User talk:Dfadden

Your submission at Articles for creation

MKT Airfield, which you submitted to Articles for creation, has been created.
The article has been assessed as Start-Class, which is recorded on the article's talk page. You may like to take a look at the grading scheme to see how you can improve the article.

You are more than welcome to continue making quality contributions to Wikipedia. Note that because you are a logged-in user, you can create articles yourself, and don't have to post a request. However, you are more than welcome to continue submitting work to Articles for Creation.

Thank you for helping improve Wikipedia!

Wilbysuffolk Talk to me 16:05, 5 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]

DYK for Timber Creek, Northern Territory

Casliber (talk · contribs) 08:17, 18 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks...

...very much for the barnstar. If it wasn't for people like yourself crating articles then I would have nothing to do. Thanks again. CambridgeBayWeather (talk) 16:05, 25 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Inverell railway line

Hello Dfadden, I just wanted to let you know that I took a look at your recently created article Inverell railway line-- This image is real great. However, I noticed there are some holes that may need filling: the article contains grammatical errors. It would be great if you could also add references to the related article Mehi River.

It's always nice to see users contributing to make Wikipedia better!Amy Z (talk) 19:51, 8 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Request for Interview

Hi Dfadden,

I recently sent you a message about the Inverell railway line .

I am a researcher at Carnegie Mellon University examining how to make interaction in Wikipedia more effective. Our research has shown that certain types of feedback encourage Wikipedians to edit more while others seem to discourage them. Experienced and less experienced Wikipedians seem to have different reactions to very similar feedback. I am interested in interviewing you about your reaction to the message I sent you. A discussion with you will help us better understand the types of feedback that can encourage newcomers's participation to Wikipedia without turning off old-timers. I can talk with you via online chat, on Skype, over the phone, or just through Wikipedia messages if you are more comfortable with that. The interview should take take less than 60 minutes. You do need to be over 18 years old, and consent to be a part of the study in order to for me to interview you. This study has been approved by Carnegie Mellon's research ethics committee (the IRB), and the Wikipedia Research Committee.

Thank you for your time, and I look forward to hearing from you soon. We will be glad to send you a draft describing our research results right after the interview.

Amy Z (talk) 00:12, 16 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you. I am unsure of where I will be in the interviewing process in two weeks. But I will contact you again then to let you know. Thank you, Amy Z (talk) 18:06, 17 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]

WikiProject Australian Roads

Hi Dfadden,

I notice that you have created some Australian road articles. I have recently started up a new project for Australian roads, with the goal of improving Wikipedia's coverage of Australian roads – currently the vast majority of articles are stub or start class. The project pages are located at Wikipedia:WikiProject Australian Roads, if you want to take a moment to look around, and join up if you're interested. Thanks, Evad37 (talk) 13:31, 14 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks

Hi Dfadden, Thanks for update to the Canberra building list I started. If you know of any more new additions be good to put them on the list.CHCBOY (talk) 21:34, 15 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Just curious...

...how did you manage, in this diff, to delete the string "ort" in the middle of a word of an unrelated paragraph? :) Regards, No such user (talk) 13:31, 17 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for picking that up. I was editing on a smartphone and sometimes it does strange things. May have inadvertently tapped the screen before hitting backspace or something, honestly I'm not sure. I didn't notice the problem on the preview screen or I would have fixed it! Dfadden (talk) 01:01, 18 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Infobox Australian road code updates

This just to let you know, since you're listed as a member of Wikipedia:WikiProject Australian Roads but haven't commented at the discussion, that there is a proposal to upgrade the code for {{Infobox Australian road}} currently underway. The proposal includes a number of completely optional functionality enhancements and some very minor layout changes but otherwise, the code is 100% backward compatible with the existing version of the template. The code has been built from code recently and successfully incorporated into {{Infobox Australian place}}. If you'd like to join the discussion, even if it's just to ask a question, please click here. Thanks for your time. --AussieLegend (✉) 02:13, 21 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]

JETGO Edit

ICAO issued Jetgo's 3 letter designator "JGO" and the international telephony designator "JETGO" on the 25th July ICAO Doc 8585/169 refers — Preceding unsigned comment added by PaulBredereck (talk • contribs) 05:48, 28 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]

I saw your JETGO edit.

Although these comments might have been reported in local media at some time, they are very misleading… and frankly are nothing more than gossip. Just because I happen to have a family interest in the Dubbo area and I have a casual chat to the Dubbo Mayor… the rubbish about JETGO flying to Dubbo gets printed.

The fact is JETGO cannot operate regional air routes within NSW from Sydney due to the cap on regional slots, so any talk about JETGO flying to Dubbo is just nonsense.

Actually most of the current JETGO page on Wikipedia is crap:

The correct facts are:

“JETGO is a Brisbane based charter airline. JETGO is the only operator of 36 or 50 seat passenger jet aircraft in Australia. JETGO took delivery of its first aircraft in March 2012 and obtained its Air Operators Certificate from CASA in May 2012. JETGO (as of May 2013) had 3 x 36 seat Embraer ERJ-135LR jets (VH-JGB, VH-JTG, and VH-JZG) in service on mining and tourism contracts, as well as ad-hoc charter with a 50 seat Embraer ERJ-145LR scheduled to enter service in September 2013 (the 145 is currently undergoing C check, paint and other mods in the USA). In December 2012 JETGO submitted an application to CASA to upgrade its Air Operators Certificate to include Regular Public Transport.”

IATA code is: JG There is no ICAO code Callsign is: Jetgo (This was assigned by AirServices Australia and all domestic and international flights operating on a JG flight number, which is 99% of our flights, use the "Jetgo" callsign) Company was founded: 25 January 2010 (not 2011) The company’s incorporated name is: JETGO Australia Holdings Pty Ltd Headquarters are at Brisbane Airport, Brisbane, Australia

Key people are: Jason Ryder (CEO) Arron Mulder (COO) Paul Bredereck (MD Airlines) Andy Goodsall (Head of Flight Operations) Bruno Bucetti (Head of Maintenance)

PaulBredereck (talk) 23:24, 13 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Avalon Airport Page

DFadden thank you for your message and notes. The feedback is appreciated and I wondered if we could collaborate?

I am a novice Wiki user and whilst I have read the guidelines, I may not know as much as you.

The information on the Avalon Airport page is the most up to date and factual. Much of what was contained on the old page was out of date, untrue, or incorrect.

Granted my writing could be more succinct so your edits or suggestions in this area would be welcomed.

Please indicate where you think the information is promotional and I will rewrite.

Thanks

Amelie100 (talk) 23:22, 20 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Amelie100, I am more than happy to offer some advice to help you become a better editor, and you will find much more (and probably more qualified) advice by signing up to projects which you are interested in, for example WP:AVIATION where contributors regularly collaborate and discuss content to improve and refine.

As to the Avalon article, if you have a look at the page history you will be able to see the edits by User:Gavbadger, an experienced contributor. On the "view history" tab, there is a function which will allow you to see your edits side by side with revisions to compare the differences. As for an example of promotional content, under the subsection General Aviation, Gavbadger has removed text which read and offers competitve landing and parking rates to aircraft operators. This may be the case, however this statement is inherently biased and is not in the style of encyclopedic content. Many contributors would agree it reads like an advertisement because it is not a neutral point of view - the rates may be "competitive", but according to whom and by comparison to where? See WP:PEA for a clearer explanation of what I mean about bias and "puffery". I am struggling to get it right sometimes too - see Palmerston Shopping Centre, a short article I created which is bordering on reading like an ad. And make sure you add lots of in text citations from a variety of reliable sources - all information on Wikipedia must meet Wikipedia:Verifiability criteria or it will likely be removed by someone pretty quickly, and you may get a reputation as a vandal. Original research is a no-no, everything must be backed by published sources. The more the better!

A reasonable example of an airport article for a similar sized airport would be Newcastle Airport (New South Wales). I made a few major edits to this, including the History and Facilities sections, but it is a collaborative work by many contributors to refine and keep it up to date. An airport article which meets Good Article criteria is Chicago Midway International Airport.

And a few last tips, when editing do not change or remove any {{[[Template:{{{1}}}|{{{1}}}]]}} tags when editing unless you are sure you know what you are doing. These usually contain tables, summaries, notifications for other editors and are there for a reason. Remember that quantity of content does not necessarily improve quality of articles. Sometimes less can be more. Study the Manual of Style, read an article's talk page before you edit and PLEASE reference as many sources as you possibly can with in-text citations.

Thanks for taking the time to read this, and again for getting involved. I hope that like me, you will find editing Wikipedia to be a rewarding and educational hobby, although it can be very time consuming and frustrating at times with all the rules and criteria! Dfadden (talk) 11:30, 21 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Your article submission Weddell, Northern Territory

Hello Dfadden. It has been over six months since you last edited your article submission, entitled Weddell, Northern Territory.

The page will shortly be deleted. If you plan on editing the page to address the issues raised when it was declined and resubmit it, simply edit the submission and remove the {{db-afc}} or {{db-g13}} code. Please note that Articles for Creation is not for indefinite hosting of material deemed unsuitable for the encyclopedia mainspace.

If your submission has already been deleted by the time you get there, and you want to retrieve it, copy this code: {{subst:Refund/G13|Wikipedia talk:Articles for creation/Weddell, Northern Territory}}, paste it in the edit box at this link, click "Save", and an administrator will in most cases undelete the submission.

Thanks for your submission to Wikipedia, and happy editing. HasteurBot (talk) 23:00, 23 November 2013 (UTC)[reply]

It's now here. Pete aka --Shirt58 (talk) 12:16, 24 November 2013 (UTC)[reply]


A7

A7 is not applicable to inhabited places, which are invariably kept at AfD (perhaps sometimes merged) if they can be verified. See WP:NPLACE for more info, iffen ye liketh. WilyD 10:17, 28 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

2012 DH-84 Riama Crash

Just thought you may be interested that the final ATSB report on this incident (PDF: 2.64MB) was released on 19 December 2013. I have already updated 2012 DH-84 Riama crash and Caboolture Airfield with the relevent details. You may want to have look, the former update may be be a bit sparse, while the latter update may be overly wordy. Regards, 220 of Borg 09:09, 23 March 2014 (UTC).[reply]

November 2014

Hello, I'm BracketBot. I have automatically detected that your edit to JETGO Australia may have broken the syntax by modifying 1 "()"s and 1 "{}"s likely mistaking one for another. If you have, don't worry: just edit the page again to fix it. If I misunderstood what happened, or if you have any questions, you can leave a message on my operator's talk page.

List of unpaired brackets remaining on the page:
  • to-start-november-10/</ref> Services between Sydney and [[Gladstone, Queensland|Gladstone]] (replacing flights withdrawn by [[Qantas|Qantaslink]]} as well as Brisbane to [[Tamworth, New South Wales|Tamworth]] 10 times per week have also been

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, BracketBot (talk) 07:35, 7 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Murder of Kylie Maybury

Hi Would you be interested in expanding the Wikipedia article on Kylie Maybury? Murder of Kylie Maybury

it just involves editing the article and adding/correcting information. I think Americans have gotten to Kylie's article as it talks about Kylie "going to the grocery store" - Isn't that an Americanism not used in Australia? Paul Austin (talk) 13:30, 15 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Bathurst railway station

In your haste to reverse the Bathurst railway station, New South Wales which clearly was done without reviewing the changes made, the following observations:

1) per WP:CYCLE I am perfectly entitled to make bold edits.

2) plenty of articles are improved by condensing, a bigger article is not necessarily a better article

3) by reversing 10 active cites have been taken back to 6, 4 of which are dead and 2 no longer required given that a more appropriate Bathurst Bullet article has been created since the article was last edited.

4) much of the information appears to have been lifted word for word from [1] in breach of WP:COPYVIO Mo7838 (talk) 08:58, 8 January 2015 (UTC)[reply]

A page you started (Mungindi Airport) has been reviewed!

Thanks for creating Mungindi Airport, Dfadden!

Wikipedia editor Lstanley1979 just reviewed your page, and wrote this note for you:

Nice work.

To reply, leave a comment on Lstanley1979's talk page.

Learn more about page curation.

ArbCom elections are now open!

Hi,
You appear to be eligible to vote in the current Arbitration Committee election. The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to enact binding solutions for disputes between editors, primarily related to serious behavioural issues that the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the ability to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail. If you wish to participate, you are welcome to review the candidates' statements and submit your choices on the voting page. For the Election committee, MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 16:56, 24 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Canberra meetup invitation

Hi, you're invited to the Canberra meetup which will take place at King O'Malley's Irish Pub in Civic on 17 February 2016. Bidgee (talk) 01:29, 5 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Orphaned non-free image File:Kingsley's Chicken Logo.jpg

⚠
⚠

Thanks for uploading File:Kingsley's Chicken Logo.jpg. The image description page currently specifies that the image is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, the image is currently not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the image was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that images for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).

Note that any non-free images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described in the criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. --B-bot (talk) 02:57, 31 July 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Canberra meetup invitation (August 2016)

I'll be in Canberra from the 29-30 August, there is a planned meet-up at King O'Malley's (though I'm open to suggestions) from 6pm on the 29 August. Sorry for the short noticed, only had the trip confirmed this afternoon. Bidgee (talk) 11:11, 22 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]

New deal for page patrollers

Hi Dfadden,

In order to better control the quality of new pages, keep out the spam, and welcome the genuine newbies, the current system we introduced in 2011 is being updated and improved. The documentation and tutorials have also been revised and given a facelift. Most importantly a new user group New Page Reviewer has been created.

Under the new rule, you may find that you are temporarily unable to mark new pages as reviewed. However, this is nothing to worry about - most current experienced patrollers are being accorded the the new right without the need to apply, and if you have significant previous experience of patrolling new pages, we strongly encourage you to apply for the new right as soon as possible - we need all the help we can get, and we are now providing a dynamic, supportive environment for your work.

Find out more about this exiting new user right now at New Page Reviewers and be sure to read the new tutorial before applying. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 04:28, 13 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]

ArbCom Elections 2016: Voting now open!

Hello, Dfadden. Voting in the 2016 Arbitration Committee elections is open from Monday, 00:00, 21 November through Sunday, 23:59, 4 December to all unblocked users who have registered an account before Wednesday, 00:00, 28 October 2016 and have made at least 150 mainspace edits before Sunday, 00:00, 1 November 2016.

The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail.

If you wish to participate in the 2016 election, please review the candidates' statements and submit your choices on the voting page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 22:08, 21 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]

New Challenge for Oceania and Australia

Hi, Wikipedia:WikiProject Oceania/The 10,000 Challenge and Wikipedia:WikiProject Australia/The 5000 Challenge are up and running based on Wikipedia:The 10,000 Challenge which has currently produced over 2300 article improvements and creations. The Australia challenge would feed into the wider region one and potentially New Zealand could have a smaller challenge too. The main goal is content improvement, tackling stale old stubs and important content and improving sourcing/making more consistent but new articles are also welcome if sourced. I understand that this is a big goal for regular editors, especially being summertime where you are, but if you'd like to see large scale quality improvements happening for Oceania and Australia like The Africa Destubathon, which has produced over 1700 articles in 5 weeks, sign up on the page. The idea will be an ongoing national editathon/challenge for the region but fuelled by a series of contests to really get articles on every province and subject mass improved. The Africa contest scaled worldwide would naturally provide great benefits to Oceania countries, particularly Australia and attract new editors. I would like some support from existing editors here to get the Challenges off to a start with some articles to make doing a Destubathon worthwhile and potentially bring about hundreds of improvements in a few weeks through a contest! Cheers.♦ --MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 02:12, 24 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Nomination for deletion of Template:Jeremy Sims

Template:Jeremy Sims has been nominated for deletion. You are invited to comment on the discussion at the template's entry on the Templates for discussion page. Ten Pound Hammer • (What did I screw up now?) 00:33, 8 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Nomination for deletion of Template:Jeremy Sims

Template:Jeremy Sims has been nominated for deletion. You are invited to comment on the discussion at the template's entry on the Templates for discussion page. Ten Pound Hammer • (What did I screw up now?) 01:11, 30 September 2017 (UTC)[reply]

ArbCom 2017 election voter message

Hello, Dfadden. Voting in the 2017 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23.59 on Sunday, 10 December. All users who registered an account before Saturday, 28 October 2017, made at least 150 mainspace edits before Wednesday, 1 November 2017 and are not currently blocked are eligible to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once.

The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail.

If you wish to participate in the 2017 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 18:42, 3 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Canberra meetup

Hi, there will be a meetup in Canberra on the 20 January 2018 at 7pm, I hope you're able to make it but understand that this is very short notice. Bidgee (talk) 13:02, 15 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Orphaned non-free image File:Royal Far West logo.png

⚠
⚠

Thanks for uploading File:Royal Far West logo.png. The image description page currently specifies that the image is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, the image is currently not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the image was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that images for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).

Note that any non-free images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described in section F5 of the criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. --B-bot (talk) 17:29, 23 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]

The following templates have been nominated for deletion:

You are invited to comment on the discussion at the template's entry on the Templates for discussion page. – McVahl (talk) 04:20, 17 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]

The WikiEagle - January 2022

The WikiEagle
The WikiProject Aviation Newsletter
Volume I — Issue 1
Aviation Project • Project discussion • Members • Assessment • Outreach • The WikiEagle
Announcements
  • After over a decade of silence, the WikiProject Aviation newsletter is making a comeback under the name The WikiEagle. This first issue was sent to all active members of the project and its sub-projects. If you wish to continue receiving The WikiEagle, you can add your username to the mailing list. For now the newsletter only covers general project news and is run by only one editor. If you wish to help or to become a columnist, please let us know. If you have an idea which you believe would improve the newsletter, please share it; suggestions are welcome and encouraged.
  • On 16 December, an RfC was closed which determined theaerodrome.com to be an unreliable source. The website, which is cited over 1,500 articles, mainly on WWI aviation, as of the publishing of this issue.
  • Luft46.com has been added to the list of problematic sources after this discussion.
  • The Jim Lovell article was promoted to Featured Article status on 26 December after being nominated by Hawkeye7.
  • The Raymond Hesselyn article was promoted to Good Article status on 4 December after being nominated by Zawed.
  • The Supermarine Sea King article was promoted to Good Article status on 22 December after being nominated by Amitchell125.
  • The William Hodgson (RAF officer) article was promoted to Good Article status on 26 December after being nominated by Zawed.
Members

New Members

Number of active members: 386. Total number of members: 921.

Closed Discussions

Featured Article assessment

Good Article assessment

Deletion

Requested moves

Article Statistics
This data reflects values from DMY.
Aviation pages by quality
Quality
Total
FA 142
FL 15
A 56
GA 505
B 4,573
C 11,878
Start 15,082
Stub 18,754
List 2,539
Category 11,638
Disambig 653
File 2,713
Portal 629
Project 89
Redirect 1,518
Template 2,489
NA 66
Assessed 73,339
Unassessed 1
Total 73,340
WikiWork factors (?) ω = 251,965 Ω = 4.91
New/Ongoing Discussions

On The Main Page

Did you know...

Discuss & propose changes to The WikiEagle at The WikiEagle talk page. To opt in/out of receiving this news letter, add or remove your username from the mailing list.
Newsletter contributor: ZLEA

MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 16:35, 1 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

ArbCom 2022 Elections voter message

Hello! Voting in the 2022 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23:59 (UTC) on Monday, 12 December 2022. All eligible users are allowed to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once.

The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail.

If you wish to participate in the 2022 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. If you no longer wish to receive these messages, you may add {{NoACEMM}} to your user talk page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 01:08, 29 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

thanks

having been in aircraft using the queenie' strip - very useful to see the clarification - the spooky thing is hearing radio chatter with control locations that are over the horizon is so many ways - thanks JarrahTree 03:22, 4 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

@JarrahTree: And thank you for tracking down the historical news articles and for all your contributions and page creations! I'm learning to fly light planes out of a country airport and it can be a lot to keep track of all the radio calls with everything else going on! You have to listen very carefully to know where everyone is and where they are going to be in a few minutes time, especially when they might be 100kms away or right on top of you! Dfadden (talk) 07:03, 4 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]
May the force be with you - It was so long ago, I had disbelief that a control tower in Melbourne even knew where strahan and queenstown were, let alone the prevailing conditions. Due to the alignment of the queenstown runway and the prevailing winds, it was more than once that the cessna travelling from Hobart for Queenstown had to divert to Strahan (the current king Charles in his more adventurous young days had claimed it was the worst road he had ever been on - I suspect his driver didnt know how to drive into tasmanian curves accidentally made into roads) - I am ever grateful that the pilot who let me sit in the front seat made it possible to take the shots of the strahan landing strip... I suppose people with drones these days are able to gain similar - it was a different world way back then... JarrahTree 07:40, 4 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

A barnstar for you!

The Original Barnstar
Bruny Island Airport is a very good page. Well done! BoyTheKingCanDance (talk) 05:33, 26 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]
@BoyTheKingCanDance: Many thanks for the Barnstar! It's nice to see my efforts are recognised and glad I could contribute to the encyclopedia and community in a positive way! Dfadden (talk) 08:08, 26 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]


not always easy

to get off the shelf easy refs... but...trove has this -

Article -West Coast Sentinel (Streaky Bay, SA : 1912 - 1954) Friday 26 January 1934 - Page 3

... CEDUNA. (By "Vox e Deserto") It is somewhat difficult to write about a centre that is practically ... rainfall is 10 inches. Important Air Port. Ceduna is an important airport on the route between Adelaide...

You are right about 'not 1939'...

JarrahTree 02:21, 11 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

A barnstar for you!

The Original Barnstar
Kadina Airport is a very good page. Well done! BoyTheKingCanDance (talk) 06:24, 11 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

ArbCom 2023 Elections voter message

Hello! Voting in the 2023 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23:59 (UTC) on Monday, 11 December 2023. All eligible users are allowed to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once.

The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail.

If you wish to participate in the 2023 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. If you no longer wish to receive these messages, you may add {{NoACEMM}} to your user talk page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 00:41, 28 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Katherine, Northern Territory

Hello Dfadden, Good day. Regarding your edits above and all other edits of that similar, pls note that source from edu, gov, private company, social media, the subject websites are all considered not reliable. Some ppl would consider edu and gov info/sites/source would considered reliable ; however as per Wikipedia guidelines, reliable source needs to be have fact checking in place. The point is who is checking the info but the edu and gov themselves and that same with private companies info from their website. Thus, pls do not add the info back unless you have source from the newspapers or books. Thank you. Cassiopeia talk 09:19, 18 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Hello user:Cassiopeia. Can you provide a wikipedia policy that supports your claim that .edu and .gov websites are not reliable sources please? WP:RS does not say this at all. While it does indicate that secondary sources are preferred, it carries the caveat that Wikipedia:CONTEXTMATTERS. You do raise a valid point in regard to commercial entities that self publish content that is often biased and promotional. However, in the case of a source that confirms which television stations are licenced to transmit in an area, the Australian Communications and Media Authority are the organisation that issue those licenses! How is that not the most authoritative source available? Would you ignore advice from the DMV that your car is no longer registered because nobody has independently "fact checked" them?
Similarly, are you seriously suggesting the National Library of Australia, which holds the largest reference collection in the country, including a catalogue of every newspaper published in Australia for the last 200 years, needs to be fact checked on their claim a newspaper exists because they are publicly funded thus have a .gov domain?
If you are indeed suggesting any sources from .edu or .gov are not acceptable under any circumstances, then we have a problem as a large number of reliable, scholarly sources are hosted on .edu domains. I'd encourage you to review wikipedia's fifth pillar, as well as WP:IAR and reconsider your position. Dfadden (talk) 11:31, 18 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Hi Dfadden, Good everning. See WP:RS and WP:IS. Under RS, it states the sources need to be published, reputable and reliable. The point is that who fact check edu, gov, private companies info because they produce the content/article/info themselves. Even many smaller newspapers are not considered reliable in Wikipedia. We need source is reliable and independent for verification which is the core policy of Wikipedia. WP:RSP is a list of reliable source, I dont think you can find any edu, gov in there, and if you do if I miss them, let me know. If you use the TV channel as source for the TV channel, then the source is not independent. National Library of Australia can not be the source as it is a library; However, the newspaper can be the source in regardless where we obtain the newspapers. Have a good night and best. Cassiopeia talk 12:01, 18 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
I can see that you also many years of experience and vastly more edits than I do, so I respect your commitment to helping improve wikipedia! I've also been here for over 10 years now and never have I seen anyone suggest .gov or .edu sources are unacceptable. Respectfully, i think you are misguided and do not fully understand the policies you cite to support your position.
WP:RSP is not an exhaustive list of acceptable sources that can and can't be used on Wikipedia. It lists sources that have been reviewed by the community where concerns have been raised about their reputation for fact checking and accuracy. The absence of .edu or .gov sources on that list does not suggest they are unreliable - it could just as easily be interpreted as the opposite; They are not listed there because no concerns have been raised over their reliability.
Regarding WP:RS, I have already pointed out that context is important when applying this policy. Your claim that a TV station's own website cannot be used as a reference for itself, is contradictory to this policy as per WP:SELFSOURCE: Self-published or questionable sources may be used as sources of information about themselves, especially in articles about themselves, without the requirement that they be published experts in the field, so long as the following criteria are met:
  • The material is neither unduly self-serving nor an exceptional claim.
  • It does not involve claims about third parties (such as people, organizations, or other entities).
  • It does not involve claims about events not directly related to the subject.
  • There is no reasonable doubt as to its authenticity.
  • The Wikipedia article is not based primarily on such sources.
In the case of Media section of the Katherine article, all these criteria are met. Furthermore, none of the information supported by these citations is remotely controversial and is unlikely to be challenged as such per WP:Verifiability, which kind of renders it a moot point. The main body of the article is already supported by many independent, secondary sources.
Finally, WP:IS is neither a policy nor a guideline, it is an essay that offers advice and opinion only. It has not been vetted by the wikipedia community, thus there is no consensus that makes it binding in any way.
If you made it this far, thank you for taking the time to read my responses. I hope you will consider that rigid application of policy without appropriate regard to context can sometimes actually harm collaborative editing. I hope you have a good evening too! Dfadden (talk) 09:03, 19 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Hi, Dfadden, Verifiability is the core policy of Wikipedia. Source should be secondary and not primary. Primary source can be used only sparingly and not as amount of content what you added in all the Australia pages and the sources you added it not from the subject itself but from other not reliable sources. Edu, gov and private companies is primary source and if the info is about the subject itself then it is not only not reliable (who is checking the source? but themselves) but also not independent. You can go and ask any experienced editors about what say about private companies, edu and gov sources and check on any Wikipedia guidelines and state edu, gov sources which you wont find them. I have sent you the links regarding IS, RS and reliable source guidelines. It is not about rigidity but about adhere to Wikipedia guidelines. If big amount of content is from the primary source, then it would be be encyclopedia but they websites. I understand you want to share the info on the page, but do also remember this is Wikipedia and there are guidelines we need to adhere to. If you find this is not want you want, then you might want to create your own website or blog or go to any social media and you can write anything you want. Pls find info from the newspaper and books and that would be independent, and reliable source. Have a good day. Cassiopeia talk 10:02, 19 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
I am trying very hard to have a respectful discussion with you, but I am having difficulty understanding you. Perhaps English is not your native language?
You say Primary source can be used only sparingly and not as amount of content what you added in all the Australia pages - Which other pages are you talking about? I thought we were just discussing the page Katherine, Northern Territory?
It seems you are upset that I re-added content you reverted, but in doing so I provided acceptable sources. As per WP:PRIMARY A primary source may be used on Wikipedia only to make straightforward, descriptive statements of facts that can be verified by any educated person with access to the primary source but without further, specialized knowledge. For example, an article about a musician may cite discographies and track listings published by the record label, and an article about a novel may cite passages to describe the plot, but any interpretation needs a secondary source. I have not made any interpretation. I have only used these sources to verify that the statements made are factual.
If you want to challenge the reliablity of the sources, then I suggest you follow the guideline at WP:PSTS - Deciding whether primary, secondary, or tertiary sources are appropriate in any given instance is a matter of good editorial judgment and common sense, and should be discussed on article talk pages. Please start a discussion on the article's talk page and seek community consensus on the matter, rather than repeating yourself on my user talk page. Dfadden (talk) 11:14, 19 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Hi Dfadden, I am not upset as I have to explain to many editors on this topic for many years and I come here in good will just like you. English is not my mother tongue even thought I have a university degree from US. I know 4-5 languages and master of none since I have a Ireland syndrome, it does not help me on writing eloquently and I apology for that. The point is that reliable source needs to have fact check mechanism. Primary source is refer to the source from the subject itself. So if for example "Katherine, Northern Territory" page, if the info added is about a TV or Radio or etc. info and the source is from the TV or Radio source then that is not a primary source but secondary source. However, this kind of sources are not reliable as compared to those of from newspapers or books (secondary reliable and independent sources). You can add sparingly info from "Katherine, Northern Territory" web page (primary source) on "Katherine, Northern Territory" Wikipedia page and not enormous amount of info primary source if the info is directly about the subject and also because articles in Wikipedia need to be sourced with significant coverage from independent, reliable sources for verification which is the guidelines of have a page in Wikipedia. I hope this explain better than my previous messages. Stay safe and best. Cassiopeia talk 01:05, 20 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Proposed deletion of File:Kingsley's Chicken Logo.jpg

Notice

The file File:Kingsley's Chicken Logo.jpg has been proposed for deletion because of the following concern:

Uploaded for Kingsley's Chicken. No other use.

While all constructive contributions to Wikipedia are appreciated, pages may be deleted for any of several reasons.

You may prevent the proposed deletion by removing the {{proposed deletion/dated files}} notice, but please explain why in your edit summary or on the file's talk page.

Please consider addressing the issues raised. Removing {{proposed deletion/dated files}} will stop the proposed deletion process, but other deletion processes exist. In particular, the speedy deletion process can result in deletion without discussion, and files for discussion allows discussion to reach consensus for deletion. --Min☠︎rax«¦talk¦» 14:05, 8 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

File:Kingsley's Chicken Logo.jpg listed for discussion

[[

File:Information.svg|30px|left]] A file that you uploaded or altered, File:Kingsley's Chicken Logo.jpg, has been listed at Wikipedia:Files for discussion. Please see the discussion to see why it has been listed (you may have to search for the title of the image to find its entry). Feel free to add your opinion on the matter below the nomination. Thank you. --Min☠︎rax«¦talk¦» 11:53, 11 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Archived discussion

The link to the discussion (which is interesting in itself...) coud also be identified https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Australian_Wikipedians%27_notice_board/Archive_62#h-NSW_State_Heritage_Register-20240515130500 - now that it is archived, is another step away from that given in the edit summaries that you have made. JarrahTree 03:47, 31 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you for the updated link! I will use it in future edit summaries accordingly! Dfadden (talk) 04:28, 31 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
No need to thank, it might not fit into the edit summary... JarrahTree 04:45, 31 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

ArbCom 2024 Elections voter message

Hello! Voting in the 2024 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23:59 (UTC) on Monday, 2 December 2024. All eligible users are allowed to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once.

The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail.

If you wish to participate in the 2024 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. If you no longer wish to receive these messages, you may add {{NoACEMM}} to your user talk page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 00:30, 19 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]