User talk:Bidgee/Archive 29

This page is an archive of past discussions. Do not edit the contents of this page. If you wish to start a new discussion or revive an old one, please do so on the current talk page.

Noticed you had reverted a few of the alphanumeric edits I have done. The ACT is also transferring to the alphanumeric system at the same time as NSW.
http://www.rta.nsw.gov.au/roadprojects/projects/alpha_numeric/documents/qanda_alpha_numeric.pdf
ACT – is planning to implement an alpha-numeric system on the Barton, Monaro, Kings and Federal Highways at the same time as the alpha-numeric system is introduced in NSW.

There is no official switchover date, some roads in NSW have already been marked alphanumerically for a couple of years. You may have already seen them.
I am happy to meet you in the middle and place a "formerly <shield image>" in appropriate places on affected articles. If you would like?
I would also be open to placing the new shield a slash (or an "or") and then the old shield for the duration of the current year, but I feel there is more work involved there.
I for one dont want to tour the length of each road to be sure each and every sign has been converted.
The introduction of the new alpha-numeric road numbering system is due to start in early 2013 and is expected to be completed before the end of 2013. (from same document).

Here is the ACT map for the changes (via NSW's RMS):
http://www.rta.nsw.gov.au/roadprojects/projects/alpha_numeric/documents/act_map.pdf

The ACT does not number its own internal highway/freeway grade roads. Just the interstate highways and connecting thoroughfares (eg. Northbourne Ave, Capital Circle, Canberra Ave).

Thoughts? - Nbound (talk) 07:05, 6 March 2013 (UTC)

Bidgee,

I am looking for images of LW3, LW4, LW5/7 and LW10 skiers for the classification articles. Did you take any at Copper Mountain? Hawkeye7 (talk) 10:16, 10 March 2013 (UTC)

Also: Do you have any more images of the German team from Sydney 2012? Hawkeye7 (talk) 10:16, 10 March 2013 (UTC)

I should do, US photographs have yet to be sorted, the Sydney ones are sorted by date on the HDD but will have to wait since I've got a large amount of data being copied ATM (I'll have a look tomorrow and try and get a few uploaded). Bidgee (talk) 12:21, 10 March 2013 (UTC)

In particular, right at this moment I am looking for pix of Annika Zeyen. She's Number 8. Hawkeye7 (talk) 20:59, 11 March 2013 (UTC)

If possible are you able to redo your current alphanumeric shields (which are definately better than the older ones, as far as presentation goes), with the white border around the shield that is on all new signs.

Example http://www.ozroads.com.au/NSW/Special/MAB/388.jpg

Unless you think its impossible without them looking bad. I might have a go myself if I have the time.

Nbound (talk) 02:23, 12 March 2013 (UTC)

In fact, there is a white border. Officially there is no green outer border and the PDF guide from the RMS show that there is no green border. Bidgee (talk) 05:46, 16 March 2013 (UTC)

Is it possible that you can complete the set, it looks a little odd with the mixture of shield types. We should aim for consistency Nbound (talk) 07:08, 17 March 2013 (UTC)

Looks much better now! GREAT! :D Nbound (talk) 12:22, 18 March 2013 (UTC)

Thanks! I should have done that myself. (But I didn't.) Most appreciated, Pdfpdf (talk) 14:15, 20 March 2013 (UTC)

Bidgee, I have moved the 2011, 2012 and 2013 V8 Supercar season pages back to their original locations. You claim that the move is justified under

The

WP:COMMONNAME applies). Bidgee (talk

) 01:15, 25 March 2013 (UTC)

Actually, the onus is on you. You want to remove the "International" from the title - but the problem is that your edits imply that the championship is the same as it was before the "International" status was applied, which is not true. The series is run to different rules since the "International" status was awarded, so regardless of what COMMONNAME says, the difference is enough to justify the inclsion of "International" in the title.

You appear to be justifying your edits under this clause in COMMONNAME:

Wikipedia does not necessarily use the subject's "official" name as an article title; it prefers to use the name that is most frequently used to refer to the subject in English-language reliable sources.

However, you have clearly overlooked the following section:

If the name of a person, group, object, or other article topic changes, then more weight should be given to the name used in reliable sources published after the name change than in those before the change.

The category is recognised by the Fédération Internationale de l'Automobile - the governing body of international motorsport - as being an "International" category. Given that this represents a fundamental change in the organisation of the championship, the name used by the FIA trumps the name used by any domestic media.

At the very least, you need a

consensus for the changes you wish to make. If you continue to move the page without a consensus, you will be referred to administrators for vandalism. Prisonermonkeys (talk

) 05:21, 25 March 2013 (UTC)

Use some commonsense, removing "International" doesn't make it more nor less of an international event. FIA doesn't trump the V8 Supercars. I suggest that when I request for the article to be moved that you don't canvass, since I've seen far too many overzealous V8 fanbois go into a panic and canvass.

oh, I suggest you look up

vandalism. My moves were not vandalism, though your opinion is pig headed. Bidgee (talk

) 06:30, 25 March 2013 (UTC)

Unsigned and uncivil comments on this talk page maybe reverted. But it's OK for you to call another edittor Pig-headed? You are experienced enough of an editor that you should know better that when changing the name of a page, if it's reverted ONCE it then becomes subject to a requested move discussion as it is then a controversial move. Edit warring an article name change is not vandalism, but it IS behavior for which you can be blocked for uncivil editting practices. It's my belief you owe Prisonermonkeys an apology, but that is only my opinion. --Falcadore (talk) 00:12, 26 March 2013 (UTC)

I've pointed out everything with weight as to why I feel (per policy and guidelines) as to the title of the championship articles, Prisonermonkeys has repeated the same rhetoric without showing a convincing argument with supporting sources (reliable) as to why it should stay as it is. I had started with good faith but that was lost with the repeating same ol unsupported argument. I have an open mind, convince me but I've not yet seen a convincing argument for it to stay as is. There will be no apology forthcoming to Prisonermonkeys. Bidgee (talk) 01:29, 2 April 2013 (UTC)

Thanks for uploading