User talk:CJ

What should Wikipedia's tagline be?
You can comment here.

cj is retired. sorta.

Home	Users	Gallery	Sandpit	To-do	Talk

replies

If you have posted your comment correctly, know that I will read it, generally within a weeks time.
I will usually always respond to your comment on my talkpage. Sometimes I may crosspost to your talkpage.
Occasionally, I may not respond — understand this is not because I have not read your comment nor is it a personal slight

Good to see the break is helping

I'm pleased to see your break is helping the stress level. I hope it gets you all the way back to normal soon. Cheers. --Scott Davis ^Talk 09:49, 25 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for checking up. I've got uni out of the way, but still have plenty to do, so I'll be contributing haphazardly. --cj | talk 09:53, 25 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]

No worries. There's four South Para Reservoir photos in commons:category:South Australia to pick from. --Scott Davis ^Talk 12:13, 25 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Cheers

Thank you ever so much for taking time out of your break to register your support at my RfA, and thanks also for the very gracious comment. It was much appreciated, and I look forward to your return to Wikipedia proper. Steve block talk 10:32, 25 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]

All systems go

My RFA is up. Thanks again for the nomination and the kind words. Snottygobble | Talk 13:34, 25 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]

You're welcome. I'm honoured to have nominated you; as I said in the RfA, it's long overdue.--cj | talk 13:40, 25 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]

go go go

sorry for messing the snotty/drew nomination page up, but my estimation (as I have said) is that some of his arts are of better standard than what the coming wa encyc (print) has offered to date - his rapid grasp of some of the more difficult issues of wa history astonishes me to say the least - as for me, if i ever finish western tas (about another 80 or so arts if I do it properly) and pastoral leases of wa (sigh only another 420 to go) I wouldnt even scratch his level of scholarship and thoroughness.oh well so much for being on a break!vcxlor 14:11, 25 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks

Hi, thanks for your response. I just wanted to know why he changed his user name. imo, it is probably not safe to give our true identity on wikipedia. --Gurubrahma 14:20, 25 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]

It's a shame, but yes, that's true. Same goes for the web as a whole.--cj | talk 14:22, 25 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Welcome pack

Sorry, but I'm just a lazy user who couldn't be bothered to log in properly. ;-) I've dropped the welcome message from talk though, so any genuinely new users who use this lab workstation can be pleasantly surprised with the bright orange box. Thanks still. Chris talk back 16:24, 25 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks.

Really. I mean that. I've restored my page and will try and do less stressful work around here. - Lucky 6.9 04:14, 26 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Syntax change?

Hello Cyberjunkie. Lately, I am finding my signature with talk page link doesn't work anymore. Has something changed? Do I need to adjust my signature? Thanks. Newhoggy 09:22, 26 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Newhoggy. Yes, that happened with mine as well. As I've been on Wikibreak I haven't gone looking to find out what the issue is, but I narrowed the signature flaw to the "raw" function. Go to your preferences page, uncheck "raw signature", and replace your signature with [[User:Newhoggy|Newhoggy]] | [[User talk:Newhoggy|Talk]] (or whatever variant you like). Basically, you have to type it out in full. Happy editing, --cj | talk 09:32, 26 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]

It works well. Thanks cj -- Newhoggy | Talk 13:08, 26 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Australian Prime Ministers

Cyberjunkie, I really fail to see why you reverted my change to the colours in the list of Australian Prime Ministers. Admittedly, it wasn't that nice on the eyes, but the present list is hopeless. --RaiderAspect 02:02, 27 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]

I thought the fact it looked, frankly, nasty, was reason enough. I intend to update them with party colour id's being used by WikiProject Australian politics. --cj | talk 02:33, 27 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Didn't seem too bad to me, but ok. EDIT: Just had a look around the WikiProject, I couldn't see anything about party colour id's --RaiderAspect 05:16, 27 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Sorry about my earlier comments - they were a bit harsh. I'd just recieved some nasty emails from someone I had blocked, and was consequently moody :). With regards to the party colour id's, see here. JPD and I had separately developed templates for use in tables. I hope to synchronise these. They're still being developed, and I haven't yet created any for historical/defunct parties. You're welcome to suggest colours.--cj | talk 04:59, 28 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Re:The Aussie take-over

Heh! No, offhand I can't think fo any kiwis coming up to be nominated. There might be some, but - as you say - a lot of the top ones are already admins (Gadfium, Moriori and the like). These things do seem to come in cycles though so probably there'll be three or four of them in a couple of months' time. Grutness...wha? 06:32, 27 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Your comment made me go through the list of wiki kiwis (that's not easy to type...), and I've offered to nominate Alan Liefting, who's been around for a while and is definitely deserving of nomination. Grutness...wha? 05:35, 29 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Good choice. Alan's been around forever! --cj | talk 06:22, 29 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Sadly he turned it down (then again, he's pretty busy outside WP with environmentla and political matters - he even stood for the Green Party at our recent general election!). Keep an eye on rfa, though - I'm sure there will be a couple of kiwis up there before long :) Grutness...wha? 11:00, 29 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Australian Aboriginal flag is the current ACOTF

Hi. You nominated Australian Aboriginal flag to be selected as Australian Collaboration of the fortnight. It has now been selected. Please improve it in any way you see fit. Thanks. --Scott Davis ^Talk 13:56, 27 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]

You're welcome

And I am a bored Australian uni student (it's true) :-) - Akamad 07:17, 29 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Template:User AmE-0

RE: The "AmE-0" on your page, you may be interested in adding Template:User AmE-0 or Category:User_AmE-0 to your user page, just letting you know about their existence in case you're interested. --Chaosfeary 12:46, 30 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Signature

Cyberjunkie, I am a somewhat new user. I don't know how to create a signiture, but I want to. Can you tell me how?- Tapd260

Hi Tapd. See Wikipedia:Sign your posts on talk pages. To sign a comment just use four tildes (~~~~) or the signature button (the second last above the edit box). Also, when starting a new topic, be sure to give it a descriptive heading (ie ==Heading==). Welcome to Wikipedia, by the way. If you have any other questions, feel free to ask me.--cj | talk 04:06, 2 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Re: your email

Not sure whether you got my reply, I sometimes have trouble with that account. Anyway, my answer is yes, I'd be honoured. --bainer (talk) 23:01, 30 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Hi bainer. I was just typing a reply to your email. Expect the nom to be up sometime today. Sorry about the delay, --cj | talk 23:05, 30 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Sorry if I seemed impatient, but my university email account doesn't always work when I use it from home. Just checking whether you had received it! --bainer (talk) 23:20, 30 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Cheers cj, I've now accepted the nom. Took a little while to get to it, I was busy writing again. --bainer (talk) 01:43, 1 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]

About WikiProject Politics

Hello, I noticed that you signed up for the Politics project. I would like your input on a notice template that I am working on, you can see it here. I have had some trouble finding a suitable image for it, so if you know of a more appropriate image or if you can suggest any changes that might improve the template, please drop a line. --Robert Harrison^{talk contrib} 06:48, 1 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]

RfA thanks

I would like to thank you for your support of my recent successful RfA. If you have any further comments or feedback for me, my door's open - don't hesistate to drop a note on my talk page. Happy editing! Enochlau 11:13, 3 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Re: Adminship

Thanks, cj. My first (and so far only) use of my new superpowers was to delete an old version of Image:HenryDaglish.jpeg, which was in fact a photo of Hal Colebatch not Henry Daglish. That particular loose end had been making me itchy for over a year, so if feels good to scratch it at last. I have added myself to the Aussie admins category, and ripped off your admin userbox. Rock on, Snottygobble | Talk 12:10, 3 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Delete

I just changed username. Is there any chance you'd be able to delete my old user and talk pages? (michaelgabrielsen) Cheers. - G^t 06:41, 4 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Yeah, help would be good! Any chance you'd be able to delete all my old user pages for me? I just wanted to change my user name to something less obvious, but I'm still me! Thankyou~ -

G^t 03:56, 7 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Happy to do that. First, I thought I'd check you'd didn't want to just redirect them to your new name. But then, if you changed it for privacy reasons, it might defeat the purpose of the change. So redirect or delete?--cj | talk 04:01, 7 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]

A delete. As much as I don't want to confuse some users, I don't want to have such a visible presence. It's easy enough to find me as a user. Thanks -

G^t

Okay, action complete. --cj | talk 04:12, 7 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Cnwb's RfA

CJ, Thanks so very much for supporting my Request for Admin. The final result was 38/0/0. I'm looking forward to spending my summer holidays shut away in a darkened room, drinking G&Ts and playing with my new tools ;-) Please accept this Tim Tam as a token of my gratitude.

On a personal note: your support means a lot to me, as I've been admiring your dedicated work on wikipedia these past few months. I was also pleasantly surprised to see you'd intended to nominate me somewhere down the track. Thanks.

Cnwb 23:10, 4 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Critters

Hi, if you're looking for a distraction (haven't exams finished yet?), I'd appreciate it if you would have a read through Short-beaked Echidna - which should be my next featured Australian animal. Thanks.--nixie 09:04, 6 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Sure. Yeah, my exams are over, but I'm about to have my wisdom teeth out, whilst preparing to move house. Busy times, :) A cursory glance shows the article to be pretty fantastic. --cj | talk 09:40, 6 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Newb question

Hi, it looks like my first foray into editing Wikipedia didn't go so well as you gave me a yellow card :) I added links to weather pages for a number of cities which I thought were relevant and I deleted two links from Perth which I considered spam. I would appreciate it if you could explain exactly what was wrong with my edits so I don't make the same mistake twice. I realise adding/deleting links isn't the greatest contribution but I thought it would be a good way to get my feet wet. 58.6.125.11 13:00, 6 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Hi. Firstly, have you considered creating an account? We welcome contributions for new users; and mistakes are quickly taken care of. The problem with the links you were adding is that they were commercial in nature and not directly relevant. That they were added prominently to the top of the external links sections suggested advertising. A better link might have been to the Bureau of Meteorology, in any case. Thanks, --cj | talk 13:40, 6 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for the quick reply. I'll register and try again. 58.6.125.11 00:47, 7 December 2005 (UTC)

Religion Portals

Hey Cyberjunkie, I saw that you removed severeal religion portals from the portal list, calling them philosophy articles. What's the reason? Those are all portals, and we were asked to list them here because it is obligatory. deeptrivia (talk) 13:18, 6 December 2005 (UTC) PS: Just to make it clear, I'm talking about these portals: Bahá'í Faith, Sikhism, Taoism, Jainism, Shinto, Zoroastrianism, Confucianism. Please revert your changes. deeptrivia (talk) 13:20, 6 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Indeed I did. Sorry, I didn't intend to. I believe I was looking at an older version of the page to see where the Philosophy Portal was previously, and then edited forgetting subsequent edits. I've returned them. Sorry again. On those Portals, however, are there maintainers for each? There's been a proliferation of Portals recently, most of which won't ever be updated; I hope the Religion Portals aren't such Portals.--cj | talk 13:29, 6 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Hi. Some of those portals are just couple of days old. Let's see how many of them turn out to be active ones. Maybe some of them won't, let's wait and see. Thanks. deeptrivia (talk) 16:13, 6 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]

hi i am rrr... 84.5.58.241

I am new on wikipedia and i tried to post on the HD subject. But as less than a rookie i messed up.. u reverted my changes and i am ok with it (i have to train on posting )... but is there a way to chat or talk with u... msn or equivalent? -- HD subject on wikipedia ...it was a bout a few minutes ago 7 december...

BDAbramson's RfA

Thank you, CJ, for your "yayness" support in my RfA - I'll do my best as an admin to make the reality of Wikipedia rise to the level of the dream. BDAbramson T 17:43, 8 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]

My RfA

cj, thanks for your nomination and support on my RfA. The final count was 46/0/0. I hope I'll live up to your support in my use of the mop and bucket. Please accept this wikithanks as a token of my gratitude ;) --bainer (talk) 22:52, 8 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Adelaide

Apologies if the edits weren't exactly right - I'll start adding in footnotes now and try to give a bit more of an Adelaide-focus. Cheers for the copyedit in education though! - G^t 13:28, 11 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Help Please

Hi there. I notice you have banned my IP 202.6.138.34 for vandalism, which is kind of worrying me since I have never vandalised anything to do with Wikipedia. I think in total I may have made about two or three very small, useful changes to a couple of articles, but have never gone and vandalised the site. My username for Wikipedia is Riksta. Any help you could offer would be appreciated. Thanks! I only found out by accident when I clicked a red link. By the way, I just clicked "edit page" on another article and it bought up the editing page OK, so I think it may be something weird here - but yeah, I haven't been vandelising and it worried me. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Riksta (talk • contribs) 09:40, 13 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Riksta. User:202.6.138.34 is a dynamic IP address used by multiple customers of Adam Internet. Unfortunately, several users of that IP have been persistently vandalising Wikipedia articles. Occassionally, blocks (not bans) are needed to prevent those users from editing, and thus vandalising. However, as a dynamic address, innocent users (such as yourself) are sometimes caught in the block. This block seems to have been particular unwise on my part, as many were caught. Fortunately, your IP was changed and you managed to avoid the block. I am sorry for the inconvience. Happy editing, --cj | talk 04:34, 13 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Block

You're not to blame, the vandals are! Thankyou for the unblock. - G^t 04:41, 13 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]

John Howard and the Cronulla riots

I don't think that this is point of view. I will outline my reasons:

We have a section titled: "A volatile environment"
John Howard has been talking about the relationship between Australians and 1.The world muslim community 2.Australia's muslim community. 3. Terrorists
Surely this rhetoric deserves to be mentioned in the "volatile environment" section.

OK, so at least mention that the crowd used the phrase "we will decide who comes to this country and the circumstances in which they come"— Preceding unsigned comment added by Mjspe1 (talk • contribs) 12:05, 14 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Mjspe1. Please review your contibution. This is not encyclopædic writing, nor does it adhere to Wikipedia principles. We have a neutrality policy that prohibits original research and requres that everything published be verifiable. Your edit stated matter-of-factly a particular bias not shared by all. For what it's worth, I certainly agree (to an extent) about the "culture of fear", but I don't think it's something that can be singled down to Howard and his cronies. Thanks, --cj | talk 02:45, 14 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Gotcha

Thanks for the calm advice. I was getting a *tad* bit annoyed there. See, this is why you're an administator! - G^t 03:00, 14 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Re: Technical stuff

I haven't had to do it, but if you delete one, move the other over it and then restore all the deleted edits both histories should be at the same name at least... --nixie 05:13, 14 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Okay. Thanks anyway, --cj | talk 05:54, 14 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Have you looked at Wikipedia:How to fix cut and paste moves? --Martyman-(talk) 05:16, 14 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Yeah. But I'm nervous I might screw up. --cj | talk 05:54, 14 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Why not create User:Cyberjunkie/Crud1, do a copy-paste move to User:Cyberjunkie/Crud2, then see if you can merge their histories? Snottygobble | Talk 06:01, 14 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Worth a shot.--cj | talk 06:03, 14 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Actually, I needn't bother. Checking the histories of the two pages (Socceroos and Australia national soccer team), I now realise they overlap and a merger wouldn't work. Thanks for the help, --cj | talk 06:06, 14 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]

I understand. It doesn't say that merging won't work, it just says that it will interleave the overlapping history making it very confusing. Probably not a very positive outcome, I guess.. --Martyman-(talk) 06:16, 14 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Seeking advice - Jung Sin Yuk-Do

Hi, Could you please take a look at the comments at Talk:Jung Sin Yuk-Do and advise what can be done about the problem. It looks like a case of somebody writing an article about themselves and editing out and criticism and calling it vandalism. Part of teh problem is that most of the edits are being done by IP numbers with no user names. Getting an understanding of what has been going on might require going back through the history a bit. If it makes it easier, I can try to document the history of it. The original article which was almost certainly self promotion was Rod Cook. It has since been deleted. A recent comment suggests that there are related pages where self promotion has been going on as well. I had a look and found a Martial Arts wiki project. I thought that referring it to them might help, but it could also inflame the situation, so I thought I would ask your opinion first. Thanks. -- Adz 07:03, 14 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]

From looking at the article and its links, I think it's something that is being taught. Whether it is a legitimate martial art or notable in any case, I'm not sure - although I reckon not. You could either 1) contact participants of WikiProject Martial Arts (presumably knowledgeable in this area) and ask their advice on a course of action, or 2) AfD it and notify the WikiProject. I'd say it has a fair change of being deleted, given it is only referenced in two other websites outside Wikipedia.--cj | talk 07:27, 14 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]

G'day

Just watching my watch page and there's somebody at 60.224.194.70 putting obvious ad links on sydney,freo, and some other places. I've sent a test1 and test2 it might have been the wrong thing to do. I just saw you're probably the only admin I know on at the moment. you might want to have a look. I might have been over-reacting maybe. you might want me to pull my head in - that;s fine. vcxlor 08:35, 14 December 2005 (UTC) Gawks alexxx got into it at same time. if only there was that much watching in wiki for all 800.000 arts! vcxlor 08:44, 14 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Seems to be fine now. There are specific warning templates for spam links that escalate in severity as the test templates do. See {{TestTemplates}} for a list of all warning templates. If you spot somebody continuing to vandalise, despite warnings, list them at Vandalism in Progress if you can't find admin's about. Other admins who watch that page should attend to it. Happy editing, --cj | talk 15:04, 14 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Yeah, ta. good advice and all, good to be back into it, trying to balance things a bit. nothing like a bit of this and that. vcxlor 15:11, 14 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Esperanza elections

File:Voting box clipart.gif

Hi CJ: This is a quick note just to let you know that there's an election under way at Esperanza. If you'd like to become a candidate for Administrator General or the Advisory Council, just add your name here by 15 December 2005.

Voting begins at 12:00UTC on 16 December and all Esperanza members are encouraged to join in.

This message was delivered to all Esperanza members. If you do not wish to receive further messages, please contact Flcelloguy. Thank you.

➨ ❝REDVERS❞ 09:47, 14 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Image:Light2.jpg has been listed for deletion

An image or media file that you uploaded, Image:Light2.jpg, has been listed at Wikipedia:Images and media for deletion. Please look there to see why this is (you may have to search for the title of the image to find its entry), if you are interested in it not being deleted. Thank you.

News from Esperanza

Hello, fellow Esperanzians! This is just a friendly reminder that elections for Administrator General and two advisory council positions have just begun. Voting will last until Friday, December 30, so make sure you exercise your right to vote! Also, I'm pleased to announce the creation of the Esperanza mailing list. I urge all members to join; see Wikipedia:Esperanza/Contact for more information. All you need to do is email me and I will activate your account. This will be a great way to relax, stay in touch, and hear important announcements. Thanks! Flcelloguy (A note?)

This message was delivered to all Esperanza members by our acting messenger, Redvers. If you do not wish to receive further messages, please list yourself at WP:ESP/S. Thanks.

Vegemite

There's some confusion about why you made so many changes to the Vegemite page, rolling back a dozen or so additions, removing the jingle, etc. Could you response there, by any chance? - DavidWBrooks 16:41, 18 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]

WikiProject AFL

Don't know if you have already checked this out but have a look at WikiProject AFL. I have single-handedly got this up and running when no-one said it could be done, or there was little interest or whatever. So I'd be pleased if you could take a look and perhaps contribute. Cheers! Rogerthat 03:41, 19 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Ianbrown's RfA

Thanks for voting in my recent RfA. I was overwhelmed at the turnout and comments received.

Ian ≡ talk 07:31, 19 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Kenso tech

What is wrong with my "Kenso tech" addition on UNSW. Do a google search in Australia. Or better still, go to a reputable university in Sydney (including UNSW) and ask people if they have heard of Kenso tech.

Australian Greens article edits

I have been editing the Australian Greens article to balance out the commentary relating to right-wing attacks against the Greens in the "Ideology" section - which I don't think meet NPOV criteria. I think that this section should relate to Greens ideology rather than intepretations of it that are biased towards recent right wing attacks - which could be put in another section. Some of my edits have been backed out, and more right-wing references (eg. Andrew Bolt) added. There are no balancing references - e.g. Margo Kingston's blog on Greens policies. What is the process for agreeing on content and NPOV fit? Political comment is obviously difficult to balance out. Peter Campbell 03:30, 20 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Hi again Peter. Politics on Wikipedia is indeed difficult to balance, but in my experience, achievable. The best way to achieve balance is through consensual editing - how this encyclopædia works, really. The first step would be to append a {{POV}} tag to the top of the Australian Greens article and then clearly outline your points on the article's talk page, making sure they generally correspond to NPOV and associated policies. Make sure you also make suggestions for improvements. If the dispute becomes more heated, or results in "waring" between to users, we have mechanisms for dealing with that also. I partially reverted the last change to article, in any case. Thanks, --cj | talk 03:59, 20 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Re: advice on Speedy Delete nominations

Thanks for the tip; I shall be more diligent in future. Cheers, Colonel Tom 04:32, 20 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Koala

I'm undecided on whether to work on Koala - which needs some serious rewriting- or one of the wombats/quolls/possums where I have a blank slate. The Koala image in the fauna article seems to be the one that is set for the main page, not sure why you can't see it.--nixie 05:31, 20 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Hmm that's odd. It's one of the two I can't see in the article itself, but at least there I see the caption and frame. It doesn't show anything on the Main Page entry because it not a thumb. Still, that's an individual fault that doesn't seem to affect any others. Confusing, but.--cj | talk 05:35, 20 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Race Riots

Hi Cyberjunkie, you made a revert edit to the 2005 Sydney race riots article that I would like to ask you about.

1. ...anger towards groups of young Lebanese men, was in part fuelled by past racist hate crimes perpetrated by other young Lebanese...

has been reverted to

...anger towards groups of young Lebanese men, caused by the crimes perpetrated by young Lebanese...

I think the first formulation is better because is more cautiously formulated and more NPOV. In the second statement, to say that event X caused reaction Y is a very strong claim. I think it's better to talk about something contributing or fuelling anger rather than making this a direct causal relationship. Could you explain your thinking in changing this back?

2. ...this pre-existing anger was exascerbated by the beach incident and erupted in the random violence.

has been reverted to

...this anger was merely triggered by the beach incident and erupted in the random violence.

I am not so concerned about this change but I do think the 2nd (reverted) version below is not as well expressed as the 1st version above. In particular, the word triggered concerns me because it seems to imply that the race riot was like a loaded gun (if I understand the trigger metaphor correctly). In other words, it was a situation just sitting there waiting to go off. I don't really agree with this and I think it's more POV than the word exascerbated. So again, I'm wondering why this was changed. --Alexxx1 23:52, 20 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]

One more thing. I understand that you have made this section of the article invisible until such time as it properly written and sourced. However, I think this may be a problem because anyone who comes to the article now will not know that there is a hidden section of text in there unless they happen to edit the page or look closely at its history. Surely, if something is not well written, it is better to leave it visible so that people will see it and edit it. That's how wikipedia works right? If it's invisible, it might never be worked on again.

So I can't really see a good reason for hiding it. I mean, if you think this section is so bad that it shouldn't be on display, shouldn't you either edit what you see as the problem or delete it altogether? I'm still a newb on wikipedia so I don't know what the standard procedure is but this is the first time I've come across a section of an article being hidden like this. --Alexxx1 03:41, 21 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Alexxx. Unfortunately, this was a case of editing-on-the-run in which I was lax. I realise the version I reverted to wasn't any better than the first, but this line caught my eye: "fuelled by past racist hate crimes". Because the sections were not Wikipedia-worthy, I hid them instead following proper editing protocol and moving them to the talk page with an explanation. This has now been done. I'm sorry for any confusion caused.--cj | talk 05:42, 21 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks very much for clarifying that. It's not a problem at all! All the best! --Alexxx1 ^{(talk/contribs)} 05:56, 21 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]

malo's RfA

Thank you!

Cyberjunkie, thanks for your support on my RFA. I was rather suprised at the overwhelming support I received. Thank you for your confidence in me. I hope that I'll live up to your expectations in the future as well. -- malo (tlk) (cntrbtns) 05:12, 21 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]