to back down and is digging himself in deeper and deeper. --Matilda ^talk 07:02, 30 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]
- That other incident doesn't give you a conflict of interest with some fishing isdustry website though ! My previous interaction with himw as over an article on the 5 o'clock wave at Wagga -close to home! Still take heart - he is nothing like our friend from Gundagai :-) All part of life's rich tapestry Keep smiling.--Matilda ^talk 07:30, 30 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Riverina Environmental Education Centre

I can't see an article on the Riverina Environmental Education Centre. I think I would start is as a subsection in the Riverina article - probably within the sub section on Agriculture. At first just a pragraph mention should do it. I think it is significant enough (because I know about it) but we need some sources to justify an article. --Matilda ^talk 07:30, 30 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Alternatively it seems apparently to be a facility of the NSW Department of Education and Training - so start soemthing at New South Wales Department of Education and Training and break out if needs be - it will make that article a bit unbalanced but ... --Matilda ^talk 07:34, 30 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Mary Oliver (violinist)

Did a little work on the article. Can you make suggestions for further improvement? Schmidt, ^{MICHAEL Q.} 07:38, 1 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Inre this diff: I am not trying to be a stinker, but isn't it up to the nom to have made a determination of notability before bringing it to AfD? I am not saying a nom must source an unsourced article, but under WP:DEL#REASON, an article that "can" be sourced as notable, whether it gets sourced or not, should not be nominated... and WP:ATD offers many solutions that an editor might follow if an article does not then qualify for deletion. For myself, when I come to an AfD, I try then do a diligent search before making a judgement for Keep, Delete, or Merge. And I have myself sourced articles because of AfD's even though I might not have added content. It's what we do to improve Wiki. I will grant however, that this diff rankled a bit because the editor making it was chastising those who had searched for notability and then voted keep accordingly. No guideline requires an editor to improve an article before "voting" in the discussion... only that they make a decision upon a diligent search, just as nothing requires an editor to have added material before adding sources. Schmidt, ^{MICHAEL Q.} 08:45, 2 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

John So

Source provided. If we were to provide a source for every minute detail, the page would be flooded. Doing some googling might help too, instead of deleting facts without verifying —Preceding unsigned comment added by Cafe Strussi (talk • contribs) 13:01, 1 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I typed in "John So receives a doctorate" into google and got it in my fifth hit - I don't know if you really did make an effort to search but I'll give you the benefit of the doubt. But even though such an article was strikingly obvious to find, the fact that you still missed it suggests there is big risk in deleting unsource information that is fact without doing a more detailed search. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Cafe Strussi (talk • contribs) 13:07, 1 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Why do you keep removing my changes

hi, i'm trying to add a link as a resource for firefighters in the firefighter article, its a relevent link. Do you have an issue with the destination link?Davidmrudolf (talk) 23:59, 1 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Olympic photos

Hi Bidgee. I have another nag for you.... select the most appropriate photos. Link in my sig YellowMonkey (choose Australia's next top model) 08:47, 2 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Mitsubishi Challenger

I think you were right to revert the removal of a citation from this page. I noticed the anon editor returned and removed it again, so I've restored the previous info. The issue was discussed on the article's talk page previously, and the argument in favour of keeping the info was never refuted. Thanks for the previous edits. --DeLarge (talk) 09:29, 3 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Award

		CVU Anti-Vandalism Award
		Thanks for reverting the vandalism on my user-talk page [1] --Flewis^(talk) 10:48, 4 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, Bidgee. You have new messages at Mvjs's talk page.
You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.

I don't understand this edit

This one. Marco and all Hurricane, Typhoons, and Tropical Storms are Tropical Cyclones. Tropical Cyclone is the overarching term that describes all of these phenomenon. Plasticup ^T/C 03:11, 8 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Exactly, a tropical storm is a tropical cyclone, the NHC doesn't need to state it broke a record in order to break a record. If Marco had TS force winds extending only 10 miles, it beat Tracy by 20 miles and thus making it the smallest TC on record. Emarsee ^{(Talk • Contribs)} 22:20, 8 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I don't think that anyone is disputing that Marco will beat Tracy if proven - but as good wikipedians we need to await an official confirmation before stating this to be a fact. Patience will prove this point and until then I have adjusted the comment at Marco and removed the suggested of fact arising at Tracy. I have also added comments at the talk pages. Best wishes. --VS ^talk 03:36, 9 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Who made you boss?

I will have you banned for making threats.

I have every right to improve Wikipedia.01001 (talk) 01:01, 10 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]