Hey Softgrow,

Welcome and enjoy Wikipedia. Your edits are much appreciated.

These links might help you with your contributions:

• Tutorial
• Manual of Style
• Policies and Guidelines

For Wikipedia-wide involvement, visit the Communtiy Portal and the Village Pump.

Be sure to check out Australian resources, like Australian Collaboration of the Week, New Australian Articles and Australian stub articles. You can list yourself at Australian Wikipedians.

Also, assuming you're an Adelaidean, have you considered participating in WikiProject Adelaide? We need all the help we can get!

Again, welcome.--Cyberjunkie 04:41, 2 Apr 2005 (UTC)

Hi, I got your message. I don't see your IP address among the ones that are currently blocked. If you still can't log in, can you post the exact block message you're seeing? That will help me track down the problem. Sorry about the inconvenience. --MarkSweep✍ 02:20, 29 August 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Softgrow. I used Geoscience Australia as the standard for all suburbs. See North Adelaide. You're welcome to revert the change.--Cyberjunkie | Talk 11:42, 21 September 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Hi. I knew about the Japanese version of the template for train lines, and have been using its format for the other lines that were made so far. Making a template template is nice, and it will save some time. Thanks for creating it, and I see you started to convert some of the existing lines already. Great! I'll use it for some lines I have the stations all ready for... and I also am happy I found your User:Softgrow/Railway_line_WIP page of colors.

One reason that I didn't copy the Japanese template/template exactly was because of an idea I have been formulating regarding the mapping of GIS data for the stations into a miniature map graphic on the side of the template, to give an idea of the train line's geography. (That is a major WIP of mine when I'm not distracted with other stuff) Also, I like some of the recent edits to Template:Sendai-Subway (the logo in the corners). I wasn't sure if the mini-map would work well in the template/template or not, and now I don't know about the logo either. And, since everything has an exception (or two), lines like Template:Tohoku Main Line and Template:Tohoku Shinkansen need different ways to deal with their branches and overall length.

As for the circle on the Yamanote line, I like the circle better, which is why I deviated from the pattern of the other lines that I made earlier. I've also seen a few comments from others who liked it. I agree that the space taken up by all of the templates is an issue, but there may be other ways to solve it. For the time being, I'd like to revert it back -- I'll remove the colored background, and give it a border instead. When I do that, I'll also put my reasons/preferences for the revert in the talk page of the template, where I'd like to move this discussion about the case for/against the circle and maybe discuss other alternatives to shrink this particular template size down (and the others as well).

- Neier 11:40, 4 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]

I was a bit surprised at your removal of my bit about bicycles. As a cyclist I can tell you that what I wrote was a fact - speed bumps don't inconvenience cyclists. It appears that it's been reinserted in modified form, so no matter. Gwaka Lumpa 12:52, 2 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Looking at your edit of speed bumps from yesterday (and boy you are fast - don't you have something else to do?), it seems that what the person who put those statements in were quite obvious and to any lay person reasonable assumptions to be made about such bumps. Ask yourself, if the bumps didn't do anything and were completely benign drivers wouldn't be distracted by them nor would their cars be damaged by them. For such a device to work, there has to be a negative effect. That negative effect is both to be unpleasent to driver over (you should know what it's like to hit a pot hole - the editor is right they're the same!) and that they can damage cars.

I would suggest that you recosider your edits. Also, I believe that driver discomfort and car damage were both published in an edition of Auto Express. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 81.152.57.27 (talk) 11:28, 15 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Wikipedia is not about the obvious, that is original research. Material needs to be backed by publication. It's not our role to write down the obvious, it is ours to record what other's have discovered. See WP:NOR. If you find the reference for the speed bumps article and it is a reliable source then by all means put it in (and consider the benefits of signing up for a username too!) Alex Sims 12:28, 15 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Just for you, searched the internet and found the correct referencies for you. The Times should meet all your necessary criteria, but I know of a couple of other referncies that support this. I think it is quite clear that the use of speed bumps in the UK is grossly excessive and that a more detailed search would easily find more evidence for you. In fact, see http://www.autoexpress.co.uk/news/autoexpressnews/67775/speed_humps_dumped_after_protest.html —Preceding unsigned comment added by 86.150.253.232 (talk) 16:11, 15 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Well done in removing more valid comments on speed bumps - and there was an international reference if you cared to look at those. I belive that you are not showing a neutral point of view on these and for some reason are very biased. Why? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 86.147.67.48 (talk) 11:22, 16 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Hello Softgrow. I see you have been editing the railways section in Adelaide. Heaps good. For the Finsbury railway station, I have it marked Finsbury on a UBD wallpaper map I have - unfortunately the wall map doesn't have anything about the year of publication at all(I suspect sometime in the 70s). Also, as I was the only editor to that page, feel free to contact me directly, it is more likely to be noticed and I would be pleased (not indignant) to reply to your query. Also my map doesn't have the Semaphore and Exeter train stations, so could you please go to Semaphore, South Australia and Exeter, South Australia and describe the previous location and presence of the railway line and stations in the suburb as I have done in Woodville North, South Australia as I feel that this is an important and relevant historical aspect of the suburb. Also you could describe where exactly the line was as I have done on Finsbury railway line, Adelaide as people no longer have maps which will tell them such information about the geography of the railway line and its neighbourhood. Happy editing.Blnguyen 00:29, 24 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Hey, I noticed that you resurrected a mis-linked speed limit archives. I did more digging, and I found that the one I originally created had a lower-cased L on "limit." That explans the red link.

I appreciate what you did, but I think it may be best to stick with the original one so that nobody gets suspicious when looking at the history tab. I fixed that link to use a lower-case l on "limit." This page also has some text that is supposedly Wikipedia-compliant for archives.

If you agree, could you flag Talk:Speed_Limit/Archive01 for speedy delete?

Thanks, Novasource 21:07, 24 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Agreed, I've applied a {{Db-author}} tag. Softgrow 22:41, 24 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Having each template is excessive, which is why I intend to replace them with station adjacency templates. The complete line information could be retained for use in each line article.--cj | talk 06:28, 27 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I used Adobe photoshop, I took a screenshot of the map from the Metro Adelaide website. :) Empty2005 02:26, 12 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

The colour in use was near-black, when the party, ABC and most other political sources use forest green to represent it. The Tom 06:31, 14 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Please continue discussion at Template talk:Australian politics/party colours/Nationals Softgrow 06:43, 14 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

This is on my talk page so you are welcome to comment. I've just removed:

• Association of British Drivers
• Safe Speed
• Safety Camera Partnership

from my watchlist. I'm finding it a waste of my time to continually edit articles where other editors wish to pursue liberterian views about speed limits instead of producing a great encyclopedia. I've now got a watchlist that isn't nearly as active and time consuming. Softgrow 10:52, 21 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I think this is a mistake. Collaboration between editors with opposing views is a way to build a great encyclopaedia - walking away and letting POV pushers have their way is not! Just zis Guy you know? 11:27, 21 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I'm finding the continual use of the Burden of proof (logical fallacy) a bit wearing. Something silly get's inserted and then I need to find a reference that disproves it. The sillier it is the less likely I'll find a reference.

I would disagree about the collaboration. The articles above have very few redeeming features. In some cases (Speed limit) yes there is collaboration to a degree, here I don't think so. You would never find an article like the ones listed in Encyclopædia Britannica.Softgrow 12:06, 21 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I don't blame you for this. Some of those articles are just awful -- so many people are pushing the cameras are bad POV and will include any link from local papers or whatever to push that POV. It gets wearing setting published research against reports in various local rags. Thanks for removing "thenewspaper" links -- I'd been wanting to do that but was worried it would seem like I was pushing my own POV. --Richard Clegg 12:54, 4 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Hey Softgrow, thanks for expressing interest in WikiProject Trains in Japan! Quite frankly, I'm surprised so many people have signed up in such a short period of time. I hope we can get enough people to start it soon. Meanwhile, I'll be looking around for more interested people, so if you know someone who might, please tell them about the Project! Cheers, Tangotango 10:25, 27 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

We now have 5 people interested in the project, and I've created the project page at Wikipedia:WikiProject Trains in Japan, shortcut WP:TJ. For now the page is a bit disorganized, but I hope we can improve that soon. Well, hope to see you on the project page! (Please add your name to the Participants list). Cheers, Tangotango 02:29, 29 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Just a note to say that I responded to your comment on User talk:Mbeychok/MRB's Survey of Wikipedian Engineers. mbeychok 19:36, 16 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Softgrow. I have started a proposal at Portal talk:Australia for an inclusion of an anniversary/on this day section to be displayed on the portal. If you are interested in this making this happen, you can comment there or go to the anniversary pages and adding in things that you consider to be notable. Regards, Blnguyen | Have your say!!! 07:39, 23 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

		The Barnstar of Diligence
		I award you this Barnstar of Diligence for being bold and planning the first Adelaide Wikimeetup! Unfortunately, i can't make it, but I'm sure everyone else from Adelaide will have great time, all due to your organisation. Killfest2—Daniel.Bryant 00:08, 8 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Apologies if you're already aware of this, but the Inaugural Adelaide Meetup will take place on Thursday 24th of August at Brougham Place Uniting Church, thanks to Alex Sims. Please indicate if you will attend or not.

This message left by May the Force be with you! Shreshth91($ |-| ŗ 3 $ |-| ţ |-|) on behalf of [ælfəks], 10:11, 13 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Hi there, have you been organising this? That's really great of you! Unfortunately, I don't think I'll be able to make it, as I don't finish lectures 'til 9PM on a Thursday; also, having only lived in Adelaide for about 7 months, I still find myself on the verge of cardiac arrest everytime I try to drive to the city from Bedford Park :p So, I'm really sorry, but I don't think I'll be able to make it there. However, I am very interested in what you guys will talk about, and I'll keep an eye out for your minutes. Hope you have a good time there, — riana_dzasta • t • c • e • ER • 10:18, 13 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

SuggestBot predicts that you will enjoy editing some of these articles. Have fun!

SuggestBot picks articles in a number of ways based on other articles you've edited, including straight text similarity, following wikilinks, and matching your editing patterns against those of other Wikipedians. It tries to recommend only articles that other Wikipedians have marked as needing work. Your contributions make Wikipedia better -- thanks for helping.

If you have feedback on how to make SuggestBot better, please tell me on SuggestBot's talk page. Thanks from ForteTuba, SuggestBot's caretaker.

P.S. You received these suggestions because your name was listed on the SuggestBot request page. If this was in error, sorry about the confusion. -- SuggestBot 03:57, 18 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I am disappointed that I didn't make it to the meetup last time, and am very thankful that someone took the time to organise it - any chance you could have a go again? :) It seemed like the perfect time and location, really. michael ^talk 08:20, 29 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Alex, thanks for organising the meetup - great to meet people offline at last !

Could you point me to the converstation with Tony re: transparency and proxies ? I forgot about it until, yet again, my IP's proxy is blocked and I have to edit via the slooooow secure server link - Peripitus (Talk) 10:20, 31 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I found this site a while back that proved a great means of showing the countries you have been too

User:Derek.munneke

Not sure you're correctly attributing parts to ABD. While they certainly do talk about the issues, it's normally because someone else has already pointed out the problems with these bumps etc. Therefore, I'd suggest changing from criticisms made by ABD to some highlighted by ABD. At least two points in that part were brought up by Auto Express magazine, with tests to show that noise and fuel consumption were significantly greater when in speed bumped areas.

Your request to be unblocked has been granted for the following reasons: Autoblock of 203.23.22.152 lifted. Request handled by:  Netsnipe  ►  14:27, 27 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

hi alex. perhaps because i am a new contributor, i don't understand "rv POV image designed by an editor (or is original research?)". please tell me why you removed my original image. it is a legitimate illustration of the equipment installed to facilitate the congestion charge and of criticisms related to it. cheers, rob

We'll have to agree to disagree on the "barbeque" issue. My research indicates that "barbecue" is the preferred spelling of the word, although "barbeque" is considered acceptable in Australian English. I see no reason not to use the preferred spelling. If a source can be found that identifies "barbeque" as the primary or preferred spelling in Australian English, I offer my sincerest apologies for the needless correction.

I have cited sources that use barbeque for the Glover playground in the article. PS don't forget to sign your comments. Alex Sims 07:17, 19 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

		The Original Barnstar
		I present you with this barnstar for your fantastic organisation of the Adelaide meetup. It was a great event, largely down to all your efforts over the last month-or-so. I'm sure everyone in attendance is extremely appreciative of your excellent work! Cheers, Daniel Bryant 04:53, 23 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Yep, great work! Really enjoyed it, looking forward to the next one (which someone else will organise, I'm sure!) Nice meeting you, – Riana ^ऋ 07:21, 23 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Sure you don't want to go for the hat trick :P Thanks for your effort Alex – it was a pleasure meeting you. Happy editing,--cj | talk 11:09, 24 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Could you give me some reason why you revered back no citation? I'm just curious? The source seems reliable in that it explains clearly in layman terms why 85th percentile rule exist using generalities with statistics. Please provide counterexample on the web to verify your claims  — 6etonyourfeet^\t\c 02:26, 27 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Also, since you removed that source you can revert all my modifications to the section since it is entirely based on that unreliable resource just to let you know. — 6etonyourfeet^\t\c 02:28, 27 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for uploading Image:Adelaide Meetup 2 Completing The WikiCensus.jpg. Wikipedia gets thousands of images uploaded every day, and in order to verify that the images can be legally used on Wikipedia, the source and copyright status must be indicated. Images need to have an image tag applied to the image description page indicating the copyright status of the image. This uniform and easy-to-understand method of indicating the license status allows potential re-users of the images to know what they are allowed to do with the images.

For more information on using images, see the following pages:

• Wikipedia:Image use policy
• Wikipedia:Image copyright tags

This is an automated notice by OrphanBot. If you need help on selecting a tag to use, or in adding the tag to the image description, feel free to post a message at Wikipedia:Media copyright questions. 12:05, 29 April 2007 (UTC)

Hey Alex I was looking through Australia related new pages and staggered into Brougham Place, North Adelaide.

Would you be able to have another go at the lead sentence / paragraph and make it's importance as a street with so many heritage listed buildings stand out more? I know what the article really needs is a range of images to go with all the heritage listed buildings.

I am concerned that although the buildings each individually meet WP:N, through having been the subject of heritage assessments - does this street also meet WP:N? It certainly doesn't jump out at me that it does. Garrie 05:29, 5 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I don't think 'Barbeque' is local spelling, just bad spelling. I did check before making the change: see Talk:Barbecue#Spelling which cites Australian, British and American dictionaries as prefering 'Barbecue'.

Ewen 05:29, 14 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Nineteen edits have been made on the Fadden, Australian Capital Territory article since the start of this year; nine of these have occured in the last three days over the spelling of "barbeque/barbeque". Perhaps we should all find something more useful to contribute to the article? WA Burdett 12:12, 16 June 2007 (UTC)

I noticed you removed my paragraph about "Political Considerations" with a rationale of POV. Well I've just added back the paragraph with references to these statements; which by the way are well known and would be even better known if people were to read about them on WIKI. The references should satisfy your opinion that the paragraph was POV. FrankWilliams 17:37, 28 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Please Continue discussion at Talk:Speed limit so it's not just you and me talking about this topic. Alex Sims 04:38, 29 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Hi. I just wanted to thank you for clarifying the fair use rationale which I put up, after it was put up for deletion. Im not sure why it was tagged as I read and followed Wikipedia:Non-free content before putting the rationale up. Thanks. Tbo ¹⁵⁷talk 09:31, 16 September 2007 (UTC) I found out it was tagged for deletion as the article title in teh rationale was incorrect. Thanks. Tbo ¹⁵⁷(talk) (review) 22:41, 16 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Hello Alex Noel Hidalgo is coming to Adelaide on Friday October 12 He will be at the Central Market for breakfast at Lucias 8am He is doing the http://luckofseven.com tour. He is interested in meeting open source and free culture folk around the world. Feel free to email me to check up about other times. eg. Perhaps the Richmnd Hotel upstairs after 5pm on Friday evening for coffee drinks chat kinds of things. Cheers Lucychili 20:41, 10 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Adelaide Meetup Next: 15 November 2024 Last: 6 March 2020 This box: view • talk • edit

Hi Alex - we're planning a third meetup in Adelaide sometime in the coming weeks, and would love to have you there. If you can, please help decide a location, a date and a time here. Thanks! ~ Riana ⁂ 11:52, 16 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Adelaide Meetup Next: 15 November 2024 Last: 6 March 2020 This box: view • talk • edit

Hi Alex Sims - after some planning we've decided to hold the third Adelaide Wikimeetup on Sunday, 17th February, 2008. The meeting will be held at Billy Baxter's in Rundle Mall at 11:30AM. Further details and directions are available on the meetup page. Please RSVP here by 20:00UTC on 15th February 2008 (that's 6AM Saturday for our time zone) so that we can inform the restaurant about numbers. Hope to see you there!

You are receiving this message because you are in Category:Wikipedians in South Australia or are listed at WP:ADEL#Participants. If this has been sent in error, please accept our apologies!

On behalf of Riana ⁂, 11:23, 5 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Alex - since Sunday is inconvenient for many people due to church, we are rescheduling for Saturday. I hope this will enable you to attend! Best, ~ Riana ⁂ 11:44, 6 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Hey, I've noticed you started three categories for primary schools in NSW, SA & Vic. I'm just curious as to why you've done this, given that each cat has 3-4 articles in it, in general, it seems that 25-30 articles is the norm to start a sub-cat. Thoughts? Five Years 17:56, 15 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I was looking for a particular primary school and found it hard to find. I then noticed that all schools had subcats by state except Primary schools. This inconsistency was what I am fixing. You are right that there are only 3-4 articles but no-one has moved all the primary schools in and potentially there are hundreds for each if the articles ever get written. Alex Sims (talk) 11:48, 16 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Categories are made out of a need, not because people feel that it is inconsistent not to have them. There are potentially hundreds? I beg to differ, in my experience, primary schools are generally not notable, and are frequently being deleted, both via PROD and AfD. There may be a case for a Category:Primary schools in New South Wales, and a Category:Primary schools in Victoria, but I don't see it going any further than that. Thoughts? Five Years 15:42, 16 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I had a read through the guidelines and they are meant as an aid to navigation. I couldn't find any reference to a minimum count per category, but for the moment I'll stick to just the larger ones (ie Vic and NSW). The proposed enhancement for Intersection Categories is something to look forward to as it would make all this much easier (and give lots of nice semantic possibilities). Alex Sims (talk) 10:56, 17 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks Alex for your suggestion. I will post a pic of Sol Trujillo shortly. I also plan to provide some suggestions for citations for the Telstra Mobiles section on the discussion page on the Telstra page. Tarnya Dunning (talk) 00:45, 30 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

 : Thanks for your assistance. Tarnya Dunning  —Preceding unsigned comment added by Tarnya Dunning (talk • contribs) 02:04, 2 May 2008 (UTC)[reply] 

There was indeed a template bug with a few Japanese railway templates earlier today, which I asked about on IRC. Apparently when a template listed on CSD was deleted, the article got hit instead and the template remained (with no hint of a db transclusion inside). It got fixed but I guess this one wasn't caught. Thanks for letting me know about this (and please let me know if you see anything else). Cheers, Gwen Gale (talk) 23:47, 31 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Looks like someone's cut and paste move of one or more templates had something to do with this. By the time I saw it on CSD it was very odd! Gwen Gale (talk) 23:52, 31 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I got the message. I think it's a good idea! Thanks Alex Iaineight (talk) —Preceding comment was added at 15:43, 10 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

A note to myself that I am wanting to change my Commons and ja wikipedia userid "Softgrow" to "Alex Sims" as I am here. Alex Sims (talk) 01:53, 3 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

What exactly should this section look like? What should it say? How should it say it? I agree that it is messy. If you explore those sources of criticism, you'll find that they do indeed oppose speed limits on the bases listed. If there is WP:OR violation it's probably more WP:SYN, for ascribing such views to critics writ large. Synchronism (talk) 05:15, 11 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Firstly your right, its more synthesis by editors than original research. The section should disappear as Criticism sections marginialise and isolate criticism and the usual approach to clean up is to have the points worked into the article. However most of these are odd's and sod's put in by editors and don't represent the position of anyone as a whole. To be honest I'm not sure how to clean up a synthesis by editors. Let's both have a think... Alex Sims (talk) 05:38, 11 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Regarding this edit and the comment, "10 no longer there": Yes, I noticed them down on the corner of Wakefield & Hutt, and wondered about the North Adelaide site. Do you know what that site is being used for now? Cheers, Pdfpdf (talk) 07:02, 14 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Residential development with the main (historic) building being retained. Check the Adelaide City Council DAP agendas/minutes for more details. Alex Sims (talk) 01:47, 15 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

"Residential development" - Hmmmmm. Sad, but predictable. Thanks, Pdfpdf (talk) 02:27, 15 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Please see: Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/BVE Trainsim (2nd nomination) Ikip (talk) 00:56, 3 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Alex Sims, Why did you remove my sections? I'm new to wiki and I assume that "rm unsourced POV" means "removed unsourced point-of-view", however, I did provide the sourse of my quotes. Also, I intend to provide more references soon as I had indicated.

So, "rm unsourced POV" doesn't appear to be the actual reason. I noticd you did something similar with Speed Bumps contributions.

I didn't remove anyone else's work even though I don't agree with their "point-of-view". Alberto —Preceding unsigned comment added by Albertoarmstrong (talk • contribs) 20:00, 7 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Alex,

I read the policy I don't don't believe I violated it. Everything I wrote is based around direct quotes taken out of research papers that actually promotes rumble strip and most of these are published or sponsed by the US Federal Highway Adminstration (FHWA) or national accident statistics.

The problem is that the Effectiveness section (that I didn't write) appears biaised in favour of rumble strips as one of the references appears from a contractor's promotional material and they have a vested interested in hyping thier services to install rumble strip to make money (i.e. sales pitch). Also, it was a superfical discussion and I added a deeper dicussion of what actually occurs. They was no mention of migration, shoulder width, etc..

At least now, the article is balanced or "neutral" so people can read it and make up their own minds.

So, there isn't a violation of policy.

Alberto —Preceding unsigned comment added by Albertoarmstrong (talk • contribs) 10:00, 8 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Alex, Please provide specifics of how the Wiki policy is violated. --Albertoarmstrong (talk) 16:51, 12 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Alex: I re-read the policy and I don't believe I'm in violation. It appears the ad hominem claim has to have a "derogatory" or a "false" spin and I don't believe I did that. Also, I thought may be you would reply that you had fallen asleep at the wheel once and rumble strips saved you from a serious accident, but you did not. So, why do you have a interest in this subject when it's not even listed on your user page? It appears that something is not adding up.

Also, after you initiated the NPOV we were suppose to have a back-and-forth discussion on the content, but you appeared to have avoided the debate (see Part I on Talk Page) and left the matter hanging. It appears you're not interested in resolving the NPOV despite my best efforts and patience. Also, the viewership is up slightly since 4 months ago, but no one else appears to have NPOV concerns over the current version of this article - just you.

Albertoarmstrong (talk) 12:29, 19 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Alex,

I just removed firvolous NPOV banner/compliant (Feb 10, 2010) and your questionable Ghana and New Zealand references (refer to Rumble Strip Talk Page for explanation). Questionable sources/interptation violate the NPOV policy.

The article gets about 90 hits per day and over the past 4 months it appears you're the only person with NPOV concerns. Your NPOV compliant is firvolous as per my defense on the Talk Page that you never countered.

Your recent "Personal Attack and Conflict of Interest" compliant against me was also firvolous (as per the Wiki editors' evaluation). I suspect your going to file another complaint against me, but given your actions (and/or inactions) over the past 4 months it will most likely backfire on you. Albertoarmstrong (talk) 22:15, 23 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Alex,

I already consulted a Wiki editor Dolphin recently about this and was adivised if there was no opposition to removing the firvolous NPOV banner then I could take it down. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Wikiquette_alerts.

The banner (and Talk Page section) has been up since Feb 10, 2010 (over 4 months) and nobody has a showed interest. These banner should have an expiration date and anything less is subject to abuse. 4 months is long enough. Even cheques are stale dated after 6 months. The concern with leaving it up indefinately is that whomever intiates it is hoping if they leave it up long enough someone will finally support them. After 4 months and about 90 views per day - nobody - time to take it down and move forward. Albertoarmstrong (talk) 12:09, 24 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, Alex. This message is being sent to inform you that there currently is a discussion at Wikipedia:Wikiquette alerts regarding an issue with which you may have been involved. Thank you.--Albertoarmstrong (talk) 16:51, 23 June 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.

For the guideline on reviewing, see Wikipedia:Reviewing. Being granted reviewer rights doesn't change how you can edit articles even with pending changes. The general help page on pending changes can be found here, and the general policy for the trial can be found here.

If you do not want this userright, you may ask any administrator to remove it for you at any time. Tiptoety ^talk 06:14, 12 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]

On the MOS:JP talk page, a discussion has been started about including or not including romanizations for words of English origin, such as Fainaru Fantajī in Final Fantasy (ファイナルファンタジー, Fainaru Fantajī) (for the sake of simplicity, I called this case "words of English origin", more information on semantics here).

Over the course of a month, it has become apparent that both the parties proposing to include or not include those romanizations cannot be convinced by the arguments or guidelines brought up by the other side. Therefore, a compromise is trying to be found that will satisfy both parties. One suggestion on a compromise has been given already, but it has not found unanimous agreement, so additional compromises are encouraged to be suggested.

One universally accepted point was to bring more users from the affected projects in to help achieve consensus, and you were one of those selected in the process.

What this invitation is:

• You should give feedback on the first suggested compromise and are highly encouraged to provide other solutions.

What this invitation is not:

• This is not a vote on including or excluding such romanizations.
• This is not a vote on compromises either.

It would be highly appreciated if you came over to the MOS:JP talk page and helped find a solution. Thank you in advance. Prime Blue (talk) 11:37, 8 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

The article Accident Analysis & Prevention has been proposed for deletion because of the following concern:

Needs reliable sources to establish notability.

While all contributions to Wikipedia are appreciated, content or articles may be deleted for any of several reasons.

You may prevent the proposed deletion by removing the {{proposed deletion/dated}} notice, but please explain why in your edit summary or on the article's talk page.

Please consider improving the article to address the issues raised. Removing {{proposed deletion/dated}} will stop the proposed deletion process, but other deletion processes exist. The speedy deletion process can result in deletion without discussion, and articles for deletion allows discussion to reach consensus for deletion. ConcernedVancouverite (talk) 15:02, 29 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Hi! I just wanted to let you know that Liam Wyatt is in town, so we were thinking of doing a quick meetup at Brunelli's cafe in Rundle Street (at the Rundle Mall end, near the car park) at 6pm on Sunday, with a possibility of drinks afterwards. So if you're interested we hope to see you there. :) - Bilby (talk) 12:47, 9 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]

First off, I'd be very thankful if you would stop removing my text about the derestriction sign in New Zealand. I spent weeks downloading all their road signs in EPS from the MOT website, converting them to SVG, uploading them to Commons, and creating the article Road signs in New Zealand. I know very intimately what that sign means, and can back it up. As for Australia, the sign is still in the online PDFs provided by New South Wales, Northern Territory and South Australia, and as long as it's on the books, it is a legal and valid sign. Fry1989 ^eh? 23:22, 7 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]

You want a citation, here you go, NSW and South Australia (notice it's version date is 2011). Both have it on the books, and fairly recent too. It's a valid sign, whether it's (commonly, cause there's plenty of pics up this sign still up) used or not. Fry1989 ^eh? 00:04, 8 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]

If further discussion is wanted, please do so on the article talk page, so it is obvious to all editors. Alex Sims (talk) 02:35, 8 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]

You might be interested in this discussion. Frietjes (talk) 23:16, 26 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]

As a reminder, you may not return any challenged content to an article including Call detail record without providing a valid inline citation. -- TRPoD aka The Red Pen of Doom 11:54, 1 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Hi. the source you restored has a serious problem: the author of the HBR article also consulted to Telstra on the very marketing model he describes. He says so in the source itself. So there is an inherent bias in the claims of the effectiveness of the strategy and therefore I dont rate the claim that Telstra was able to "retain several point of market share" by using this strategy as "encyclopedic". Please reconsider. Thanks 101.164.50.161 (talk) 20:52, 11 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]

I don't share your concerns. The article is from a peer reviewed journal and this will counter any bias. pleas have areas of WP:RS . P.S. You might want to consider getting a Wikipedia username. It makes communication between editors much easier, also gives you a Watchlist. Alex Sims (talk) 23:35, 11 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]

I don't think the HBR is peer reviewed 101.171.170.147 (talk) 02:32, 12 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Harvard Business Review articles are internally reviewed and references checked. The bar for entry is quite high, and I doubt anyone would not consider the printed magazine reliable. You could argue it sits somewhere between a scholarly publication and a news article in reputation, but I would put it along with scholarly publications. If you really wanted to you could use a review article (if one exists) about the same topic instead of this reference, but I would leave the reference in. Any bias you are concerned about would have been dealt with by the editors of the HBR. Alex Sims (talk) 06:45, 12 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Like any magazine, articles are reviewed by editor. But I seriously doubt that the content of articles is fact checked independently. Anyways, I have amended the article to reflect the reference, ie that the person who designed the Telstra program claims is works. A fair compromise Id say. 101.164.50.161 (talk) 22:46, 12 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]

You seem to have a barrow to push by using straw man arguments about HBR. The same author has used the same arguments in scholarly peer-reviewed journals. Please discuss further on the article talk page not here. Alex Sims (talk) 23:26, 12 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Moved to Talk:Telstra § Telstra source

 – Centralise the discussion Alex Sims (talk) 09:23, 13 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]

If you are a member of one or more of the IEEE technical societies, you may wish to identify yourself as such on Wikipedia. I’ve created Wikipedian categories for each of the 38 IEEE technical societies. The new Template:User IEEE member creates a userbox identifying the society and your membership grade and includes your user page in the relevant Wikipedian category. If you have any questions, feel free to drop me a note. Yours aye,  Buaidh  17:41, 11 December 2013 (UTC) — IEEE Life Member[reply]

Adelaide Meetup Next: 15 November 2024 Last: 6 March 2020 This box: view • talk • edit

More info here. Cheers, Pdfpdf (talk) 11:40, 10 April 2014 (UTC)[reply]

It was decided the meeting should be written up, and that this should be a collaborative exercise. I have "started the ball rolling" at Wikipedia:Meetup/Adelaide/Meetup 8#Meeting summary Cheers, Pdfpdf (talk) 15:22, 19 April 2014 (UTC)[reply]

You silver-tongued devil! You've seduced me!! I'm not available on Sunday, but otherwise ... Where is it happening? Pdfpdf (talk) 12:05, 10 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Level 1, 182 Victoria Square, Adelaide (Flinders University). I have 10 page PDF from the organisers with lots of information. Alex Sims (talk) 12:12, 10 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Suggest that, unless there is some reason not to, you upload it to commons.

Alternatively, you could just email it to me. [1]

(And if you feel it appropriate, I could subsequently upload it to commons ... ) Cheers, Pdfpdf (talk) 13:10, 10 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Sorry, I'm unable to help - I'm flat out at the moment, preparing for another event on Sunday. Cheers, Bahudhara (talk) 02:53, 11 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]

How did the event go? I was very interested but busy that entire weekend (sporting carnival). Tullyis (talk) 22:37, 15 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, Alex Sims. Please check your email; you've got mail!
It may take a few minutes from the time the email is sent for it to show up in your inbox. You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{You've got mail}} or {{ygm}} template.— Bahudhara (talk) 03:51, 25 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you for creating a new article. Please consider expanding this short stub so that it has value as an encyclopedic entry. If this person is notable and is in a modern country such as Australia there will be plenty of reliable sources providing personal background and career. Thanks, and best wishes for the holidays. --Kudpung กุดผึ้ง (talk) 10:51, 20 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Template:Infobox Japan station has been nominated for merging with Template:Infobox station. You are invited to comment on the discussion at the template's entry on the Templates for discussion page. Thank you. Jc86035 (talk • contribs) Use {{re|Jc86035}} to reply to me 14:30, 9 May 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) 13:01, 23 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, Alex Sims. 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]

YOU WILL NEVER STOP THE CENSORSHIP OF THE TRUTH. VIVA LA COMMUNE. VIVA LA REVOLUTION. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 101.166.131.214 (talk) 11:14, 4 May 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, Alex Sims. 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]

Hi, I noticed your edit https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Electoral_district_of_Adelaide&curid=3673541&diff=832452379&oldid=832435379 where you removed the section about Walkerville (suburb) being redistributed from Adelaide (electoral district). Whilst the section is lengthy, it's well referenced and I think has a continuing place in Wikipedia. Can I ask you to reinstate it? (I could just revert it but you seem keen :) Alex Sims (talk) 04:02, 26 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Hi there - firstly (and not that it matters all that much, but) did you know I was actually the one who created and added the paragraph in question? Anywho... it is too specific and is in the past now to take up such volume in the article. Are you aware it is all still at Rachel Sanderson where due to her actions it holds much more relevance? Also, when you say "Walkerville (suburb) being redistributed from Adelaide (electoral district)", it comes across as a statement... you are aware that Walkerville ended up untouched and unredistributed in the 2016 redistribution, don't you? Timeshift (talk) 05:00, 26 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]

No I didn't know you did it, it was a nice paragraph. I didn't know it was in the Rachel Sanderson article. I might add a sentence pointing to that section from the Adelaide electoral district article. I was aware that it was left untouched, but if not for the actions of the 130(?not sure of number, but it was a lot) respondents it would have ended up in another seat. It seems now, decisive in the result for Adelaide in the 2018 State election, but thats my own synthesis, I will keep an eye out for a reliable source commenting about the two. Anyway thanks for replying and keep up the good work. Alex Sims (talk) 05:37, 26 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Well the Liberals only picked up: three of the four Labor seats redistributed to them as well as the new vacant ultra-marginal seat of King, all of which (apart from Elder and King) came about via the revision between the draft and final release. Sure, on the draft redistribution, Adelaide would indeed have been won by Labor if Sanderson didn't do what was until then unprecedented (and yes, 130 respondents from her pro-forma template is by far the state record), but the draft is the draft and the final is the final. To state that Sanderson's and Walkerville's actions are what got her across the line might be true, but as you observe, it is easily challenged on synth grounds, particularly with no reliable source confirming it. It seems reasonably clear that you are in the Adelaide electorate (as am I), so perhaps it seems a bigger deal than it really is? A redistribution is only a redistribution upon the final release. Anything before that is just speculation and theory. Having said all that, in theory I wouldn't object to the properly-worded addition of a sentence pointing to the Sanderson section. Timeshift (talk) 06:01, 26 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]

An article you recently created, Mike Dumbleton, does not have enough sources and citations as written to remain published. It needs more citations from reliable, independent sources. (?) Information that can't be referenced should be removed (verifiability is of central importance on Wikipedia). I've moved your draft to draftspace (with a prefix of "Draft:" before the article title) where you can incubate the article with minimal disruption. When you feel the article meets Wikipedia's general notability guideline and thus is ready for mainspace, please follow the confirms on the Articles for Creation template atop the page. Best, Barkeep49 (talk) 02:26, 19 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Additionally the main content of the page was a straight copy and paste from the publisher's website which has copyright issues. Best, Barkeep49 (talk) 02:31, 19 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]

As you created Mighty Trains, I was wondering if you're interested in creating sister show Mighty Planes? (an early draft is up at DRAFT: Mighty Planes) -- 65.94.42.18 (talk) 04:49, 3 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, Alex Sims. Voting in the 2018 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23.59 on Sunday, 2 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, Alex Sims. 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]

G'day Alex,

This is about the high-resolution routemap from the 1912 sheet published by the MTT that you uploaded at https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Adelaide-tram-bus-time-table-tram-adelaide-trams-a41.jpg in 2017. I subsequently made some minor adjustments to it, removing some of the distortion caused by folds where I could, and on the front panel, and straightening and removing the black edges. (I hope you found / will find those amendments constructive and done in good faith; if not, you have the option of "Revert".)

A friend of mine is keen on mounting a print of the map and front panel for a display. Would you be amenable to producing another scan or photo that would eliminate the folds distortion? It would be good to have an undistorted image at Wikimedia Commons too. (If I could help, please let me know.)

If you answer in the negative, that's OK; I'm only following the adage, "Don't ask, don't get"! In any event, thank you for the original upload; it has been especially useful as a source (among others) for my drawing up a diagram of routes in the later MTT era. Cheers, Simon. SCHolar44 (talk) 03:48, 24 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Hi, thank you for Special:Diff/883584492. Could you clarify, ideally using a dummy edit's summary to the same article, that you personally have access to the journal, and that you personally have verified the integrity of the internet forum quote? ~ ToBeFree (talk) 19:22, 16 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]

A tag has been placed on Category:Defunct schools in South Australia requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section C1 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because the category has been empty for seven days or more and is not a disambiguation category, a category redirect, a featured topics category, under discussion at Categories for discussion, or a project category that by its nature may become empty on occasion.

If you think this page should not be deleted for this reason, you may contest the nomination by visiting the page and clicking the button labelled "Contest this speedy deletion". This will give you the opportunity to explain why you believe the page should not be deleted. However, be aware that once a page is tagged for speedy deletion, it may be deleted without delay. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag from the page yourself, but do not hesitate to add information in line with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. UnitedStatesian (talk) 16:54, 17 August 2019 (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) 00:04, 19 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, I'm contacting editors who are categorized as transportation engineers. Please help improve the section about the effects of congestion pricing and its long term effects. Congpric (talk) 11:56, 1 October 2020 (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) 01:14, 24 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Alex! I see from your userboxes that you contribute to OpenStreetMap. When using OSM for an article on Morialta Protestant Children's Home I noticed a considerable discrepancy between it and the external maps around Norton Summit but didn't know what to do about it. Is this something of interest to the OSM community? Doug butler (talk) 01:50, 10 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Doug, happy to help by putting more detail in OpenStreetMap. Which aspect would you like fixed? Alex Sims (talk) 01:54, 10 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Alex. No I am just confused. Taking the OSM map centred on Norton Summit and then switching to (say) Google map, I get a pin symbol at a point that has no reference to that OSM, and took it for a huge discrepancy.

However, I just now entered coordinates -34.9228 138.7245, which I had for the Scenic Hotel, to each of the "external maps" and it hit the right spot every time.

So the pin has nothing to do with any of the four data points I put on that page, or to the centre. Teaches me to be more trusting of technology and people who know what they're doing. Doug butler (talk) 06:46, 11 March 2021 (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) 00:08, 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) 00:27, 29 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

An article you recently created, Newell Platten, is not suitable as written to remain published. It needs more in-depth coverage about the subject itself, with citations from reliable, independent sources in order to show it meets WP:GNG. It should have at least three, to be safe. And please remember that interviews, as primary sources, do not count towards GNG.(?) Information that can't be referenced should be removed (verifiability is of central importance on Wikipedia). I've moved your draft to draftspace (with a prefix of "Draft:" before the article title) where you can incubate the article with minimal disruption. When you feel the article meets Wikipedia's general notability guideline and thus is ready for mainspace, please click on the "Submit your draft for review!" button at the top of the page.Onel5969 ^{TT me} 14:16, 24 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, Alex Sims. This is a bot-delivered message letting you know that Draft:Newell Platten, a page you created, has not been edited in at least 5 months. Drafts that have not been edited for six months may be deleted, so if you wish to retain the page, please edit it again or request that it be moved to your userspace.

If the page has already been deleted, you can request it be undeleted so you can continue working on it.

Thank you for your submission to Wikipedia. FireflyBot (talk) 15:04, 24 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]

G'day Alex, thanks for your addition of that cat "MHAs should always be listed in the main cat and other submits (e.g. Women) as required." on Hood's article. Can you explain why or point me to the category guidance if any? Women MHAs seem like a child cat of MHAs to me. Thanks, Peacemaker67 (click to talk to me) 09:45, 19 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

The note on Category:Members of the South Australian House of Assembly that says

For convenience, all Members of the South Australian House of Assembly should be included in this category. This includes all MHAs that can also be found in the subcategories.

which is fairly logical as otherwise the list would only contain MHAs that are not women, not premiers, not deputy speakers etc. Far more useful to have them all listed there. Alex Sims (talk) 11:20, 19 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

OK, thanks. Peacemaker67 (click to talk to me) 22:39, 19 November 2023 (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) 00:22, 28 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Please, don't go against Wikipedia's MOS solely for personal reasons. Claudia Sheinbaum is listed accordingly at President of Mexico, List of presidents of Mexico, and even the article itself. This hatnote goes against the purpose of hatnotes and it is completely unjustified if ignorance is the main reason why it was added. (CC) Tbhotch^™ 07:48, 20 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I've replied at Talk:Andrés Manuel López Obrador. Please comment there. Alex Sims (talk) 12:38, 20 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Alex, concerning File:World Map of Speed Limit Units on Traffic Signs.svg Liberia is marked as using mph (as sole country). A year or so ago I remarked on the discussion page that according to internet resources km/h is used. Now I met someone who has been in Liberia recently. He told me that Liberia is more or less metric and that speed limit signs (which are not very frequent) are im km/h. Can you update the graphics? — Wassermaus (talk) 08:14, 1 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Wassermaus, looks like I was the last person to edit https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:World_Map_of_Speed_Limit_Units_on_Traffic_Signs.svg so I should give it a go. Might also check projection and current practice for coloured world maps at the same time. Alex Sims (talk) 06:52, 5 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

There's a note on the top of the North Adelaide page from 2019 that advises that unsourced material doesn't belong on this encyclopedic article. So why, as an experienced editor, do you feel the need and right to ignore that, and wikipedia's numerous policies and guidelines, by continuing to add back in unsourced promotional pub crap, as you did back in August. Your edit summary states "it's on a map". By that warped logic, every single building found on googlemaps, bingmaps, or any other mapping resources should be listed in encyclopedia.

I just don't get that warped logic. Please explain. Also, as an experienced editor like me, shouldn't you be removing, rather than adding back in, unsourced promotional crap?? 50.81.237.112 (talk) 01:51, 18 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]