User talk:Pdfpdf/Archive16

Hi

How are you doing? did you get TW working? :) A8UDI 04:19, 13 November 2009 (UTC)

Spring brings hayfever and sinus infections; I've largely been coughing, sniffing, asleep or drugged for the last week. I'm embarassed to admit I haven't looked at TW yet - when awake, I've been involved in article-writing & article-expanding, and deliberately avoiding/ignoring potential edit wars.

Have you moved south-east yet? Pdfpdf (talk) 04:29, 13 November 2009 (UTC)

haha, no, and probably not for some time. I'm sorry to hear about your illness. I highly recommend you check out twinkle (it literally takes 2 clicks to install) and you can easily warn users and report them with 2 clicks. It is stable so if that "youre responsible for your actions" warning scares, dont let it. Friendly is excellent for welcoming users. Both of these apps "install" on the drop down options list on the top. ARV is used to report, Warn is self explanatory and Wel is for welcoming. There is also a TB (talk back) to quickly alert someone when they have messages. :) PS you're from Australia? Oh god, men with australian accents... can't handle it... no really.. Tom A8UDI 04:37, 13 November 2009 (UTC)

Hmmm. Is that like "women in uniform"?

(And whilst I have a "cold" my voice is several tones deeper, too ... )

Well, you certainly present a convincing arguement! When my brain is doing better than "auto-pilot", I'll have to "give it a go". Thanks. Cheers, Pdfpdf (talk) 04:45, 13 November 2009 (UTC)

sorry I didn't reply... I had a party last night and went to bed :p.. opposite time zones here in NY. Anyway, you could produce avi files? hahaha oh boy! exciting!! Tom A8UDI 13:23, 13 November 2009 (UTC)

Juggling

(From User talk:Hawkeye7)

Yes. It didn't fit there very well, but I couldn't think of a better solution. (Your solution is better.) Pdfpdf (talk) 01:32, 13 November 2009 (UTC)

Thanks for your help for this one. Much appreciated! Hawkeye7 (talk) 03:39, 13 November 2009 (UTC)

No worries. I found it interesting; I'm glad you found my interest helpful. Cheers Pdfpdf (talk) 04:18, 13 November 2009 (UTC)

In answer to your question in the edit summary, Denzil MacArthur-Onslow was an Australian general of the post-WWII period. After commanding an armoured brigade in WWII, he commanded the BCOF in Japan. He was promoted to major general in 1955. James and George, both major generals, were his uncles. I think you confused him with one of them. He's also often confused with his son Ion, also actually named Denzil, the Pura Mock and Daffodil Marg man. And yes, they are related to those MacArthurs and those Onslows from Australian History class. The family almost merits a volume of the ADB all to themselves. Hawkeye7 (talk) 10:09, 13 November 2009 (UTC)

On the sheep's back ...

Lol! (What's that one-liner? "Nepotism starts at home"!)
You've stimulated my interest!
So, according to WP, we have:

• (1) Brig Gen George MacLeay MacArthur-Onslow CMG, DSO (2 May 1875 - 12 September 1931)
  • great grandson of (5) John MacArthur.
  • he had 5 siblings.
  • "Like his brother, he was aide de camp to the Governor General from 1920 to 1923 and commanded the 1st Cavalry Division from 1927 to 1931." - a) I expact that's very poor and ambiguous grammar!! (e.g. I bet they won't both ADC at the same time.); b) Which brother?
• (2) Maj Gen James William Macarthur-Onslow VD (7 November 1867 – 17 November 1946)
  • husband of (3) Enid Emma Macarthur
  • son of (7) Arthur Alexander Walton Onslow
  • son of (8) Elizabeth Onslow (nee Macarthur)
  • father of (10) son of (2)&(3)
  • father of (11) daughter1 of (2)&(3)
  • father of (12) daughter2 of (2)&(3)
• (3) Enid Emma Macarthur
  • wife of (2) James Macarthur-Onslow
  • granddaughter of (4) Hannibal Macarthur
  • mother of (10) son of (2)&(3)
  • mother of (11) daughter1 of (2)&(3)
  • mother of (12) daughter2 of (2)&(3)
• (4) Hannibal Hawkins Macarthur (1788 - 1861)
  • nephew of (5) John Macarthur
  • grandfather of (3) Enid Emma Macarthur
• (5) John Macarthur (wool pioneer) (1766 – 11 April 1834)
  • 'He spelled his surname "M'Arthur" for most of his life. He occasionally varied it to "MacArthur". The spelling "Macarthur" (with a lower case "a") became established only very late in his life.'
  • second son of (6) Alexander Macarthur
  • uncle of (4) Hannibal Hawkins Macarthur
• (6) Alexander Macarthur
  • father of (5) John Macarthur
• (7) Arthur Alexander Walton Onslow
  • father of (2) James Macarthur-Onslow
  • husband of (8) Elizabeth Onslow (nee Macarthur)
• (8) Elizabeth Onslow (nee Macarthur) (1840-1911):
  • daughter of (9) James Macarthur;
  • granddaughter of (5) John Macarthur
  • mother of (2) James Macarthur-Onslow
• (9) James Macarthur
  • father of (8) Elizabeth Onslow (nee Macarthur)
• (10) son of (2)&(3)
• (11) daughter1 of (2)&(3)
• (12) daughter2 of (2)&(3)

OK! Now we come to your information:

• (13) Denzil
  • James and George, both major generals, were his uncles.
    • So (1) & (2) were brothers?
    • So (1) George was a 2*, not a 1*?
• (14) his son Ion, also actually named Denzil

Hmmm. Cheers, Pdfpdf (talk) 12:30, 13 November 2009 (UTC)

Did you check out User:Choess/Onslow tree? Hawkeye7 (talk) 18:53, 13 November 2009 (UTC)

George

Just had a quick glance. Looks like it needs to be studied!

Back to James, George and Denzil

1) Q: Who was Denzil's dad?

A: Francis Arthur - a third brother

http://www.unsw.adfa.edu.au/~rmallett/Generals/onslow.html

The MacArthur-Onslows were also a military family. George's brothers James and Arthur served in the South African War where James was mentioned in dispatches. James also served with the AIF, as a colonel with the Sea transport Service. He was aide de camp to the governor general from 1902 to 1909 and 1917 to 1920 and retired from the army with the rank of major general in 1925. Arthur's son, Major General Sir Denzil MacArthur-Onslow served with the 2nd AIF and was promoted to major general in 1955.

2) Wikipedia article George MacArthur-Onslow says he was Brig Gen. So does the above webpage. Also adb

Q:Have you got a quotable reference I can use to support Maj Gen?

Cheers, Pdfpdf (talk) 15:37, 14 November 2009 (UTC)

Ooops. You're right. Hawkeye7 (talk) 21:07, 14 November 2009 (UTC)

Hardly! ;-) I have no idea. It's just I couldn't find any evidence to the contrary ...

Denzil interests me - it's an unusual name for an Australian. "More investgation required". Cheers, Pdfpdf (talk) 01:24, 15 November 2009 (UTC)

white space

(From User talk:Wolfer68#white space)

Regarding this edit and your comment: "no need for <br>, an actual space does the trick."
It doesn't "do the trick" on my computer. What magic are you employing? Pdfpdf (talk) 06:35, 15 November 2009 (UTC)

I don't know what it looks like on your computer, but unlike navboxes at the bottom of the page, I always see a small space above and below succession boxes when the return key is used to add a space. --Wolfer68 (talk) 06:57, 15 November 2009 (UTC)

Yes, I gathered that. And as I said/implied, I don't see that. And that's why it was like that.

So where does that leave us?

(I'm inclined to restore it, but decided it would be more polite to discuss the matter first.)

Cheers, Pdfpdf (talk) 07:26, 15 November 2009 (UTC)

Ok, I have no problem with that, it's just that I've never seen it done on any page that I've come across with succession boxes. I've seen it on artist's navigational boxes, because I've seen what that does, but even that's not really a big deal. --Wolfer68 (talk) 07:32, 15 November 2009 (UTC)

Hmmmm. I'm interested by your response, and the apparent fact that my experience is so different from your experience. Perhaps it would be more accurate to say I'm puzzled - maybe even "concerned".

I agree that, in the grand scheme of life, it is far from being even a small deal. Never-the-less, in the interim, I'll accept your offer.

Nice talking to you. Cheers, Pdfpdf (talk) 07:44, 15 November 2009 (UTC)

Botanic garden

I've been working quite extensively on the botanical garden article. As you've been fairly active in editing the botanic garden article, please review my suggestion re its status as a disambiguation page on Talk:botanic garden. Peter coxhead (talk) 07:57, 16 November 2009 (UTC)

Done. (I support you suggestion - see detail at Talk:botanic garden.) Pdfpdf (talk) 09:44, 16 November 2009 (UTC)

NowCommons

File:UofAdelaide-TeachersCollegeBuildings-Aug08.jpg is now available on Wikimedia Commons as Commons:File:UofAdelaide-TeachersCollegeBuildings-Aug08.jpg. --Erwin85Bot (talk) 18:40, 21 November 2009 (UTC)

File:UofAdelaide-Cloisters-Aug08.jpg is now available as Commons:File:UofAdelaide-Cloisters-Aug08.jpg. --Erwin85Bot (talk) 18:45, 21 November 2009 (UTC)

BLP policy

Rather than getting into an edit war over WP:BLPNAME and risking a block, I would suggest leaving it be. The material you are trying to re-add is tabloid in character and adds nothing to an encyclopaedic understanding of the matter. The key elements regarding Rann are still there. The names are, indeed, referred to in the articles which the article cites, so those sites can wear the potential legal issues crawling out of this case rather than ourselves. The general rule re these sort of things has always been "only name them if they would be notable themselves". A parliamentary waitress does not fit this category. This isn't paranoia - it has two angles, firstly, recognition that while those News.com.au stories will be off the front page in a week or less and not even viewable after a year, Wikipedia is aiming for the permanent record, so the individual gets their privacy back to some degree; and secondly, recognition that in a fraught legal atmosphere Wikipedia should not be siding itself with the participants (and, if the claims being made are any guide, I am meaning that Seven and New Idea are the participants). Additionally, there is issues of WP:WEIGHT within the article if the section is significantly expanded. Orderinchaos 00:40, 25 November 2009 (UTC)

Rhodes

This is wikipedia, editors section. Nothing is undisputably relevant and useful. But I think the Rhodes/sexuality section is ok, it starts by clearly stating the issue is ambiguous and then explains what evidence there is. Best wiki style when something turns out to be controversial. I'm still not an expert but there are several copyright expired biographies available on internet archive. He was very famous and all his mates seem to have written something. There was a suggestion in the introduction of the book written by his secretary Jourdan that various scurrilous rumours had circulated after Rhodes' death, and this was what had motivated him to write the book to set the record straight. Which just makes me curious what the rumours were! It is hard to judge precisely what people may have meant by some of the statements and descriptions. I think people, men in th company of men, may have been more demonstrative then than now. But on the other hand, if they took things further would have been more secretive about that.

Interestingly (or not), I got into this because someone gave me a biography of Churchill. Which led me to the British navy in WW1, where Churchill got himself into trouble, and now more widely the background first of the navy and then the war. I was delighted to discover Kipling wrote 'If' (which I always liked) thinking of Jameson. Not because I knew anything about Jameson before this week, but because it was about someone specific. I am now curious to know more about him to see if he fits the bill. Churchill wrote his own accounts of events in South Africa which I read first, but I can't now exactly remember where it was to go back and see exactly what he said about Jameson and Rhodes. If Churchill was gay he was a lot better at hiding it than Rhodes, but he was undeniably gay-friendly. Churchill fell out with Kitchener, but he was on good terms with his ADC Ian Hamilton, who also fits the profile to have been in the, er, club. And then the Kipling article had a picture of Hamilton going to Kipling's funeral! I don't know your interests, but a chap called Gordon wrote a book 'The rules of the Game' about the class riddled british navy before ww1. He had a chapter on the masons. I think an author just might have been better off having one on who was sleeping with whom in male dominated Victorian society. Churchill was a great one for using contacts. Sandpiper (talk) 18:37, 25 November 2009 (UTC)

Rann

I think both points are relevant. Timeshift (talk) 12:56, 29 November 2009 (UTC)

Apologies for misinterpreting your words.

I can't believe quickly politics has changed here. I just hope like others who've been in his position that the electors don't care. Timeshift (talk) 13:15, 29 November 2009 (UTC)

Re:Hila Levy move

Thank you, I was slow in doing so, because I had other issues here to deal with, but it was one thing that you recommended and that I had in the back of my mind since. Therefore, thank you once more. Tony the Marine (talk) 17:20, 29 November 2009 (UTC)

Old Adelaide Family

Just to inform you, I will be nominating it for deletion when I get home later. No evidence to suggest this category is notable/meaningful/encyclopedic. Regards Hazir (talk) 00:10, 30 November 2009 (UTC)

Nomination is now at http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Categories_for_discussion/Log/2009_December_1#Category:_Old_Adelaide_Family . I'll comment there. Peter Ballard (talk) 23:38, 1 December 2009 (UTC)

Annesley College

Regarding my removal of the redlink in the See Also section of Annesley College, which you reverted, and asked why it was removed, I direct you to Wikipedia's guidelines on this matter. As there is not presently an article for List of schools offering the International Baccalaureate Primary Years Programme (it was deleted in August), it appears as a redlink in the article. Therefore I removed it. And I've removed it again, for the same reasons. Thanks. Salamurai (talk) 14:21, 8 December 2009 (UTC)

Orphaned non-free images

Thanks for uploading File:CA-Army-OF8.gif. The image description page currently specifies that the image is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, the image is currently orphaned, meaning that it is not used in any articles on Wikipedia.

Note that any non-free images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. ZooFari 06:35, 12 December 2009 (UTC)

Thanks for uploading File:CA-Army-OF7.gif. The image is currently orphaned. ZooFari 06:36, 12 December 2009 (UTC)

Thanks for uploading File:CA-Army-OF5.gif. The image is currently orphaned. ZooFari 06:36, 12 December 2009 (UTC)

Thanks for uploading File:CA-Army-OF4.gif. The image is currently orphaned. ZooFari 06:36, 12 December 2009 (UTC)

DSTO

Thanks Pdfpdf. What I really should have done is created 'Category:Military industry of Australia' and collected all the defence companies. DSTO isn't industry exactly - you're right. Feel free to revert. Cheers Buckshot06 (talk) 21:13, 14 December 2009 (UTC)

Beer in Serbia and Montenegro

Hi, if you care to look at the bottom of http://www.economicexpert.com/a/Beer:in:Serbia:and:Montenegro.html, you will see the following text:

This article is from Wikipedia licensed under the GNU Free Documentation License. It uses material from the Wikipedia article "Beer in Serbia and Montenegro".

And that notice is actually linked to the Wikipedia article, which in my book is conclusive proof. It is probably taken from an older version of the Wikipedia article. Cheers. Jezhotwells (talk) 16:11, 27 December 2009 (UTC)

Indeed it does! Yes, I agree with you.

Thank you - I had missed that inconspicuous but highly relevant piece of information.

Cheers, Pdfpdf (talk) 04:03, 28 December 2009 (UTC)

List of ACs

Thanks, Pdfpdf. Yuletide and other relevant felicitations to you, too.

Actually, some of these people are quite obscure, because ACs (or even knighthoods and peerages) are not necessarily any guarantee of celebrity. They get their name in the paper on the day of the award, in some cases for the only time in their lives. Notability is probably satisfied, however, since there has to be some official record of the deeds for which they're being honoured.

Some of the names have been on my personal To Do List for ages, but that list turns out to be just as much a List of Things NOT To Do as anything else. New Years Resolution: Making a list of things I have to do means I actually have to do them ... eventually.  :)

Ignoring the problem - that might work. Come back in 20 years and see if there are still any red links. Some editors loathe red links, and would have removed them from "our" list by now. I have no issue with them; they're a reminder that something remains undone. -- Jack of Oz ... speak! ... 20:08, 30 December 2009 (UTC)

Broadbents

I meant their genealogical relationship; because there is some chance that the reader will be able to remember that, and his chance of remembering the exact birth and deathdates is negligible. Septentrionalis PMAnderson 01:59, 31 December 2009 (UTC)

Other means of disambiguation (Service, war fought in, final rank) might be even better, but I don't see any that really work. Septentrionalis PMAnderson 02:21, 31 December 2009 (UTC)

New year's greetings

Hi! I just wanted to wish you a great new year - I hope it proves to be a good one. :) - Bilby (talk) 13:43, 31 December 2009 (UTC)

Oddfellows

Thanks for the kind words about my photos!

I'm not much more fond of "the powerful" than of "the people in power". And elite seems to me to come pretty close:

"In sociology as in general usage, the elite is a relatively small dominant group within a large society, having a privileged status perceived as being envied by others of a lower line of order. The elite at the top of the social strata almost invariably puts it in a position of leadership, whether it be expected or volunteered, and often subjects the holders of elite status to pressure to maintain that leadership position as part of status." (from the Wikipedia entry)

Elite, as a noun, is a more precise word than the broader meanings that attach to "elitism". I'll grant you, though, that it carries those other connotations as baggage.

"Establishment" isn't bad, though historically it is all tied up with religion.

What about "power elite"? "Ruling class"? Actually, "ruling class" might make sense. It's a bit antique, and were dealing with an historical subject.

I'll leave it up to you, though-- I only hit the article as a drive-by.

Cheers! -- Mwanner | Talk 20:39, 31 December 2009 (UTC)