This is an archive of past discussions with User:ScottDavis. 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 there. I have posted a naming conventions proposal for Chilean settlements. I would like to know your opinion. Thanks! ☆ CieloEstrellado05:55, 26 April 2007 (UTC)
What do you think about changing this article to show the name of each year's race in the first column of the Results table rather than in the separate Race History table.
That way we only need to read one table to get the full picture and, if and when a race result is added, the name in the first column of the Results table can easily be changed into a link to the race results.
Disruptive edits by CieloEstrellado, previously warned on the same subject
Sorry to bother you with this, but you left a message on the above users talk page, asking him to abide by Chile city naming convention. He has been warned several times, but still continues to violate this policy. He is very clever because normal users can not change his edits back, for example he moved Pucón, Chile to Pucón. I can not revert because I can't crush an existing page as a normal level user. If you look here and here you will see he keeps moving the page back. He has done a huge amount of page moves in this way.--Jackaranga01:07, 28 April 2007 (UTC)
I'm undoing the harm done by JaxHere who went on a page move rampage some weeks ago. There's no reason to abide to a "convention" that was discussed by only two people (JaxHere and ScottDavis). I'm going back to the previous state of things and have proposed something new that can be now broadly discussed with as many people as possible to reach a real concensus. ☆ CieloEstrellado06:49, 28 April 2007 (UTC)
fromuser talk:CieloEstrelladoDiscuss first, move last, and don't make the disruptive extra edits to the redirects. If the eventual (new) decision is something other than the status quo for most of this year and different than your view of how stuff should be, then someone has to mve things again, and your edited redirects just make it harder. I have no problem with a new discussion, but your moves are not helping. --Scott DavisTalk06:56, 28 April 2007 (UTC)
The status quo is not this "convention" you two have created. The status quo, which has existed for many years, is something similar to what I've proposed. The difference is that now I'm spelling it out for everyone, so nobody can say there's no "convention". So, please, do not (a) create conventions without concensus, (b) make several changes to articles that suit your conventions, and (c) force people to follow your conventions. People will just rebel. ☆ CieloEstrellado06:59, 28 April 2007 (UTC)
The status quo is the current state. Agreed it is different to what existed before December 2006 when Jaxhere initiated a discussion to standardise naming of Chile placename articles. You did not get involved in the discussion at that time. I do not know if it is because he/we failed to identify you as an interested party, or because you chose not to be involved - I assure you we tried to make contact with anyone who might be interested. That was part of the reason to move a few high-profile articles at a time, to alert people who had them on their watchlists. Consensuswas reached, as there was no opposition. This could even be called unanimous consent. If the name of an article differs from the guideline, it is appropriate to rename the article to fit. Rebellion is not generally the way to make changes, until the majority are rebelling against an entrenched minority, which is clearly not the case here. --Scott DavisTalk08:31, 28 April 2007 (UTC)
I think there were four or five people who contributed to the discussion around the time the convention was established (counting us). Several more were contacted, and efforts were made to advise any other interested people. Do you believe you are in the majority? Incidentally, Wikipedia works on consensus, not majority. --Scott DavisTalk09:18, 28 April 2007 (UTC)
Censensus by two people on such an overreaching matter is not legitimate. You should have demanded that everybody contacted actually voted or at least voiced their approval. Contacting interested users is just a first step. ☆ CieloEstrellado01:26, 30 April 2007 (UTC)
So discuss it at Wikipedia talk:Chile-related regional notice board and seek to get people to agree with you. There was no need for you to go round undoing the hard work of others, and then making disruptive edits to make your way stick. You are welcome to open a poll there if you feel that will help to crystallise opinions. --Scott DavisTalk01:31, 30 April 2007 (UTC)
Hi Scott, just thought I would let you know I received some images from Calder Parks marketing manager to use on the wikipedia article. If you could take a quick look at the images in their discussion area in regards to their copywrite it would be much appreciated. I have listed the original email from them expressing permission to use their images however they are still marked for possible deletion.
If needed I could contact them back and ask if they would allow the photos to be released under a different licence.
Also if you think there is a more presentable way to use the images in the article feel free to make some changes.
I think you need to respond to her and point out "For an image to be considered "free" under Wikipedia's Image use policy, the license must permit both commercial reuse and derivative works" from Wikipedia:Image copyright tags. Ask if she can confirm that the images are released under a suitable free licence such as one of the Creative Commons licences listed on Wikipedia:Image copyright tags/Free licenses, or even released to the public domain. She is clearly aware of Wikipedia (based on the request to change the top photo), but may not be aware that Wikipedia content is allowed to be copied for other purposes (provided the necessary licence conditions are followed) and therefore images need to be released for uses beyond just Wikipedia.
I have just created an article for the 1968 Surfers Paradise 6 Hour but for some reason I titled it Surfers Paradise 6 Hour. How do I change the title please?
There's a "move" link at the top (in the default skin) of each page when you're logged in. You can use that to move (rename) a page. --Scott DavisTalk13:51, 5 May 2007 (UTC)
Mount Barker
ok it is true The Marauders do live in mount barker
— Preceding unsigned comment added by 58.104.10.133 (talk)
A few of us are struggling a bit with this new article and I was hoping that you could offer some guidance please, through the article's Talk page. -- Johnfos10:52, 23 May 2007 (UTC)
Apologies
In the unnecesarily now very stretched range of threads I most stupidly inhabit (self confessed flittergibbet here) I realised I never walked through the NT mines issue that you flagged all that time ago. My apologies. Is it still an issue? SatuSuro02:09, 24 May 2007 (UTC)
Several of them could do with a good going over for completeness, NPOV and accuracy. I don't think there are any currently active wars though. I haven't spent much time here this week, so haven't visited the Energy policy mentioned above yet either. I'm nearly as much of a flittergibbet as you. --Scott DavisTalk15:38, 24 May 2007 (UTC)
Cripes that would be hard. remind me the arts sometime at my talk page if you still want em checked. Tasmania is the visited thread today, who knows what it will be friday SatuSuro15:58, 24 May 2007 (UTC)
thanks for that will slowly check over the next day or so - should be a good distraction from some other things that I have been avoiding :) SatuSuro08:42, 27 May 2007 (UTC)
Newbie
Hi Scott. I don't know how active you are at the moment, but I was hoping you might be able to keep an eye on Fitzpatrickjm (talk·contribs). He doesn't seem to be quite up on wikiquette and, in amongst creating articles with only tenuous notability, was making a mess of categorisation on last check.--cj | talk02:51, 29 May 2007 (UTC)
As you noticed, I'm having a bit of a wiki-slowdown lately (not quite a wikibreak), but I'll try to watch - I've seen him around a bit already. He seems very patriotic and proud of South Australia, which can be good, if he can tone down the advertising a bit. --Scott DavisTalk22:23, 29 May 2007 (UTC)
literature article
That is so embarrassing. Almost as bad as Fish in Australia. I found some further reading for jabiluka - but I see what you mean for the others. You'd need a parapsychology or UFO expert (those that get hounded by POINT editors) to tweak and cleave some of the contradictory parts apart. I'll have to grovel for many weeks over the pathetic literature article.... that is just plain downright pathetic. Almost as bad as I first found it with a rubbishy oral poetry item clogging it up. Sigh.SatuSuro 14:50, 28 May 2007 (UTC)
And as for the latest - cripes having been on vndl watch on that one - its enough to drive one to anthropology textbooks of yesteryear :) SatuSuro 15:50, 10 June 2007 (UTC)
Cripes as i see it on someones elses talk page i find one on mine. ok the anthrop text books from the old days are on the search list, sigh SatuSuro15:52, 10 June 2007 (UTC)
You must have been quick to get to read the notice on someone else's talk page before yours. It was less than three minutes between the first and last notices :-) Goodnight. --Scott DavisTalk16:02, 10 June 2007 (UTC)
Thanks - I'd rather do stuff than talk about it sometimes. A lot more to fix though, but I'm not sure if it will be me. --Scott DavisTalk04:28, 11 June 2007 (UTC)
NT uranium issues
Beginning to get a handle on the bias from both sides - taking it very gradually - there is hope... :| SatuSuro13:04, 11 June 2007 (UTC)
I had missed that new (working silly hours this week and next). This says that they were working on developing the technology, and doesn't say what for. At that time, it appears more likely to have been for civilian than military purposes though. I don't think natural uranium reactors had been developed yet. I guess scientists explore what's interesting, and sometimes they make useful breakthroughs, not always for what they expected. --Scott DavisTalk03:04, 15 June 2007 (UTC)
Disambiguating Bath 6 months ago doeasn't really count as an edit, when I did that to hundreds of articles on the same day. Thanks anyway. --Scott DavisTalk17:24, 20 June 2007 (UTC)
ACOTF
Thanks for the notification. I put that up there as something non-state-based that Australian editors might have an interest in improving. It was also an attempt to add a few more things to ACOTF to get people's interest back in it - we're going to run out of things to nominate in a couple of fortnights. JRG12:13, 8 July 2007 (UTC)
Wine regions
I noticed your additions very nice thank you for helping, I was suprised that there were no Wine categories for Australian media on Commons. Gnangarra
No worries. I've added the pictures from near Naracoorte, to the Wrattonbully category now, too. If I'd seen your request last week, I'd have taken some piccies while I was in the Coonawarra last weekend. Hopefully a few other people will find things for the categories, too. --Scott DavisTalk23:15, 8 July 2007 (UTC)
Appellate review
Was there any consensus reached that Appellate review ought to be merged into Appeal? The tag is still on Appellate review. I'd do the work to merge them, but the Appeal article seems to generate controversy. Bearian20:43, 9 July 2007 (UTC)
That looks OK to me - I can't see much complaint about that merge. I note that nobody has undone any of the merges I did a few months ago, either, just complained. I think the suggestion that respondent now redirects to the wrong place may be valid, but it was just as wrong before I merged appellee, and that's a separate discussion. There may eventually be a case for splitting Appeal into several articles, but probably along different lines than the old articles had been. More like separating judicial, administrative and sporting contexts. --Scott DavisTalk23:30, 10 July 2007 (UTC)
Looks OK so far. Apokrif's comments are probably valid, but we need to start somewhere. It has to be more than a pure disambig page, even if there are more detailed articles with narrower scopes. --Scott DavisTalk00:35, 16 July 2007 (UTC)
User RDUNC
Hi Scott
I wonder if you would help a new user who emailed me on 6 July (only just read it). You will see from his talk page User talk:RDUNC he has had some bother in getting started. An editor, User:Lucasbfr, has been providing him with some useful advice but perhaps he needs some follow up - see User talk:Lucasbfr#Murray River Queen- the continuing saga..... and the next two sections.
I have sent you a copy of my email reply to him. I have also asked VirtualSteve to help in case one or the other of you is too busy.
I've been working on clarifying links to Lake Placid (a town in New York, a town in Florida, as well as a few lakes and a film). In the process of reviewing Special:Whatlinkshere/Lake_Placid (which is much shorter than when I started, I'm pleased to report) I found User:ScottDavis/plain town names/Queensland. Are you working to clarify place links, or just to add the proper administrative districts to the page names? Do you have any insight that could pertain to "clarifying" (the name I have attached to the process of directing links to their proper target, not a disambiguation page)? Its heartening to find somebody engaged in something at least somewhat related to my own efforts. User:RideABicycle/Signature 23:30, 16 July 2007 (UTC)
Thankyou - disambiguating links to these pages is important. My project is to ensure that if there is an article about a town in Australia, it is properly named, and has a redirect or link from a disambig page at the shorter name. I've added Lake Placid, Queensland to Lake Placid, and removed it from the plain town names list. I don't know any more about it than can be found around the incoming link, and the official [coordinates from http://www.ga.gov.au/bin/gazd01?rec=140346 Geoscience Australia], so I won't bother to create a one-line stub. --Scott DavisTalk15:21, 18 July 2007 (UTC)
Hi As I had a watch on your page from my note above, I saw the commentary here. I think the place is more or less a suburb of Cairns based on Lake Placid, to the north west of the city, is actually a natural pond in the Barron River, created by a rock barrage. It is a good spot for a swim and a picnic and there is even a restaurant. from [1]. It is in fact mentioned as such in Cairns, Queensland#Urban layout. Perhaps someone will write about it one day. Some nice pictures in the restaurant's website and it is adjacent to the Barron Gorge National Park[2] --Golden Wattle talk22:17, 18 July 2007 (UTC)
I agree that the solution you are looking to implement would be the wiser one, in retrospect. I hope the disambiguation page at Alan Barnes is better than what was previously there. Bobo.03:40, 21 July 2007 (UTC)
I stand by it as far as I can see. I've been removing religion categories from articles most of the afternoon added with no claim in the text for most of them. Montague Miller says "Miller remained a committed atheist ..." in the last sentence, but nothing before that or in the two online references say anything about atheism or any religion. Anarchist, socialist and pacifist do not necessarily imply atheist. Since the article claimed he was atheist, I asked for a reference instead of removing the category. --Scott DavisTalk08:13, 22 July 2007 (UTC)
Congraluations. You can now say you have read Harry Hooton - chicks dig poets, at least they used to. I assume you have read Matters, Leonard W., (Mrs.), Australasians Who Count in London and Who Counts in Western Australia, terrific stuff, but it also fails to mention this well known fact. You should not claim to have read this. I am sorry to hear about your troubles elsewhere, but it is not my doing. I look forward to your reply. Happy editing, Fred ☻ 08:33, 22 July 2007 (UTC)
I didn't consider that "He died, as he wanted it known, with 'atheistic fortitude'..." was enough to get to "Miller remained a committed atheist ..." to Category:Australian atheists. However, as I said, I left that one there due to it having some claim. Most of the others have nothing, although it looks like User:203.87.33.39 might have been working from some reference, he/she didn't provide it. You are welcome to revert if you believe the references support the sentence and category. --Scott DavisTalk08:47, 22 July 2007 (UTC)
The bitter divisions of World War I had brought him into greatest prominence at the end of his life. He died, as he wanted it known, with 'atheistic fortitude', in Perth on 17 November 1920 and was buried in the interdenominational section of Karrakatta cemetery, the mourners singing 'The Red Flag'.
— Eric Fry, ADB
Stick the point please. I don't know how much more clearly the biographer could state it. The infobox there has Religious Influence: Atheist. Until you come up with a better reference, I am asking you to undo your action. You have assumed a burden, don't make it mine. Can I expect your reply on my page, please. Fred ☻ 08:59, 22 July 2007 (UTC)
The statement that Montague David Miller was a 'committed atheist' cannot be substantially formed from "He died, as he wanted it known, with 'atheistic fortitude'...". The citation needed tag Scott Davis placed is needed, so that a reference proving or disproving the fact is provided. Concerning the inclusion of Montague Miller into Category:Australian atheists, I do not believe the aritcle should be included. However, until such time that the claim of Montague Miller being an atheist is proven, there is no harm in including the aritcle into the category, as there still is a claim. Stickeylabel12:35, 22 July 2007 (UTC)
Scott, you started by telling me that there was no mention at either reference. There Is.
but nothing before that or in the two online references say anything about atheism or any religion [above]
You implied I was including and defending an referenced statement. Bulldust.
Are you now contending that the Australian Dictionary of Biography 'twice asserting, in a one page bio, that he was an atheist is an inadequate reference. He is in their category for goodness sake, take it up with them. That he died declaring this belief, shows the greatest possible amount of conviction. This is not my opinion, spare me yours. What someone else has done with a cat somewhere, is not a license for you to challenge my referenced stub. Fred ☻ 12:58, 22 July 2007 (UTC)
Go ahead. I do not intend to alter the article further. I had no idea what Stickey's opinion was going to be. I chose him/her purely because they asked me to do the WP:ACOTF stuff below. --Scott DavisTalk13:09, 22 July 2007 (UTC)
You have insulted me and wasted my time. I will state this clearly now, I am requesting an apology. Here's ya tag {{cn}} Fred ☻ 13:18, 22 July 2007 (UTC)
Thank you for your reply. I don't make this stuff up, and then pretend I didn't. I'm going to contribute somewhere else for a while. Regards, Fred ☻ 13:35, 22 July 2007 (UTC)
Yeah, I'm getting to it - I have a few of the dodgy religion category articles to check still. Sorry I'm a few hours late. --Scott DavisTalk11:22, 22 July 2007 (UTC)
Dear Scott - I want to use your two photos of Serviceton Railway station - on the wiki Serviceton page - in a student documentary called 'A Town with No Cheer'. How can I get in touch with you to discuss this?
— Preceding unsigned comment added by 203.213.58.17 (talk)
Thank you, Scott - I'll get in touch by above link with further details soon. Yours, the "Elder Lemon".
sorry
i did not realise it was vandalism and will not do it again....do u think u could leave the checkers part up plz?
— Preceding unsigned comment added by 58.105.133.140 (talk)
Thanks for the apology. Accepted. There is no evidence that Ryan Thomas the British actor is either a checkers player or associated with Wodonga, so this edit cannot remain. Sorry. It could go back if you reference it from an international checkers tournament website or newspaper article about him competing in the finals of an international tournament. --Scott DavisTalk12:23, 7 August 2007 (UTC)
arwtee
Hello Scott
I'm very surprised that you regard me offering my video of various places to view for free as spam. I would have imagined most wikipedians would be happy to view it..
Of course I want credit for it - most images are rightly credited to the person who created them and in the off chance that someone viewing wants me to do some work for them, I think that is fair.
My main aim however is to get my stuff out there because I am proud of it and I am happy for interested people to view it for free. The links are worthless to me for page rankings as wikipedia has a "no follow" tag on pages
The Microsoft wikipedia page links to Microsoft's web page. What do you think if someone followed that link and ended up buying a microsoft product?
I think you should stick to the fundamental criteria for links that it should be relevant and useful - I will accept any critisism of anything I have done if that is not the case.
Hi Rob. I liked some of your videos for what they are, and would not have complained about links to the specific video page on articles that the subject of the video and the topic of the article closely align. In fact I formatted one or two to do just that. Most of the links I saw were to the front page of your website, and most were attached to articles that only had a loose association to the subjects of any of your videos. Have a close read of WP:SPAM#How not to be a spammer, especially point 1 and the first and last bullets of point 5. Those two points (Adding a link to the top of an unordered list and Adding the same link to many articles) are what caught my attention when about 30 appeared on my watchlist in quick succession. A video of the township of Innamincka on the article Innamincka, South Australia was OK, but the link to the front page of your website is doubtful, and attaching it to every article that includes "outback" "Simpson Desert", "Great Australian Bight" or "Nullarbor Plain" was just wrong - there is no video I could find on your site that showed Great Australian Bight Marine Park (Commonwealth waters) which starts 20 nautical miles offshore, or Birdsville Races for example. Your Microsoft example is not the same - the Microsoft article links to that website, but not every article about a computer or software regardless of what operating system it runs on. --Scott DavisTalk07:03, 9 August 2007 (UTC)
Mate you ever been to Jamestown?
Scott
I lived in Jamestown for 6 years, my wife is from jamestown and I know the place well. Ever lived there? No? What a shock.
I do not apologise for reverting your edits to Jamestown, South Australia or the warning I gave you. You are welcome to contribute to Wikipedia, but please contribute value. Someone has already posted a welcome message with helpful links on your talk page. And to answer your question: yes I have been to Jamestown, but not lived there. --Scott DavisTalk00:38, 23 August 2007 (UTC)
Sorry. I agree, but was away for the night without internet access. It looks like RoxBo did cut-and-paste moves, so the pages should really have their histories merged. I'll do that, and let Longhair know. --Scott DavisTalk07:38, 25 August 2007 (UTC)
Looking at the articles, it looks as though RoxBo has done some pasting since my earlier moves. I'll check back in after dinner and see what I can sort through. -- Longhair\talk09:49, 25 August 2007 (UTC)
P.C
very re assuring to see that the first edit after the unprotection was vandalism. oh I got it watch listed, will give it a little while before considering to semi protection. BTW i'm off tonight so will look at it tomorrow. Gnangarra
Hey Scott. Just enquiring as to the meaning of a rather confusing message you recently posted to me.
I pride myself on having NEVER disrupted the sanctity of wikipedia with the posting of "rubbish".
Especially not on some page about electrical power points or whatever the hell that was.
What the fuck is your problem anyway fascist?
Were you beaten as a child?
Sincerest regards, a concerned wikiped. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 211.31.90.214 (talk) 12:34, 12 September 2007 (UTC)
Hey Scott,
I appreciate what wikipedia administrators do, which is why it angers me so much that you are damagiing their reputation and corrupting their aims. Would you like a quick lesson on how this site works?
Wikipedia is "the free encyclopedia anyone can edit". ANYONE, Scott. That privelege is not reserved for you alone.
So please respect the contributions others have to make.
I would like you to realise that unless you back down in...... lets say, the next week? then this is war. I promise I will hit you where it hurts the most- in your favourite wikipedia articles!! And make no mistake, I have A LOT of free time. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 211.31.90.214 (talk) 11:24, 14 September 2007 (UTC)
I was wondering if you might be able to provide some feedback on a debate on article labelling going on here. Not looking for support but a clarification from a more experienced editor would be useful. Thank you. --Falcadore13:59, 18 September 2007 (UTC)
I came across your talk page and noticed you seems to get a lot of grief over nothing, so, have a
Jac16888 has smiled at you! Smiles promote WikiLove and hopefully this one has made your day better. Spread the WikiLove by smiling at someone else, whether it be someone you have had disagreements with in the past or a good friend. Happy editing! Smile at others by adding {{subst:Smile}} to their talk page with a friendly message.
When I was in my heavy edit mode some months back any dog and their editor tended to put timor (and other indonesian islands) in the pacific and the indian ocean (or similar processes) because their weird and wonderful sources told them so - this current issue is absoloutely bizarre - surely there needs to be either a separate article within the ambit of an ocean project - to adequately cover the issues - its not just the IHO - but it falls over into a number of subjects and puts a bad name on wikipedia if we carry a POV from one point of view - I really think that the current state of talk issues on insisting that the indian ocean lies across the great australian bight is ananomaly and not correct in australian law - or for that matter international - I have tried my mate who has a Phd in australian maritime boundaries - but he is away at the moment, sigh SatuSuro09:13, 21 September 2007 (UTC)
It seems to be far from clear. It appears that Southern Ocean#History says that only 14 countries voted in favour of using the name "Southern Ocean" and defining it to be no further north than 60° South. That's not many countries, even out of only 68 members of the IHO. Neither article says what countries are bound by the decision, or whether it needs to be (or has been) ratified by their respective governments. Just because the IHO has decreed something maynot make it so (everywhere). Australia is a member of the IHO, represented by the Royal Australian Navy Hydrographic Service. A search for "Southern Ocean" in their Maritime Gazetteer of Australia (MGA) Search yields 34 results, only 6 of which are south of 60° South latitude. Particularly relevant to this discussion is the third match, at 35°0'S, 115°0'E, from chart Aus335 near Cape Leeuwin. I think the statement that Bass Strait and the Great Australian Bight are in the Indian Ocean and not the Southern Ocean is far from universally true. I'm not quite sure how to take it further, or even which place to try to centralise discussion to. --Scott DavisTalk10:03, 21 September 2007 (UTC)
Just put oceans on your watch list and watch the watch list light up with bright sparks and their inventive misuse of irregular sources - enough to make one reach of an international maritime lawyer with a phd in the international law of the sea, sigh (my mate has the phd but he is a geographer/cartographer - wherever he is) SatuSuro10:38, 21 September 2007 (UTC)
It's an interesting topic, but it would help if we could get some consensus on how to handle it. I don't think the IHO POV should be enforced without agreement. I've tried to bring the discussion together at Talk:Australia#Ocean_names, and will try to improve several of the related articles. --Scott DavisTalk10:43, 21 September 2007 (UTC)
Please help to find the right articles and link to the new article from them. I'm having trouble working it in to any now. Thanks for the suggestion to write the article, and any ideas you might have on how to improve it. I suspect it's still a bit biased. --Scott DavisTalk13:51, 26 September 2007 (UTC)
It was supposed to remove the ACOTF tag as the time was up. I also removed a few other cleanup tags that appeared to be no longer required., showing that ACOTF had worked. I've also done a quick copyedit now. --Scott DavisTalk12:42, 2 October 2007 (UTC)
Thankyou. Somebody else fixed it before I got to it. It would have been OK for you to fix it too, by clicking on the last good version and editing then saving that. --Scott DavisTalk04:42, 6 October 2007 (UTC)
'twas wondering about an assist, or a recommendation to a more experienced edittor that might help. Some recent additions to the Bathurst 1000 appear that were notably pro-Holden and pro-Australia in general and a placed an NPOV tag on it and have since had some discussion with the edittor concerned. Additionally, some continuing discussions with another user on the pages of Christian Murchison and Adam Macrow have become an edit war, to the point where I have felt the need to quote sections of the V8Supercar manual, but I feel to emotionally connected to both issues to attain solutions. If you could help with someone to review the additional content on the Bathurst 1000 article, and if arbitration is recquired with other matter, or indeed if I am an appropriate person to edit wikipedia. My thanks. --Falcadore (talk) 08:38, 6 December 2007 (UTC)
As you've probably noticed, I've been fairly busy with stuff outside Wikipedia for the last several months. I'll try to have a look and see if I can help. I've looked at Christian Murchison - your behaviour and response on talk:Christian Murchison look perfectly reasonable to me. I haven't looked at the others yet. --Scott DavisTalk13:28, 8 December 2007 (UTC)
ACOTF
Hi Scott. Thanks for the reminder. It may not be a bad thing to let some of the collaborations extend a little longer over silly season. Best wishes to you and yours for Christmas too. Cheers, Mattinbgn\talk16:04, 9 December 2007 (UTC)
Hi - it is pleasing that this one does seem to be generating attention :-) Thanks for your ongoing maintenance of this aspect of the Australian wikiproject Regards--Matildatalk00:00, 11 December 2007 (UTC)
Recognition
ScottDavis, I am pleased to issue you with the Drover's Award. The Award is given to Australian Wikipedians who work tirelessly behind the scenes, especially on WikiProject and Portal maintenance tasks. Thanks for your contributions, particularly in the maintenance of the ACOTF, which help us build a better encyclopaedia. Matildatalk00:08, 11 December 2007 (UTC)
WikiProject Australia publishes a newsletter informing Australian Wikipedians of ongoing events and happenings within the community and the project. This month's newsletter has been published. If you wish to unsubscribe from these messages, or prefer to have the newsletter delivered in full to your talk page, see our subscription page. This notice delivered by BrownBot (talk), at 22:05, 11 December 2007 (UTC).
