User talk:SCHolar44

If I have left you a message: please answer on your talk page, linking to me ({{Ping|SCHolar44}}), so that I will be notified. If you leave me a message: I will answer on my talk page, linking to your username, so that you will be notified. Please click here to leave me a new message.

Hi,

I saw your feedback on Help:Wikipedia: The Missing Manual/Formatting and Illustrating Articles/Adding Images, which prompted me to make a few improvements to the page. Notably, I have added two new boxes: Attribution and the Author field and What about attribution?.

I hope this was the sort of thing you were looking for; if not, please let me know. If you have any other ideas for improving the page, feel free to edit the page yourself, put a note on the talk page or leave further feedback.

Thanks for your feedback! – PartTimeGnome (talk | contribs) 20:47, 11 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks indeed, PTG!

Both changes are really good. The Attribution and the Author field addition gives really useful advice.

Taking that forward now, let's imagine a situation in which someone wants to use a Wikimedia Commons image provided by someone else. The photographer wants his/her name attributed, plus the fact that they have granted a CC-BY-3.0 licence. Maybe, therefore, the wording could be something as in my new sentence (at the end):

"If you chose a license that requires re-users of the image to give attribution to its creator, then the Author field is important: it tells people who they should credit for the image. For your own work, Author is already filled in with your user name, so you don't need to change it. If someone else has given you permission to upload their work, you'll need to put their name here instead. You can also add the Creative Commons or other licence that the image owner has stipulated for the image's use: for example, Photographer Name CC-BY-3.0.

What do you think?

Cheers.

SCH

SCHolar44 (talk) 07:42, 17 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Hello again! I've replied at the chapter's talk page, so anyone else watching the page can chime in if they're interested. I'm watching that page, so I'll see any reply you post there. Thanks. – PartTimeGnome (talk | contribs) 21:29, 17 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, SCHolar44,

Thanks for creating Tramways revival in Adelaide! I edit here too, under the username FULBERT and it's nice to meet you :-)

I wanted to let you know that I have tagged the page as having some issues to fix, as a part of our page curation process and note that:-

Well-sourced article on trams.

The tags can be removed by you or another editor once the issues they mention are addressed. If you have questions, leave a comment here and prepend it with {{Re|FULBERT}}. And, don't forget to sign your reply with ~~~~ . For broader editing help, please visit the Teahouse.

Delivered via the Page Curation tool, on behalf of the reviewer.

FULBERT (talk) 12:04, 8 June 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Content you added to the above article appears to have been copied from http://www.hydro.gov.au/factsheets/WFS_Names_and_Limits_of_Oceans_and_Seas_Around_Australia.pdf, which is not released under a compatible license. Copying text directly from a source is a violation of Wikipedia's copyright policy. Unfortunately, for copyright reasons, the content had to be removed. Content you add to Wikipedia should be written in your own words. Please leave a message on my talk page if you have any questions. — Diannaa 🍁 (talk) 01:08, 14 June 2019 (UTC)[reply]

@Diannaa: I'm mystified by this. You say the text "is not released under a compatible license". It is licensed under CC BY 4.0 International. Unless strong reasons exist to the contrary (and in this case clearly ther are not, because it's available on a public website) text written, and an image created, by an agency of the Australian Government is subject to a blanket release under that licence. You will see that licence, for example, on the image from the Australian Hydrographic Office which you have left on the page. The policy for images is:

"This image was published by an Australian Government agency. The Government is a member of the Open Government Partnership, which promotes better access to and use of government-held information. Wherever possible the Government therefore releases copyright public-sector information under Creative Commons BY licences or other open content licences. This image clearly comes within the government's default release policy, licensable under CC BY 4.0 International."

The policy for text is the same.

Unfortunately, as a result of your action the text I inserted is unavailable to me now to check. If I recall correctly, I did not copy it absolutely but made a few changes outside of the key provisions. For the key provisions (again: if I recall correctly) I did not change the text, because it is a formal declaration of Australian Government policy. Given its importance, it ought not to be condensed or otherwise editorialised. And in any case, it is stated briefly.

You say "Copying text directly from a source is a violation of Wikipedia's policy". I can't find that (but would appreciate it if you could point it out). I do see, however:

To re-distribute text on Wikipedia in any form, provide credit to the authors either by including a) a hyperlink (where possible) or URL to the page or pages you are re-using, b) a hyperlink (where possible) or URL to an alternative, stable online copy which is freely accessible, which conforms with the license, and which provides credit to the authors in a manner equivalent to the credit given on this website ...".

I thought I had done that when I referenced the text.

Would you please reverse the changes you made? SCHolar44 (talk) 14:55, 14 June 2019 (UTC)[reply]

The page you cited as a source does not have a copyright notice for the prose. The only copyright notice on it is for the map, and that says "© Commonwealth of Australia, 2019". Checking the copyright notice for the source website http://www.hydro.gov.au/, I discover "© Commonwealth of Australia 2019. This work is copyright. You may download, display, print and reproduce this material in unaltered form (retaining this notice and imagery metadata) only for your personal, non-commercial use or use within your family or organisation." So this particular document does appear to enjoy copyright protection. — Diannaa 🍁 (talk) 16:53, 14 June 2019 (UTC)[reply]

@Diannaa:, thank you for pointing out that detail. Since the copyright notice on the page contravenes the Australian Government directive I have written to the Australian Hydrographic Office to seek to have it corrected.

I asked earlier, "You say 'Copying text directly from a source is a violation of Wikipedia's policy'. I can't find that (but would appreciate it if you could point it out)." I'd appreciate hearing from you on this. SCHolar44 (talk) 00:34, 16 June 2019 (UTC)[reply]

The policy page was linked in my first post; Wikipedia:Copyrights. There's a simplified version at Wikipedia:FAQ/Copyright. — Diannaa 🍁 (talk) 11:56, 16 June 2019 (UTC)[reply]

@Diannaa: I saw that but couldn't see where copying text directly from a source is mentioned as a violation of Wikipedia's policy on that page. Maybe I'm having a bad day but on re-reading the page I still can't see that.SCHolar44 (talk) 13:50, 16 June 2019 (UTC)[reply]

It doesn't use that exact wording. Under "Governing copyright law" it states that "The Wikimedia Foundation is based in the United States and accordingly governed by United States copyright law." The section Using copyrighted work from others says in part "Generally, Wikipedia must have permission to use copyrighted works" and "If you want to import media (including text) that you have found elsewhere, and it does not meet the non-free content policy and guideline, you can only do so if it is public domain or available under terms that are compatible with the CC BY-SA license"; a little further along in the section Copyright violations it states that "Contributors who repeatedly post copyrighted material despite appropriate warnings may be blocked from editing by any administrator to prevent further problems". — Diannaa 🍁 (talk) 14:01, 16 June 2019 (UTC)[reply]

I left this question on Rich's Talk page:

Hello Rich, I notice you have swapped the order in which a couple of footnotes appear in the articles Nurragi railway station and Milang railway line.

It's of no great import, but I'm curious as to the reason. When entering more than one reference at the end of a paragraph I usually put the more substantive reference first. So I'm curious whether there are other policies or factors I'm not familiar with.

While I'm here: one change somewhere consisted only of removing a space between the end of "</ref>" and the end of a paragraph. I had thought that such spaces were of no account. Do you have some info on this? Cheers, SCHolar44 (talk) 00:51, 13 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Rich replied:

Footnotes should be in ascending numerical order, including when they are reused. This is standard in academic work, however on wikis if we swap two early refs they renumber and later uses will then list out of order. People do add references with an eye to order, though different reasons have been given varying from chronological order, order of importance, order of accessibility or order of facts they support in the sentence they come after.

Spaces before ref tags do render, and, perhaps worse, lines will break on such spaces, leaving the superscripts on the next line.

HTH. All the best: Rich Farmbrough, 17:47, 17 November 2019 (UTC).[reply]

This help request has been answered. If you need more help, you can ask another question on your talk page, contact the responding user(s) directly on their user talk page, or consider visiting the Teahouse.

Dear experts,

In a work-in-progress draft article on a sub-page of my User page, here, I have two collapsed wikitables, headed " Personalising your request" and " What's their name?"

I would like them to be at the right-hand margin, the second one immediately below the first, with the body text of the article flowing around them.

Could you tell me how to do that, please?

Your advice will be appreciated, since my search for the solution has been unsuccessful.

Cheers, Simon. SCHolar44 (talk) 08:59, 24 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

I've changed the floatleft to a floatright and it seems to have the desired effect. If you want more help, change the {{help me-helped}} back into a {{help me}}, stop by the Teahouse, or Wikipedia's live help channel, or the help desk to ask someone for assistance. Primefac (talk) 15:51, 24 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Reigate St Mary's School

Hi SCHolar44. Your account has been added to the "New page reviewers" user group. Please check back at WP:PERM in case your user right is time limited or probationary. This user group allows you to review new pages through the Curation system and mark them as patrolled, tag them for maintenance issues, or nominate them for deletion. The list of articles awaiting review is located at the New Pages Feed. New page reviewing is vital to maintaining the integrity of the encyclopedia. If you have not already done so, you must read the tutorial at New Pages Review, the linked guides and essays, and fully understand the deletion policy. If you need any help or want to discuss the process, you are welcome to use the new page reviewer talk page. In addition, please remember:

• Be nice to new editors. They are usually not aware that they are doing anything wrong. Do make use of the message feature when tagging pages for maintenance so that they are aware.
• You will frequently be asked by users to explain why their page is being deleted. Please be formal and polite in your approach to them – even if they are not.
• If you are not sure what to do with a page, don't review it – just leave it for another reviewer.
• Accuracy is more important than speed. Take your time to patrol each page. Use the message feature to communicate with article creators and offer advice as much as possible.

The reviewer right does not change your status or how you can edit articles. If you no longer want this user right, you also may ask any administrator to remove it for you at any time. In cases of abuse or persistent inaccuracy of reviewing, or long-term inactivity, the right may be withdrawn at administrator discretion. _signed, Rosguill ^talk 22:45, 18 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Very sorry to say - I think the query as laid out is too complicated - I think there are likely very few who could even deal with your query, let alone have to time to unravel... the potential for no responses at all is very likely... well worth trawling through the TRains project - as to adept Australians currently available who would be interested, I would be skeptical - however your effort in laying all that out, is admirable, best of luck... I may be able to deal with over weekend, but not sure...JarrahTree 03:16, 14 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

BTw Sydney-Perth_railway is a redirect... JarrahTree 03:42, 14 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

G'day, JarrahTree. Thanks for your observations -- I think you're spot on. My remarks suffered from too many interruptions while writing up over a couple days, and it ended up as what Benjamin Franklin is supposed to have said: "I did not have time to make my letter shorter."

Subject to any change resulting from someone making a useful comment, I'll go ahead in a week or two by:

• renaming Adelaide–Darwin Railway to Adelaide–Darwin rail corridor
• swapping the roles of East–west rail corridor (Australia) and Sydney–Perth rail corridor (I didn't put that well previously, did I?)
• starting a new page, North-south rail corridor (Australia) – comparable to the present East–west rail corridor article – to redirect to the Adelaide–Darwin rail corridor article.
• starting a new redirect page, Transcontinental rail corridors (Australia), to point to the E-W and N-S corridor articles.

I hope that saves you wasting your time wading through! I'll appreciate your comments. Cheers, SCHolar44 (talk) 06:16, 14 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Please gat familiar with Template:Convert and Template:Track gauge, then please use them and do not remove where they are already used. "ins"is not an acceptable abbreviation for inches. see Talk:South Australian Railways K class (narrow gauge)#Use of templates Peter Horn User talk 20:58, 11 January 2021 (UTC) also @PrimeHunter:[reply]

Did you ever find the answer to this question, which I just now saw? If not, WP:VPT may be the place to ask.— Vchimpanzee • talk • contributions • 23:36, 11 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you for asking, Vchimpanzee. I received some advice that led me to partially implement what I had wanted. I might review it now and ask at VP. Cheers, Simon – SCHolar44 🇦🇺 💬 at 23:57, 13 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Hello Scholar
Please see File talk:South Australian Railways K class (broad gauge) locomotive drawing (Hugh S. Williams).png#Conversions not exact Peter Horn User talk 18:27, 15 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]

[Note of action]: These have now been corrected. Thanks be to Peter Horn. SCHolar44 (talk) 12:45, 16 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks, I left a note on the previously mentioned talk page. Peter Horn User talk 16:27, 16 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Hi SCH,

I really admire the work you did assembling the Adelaide horse-drawn tram network map as it stood in the 1900s. After an extensive search, this has been the most complete map I have been able to find to date of the horse-drawn network.

I am a content producer by trade and videographer/animator/editor by hobby, and am currently working on a film project about the history of Adelaide's tram network. In particular, I am researching the chronology of the construction, the opening, and the closing of lines in the network. I note in the map description you state: The map was created using data from numerous contemporaneous sources: diagrams, texts and photographs (copyright expired), but don't list the sources.

I wouldn't presume to ask you to actually construct it, but do you believe it to be possible for a network timeline to be constructed based on your previous research for the map? I think it could be beneficial to add such a timeline to the Horse trams in Adelaide page.

This information would also help me with the video I am working on. If you're interested in assisting me with sources for the video, I would be most happy to credit you for your work.

Keen to hear your thoughts.

Cheers, Kerrscur Kerrscur (talk) 06:53, 4 June 2021 (UTC)[reply]

G'day Malcolm  ;-)
I responded with an e-mail giving some details on 12 June and asking a few questions for clarification. My cc copy states "This email was sent by user "SCHolar44" on the English Wikipedia to user "Kerrscur". It has been automatically delivered." Did you receive it? Or did it perish in my spam system? Or ... ? Cheers, SCHolar44 (talk) 12:24, 23 June 2021 (UTC)[reply]

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Steam locomotive components, to which you have significantly contributed, is suitable for inclusion in Wikipedia according to Wikipedia's policies and guidelines or if it should be deleted.

The discussion will take place at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Steam locomotive components until a consensus is reached, and anyone, including you, is welcome to contribute to the discussion. 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.

To customise your preferences for automated AfD notifications for articles to which you've significantly contributed (or to opt-out entirely), please visit the configuration page. Delivered by SDZeroBot (talk) 01:02, 25 June 2021 (UTC)[reply]

[Note of action]: After discussion, the article was not deleted. SCHolar44 (talk) 12:46, 16 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Are you basically like my manager? Just need some clarification. THANKS! --23bradly.slater (talk) 19:49, 5 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Hello User:23bradly.slater, we're too egalitarian here to be managers.  :-) "Guide" is probably the best word; "mentor" might be pushing it a bit. I'm an ordinary editor but with 13 years of hard-earned experience, off and on, and I'm happy, as much as I can in practical terms, to put that to use if you need help. (My first bit of advice is to create an account, so that you'll see this response automatically -- see Help:Notifications.) All the best, Simon ‑‑ SCHolar44 (talk) 12:24, 7 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Simon!

I'm Aaron. Thanks for reaching out! I am trying to publish my first article about a the rural sociologist Charles P. Loomis but can't seem to find the publish button. I would be glad to receive any feedback as well as any help getting that article out into the world you can provide!

What topics do you edit most? What are your interests?

Aaron --Designingresilience (talk) 18:23, 7 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Good to hear from you, Aaron. I see from your Talk page that the article is the first editing/writing you have done in Wikipedia. Launching your own article as the number 1 step is ambitious.  :-) I caution against, as you put it, "find[ing] the publish button" at this early stage. Reasons: take a look at the guidance at Help:Your first article. You'll see: "Practice first. Before starting, try editing existing articles to get a feel for writing and for using Wikipedia's mark-up language – we recommend that you first take a tour through the tutorial or review contributing to Wikipedia to learn editing basics." And "...The Article Wizard will help you create your article in Draft space, and will put some useful templates into your draft, including the button to click when you are ready to submit the draft for review."

I recommend becoming very familiar with the article – it will save what may otherwise be a bruising! Not because people who comment on or edit your work are ill-disposed to newcomers but because the process of "anyone can edit" lends itself to sometimes (or at first, more likely often) much of one's prized, carefully crafted words being deleted or substantially altered. This is a normal process in Wikipedia – it's the secret of Wikipedia's success – and it gets better as you go on. Pushing back when appropriate lends, er, vigour at times! Note especially the advice in the Create your draft section, especially "It's always a good idea to draft your article before adding it to the main article space, and it's required for very new contributors. The article wizard will guide you through the steps of creating a draft."

You asked, "What topics do you edit most?" I'm a bit of a magpie, and my editing interests tend to come and go, but the most common in recent times are in history, especially about the state in Australia where I grew up and to which I recently returned after many years – it's a way of re-familiarising myself with long-forgotten information and researching from there. Secondly I write on the South Australian Railways, not only on engineering (e.g., Steam locomotive components) but also on the crucial influence it had on the European settlement of South Australia in the latter 19th century and the early 20th. My magnum opus, which I wrote early in my association with Wikipedia, is Paul Wild (Australian scientist). Typical of recent writings are 5 of the 6 articles listed on the disambiguation page, Port Pirie railway station (I'm working on the sixth). I'm a procrastinator, so I have about 30 articles in various stages of incompletion – but I only do what I feel like at the time. (PS: By the way, you'll eventually need to add Charles P. to the list of other Charles Loomises on the Charles Loomis disambiguation page.)

So, Aaron, do proceed with your evident enthusiasm and exercising a little caution at first, and you will – I very much hope – come to enjoy helping Wikipedia to be the amazing creation it is! I'm looking forward to seeing your draft in due course – and if you like, before then, some edits of other articles that you do. Best wishes, Simon  –  SCHolar44 (talk) 08:50, 8 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Hi it’s Iba, for Yahya, in Christianity it’s “John the Baptist” his mothers name in the bible is Elizabeth and she has her own page and in islam her name is Esha and she doesn’t have her own page regarding her about being Johns mother and Zachariah’s wife and I don’t know how to make one for her, would you mind making one if you know how to? Thanks. --Imaemohh (talk) 00:06, 15 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Hello Iba,

Wikipedia doesn't have separate pages for the same person (or object) under different names. The appropriate course, I think, would be to add a link from the Redirect page "Esha" to the article "Elizabeth" -- so that anyone can choose that use of Esha and be taken to the Elizabeth article. Before that, however, it would be appropriate to add to the "Elizabeth" article, at least, something to the effect that "In Islam, the name for Elizabeth is Esha." Importantly, you would need to provide a reference -- a reliable published source that states that fact -- so you can cite it (since Wikipedia is an encyclopaedia, substantive facts need a reference) at the end of that sentence.

I notice you have only been with Wikipedia for a few days, so I'll be happy to carry out the Redirect if you add the sentence(s) and reference to the Elizabeth article (or send it to me and I'll check it out first). That will help you to get going on your journey into the quite complex Wikipedia world.  :-) Have you read Help:Your first article yet?

Best wishes, Simon – SCHolar44 🇦🇺 💬 at 02:13, 15 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Your edit to Sidney Kidman has been removed in whole or in part, as it appears to have added copyrighted material to Wikipedia without evidence of permission from the copyright holder. If you are the copyright holder, please read Wikipedia:Donating copyrighted materials for more information on uploading your material to Wikipedia. For legal reasons, Wikipedia cannot accept copyrighted material, including text or images from print publications or from other websites, without an appropriate and verifiable license. All such contributions will be deleted. You may use external websites or publications as a source of information, but not as a source of content, such as sentences or images—you must write using your own words. Wikipedia takes copyright very seriously, and persistent violators of our copyright policy will be blocked from editing. See Wikipedia:Copying text from other sources for more information. — Diannaa (talk) 21:17, 25 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Diannaa, I am unaware of having copied ADB content to the extent that would violate Australia's copyright regulations for re-use in the context of Wikipedia. However, I do not have access to what I wrote. Would you please e-mail me (and leave a {{You've got mail}} notification), or take some other action so that I can copy my text into a word processor and attend to this. SCHolar44 (talk) 00:25, 26 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]

What can i do for a beginner, and what is a more difficult matter i shouldn’t touch, for now, until i become better? --NUPetro (talk) 19:54, 1 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Hello NUPetro, welcome to Wikipedia! I hope you enjoy your journey, which can be fascinating. It's good that you have already set up an account, which will make communication easier for you and others.

The best place to start is at Help:Your first article. I recommend you do some editing of articles before considering writing one -- some people never write an article but edit ones that need improving. Working on existing articles is a good way to learn our protocols and style conventions; see the Task Center for a range of articles that need assistance and tasks you can help out with. Take a look at the introductory tutorial and the contributing to Wikipedia article to learn the basics about editing. Quite often I copy the wiki markup (under the Edit tab) of the article or section I want to edit, then open it in my Sandbox. Of course you can edit it via the Edit tab of the actual article, which is appropriate for small edits, but I prefer to do longer editing in my own sandbox first -- then to transfer it to the article.

If you need help, try to hunt it down in Wikipedia (Help:...), because you'll pick up a lot of good info on the way. You can also ask questions at the Village pump. And you're welcome to browse through my user page (click the "User page" tab at the top of the Talk page you're reading now). I haven't written it for anyone but me; I have a poor memory and it serves to remind me of all sorts of things I have come across and needed in the past 13 years.

I hope this information is what you were looking for. Cheers, Simon  –  SCHolar44 🇦🇺 💬 at 06:27, 3 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]

While I am correcting historical inaccuracies they keep getting 'reverted' by users with what seems to be a pro nationalistic agenda. Is there anything I can do about this? --MacMort (talk) 16:56, 14 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Hello MacMort, I'm sorry I overlooked your post -- pre-Christmas frazzle is my excuse!

If you take a look at Help:Wikipedia: The Missing Manual/Collaborating with other editors/Resolving content disputes, you'll see what to do. An observation I'd make, having read some of the comments on Cruthin's Talk page, is that when there is such fundamental disagreement it will be highly desirable to provide detailed sources for your opinions. Apart from strengthening your argument, it will favour a better outcome if the dispute goes to the full conciliation process. Best wishes, Simon -- SCHolar44 (talk) 11:16, 31 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Hi, I am trying to upload images for this article that are from a personal library. I see I can do that, but I have used working titles as the 'image title' and now want to edit the titles/source. Can I just delete the uploaded images and start over or is there a way to update the image title? This article is in a sandbox tilted "Phil Horton". Thanks --EllenCarl14 (talk) 20:15, 6 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Hello Ellen, I see you have now uploaded the photos to Wikimedia Commons and they appear in the article. My suggestions would be:

• File:Phil image 6 on steps.jpg → File:Phil Horton on steps.jpg
• File:Coach Phil Horton and pit crew celebrating Dale Jarrett -88 Win 2003.jpg is a great filename but at 8 kB it is far, far too small -- I would recommend ditching it.

Check the criteria at COM:FR to make sure the renaming is all OK.

For uncontroversial/technical requests, go to Wikipedia:Requested moves/Technical requests and edit the "Uncontroversial technical requests" subsection by inserting the following code, adding 2 page titles and the reason: :

{{subst:RMassist| current page title | new page title | reason = reason for move}}

This will automatically insert a bullet and include your signature. No edits to the article's talk page are required.

I strongly recommend you create a user page, so that I can reply to you. Unless you have your eye on my talk page (this page), you'll never see this response.

I hope this helps! Cheers, Simon – SCHolar44 (talk) 06:17, 7 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

In an article how would I lock it like where it would be semi locked. --WolfeReAds (talk) 23:22, 14 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

You can't do that, WolfeReAds -- that's only done, after consensus by a number of editors, in things such as templates and contentious articles: see, for example, Israel and Talk:Israel. This article has useful information: Help:Simple guide to vandalism cleanup.

If you are new to Wikipedia editing, carefully read Help:Your first article for advice on a range of topics that you may find relevant at present. A good list of Help articles is at Help:Directory.

It's difficult to know what else to tell you since I don't know what the article is about, the circumstance of the changes, and the degree to which your edits and those of someone who disagrees with you are backed up by reliable references -- they are central to all Wikipedia writing. In the Help article about first articles, under the heading "References", is this:

As noted, the sources you use must be reliable; that is, they must be sources that exercise some form of editorial control and have some reputation for fact-checking and accuracy. Print sources (and web-based versions of those sources) tend to be the most reliable, though some web-only sources may also be reliable. Examples might include (but are not limited to) books published by major publishing houses, newspapers, magazines, peer-reviewed scholarly journals, websites of any of the above, and other websites that meet the same requirements as a reputable print-based source.

If your writing complies with this, it's time to seek comment from other editors, leading to consensus. This is usually done by asking on the article's Talk page, but that's unlikely to attract responses in a new article. Then it's time to do what's shown in the Wikipedia:Help desk article. Cheers, SCHolar44 (talk) 03:10, 15 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

There does not seem to be an equivalent of https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Central_Australia_Railway#Floods in either the Trans article of the east west corridor article - I have been trawling trove newspaper reports and have found, about 10 - do you think it would warrant a section somewhere? Your advice is being sought as your work is quite amazing - I hadnt noticed as my subject areas are very chaotic of recent... oops we conversed over a year ago... I blame it all on the plague... JarrahTree 09:22, 4 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Not a very good start, but a start, https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Trans-Australian_Railway#Disruptions - again your opinion as to whether there is enough material for a table - would be appreciated. JarrahTree 06:03, 5 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]

G'day, JT, great to hear from you! Thank you for kind comment. My personal preference, for what it’s worth, is to dig up some good references to flooding and to put the details, including when and where, into a table as in the Central_Australia_Railway#Floods (I thought I had put the CAR floods into a table a year or more ago but I see it was only 2 months ago: time flies when you're having fun but like you I'll blame it on the plague).  ;-) I only put the details into a table because I thought the list in open text was disruptive to the flow -- only my personal view but nobody seems to object -- but I wouldn't necessarily do likewise for a shorter list.

On Thursday I was at the National Railway Museum, and succeeded in getting hold of some excellent articles on the TAR in the ARHS Bulletins for 1946, 1947, 1956 and 1957. I intend to supplement refs I already have – especially from Ron Fitch's Australian Railwayman: from cadet engineer to railways commissioner (2006), ISBN 1877058483 – for a major upgrade on the TAR that I'm drafting at present. (By the way, inferring you're a sandgroper from your username: Fitch's book has some fascinating history of his time in the WAGR before he became Chief Civil Engineer for the TAR in 1949 – well worth getting hold of.) I had in mind to evaluate the merits of compiling a list, whether or not in a table, when I have all the info I'm likely to get (the NRM had several books I hadn't seen before but I had to leave; will follow up next week) and in the meantime your paragraph seems to cover the subject fine.

If it's of interest, I've just uploaded 20 photos of the construction of the TAR after some months of hunting them down to illustrate what life was like and what technology was used: here -- first image is Trans-Australian Railway -- 'steam navvy' excavator in cutting (SLSA B 44764).jpg, last is Trans-Australian Railway -- workers' tents after a storm at 302mi camp (between Lyons and Wynbring) (SLSA B 34973).jpg. And I'm also working on a major upgrade to the Central Australia Railway article -- very enjoyable researching! Best wishes, Simon -- SCHolar44 (talk) 11:09, 5 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]

If you have any advice on editing some bad mistakes on a biographical Wikipedia page on me -(Marie Yates - artist) - would be so grateful. Some of the problems are not just inaccuracies but contentious personal opinions of whoever wrote it. (NOT me and unknown to me). My website is down at the moment but when it re-emerges it will have most of the needed corrections clearly available. --Yatesm (talk) 15:47, 12 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Hello Marie,

It's been a bit difficult to acquaint myself with your situation because your question is light on detail and the two links in the references from which I could obtain information are respectively (1) dead (2) not responding. I have looked at the history of the Marie Yates page and can't see anything contentious per se (not that I'm denying it may exist -- just that I literally can't see it). The changes in the past year have been minor tweaks other than removal of an unlicensed photo.

I expect you're familiar with the difficulties and extra precautions needed for pages that are biographies of living persons: for example, why a personal website shouldn't be used since it's a self-published source (see here). If not, please see Wikipedia:Biographies of living persons, which gives a lot of information and includes a link to ask for help on your Talk page, which a volunteer will soon visit. That's one reason (among others) you should open an account and start a Talk page. The articles about writing about yourself, family, friends; autobiographies are also worth reading. Cheers, SCHolar44 (talk) 08:02, 15 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Hello

I am not surprised that you could not see anything contentious in the Wikidedia page on myself as an artist, as the two links in the references from which you should obtain information are dead and unresponsive as you point out, so you could not see them.

As those two links were the only and whole source of the article, notwithstanding the totally incorrect and confusing use of most dates, places and names supposedly sourced from them, it is quite understandable for you were not able to see the vast differences between the articles and the sources. Now you can at least check one of the sources which is again online - www.marieyates.org.uk.

The other aspect of the article the details of which could not be available immediately to you would be its complete bias in favour of the author’s commercial interest in generating sales of a few certain artistic products of mine to the detriment of the rest of my earlier, later or more recent productivity by the simple means of occluding them, their details, history and exhibition, entirely from his lists and descriptions. In fact the article is an advertisment for particular sales, but very particularly for sales of art items that are owned by the author.

By the above you may deduce correctly that I have discovered the authorship of the article and how easy it was to realise it.

This leads me to the question of the updated and online source that should now be used in the rewriting of the article. Of course my updated web page (see above) now online IS a self-published source - and as it is totally written and published by the subject of the article - myself - I understand that to be OK with Wikipedia.

So where do we go from here please ?? - will someone rewrite it, or should I do it? I would very much like to do it myself. Please advise.

Best Wishes Yatesm 17.25 4 April 2022 EEC Yatesm (talk) 14:37, 4 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Hello Marie,

I can appreciate, now, your concern about bias in favour of an author’s commercial interest in generating sales of a few of your artistic products. From what you say, there are two main factors going on here:

• First, failure of a writer to comply with the strict policy of a neutral point of view, possibly extending to disruptive editing. One way of remedying that is to post a message on the article's Talk page, which will bring the matter to the attention of others who work on that article -- see Contact us/Article subjects for how to do this. More information is at Biographies of living persons/Help, which includes asking for assistance at the biographies of living persons noticeboard. You can insert an edit request on the article's Talk page to ask other editors to examine the article and to make changes that will rectify any imbalance they see. Or -- perhaps if other options don't turn out well -- you can place {{adminhelp}} on your user talk page, which will attract an administrator. (To do that you will need to create a Yatesm talk page, which I previously advised.)

• The second factor is conflict of interest, which invariably comes into play when someone edits an article about herself. You shouldn't change the article. I recommend you look at the article "Conflict of interest" and particularly the How to disclose a COI section. Despite not editing the article, you will however need to be explicit about what you think needs changing when you talk with other editors.

Self-published sources are discussed in this article about verifiability.

I think that's about the limit of my knowledge of this topic! It's probably best, if you need more, to post a request on the Teahouse help page.  :-) Best wishes, Simon – SCHolar44 🇦🇺 💬 at 05:58, 5 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Dear Simon

Thanks for your advice and for Identifying the two main factors -1. Neutral Point of View and disruptive editing, and - 2. Conflict of Interest.  

I have read up on the second factor profusely and feel it is irrelevant to me and my current situation as I am not in any shape or form selling anything at all, have no current commercial connections and am only trying to protect my reputation as an artist for posterity and with the truth, which I do not see as a conflict.

Regarding the first factor - Neutral Point of View and disruptive editing, I would indeed like to launch into this with all my energy, but I am an eighty-two year old who has only ever been an artist and I am unsure, even mighty unconfident as to working through these complex procedures advocated and which you describe. So I would appreciate any additional advice when I state that I will start off by doing one of the following three choices:

1.Either to post a message on the article's Talk page, which will bring the matter to the attention of others who work on that article ( a little worrying in drawing attention to my identity for the authors - my login name IS my name).

2. OR insert an edit request on the article's Talk page to ask other editors to examine the article and to make changes that will rectify any imbalance they see. (which may well conflict with what you or I see)

3. OR place {{adminhelp}} on my user talk page, which will attract an administrator - What is the best form of initial communication? - possibly to quote yours and mine exchanges herein as background info? Is it a good idea to write a newly edited (by me) article in order to give some indication of the problems in the original text?

Please tell me which in your opinion would be best, much appreciated, Marie - Yatesm Yatesm (talk) 08:17, 5 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]

First, an apology, Marie: I forgot to put "w:", indicating a Wikipedia Help article, in the link in the sentence that should have read (with links corrected), "I recommend you look at the article Conflict of interest and particularly the How to disclose a COI section." You were taken, unfortunately, to the Wikipedia "knowledge" article on COI, whereas it should have linked, as here, to the Wikipedia COI project page. Consequently, you have not yet been able to take on board the policies regarding COI. To take two factors: you will see in the first paragraph of the article, "That someone has a conflict of interest is a description of a situation, not a judgement about that person's opinions, integrity, or good faith." And the Plain and simple conflict of interest guide states the article "should reflect the available published literature on the subject...". A reading of those two articles will show that "not in any shape or form selling anything at all, have no current commercial connections and am only trying to protect my reputation as an artist for posterity and with the truth, which I do not see as a conflict" does not align with the policy, other than the supreme need for an article to be truthful. If there were an article about me, heaven forbid, I would also have an inherent COI by virtue of being the subject. The guidelines advise how to manage COI. At this stage, helping other editors to write the story (and condense it a bit, by the way) could work wonders.

As to which action you could take, the one that "starts at the beginning", i.e. lets fellow editors know clearly where you perceive the problem to be, based on your description of what you consider unsatisfactory, is the one I'd favour at first. Inserting an edit request would be appropriate. I would suggest not writing replacement text wholesale, e.g. as paragraphs, but rather pointing out incorrect text. Something like this might work (1st and 4th lines are your comment; the rest is the text):

This paragraph contains errors: During his career he invented an aircraft landing system. Later, as general manager of CSIRO, he restructured the organisation. In the 1970s–80s he managed a project to build a new railway between Sydney and Melbourne, but the project lapsed. This is more factual and more specific, with references, which may be helpful in your editing/rewriting the text: In 1972 he invented Interscan, a standard microwave landing system. From 1978 to 1985 he was chairman of the CSIRO, during which time he expanded the organisation's scope and directed its restructuring.[ref] He retired from the CSIRO to lead (from 1986) the Very Fast Train Joint Venture, a private sector project that sought to build a high-speed railway between Australia's two most populous cities. Lack of support from government brought it to an end in 1991.[ref]

You could use colour to highlight text that needs correcting. You could also set out your comments in a table:

Content	Notes
... she pursued the ideal American Modernist aesthetic	I rejected it (see [insert here a ref to a reliable, 3rd-party, published source])
...in the 60s the artist turned to the Conceptual art movement	1970s

One way you could be very useful would be to provide references for the information you provide -- for example, reviews in newspapers or journals -- which might escape the notice of other editors. The editors would then be able to verify and use them.

Good luck -- and hopefully you will find kindly people visit the Talk page.  :-) SCHolar44 (talk) 12:19, 5 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Salam Alaikum, should I edit articles with typos or punctuation errors or should I try to edit more major things like dates and effects or facts? --Spartan The Great (talk) 11:04, 27 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Hello Spartan, I see on your Talk page that the "Welcome to Wikipedia" notice was generated yesterday. If you are very new to Wikipedia, you may find a good way to ease yourself in is to edit some typos or punctuation errors -- see H:PUNC for Wikipedia's established practices. Become familiar with the Manual of Style (MOS:) too. I like to read through articles of which I have a certain amount of knowledge, looking for parts that are under-referenced and finding references for them, and copy-editing to make the expression tighter.

When you are ready to prepare your first article, choose one for which you have ready access to reliable published sources -- and start! But not before going to the bottom of the MOS: page: you'll see three horizontal blue panels. Click "Show" and read them, starting with the bottom one, "Writing guides". Read especially "Starting an article". Yes -- there's a lot to take on board. But the information there is hugely valuable, and knowing it will give you confidence and skills. I hope you find your journey in Wikipedia as deeply rewarding as most of us do. And welcome!  :-)

Cheers, Simon – SCHolar44 🇦🇺 💬 at 12:16, 29 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Re: Loh Chiu [1] I have no reason to doubt this but we need a reliable source to override the Ah Chieu form used by the sources supplied in the article. Hawkeye7 (discuss) 01:34, 6 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]

The reference I had contained an error. The MacArthur Memorial, in Norfolk, Virginia, who have her passport and other documents and provided the information, are looking through their collection to provide a published source. This should be provided in the next few days. I would prefer to leave the text in place until then but if the source does not eventuate "real soon now" I'll remove the entire text referring to her correct name. Cheers, Simon – SCHolar44 🇦🇺 💬 at 09:17, 6 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Done. SCHolar44 (talk) 04:48, 12 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]

How do I post? --ArenaFan4life (talk) 02:13, 23 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, ArenaFan4life,

Welcome to Wikipedia! It's an online encyclopedia, not social media or fanzines, so there are differences, such as no "posts" as such. As I found out when I started (my first efforts were, er, cringeworthy), some learning is necessary before you can be a successful writer/editor. It isn't difficult. Click on "contribute" in the left-hand sidebar on any page and you'll be taken to an introductory page. What follows from here covers all the basics, including some tutorials aimed at complete newcomers interested in contributing. Each of them takes only a few minutes. You can click on the big "Get started" button to start on the tutorials, but I recommend first clicking, under the heading "For more training information, see also" heading, the link that reads "A single-page guide to contributing". (You can always return to this page at Wikipedia:Contributing to Wikipedia).

One thing you'll need to explore is referencing, because Wikipedia is about what can be independently confirmed from a reliable published source, which you need to include at the end of the particular facts you are adding.

Once you are happy with what you've produced, go to the article that the paragraph will fit in (I'm assuming there is a pre-existing article) and proceed with either of two alternatives: add your material to the article if you're confident, or go to the article's Talk page and ask people who watch the page to have a look at your draft at the Sandbox attached to your User page (you'll need to create both of those page -- easy). If there isn't an existing article you'll need to read up on that too!

I wish you a pleasant and fulfilling journey in Wikipedia -- not only with your current interest.  ;-)   Cheers, Simon – SCHolar44 🇦🇺 💬 at 07:26, 23 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Hi, there is currently a proposal for an Australian Transport WikiProject. I thought you may be interested due to your edits and interests in transport in Australia. The proposal can be found at Wikipedia:WikiProject Council/Proposals/Australian Transport. If you are interested, add yourself to the Support section of the page. Thank you! Fork99 (talk) 10:49, 12 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Hey, just for your information, WikiProject Australian Transport has been up and running for a little while now. @SCHolar44. Fork99 (talk) 04:51, 21 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]

New Page Patrol | October 2023 Backlog Drive
On 1 October, a one-month backlog drive for New Page Patrol will begin. Barnstars will be awarded based on the number of articles and redirects patrolled. Barnstars will also be granted for re-reviewing articles previously reviewed by other patrollers during the drive. Articles will earn 3x as many points compared to redirects. Interested in taking part? Sign up here.
You're receiving this message because you are a new page patroller. To opt-out of future mailings, please remove yourself here.

MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 09:14, 9 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]

MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 16:46, 22 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Hello. Help delete template for acticle Akane Yamaguchi. Thanks you. 27.64.221.154 (talk) 06:10, 15 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Done. Added "excessive detail" template. SCHolar44 (talk) 06:41, 15 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]

New Page Patrol | January 2024 Articles Backlog Drive
On 1 January 2024, a one-month backlog drive for New Page Patrol will begin. Barnstars will be awarded based on the number of articles patrolled. Barnstars will also be granted for re-reviewing articles previously reviewed by other patrollers during the drive. Each review will earn 1 point. Interested in taking part? Sign up here.
You're receiving this message because you are a new page patroller. To opt-out of future mailings, please remove yourself here.

MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 02:10, 20 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Hi -- not sure if you'll be interested in this, but I saw you'd worked on Victor Harbor Horse Drawn Tram relatively recently and I thought I'd ask. I've been uploading some old photographs of Australia and just put this on Commons. It shows the tram in use starting in 1956. I was going to add it to the gallery but it's a bit cramped so I thought I'd just let you know about it in case you think it's worth shoe-horning in. All the best -- Mike Christie (talk - contribs - library) 21:19, 19 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Hello Mike,

I apologise for not replying. When you wrote I was in the middle of an infection by courtesy of the Wuhan Institute of Virology, and after that it was buried in my To-do list.  :-\

I have modified the gallery so it displays a maximum of 3 images per row (best for small-screen display), and added yours to row 2.

I was a youngster when the horse trams were discontinued and the mostrosity appeared. I remember how cheesed off I was (and everyone else I knew).

Would you be happy if I cropped the foreground and reduced the blue cast when I next do a batch of photo-tweaking? No probs if not.

Best wishes, and thank you for letting me know about the photo -- it's a good one! Simon -- SCHolar44 (talk) 13:00, 19 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 16:27, 2 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

New Page Patrol | May 2024 Articles Backlog Drive
On 1 May 2024, a one-month backlog drive for New Page Patrol will begin. Barnstars will be awarded based on the number of articles patrolled. Barnstars will also be granted for re-reviewing articles previously reviewed by other patrollers during the drive. Each review will earn 1 point. Interested in taking part? Sign up here.
You're receiving this message because you are a new page patroller. To opt-out of future mailings, please remove yourself here.

MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 16:15, 17 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Hi, I notice on your map you have the Grange horse tram terminating outside the Grange Hotel on Jetty Street. It actually terminated on Beach Street in a similar manner. You can check this by looking at the Parliamentary Act that created the extension from Henley Beach and the Act that allowed the never to be built tramway along Beach Street. Cheers Chris 58.161.174.54 (talk) 00:40, 6 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

For the record (since Chris has no account, I can't post on his User page):

I checked the source for the details: eminent railway historian Lionel Kingsborough provided the data for CJM Steele's map on p. 159 of Adelaide Road Passenger Transport 1836-1958, J. Radcliffe & C. Steele (1974). Jetty Street and Seaview Road are named (and only they) on the map. I consulted a colleague who affirmed this, adding "It made sense to end in Jetty Street because the jetty was the commercial centre." So although I appreciated Chris making the comment, in the absence of contrary information (the Act's wording doesn't preclude small modification of the routes, unfortunately) I won't be modifying the map. SCHolar44 (talk) 09:49, 25 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

New pages patrol | September 2024 Backlog Drive
On 1 September 2024, a one-month backlog drive for new pages patrol will begin. Barnstars will be awarded based on the number of articles and redirects patrolled. Barnstars will also be granted for re-reviewing articles previously reviewed by other patrollers during the drive. Each article review will earn 1 point, and each redirect review will earn 0.2 points. Interested in taking part? Sign up here.
You're receiving this message because you are a new page patroller. To opt-out of future mailings, please remove yourself here.

MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 17:10, 26 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

What is meant by "isha" in "isha, 1 July 2016 to 30 June 2017" in this edit? Mitch Ames (talk) 10:36, 18 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Many thanks for pointing this out, Mitch. My secondary computer, on which I instigated the edits, developed a fault that slowed down or skipped inputs via the keyboard. This edit, which I had keyed as "That is," was (just) before I noticed the fault. I'll check to make sure it's the only one. Cheers, Simon. SCHolar44 (talk) 03:17, 19 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

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

You are cordially invited to this meetup to:

• discuss the WikiCon Australia 2024 event to be held in Adelaide on 23 November 2024, which involves the setting up of a GLAM collaboration between Wikimedia Australia and the South Australian Museum, and, possibly later, other local GLAM institutions
• discuss means of recruitment/mentoring/training of new editors, and the possibility of holding more regular meetups in Adelaide.

Cheers, Bahudhara (talk) 10:54, 31 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]