User talk:Robert Brockway

Hello, welcome to Wikipedia. Here's some tips:

• You can introduce yourself on the new users page.
• You can sign your name using three tildes, like ~~~. If you use four, you can add a datestamp too.
• Remember to use the show preview button before you save a page.
• If you have any questions, see the help pages, add a question to the village pump or ask me on my talk page.

Other useful pages are: how to edit, how to write a great article, naming conventions, manual of style and the Wikipedia policies.

I hope you enjoy editing here and being a Wikipedian! Angela. 14:37, Apr 13, 2004 (UTC)

In addition to Angela's standard welcome above, I want to personally welcome Rob to Wikipedia. I have known Rob "in real life" since 1995 and know, beyond ANY doubt, that he will make valuable (and very level-headed) contributions to our cause. It will only take a team of 10 editors, working full time, to fix his typos. <grin> G'day mate! - Gaz 15:39, 14 Apr 2004 (UTC)

Hey, cool article on Archibald Fenner Brockway. Relative of yours? Isomorphic 21:49, 18 Apr 2004 (UTC)

Distant relative :)

2nd cousin to my grandfather. I really respect his views and the things he did to oppose wars he disagreed with.

Cheers,

      Rob 

"There is also confusion over the effect on Australia's sovereignty over the excised area."

Really? I haven't heard anything about this... who has suggested that sovereignty is affected, and in what way? - Borofkin 02:40, 12 Nov 2004 (UTC)

Thanks for uploading Image:SchapelleCorbyInCell.jpg. What exactly was the permission given? Only for Wikipedia? Or was it free to use for whatever, commercial or otherwise? Thanks. Evil Monkey∴Hello 12:07, Apr 14, 2005 (UTC)

It's a fundamental policy of Wikipedia that it does not take a standpoint but fairly represents all views. In the same way that it would not be fair to show Schapelle next to a big bag of weed, it's not fair to show her pitiful in jail. The photo of her with friends is not really a good enough illustration of her to use as a photo of her. Look, if you're in touch with her family, they must have dozens, hundreds of photos of her. You just need one of her that does her justice. Not a heartbreaking "I am in jail" shot. Not one that hints that she is being inhumanly treated. The picture is posed so that the cell looks cramped and dark. It probably is but the impression it gives should be balanced by a standard photo of the person herself. I'm not going to revert it again. If you insist on placing a photo that tells a story, sobeit. I appreciate the feeling Schapelle's case has aroused in some and I'm content that I've made my point. Grace Note 05:07, 27 Apr 2005 (UTC)

Yes, fair enough. I paraphrased him but you're right that what he actually said is a better think to include than my conclusions about what he meant by it. BTW, I think it's fair enough to take off the NPOV tag now, because we've stabilised at an article that while it's not perfect and is a bit skimpy on the prosecution's side, is pretty fair.Grace Note 07:54, 30 Apr 2005 (UTC)

Thanks for pointing out the error. The year was 1777, not 1977. - JMBell° 11:48, 2 May 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Sorry for the confusion on Schapelle Corby, it looks like Wikipedia was serious glitching this afternoon. I was tracking the contributions of User:67.81.177.1, a new user who appeared to have overwritten sections of a couple different articles. This is what I saw (click diff link):

1. 11:46, 6 May 2005 (hist) (diff) Schapelle Corby

I copied his addition with link, opened the previous revision that had the apparently deleted Bali Nine section intact, pasted his addition in, and saved the previous revision -- I made no other changes or deletions.

However, that user no longer appears in the Corby page history, and the diff on my edit is radically different from what I saved; I certainly didn't see any drastic shortening of the article when I reviewed it after saving. It's possible someone else was actively editing at the time, but I did not receive an edit conflict. If it's my mistake, I apologize; if it's Wikipedia's system, then I hope the damage is not lasting. Good luck, the article is shaping up nicely. — Catherine\^talk 03:09, 25 May 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for cleaning up the vandalism on my User page. Zoe 08:40, August 28, 2005 (UTC)

It used to be unlocked, I unlocked it when I left last time, just haven't gotten around to locking it again. Zoe 09:13, August 28, 2005 (UTC)

Hi. I reverted your edit to Buck Rogers in the 25th Century because the use of the term "ejaculation" is actually correct. It's an old term frequently used in literature to mean a statement that is blurted out. So in this context I don't believe it to be vandalism. Cheers! 23skidoo 14:47, 11 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Rob - I invite you to use the 'sage-au' box in your Babel box, that I've just created. Steven Plunkett 14:32, 12 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Whoh - I just saw your edit there in SAGE-AU. Are you sure? Because when I showed the exec this article that didn't dispute any of the information. What I meant by offshoot was that it was formed by people from SAGE(US), obviously keeping the brand and other attributes etc. Would be interested in discussing this more with you. Steven Plunkett 04:18, 3 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Hi there! I'd like to invite you to explore Wikimedia Canada, and create a list of people interested in forming a local chapter for our nation. A local chapter will help promote and improve the organization, within our great nation. We'd also like to encourage everyone to suggest projects for our national chapter to participate in. Hope to see you there!--DarkEvil 04:29, 3 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Hi, I've added the information from the Iced coffee (Australia) article into a subsection of the article Iced coffee under Iced coffee#Australia. I did this because it has been nearly two weeks since anything has been done to the article and over a week since you last left a message on its talk page. I was hoping you would add the sources for the information about the popularity of iced coffee and its caffiene content compared to Coca-Cola. I'm letting you know this because I was going to turn the Iced coffee (Australia) article into a redirect to Iced coffee, but I realized this would be pretty rude of me if you were still planning to work on it. Please let me know whenever you can. =) — Indi ^{[ talk ]} 15:52, 15 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Hey, thanks for taking the time to reply! =) Okay, I guess I'll turn it into a redirect since I have your consent. — Indi ^{[ talk ]} 11:45, 17 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Hi, Robert. Please see my comments on Eli_Cohen. Thanks, --Stoopideggs2 23:11, 26 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

See also Derek Price's 1959 theory. —Viriditas | Talk 00:22, 10 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Robert: I believe that you misread Caroline Island when you purported to remove an "inaccuracy" from it regarding the International Date Line. Please discuss. - Seth Ilys 19:42, 13 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Robert: Thanks for your comment on Caroline Island. The wording is perfectly clear to me, but perhaps, working together, we can come up with something better and clearer to everyone. Let's work on improving the wording of that section on Talk:Caroline Island. - Seth Ilys 00:03, 14 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Please note that the article did not state Caroline Island was closest to the International Date Line. As was explained, the 1995 adjustment of the exact positioning of the IDL (made so that Kiribati would no longer be on both sides of the line) led to the Line no longer being quite so linear - consider the following diagram. You see that little red spot? That's Caroline Island. It's not the nearest, but it is the easternmost point that's west of the line.

This is why the main page is locked against editing by non-administrators. This particular topic was already addressed in the article. DS 19:42, 13 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Sorry 'bout that. I was going through the history, and thought that there was a lot of vandalism that wasn't cleaned up. I must have missed the edit which cleaned it up. Thanks for noticing. --liquidGhoul 23:32, 13 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Rob. The image I uploaded was a part of the publication from CIC Canada. It's a sample only and it does not constitute any problem on my side.

You say that most Australian governments have goverened without control of the Senate. In terms of number of years, I'm not sure if this is true (I will check), but even if it is, it misses the point. Most recent governments (Whitlam, Fraser, Hawke, Keating, Howard until 2005) have had to deal with Senates where minor parties and independents hold the balance. It is unusual for a government to face a Senate where the Opposition party has a majority in its own right. This happened for the first time to Cook in 1913 - he had a one-seat majority in the Reps and a Labor majority in the Senate which obstructed him at every turn in the hope of forcing an early election, as indeed they did. It subsequently happened to Scullin, and to Menzies in 1949-51. I can't think of any other occasions. Adam 02:29, 3 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

History of Senate control:

• 1901-10: Minority governments with no party controlling either House
• 1910-13: ALP majority in both houses
• 1913-14: Liberal government, ALP control Senate (double dissolution)
• 1914-16: ALP majority both houses
• 1916-29: Nationalist or Nat/Country majority both houses
• 1929-32: ALP government, Nat/Country control Senate
• 1932-41: UAP/Country majority both houses
• 1941-43: ALP government, UAP/Country control Senate (wartime, no obstruction of government)
• 1943-49: ALP majority both houses
• 1949-51: Lib/CP government, ALP Senate (double dissolution)
• 1951-65: Lib/CP majority both houses
• 1965-72: Lib/CP government, DLP balance of power in Senate
• 1972-74: ALP government, DLP balance of power in Senate (double dissolution)
• 1974-75: ALP government, 2 independents balance of power in Senate (double dissolution)
• 1975-81: Lib/NCP majority both houses
• 1981-83: Lib/NCP government, Aust Dems balance of power in Senate
• 1983-96: ALP government, Aust Dems balance of power in Senate (double dissolution 1987)
• 1996-2005: Lib/Nat government, Aust Dems and Greens balance of power in Senate
• 2005-08 (at least: Lib/Nat majority both houses

Thus, for the period 1910-2008:

• Government control of both houses = 57 years
• Minor parties control Senate = 35 years
• Opposition control Senate = 6 years

Adam 03:36, 3 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Adam 03:36, 3 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Regarding this edit summary: the default stance when something's inclusion in an article is being challenged is not to just leave it there for the duration of the discussion. --Cyde Weys 19:03, 7 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Hi, read your talk page and thought you might want to add this user box.

This user thinks that registration should be required to edit articles.

. Rimmeraj 06:35, 27 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Your comment about Lasseter's reef not being an actual mine is absolutely correct, but then many other supposed discoveries popularly referred to as "lost mines" have never been mined, either. I use the term "lost mine" because it is the popular term used for this type of legend. You would certainly be justified in adding a qualifier to the Lost mines article that some of the legends - even if true - were never actual mines. Plazak 17:15, 3 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

(replying to message on my talk page) — If you could get it released under the GFDL, that would be great. Make sure to get the copyright holder to send a statement to permissions-en AT wikimedia DOT org so we have an official record of this. Wikipedia:Requesting copyright permission has some useful tips. —Remember the dot ^(talk) 05:51, 14 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Have you already heard any news about this image? Otherwise I will delete it. It can always be restored when/if permission arrives. Garion96 (talk) 14:21, 9 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Ok, it is deleted now. Garion96 (talk) 22:02, 9 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I hadn't picked up the AfD, so I've restored for now. The credibility of the article would be greatly enhanced if it had independent references and a less promotional style, thanks, Jimfbleak 05:56, 1 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

No problem, I only view comments as abrupt if they involve blanking my page or strings of abuse. I understand your concern about speedies, but from my viewpoint there is a never-ending stream of copyright violation, advertising, nonsense and attacks. Notability is more difficult, but there have to be guidelines, or every website/person/unsigned teenage band in the world could have an article in what is supposed to be an encyclopaedia. Thanks, Jimfbleak 09:39, 1 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

A {{prod}} template has been added to the article Home Unix Machine Brisbane User Group, suggesting that it be deleted according to the proposed deletion process. All contributions are appreciated, but this article may not satisfy Wikipedia's criteria for inclusion, and the deletion notice explains why (see also "What Wikipedia is not" and Wikipedia's deletion policy). You may contest the proposed deletion by removing the {{dated prod}} notice, but please explain why you disagree with the proposed deletion in your edit summary or on its talk page. Also, please consider improving the article to address the issues raised. Even though removing the deletion notice will prevent deletion through the proposed deletion process, the article may still be deleted if it matches any of the speedy deletion criteria or it can be sent to Articles for Deletion, where it may be deleted if consensus to delete is reached. If you endorse deletion of the article, and you are the only person who has made substantial edits to the page, please tag it with {{db-author}}. alexis+kate=? 02:41, 25 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Robert,

Not sure if you've seen it yet, but the HUMBUG article has been listed on DRV. I figured you might have an opinion that should be heard. :)

— xDanielx ^T/_C 20:51, 9 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Robert, the problem wasn't noteworthiness, I very much agree that it is noteworthy, the problem was the source is so vague and not necessarily reliable, however I have done some more research and found the original source and will add the information now. Cheers, WikiTownsvillian 09:14, 13 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

The Schapelle Corby article received heavy editing today by new/unregistered users, which I noticed at WikiRage.com. The article may benefit from a good review. According to Wikipedia Page History Statistics, you are one of the top contributors to that page. If you have the time, would you please read over the article and make any necessary changes. Thanks. -- Jreferee ^(Talk) 02:48, 15 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

We just had an edit conflict in Five_Good_Emperors. You deleted the unbalanced </ref> while I was adding the missing <ref> to balance it :-) Either way cleaned it up, but if you compare the syntax of the 2nd footnote, to (what is now) the first footnote, you'll see what the original author had meant to do. —Preceding unsigned comment added by PeterStJohn (talk • contribs) 17:04, 18 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Hello Robert, you recently edited the page Israel and the United Nations. I invite you to have a look at my rewrite of this subject, Israel, Palestine and the United Nations. I intend to replace the first with the second. Let me know what you think. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Emmanuelm (talk • contribs) 13:17, 19 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, I'm looking at this edit: [1] (No time before 1970 in the epoch. Looks like an edit by someone who fundamentally misunderstood the concept). Check out the image Image:Year 2038 problem.gif for an easy way to watch rollover. As you can see, after 0x7fffffff (2038), comes 0x80000000 (1901). You can have dates before the epoch, because you can have negative dates. I've undone your edit. ~a (user • talk • contribs) 01:19, 18 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, there.

I just wanted to know if you're able to take a picture of the Coptic Orthodox Church Center in Mississauga OR St. Mark's Coptic Orthodox Church in Toronto. You can find out the street address online (the links to those websites are on the image pages). The current images are, unfortunately, copyrighted, as I was the one who uploaded them.

The current (copyrighted) images may get deleted, so if they do, then I'll need to replace them.

I need you or somebody else to take a picture, release its copyright, and upload it onto Wikipedia. I HAVE contacted others to notify them also, so if there are more than one pictures, that's OK (I can still make an article on them). I want these images to be used for, specifically, the article "Coptic Orthodox Church in Canada". The image pages are, again:

• Toronto: Image:St Mark's CopticChurch--TO.jpg
• Mississauga: Image:Canadian Coptic Center.jpg

• ~ Troy 22:34, 11 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Labor is 51.7pc in Bennelong - the computer, rightly, is predicting a Labor gain. It is not a declared result in the table, and the wording never said it was. Timeshift (talk) 18:32, 25 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I've worked around actors for 36 years -- it's quite believable. Ed Fitzgerald (unfutz) ^{(talk / cont)} 21:32, 3 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

FWIW. You're not alone in being wound up by Mr. Ed. --Tagishsimon (talk) 10:28, 24 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

When did a Canadian PR card become "required for admission as a permanent resident on arrival at a Canadian port of entry"? As far as I can see, the claim that it's not required is neither misleading nor wrong; having a PR card won't guarantee entry into Canada, nor will not having one prevent someone with PR status from entering the country.

Of course a definitive cite on that point wouldn't go amiss in the article. Mark Grant (talk) 01:46, 21 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

True, I can see now where that comment could be confusing, the card is not required to enter Canada, but it's generally required to board a plane to fly to Canada; if you can get to Canadian immigration, then you can prove your residency status in other ways in order to enter the country. I'll see if I can find a proper cite and clean up the explanation at some point. Mark Grant (talk) 04:44, 22 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, Robert Brockway. Based on the templates on your talk page, I would like you to consider joining the Article Rescue Squadron. Rescue Squadron members are focused on rescuing articles for deletion, that might otherwise be lost forever. I think you will find our project matches your vision of Wikipedia. Article Rescue Members are not necessarily inclusionists, all wikipedians are warmly welcome to join.~~~~

What would you think of a recent changes page for articles with few watchers? When you patrol recent changes, do you find that the rare/obscure articles (which typically have fewer editors watching them) are in greater danger of having vandalism missed, or is this usually caught? When you come across vandalism that would probably have been missed, is it usually on obscure pages? I have a Tracking watchers on recent changes proposal going, but given that I don't do too much recent changes patrolling, I thought it might be a good idea to ask a couple of people who do for input. –M^T 22:27, 28 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Hey, I read your comments about the movie Stop-Loss. You said that in the end, it was a flashback of what happened earlier on; however, if you read this revision a year ago [2], it seems as if the person who added this huge "synopsis"--or rather what would seem to be the entire script...--copied and pasted it from a website that has the entire summary. He states that they do go onto a second tour and I would agree. Even though you can't see King's scar, you can see King tapping on the soldiers from his former unit. This signifies their past relationship and logically, if you just met somone for the first time, you would not be patting them on the head. In addition, Michelle was staring at King and not Shriver which tells us that this occured after michelle and shriver broke up.

There is one part that did confuse me though and that part was when I saw Ricardo (if that is how you spell his name) on the bus with his family waving at him. So perhaps you are right, but the majority of the evidence points toward the theory of the second tour. Regards,--Edu killer (talk) 01:33, 9 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]

EDIT! Yes I looked at the scene again and there IS a scar. This is their second tour, NOT a flashback.--Edu killer (talk) 02:05, 9 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Wow, you are an old timer, 14 months earlier than me! I am excited, we need experienced veteran editors like yourself.

Please take a minute to sign your name to our list of 270+ members:

• Wikipedia:ARSM#All_Members

Good news, we are building our first newsletter and should sent out this weekend, keep an eye out for it! Ikip (talk) 21:31, 22 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]

The Wikipedia:Article Rescue Squadron Newsletter
The Article Rescue Squadron Newsletter Issue 1 (September 2009) Content News and announcements Want ads Feature: Article rescue as a team effort Featured editor: MichaelQSchmidt

You are receiving this note because of your participation in Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Iceland–Mexico relations, which is now being revisited at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Iceland–Mexico relations (2nd nomination). –xeno^talk 17:37, 15 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Hello. Your account has been granted the "reviewer" userright, allowing you to review other users' edits on certain flagged pages. Pending changes, also known as flagged protection, is currently undergoing a two-month trial scheduled to end 15 August 2010.

Reviewers can review edits made by users who are not autoconfirmed to articles placed under pending changes. Pending changes is applied to only a small number of articles, similarly to how semi-protection is applied but in a more controlled way for the trial. The list of articles with pending changes awaiting review is located at Special:OldReviewedPages.

When reviewing, edits should be accepted if they are not obvious vandalism or BLP violations, and not clearly problematic in light of the reason given for protection (see Wikipedia:Reviewing process). More detailed documentation and guidelines can be found here.

If you do not want this userright, you may ask any administrator to remove it for you at any time. Courcelles (talk) 18:45, 19 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Armageddon theology WritersCramp (talk) 13:55, 11 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]

You were right to remove it - it was basically a WP:OR rant. Orderinchaos 10:09, 20 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Robert,

As you've noticed it appears we have a problem on the Bradley Manning wikipedia page with people constantly reverting information about his dual citizenship - despite supporting evidence being linked to within the main body of the article itself! I am not hugely familiar with wikipedia procedure, but what would be the next step from here? The real-life consequences of having innaccurate information on the page are actually quite serious.

All the best,

Naomi

Auerfeld (talk) 12:16, 27 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for getting back to me! I am raising the issue again on the article Talk page, so that it can't be said that we haven't gone to full lengths to solve this by consensus. If that doesn't work, maybe you could advise on the next step? I'm afraid I don't really know my way around the systems here. Also, is this the best way to communicate on this... (sorry, as I said, I'm really a Wikipedia novice).

Naomi

Auerfeld (talk) 10:47, 28 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks again for all your help with the procedure here - I'm learning new things every day :) I'll keep my fingers crossed that it yields results!

Naomi

Auerfeld (talk) 14:47, 28 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Really sorry to ask again, but I am being told I cannot change the article. Would you oblige?

Thank you. Naomi

Auerfeld (talk) 23:12, 28 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for the note, Robert - will do Auerfeld (talk) 12:23, 30 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Robert,

I just added this detail to my account - look forward to hearing from you.

All the best,

Naomi Auerfeld (talk) 12:53, 30 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]

With regard to your question here [3], I never name and report meat/sockpuppets, unless this is absolutely necessary. This helps to minimize confrontations. Biophys (talk) 16:19, 10 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Did your test of rollback on your user page do what you expected? In case you are not aware, the way rollback works is this: Suppose user X has made three consecutive edits to an article (no other edit has occurred since the time of X's first edit). You decide that X's three edits satisfy Wikpedia's definition of vandalism so click "rollback". The effect is that all of X's consecutive edits are removed. That includes any edits X may have made after the three edits that you noticed—all consecutive edits by X are removed back to the last edit by another user. Rollback should only be used to remove obvious vandalism (or, rarely, certain other things per WP:ROLLBACK). Johnuniq (talk) 09:36, 8 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Hi. When you recently edited Software in the Public Interest, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Haskell (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.

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 10:58, 11 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for uploading File:APNIC OFFICE 2011.JPG. I noticed that while you provided a valid copyright licensing tag, there is no proof that the creator of the file agreed to license it under the given license.

If you created this media entirely yourself but have previously published it elsewhere (especially online), please either

• make a note permitting reuse under the CC-BY-SA or another acceptable free license (see this list) at the site of the original publication; or
• Send an email from an address associated with the original publication to permissions-enwikimedia.org, stating your ownership of the material and your intention to publish it under a free license. You can find a sample permission letter here. If you take this step, add {{OTRS pending}} to the file description page to prevent premature deletion.

If you did not create it entirely yourself, please ask the person who created the file to take one of the two steps listed above, or if the owner of the file has already given their permission to you via email, please forward that email to permissions-enwikimedia.org.

If you believe the media meets the criteria at Wikipedia:Non-free content, use a tag such as {{non-free fair use in|article name}} or one of the other tags listed at Wikipedia:File copyright tags#Fair use, and add a rationale justifying the file's use on the article or articles where it is included. See Wikipedia:File copyright tags for the full list of copyright tags that you can use.

If you have uploaded other files, consider checking that you have provided evidence that their copyright owners have agreed to license their works under the tags you supplied, too. You can find a list of files you have created in your upload log. Files lacking evidence of permission may be deleted one week after they have been tagged, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. You may wish to read the Wikipedia's image use policy. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you. Stefan2 (talk) 01:40, 17 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]

	Brisbane Meetup v t e Next: To be decided (watch) Last: Saturday 13 January 2018
See also: Australian events listed at Wikimedia.org.au (or on Facebook)

Hi there! You are cordially invited to a series of Paralympic History workshops and a meetup next Saturday (26 May) and Sunday. In attendance will be University of Queensland faculty and Australian Paralympic Committee staff. Details and an attendee list are at Wikipedia:Meetup/Brisbane/5. Hope to see you there! John Vandenberg 07:03, 16 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]

(this automated message was delivered using replace.py to all users in Category:Wikipedians in Brisbane)

Brisbane Meetup Next: 3 August 2012 - Dinner Last: 26 May 2012 - Dinner @ Southbank This box: view talk edit

Hi there! You are cordially invited to a meetup this Friday evening (3 August). Details and an attendee list are at Wikipedia:Meetup/Brisbane/6. Hope to see you there! John Vandenberg 01:20, 1 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]

(this automated message was delivered using replace.py to all users in Brisbane)

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Feudum Acinganorum, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Romani (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.

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 12:20, 14 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Brisbane Meetup Next: 11 February 2013 5-8PM - Drinks and light dinner at SLQ with Sue Gardner Last: 3 August 2012 This box: view talk edit

Hi there! You are cordially invited to a meetup on 11 Febrary 2013 with Sue Gardner.

Details at Wikipedia:Meetup/Brisbane/7. Hope to see you there! John Vandenberg 10:41, 30 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

(this automated message was delivered using replace.py to all users in SEQ)

Oh, I'm sure that's true. The article has been the subject of COI editing since its inception; indeed, Petersen is either an accomplished self-publicist or has a little army of these people, because every election in which she stands Antony Green and all the electoral sites get bombarded with people convinced she's a real chance to win, which she never does. I'm far from convinced she's notable in the first place but she passed the last AfD and has pretty much had these sorts of edits constantly ever since. By all means raise it at COI, although I'm sure that once Australianindi is dealt with another will appear. It's that sort of article. Frickeg (talk) 19:40, 18 March 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Royal Charter (ship), 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.

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 14:32, 1 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited NetApp filer, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page NFS (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.

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 11:28, 11 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]

When you say that a virtual address space larger than the amount of physical memory is "was largely restricted to larger systems", what do you mean by "larger systems"? As far as I know, it applied to most if not all mainframes (S/3x0, PDP-10, the Multics machines); what are some of the examples of systems that had more physical memory than virtual address space (other than the ones listed in Paging#Main memory larger than virtual address space)? Guy Harris (talk) 00:38, 14 November 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you for your contributions to the encyclopedia! In case you are not already aware, an article to which you have recently contributed, Men's rights movement, is on article probation. A detailed description of the terms of article probation may be found at Talk:Men's rights movement/Article probation. Also note that the terms of some article probations extend to related articles and their associated talk pages.

The above is a templated message. Please accept it as a routine friendly notice, not as a claim that there is necessarily any problem with your edits. Thank you. -- Bbb23 (talk) 23:26, 12 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article OSUNIX is suitable for inclusion in Wikipedia according to Wikipedia's policies and guidelines or whether it should be deleted.

The article will be discussed at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/OSUNIX until a consensus is reached, and anyone is welcome to contribute to the discussion. The nomination will explain the policies and guidelines which are of concern. The discussion focuses on high-quality evidence and our policies and guidelines.

Users may edit the article during the discussion, including to improve the article to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the article-for-deletion notice from the top of the article. Someone not using his real name (talk) 00:08, 24 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited History of Australia, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page New Holland (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.

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 09:15, 23 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Hi there! I'm dropping you this notice as you've indicated on your userpage that you're a Wikipedian in the Brisbane area. Assuming significant interest, I'm organising an event for August 22 at the SLQ Café in South Brisbane, and we'd love for you to come along. A list of people interested in coming, and a discussion space has been created at Wikipedia:Meetup/Brisbane/8. Hope to see you there! MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 10:39, 7 August 2015 (UTC)[reply]

This message has been automatically sent to all users in Category:Wikipedians in Brisbane. If you do not wish to receive further messages like this, please either remove your user page from this category, or add yourself to Category:Opted-out of message delivery

I once gave a talk at HUMBUG on DNS location. I now stumble across your Wiki - Salute el presidente! DNSLOC (talk) 14:45, 9 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Hi,
You appear to be eligible to vote in the current Arbitration Committee election. The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to enact binding solutions for disputes between editors, primarily related to serious behavioural issues that the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the ability to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail. If you wish to participate, you are welcome to review the candidates' statements and submit your choices on the voting page. For the Election committee, MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 22:14, 30 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Hi there! I'm dropping you this notice as you've indicated on your userpage that you're a Wikipedian in the Brisbane area. To celebrate fifteen years of Wikipedia, we are holding a celebration in Brisbane on the 16th of January and you are invited! For further information, and to register your interest, please see our meetup page. Hope to see you there!

This message has been automatically sent to all users in Category:Wikipedians in Brisbane. If you do not wish to receive further messages like this, please either remove your user page from this category, or add yourself to Category:Opted-out of message delivery.

An editor has asked for a discussion to address the redirect Mathematical recursion. Since you had some involvement with the Mathematical recursion redirect, you might want to participate in the redirect discussion if you have not already done so. Si Trew (talk) 22:15, 4 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]

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

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

If you wish to participate in the 2016 election, please review the candidates' statements and submit your choices on the voting page. Mdann52 (talk) 22:08, 21 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]

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

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

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

Greetings Recent Changes Patrollers!

This is a one-time-only message to inform you about technical proposals related to Recent Changes Patrol in the 2016 Community Wishlist Survey that I think you may be interested in reviewing and perhaps even voting for:

1. Adjust number of entries and days at Last unpatrolled
2. Editor-focused central editing dashboard
3. "Hide trusted users" checkbox option on watchlists and related/recent changes (RC) pages
4. Real-Time Recent Changes App for Android
5. Shortcut for patrollers to last changes list

Further, there are more than 20 proposals related to Watchlists in general that you may be interested in reviewing. (and over 260 proposals in all, across many aspects of wikis)

Thank you for your consideration. Please note that voting for proposals continues through December 12, 2016.

Note: You received this message because you have transcluded {{User wikipedia/RC Patrol}} (user box) on your user page. Since this message is "one-time-only" there is no opt out for future mailings.

Best regards, Stevietheman — Delivered: 01:10, 8 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]

As an Australian Wikipedian, your opinion is sought on a proposal to advocate for the introduction of Fair Use into Australian copyright law. The discussion is taking place at the Australian Wikipedians' notice board, please read the proposal and comment there. MediaWiki message delivery MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 11:08, 2 March 2017 (UTC)[reply]

This message has been automatically sent to all users in Category:Australian Wikipedians. If you do not wish to receive further messages like this, please either remove your user page from this category, or add yourself to Category:Opted-out of message delivery

If you are in or near Brisbane, please join us on Sunday 10 December 2017 any time from noon to 4pm at The Edge at the State Library of Queensland. For more details and to sign up, please go to the meetup page. See you there! Kerry (talk) 22:39, 27 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]

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

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

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

	Brisbane Meetup v t e Next: To be decided (watch) Last: Saturday 13 January 2018
See also: Australian events listed at Wikimedia.org.au (or on Facebook)

If you are in or near Brisbane, please join us on Saturday 13 January 2018 any time from noon to 4pm at The Edge at the State Library of Queensland. For more details and to sign up, please go to the meetup page. See you there!

An editor has asked for a discussion to address the redirect Cheese powder. Since you had some involvement with the Cheese powder redirect, you might want to participate in the redirect discussion if you have not already done so. feminist (talk) 13:26, 7 October 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, Robert Brockway. Voting in the 2018 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23.59 on Sunday, 3 December. All users who registered an account before Sunday, 28 October 2018, made at least 150 mainspace edits before Thursday, 1 November 2018 and are not currently blocked are eligible to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once.

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

If you wish to participate in the 2018 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 18:42, 19 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Hello! Voting in the 2019 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23:59 on Monday, 2 December 2019. All eligible users are allowed to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once. The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail. If you wish to participate in the 2019 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. If you no longer wish to receive these messages, you may add {{NoACEMM}} to your user talk page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 00:03, 19 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Hello! Voting in the 2020 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23:59 (UTC) on Monday, 7 December 2020. All eligible users are allowed to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once. The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail. If you wish to participate in the 2020 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. If you no longer wish to receive these messages, you may add {{NoACEMM}} to your user talk page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 01:16, 24 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Hello! Voting in the 2021 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23:59 (UTC) on Monday, 6 December 2021. All eligible users are allowed to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once. The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail. If you wish to participate in the 2021 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. If you no longer wish to receive these messages, you may add {{NoACEMM}} to your user talk page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 00:03, 23 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]

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

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

If you wish to participate in the 2022 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. If you no longer wish to receive these messages, you may add {{NoACEMM}} to your user talk page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 00:25, 29 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

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

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

If you wish to participate in the 2023 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. If you no longer wish to receive these messages, you may add {{NoACEMM}} to your user talk page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 00:20, 28 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]