User talk:Asa01

Welcome!

Hello, Asa01, 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:

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! -- Zanimum

Sources for John Deeks

Hello, good work on John Deeks, and thanks for the contribution. However, you forgot to add any references to the article. Keeping Wikipedia accurate and verifiable is very important, and there is currently a push to encourage editors to cite the sources they used when adding content. What websites, books, or other places did you learn the information that you added to John Deeks? Would it be possible for you to mention them in the article? Thank you very much. - SimonP 05:09, 4 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Christmas

Actually, as it happens, the Russians celebrate it in January [1] ;) Morwen - Talk 23:53, 16 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Yeah I was originally going to take out the reference to December, but then realised I might be being a little hasty, so left it in. However I forgot to change my comment.

Fair enough ;) I notice the article doesn't actually mention that - but not sure what other countries keep that calendar. Morwen - Talk 00:35, 17 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]

TV

Hi mate, noticed your work on John Deeks among other things. Drop us a line re TV presenters/voiceovers. Rogerthat 13:10, 9 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Great job!

I went to revert User:In Name And Blood's edits, and saw you've already all of them! :) —Quarl ^(talk) 2006-01-20 08:12Z

Thanks re User:In Name And Blood. He put a lot of work into that didn't he? His earlier edits (Rowan Stewart, filmmaker) seem dodgy too. Asa01 08:15, 20 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Yup, I already nominated Rowan Stewart and Echoes Of Grace for deletion (Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Rowan Stewart) :) —Quarl ^(talk) 2006-01-20 08:19Z

Wow!

Hey - quick work dabbing The Dismissal (television series)! I was about to do it myself and couldn't work out how come those articles supposedly linked to The Dismissal but were already linked to The Dismissal (television series) when I tried editing them... Thanks! Regards, CLW 08:45, 30 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Yeah I noticed the merge had occured so just changed the linking to pages. Then I realised the merge had just happened minutes before, so I hope I wasn't loking you out when you were trying to update the linking-to pages! Asa01 08:47, 30 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Image Tagging for Image:Number 96 shot of Nigel Arnold and Jaja.JPG

Thanks for uploading Image:Number 96 shot of Nigel Arnold and Jaja.JPG. The image has been identified as not specifying the source and creator of the image, which is required by Wikipedia's policy on images. If you don't indicate the source and creator of the image on the image's description page, it may be deleted some time in the next seven days. If you have uploaded other images, please verify that you have provided source information for them as well.

For more information on using images, see the following pages:

This is an automated notice by OrphanBot. For assistance on the image use policy, see Wikipedia:Media copyright questions. 00:10, 4 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

broadcasted

I think if you do a web search or look up a dictionary you will find 'broadcasted' is a word. --ozzmosis 03:57, 4 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Ooops sorry so it is! Gee it just sounds wrong to me. Thanks for the message. Asa01 04:07, 4 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Straw poll on the infobox

Hi, I don't know if you haven't noticed the message on the BB06 talk page, or if you've chosen not to vote, or whatever; but if you have missed it, there's a straw poll taking place on this page, about whether the infobox should have colours going right through the rows, or whether colours should just be on the side, in one box. If you want to vote, then feel free. And if you don't, then feel free as well, I guess. Anyway, just letting you know about it in case you didn't know already. --JD[^{don't talk}|_email] 23:37, 15 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Ste4k

(copied over from my talk page)

Though it is hardly the most important article, I thought her attempted AfD of Big Brother (Australia series 6) [[2]] was pretty outrageous, and clearly misinterpreted the policies quoted in the AfD (Like, sure the contestants on the show are not notable in themsevles, but the article is not about those individuals, it is about an actual television show, and most TV shows have acticles.) This AfD came after lots of lengthy arguments conducted on that article's talk page. Asa01 04:42, 20 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I completely agree. That was the AfD that first brought ste4k to my attention. It was a blatantly inappropriate nomination, but every time I discussed it with her she refused to listen to what I was saying, instead replying with things like "Please see WP:VER, thanks." Her behavior has certainly not improved since then. You may be interested in commenting on an RfC on her behavior that is being prepared at User:Will Beback/Sandbox. Thanks. --Nscheffey^(T/C) 02:00, 21 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Entry for Philippa Baker

Hi,

I'm not sure that I'm doing this right, but I'm trying to contact Asa01. As far as I can tell, you are the author of the entry on Philippa Baker, Australian actor from Number 96.

Philippa Baker is my mother. I do not doubt that your entry is correct, but there are some details that my mum doesn't remember.

I wondered if you could tell me your source for saying she and Johnny were written out of Number 96 at the end of 1974? She doesn't recall this, but that doesn't mean it didn't happen. If I knew where you got that information, I could judge how accurate it is likely to be.

My email address is amanda-wiki at gormand com au

Thanks,

Amanda Hickie 220.233.81.113 09:14, 27 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Cashed Up Bogan

Why does this have its own page? We already have bogan which surely is enough?

Furthermore, I have said in that article's talk page, this page seems highly dodgy. Wikipedia should not have original research and stuff should be verified. In this case it seems that it is the one external reference that is engaging in the original research: The Age chatted to a single marketing guy who went on about the concept of cub. Whether the cub really is a notable, new, or specific phenomenon is not coroborated by that article. The article just reprints one person's opinion. Furthermore there is no coroboration that any other marketing people believe in the concept, or if anyone else uses the term at all. So wikipedia is reproducing someone else's original research, but presenting that original research as fact. Asa01 21:11, 17 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

G'Day Asa01,

I've seen that marketing research featured in an article in The Sydney Morning Herald also. It was also used to describe Shane Warne in another Herald article recently. But these are not the only places that the term has been used lately. I've seen it used on a number of blogs/forums, magazine articles and even on The Chaser's War on Everything TV show.

I don't feel passion for the article remaining. Maybe it is enough to include it in the Bogan article. I suppose you might think differently when it appears in the next edition of the Macquarie dictionary. J Bar 23:15, 1 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Chuck Cunningham

Thanks for letting me know. I've redeleted it and protected the page. Nandesuka 03:27, 7 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Carmen Duncan

Thanks, the Carmen Duncan article needed a good picture! Did she appear on Number 96 before Australian TV switched to color? I was wondering why it was in black and white (in the US, we switched to color in the mid-1960s). Mike H. I did "That's hot" first! 17:54, 8 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

(List of) unseen character(s)

Thanks. I had intended to AfD it, but was surprised to see that there was actually a not-bad article buried under that list. Kind of a pleasant surprise. :) —tregoweth (talk) 06:33, 9 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Easties and Westies

Hi Asa. Would you support the deletion of both Easties and Westies? Both articles are magnets for derogatory comments. --WikiCats 04:49, 14 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Code Brown

LOL, I liked the code-brown part of the article too! it wass funny! LOL! Kitler005 16:08, 5 September 2006 (UTC) 16:08, 5 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Shrimp vs. prawns

Actually they are different groups of species. See shrimp and prawn. But usually a cuisine will only use one term, despite whether shrimp or prawns are being referred to. Grouse 20:05, 10 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

That's why I didn't adjust your edit :) --Grouse 23:28, 10 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]