User talk:HiLo48

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia


Hello, HiLo48, and welcome to Wikipedia! Thank you for your contributions. I hope you like the place and decide to stay. Here are some pages that you might find helpful:

I hope you enjoy editing here and being a Wikipedian! Please sign your messages on discussion pages using four tildes (~~~~); this will automatically insert your username and the date. If you need help, check out Wikipedia:Questions, ask me on my talk page, or ask your question on this page and then place {{helpme}} before the question. Again, welcome! -- Longhair\talk 07:32, 14 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Clean road trains of the future - though not here yet[edit]

Hi HiLo48, trucks should change to cleaner fuels like electric or hydrogen, and smaller clean trucks are indeed catching on. But road trains seem to be the exception so far, with very few clean ones being used. So for the time being, road trains are almost exclusively diesel. That fact is notable, and should be included in an encyclopedia. Failing to do so merely hides the pollution. National fuel usage could be included to show scale.

It seems the Townsville hydrogen road train is not yet operating

I tried to link to WP:Wikipedia is an encyclopedia, not wp;wia.

Let's keep focusing on facts, and update when necessary. Thanks from TGCP (talk) 00:45, 25 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I asked you to take this matter to the article's Talk page. Instead, you came here to discuss it, and changed the article without global discussion. This is not the place. HiLo48 (talk) 01:32, 25 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]
This was merely to inform you, and remind you that content must be encyclopedic. You can debate on that Talk page if you will. I see no reason to leave out basic facts, hence no reason for your deletion. TGCP (talk) 01:55, 25 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Please stop wasting your time here, and discuss this in the correct place. HiLo48 (talk) 02:16, 25 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

ITN recognition for Linda White (politician)[edit]

On 2 March 2024, In the news was updated with an item that involved the article Linda White (politician), which you nominated. If you know of another recently created or updated article suitable for inclusion in ITN, please suggest it on the candidates page. – robertsky (talk) 00:23, 2 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]


Hi there, last August you made an edit to my Talk page pointing out the use of the quadruple ~. Just wanted to say thanks for that (and I wish I would've noticed earlier, I had assumed Wiki adds that automagically ^^) Steffens123 (talk) 21:56, 5 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Orren Stephenson[edit]

Should editing on this page be restricted? There seem to be a queue of enthusiastic IPs wanting to add the obvious to it, and I imagine this will just continue even before a court case starts.(Of course, in time there will be a place for a page on the event itself). What do you think? Nickm57 (talk) 02:39, 8 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I suspect such action will calm down soon. HiLo48 (talk) 03:31, 8 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]


Hello friend. Thank you for the invite. I tried to get an account for like 10 years and was always refused on the grounds of something like "Because I don't feel like it, you little f*ing fa*got. Go s*ck your daddy's c*ck now and k*ll yourself! lol"

Sad. I have found this place is run like a mafia gang of 12 year olds on Ritalin. Luckily, many news pieces have been done about it. What is it? 6,000,0000 articles, and 95% of them are run by 6 users? Yet they advertise it like it is some egalitarian, communal sharing of knowledge.

Rather than come back here, learn to tolerate what you hate, contribute your time, maybe you should get something started exposing the problems? You could be the next Martin Luther, but for online knowledge. Many people would join you! Cheers.

-Tom B. (talk) 11:07, 8 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]


Thanks for the greeting, HiLo48, but I've been editing Wikipedia for about 20 years, and have always deliberately chosen to do so without an account.

Doubtless if I change my mind (which I may one day) I'll be deluged with accusations of being a sock because I'll appear "too practised for a newbie" :-). {The poster formerly known as} (talk) 00:41, 15 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Are you aware that you will actually have more privacy when you use an account? With a tool readily available to all users, right now I can tell that you are probably located in or near Bradford in England. Other tools can narrow down IP addresses much more. HiLo48 (talk) 01:41, 15 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Why are you tracking him down that's a bit weird mate Neanderthal4914 (talk) 04:52, 27 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

A reminder[edit]

You are editing under a civility restriction that specifies you may not make comments assuming other editors are acting in bad faith. With that in mind, do you stand by your insinuation I am advocating for the name "Tasmania Devils" to to suit [my] obsession with nicknames? – Teratix 04:14, 27 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I gave evidence for that position. Discuss the evidence, not me. HiLo48 (talk) 04:41, 27 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Information icon There is currently a discussion at Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents regarding an issue with which you may have been involved. Thank you.– Teratix 05:42, 27 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

You're a smart guy, HiLo, I don't need tell you there's a way to describe the fact an editor holds a particular position without implying he is single-mindedly and irrationally bent on enforcing this position. – Teratix 07:12, 27 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
So you can't actually think of a better word. I'm quite serioous. If there is one you would prefer and it makes sense, I'll use it. HiLo48 (talk) 07:17, 27 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
You could say "Teratix's favoured position is to use the nicknames in Tasmania and Fremantle's cases, and he has expressed some preference to use nicknames in at least some other clubs' cases". – Teratix 07:23, 27 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Ha ha ha. You have argued for more than that, but I shall try. HiLo48 (talk) 09:13, 27 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you[edit]

For withdrawing the comment. We still have disagreements, but I can appreciate you have done something reasonable here. – Teratix 10:27, 27 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

ITN recognition for Les Twentyman[edit]

On 5 April 2024, In the news was updated with an item that involved the article Les Twentyman, which you nominated. If you know of another recently created or updated article suitable for inclusion in ITN, please suggest it on the candidates page. SpencerT•C 09:07, 5 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Noah's Ark[edit]

That editor is a real problem. As I'm involved in reverting in the end it might have to be ANI if they continue to get warnings. Doug Weller talk 08:30, 20 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Please explain why reference with 0 citations is notable[edit]

see Talk:Teaching#Remove reference Further reading HudecEmil (talk) 10:29, 5 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

HudecEmil - Unlike yours, my edit was fully explained with an Edit summary. All I saw was a removal of content with no explanation. That's unacceptable. You need to tell others what you have done, and why. HiLo48 (talk) 10:34, 5 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
I see, so adding an explanation "reference has 0 citations, lack of notability", would be ok with you? HudecEmil (talk) 10:41, 5 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
That actually reads quite strangely. I don't know what you mean by "citation" and "reference". To me, they are usually the same thing. HiLo48 (talk) 10:56, 5 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Is "this article has been cited by 0 other peer-reviewed articles, lack of notability" better? HudecEmil (talk) 11:06, 5 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Yes, but it's not just me that you need to convince. Just make sure you write something that explains what you have done to ALL other editors. HiLo48 (talk) 11:13, 5 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
agree HudecEmil (talk) 11:18, 5 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

James Harrison[edit]

Just trust me on this the math makes zero sense and people had already discussed on the talk page a literal decade ago that millions of lives saved does not make sense mathematically and that an article from the Australian red cross claimed 10,000 saved which is at least in the realm of possibility Please revert my edit back. TaqPCR (talk) 07:56, 6 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

TaqPCR - As I wrote in my Edit summary, the claim is backed by a reliable source. I also said you need to take your concerns to the article's Talk page, not here. HiLo48 (talk) 08:09, 6 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
And as I said it was already mentioned on the talk page a literal decade ago Talk:James Harrison (blood donor)#2 million saved with a counter citation from the Australian red cross, the people actually taking and using the blood. That's why I called it a persistent myth. TaqPCR (talk) 08:35, 6 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
I decided that I would just make the reversion myself because this has already been discussed in the talk pages. TaqPCR (talk) 09:25, 6 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Fine, but I wish you would stop seeing me as the enemy and/or arbiter here. The article's Talk page was the place to discuss this, not here, nor in Edit summaries. Yours are essays, not summaries. And do try to be a little less confrontational over this. HiLo48 (talk) 10:07, 6 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]