See more User talk:Mitch Ames articles on AOD.

Powered by
TTSReader
Share this page on
Article provided by Wikipedia


( => ( => ( => User talk:Mitch Ames [pageid] => 20961545 ) =>

Contents

"Murder of Michelle Garvey[edit]

"Paul Benjamin Austin ("talk) 19:39, 9 January 2018 (UTC) This report indicates that there were signs of sexual assault and although Michelle was clothed, she was missing things like her bra and her shoes.

www.khou.com/news/investigations/investigations-who-killed-michelle/408484935

Why are you telling me this? "Mitch Ames ("talk) 13:39, 10 January 2018 (UTC)
I'd like to add the info to the article but don't feel i could write good enough prose. "Paul Benjamin Austin ("talk) 16:45, 10 January 2018 (UTC)


hny etc[edit]

very strange being back how come something weird hasnt happened or something "JarrahTree 11:52, 12 January 2018 (UTC)

how come something weird hasnt happened — How do know it hasn't, if you "weren't here to observe it? "Mitch Ames ("talk) 11:56, 12 January 2018 (UTC)
having shifted house, the environment is no longer feline... as for Heisenberg, Schrödinger's cat, or anality or banality - observation is where the presumption of the power of comprehension is over-rated... what about the impossibility of the observational powers... faraday cage or gaussian cage notwithstanding.. "JarrahTree 12:04, 12 January 2018 (UTC)

needless to say[edit]

I do not agree that the defunct and published cats are related - in a strict sense of the usage of english but as you have already,.... there a few hundred or more where the cats are the least of a problem...

thanks for what you have done so far anyways... "JarrahTree 01:07, 19 January 2018 (UTC)

I presume we're talking about "Defunct newspapers of Foo" being a subcat of "Newspapers published in Foo", eg "Category:Defunct newspapers of Melbourne. Surely "defunct newspapers" were "published"? Typically categories include the past unless explicitly stated otherwise. eg "published in" means "are or were published in", not "currently published in". "Mitch Ames ("talk) 02:13, 19 January 2018 (UTC)

in city today?[edit]

have tickets for stadium at two times if you are interested.. "JarrahTree 03:08, 20 January 2018 (UTC)

rubbish[edit]

rubbish edit - it is relevant as there are conflicting items of information and inadequate referncing on commons - iced water across your front in affrontery "JarrahTree 06:03, 26 January 2018 (UTC)

I seem to have gone temporarily colour-blind and cannot see any link in your text to the specific edit that you're objecting to. I wave the mouse over your text but no tool-tip or pop-up or URL in the status bar appears. Clicking hopefully on words in the post doesn't work either. Why can't these wretched computers just tell us what we want to know. I suppose I could just guess which of today's ten edits you mean - assuming it one those and not a less recent one... "Mitch Ames ("talk) 06:15, 26 January 2018 (UTC)

Nah my sympathy, I have worse than that, I have tried an infernal new watchlist thingi me do - driving crazy

You quite validly (in the face of the evidence) removed text from a footnote

Problem is that some documents identify

  1. Concourse
  2. gates (by alpha)

around the stadium, and there is nothing in the photos taken on the open day that specify whether either of the concourses or 'gates' they are looking at

bit of a muddle, and justifiable delete - it needs to be improved and clarified - imho "JarrahTree 06:22, 26 January 2018 (UTC)

removed text from a footnote — There's a reason I prefer clear "separation of references and explanatory text. The text that I removed looked like it should have been explanatory text, not a "reference per se. Had it actually explained anything, I would have moved it into a separate "Notes" section. And/or, if "we thought it sufficiently important and the sources supported it, moved it into the article body text. I did consider something along the lines of "Western concourse serves Gate B, Eastern concourse serves Gate A", but the Precinct Map in the reference does not support that statement. In fact the ref says "Western concourse serving ...Joondalup and Fremantle Lines, ... Eastern concourse serving the Armadale ... and Perth". Ie the station concourses correlate to "bus/train services, not "stadium gates. Concourse and gates are quite separate things. "Mitch Ames ("talk) 07:27, 26 January 2018 (UTC)
the ref says "Western concourse serving ...Joondalup and Fremantle Lines, ... Eastern concourse serving the Armadale ... and Perth". — And now so does the article. "Mitch Ames ("talk) 07:28, 26 January 2018 (UTC)
Thanks for doing that - the problem is I dont believe the PTA publicity machine when they something serves something - whats the chance they keep trying to tweak that over time, and it changes :( "JarrahTree 07:50, 26 January 2018 (UTC)
If you really think that the Guide is not a reliable source we could just delete that last edit. If it changes, we can update the article. The ref has |date= and |access-date=, so it's verifiable to a specific version. "Mitch Ames ("talk) 08:19, 26 January 2018 (UTC)

My three main sources are:

The West Australian Optus Stadium commemorative magazine Wednesday January 24 16 pages in side the west of the day
Optus Stadium Open Day online info - map (also found in the transperth info cited)
Getting to and from Optus Stadium a guide to using the new public transport system
Issued tickets for open day

On the day - and in the getting to and from item (pages 4 and 5 precinct map) - Gates A and B were across from the Western Concourse

The map used in ticket and 'getting to and from used the same map' are the same Page 7 of the West Australian magazine has a map but no breakdown of identification of gates or concourses

It seems that the instructions in the tickets on the day were trying to specifically guide people to enter by identified gates (A and B) leave by identified gates (C and D)

however this made no sense whatsoever for the access to the train/railway sense

so concourse 'western' was the entry point and concourse 'eastern' was the exit point

I was accompanying someone on painkillers - very unimpressed - the indication of the 'entry' and 'exit' signs was negligble or non existent by late afternoon, and not all staff we 'herding' the crowd apart from denying access to the entry concourse for exit purposes

hmmm "JarrahTree 08:35, 26 January 2018 (UTC)

The rules for the Open Day:
Utilise your ticket to enter the Stadium will be via Gates A and B on the Eastern side of the Stadium.
Patrons will exit the Stadium via Gates C and D on the North and South of the Stadium.}}
won't necessarily apply for normal events. (The Open's multiple "shifts", with one group leaving as the next arrives, is probably not the normal scenario.)

(Mitch didnt sign here... ahh the exigencies of Stadia... ) "JarrahTree 00:16, 28 January 2018 (UTC)

Interesting on images from the ABC tv news tonight, the concourse sign boards (just below the signage) light up and show which line is accessed from the relevant concourse "JarrahTree 12:47, 28 January 2018 (UTC)

Like these: [1][2] ?
I'm sure those signs weren't the most interesting thing on the news coverage of the stadium...
"Mitch Ames ("talk) 12:55, 28 January 2018 (UTC)

All depends whether small things amuse... the world is a very big place "JarrahTree 13:34, 28 January 2018 (UTC)

Merger discussion for "Douglas Arterial Road[edit]

""Merge-arrows.svg

An article that you have been involved in editing—"Douglas Arterial Road—has been proposed for "merging with another article. If you are interested, please participate in "the merger discussion. Thank you. "Downsize43 ("talk) 23:33, 8 February 2018 (UTC)

Wilkatana Station[edit]

Hi, why is the bold unnecessary? Please refer "MOS:BOLD#OTHER. Please reply here if you wish to do so. Regards "Cowdy001 ("talk) 10:50, 19 February 2018 (UTC)

Relevant diff: [3]
Because the text that I unbolded was the same as the article title that was already bold in the lead sentence. I don't think "MOS:BOLD#OTHER applies here.
Given that the sheep/cattle station and the locality are logically separate (even if co-located) entities, perhaps the locality should be a separate article. Alternatively, perhaps split the last paragraph of the existing "Wilkatana Station into separate section "Locality". Presumably the "astonishment" factor that BOLD#OTHER seeks to remove is that a link took the reader to an article about a station when they were expecting an article about a locality. A "Locality" section would more obviously inform the reader than the station name (which does not include the word "locality").
"Mitch Ames ("talk) 11:33, 19 February 2018 (UTC)
In notice a similar issue with "Beltana Station, where the term is bold-formatted (for the second time) in a paragraph about the locality. In this case there is a separate article "Beltana about the town. The hatnote on "Beltana Station says that "Beltana covers the locality, but "Beltana itself doesn't mention the locality. "Mitch Ames ("talk) 12:06, 19 February 2018 (UTC)

broome[edit]

If I was very rich, I would send you there - the articles we need that are not done yet are many. As it is please note if oyu havent been there - take care with the geography and all - cheers "JarrahTree 11:40, 23 February 2018 (UTC)

If only some rich benefactor would donate some money to Wikimedia Australia, so that we could afford a research trip up there ... "Mitch Ames ("talk) 12:22, 23 February 2018 (UTC)
mind you trove might have enough - the visit would be good for commons - I am quite concerned if you dont know the local geography that something like my recent start of the roebuck plains material - "Roebuck_Plains_Station can end up worse than even worth starting...

Roebuck bay article was created with no interest in the geographic unit of the plains - the roadhouse is insufficient for an article in itself, and the station hasnt had the proper pastoral lease thingoes for it either... "JarrahTree 12:37, 23 February 2018 (UTC)

WP:REFPUNCT transcends mere geography. "Mitch Ames ("talk) 12:49, 23 February 2018 (UTC)
Hmm never thought you would be into "Transcendence - interesing - which one ?  :) "JarrahTree 12:55, 23 February 2018 (UTC)
) )