User talk:Ian Rose/Archive Jul-Dec 2007

Morotai Mutiny

Hi Ian. It may be worth nominating this article for a Military history WikiProject A-class review. There'll probably be some grumbling about it not being very long, but I think that it would have a good chance of getting up - it seems an appropriate length to me. --Nick Dowling 08:37, 30 June 2007 (UTC)

Nick, many thanks for the suggestion, I might just do that. Have to admit I always thought it could go the GA-class distance, but why not try for A? If length becomes a stumbling block there are still a few more details we could put in without simply padding it. Cheers, Ian Rose 08:47, 3 July 2007 (UTC)

DYK

On July 3, 2007, Did you know? was updated with a fact from the article Bobby Gibbes, which you created or substantially expanded. If you know of another interesting fact from a recently created article, then please suggest it on the Did you know? talk page.

Hey great work Ian and well done....What is it with these Australian editors....they are so invisibly effective! Happy editing, Blnguyen (bananabucket) 00:50, 3 July 2007 (UTC)

Thanks

To you too, for all your contributions to WP. Grant | Talk 09:38, 5 July 2007 (UTC)

Image:Lodger_cover.jpg

I have tagged Image:Lodger_cover.jpg as a disputed use of non-free media, because there is a concern that the rationale you have provided for using this image under "fair use" may be invalid. Please clarify your fair use rationale on the image description page. Thank you. Videmus Omnia 05:38, 12 July 2007 (UTC)

Done. Cheers, Ian Rose 04:23, 16 July 2007 (UTC)

License tagging for Image:AWM019136JonesBostockMissouri.jpg

Thanks for uploading Image:AWM019136JonesBostockMissouri.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. 04:05, 16 July 2007 (UTC)

Done - ho-hum, 15 minutes to update a copyright notice before being swooped upon... Cheers, Ian Rose 04:22, 16 July 2007 (UTC)

Len Waters

Thanks for the bio-box. I've changed the reference to Jim now. I didn't become aware of him until I searched for Len in the Australian Dictionary of Biography database and only found an article on Jim. (I assume that an article on Len will be forthcoming.) I'm not sure if Jim is notable enough for an article here; there were a lot of indigenous infantrymen, he wasn't in a special unit, wasn't an officer and wasn't decorated. His main claim to fame seem to be that he was among those who volunteered to take part in trials of the anti-malaria drug atebrin. Grant | Talk 13:30, 24 July 2007 (UTC)

I just noticed that they don't have an article on George Jones either, although there is one on Bostock. Grant | Talk 13:44, 24 July 2007 (UTC)

Yes, it's one form of vindication for Bostock! I'm making use of it - amongst my usual sources - for the Bostock article I'm writing now, should be finished in a few days. There's also one on Stanley Goble if I remember rightly, next on my list. Cheers, Ian Rose 14:52, 24 July 2007 (UTC)

Re: Australian Defence Force

Thanks for the comment, and thanks for your vote. --Nick Dowling 10:27, 25 July 2007 (UTC)

Thx

No problem with you messing around with my user page. Just though I'd better say that. ;D Kjet 16:25, 26 July 2007 (UTC)

FAR

George I of Great Britain has been nominated for a featured article review. Articles are typically reviewed for two weeks. Please leave your comments and help us to return the article to featured quality. If concerns are not addressed during the review period, articles are moved onto the Featured Article Removal Candidates list for a further period, where editors may declare "Keep" or "Remove" the article from featured status. The instructions for the review process are here. Reviewers' concerns are here. Epbr123 21:12, 28 July 2007 (UTC)

William Bostock

Hi Ian Rose. You are off to such a great start on the article William Bostock that it may qualify to appear on Wikipedia's Main Page under the Did you know... section. The Main Page gets about 4,000,000 hits per day and appearing on the Main Page may help bring publicity and assistance to the article. However, there is a five day from article creation window for Did you know... nominations. Before five days pass from the date the article was created and if you haven't already done so, please consider nominating the article to appear on the Main Page by posting a nomination at Did you know suggestions. If you do nominate the article for DYK, please cross out the article name on the "Good" articles proposed by bot list. Also, don't forget to keep checking back at Did you know suggestions for comments regarding your nomination. Again, great job on the article. -- Jreferee ^(Talk) 01:34, 29 July 2007 (UTC)

Songwriter Credits

Hi Ian, I don't know if I'm on your watch list (I'm sure I am!!), however apologies on the Bowie songwriting credit changes, I have posted a message on my talk page, and it still seems that there are an awful lot of these credits in small text. The guidance does show large text granted, however does not specifically say that small text cannot be used, and this was evident in some of the Bowie albums, where some were in small text and others in standard... Perhaps you can educate me further? 194.81.124.196 13:16, 7 August 2007 (UTC)

Hi there, yes I do automatically watch any page I edit! As noted at the top, I'll just leave this here to keep the thread. If you've seen small text around a fair bit, I understand it may appear that it's acceptable. However another editor had pointed out to you the same thing that I did... Re. Bowie, however, the only ones with small text were ones I hadn't edited for a while, as I work to keep them all to standard. It's one of those things I don't feel strongly about in itself, I just like to see commonality of presentation and normal text does predominate, as well as being in the guidance example. You're not the only one who has been on a bit of a campaign to change credits to small text in a desire to see a standard (just a different one!) and I can assure you I revert those editors (with explanation) when I see them as well. If you think the guideline re. text size needs to be spelt out more clearly, you can always raise the suggestion on the talk page at WP:ALBUM. Cheers, Ian Rose 13:47, 7 August 2007 (UTC)

Hi Ian, Thanks for that, I can understand that it would seem that I was doing it deliberately on the basis of the previous warning, however my computer at work had not forwarded this message previously. As happens at work sometimes, others take control of your computer and do things you don't want!! I refer not to the use of small text, which was me, but to other areas of vandalism relating to football (soccer) players, which were definitely not me!! Better security has been arranged. Thanks for the advice and link. Kind regards, 194.81.124.196 13:18, 9 August 2007 (UTC)

Wikipedia:WikiProject The Rolling Stones

I started a WP for the Stones. Please join and spread the word. Stan weller 06:41, 8 August 2007 (UTC)

Ashkelon

Of course, of course. I have no idea why I thought about the story this morning, and spent 20 minutes trying to track down the name - do you have any idea how many Google hits there were for "streets" + "crucifixion"? Especially when you think it's by Harry Turtledove, not Harrison.

If you want to nom it for DYK, be my guest. DS 02:32, 9 August 2007 (UTC)

Trivia tag

I think you're probably right re putting in the tag to updating. But my excuse is I was going to the pub for lunch. So the thought of beer addled my brain - as an aussie you should understand that! Cheers --JD554 14:00, 10 August 2007 (UTC)

Heh, of course I understand - you're excused...! Cheers, Ian Rose 15:37, 10 August 2007 (UTC)

2001: A Space Odyssey

I wasn't quite done pruning, it was a lot of data..thanks for reverting back. Waaay too long and detailed synopsis... – Dreadstar † 18:55, 10 August 2007 (UTC)

Hello! An anonymous editor has reverted back to a several months-old version of the synopsis which is full of irrelevant detail, Original Research, and editorial interpretation. I have reverted his/her changes twice, and in response the editor has now violated the 3RR policy. I myself don't wish to violate that policy, but his/her changes are so damaging to the overall quality of the article that I think a full-scale revert should be done. I have addressed the issue on the talk page. Since you seem to agree that a consensus had been reached to prune, not extend, the section, I would like to invite you to help us discuss/resolve the problem before it gets out of hand. If you have the time, please provide your two-cents worth. Thanks.-Hal Raglan 02:02, 11 August 2007 (UTC)

Hi guys, sorry I couldn't respond earlier. From what I've seen on the 2001 talk page and a quick review of the current synopsis in the article itself, it looks like we're back to what I last reverted to, i.e. the most recently generally accepted plot edit. Is that about right? Cheers, Ian Rose 08:28, 11 August 2007 (UTC)

Yes, you are correct. The anonymous editor finally reverted back to the previously accepted version of the synopsis. The issue seems to be resolved as of now.-Hal Raglan 22:23, 11 August 2007 (UTC)

User 202.95.200.12 and Repeated Reverts

I'm getting really frustrated with this unregistered user, particularly his continued reverts to the Tenerife disaster and List of Mayday episodes pages, stripping out content and continuing to perpetuate his own scheme of aircraft identification. I've posted this issue on the page of the administrator John (here), and wondered if you might want to add anything to that discussion. I'm not wanting to pick a revert war, but I'm sick of his (or her) reverts to articles. I'd appreciate your input. Sacxpert 18:04, 12 August 2007 (UTC)

Request for input on Thai Airways flight 358 article

I wondered if you know anything about this incident. I know that it was shown on Mayday (TV series), but I haven't seen the episode. I can't find any real references on the Internet, not even at Aviation-safety.net and the like. There seems to be consensus that nobody died, but one editor says that 400 people were injured while another says there were no injuries. It's a mess, and w/out sources, I wonder if it's best left to the Thai Airways International page and the page about the Don Mueang International Airport. This makes me think that perhaps someone should start an AfD process (administrator NawlinWiki already tried a non-notable incident prod). I'd appreciate your thoughts, esp. on the article talk page. Cheers and thanks again! Sacxpert 08:09, 14 August 2007 (UTC)

Greetings again. Thanks for your contribution on the talk page for the article. Based on this, I have started an AfD here, in case you should wish to comment. Thanks again, and a pleasant day to you. Sacxpert 04:43, 15 August 2007 (UTC)

I would like to reach agreement with you about "Like a Rolling Stone"

I have added the cite for the source of information about Dylan having met Sedgwick in December 1964. In my opinion, the sentence before, which is uncited, is rather weasley ... I am willing to leave it in as this will make the readers aware of the debate on this point.

I also have 3 cats. Have you ever been to New York ? —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 64.65.213.121 09:14, 16 August 2007 (UTC).

I'm sure we can reach agreement. I've read your source and it looks good but the citation/footnote needs to be tidied a bit - I'm happy to do that. Re. the sentence before ("widely believed..."), that's not one I added and I agree with you, it too should be cited and/or toned down a little - I can probably do something with that.

No, never been to New York but it's on my list. Some time soon I'll put a little section on my user page about where I have been...

By the way - just some housekeeping - it'd be great if you could create a user name for yourself and also sign/date your posts on pages with four tildes (~). Cheers, Ian Rose 14:23, 16 August 2007 (UTC)

Ian : u da man. NY, especially at Christmas, is a tragically romantic place. I lived and worked in Manhattan for 6 years and every minute felt like I was living in a movie. 'Stone was the first song I ever learned to cover all the way through but as I grew older and wiser I began to feel more and more sympathy for the subject and I feel that this is a very important matter. Interesting that Baez went to MIT. Thanks for your work on this.

George Jones

Hi, next time you want to create an A-Class review, can you put it on the main review page and not on the previous review. This makes it visible for all editors to see in their watchlists! You can edit using the edit tab above the a class section or by using the edit tab at the top of the page. Don't worry it was an easy mistake to make!!! ;) Good luck with the review. Woodym555 14:20, 6 September 2007 (UTC)

Yup, the instruction for A-Class review is to add the newly-nominated article at the top of the list of review requests that follow, which is what I did, without noticing the side effect.  ;-) Cheers, Ian Rose 14:34, 6 September 2007 (UTC)

Young Frankenstein

Why is it not allowed to write that Frau Bluchers name is associated with frightented horses, or any other major gags? This is one of the least formal movies out there, is it neccesary for the format of this entry to be completely formal?

Would the Top Secret movie format be acceptable?

Notable gags

At the beginning a German courier gets off his motorbike and he ties it up like a horse. Also, when he goes inside and takes off his helmet, the straps look like they were painted on his face. Nick spits in the face of General Streck during the interrogation scene. As an angry Streck storms out of the room, Colonel Von Horst says "Ich liebe dich, mein Schatz!" ("I love you, my sweetheart!")

--Piali 00:37, 7 September 2007 (UTC)

Hear what you're saying but a number of gags are already mentioned in various spots in the article, not simply in the Plot. Frau Blucher's association with frightened horses, and origin, is discussed at some length under Influences, so it doesn't really need a mention in the Plot section. We need to avoid getting too detailed in the plot, it looks like fancruft. For instance the enormous door knockers and (literal) sleight-of-hand with the policeman are a bit over the top detail-wise. I'm also not a fan of lists like Notable Gags - any list in an article tends to get added to until it's unwieldy and trivial. Of course I don't own this article and you could raise this on the Talk Page if you want to try and drum up support elsewhere... Cheers, Ian Rose 00:52, 7 September 2007 (UTC)

Orphaned non-free media (Image:300 spartans.jpeg)

Thanks for uploading Image:300 spartans.jpeg. The media description page currently specifies that it is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, it is currently orphaned, meaning that it is not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the media was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that media for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).

If you have uploaded other unlicensed media, please check whether they're used in any articles or not. You can find a list of 'image' pages you have edited by clicking on the "my contributions" link (it is located at the very top of any Wikipedia page when you are logged in), and then selecting "Image" from the dropdown box. Note that all non-free media not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. BetacommandBot 13:33, 9 September 2007 (UTC)

Delete away, original film poster's in the article now... Cheers, Ian Rose 14:00, 9 September 2007 (UTC)

CC

Thanks. Yeah, I know. I don't own the book and I'm relying on infrequent visits to the local reference library. Next time. Grant | Talk 03:14, 11 September 2007 (UTC)

Heh, you and me both - but that's what libraries are for... Cheers, Ian Rose 08:35, 11 September 2007 (UTC)

Thank you

Thanks for cleaning up after me, I just removed the horribly apparent POV. But,thank you again. --Kamden 19:13, 12 September 2007 (UTC)

Ricky Gardiner

A {{prod}} template has been added to the article Ricky Gardiner, suggesting that it be deleted according to the proposed deletion process. All contributions are appreciated, but this article may not satisfy Wikipedia's criteria for inclusion, and the deletion notice explains why (see also "What Wikipedia is not" and Wikipedia's deletion policy). You may contest the proposed deletion by removing the {{dated prod}} notice, but please explain why you disagree with the proposed deletion in your edit summary or on its talk page. Also, please consider improving the article to address the issues raised. Even though removing the deletion notice will prevent deletion through the proposed deletion process, the article may still be deleted if it matches any of the speedy deletion criteria or it can be sent to Articles for Deletion, where it may be deleted if consensus to delete is reached. If you endorse deletion of the article, and you are the only person who has made substantial edits to the page, please tag it with {{db-author}}. FisherQueen (Talk) 16:35, 23 September 2007 (UTC)

Additional refs were added and Prod removed. Cheers, Ian Rose 05:31, 24 September 2007 (UTC)

The Jean Genie

There are some recent edits to that article, and I decided not to do anything to it since you are the main "editor" lets say. But check it out all the same ^^ Dengero 01:25, 24 September 2007 (UTC)

Looks like just some minor items in pop culture and covers so doesn't fuss me too much either way. Thanks for letting me know, however, as I do still take an interest in articles I've heavily edited. Cheers, Ian Rose 05:31, 24 September 2007 (UTC)

Richard Williams

On 25 September, 2007, Did you know? was updated with a fact from the article Richard Williams (RAAF officer), which you created or substantially expanded. If you know of another interesting fact from a recently created article, then please suggest it on the Did you know? talk page.

Very nice article, it is on the main page now. Thanks for the contribution -- Samir 00:53, 25 September 2007 (UTC)

Life of Brian

Good call. I've given some citations. --Dweller 11:55, 25 September 2007 (UTC)

Sigh. I won't edit war. Users who'd rather revert than discuss are so tiresome. And since when does anyone need to explain including material in Wikipedia, but not blanking? Check the history. --Dweller 21:29, 25 September 2007 (UTC)

To clarify, I reverted your initial edit with a summary advising a citation was needed, which you agreed. Svetovid's subsequent reversions over the reliability of the blog provided as reference (a reasonable concern I'd think) is another matter, which I believe you've discussed elsewhere. Cheers, Ian Rose 05:38, 26 September 2007 (UTC)

YUp. It's the latter I'm referring to. Your behaviour was impeccable and appropriate. --Dweller 05:57, 26 September 2007 (UTC)

Re: Morotai Mutiny

Hi Ian. I'd suggest that you go straight to A-class review with this article - it should pass it with flying colours. The only suggestion I'd make is that you expand the article a bit to discuss whether the 'mutiny' itself had any impact on 1TAF's performance. On page 456 of Air War Against Japan (from the Official History of WW2) George Odgers states that the RAAF's poor performance during the Battle of Tarakan (1945) was partially due to the troubles at Morotai. By the way, your talk page is getting rather long - you might want to create an archive for the older messages. --Nick Dowling 03:54, 30 September 2007 (UTC)

Thanks for both bits of advice, Nick. Re. Odgers, the number of times I've read over chapters 26/27 re. this article and the ones on Jones, Bostock and Arthur (wait for the last-mentioned...) I think I'd figured his stuff was already in there by some osmosis... Specifically re. the effect on Tarakan, it seems to me that it shouldn't be overemphasised given a number of other factors what had little or nothing to do with the mutiny but worth a mention, which I've done. Cheers, Ian Rose 10:13, 30 September 2007 (UTC)

I agree that the 'mutiny' didn't have a big impact on Tarakan - Odgers only devotes a few sentences to this. He does cite the RAAF's many foul-ups during this battle (the most serious of which was that the battle ever occurred as the airstrip should never have been evaluated as useable) as examples of 1TAF and the RAAF's state of dysfunction, but I guess that this best belongs in articles on the RAAF as an institution. --Nick Dowling 11:33, 30 September 2007 (UTC)

Hi Ian, I just did a copyedit of the article and made a few minor changes. I've got a few minor suggestions for tweaks to the article you might want to consider:

• In the first section it's stated that 1TAF was focused on close air support. However, as most of its missions from Morotai were flown against Japanese targets on islands where there was no allied presence, I don't think that this should be classed as CAS. Rather, it seems to have been some form of harrassment and suppression of Japanese garrisons to ensure that they stayed quiet.

• Actually my original version way back used the term 'garrison duties', cited in Stephens, so I've reinstated that and also used the term 'harassing'.

• The second section also states that Arthur asked his intel staff to "to demonstrate" that 1TAF wasn't beeing used effectively. Did he tell his staff what conclusion he wanted, or did they reach it independently?

• The 'conclusion before the evidence' line isn't quite clear either way but I've reworded to clarify that the disquiet came first, followed by the figures to back it up.

• In the section on the mutiny it's unclear why Kenney decided to get involved and stood by the pilots given that he was ultimately the officer responsible for 1TAF's deployment and tasks. Was he admiting a mistake? --Nick Dowling 11:00, 3 October 2007 (UTC)

• None of the sources really go into Kenney's motives for getting involved, most either agreeing with Jones that it was an RAAF affair or else claiming that as head of AAF Kenney was fully entitled to drill down to that level. Rather than go into those arguments I've just stated the bare facts. Helson in his thesis on Jones notes the same irony you do re. him sticking up for the pilots while bearing the higher responsibility for their dissatisfaction - I may include that if I can think of a good way to word it... Thanks as usual for the comments/suggestions. Cheers, Ian Rose 15:22, 3 October 2007 (UTC)

Archive

Fixed, I think. Let me know if it's still not right... I will also have another look at the mutiny article. Cheers, Grant | Talk 12:12, 30 September 2007 (UTC)

Looks great - tks mate. Cheers, Ian Rose 12:24, 30 September 2007 (UTC)

Disputed fair use rationale for Image:FiresideFavourites1.jpg

Thanks for uploading Image:FiresideFavourites1.jpg. However, there is a concern that the rationale you have provided for using this image under "fair use" may be invalid. Please read the instructions at Wikipedia:Non-free content carefully, then go to the image description page and clarify why you think the image qualifies for fair use. Using one of the templates at Wikipedia:Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to ensure that your image is in compliance with Wikipedia policy, but remember that you must complete the template. Do not simply insert a blank template on an image page.

If it is determined that the image does not qualify under fair use, it will be deleted within a couple of days according to our criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the media copyright questions page. Thank you.BetacommandBot 20:36, 1 October 2007 (UTC)

Done. Cheers, Ian Rose 22:59, 1 October 2007 (UTC)

Re: Christiane F

Hi Ian.

Thx. Actually I just stumbled across the article on Christiane F. and thought it needed some additional information. I am not a native English speaker and I am not perfect in style and grammar so I was reluctant to get a user ID because I didn´t want to risk lowering the standard on the article and have my "name" to it. I am also not that familiar with the wikipedia system and its functions, policies and guidelines. Guess I was afraid of doing something incorrectly. Some people can get a little cranky over very small details on wikipedia judging from their internal discussions. But I guess its not that big of a deal as long as you stay within the guidelines.

Regards, Andy Paxx 04:08, 5 October 2007 (UTC).

Heh, understand your concern about people 'jumping' on new editors, unfortunately it does happen sometimes even though there's a guideline about it too, Andy... All I can say is that if people are showing good faith, as you did, the odd grammatical or stylistic error is nothing - we all make mistakes there sometimes, including me. Thanks for your contribution, hope you'll continue on other articles as well. Cheers, Ian Rose 04:27, 5 October 2007 (UTC)

HMAS Tobruk photo

Hi Ian, I'm disputing this deletion as its nonsense to claim that it can be replaced - it shows Tobruk's unique and important role and, as you point out, it can't be replaced by a free image as she only does this occassionally and never in a public area. A comment of support at the image's discussion page would be greatly appreciated. --Nick Dowling 01:28, 13 October 2007 (UTC)

References

Hi Ian, thanks for your note about references. This is not necessarily my style but it is a combination of the notes (in reality an endnotes section) within an overall reference section. As you may know, the actual bibliographical referencing protocols are much more specific and detailed although in the WickyWaky world we inhabit, there have to be some concessions for what has already been established. The MOS clearly states that the order of the standard appendices can be manipulated. Within that guideline, the aviation project task force has determined to standardize an order within its own guidelines. From a cursory read of the article on Richard Williams (RAAF officer), it appeared to fall within the guidelines of the project.

Another editor had created this style guide and it definitely has an improvement over the style you have reverted to in that the citations and references are placed closer together since they are, in most cases, related. It is also "cleaner," more compact and falls in line with the established formats of notes and references (again, in the "real world" – endnotes and bibliographic listing). As well, the new reference format also combines a columns format and a smaller font in order to condense space. I'm sorry you can't see the advantages to it, but this new format has been in use in countless aircraft articles and every editor (bar one) has seen that it is superior to the divided section employed previously.

When I first reviewed the article on Richard Williams (RAAF officer), I noted numerous errors in the citations as well as the bibliography section, although I simply added this stylistic change rather than getting into the nitty-gritty of correcting individual errors. The reference section uses the @#$%%^&* templates that are APA style guides rather than MLA styles (which are the standard for research articles in the humanities). FWIW Bzuk 05:29, 22 October 2007 (UTC).

Thanks for that detailed rationale, mate. To take your points in order, yes aviators like Williams would naturally fall under the Aviation project but, as can be seen from the Talk page, they also come under Military History, Biography and the Australian Military History Task Force. You mention countless aircraft articles but if we're looking at precedents I'd say the format for an article like this bears more in common with biographical ones, e.g. Admiral Cunningham, an FA-class which appears to use the same general layout for refs that I've employed. Obviously reducing the size of the font for the References/Bibliography and Further Reading sections cuts down on some space but 'normal-size' complete references are more 'real-world' in my experience, and a lot easier on the eyes! The diff is not particularly apparent on IE6 but is much more so on Firefox. Cheers, Ian Rose 16:25, 25 October 2007 (UTC)

Disputed fair use rationale for Image:10SQN.jpg

Thanks for uploading Image:10SQN.jpg. However, there is a concern that the rationale you have provided for using this image under "fair use" may be invalid. Please read the instructions at Wikipedia:Non-free content carefully, then go to the image description page and clarify why you think the image qualifies for fair use. Using one of the templates at Wikipedia:Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to ensure that your image is in compliance with Wikipedia policy, but remember that you must complete the template. Do not simply insert a blank template on an image page.

If it is determined that the image does not qualify under fair use, it will be deleted within a couple of days according to our criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the media copyright questions page. Thank you.BetacommandBot 04:23, 27 October 2007 (UTC)

Ho-hum - done. Cheers, Ian Rose 08:10, 27 October 2007 (UTC)

Sorry Ian, only just saw your message. What is the situation now? Grant | Talk 07:12, 30 October 2007 (UTC)

Hi Grant. For 10SQN I got a warning, as the uploader, from BetacommandBot (above). This bot also, quite correctly, tagged both the image file and the talk page of the 10SQN article. So this one's taken care of and I've also added FURs for 3 or 4 other crests that have survived. However the vast majority (e.g. Air Command, 78WG, 81WG, 33-38SQN, etc, have had their crest files deleted without any warning on the article talk pages - so I suspect it was someone or something other than BetacommandBot that was involved, otherwise a warning would've appeared on the article talk pages and I would've been alerted to update the images with FURs. Of course I could download the images from various sources from scratch but I really think they should just be restored so FURs can be added - IMO they fall under fair use so long as they have a rationale, and so there should've been warning before they were deleted. Cheers, Ian Rose 15:20, 30 October 2007 (UTC)

Disputed fair use rationale for Image:Bowie JohnDancing1.jpg

Thanks for uploading Image:Bowie JohnDancing1.jpg. However, there is a concern that the rationale you have provided for using this image under "fair use" may be invalid. Please read the instructions at Wikipedia:Non-free content carefully, then go to the image description page and clarify why you think the image qualifies for fair use. Using one of the templates at Wikipedia:Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to ensure that your image is in compliance with Wikipedia policy, but remember that you must complete the template. Do not simply insert a blank template on an image page.

If it is determined that the image does not qualify under fair use, it will be deleted within a couple of days according to our criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the media copyright questions page. Thank you.BetacommandBot 09:24, 27 October 2007 (UTC)

Another one done... Cheers, Ian Rose 10:37, 27 October 2007 (UTC)

Sex Pistols

Thanks for reverting me. I though I had caught it quick enough. It struck me as a incorrect link so I changed it then thought I had stopped it editing. Thanks and sorry. Bevo74 12:45, 30 October 2007 (UTC)

Heh, no prob. Cheers, Ian Rose 12:54, 30 October 2007 (UTC)

Military history of Australia during World War II

Hi Ian, I've been (slowly!) working on expanding and improving this article. The coverage of the RAAF is OK, but is a bit patchy and if you've got some spare time I'm sure that you could improve it... --Nick Dowling 07:40, 3 November 2007 (UTC)

By the way, I just saw that Morotai Mutiny has passed its A-class review - congratulations! - this is well deserved. --Nick Dowling 07:43, 3 November 2007 (UTC)

Tks for that mate - and for your vote and the pictures you added to it early on. Re. the WWII history article, now that I've finally done Wilf Arthur I've just got to get my half-written bio on Stanley Goble out of my system and then I'll be more than happy to work on it. Cheers, Ian Rose 09:55, 3 November 2007 (UTC)

DYK

On November 6, 2007, Did you know? was updated with a fact from the article Wilfred Arthur, which you created or substantially expanded. If you know of another interesting fact from a recently created article, then please suggest it on the Did you know? talk page.

Hi Ian. thanks for your many Australian military contributions. Blnguyen (bananabucket) 02:37, 6 November 2007 (UTC)

My admin ship

Hi Ian, thanks for the congratulations. My brand, spanking new admin ship has been launched onto the high seas of wikipedia. I am rather humbled by the unanimous support to be honest. Well done on all the Australian articles by the way!! If you ever need any help, be it a review or an admin action, don't hesitate to ask. Regards Woodym555 11:15, 9 November 2007 (UTC)

Krautrock

Hi. My fault. I reverted the anon last time when he added the genre to the userbox. I have since researched it, and have to agree that "Station to Station" certainly gives testimony to being krautrock. Therefore I will not be reverting it again. Thanks. Ref ^(chew)(do) 01:18, 21 November 2007 (UTC)

Heh, think nothing of it - the Bowie page is definitely better for your attention to it... Cheers, Ian Rose (talk) 12:33, 21 November 2007 (UTC)

Heads up User talk:WesleyDodds#David Bowie. No edit war for me. Thanks. Ref ^(chew)(do) 12:20, 22 November 2007 (UTC)

DYK

On 6 December, 2007, Did you know? was updated with a fact from the article Stanley Goble, which you created or substantially expanded. If you know of another interesting fact from a recently created article, then please suggest it on the Did you know? talk page.

—Wknight94 (talk) 03:27, 6 December 2007 (UTC)

Award

In recognition of your diligent contributions towards the various reviews of military history articles, I am delighted to award you the Content Review Medal. Kirill 16:55, 8 December 2007 (UTC)

Hughie Edwards

Ian, would you mind if I revised your use of citations/references in this article? FWIW, I can explain in detail why some changes are necessary. Bzuk (talk) 15:09, 11 December 2007 (UTC).

Hi Ian , thanks for replying. I would like to rationalize the references section as there are three different date conventions used, while the actual bibliographical record needs revision since it is incomplete, incorrectly ordered and does not follow a recognized style guide. As you had already indicated, the article is not one you initiated so that the new edits would not be a problem. FWIW Bzuk (talk) 06:03, 13 December 2007 (UTC).

DYK

On 14 December, 2007, Did you know? was updated with a fact from the article Valston Hancock, which you created or substantially expanded. If you know of another interesting fact from a recently created article, then please suggest it on the Did you know? talk page.

--Carabinieri (talk) 19:30, 14 December 2007 (UTC)

Homophobic Edits

Phil Brady is a homosexual. This is cited in the bruce and phil page. Just because he is not openly gay does not mean he isn't. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Philmanskkjaaaw (talk • contribs) 23:49, 19 December 2007 (UTC)

Actually, it doesn't appear to be there at all - I checked that before I edited the article. See your own talk page for comments from others with similar experience. I also made a number of checks on the web to see if any source could verify your assertion and found none. In any case, your edit-warring and blanket reversion of style edits along with content doesn't help your case. Cheers, Ian Rose (talk) 03:24, 20 December 2007 (UTC)

250 Sqn

It had crossed my mind, but I haven't done any work on it at all. Feel free to make a start and I will help when I can. BTW, well done with all the articles on RAAF personnel. Grant | Talk 01:13, 23 December 2007 (UTC)

David Bowie

Heads up, US English introduction campaign. I have desisted from possible edit war. Thanks. Ref ^(chew)(do) 19:13, 23 December 2007 (UTC)

Thanks mate - many of the changes (apart from the US spelling of course) were useful so I've done a surgical edit rather than straightforward reversion - see what you think. Cheers, Ian Rose (talk) 10:54, 24 December 2007 (UTC)

Totally agree - the guy/gal actually knows what they're doing grammatically (bar the apostrophes sometimes), but has no idea about the etiquette of UK article, UK spelling/US article, US spelling in Wikipedia. The frustrating thing at the time was the lack of response, despite many attempts to ellicit one, and finally the call from another editor re: edit warring, at which point I quit (and always will). Thanks for the revision. Best wishes. Ref ^(chew)(do) 15:59, 24 December 2007 (UTC)

Hey, looks like they're talking now - 'tis the season...! Cheers, Ian Rose (talk)

Merry Xmas

Merry Christmas to you, and a Happy New Year. Ref ^(chew)(do) 19:02, 25 December 2007 (UTC)

Philip Brady and Bruce Mansfield

I've semi-protected these two articles for 3 days to see what happens. You might want to consider filing a report at WP:ANI if this is a case of long term abuse. You can also request that pages be protected at WP:RFPP, which usually gets you a faster response. Hut 8.5 22:24, 28 December 2007 (UTC)

Tks mate. Cheers, Ian Rose (talk) 22:30, 28 December 2007 (UTC)

Image:004353Drummond1.jpg

Ian, Image:004353Drummond1.jpg is now undeleted. Apologies for any inconvenience. All the best, Angus McLellan (Talk) 11:59, 29 December 2007 (UTC)

No prob, thanks for the quick response. Cheers, Ian Rose (talk) 12:10, 29 December 2007 (UTC)

Re: Congratulations on your adminship

(Belated) thanks Ian. --Nick Dowling (talk) 03:43, 30 December 2007 (UTC)