User talk:Ian Rose/Archive Jul-Dec 2008

John Lydon and Morrissey

Please stop changing the introduction to the John Lydon and Morrissey articles. Lydon and Morrissey are British born and not just "English", their ancestral origins are equally as appropriate as their birth origins. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 199.72.194.218 (talk) 00:26, 6 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Firstly, I don't edit Morrissey's article, so you have the wrong 'culprit' there. Secondly, re. Lydon, pls pay attention to edit summaries: I have no issue with discussing someone's ancestry in their article, but placing it in the lead - particularly a short lead as in Lydon's article - is undue weight, especially when it's not even cited yet. If it belongs anywhere, it's in the Early Life section, which is where I've left it. Cheers, Ian Rose (talk) 00:48, 6 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I don't believe there is any criminal activity here and therefore no attempt to find a culprit, at least on my part. Interesting that you "don't edit Morrissey's article" but you "left it" in the Early Life Section. Again, interesting. I believe both look fairly well proportioned at this time. Fair Dinkum --Mike Brady199.72.194.218 (talk) 02:16, 6 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

If you re-read my paragraph above, you'll see it's the Lydon article I've edited and was referring to when I said I'd "left it", not the Morrissey one... Cheers, Ian Rose (talk) 10:17, 12 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Re:Air Combat Group

It has the date of "2008a" because there are two references that look quite a bit alike, and so to distinguish between the two, the dates are changed. -- Cheers mate! CYCLONICWHIRLWIND ^talk 17:48, 25 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

What have the romans ever done for us? vs Talmud

Hi. I've put down a comment claiming a similarity between this bit in Life of Brian and a certain Talmudic debate, and you removed it. Of course I have no way of telling whether Monty Python had prior knowledge of this Talmudic passage, let alone based the dialog on it. In any case, I have not put down any such claim. I've only put a neutral statement pointing out the similarity, as it is of interest, whether accidental or intentional. My personal guess is that they indeed parodied this debate. Here's a blog entry I've found comparing the two: http://search-for-emes.blogspot.com/2006/05/and-now-for-something-completely.html. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 128.139.226.37 (talk) 16:55, 28 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

G'day NewSouthWikiWelshman

...and I mean 'welshman' in the most gender neutral way, of course...and I'm aware that not all of you guys are from NSW.. and I'm aware that this hasn't been the most smoothly written note in Wiki's history, but hey ho...slaps head, persuades voices in head to pipe down, and continues.... Fancy attending a meetup? - We've got some interested Chapter stuff to chat about, no doubt there may be some tales of Arabian Nights (or at least Egyptian conferences), and it just generally felt like it was about time..... head over here if you're interested.... do feel free to wiki-edit away in the usual fashion too if you've got any other ideas! cheers all, Privatemusings (talk) 07:25, 29 July 2008 (UTC)you've been spammed in this nature because you signed up as interested in being notified about this sort of thing.. hope that's ok![reply]

Ribbons

Discussion now at Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Military history/Australian military history task force#Ribbons. Cheers, Ian Rose (talk) 08:18, 7 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Victoria Cross

Hi again. I'm afraid I don't understand your edit or your edit comment.
I would not have thought there was any doubt that Ashcroft's is the most notable collection of VC's. Why is saying so "editoralising"?
Also, I don't understand what you mean in the edit comment by "space".
(Perhaps you should restrict the words in your answer to 3 syllables so I don't get confused?)
Cheers, Pdfpdf (talk) 15:05, 8 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Simple one first: citations are supposed to appear immediately after punctuation, without a space between the two - that's the space I removed. Other one: I agree about the importance of Ashcroft's collection and that sentence, in mentioning he owns one-tenth of the world's VCs, demonstrates that - which is why "most notably" is editorialising. Expressions like "notably" are also referred to as "peacock" terms, something to be avoided - see WP:Peacock, particularly Don't peacock your facts. I see the avoidance of such expressions as a way of treating our readers with respect, allowing them to decide what's notable themselves. Cheers, Ian Rose (talk) 15:31, 8 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for your reply. I agree. Cheers, Pdfpdf (talk) 02:21, 9 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

A different straw poll on Talk:The Beatles

It would be easy to overlook because there are now two polls going at the same time. The newest one is here. Thanks. Ward3001 (talk) 16:44, 10 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Work as a copyeditor

I have worked on your side at making the ACG an FA-Class article, which is what I am still working on. I would also like to request that you help me to making AFTG. I will get the major info on it, and place it into the article, but if you could copyedit it all (not necessarily all of it) and making it look got, like per WP:MOS and WP:MOSNUM, I would be eternally grateful. Yours truthfully, CYCLONICWHIRLWIND ^talk 00:31, 26 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Sorry it's been a while, made a few minor changes and found a citation for the current Commander (so corrected conflicting data in infobox) but in general looks okay. Cheers, Ian Rose (talk) 04:09, 6 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Possibly unfree Image:HughieEdwards.jpg

An image that you uploaded or altered, Image:HughieEdwards.jpg, has been listed at Wikipedia:Possibly unfree images because its copyright status is unclear or disputed. If the image's copyright status cannot be verified, it may be deleted. You may find more information on the image description page. You are welcome to add comments to its entry at the discussion if you are interested in it not being deleted. Thank you. Fut.Perf. ☼ 22:52, 11 September 2008 (UTC) --Fut.Perf. ☼ 22:52, 11 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Actioned. Cheers, Ian Rose (talk) 10:33, 17 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

1000km

Where does 1002 come from? The oft quoted track length is 6.213 kilometres. Multiple that by 161 and you get 1000.293. The contrast is the pre-Caltex Chase version, 6.172 km x 163 laps = 1006.036. --Falcadore (talk) 02:43, 16 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

No prob but surprised you haven't changed it yourself to 1,000 before now in that case - if you check the history you'll see it was 1,002 for a long time so when an anon editor changed it without explanation I reverted (obviously with the pre-Caltex Chase version of a bit over 1,000km in mind - my error). Cheers, Ian Rose (talk) 12:36, 16 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Didn't notice it until pointed out. Didn't want to trigger an edit war when explanation in either direction could defuse. --Falcadore (talk) 13:17, 16 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Heh, I quite understand - I must've sounded like I thought I knew what I was talking about, even though I didn't...! Cheers, Ian Rose (talk) 14:35, 16 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

VC

I'm not going to loose any sleep over it. Let's go with the inaccurate data then. 86.24.116.38 (talk) 22:21, 19 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Please have a look at Talk:Victoria Cross#Sizes of public collections. Cheers, Pdfpdf (talk) 23:42, 19 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Re: Your comments on Zappa FAC

Thank you so much for you kind comments. You have made my day! Also, I can see that the article has been promoted to FA (not yet updated to this by bot). Thanks for your support. All the best. --HJensen, talk 08:52, 24 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Morotai Mutiny

Congratulations on achieving featured status on another excellent article! You've done an absolutely brilliant job on the article, and I hope to see Richard Williams (RAAF officer) up for the challenge next. Cheers, Abraham, B.S. (talk) 02:12, 27 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Edward Bell

Hi Ian

Thanx for redirecting Edward Bell (Artist) to Edward Bell (artist). Is there anyway we can delete the original title.. or do we just leave it? Havent dealt with a re-direct before!Pamela Gardiner (talk) 19:31, 29 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Sorry for such a belated reply, Pamela, but I wouldn't worry too much about that - it's probably just as well to leave it as some may well type in "Edward Bell (Artist)" when searching. If an administrator decides it should go, they'll deal with it... Cheers, Ian Rose (talk) 02:37, 6 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Fair point. As long as they go to the same place I guess it doesnt matter! Pam. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 91.109.163.80 (talk) 04:20, 7 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Response

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

Nick Dowling (talk) 12:05, 2 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for 2001 Reversions- Extra Note

Thanks for reverting the 2001 edits. But in addition to the editorializing you mention, the user clearly didn't have the faintest idea what a "jump cut" is. Even now the bone-ship cut is technicaly a "match cut" but only informally in a lay sense a "jump cut", but the stuff the recent user described as a "jump cut" ain't a jump cut even by the loosest most stretched out definition of the word.

Regards

--WickerGuy (talk) 12:24, 2 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Just did a bit of trimming of what seemed unnecessary detail and minor rewording. Cheers, Ian Rose (talk) 22:21, 18 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Notice

A Sydney Meetup

G'day all - I'm dropping this note in to let you know that there's to be a Wiki Meetup the week after next, on Tuesday, 21st at 18:00 at The Paragon in Circular Quay. If you've ever thought about popping along to one of these, but haven't had the chance - now's the time! If you love the idea, but the time and / or place don't quite work for you, please do feel free to wiki edit away at the meetup page and I'm sure we can sort something out :-) Meetups are a great way to share wiki-thoughts, meet wiki-friends, and generally learn how to prefix all areas of your life with wiki- :-)

It's a very friendly bunch, and we're hoping to be able to formally collect membership fees and details for the Australian Chapter (did you know that we're the only current english speaking chapter? Join now for kudos and future bragging rights!) - as well as just generally have a good 'ol time. I look forward to seeing you there :-) best, Privatemusings (talk) 07:48, 10 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Re: ShadowBlindx

Re your message: I had signed off and missed the further vandalism, but Lankiveil blocked him. -- Gogo Dodo (talk) 22:23, 11 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

McIntyre

Having also drawn a blank on full name/surname I decided to try first names, since his were reasonably unusual, and up came the results. David Underdown (talk) 14:19, 13 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Heh, where there's a will... Anyway, tks again, your perseverance helped round the article out very nicely. Cheers, Ian Rose (talk) 14:30, 13 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

The worst I came across was trying to dig things out for Thomas Blamey. I eventually discovered, I forget how now, that the OCR process on the scanned copies had fairly consistently rendered his surname as Blarney rather than Blamey... David Underdown (talk) 14:52, 13 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Blarney?! Jeez, you wouldn't read about it (except in the Gazette of course)... Cheers, Ian Rose (talk) 21:34, 13 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Help

Hi, you know who I am (Tartarus), but I was wondering if you could do some copyediting for me on this page. Not for content, but for style, prose, and neutrality. TARTARUS ^talk 16:21, 13 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Sorry for not getting back to you sooner - sure, I'll have a go. Cheers, Ian Rose (talk) 12:18, 18 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Obviously a few others have been able to get in there before me, but did a couple of things. Cheers, Ian Rose (talk) 12:38, 26 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

DYK for Ivor McIntyre

On 19 October, 2008, Did you know? was updated with a fact from the article Ivor McIntyre, which you created or substantially expanded. If you know of another interesting fact from a recently created article, then please suggest it on the Did you know? talk page.

Keep up the good work! ~ User:Ameliorate! ^{(with the !) (talk)} 10:05, 19 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Article you may be interested in

Hey there! I saw your name on WP:AUSMIL and thought you may be interested in helping out on an article. I've recently done a major expansion on Bruce Kingsbury, and I was hoping, if you had enough free time, that you could copy-edit the article and leave a few observations. I've pretty much worked alone on this one so it'd be a great help if you are able to assist me. Thanks!! \ / (⁂) 09:17, 20 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Happy to have a go, but still owe one (see above) so may not be for a day or two. Cheers, Ian Rose (talk) 10:24, 20 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

All Saints (TV series)

Hi. I noticed you reverted the edits to this article (with an amusing summary, might I add) after a newuser edited after my revert. I have an odd feeling that User:Reveal10 is a sockpuppet of User:McLeod1, the account only having been created to edit the television article. Im not sure about you, but I have next to no time at the moment. Perhaps you'd like to proceed with the honours? Regards, --Ali K (talk) 13:28, 1 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Live and Let Die GA Review.

Thankyou for review on Live and Let Die (film).

I have responded to your issues on the article and talk page. Live and Let Die (film)

Thanks. The Windler talk 10:52, 6 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Copyright status of AWM images (again)

Hi Ian, Have you seen that the AWM is uploading some old (early 1950s and earlier) images from its database onto Flickr with the copyright status set to 'No known copyright restrictions' at [1]? I imagine that it would come in handy if the status of these images is called into question again! Nick-D (talk) 09:58, 17 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Tks Nick, found that too the other day - every bit helps, I guess! Ta also for deleting that cat I blindly added to the Vampire pic along with PD-Australia... Cheers, Ian Rose (talk) 12:19, 17 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

re Colin Hannah

Most of the work? Lol, most of what I have done is in info and succession boxes, I don't think I've even touched the prose! You are very welcome to improve the article; I know that this is your area of expertise, and you will be able to improve it much more than what I could. I have/had no plans for further improvement, and I look forward to seeing the article when you are finished. Cheers, Abraham, B.S. (talk) 11:47, 17 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Heh, of course, it was JackOfOz who did the prose - I shall sally forth to his talk page and see if he had plans for it... Thanks/cheers, Ian Rose (talk) 12:15, 17 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Warrrrm Jets

Thanks for all your help on that Eno album. You did a really good job on Station to Station too. Hopefully this will become a GA! Andrzejbanas (talk) 15:05, 17 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Barnstar

		The Original Barnstar
		For creating Charles Read (RAAF officer), and having contributed in one edit the kind of quality and quantity that would take other editors a thousand edits; and more generally, for superb editing of Australian military history content. - Richard Cavell (talk) 05:14, 28 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I second this nomination. - Canglesea (talk) 17:52, 29 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

DYK for Charles Read (RAAF officer)

On 2 December, 2008, Did you know? was updated with a fact from the article Charles Read (RAAF officer), which you created or substantially expanded. If you know of another interesting fact from a recently created article, then please suggest it on the Did you know? talk page.

BorgQueen (talk) 14:05, 2 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

DYK for Alister Murdoch

On 3 December, 2008, Did you know? was updated with a fact from the article Alister Murdoch, which you created or substantially expanded. If you know of another interesting fact from a recently created article, then please suggest it on the Did you know? talk page.

BorgQueen (talk) 08:16, 3 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Wiki Christmas Meetup

G'day all - I'm hoping that I might persuade you along to a Wiki christmas celebration / meetup on december 18th :-) - The meetup regulars are a friendly bunch, and we're very much hoping to get a few new folk along to chat about all things Wiki (and there are apparently some exciting things in the pipeline! Come along to find out a bit more ;-) - you can sign up here - and do feel free to edit that page with any more ideas or suggestions too :-)

Hope to see you there - I've heard a rumour that the first drink is on the highest placed Australian in the current arbcom elections.... Privatemusings (talk) 23:44, 4 December 2008 (UTC)ok, so I started that rumour too....[reply]

re Frank Hubert McNamara‎ & William Ellis Newton

Hi Ian, I did have plans to eventually get to these articles - particularly Newton - but they weren't in the near future. As they say "first come, first served", if you have immediate plans for the articles then go right ahead; perhaps I'll be able to add some more information with my sources when you're done :) Thanks for the curtesy call; I appreciate it. Cheers, Abraham, B.S. (talk) 12:02, 5 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Cool. Well, we'll see how we go. Cheers, Ian Rose (talk) 00:50, 7 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Copyright of AWM pictures

Hi Ian Do you know if pictures stored at the Australian War Memorial or its website are automatically owned by the AWM and PD under criterion E of PD-Australia. I didn't think that this was the case, but User:Abraham, B.S. thinks that I should be able to use them on Military career of Keith Miller - discussion User_talk:YellowMonkey#Military_career_of_Keith_Miller_photographs. These photos include photos taken in the UK, in the 1940s, where a 70 years after death rule applies, but he is suggesting that an AWM stored photo falls under PD-Aus even though all of these photos were taken in the UK. I guess replying there to keep it in one place is most convenient. YellowMonkey (bananabucket) 05:12, 16 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

re David Bowie song meanings

Hi. The interpretations mentioned in the original form of the page for Man Who Sold The World may indeed be supported by citation; however, David Bowie did not himself validate these interpretaions and they should not be put forth as what these songs 'mean' in a general sense, especially considering that they are clearly incomplete or incorrect views of these song meanings. I could tolerate no song interpretations at all for this album, but I cannot tolerate the current ones for those two songs.

When concerning oneself with the citation for a song meaning, the lyrics themselves should be seen as the most important source. The original cited interpretation listed for the song "After All" says that the song is about children with powers their parents don't understand. However, the actual lyrics do not support this view. Quoting from them, the lyrics speak of individuals who are "just taller children" but also "nobody's children" and later in the lyrics "just OLDER children" who are "alone" and "sit in silence" and who "they think that we're holding a secretive ball."

It's ludicrous to interpret this song to be simply about children with parents that do not understand. Personally, I believe Bowie is once again speaking of the mentally disabled as he did in "All The Madmen," but I did not want to put this on the page because that is my interpretation. I believe the language that I used is general enough and logically follows from commonplace understanding of the English language and the lyrics of the song. If you do not agree, feel free to remove the interpretations entirely, as that conforms more strictly to wikipedia ideals, but note that there are plenty of worthwhile wiki pages that have a few minor unsupported claims, and perhaps good uncited information is better than cited bad information. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 70.142.144.131 (talk) 16:48, 22 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Note also that the previous interpretations of these songs that were put forth cited a piece of writing by the instrumental composer David Buckley. He's not a music critic or a poet. Writing instrumental music--he wrote the music for the video game Call of Duty 2--hardly qualifies a person to give definitive meanings of Bowie songs that are not supported by inspection of the actual lyrics. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 70.142.144.131 (talk) 16:57, 22 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Just back from Xmas away - thank you for your exposition. A tenet of Wikipedia is verifiability, not truth, and cited interpretations do carry more weight than yours or mine. Nor do suggestions of what you find "ludicrous" and what you will or won't "tolerate" impress a great deal. That said, re-reading a few different works, I'd concede that a song like "After All" has many readings and it's difficult to assign one blanket interpetation, so for now it's simpler to drop it entirely from the passage. Re. "Saviour Machine", however, the wording there is in keeping with readings of the lyrics by Carr & Murray, Buckley and Allmusic, to name three, whereas yours would need citation to remain. I've altered the article accordingly. Cheers, Ian Rose (talk) 14:30, 26 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]