SM247
Welcome!
Hello, SM247, and welcome to Wikipedia! Thank you for your contributions. I hope you like the place and decide to stay. Here are a few good links for newcomers:
- The five pillars of Wikipedia
- How to edit a page
- Help pages
- Tutorial
- How to write a great article
- Manual of Style
I hope you enjoy editing here and being a Wikipedian! Please sign your name on talk pages using four tildes (~~~~); this will automatically produce your name and the date. If you need help, check out Wikipedia:Where to ask a question, ask me on my talk page, or place {{helpme}}
on your talk page and someone will show up shortly to answer your questions. Again, welcome! Karmafist 01:11, 20 January 2006 (UTC)
Busway Stations
The reason why I have put the bus routes for the Queen Street Bus Station and Cultural Centre Busway Station onto their own separate pages, is because the bus route information swamped the information on the two main article pages by the sheer large volume of the number of buses (plus their route information) which use these two stations. The main article pages are supposed to be about the bus stations themselves, as article pages within an international encyclopedia - the article pages are not supposed to be about the buses and the bus routes. The bus route information does not need to be on the main pages for the stations. Brisbane people, who are interested in which buses leave which of these two bus stations, are still able to find out what they want to know by clicking on the links on the main pages for bus route information for the stations which I have set up, using the information you supplied.
The only bus stations, which, I think (at the moment), will need to have the listing of bus routes on a separate special page, are the Queen Street Bus Station and Cultural Centre Busway Station (which now have their own pages) and also King George Square Busway Station.
The reason why I am thinking of, for the future, a separate page for bus routes for King George Square Busway Station, is because the bus station may possibly eventually carry a far greater volume of buses, in the future, than it would appear to be going to do at the moment. If indications are correct, future plans, by the Brisbane City Council, suggest that the buses may eventually go to the Queen Street Bus Station via the King George Square Busway Station, instead of through the entrance/exit portal in front of the Treasury Casino. If this is so, then the King George Square Busway Station might eventually have a listing as large, or perhaps even larger, than the number of buses which use the Cultural Centre Busway Station.
This problem should not occur with suburban busway stations, where the number of buses using the stations are a lot less in number. Therefore, it would be okay to leave the bus route information on the suburban busway stations pages. Figaro 23:17, 26 January 2006 (UTC)
User page
Sorry. I accidentally edited your user page with my previous comment about busway stations. When I discovered my error, I immediately moved the comment to your talk page. Again, sorry for the error. Figaro 23:35, 26 January 2006 (UTC)
Brisbane Central railway station (Bus routes)
Hey there.
I've decided to move the bus routes for Central to a separate page. Seeing that Brisbane is also a hub for many bus services. I understand that South East Queensland public transport is integrated, but the numerous amont of bus services in the city flooded what should normally be a railway station article. I understand that Figaro has already done Roma Street.
However, bus connections listed from many suburban railway stations would be ok seeing there isnt as much services as the ones from the city stations. Arnzy 05:54, 27 January 2006 (UTC)
I looked through your bus station project a little. It's huge and detailed, it would be a shame to delete it (as deleting the one put up for afd would justify deleting the other ones). You could compare it to Paris Métro if you want to justify it. However, it's considered to be the metro system, and would have no notability problems. Obli (Talk) 10:54, 29 January 2006 (UTC)
CityTrain Lines: stations template
I'll see what I can do, but modified templates may have to be done for the small lines (ie Doomben, Airport, Corinda via South Brisbane), considering all trains on those mentioned lines (except Airport) are all-stops trains. -- Arnzy (Talk) 01:26, 25 March 2006 (UTC)
Wikipedia:Articles for deletion
Your article TransLink (South East Queensland) services has been listed for deletion at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/TransLink (South East Queensland) services. --WikiCats 11:50, 2 May 2006 (UTC)
TransLink bus routes servicing...
Hi SM247. I came across your Ebbw Vale railway station, Brisbane article through the Random article link, and I noticed the highly unusual TransLink bus routes servicing section. If I could I'd like to give you a few styling tips:
- The See also section is a standard appendix, so you should put the Translink section above it, not below.
- This section really should be a template of some sort, like an infobox, or be incorporated into the regular text. Why does it warrant its own section?
- Avoid putting links in the section header.
If you'd like help fixing these issues, let me know. I'd be glad to lend a hand. ~MDD4696 22:52, 12 May 2006 (UTC)
Thanks for your hints. In future, I want to modify all the TransLink articles mentioning bus routes in some fashion that will enable the standard route details at TransLink (South East Queensland) services to be template-linked (i.e. so that any changes made there will also change references in other articles, saving a huge amount of time).
As long as there is still a link to the services page somewhere, feel free to modify the headings.
My editing was just intended to be an interim standardisation of all the station articles which were formerly all over the place depending on which line you looked at. I'd like to see them all standard format, but if you want to change the layout, by all means. I'm not so skilled in that regard. SM247 00:52, 13 May 2006 (UTC)
CBD rail stations templates
Yeah, I've put the lines in order of the same next stations template to keep the consistency at the time. But I'll have a look at it, and would have to agree that it would need to be moved to keep to consistency and to keep the lines with the same colour next to each other.
Also furthermore, can you have a look at talk page for the NCL, there is a discussion i started whether if the Nambour/Gympie line should be split from the article. Some draft stuff is in the sandbox of my user page. --Arnzy (whats up?) 04:47, 13 May 2006 (UTC)
Moving pages
Do not copy and paste pages to move them, this loses the edit history. Use the "move this page" function. We also like to have pages with the most common name, so moving "Millennium train" to "M set" is not the best idea. Also note the naming convention for articles -- only capitalize proper nouns. Dysprosia 10:20, 17 May 2006 (UTC)
"Set" is still very far from titling conventions. Redirects will pick up any variants in naming that exist. Dysprosia 01:01, 18 May 2006 (UTC)
Edit summary
Hi SM. I have noted that you don't usually provide an edit summary. It is helpful when following up edits to have an edit summary. Keep up the good work. --WikiCats 10:51, 17 May 2006 (UTC)
I try when possible, but sometimes I make repetitive changes to a large series of articles, and it is truly a pain in the arse to do one for each, especially if it is non-substantial edit only (e.g. where one thing is cut 'n' pasted into many articles). SM247 20:24, 17 May 2006 (UTC)
Metroad markers
Hi SM247, no worries =). By the way, are there any more Brisbane place names to add to Australian English vocabulary#Place names? Cheers. -Techelf 08:18, 30 May 2006 (UTC)
Olny Surfers that I can think of right now. SM247 20:21, 30 May 2006 (UTC)
User:Authedu permenantly blocked
I decided that I should let you know that User:Authedu whom you have had grievences with in the past has been permenantly blocked today for vandalism. It's kind of interesting that he thinks that adding things such as this is simply "being balanced":
- "THE SOUTHPORT SCHOOL IS A FUCKHOLE AND GREG WAIN IS OUT TO SCREW EVERYBODY FOR MORE MONEY. IF YOU HAVE A CHILD MAKE SURE YOU DON'T SEND HIM or HER TO THE SOUTHPORT SHITHOLE."
Best wishes--Conrad Devonshire Talk 03:41, 31 May 2006 (UTC)
Excellent. SM247 04:03, 31 May 2006 (UTC)
TSS
With the greatest respect, I found your message to be condescending. I am certain that myself and the many other users you evaluate would benefit from constructive criticism rather than blatant statements. However, I am thankful for your suggestions. You said you have "no difficulties with well-written work that criticises the School and indeed [you] encourage it." I am disappointed with this statement. The statement, as I understand, communicates that all comments posted on the TSS ‘wikipage' must be validated by primarily you. I would appreciate other users contributing their two penneth. Please forgive me, I am unfamiliar with Wikipedia and such a suggestion may be ludicrous, but I am in favour of balance and from your comment, I deduce, that so are you.
Would you like to contribute an article that communicates another interpretation of the School? - Regards 144.133.216.231.
I am sorry that you found my comments condescending, but the page has been attracting poorly written comments by members of the School who obviously have no grasp of Wikipolicies. As it stands, I (and any other user) have a right to edit the page and I do not tolerate badly constructed sentences or thoughts. As I said, what is needed is verification such as newspaper articles, official reports etc and the like. I do not doubt the validity of your premise, but the way it was expressed can be better worded.
All in all - I am obviously biased in favour of the School and I do not deny that, but what that means is that I do not like to see a poorly written article. For example, see edits and comments made by User:Authedu (who has since been banned) and references to particular current students who are not notable or which have been made in bad faith and poor taste.
I dearly hope I have not insulted you, for that was not my intention. SM247 22:42, 7 June 2006 (UTC)
Thank you for your reply. I am pleased to see your rendition of 'Academic Pursuits' on the TSS 'wikipage'. I hope you do not mind but I added the word 'two' before the mention of OP3. I hope this does not upset, if it does, I am more than happy to work towards a solution.
I am not sure how much you are involved with the School (are you possibly an old-boy?), but you may remember the tantrums thrown over last year's OP results? Well, this issue is the topic of discussion amongst TSS staff and students alike, and it appears Mr. Authedu had his own ‘strongly-worded’ thoughts to share on the matter... Would it frustrate you to see a quick, balanced summation of ‘for’ and ‘against’ the 2005 OP conundrum, possibly under 'Academic Pursuits'? Furthermore, you stated above you required that users supply 'newspaper articles' (or official reports and such forth) to validate their postings, well, what are your thoughts on this one: http://www.news.com.au/story/0,10117,18691803-1248,00.html - Regards 144.133.216.231.
Well, essentially, the academic results of one year aren't extremely encyclopaedic, you see, and last year was an aberration anyway compared to previous years. For a start, as mentioned in that article, the figures are meaningless as they only reflect an entrance rank for university - they do not reflect whether the student has a better quality education. Also, the fact that TSS is not a selective school is relevant here. But, feel free to write something. Jammo (SM247) 20:43, 8 June 2006 (UTC)
Ok. I'll leave it at that. 144.133.216.231 08:27, 9 June 2006 (UTC) |
Tomadelete?
Did you really have to go there?? Tomachuck is a valid word, and it will find its home on wikipedia... it may take a little more time for it to catch on, but it will have its day... I hope that nonone tomachucks you in your sleep.
No, it will not, because it is an unverified tomaneologism. Please make proper edits, or if you must edit badly, at least be funny. SM247 02:42, 8 June 2006 (UTC)