This is an archive of past discussions with User:Evad37. Do not edit the contents of this page. If you wish to start a new discussion or revive an old one, please do so on the current talk page.
Hello Evad37: Thanks for all of your contributions to improve the encyclopedia for Wikipedia's readers, and have a happy and enjoyable New Year! Cheers, satusuro14:36, 31 December 2013 (UTC)
Send New Year cheer by adding {{subst:Happy New Year 2014}} to user talk pages with a friendly message.
I don't actually see the need to effectively fork the infobox road small template, when that template is working well and provides for all the necessary details – I have used it in two list articles I created recently, Tourist Drives in Western Australia and Major roads in the Wheatbelt region of Western Australia (I tested the IRS template out while I was developing those articles in my sandbox). We can discuss further if you wish, but this is where I'm at, at the moment. - Evad37[talk]17:27, 2 January 2014 (UTC)
Addng the small parameter isn't forking infobox road small, and there is something to be said for the consistency of sticking to using just the one template (Infobox Australian road) in all Australian articles. Having seen how easy it was to incorporate the small option, I don't really see why it was necessary to fork infobox road to create a separate infobox road small. That said, if there is no continued desire to have a small option, I'll just post a thread at the infobox talk page should we decide to raise the matter again in the future. At least that way we won't have to start over again. --AussieLegend (✉) 00:41, 3 January 2014 (UTC)
Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Wellington Street, Perth, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Princess Margaret Hospital (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver). Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.
Please sign this post - perhaps with a manually inserted retrospective time. (Apparently SineBot is on holidays as well.) The discussion will probably be easier to follow with signatures (and valid dates/times). Mitch Ames (talk) 13:29, 5 January 2014 (UTC)
Thanks, I want to take it all the way to FA, but I might need to do a bit of research in the state library first. - Evad37[talk]13:47, 12 January 2014 (UTC)
thank you as always, also if you hadnt passed it recently the roads made by len beadell might be of interest. thanks again and cheers satusuro15:20, 12 January 2014 (UTC)
water in the wheatbelt, wanted, un wanted, saline and otherwise is a project in itself... many hours in the battye and sro i think - thank you for the link much appreciate the heads up satusuro03:37, 15 January 2014 (UTC)
The clackline thing is really as complicated as we want to make it - the rail junction there and the issues of spencer brook northam connection could lead to a whole range of spinoff additions to both the clackline, toodyay, spencers brook and northam articles - nothing straight forward at all, also at some stage in the 1940s and 1950s the interconnectedness is something worthy of a long coffee/tee/beer break sometime satusuro08:13, 19 January 2014 (UTC)
problem
[2] was created to alleviate the issue raised at awnb. however a POV laden uncited list also exists at [3] wwhich really breaks more rules than i can think of and even with WP:Bold still smells of deletable content. what do you think? satusuro14:20, 15 January 2014 (UTC)
haha - i think the natural course of events has already flown for those two now they have been under the spotlight for a bit. suspect the radar missed the long standing crap for no particular bad or good reason satusuro08:15, 19 January 2014 (UTC)
January 2014
Hello, I'm BracketBot. I have automatically detected that your edit to Anzac Avenue may have broken the syntax by modifying 2 "{}"s. 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.
I see you messaging users on WP:TAFI, it seems like your doing that manually. I would recommend WP:MMS, it's way easier, than manually cut and paste. And if you need help doing that you could always ask me. Cheers, ///EuroCarGT01:25, 20 January 2014 (UTC)
An admin is not needed for this, just a user with the massmesage userright, such as me. Feel free to ping me here when you have a message ready to go. Technical 13 (talk) 02:30, 20 January 2014 (UTC)
At the very bottom of every TAFI message I have received there is an extra </div> at the very bottom after the table that breaks the formatting of my talk page. If you could look into that and remove that extra div from the boilerplate template you used to create the message, i would greatly appreciate that. Thanks. Technical 13 (talk) 02:19, 20 January 2014 (UTC)
Hmmm... there was something in the MOS about bolding terms which are the subject of redirects, which is more what I was going for (though I haven't yet created the redirects, its on my mental to-do list). Though the bold text is perhaps not entirely necessary, given that the road names are used as level 2 headings, and the alternate names are usually similar, with only the use of dashes or order of words being different... but on the other hand normal articles have their titles bolded in the lead, even though there is a level 1 heading right above it. I actually got the formatting from WP:USRD/RCS examples and the like, so there is some precedence (or other articles to cleanup as the case may be) - Evad37[talk]15:05, 24 January 2014 (UTC)
I did think about redirects, and checked several of the terms to see if they were redirects (and didn't find any). Some of them obviously wouldn't be redirects because there are {{main}} articles. WP:R#PLA says "It will often be appropriate to bold the redirected term", so that it is clear to the reader why they are in an article that is different to the link they clicked. However in this case I don't believe the bold is necessary - the section heading is what they will be expecting. Mitch Ames (talk) 11:25, 25 January 2014 (UTC)
As long as they are created with enough info to demonstrate notability... the "danger" of (stub) articles on smaller streets is increased likelihood of PROD/AFD/complaints of WP:NOTEVERYTHING. If/when you or others create articles, let me know here or post to the WT:WA new articles noticeboard, and I'll come along and tidy things up, but I've still got the major roads in the other regions to work on (Gascoyne is up next) - Evad37[talk]02:42, 28 January 2014 (UTC)
Disambiguation link notification for February 1
Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Seventh Avenue Bridge, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Third Avenue Bridge (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver). Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.
feel free to re-arrange the added refs, it just seems right to show the old girl has had more facelifts than... whoever... satusuro14:37, 1 February 2014 (UTC)
@Mitch Ames: Thanks for your copyediting and comments, but you should probably move them to the FAC page (the GA review was already closed as a pass). I'll take a more detailed look and respond tomorrow. Cheers, Evad37[talk]16:16, 1 February 2014 (UTC)
tweak to duplinks
Thanks for making that change to duplinks (highlighting the first link of a pair in green), that will help a lot. I'm not a coder, but I can handle regex, and there's some interest in a script that will highlight everything within an article from a list of regex expressions in the same way as duplinks (and your way, in green and red, would be even better). Can you show me how to make that change to your script? - Dank (push to talk) 14:57, 2 February 2014 (UTC)
Hmmm... this sounds a bit complicated. duplinks and my version, duplinks-alt, do the highlighting by adding a custom CSS class to the existing <a> ... </a> html tags which define links. To do a similar thing for some words within a paragraph, <span> ... </span> tags would need to be added around those words, so the highlighting could apply just to those words. User:Evad37/showhardspaces.js may be a better starting off point, as it is a simpler script that finds hard spaces ( ) and replaces them with a visible marker, using the <span> method. - Evad37[talk]15:43, 2 February 2014 (UTC)
Or perhaps ask at WP:VPT, where you'll probably find more advanced coders – I'm more of an intermediate-level coder, and I don't actually have any regex experience. - Evad37[talk]15:48, 2 February 2014 (UTC)
Hello, I'm BracketBot. I have automatically detected that your edit to Life sciences may have broken the syntax by modifying 1 "()"s. 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:
School Classroom through Arizona State University's BioREACH PROGRAM', accessed on October 16, 2012)]. Public.asu.edu. Retrieved on 2013-03-20.</ref> The term itself is largely believed to have been
I don't think it is broken – you do indeed seem to be opted out. The last TAFI message was for week 8, sent to you at 16:22, 17 February 2014 [7]. You opted out about 1 hour later [8], and have not been "spammed" since then – you did not get a week 9 message, like the one directly above this section. If you no longer want to see the old TAFI messages, feel free to archive or delete them. - Evad37[talk]00:51, 28 February 2014 (UTC)
I'd say its sometime between 1970, when construction of the interchange began, and late 1972, when most of the work was completed. - Evad37[talk]00:51, 4 March 2014 (UTC)
looking at it som emore its is late '59 as th narrows is still being built this wouldnt actually be the mitchell but rather just the roads that ran off the narrows to link it into the city. Gnangarra05:24, 4 March 2014 (UTC)
Just a quick note to congratulate you on the promotion of Great Eastern Highway to FA status recently. If you would like to see this (or any other FA) appear as "Today's featured article" soon, please nominate it at the requests page; if you'd like to see an FA on a particular date in the next year or so, please add it to the "pending" list. In the absence of a request, the article may end up being picked at any time (although with 1,317 articles in Category:Featured articles that have not appeared on the main page at present, there's no telling how long – or short! – the wait might be). If you'd got any TFA-related questions or problems, please let me know. BencherliteTalk10:02, 12 March 2014 (UTC)
Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Great Northern Highway, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Fitzroy River (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver). Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.
Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited List of highways in Tasmania, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Goodwood Road (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver). Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.
Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Bruce Highway, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Flinders Highway (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver). Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.
Hello, I'm BracketBot. I have automatically detected that your edit to South Gippsland Highway may have broken the syntax by modifying 4 "[]"s and 4 "{}"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(Click show ⇨)
from highway)</small><br />'''[[Princes Highway, Melbourne|Lonsdale Street (Princes Highway)]]''' [[Image:Australian Alternate Route 1}} ''to [[Dandenong, Victoria|Dandenong]] and [[Melbourne, Victoria|Melbourne]]''<br />'''[[Princes
and [[Melbourne, Victoria|Melbourne]]''<br />'''[[Princes Highway, Melbourne|Princes Highway]]''' [[Image:Australian Alternate Route 1}} ''to [[Berwick, Victoria|Berwick]] and [[Warragul, Victoria|Warragul]]''
Why would my signature not include my user page? I will try and fix that right now. Thanks.--Simplysavvy 06:55, 1 May 2014 (UTC) — Preceding unsigned comment added by Simplysavvy (talk • contribs)
Should an article about a road be in the same-named category? I can see the sense the logic of both of:
Yes
No, but the category has {{cat main}}. (Although this only links from the cat to the article, but there is no obvious link from the article to the cat. However it does remove the problem whereby an article about a road is indirectly in a category "Buildings and structures on roads in Western Australia".)
Presumably we should be consistent about it, but recent changes are not consistent, eg
[9] and [10] takes the article out of the category and adds {{cat main}}
I started removing the roads themselves after adding the {{cat main}}s to categories, but the I wasn't so sure about the removal. Any, part of the problem is that these cats aren't actually about roads themselves, rather thare are about the buildings and structures built on (alongside?) the road. If you look through the content of the cats, the very vast majority of the pages do not below under the Roads in Western Australia category tree, but do belong under the Category:Buildings and structures in Western Australia category tree. Having thought about it some more, the XYZ Road categories should probably be renamed (and turned into category redirects to) Buildings on XYZ Road (or similar) – which logically would mean that the roads themselves should not be in the categories. Also, I just realised the problem of road articles not being in the category for buildings could be solved by including said category in the see also section of the article. Does that make sense to you?
One obvious problem is whether (as suggested by WP:EPONYMOUS) the article itself is a member of the eponymous category. Is a road "a building, structure or other feature on" itself? For the purpose of this exercise it might be better to answer "yes", in which case we should change {{cathead on road}} to say "This category is for {{{1}}}, and buildings, structures, and other features on it." (I can't think of any possible article that might be considered a member of category:Something Street that was not a building or structure or Something Street itself.)
One obvious problem is whether (as suggested by WP:EPONYMOUS) the article itself is a member of the eponymous category. Looking through the guideline again, it is quite clear that if they are eponymous categories (as the current names suggest), then the article which each category covers should be in that category. If not, then categories should be renamed/redirected so its clear they are not eponymous categories, eg XYZ Road → Buildings and structures on XYZ road. However, a pragmatic benefit of having the roads in the cats is better navigation, so readers can find the cats from the road articles.
Is a road "a building, structure or other feature on" itself? I would say actually no, its not, but leave the articles in the cats per WP:EPONYMOUS – unless the cats are renamed per the previous point above, in which remove them from the cats. But WP:SUBCAT does allow for "possibly a few exceptions", so does the {{cathead on road}} hatnote actually need to be changed, in anycase?
By extension, Category:Buildings and structures on roads in Western Australia should probably be renamed (for example) Category:Roads in Western Australia and buildings and structures thereon. If a road is a structure (see below), then it doesn't matter that sub-sub-categories of Buildings and structures in Western Australia contains roads, which would seem to go against your renaming argument. (In contrast, a building is very definitely not a road, which is why these categories can't be subcategories of Roads in Western Australia)
this category should not be a container category... Perhaps it would be better to keep it as a container category, and have "in region" subcategories (ie, Category:Buildings and structures on roads in the Wheatbelt region of Western Australia) for that purpose? But on the other hand, that might be peeking into a can of worms, given how many different definitions of regions there are.
Is a road a "structure", for the purposes of "Category:Buildings and structures in Western Australia? Well, we do have the category tree Buildings and structures in Australia → Infrastructure in Australia → Transport infrastructure in Australia → Roads in Australia. Nonbuilding structure lists road as a type, and infrastructure "is basic physical and organizational structures needed for the operation of a society or enterprise". So that's three points in favour of a road being a type of structure.
Category:Something Street is defined by {{cathead on road}} to be for "[structures etc] on Something Street", but the category contains Something Street, which is not "on" itself. I agree that (regardless of exactly what we call the category) having Something Street in the same category as structures etc on Something Street is a good idea. The category name Something Street is sufficiently general that there's no contradiction in it including the street and structures thereon, so there's no need to change these category names. The category definition - {{cathead on road}} - however does differ from the contents. Not by much, I know, but we might might as well be accurate if we can.
My proposed change is that {{cathead on road}} say "This category is for {{{1}}}, and buildings, structures, and other features on it.", so that it accurately describes the category. (There's no need to change the names of the many categories:Something Street.)
The existing Category:Buildings and structures on roads in Western Australia contains Something Street (indirectly, via Category:Something Street). But Something Street is a road; it is not on a road. (I agree that a road is a structure, but that doesn't matter here.)
Possible solutions:
Rename this one category to "Roads in Western Australia and buildings and structures thereon. Literally accurate, considering its contents (direct and indirect), and still fits under Category:Buildings and structures in Western Australia. The disadvantage is that this name places more emphasis on the roads rather than the structures.
Leave the category name as it is, but add an explanatory note that subcategories contain the roads themselves, as well as structures etc on the roads. Simple, keeps the focus on the buildings and structures rather than the roads, and probably sufficient.
I'm struggling to see how deleting the category would improve navigation. "Do we really need a category that includes all the structures that are on roads but excludes those that are not on roads" – that's not really the purpose of the cat. It was actually intended to be more of a metacategory, breaking down buildings and structures by the road they are on, rather than by type (airport, hospital, etc) or location (city/suburb/town/locality/region).
The "in Australia" cats could be parents for the "in Western Australia" cats, but do not negate the value of the state-specific cats. I don't see any reason why an "in Australia" cat for buildings by road would not have an "in Western Australia" subcat (and similar for other states/territories).
Now, the by location (city/suburb/town/locality/region) cats or proposed cats can't replace the "in Western Australia" cat for roads in more than one location. Consider, for example, a "Great Northern Highway" category, with structures all the way from Perth to Wyndham. Anyone browsing the subcategories of Category:Buildings and structures in Perth, Western Australia should not be seeing articles on historic buildings in Wyndham, and vice-versa. So they can not completely replace/justify deleting the cat, but could be created for specific locations, eg for Fremantle.
So I think there is still a place for the "in WA" category. More replies tomorrow re your other proposals tomorrow. - Evad37[talk]15:21, 14 May 2014 (UTC)
Note: I changed the bullets in your message to numbers to make replying easier
Yeah, the proposed change to {{cathead on road}} seems reasonable.
Adding an explanatory note seems like the better solution. The focus should be on the buildings/structures, which make up the vast majority of pages in these categories, rather than the roads.
The main problem with putting pages directly within the category is that the inclusion criteria is then too broad: Almost every building/structure can be described as being on a road, if the road is not specified. How is that useful? - Evad37[talk]06:05, 15 May 2014 (UTC)
(4) "... a category that includes all the structures that are on roads but excludes those that are not on roads" [is] not really the purpose of the cat. It was actually intended to be more of a metacategory, breaking down buildings and structures by the road they are on... That would be consistent with changing/renaming Category:Buildings and structures on roads in Western Australia to Category:Buildings and structures in Western Australia by road (a subcat of "... in Australia by road") - "by road" explicitly indicates that we want to list by specific road, whereas "on roads" does not.
(3) If we change the category to "by road" instead of "on roads", the problem of "too broad a category" goes away, because it is a metacategory rather than a category. As suggested by WP:DIFFUSE, we might want to consider adding {{catdiffuse}}, which allows for direct inclusion of articles not yet categorized by road but suggests that they should be so categorized. Mitch Ames (talk) 08:40, 17 May 2014 (UTC)
One fundamental point that hasn't yet been considered is whether the Something Street categories should actually exist in the first place. In particular, is the street a building is on a WP:DEFINING characteristic? And is categorising buildings by roads an example of Intersection by location (overcategorisation)? - Evad37[talk]06:05, 15 May 2014 (UTC)
The street is part of a building's address/location, which I believe is a defining characteristic. One could reasonably "define" a building by its street address of "123 Something St". In most cases it would be reasonable for the lead sentence to say something like "Xxxxx is a building on Something St in Perth". It's not so obvious whether this applies to other structures, which typically would not have a street number or "street address" in the usual sense. Mitch Ames (talk) 08:40, 17 May 2014 (UTC)
Well, when you put it like that... but it would be good to see what other editors think, as you suggest below - Evad37[talk]01:48, 18 May 2014 (UTC)
Input from other editors would be helpful. There may be merit in raising this issue somewhere with more visibility and/or more interested watchers, such as WT:AURD. (I have no objections to the entire section being moved, to keep everything in one place.) Mitch Ames (talk) 08:41, 17 May 2014 (UTC)
It seems we are close to agreement on most of the points, so perhaps rather than copying/moving the whole conversation, it would be better to come up with a clearer and more concise description of the problems and proposed solutions before we go off to another venue. I would suggest WT:WA, as this involve buildings and structures other than roads, and all of these eponymous road categories are within WA (except Category:Liverpool Street, Hobart, but that was created by SatuSuro)). WT:WA would also have more watchers/active participants than WT:AURD - Evad37[talk]01:48, 18 May 2014 (UTC)
Hello, I noticed a while back you rated Kingston Bypass a C-Class. While I am more than happy with this evaluation, I am a little confused how said article can be rated C, while the Brighton Bypass is rated as a starter. Would you mind comparing the two articles and re-evaluating or explaining the reasons why the Brighton Bypass is not yet suitable to be C Class?
Hello Evad37. I am just letting you know that I declined the speedy deletion of Koo Wee Rup Bypass, a page you tagged for speedy deletion, because of the following concern: Redirect would do the job. I'll sort that. . Thank you. GedUK12:36, 8 May 2014 (UTC)
Don't know... perhaps no Tasmanian roads were showing the system links before I made them show by default for freeways, highways, etc. - Evad37[talk]02:37, 9 May 2014 (UTC)
In relation to the issues raised in relation to the Cooper Developmental Road and the Bullo Developmental Road, what sort of technology is available to try to produce the maps etc. For example, the Qld Globe KML file is available under CC-BY licensing at no cost and presumably contains every major road under the control of the Queensland Govt, but I'm not sure what tools are available to work with it to create maps and extract portions of it as KML files(I normally just use it within Google Earth to view the information). Apart from roads, I would be quite interested to produce maps of other things like local government boundaries and localities within LGA boundaries etc, so wouldn't mind learning how to do more along these lines. Thanks Kerry (talk) 21:44, 20 May 2014 (UTC)
QGIS is a free vector-editing program I use to create my maps. It can import KML files and other vector data such as SHP files – Geoscience Australia has a number of these files available under CC-BY at [12]. The most useful ones I've found are under the Topographic Mapping section. OpenStreetMap.org is also available under a similar copy-left licence, and can be exported (for a smaller area) or downloaded (for larger areas). There's more info on how to create map images and other ways to create KML files at Wikipedia:WikiProject U.S. Roads/Maps task force/Tutorial. If you want to create map images for roads, WP:AURD has some mapping standards, so that we can end up with similar maps from different editors. Anyway, hope this helps, and happy mapping! - Evad37[talk]01:41, 21 May 2014 (UTC)
Thanks again. I have downloaded some of the software but have yet to experiment with it (too many other things to do lately!). Kerry (talk) 06:26, 27 May 2014 (UTC)
Disambiguation link notification for May 21
Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Avro Anson Memorial, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Sunday Mail (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver). Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.
This is a note to let the main editors of Great Eastern Highway know that the article will be appearing as today's featured article on June 14 16, 2014. If this article needs any attention or maintenance, it would be preferable if that could be done before its appearance on the Main Page. If you prefer that the article appear as TFA on a different date, or not at present, please ask Bencherlite (talk·contribs). You can view the TFA blurb at Wikipedia:Today's featured article/June 16, 2014. If it needs tweaking, or if it needs rewording to match improvements to the article between now and its main page appearance, please edit it, following the instructions at Wikipedia:Today's featured article/requests/instructions. The blurb as it stands now is below:
Great Eastern Highway is a 590-kilometre-long (370 mi) road linking the Western Australian capital of Perth with the city of Kalgoorlie. A key route for vehicles accessing the eastern Wheatbelt and the Goldfields, it is the western portion of the main road link between Perth and the eastern states of Australia. The highway forms the majority of National Highway 94, with various segments included in other road routes. The highway was created in the 1930s from an existing system of roads linking Perth with the Goldfields, though the name was coined to describe a different route from Perth to Guildford (modern-day Guildford Road). The Belmont section was constructed in 1867 using convict labour, with the road base made from sections of tree trunks. Over the years the road has been upgraded, with the whole highway sealed by 1953, segments reconstructed and widened, dual carriageways created in Perth and Kalgoorlie, and grade separated interchanges built at major intersections. A number of bypasses have been constructed, including Great Eastern Highway Bypass in Perth, and a future route to replace Great Eastern Highway's current ascent of the Darling Scarp has been identified. (Full article...)
You (and your talk-page stalkers) may also be interested to hear that there have been some changes at the TFA requests page recently. Nominators no longer need to calculate how many "points" an article has, the instructions have been simplified, and there's a new nomination system using templates based on those used for DYK suggestions. Please consider nominating another article, or commenting on an existing nomination, and leaving some feedback on your experience. Thank you. UcuchaBot (talk) 23:01, 24 May 2014 (UTC)
@Adikhajuria: We don't actually have a TAFI email address, so I've changed it to "n/a", per Cricket WikiProject and WikiProject Architecture. - Evad37[talk]01:16, 28 May 2014 (UTC)
Main Page appearance: Great Eastern Highway (2)
Just to say that the appearance has been pushed back a couple of days to make room for a D-Day related article on 14th June in this 70th anniversary year. Hope this is OK. Thanks, BencherliteTalk00:04, 30 May 2014 (UTC)
Just a quick note to congratulate you on the promotion of Clackline Bridge to FA status recently. If you would like to see this (or any other FA) appear as "Today's featured article" soon (either on a particular date or on any available date), please nominate it at the requests page. If you'd like to see an FA appear on a particular date in the next year or so, please add it to the "pending" list. In the absence of a request, the article may end up being picked at any time (although with about 1,307 articles waiting their turn at present, there's no telling how long – or short! – the wait might be). If you'd got any TFA-related questions or problems, please let me know. BencherliteTalk18:02, 1 June 2014 (UTC)
Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Bruxner Highway, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Pacific Highway (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver). Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.
Thank you so much, as always - I am also open to any further ideas re the wheatbelt project tag being as is and placed out in the teeritory - any thoughts? satusuro09:58, 3 June 2014 (UTC)
The wheatbelt banner is probably almost ready to go, except that it isn't using any tracking categories at all. Should it put everything that it tags into a "Wheatbelt Project article" category? - Evad37[talk]10:19, 3 June 2014 (UTC)
As long as there are no logistic issues - no contraventions or ramifications for any other category trees or their structure - it sounds great if it can work as a sort of 'independent' grouping that simply identifies the subject as situated within the scope of the wheatbelt... satusuro10:35, 3 June 2014 (UTC)
There was a typo in Template:WikiProject Australia, now fixed [13]. The categories should eventually fill up (maybe over a few weeks), or WP:NULL editing a talk page will immediately list that page in the category. (I'll move the Wheatbelt banner shortly.) - Evad37[talk]09:58, 4 June 2014 (UTC)
Have created a draft article - List of lanes and arcades in Perth. Wanted some feedback as to what categories I should include e.g. Category: Roads in Western Australia ? Given that it is not 'a' road but a list of lanes & roads. Also would like to use the City of Perth's map of the Laneways but its potentially subject to copyright, since its your area of expertise how do we go about preparing a non copyright version. Dan arndt (talk) 04:07, 9 June 2014 (UTC)
Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Tasman Highway, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page River Derwent (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver). Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.
Thanks for your comment at AWNB - it is close to head banging on the subject, when others insist the whole thing sounds too/so complicated. Your answer was good - thanks for that and cheers satusuro10:52, 21 June 2014 (UTC)
Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Cobb Highway, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Victoria (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver). Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.
Looks like the changes that mw:Typography refresh made to font size and line spacing (which I override with custom CSS) is pushing that last line down beyond the picture box, so that line is centred with respect to the whole purple box, rather than with respect to the left edge of the purble box and the left edge of the picture box. If I make the image a bit bigger, it should fix it. - Evad37[talk]03:02, 8 July 2014 (UTC)
Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Albany Highway, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Great Southern Railway. Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.
In the old coast road art - not sure how to link to the article about Leigh Edmonds - hope you can do - not sure how to tweak trove/cite bracket thingoes for a link to the article about him. satusuro03:16, 2 August 2014 (UTC)
Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Old Coast Road, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Bunbury. Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.
Hi there, I'm pleased to inform you that I've begun reviewing the article Great Northern Highway you nominated for GA-status according to the criteria. This process may take up to 7 days. Feel free to contact me with any questions or comments you might have during this period. Message delivered by Legobot, on behalf of Casliber -- Casliber (talk) 01:20, 10 August 2014 (UTC)
Greetings Evad37 once again! I've assessed former TAFI article Stir frying using the new & updated template. Some things to note are there's no B6 field so that should be removed and lastly the "Post-improvement Class checklist" still lists the old class rather than the latest revised one. One recommendation is to put the "This article was improved from Stub-Class to C-Class" thing with the arrow towards the centre of the template. Best, ///EuroCarGT05:23, 17 August 2014 (UTC)
Hi EuroCarGT, thanks for trying out the template.
Re B6: I'll have to look into how WP:MILHIST handle the B-checklist for their banner, or maybe just write some code myself (the banner currently uses the standard subtemplate WPBannerMeta/hooks/bchecklist).
Re Post checklist: If b1 to b5 are filled in and meet the B-class and C-class criteria, it *should* be overriding whatever value is in |newclass=. I'll have to investigate to find out what isn't working.
Re alignment: The usual convention for wikiproject banners is that the class-box is left-aligned (eg the China and Food&Drink banners below it on Talk:Stir frying). But it should be easy enough to change if there is consensus for it on WT:TAFI.
Re this diff: I changed the pre-assessment to start-class, because the pre-TAFI version of Stir Frying was definitely not B-Class... was that a typo/mistake, or do I explain the parameters better?
The template still says 'B' class checklist in my screen, I have limited expertise in templates so not sure what you did fixed it or not. Best, ///EuroCarGT04:28, 25 August 2014 (UTC)
Thank you for all your hard work helping to redevelop the TAFI project, particularly for your redesigning of pages and templates, all your contributions on the talk page, your votes and article nominations, setting up the schedule, and (of course) your improvements to our articles. You are an excellent, high calibre editor, and you are much appreciated. NickPenguin(contribs)13:38, 23 August 2014 (UTC)
I notice you have a stack of Barnstars and realise you may see this as just another to throw on the pile, but as this is only the second I've given in 8 years, it's kind of a big deal for me. Thank you for the energetic, highly enthusiastic assistance with regards to my map requests Wikiian17:19, 14 September 2014 (UTC)
This is also a big deal as I've written to several other map contributor's in the past asking for help and never heard back - I'm sure you can understand, it feels like all my Christmases have come at once. Wikiian17:19, 14 September 2014 (UTC)
Hi Evad: I'm not sure it's necessary to include all of the shortcuts in the tabbed header. The shortcuts are usually just placed on the individual pages. I think the shortcuts clutter the tabs to the point that people may skip over them due to being rather complex to read. This isn't a criticism of your work, just how I perceive the tabs with the additions you made. NorthAmerica100003:11, 15 September 2014 (UTC)
I made a comment here but it might go unnoticed. I think if there are no objections by Saturday, we should start dropping noms with less than 4 points, and add that to the weekly blurb. --NickPenguin(contribs)03:28, 16 September 2014 (UTC)
Junction table help request
Hi Evad, I've used the nspan attribute in the table on Spencer Highway and seem to have acquired an extra empty column on the spanned rows. Have I done something wrong, or discovered something that just doesn't quite work? Thanks in advance for having a look in. --Scott DavisTalk10:25, 16 September 2014 (UTC)
Just FYI, I added an {{Unapproved}} template to the WordPress.com entry at WP:TAFIN (after almost a month, and with two opposes and only one support, unlikely to be approved). So, this can be used as a test to ensure that entries are being properly archived. Also, once the bot automatically creates the year/month page, requesting that you please add a link to the September 2014–present section at Wikipedia:Today's articles for improvement/Nominated articles/Archives. Since you appear to know the formatting for where the new page will be created, it will make it easier for everyone. From there, as new pages are created by the bot, they can be added to the nomination archive index page.
Also, thanks for all of your work at TAFI. I have worked to improve a significant number of articles on Wikipedia, and it's nice to have the TAFI project to actually collaborate with people that are interested in doing so. It's difficult to find places to collaborate on Wikipedia nowadays. NorthAmerica100016:51, 23 September 2014 (UTC)
I also added the {{Unapproved}} template to Nirmala (novel) yesterday, which had been sitting there since June(!) because it was undated, so we should be seeing ClueBot III there soon. Once the bot starts archiving, it will create and a maintain an index which we can transclude into that section of our archive page – there should be no need for us to keep updating it. (Also, thanks for the thanks) - Evad37[talk]00:14, 24 September 2014 (UTC)
[15] - feels like a red rag to myself a talk page tagger - surely some projects have identified redirect pages on their category/article lists? also surely there is a category? havent researched this, but it seems it needs more for insurance of belonging to something somehow - it looks very vulnerable as is. btw great work on the prison! satusuro05:04, 24 September 2014 (UTC)
Yes, |class=redirect will work for most projects, which I've just done with the banners now at Talk:Australind Bunbury Tourist Drive (I guess I missed creating the talk page when I created the redirect). And thanks for the praise for Fremantle Prison, but there's still much work to do to get it up to GA standards (hard to believe that this version used to be a good article – I guess the standards were looser back then) - Evad37[talk]07:02, 24 September 2014 (UTC)
thanks for the clue - i suspect that GA was in the early days quite low... looser than you can imagine - I would like to get Goldfield Water Supply article up in that territory, but wont do until i get 2 or 3 essential texts outta library... the detail is mind boggling complex.. satusuro07:10, 24 September 2014 (UTC)
ClueBot III is archiving e.g. [16], [17], but marking noms Approved / Not approved and updating the holding area have to be done manually. See also the reply I left on WT:TAFI re your potential bot request - Evad37[talk]16:18, 2 October 2014 (UTC)
Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Robertson Drive, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Bunbury. Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.
Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Fremantle Prison, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Act of war. Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.
Send Halloween cheer by adding {{subst:Happy Halloween}} to user talk pages with a friendly message.
I am sure you will find reality far more spooky than any friday night in Albany, for instance.... best of luck with the open house stuff, if you can remember or still have my phone number on sunday give me a call, I think I might come in for a few hours - if you are out and about... satusuro23:51, 31 October 2014 (UTC)
@SatuSuro: Thanks. I managed to get to quite a few different buildings today, but I'll probably only be visiting 2 or 3 tomorrow morning as I have other commitments in the afternoon. Cheers, - Evad37[talk]14:11, 1 November 2014 (UTC)
Wheatbelt railway line article
This mornings west australian has the most accurate timeline i have seen to date - so am about to revert yours and mitchs edits to get back to what I had been trying to do last year - please contact me off or online before taking issue with my revert if that is at all possible satusuro01:46, 1 November 2014 (UTC)
It seems you've already self-reverted your revert by the time I've read this, but I don't mind if you want to restructure the article with additional info from other sources... (I seem to recall that last year there was a suggestion that this could be an overview article, with sub-articles to properly treat the sub-topics.) - Evad37[talk]14:16, 1 November 2014 (UTC)
having greviously disrupted mitches talk page and life, we (mitch and I) have agreed to talk off wiki about how to go into the complexities... satusuro23:23, 1 November 2014 (UTC)
Hello Evad37. This message is part of a mass mailing to people who appear active in reviewing articles for creation submissions. First of all, thank you for taking part in this important work! I'm sorry this message is a form letter – it really was the only way I could think of to covey the issue economically. Of course, this also means that I have not looked to see whether the matter is applicable to you in particular.
The issue is in rather large numbers of copyright violations ("copyvios") making their way through AfC reviews without being detected (even when easy to check, and even when hallmarks of copyvios in the text that should have invited a check, were glaring). A second issue is the correct method of dealing with them when discovered.
If you don't do so already, I'd like to ask for your to help with this problem by taking on the practice of performing a copyvio check as the first step in any AfC review. The most basic method is to simply copy a unique but small portion of text from the draft body and run it through a search engine in quotation marks. Trying this from two different paragraphs is recommended. (If you have any question about whether the text was copied from the draft, rather than the other way around (a "backwards copyvio"), the Wayback Machine is very useful for sussing that out.)
If you do find a copyright violation, please do not decline the draft on that basis. Copyright violations need to be dealt with immediately as they may harm those whose content is being used and expose Wikipedia to potential legal liability. If the draft is substantially a copyvio, and there's no non-infringing version to revert to, please mark the page for speedy deletion right away using {{db-g12|url=URL of source}}. If there is an assertion of permission, please replace the draft article's content with {{subst:copyvio|url=URL of source}}.
Some of the more obvious indicia of a copyvio are use of the first person ("we/our/us..."), phrases like "this site", or apparent artifacts of content written for somewhere else ("top", "go to top", "next page", "click here", use of smartquotes, etc.); inappropriate tone of voice, such as an overly informal tone or a very slanted marketing voice with weasel words; including intellectual property symbols (™,®); and blocks of text being added all at once in a finished form with no misspellings or other errors.
The comments made by Cloudz679 do have me a little bit concerned about that editors behaviour. Friendly reminders about doing the process correctly and such do not seem to have gotten through. I think I will make a more firm reminder on their talk page, and if that doesn't seem to get anywhere, then just ask if they refrain from scheduling the voting. --NickPenguin(contribs)23:05, 30 November 2014 (UTC)
@NickPenguin: I think maybe just ask them to refrain from setting up votes, as a show of good-faith on their part – especially while you atre willing and able to do it correctly. Perhaps also a reminder that misusing multiple accounts/IPs could lead to blocking and banning (if the concerning behaviour continues, we might end up at WP:SPI or WP:ANI). - Evad37[talk]03:11, 1 December 2014 (UTC)
@SatuSuro: Hook seems good (assuming you have a WP:RS), but definitely needs to be started in a user sandbox so the article can be in a reasonable enough shape for a DYK nomination as a new article (in mainspace for less than 7 days). I'll have a look for sources myself over the next day or so and see what I can put together at User:Evad37/Garratt Road Bridge - Evad37[talk]02:53, 17 December 2014 (UTC)
[Seven Network (Australia). Perth (1971), Garratt Road Bridge under construction, Channel 7, retrieved 17 December 2014] - I dont like the use of the word 'probably' in the summary of the library cataglogue entry, there are also bridges no longer existent - the original freo rail bridge(s) of which i have a very large amount of info on, and the belmont racecourse railway bridge which i have very little satusuro02:58, 17 December 2014 (UTC)
It is state heritage listed, so we may even have enough for a article as good as Clackline Bridge. Also, another possible hook: "Garratt Road Bridge is ... the longest extant timber bridge in Western Australia" [18]
No, please will you do it - make sure you get in soon - I'll explain some meetup sometime late - please - you do it satusuro14:08, 26 December 2014 (UTC)
Hi there, I'm pleased to inform you that I've begun reviewing the article Fremantle Prison you nominated for GA-status according to the criteria. This process may take up to 7 days. Feel free to contact me with any questions or comments you might have during this period. Message delivered by Legobot, on behalf of Mitch Ames -- Mitch Ames (talk) 13:00, 18 December 2014 (UTC)
Hi Evad, I've been looking at Indigenous Australians which has the template infobox ethnic groups the template has a section that doest fit the purpose for which its being used I was wondering if you could create a new template to replace that section, hopefully it can be nested within or made stand alone. The section I'm talking about is labeled "Regions with significant populations" where as its just list populations by state. I'd like to be able to do both state populations inc a % of total population and a regional/family breakdown ie WA population & Noongar population do think you could help? Gnangarra03:16, 24 December 2014 (UTC)
I think that's do-able using {{Infobox3cols}}, but I just want to be sure I know what you're after before I start coding. For the percent column, I think it would be something like
– Which could be used as either an embeddable box, or a stand-alone box?
As for regional/family breakdown, would that just require additional rows, so that if |region8={{flag|Western Australia}}, then |region9=• [[Noongar]] (plus appropriate numbers in the related parameters) which could look something like
Sorry was looking at ABS data apparently they dont ask for indigenous by country so we have more information available on people from Norway than Noongar people. but if you could do a template for the state stats for now giving %total population that would be great.. I'll need to sort the data being used as whats in the article is from different years before breaking it down to "country" which is more complexe because ABS doesnt use the same boundaries Gnangarra09:27, 24 December 2014 (UTC)
what sats says plus the titling of Regions with significant populations as its distribution by state not actual regions/countries, which is the next section to be added once I find comprehensive reliable source for the break down of populations by indigenous regional/countries Gnangarra13:30, 24 December 2014 (UTC)
Fixed the NT issue, and now distribution by XYZ can be set using |distribution=. The fix for {{infobox ethnic group}} is a little bit hacky, but we should be able to fix that easily enough - Evad37[talk]14:03, 24 December 2014 (UTC)
Done, a saner way to embed the new box, |pop_embed=, now available - Evad37[talk]
Thanks you I have updated the info box [19] in the article if you want to move the template from user space to template space go for it Gnangarra14:38, 24 December 2014 (UTC)
Your concerns about the above have been addressed. Please visit the DYK nomination to view them, and advise me if you have any other questions about the nomination. Thank you for reviewing DYK nominations.
.jpg)
.jpg)
