User talk:Carbonrodney
This article is licensed under the GNU Free Documentation License. It uses material from the Wikipedia article "User_talk:Carbonrodney".

content
Welcome to my talk page, please be civil




Contents

The Meisner Technique School of Acting

I want you to know that am not the teacher of the school. As far as I can tell by the notability page you referred me to, yes this is notable enough. And as for the definition of encyclopedia that you referred me to, there is nothing in the definition that leads me to believe that this article couldn't belong. Especially when I see so many similar ones already in existence on Wikipedia. I just don't understand how you are qualifying some and disqualifying others who are completely comparable to the material you have already set precedence with. I have provided links from 3rd party sources and still nothing. What do you need from me? Couldn't it at least be a stub?? --Jmjrrtt (talk) 17:12, 18 July 2008 (UTC)

I am confused by your notability policy. There seems to be a lot of gray area covered, but not much black and white. What makes The Meisner Technique School of Acting any different from The Sanford Meisner Center for the Arts. The Meisner Technique School of Acting is a reputable school, with a reputable director who also happens to be a legitimate actor and a disciple of Sanford Meisner. --Jmjrrtt (talk) 22:42, 17 July 2008 (UTC)

Message

No problem, and in case that you may need help, contact me! Macy (talk) 02:56, 3 April 2008 (UTC)

"Weasel-y" language

I meant no offense by my use of that term. It simply describes the language "Some say." I actually agreed with your moving the text to a different section. It's tough to edit articles where you care deeply about the subject matter, as it appears you do here. However, I have no doubt that you are editing in complete good-faith, and I hope you don't leave that article. We need more good-faith editors there, not less. Regards, S. Dean Jameson 05:27, 15 July 2008 (UTC)

Your recent edits

Hi there. In case you didn't know, when you add content to talk pages and Wikipedia pages that have open discussion, you should sign your posts by typing four tildes ( ~~~~ ) at the end of your comment. If you can't type the tilde character, you should click on the signature button Image:Signature_icon.png located above the edit window. This will automatically insert a signature with your name and the time you posted the comment. This information is useful because other editors will be able to tell who said what, and when. Thank you! --SineBot (talk) 07:28, 16 July 2008 (UTC)

Mosquito

Under section 79 subsection 1 g of the Environmental Protection Act 1990 a statutory nusiance includes 'noise emitted from premises so as to be prejudicial to health or a nuisance'. The device works by emitting a noise that annoys those who can hear it. There are exceptions to g for defence purposes and aircraft. Section 80 requires a local authority (Local council) to serve an abatement notice where a statutory nuisance exists or is likely to occur. Abatement notices should require the nuisance to be abated or prohibit its occurence. It is an offence to fail to comply with an abatement notice unless it is overturned by a court. Anyone affected by the nuisance can sue to get the nuisance stopped. If the nuisance affects a sufficiently large portion of her majesties subjects, it is public nuisance, which is a serious crime carrying a maximum sentence of life imprisonment. I am a bit rusty on tort law, but essentially the tort of nuisance is comitted when a person does something that affects another persons land, without actually being on their land, that stops the person using their land how they like, or makes it harder or less enjoyable to use the land. A bit rough, but about right I think. Dolive21 (talk) 11:56, 16 July 2008 (UTC)


It might be public nuisance, but it would certainly be a statutory nuisance, so the council should serve them with an abatement notice, and those affected could sue under section 82 for an order that the nuisance should stop.Dolive21 (talk) 12:11, 16 July 2008 (UTC)
To make the council enforce it would require a judicial review, a very expensive legal process in the High Court. The young people do not have the money for that, nor do they have the money to use the section 82 procedure to enforce it themselves. The councils are not usually very simpathetic. Dolive21 (talk) 12:29, 16 July 2008 (UTC)

Wild Bird Magazine AfD

Thanks for that, but you were a bit quick off the draw - see my comments on the AfD nomination :-) CultureDrone (talk) 07:12, 17 July 2008 (UTC)

Lol, no worries, I wasn't having a go at you - I was just surprised when I got an edit conflict when typing in my nomination - people aren't normally that fast ! :-) Here's a question for you though - why doesn't the '....this article's entry...' link on the article link to the correct discussion page ? It's going straight into edit mode - at least it does when I click on it... CultureDrone (talk) 07:25, 17 July 2008 (UTC)

Tags on photos

Hi, I have noticed that you have incorrectly tagged several photos you have uploaded. The Australian Department of Defence does not release photos into the public domain and any use of these photos on Wikipedia needs to be justified by a fair use statement (please see WP:FAIRUSE). The following images are tagged incorrectly and need to be fixed:

Please be more careful in the future - using the wrong copyright tags can lead to you being banned and could cause trouble for other editors who are trying to do the right thing by using Department of Defence photos under a fair use tag. Image:ADF Commanders 2008 fair use claimed.jpg is a DoD image I've recently uploaded and claimed fair use for which may be useful to you as a model. Let me know if you have any questions. Thanks, Nick Dowling (talk) 10:53, 18 July 2008 (UTC)

For some dumb reason the Template:Non-free promotional tag isn't available at the point where images are uploaded and has to be added later. This is the appropriate tag to use for DoD photos, though note that a fair use statement is required for each article the image is used in (Image:SASR Iraq.jpg is an example of an image where fair use is being claimed for a couple of articles). The images should only be used for instances were it's not possible to find a 'free' alternative and the photo is very important to the article. Nick Dowling (talk) 11:20, 18 July 2008 (UTC)
Yep, they all look good now. However, wasn't the first photo from Iraq? Nick Dowling (talk) 00:11, 19 July 2008 (UTC)
As stated above, those images are not released into the public domain and require a fair use statement so they fall under WP:NFCC#9. « ₣M₣ » 16:35, 20 July 2008 (UTC)

University High School

Your edits are incredibly irrelevant. I can number many odd additions you have made.
1. You correct others for adding "hearsay" but you add incredibly uncalled for information on the principals. Eg. "sex scandal???"
2. Add (special) is useless
3. Adding "Academic" is arbitrary as the topic is already curriculum.
4. Your information on French being compulsory is false!
5. The poetry competitions are not compulsory.
6. Your summary of Unihigh's special maths class includes irrelevant information. Eg (across the state, year 9 is typically low in new information...)
7. Your criticism of the acceleration program is incredibly subjective and inappropriate. Eg. "best teachers"
8. Your student body section is full of titles without any information!
9. The bridge plan is quite possibly is unlikely
10. Your "extra curricular section" may seem appropriate, but your comments are at times irrelevant and false.
11. Ultimately, your edits damage the integrity of the article and hence the school.
So I will once again re-edit.
Someone111111 (talk) 15:27, 18 July 2008 (UTC)

Ok, yes i must admit my previous was quite angry, but i just felt your edits were inappropriate and because i currently go there i wasnt that happy.
1. The sex scandal was not the only thing, things like "sharing the name with a famous beatle" wasn't very great either. The idea of getting others attention by adding random isnt what i think i appropriate.
2. Considering uve already put it as a header obviously means the Bryce house is different from the others.
3. Adding Academic is pointless, because the title Curriculum is quite obvious that it relates to that.
7. Yes, my argument that it affects the school's integrity is flawed but had the criticisms been substantiated like u said i would've left the edits. Furthermore you suggest things that would be far too subjective to be substantiated like the "best teachers". Many teachers that are deemed teach the main stream class. Had you added something like they restricted the choice of some other subjects like drama to accommodate compulsory Latin, it would have been more appropriate.
8. Ok i was a bit hasty when i deleted the titles but i dont think it is significant enough to add when information on these are quite limited and expected from high schools.
9. Yes you fixed it but u still left the bridge plan. I criticized in 1 as i was trying to indicate hypocrisy when u added the information on the principals.
10. I tried to add content, by adding information on the language school that you deleted. Yes i may have deleted the sports section to hastily but you information on the Music school is also not completely true.
Finally, I am incredibly sorry for being harsh and to a certain extent rude, but i do believe at times editing must involve DELETING if appropriate. Yet I am still not convinced that your actions are appropriate as you say i should not delete yet you still delete mine. Furthermore you cite pages on wikilove and mastodon yet you write in an condescending manner.

I am once again apologetic for writing such a blunt note. Someone111111 (talk) 08:58, 19 July 2008 (UTC)

Hi again, I was extremely glad to read your last note, I am again truly sorry for being very blunt and rude before, I tend to get annoyed very easily. Yeah i guess there is some restrictions to year 7 subjects but im not entirely sure now, because of a lack of people choosing Indonesian they dropped that subject. For the LOTE thing, the school now allow Year 7s to choose between German and French, because there are more German teachers. I am glad you can compromise and I will try my best to compromise too especially not completely deleting things. If you like you can send ideas about the topics and as a current student i will try my best to add with new information on things like the extra curricular stuff, , though i would like to keep the principals section without the extra info. I am a current year 12 so im not particular sure how the school operates in the other sub-schools, there have been many changes.
I hope we can maintain friendly correspondence Someone111111 (talk) 12:29, 19 July 2008 (UTC)

Your rollback request

Hi! I regret that I must inform you that your request for the rollback permission has been denied. You can discover why by checking the archives at Wikipedia:Requests for permissions/Denied/July 2008#Carbonrodney. SoxBot X (talk) 12:21, 20 July 2008 (UTC)

Re:Rollback request

Hello, Carbonrodney. You have new messages at Fritzpoll's talk page.
You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} template.

Microbiology

Hi there, welcome to the Wikiproject! If you have any questions or suggestions, please drop me a note on my talkpage. Tim Vickers (talk) 16:34, 21 July 2008 (UTC)

Welcome as well to MCB! Tim Vickers (talk) 16:54, 21 July 2008 (UTC)

Restriction enzyme is the current MCB collaboration of the month. There is also a list of ways you can get involved on the main MCB homepage. Tim Vickers (talk) 03:16, 22 July 2008 (UTC)

Re: Reducing size of fair use photos

Hi Melesse,

I don't know if you are doing it manually, or using a script to do this... but you should either not forget or edit your script to account for fair use tags... The DoD images I uploaded, which you reduced, need to have their tags updated to reflect this. --Carbonrodney (talk) 12:44, 20 July 2008 (UTC)

I do them manually. Updated to reflect what? Melesse (talk) 04:47, 22 July 2008 (UTC)

You go to Uni High?

Is this Aaron in year 8? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 122.108.85.231 (talk) 12:27, 22 July 2008 (UTC)


Ooooo

you got me son! 77.49.214.80 (talk) 18:12, 22 July 2008 (UTC)

User:The Clart

I've delisted him from WP:AIV for now: he hasn't edited for a while, and is on his final warning. Just report him again if he does it once more, or if any suspicious socks turn up. Thanks for the report, anyway, and have a nice day. —Ilmari Karonen (talk) 07:02, 23 July 2008 (UTC)


Need Help

Was wondering if I could get you to take a look at this collaborative effort I'm trying to start. I was wondering if we could get the whole team in on it too. Any feedback or comments would be greatly appreciated. Thanks in advance! DxNate 00:45, 29 Aug 2008 User-Talk-Contribs

+Rollbacker

Y Done - I'm convinced that you can use this tool wisely, but any administrator can take it away if you misuse it, so use it wisely! Any other questions, drop a line to my talkpage Fritzpoll (talk) 09:53, 25 July 2008 (UTC)

RfA Thanks

Thank you for participating in my RfA, wich was successful with 73 support, 6 oppose, and 5 neutral.

I'll try to be as clear as I can in my communication and to clear some of the admin backlog on images.

If there is anything I can help you with, don't hesitate to ask me on my talk page!

Cheers, --Steven Fruitsmaak (Reply) 14:47, 27 July 2008 (UTC)

RFA thankspam

Thanks for your support in my RFA, which passed with 140 supporting, 11 opposing, and 4 neutral. I will do my best to live up to the trust that you have given to me. If I can ever assist you with anything, just ask.

Cheers!

J.delanoygabsadds 20:24, 27 July 2008 (UTC)

RFA thank-you

Thank-you for your support of me at my recent RFA, which was successful. I have appreciated everyone's comments and encouragement there. Good Ol’factory (talk) 03:48, 29 July 2008 (UTC)

POV accusation (JH War Crimes)

WP:AGF please. A criticism by political opponents is not notable - it is routine and expected that a politician's opponents will call him nasty names. I left the Valder accusation of War Crimes in the Howard Govt article because Valder was a Liberal. --Surturz (talk) 13:46, 30 July 2008 (UTC)

I note that an admin reverted your edit with the summary that "bad faith accusations are not tolerated". I leave you to draw your own conclusions. --Surturz (talk) 13:56, 30 July 2008 (UTC)
Everyone has a point of view. Edit summaries will sometimes reflect the person's mood/frustration - I know a scan of mine probably won't turn up a perfect 100. But accusing someone of vandalism simply because they disagree with you in a content dispute is a very serious allegation. Note from WP:VAND: "Any good-faith effort to improve the encyclopedia, even if misguided or ill-considered, is not vandalism." I think personally it's a fair application of WP:NOT and WP:UNDUE - and I may note I have disagreed with many past edits by Surturz in the John Howard arena, as any watcher will attest. (I'm certainly of an opposite political orientation, and even have the Kevin07 t-shirt to prove it.) I've also spent a fair part of my evening dealing with real vandalism by a prolific sockpuppetteer despite being bandwidth-limited by my ISP until the end of the month. It would seem you are rather invested in this particular edit/news item, and I suggest stepping back and entering some form of dispute resolution with those whom you disagree. Any other "solution" is going to result in an endless edit war. I've been around the John Howard article long enough to know the environment there - in fact, I have an essay about it which I one day hope to launch as a guide to handling difficult editing environments. Orderinchaos 14:05, 30 July 2008 (UTC)
As the material being removed was not there 2 days ago, I question whose edit was unhelpful. In general Wikipedia's consensus procedure holds that in order to add something contentious to a contested page, one has to obtain consensus on the talk page first - this was not done. Also, sometimes we get waves of activists coming through John Howard pushing some obscure point almost to the level of madness, and it's difficult to determine where they've all arrived from. For the most part they are not historically speaking editors of the article. As for not accusing him of vandalism, your actual words were: "POV editing like your recent edits on John Howard [...] are borderline vandalism." Your edit summary read: "POV removal, even borderline vandalism." Orderinchaos 14:24, 30 July 2008 (UTC)
Not an "official process" by any means. If people want to properly deal with the things John Howard did in office, acting like the Socialist Alliance is not going to win them credibility either here or at The Hague. The ICC get thousands of dud requests every year, must we have reference to every last one of them here? Putting on my non-Wiki persona here, trying for a prosecution on AWB, or raising a commission of inquiry into the bailout of National Textiles, or having a Royal Commission into the "regional rorts" affair with very open terms of reference that would flush out the Coalition parties' misappropriations and possibly claim a few scalps, would all be quite effective measures to push for which would not be radical but which would be extremely embarrassing for the conservative side of politics, especially if any individual MPs were found to have personally benefitted (eg giving grants to their own companies). This one has no chance of going anywhere, just like the Aboriginals' appeal to the ICC some years ago. Orderinchaos 14:42, 30 July 2008 (UTC)

RfA thanks

Thank you for participating in my RfA, which did not succeed with 30 in support, 28 in opposition and 6 neutral votes. Thanks again for the support!


—CycloneNimrodTalk? 15:43, 3 August 2008 (UTC)

RfC

Many thanks for your responses, laid out neatly, point by point. I'll leave them for others to address, for the time being. Perhaps you'd like to add a response addressing the point I and others made about the lack of media coverage? If this is notable, then how come we Wikipedians have spent more time and effort on it than the entirety of the world's media outlets? --Pete (talk) 22:02, 3 August 2008 (UTC)

  • Thanks for your note - I appreciated it. I am sure I won't stay away indefinitely but a break will do me good --Matilda talk 05:11, 4 August 2008 (UTC)
Your contribution history is interesting in the lack of things I'd expect to see in the history of a major party in a dispute. I'm genuinely curious now as to whether this is one of our old friends revisited. Orderinchaos 07:46, 5 August 2008 (UTC)
Please come clean with the details of your previous editing identity. I am genuinely interested to know now, especially after examining your contributions. There is a reasonable basis for an RfC/U here. Your actions are not those of a new editor who happened upon this article. Orderinchaos 08:08, 5 August 2008 (UTC)
As for the matter - it is indeed drama. There is an existing RfC - comment on that if you must. Orderinchaos 08:10, 5 August 2008 (UTC)

WikiProject Good Articles Newsletter

Sorry about the delay. AWB has been having a few issues lately. Here is the august issue of the WikiProject Good Articles Newsletter! Dr. Cash (talk) 20:27, 19 August 2008 (UTC)

What are you doing up there?

You are listed at the top of the Wikipedia:Typo/Members page with the quote "what am I doing up here?". How'd you get up there? It's cute but unless there's a good reason should should break the order of the page. Jason Quinn (talk) 23:57, 20 August 2008 (UTC)
© jGames.co.uk 2007 (some content from Wikipedia under GDL ) !-- ValueClick Media 468x60 and 728x90 Banner CODE for jgames.co.uk -->
Your Ad Here