User talk:Cgoodwin

I'm sorry it's starting to turn this way. I think it's clear enough that you would be willing to learn all these things and take the tools very slowly, but adminship is not a provisional thing, so I guess I can see their argument there. Hope that you will speak with your nominator after the RfA is over to see where you want to go from here. Best, ceranthor 19:31, 2 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I have read your RfA and it is clear there are some editors who are trying to yank your chain. Glad to see you are not letting them provoke you. We do need Admins like you. Thanks for making yourself available! - Ret.Prof (talk) 20:04, 2 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Yikes! What a pileon! Hope this isn't getting you down. I'd be spitting tacks about now, which is probably why I don't think I'll ever want to be an admin. Montanabw^(talk) 04:05, 3 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, Cgoodwin. I saw that you left messages at the talk pages of Ceranthor, Ret.Prof and Montanabw, where you seem to be talking about the RfA as being over already. Officially, your RfA is still open and is schedule to run until 08:10, 8 August 2010. If you wish to withdraw the RfA (which, IMO, would be a good idea at this point), the technical way to do that is to post a note at the RfA page itself, directly below your original acceptance note. Nsk92 (talk) 08:00, 3 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

(edit conflict) Comment to Nsk92: An RfA can't technically be withdrawn. The users make their decision, whether to support, oppose or be neutral. Then if the user gets a support percentage of all amount of users voting in the RfA after it is closed that is high enough, a bureaucrat will assign the nominated user the administrator privileges. /HeyMid (contributions) 13:26, 3 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

An RfA can technically be withdrawn by the candidate indicating he wishes for it to end. Then someone uninvolved can close it at that time. ···

Join WikiProject Japan! 15:38, 3 August 2010 (UTC)[reply

]

OK. I think I misunderstood him. How does it work when a bureaucrat closes an RfA? /HeyMid (contributions) 17:45, 3 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

See reply at your talk page, User talk:Heymid. Nsk92 (talk) 18:11, 3 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

• Hang in there and keep your chin up. If at first you don't succeed try again. Take your time and answer the questions, you will only learn from the experience. J04n(talk page) 13:21, 3 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

• Exactly - My first RFA was kind of a train wreck as well, but eventually the second RFA went a lot better. I know that a failed RFA can be quite dishearting, especially because the intention the RFA and your edits is certainly positive. Don't let this get you down though! I said it before and i said i'll say it again - you are a fantastic contributer and this RFA is in no way a reflection of your value to Wikipedia.

Just work a bit as an editor in the administrative related area's such as vandalism and newpage patrol, and get some working experience and affinity with the policies related to them (I can guarantee you that they vary quite a bit from FA related rules, and that there are a lot of details). Once people see that you are knowledgeable in those area's you will breeze trough the next RFA. Or alternatively you might conclude that you don't like the maintenance work, and that you prefer writing article's. Either way, keep in mind that an admin is simply a Wikipedian-style cleaner with a bucket on his head, a mop in his hand and some sponge's under his soles. I know it sounds comical, but it is really quite accurate (In a figurative way). An admin is in no way more important or valuable then any other Wikipedian. Excirial ^{(Contact me,Contribs)} 20:13, 3 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

• Sorry to see your RFA fail. I was hoping that you could explain yourself better; you could have gotten my Neutral to turn into Support easily. Bwrs (talk) 00:30, 4 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

same here, I voted neutral but that could have easily been a support. There were alot of queries thrown your way. I guess the trick to those is quality in answers over quantity. I hope you decide to run again in the near future. a little bit of tweaking, only a little and you should be fine, just take some time to read what people were looking for and you nail it next time. If you want to join the fight against the vandals there are many editors(myself included) who can teach you a few quick pointers to be up on on your way to build up a bit of experince. Any queries fire away, But do give RFA another shot down the road, youd be a fine admin one day :) Ottawa4ever (talk) 08:12, 4 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

• I'm very disappointed your RFA failed. You would definitely be a good admin for Wikipedia. Please shake it off and continue your excellent work here as an editor! I hope you will take the suggestions of your opposition to heart and put them into practice. I hope you will consider running for admin again in the future. Acps110 ^{(talk • contribs)} 10:41, 4 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I regret to inform you that

Don't give up. Some our best admins (& bureaucrats) have taken 2 or three tries. The good guys must not let them selves be bullied or intimidated. Take Nihonjoe for example. After 4 tries and some nasty false accusations he prevailed. My only question is how thick is your skin? A fan. - Ret.Prof (talk) 00:47, 4 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Though that was running for bureaucratship, not adminship. Just to be clear. :) ···

Join WikiProject Japan! 04:47, 4 August 2010 (UTC)***Corrected - Ret.Prof (talk) 03:44, 5 August 2010 (UTC)[reply

]

I gotta say that after watching this one, I will probably never bother to even try become an admin. If Cg got slammed this hard for having a clean record of NOT engaging in dramas and getting over-involved, someone like myself with a track record is doomed. Montanabw^(talk) 22:35, 4 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

The problem with RfA is that it is the one area where people are basically encouraged to attack other users personally. It's a big issue and a major reason why adminship growth has basically gone the way of the Dodo. Steven Walling 00:31, 5 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I'm sorry it didn't go well. On one hand, I know it's a little draining and a waste of time you could spend on other things. On the other hand, it's an interesting learning experience and as others have pointed out, it's not uncommon to fail your first RfA (I did!). I would like to say that many of the opposes were of a particularly tiresome strain that has cursed the process lately (I'm talking here about the "doesn't need the tools" junk especially). All in all, it's good not to take it personally, even if RfA is one of the few places were users are encouraged to sound off about your editing with few checks on their behavior or requirements to be courteous. Thank you again for accepting my nomination, Steven Walling 00:30, 5 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I agree with the "doesn't need the tools" junk especially! We have too many 'needy' admins. The truth is that we need people like him. - Ret.Prof (talk) 03:56, 5 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I will simply say this: for Steven to have been so dismissive of comments that this RfA did not offer a clear indication of what you would need admin tools for, going so far as to cite AGF and admonish one user to change his !vote, was a huge nail in the coffin, right off the bat, as far as I was concerned. For me, it came across as arrogant and certainly hardened my own opposition. He may think it "junk," but this is a widely held view that would have to be properly addressed in any future nomination, I should think. Please feel free to remove this comment if you wish: it's your page. Sorry it didn't work out,

talk) 18:16, 5 August 2010 (UTC)[reply

]

I think that the RfA process is very flawed. Basically, regardless of Cg's individual merits, which are substantial, the whole thing feels like what would happen if people let all the grad students piling on a professor seeking tenure! =:-O There's got to be a better way of doing this. I mean, slamblasting someone for AVOIDING AIV and WQAs and ANI? That's a problem! Montanabw^(talk) 21:40, 5 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Cg, can you find a photo of a Tattersall? I've been ripping my hair out (well, once in a while) trying to find a copyright free image of the old ring spades (or, for that matter, a modern spade) with little success. (There is a tack store 60 miles from here that MIGHT have some spades on the rack, but then I have to remember to take the turn off, drive 10 miles off the interstate, sigh, the things I do for wiki...LOL!) Anyway, I appreciate the work you are doing on that article, and thanks! Montanabw^(talk) 17:05, 23 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Cgoodwin,Good morning Have uploaded to Commons 2 photos taken in 1952 of Randwick Racecourse. Have tried to position these but maybe the template does not allow more. Would you be kind enough to position down right hand side if possible. Also I will be uploading next week a rare original photo finish of Poitrel defeating Kennaquhair at Randwick in 1920 also a cropped close up of Poitrel on the winning post. This would look great in the article you did on Kennaquhair or possible article on Poitrel as well. Thanks for your help with the racebooks LESHAIGH (talk) 23:03, 2 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Just a FYI on the various article renamings and such, my basic position is that I'm with you on Stockman, and I also see your view on having articles (at least, non-stub articles) on Au agriculture named what they are in Au when unique enough, though we may also need articles about the generic overall worldwide concept (like whatever we wind up naming the Livestock/Animal Unit piece). The trick for me will be figuring out when there is actually something unique (Australian Stock Horse versus generic Stock horses) or if we are just using different words for very similar things (cattle crush/cattle squeeze chute). On that note, I'm not sure if I did the right thing to toss the US roundup stuff into the mustering article; seems the basic outline is pretty similar, but wondering if there is a need to explain the differences more...dunno. Anyway, my point (I have a point, somewhere) is that I think I see where you are coming from and have general supportive feelings even if I spat and argue a bit!  ;-) Montanabw^(talk) 06:08, 12 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Hm. Both of you might want to review what

Wikipedia:Sock puppetry says about meat puppets. 69.3.72.9 (talk) 17:59, 12 September 2010 (UTC)[reply

]

69.3.72.9, that is inappropriate. A meatpuppet is when someone goes and recruits a bunch of people, particularly non-previous editors, to dogpile on an article. Here, Cg and I happen to be wiki-acquaintences of long standing, and we don't necessarily agree on every single article, so I wanted to tell Cg that I FULLY SUPPORT Cg's position here. By the way, why don't you log in under you wikipedia ID, because you are clearly an experienced user with a clear interest in disambiguation issues, given your similar behavior at

cattle barron (sic), stockgrower, and so on. Montanabw^(talk) 02:15, 13 September 2010 (UTC)[reply

]

This was public discussion between users (mostly about past actions) on topics in which they both already have an interest. Very hard indeed to see how that could reasonably be called meat puppetry: this is a wholly unjustified accusation of two very experienced editors. Richard New Forest (talk) 09:46, 14 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you for letting me know about the intention of some people to merge the Stockman article with a non-Australian article. I was not previously aware of this merge proposal and very much appreciate your commenting to me about it. Like you, I strongly oppose the merge and have now added my comment on the Stockman talk page. All the best. Figaro (talk) 11:10, 12 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]

There are no plans to merge Stockman with an American article. The proposal is to move the article to a new page name, and move the disambiguation page to Stockman. This proposal is intended to ensure that this very nice article about the Australian stockman does not attract (more) largely irrelevant content about the word "stockman" as used in the United States. 69.3.72.9 (talk) 17:51, 12 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Cgoodwin, thanks for letting me know. After taking a squiz at the talkpage, I agree that a merge would be inappropriate, but the proposed rename doesn't seem so bad. Regardless, I'm not sure I have any real value to add to the discussion.

As an aside, I'm very impressed with how the article looks at the moment. I believe you've been the primary contributor there. Nice job! fuddlemark (befuddle me!) 11:56, 13 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Well, anon 69 got an innocent closer to move the article. I see you did some editing on it. I'm raising a stink that the article was moved without consensus, but if you don't care and think I should back off, I'll take that into consideration. Montanabw^(talk) 00:09, 29 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I will leave it all up to to make the calls. It appears that we will lose anyway.Cgoodwin (talk) 03:06, 29 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I suppose it's a question of choosing one's battles. Sigh. (I suspect this anon user is someone who has previously been blocked for moving articles without consensus.) Montanabw^(talk) 20:14, 29 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Hi. You reverted an obvious good faith edit, calling it vandalism. [1] That was only the IP's second edit. Please try to be kind to newbies. 69.3.72.249 (talk) 03:40, 14 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Well, I think that's really being quite generous to the newbie. They removed in-line citations without reason, damaging the integrity of the article, and it's very hard to see how they can have thought their edit was an improvement. Perhaps it could be called experimentation, but I don't think Cgoodwin was too far out, and it was certainly not "obvious" that it was a good faith edit. Don't forget that experienced editors also deserve generosity, and we all benefit from it from time to time. Richard New Forest (talk) 09:46, 14 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Okay, for "obvious good faith edit" you may substitute "edit that is not obvious vandalism". Either way, labeling it "vandalism" is, in my opinion, unkind. 69.3.72.249 (talk) 17:29, 14 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]

It was the second time these changes had been reverted, for one thing. I had to fix their mess the first time. Cg is an experienced editor and the changes were appropriate. And 69.3.72.249, how about you log in under the User name that you clearly must have? It's patently obvious you aren't a newbie, whoever you are. Montanabw^(talk) 20:58, 14 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, could you create more Australian racehorses article, since Australian racehorses article behind than Great Britain, Ireland and American. I think we have more group one winners and leading sires (e.g.

You are quite right in saying that we should have more Tb articles, especially as we are one of the leading Tb breeding countries. I will endeavour to include some more. Recently I have been updating and adding images to a few of the articles that are seriously in need of improvement. Many Standardbred articles, too, need some serious editing. Thank you, too, for your contributions to these articles. Cgoodwin (talk) 05:58, 2 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Just an FYI that user 69.3.72.249 just filed an ANI on me. Pretty sure I know who this user actually is, but for now am just looking at their behavior as an anon. Some of this came about from the move discussion at Stockman. You don't have to do anything if you don't care to, but I'm letting you know what's up. Montanabw^(talk) 02:07, 6 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]

And now they are blocked. Ahhhh... Montanabw^(talk) 02:30, 18 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]

nominate ) 18:04, 11 October 2010 (UTC) Weeds image Hi CGoodwin, sorry to ask you this question here; I am a design student hoping to use your image of the cows who have succumbed to some weeds. I have been trying to acquire the book it came from in order to scan it in higher resolution, but cannot find it here in Auckland. Could you please, if you are able, somehow provide me with a high-resolution version? If you are able, please contact me at [email protected]. Thanks very much, Rafe.copeland (talk) 07:41, 13 October 2010 (UTC)[reply] Reply on your user page. Sorry that I have not been of much assistance~. Cgoodwin (talk) 08:26, 13 October 2010 (UTC)[reply] Not at all, thanks anyway. I will try and make do with what you've already got. Cheers Rafe Copeland (talk) 08:49, 13 October 2010 (UTC)[reply] Oh great one, cite check request That darn bot tagged two Aussie citation with a deadlink tag in the Thoroughbred article . Sometimes the bot is wrong. Can you check the links and see if they really are dead? If they are, can you find new sources for the same info? If they aren't, can you toss the tags and tell the bot owner to note them as exceptions? (The same bot tagged other non-dead stuff as dead earlier, so I tend to verify their tags before tossing...). Figured you'd be the best person to fix them if they are dead. Hope all else is well with you! Montanabw(talk) 02:25, 18 October 2010 (UTC)[reply] Glenmorgan, Queensland Hi Cgoodwin. Nice article with Glenmorgan then you need to redirect it to the disambiguated term (i.e. #REDIRECT [[Glenmorgan, Queensland]]) Or you could just simplify matters and move the article to the plain term "Glenmorgan", if you like :) Cheers, Mattinbgn (talk) 07:34, 12 November 2010 (UTC)[reply] Interesting reuse of one of your Commons photos [2] See the image credit. That's free licenses at work! :-) Steven Walling 16:10, 9 December 2010 (UTC)[reply] I GOTTA figure out a way to make a gig like that work ... people pay you to do manual labor, particularly hauling manure? Oh YESSSS! Montanabw(talk) 23:11, 9 December 2010 (UTC)[reply] Looking for new request I found Whobegotyou in Japanese Wikipedia, would you like to translate or create it? It is one of most important article behind So You Think.--Horsemeister (talk) 00:27, 11 December 2010 (UTC)[reply] Thank you for your suggestion. I will give it a go, even though these translated Japanese articles make for some strange reading at times.Cgoodwin (talk) 07:00, 11 December 2010 (UTC)[reply] Bulls... CG, seems bull riding is under attack as having an insufficiently global focus. Can you add anything there about Australian variants? Montanabw(talk) 10:43, 30 December 2010 (UTC)[reply] Please edit as required.Cgoodwin (talk) 02:41, 31 December 2010 (UTC)[reply] Thanks for what you added! Much appreciated! Montanabw(talk) 00:50, 3 January 2011 (UTC)[reply] Lamb fry/fries Hi, thanks for your contributions to these articles. Given that 'fry' in general and 'lamb fry' in particular can refer to a variety of things (not just testicles and liver, but also other innards according to the OED, I wonder if it makes sense at all to have articles with these names. Wouldn't it make more sense to have a disambiguation page for lamb fry/fries pointing to Testicle (food) and Liver (food)? Those articles could include various dishes (such as the Australian ones mentioned in the article). What do you think? --Macrakis (talk) 16:50, 2 January 2011 (UTC)[reply] There are other editors involved here. I suggest that this is taken to the relative talk pages. I think that we have some type of oysters along these lines, too. Can't remember the name though. Have seen too many testicles lying in the dirt, not my type of food! Cgoodwin (talk) 02:25, 3 January 2011 (UTC)[reply] I was just lurking, but don't forget Rocky Mountain Oysters! LOL! Montanabw(talk) 00:50, 3 January 2011 (UTC)[reply ] Question In Australia, have any group race held in non-turf surface?--Horsemeister (talk) 14:25, 11 January 2011 (UTC)[reply] No, I am not aware of any group races that are contested on non-turf surfaces. Darwin is the only capital city that has such a track, but it does not have any group races.Cgoodwin (talk) 02:12, 12 January 2011 (UTC)[reply] Also, no any non-turf surface race inListed level?--Horsemeister (talk) 15:34, 12 January 2011 (UTC)[reply] No, I am not aware of any listed races that are contested on non-turf surfaces. In New Zealand, too, Group and listed races are also contested on turf.Cgoodwin (talk) 23:41, 13 January 2011 (UTC)[reply] Saddle motherlode FYI, we have a new WPEQ person who rebuilds saddles and uploaded a bunch of saddle photos, some showing innards and some showing Aussie saddles. Could have fun with these! Montanabw(talk) 17:16, 7 February 2011 (UTC)[reply] More separation by a common language ;-) Cg, my handy horsey dictionary (published in the USA) claims that the term "hack" is used in Australia to mean "to present, exhibit or compete, as in a horse show." Aside from the really awkward wording, it is true? I'm going to be putting a little bit of sourceing into hack (horse) and if you could check that and fix my errors in Au uses of the term, I'd be grateful! Thanks. Montanabw(talk) 03:29, 17 February 2011 (UTC)[reply] Bits Just a thanks for the cleanup of the bit stuff. A lot of the tack articles were originally created around 2006 or so by User:Eventer, who was a nice person but not around much any more. She was helpful to me when I came on, but also in those days it was more OK to just write stuff without sources and there was a lot more tolerance of "how to" content. So there's a lot of that in the equipment articles. Usually, any article with a lot of "shoulds" in it is one of Eventer's old ones. I cleaned up a lot of them with general wordsmithing and such but most I haven't looked at most of them real closely in years. (That one now-banned editor who used to drive me so nuts sort of targeted the tack articles and I just got tired of going down that road, I guess) Montanabw(talk) 04:39, 20 February 2011 (UTC)[reply] On a different note, we are going to have to sort out the stuff on nickel bit mouthpieces. Over here, they are considered cheap throwaway bits and less desirable than steel, but I note that my Henderson book (I don't have the Edwards book) states that the metal is softer which on one hand is probably why it's less desired here, but the book notes the same properties also may make them more palatable to the horse. Interesting. Curious your thoughts on the matter. Montanabw(talk) 04:39, 20 February 2011 (UTC)[reply] The only solid nickel bits that I have had anything to with are the old, now rare solid nickel bits, as in the Kimblewick, maybe a driving bit plus some stirrups. Many years ago SN was used in the production of irons and bits. In irons it was prone to bending and could prove dangerous in a fall. Many bits and irons were also made of steel and had a shiny chrome or nickel coat that peeled and the metal underneath rusted. Stainless steel was very expensive when it first came here, but is now much cheaper. Modern SS bits sometimes have about 8% nickel content that is claimed to add strength and durability. I recently read though that nickel is now more expensive in bits than SS, but I suspect that this would not be referring to SN as it is not now available here in new bits. It is all a bit confusing. Cgoodwin (talk) 05:36, 20 February 2011 (UTC)[reply] But your explanation makes sense to me. I'll probably have to see if there are any manufacturers of nickel equipment here. It is spoken of, but I know that people keep old stuff around forever too. I've heard the bit about stirrups, I've heard some rumbles that the issue is over stuff manufactured n east Asia. We also, for some reason, have a tack-making industry operated out of some prisons too, must be a holdover from old times. Both are viewed as sources of cheap, shoddy tack. Montanabw(talk) 05:14, 21 February 2011 (UTC)[reply] Warning for false labelling as vandalism Please be more careful about labeling vandalism The edit to New South Wales that you called vandalism was not. Even if an edit seems suspicious, assume good faith and do some research before acting. Your destructive edit has been undone.119.12.70.215 (talk) 07:19, 26 March 2011 (UTC)[reply] At 4.45 the NSW voting was not nearly completed let alone decided and your edit was more than suspicious and it was undone by several others later.Cgoodwin (talk) 03:15, 27 March 2011 (UTC)[reply] Chronological ordering With reference to your recent edits on Chronological ordering, whilst accepting that there is a guideline for earliest to latest chronological ordering, the default ordering for all Australian, American and Canadian past race winners is the reverse order. In my opinion this has developed because the most recent results are the more likely to be the subject of a query from the general public. This is illustrated by the method used in British races, which takes the most recent 30 - 40 years results and puts them at the top of the list but in earliest to latest order. The overall result is complete mishmash, and also does not follow the guideline. To get another perspective on this please take a look at Thorougbred Project.Cuddy Wifter (talk) 03:52, 14 April 2011 (UTC)[reply ] Pls contact me Hi Cg, can you please contact me, paul at horseracing .com.au (just splitting this up to avoid possible spam) Manna Hill Moved to Manna Hill New article Hi Cg, I finally created stock contractor. Feel free to trot over and expand, add in needed stuff, etc., particularly from the Au viewpoint. I swiped one of your sources, by the way. ;-) Montanabw(talk) 19:43, 27 May 2011 (UTC)[reply] Dogwood Crossing WikiAcademy Hi Cgoodwin, Is there any chance that you could help us with Wikipedia:Meetup/Dogwood Crossing. It will be our first regional workshop, and you're extensive experience in editing regional topics would be invaluable. John Vandenberg (chat) 07:50, 4 June 2011 (UTC)[reply] Place types I note that you changed the "|type=" field in a number of articles using {{Infobox Australian place}} to "village" or "place". {{Infobox Australian place}} has a limited number of valid types, these are "city", "suburb", "town", "lga" and "region". "Village" and "place" are not valid types. Only valid types should be used, as these affect the way that certain aspects of the infobox are managed. --AussieLegend (talk) 15:31, 22 June 2011 (UTC)[reply] An Invite to join the Highways WikiProject WP:HWY/LA - - - - - - - - - - - - WikiProject Highways - - - - - - - - - - - - Hi, Cgoodwin, you are graciously extended an invitation to join the International Highways WikiProject and its new regional taskforces! The Highways WikiProject is an evolving and expanding WikiProject. We are a group of editors who are dedicated to creating, revising, and expanding articles, lists, categories, and Wikiprojects, or anything related to International Roads. This includes supporting existing regional road WikiProjects and fostering the development of new international highway WikiProjects. We have recently created five regional task forces focused on Europe, Asia, Africa, Oceania and Latin America. To improve road and highway articles, here are guidelines for Wikipedia:WikiProject Highways/New articles/Invite template. We look forward to welcoming you to the project! naveenpf (talk) 03:15, 25 June 2011 (UTC)[reply] FYI A RfC has been filed by JLAN on this issue. Your input would be helpful as you have an Australian perspective: Wikipedia_talk:WikiProject_Equine#RFC:_what_units_should_be_used_for_horse_and_pony_heights.3F. Montanabw(talk) 18:45, 27 June 2011 (UTC)[reply] Take a look, please before reverting "Allocasuarina". Flora of Australia Online. Department of the Environment and Heritage, Australian Government. "Allocasuarina". Flora of Australia Online. Department of the Environment and Heritage, Australian Government. http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Allocasuarina&diff=prev&oldid=440405161 and you might find why Canyq was doing those edits Suro 03:08, 20 July 2011 (UTC)[reply ] Version of this in Australia? Please feel free to make Cow-calf operation less US-centric. Thanks, Steven Walling • talk 05:57, 13 August 2011 (UTC)[reply ] CycadGorge.jpg Hi can you contact me via my user talk email link as I wish to use this image in a book on Medicinal plants Ringpicker (talk) 04:10, 19 August 2011 (UTC)[reply] Pedigree Query Thanks for pointing out the problems with Pedigree Query in your edit of New Approach. I see now that you already flagged this up on the project discussion page. I think the database is probably 99.9% accurate (<200 errors in 1.2 million entries), but if users can just tinker around with it (a bit like wikipedia?), I see that we can't use it for reference. I am working through the articles I have created (list on my user page), replacing the PQ references. Tigerboy1966 (talk) 23:46, 1 September 2011 (UTC)[reply] Thanks for Assessment- help needed! Thank you for assessing the New Approach article, your comments were very encouraging. Unfortunately, all the other articles I have been working on have been asssessed at START class so now I'm thoroughly puzzled. As the user who assessed them went through them at a rate of about one article a minute (I've checked the times) I assume that I must be doing something obviously wrong. Sorry to bother you about this, but could you take a look and see what the problem is? Tigerboy1966 (talk) 02:05, 3 September 2011 (UTC)[reply] it's OK, I've done major rewrites now. btw on the PQ issue, you were so right. According to the site, Mumtaz Mahal (horse) wasn't a proper Tb- try it!Tigerboy1966 (talk) 12:51, 10 September 2011 (UTC)[reply] Alamshar and the Manual of Style Thanks for improvements to Alamshar. I have been having a look at the MoS and I can see that I tend to be a bit heavy on the Capital Letters (or capital letters), and that I need to write the dates in WP style. At the moment I'm working on expanding stubs, for example Daylami, Dubai Millennium, Falbrav etcTigerboy1966 (talk) 08:58, 17 September 2011 (UTC)[reply] Daylami Thanks for correcting date format on the Daylami article. I am hoping to put this article forward for GA assessment soon, although I am going to test the water first with Fantastic Light. The rationale for this is that I'm more likely to hit the right tone when I'm writing about a horse that I have no strong feelings about- I am a bit of a Daylami fanboy.Tigerboy1966 (talk) 11:20, 2 October 2011 (UTC)[reply] Bathurst Meetup Hi again Cgoodwin. We have a meetup at Bathurst this Sunday and it would be great if you could attend. We have attendees from across the state. Wikipedia:Meetup/Bathurst. --John Vandenberg (chat) 11:23, 5 October 2011 (UTC)[reply] Cheers! Thanks for adding the detail on Fantastic Light's Australian stud career. You'll be pleased to know that it's passed GA.Tigerboy1966 (talk) 18:05, 12 October 2011 (UTC)[reply] Village Kid I see that there is a link to Village Kid on the Miracle Mile article. It links to the pop group. I can't find any article relating to the harness horse Village Kid. I guess the best way forward is to start a new one under Village Kid(horse). :) Wallie (talk) 07:14, 16 October 2011 (UTC)[reply] A D Hollindale Stakes Concerning the chronilogical ordering of past winners, I would refer you to the following message which I posted on your talk page on 14 April 2011. I would appreciate a reply. With reference to your recent edits on Chronological ordering, whilst accepting that there is a guideline for earliest to latest chronological ordering, the default ordering for all Australian, American and Canadian past race winners is the reverse order. In my opinion this has developed because the most recent results are the more likely to be the subject of a query from the general public. This is illustrated by the method used in British races, which takes the most recent 30 - 40 years results and puts them at the top of the list but in earliest to latest order. The overall result is complete mishmash, and also does not follow the guideline. To get another perspective on this please take a look at Thorougbred Project.Cuddy Wifter (talk ) 03:52, 14 April 2011 (UTC) Cuddy Wifter (talk) 04:55, 18 October 2011 (UTC)[reply] The MOS very clearly states that, and I quote "Chronological lists, including all timelines and lists of works, should be in earliest-to-latest chronological order. Special cases which specifically require frequent daily additions, such as Deaths in 2010, may use reverse chronological order for temporary convenience, although these articles should revert to non-reverse order when the article has stabilized, such as Deaths in 2003." It is quite ridiculous that the chronological order is changed twice in consecutive parts of the A D Hollindale Stakes, as it was. Cgoodwin (talk) 02:24, 19 October 2011 (UTC)[reply] New Page Patrol survey New page patrol – Survey Invitation Hello Cgoodwin! The WMF is currently developing new tools to make new page patrolling much easier. Whether you have patrolled many pages or only a few, we now need to know about your experience. The survey takes only 6 minutes, and the information you provide will not be shared with third parties other than to assist us in analyzing the results of the survey; the WMF will not use the information to identify you. If this invitation also appears on other accounts you may have, please complete the survey once only. If this has been sent to you in error and you have never patrolled new pages, please ignore it. Please click HERE to take part. Many thanks in advance for providing this essential feedback. You are receiving this invitation because you have patrolled new pages. For more information, please see NPP Survey Progeny Lists I would like your opinion on using bulleted lists for the progeny of Tb racehorses- see Darshaan, Nureyev, Bois Roussel etc. Would these be better as prose with just 3 or 4 examples? Do we need to have "grandsire" sections? Also thanks for contributing the image to Bois Roussel. The article looks tons better than it did three days ago. Do check out the 1938 Derby newsreel link I added if you get the chance, it's a pretty spectacular performance. Tigerboy1966 (talk) 14:24, 31 October 2011 (UTC)[reply] WP MOS accepts the use of bulleted lists for children, and the progeny of horses. Longer lists are easier to follow in this manner. Where the important daughters of stallions have produced winners that have contributed to these horses being leading BM sires I think that it is important to name them. I have deleted "b." as this is the standard abbreviation for bay and in these cases it is unlikely that this is so. I hope to be able to add more images of the earlier horses if possble.Cgoodwin (talk) 01:21, 11 November 2011 (UTC)[reply] Poseidon ( Horse ) Edit Hi,Cgoodwin Have uploaded to Commons under Horse racing in Australia an original 1906 photo of Poseidon As a major contributor to this article thought I would leave the edit decision to you Many Thanks LESHAIGH (talk) 04:25, 14 November 2011 (UTC)[reply] Au and UK and US English and horse stuff Trying to clean up several articles with possible merges into a catchall now called equestrian facility until we cook up something better. Definitely need an Aussie on board here! Montanabw(talk) 03:04, 21 November 2011 (UTC)[reply] Hydronymy I am interested in hydronymy as it looks the language of prehistoric Europe is reflected therein. I left a message on the wikiproject rivers talkpage, just looking for editors with similar interests to exchange information. I have discovered the so called old european hydronymy is not limited to Europe but has many correspondences in Iran, India and furhter away so I think this disproves the current scholarly etymological interpretations. Presently I am trying to research Bengal and Burma.Aldrasto11 (talk) 10:40, 3 June 2013 (UTC)[reply] Wikipedia trainers requested in New South Wales Wikimedia Australia is looking for experienced Wikipedians to help out at training sessions across New South Wales, in particular in Newcastle, Wollongong, Port Macquarie and in Parkes. If you're interested, the details are at the following link: http://lists.wikimedia.org/pipermail/wikimediaau-l/2013-July/003677.html We'd love to see you there! Lankiveil (speak to me) 13:19, 2 July 2013 (UTC)[reply] Image use in academic journal Image use in academic journal I would like to use your image in a print journal. Can you get back to me about signing a copyright agreement? Thanks Lsharkey (talk) 15:11, 25 April 2014 (UTC)[reply] Pound or Lira? Hi, in April 2009 you added the following line to Nearco: “In England Nearco sired the winners of 657½ races worth ₤501,665.” That fact that you used the Lira sign ₤ instead of the pound sign £ confused me a bit. Is it really Lira, or is this a typo? --bender235 (talk) 16:22, 11 June 2014 (UTC)[reply] CG hasn't edited in a long time, but as I know this user is an Aussie, I'm pretty comfortable saying that pounds was intended.  ;-) Montanabw(talk) 02:18, 14 June 2014 (UTC)[reply] New Challenge for Oceania and Australia Hi, Wikipedia:The 10,000 Challenge which has currently produced over 2300 article improvements and creations. The Australia challenge would feed into the wider region one and potentially New Zealand could have a smaller challenge too. The main goal is content improvement, tackling stale old stubs and important content and improving sourcing/making more consistent but new articles are also welcome if sourced. I understand that this is a big goal for regular editors, especially being summertime where you are, but if you'd like to see large scale quality improvements happening for Oceania and Australia like The Africa Destubathon, which has produced over 1700 articles in 5 weeks, sign up on the page. The idea will be an ongoing national editathon/challenge for the region but fuelled by a series of contests to really get articles on every province and subject mass improved. The Africa contest scaled worldwide would naturally provide great benefits to Oceania countries, particularly Australia and attract new editors. I would like some support from existing editors here to get the Challenges off to a start with some articles to make doing a Destubathon worthwhile and potentially bring about hundreds of improvements in a few weeks through a contest! Cheers.♦ --MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 02:12, 24 November 2016 (UTC)[reply ] Fair Use in Australia discussion As an Australian Wikipedian, your opinion is sought on a proposal to advocate for the introduction of Fair Use into Australian copyright law. The discussion is taking place at the Australian Wikipedians' notice board, please read the proposal and comment there. MediaWiki message delivery MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 11:07, 2 March 2017 (UTC)[reply] This message has been automatically sent to all users in Category:Australian Wikipedians. If you do not wish to receive further messages like this, please either remove your user page from this category, or add yourself to Category:Opted-out of message delivery Brumby page Hello, can you please come to the Brumby page and have a look and give some suggestions. I was called to the page myself due and asked to mediate a better term than ferial, as we have a Federal judge that in a ruling has eluded to the fact that this label is a little misleading and I tend to agree as it can give a narrative that a could lead to its mistreatment. His term that he has chosen is Brumby Shenqijing (talk) 09:17, 7 June 2020 (UTC)[reply] Full citation request Greetings and felicitations. I realize that you have not made any edits to Wikipedia in thirteen years, but just in case you are still there: You created the article Poll Dorset, with the referenced book The Land Stock Types, which is also used in three other articles (copy and paste: https://www.google.com/search?q=site%3Aen.wikipedia.org+"The+Land+Stock+Types"). I've added as much bibliographic information to it as I've been able to find, but I'm hoping you can fill in the author, publication date, and ISBN (if there is one). The publisher was apparently bought out about two decades ago, so there seems to be little point in contacting the successor company, and no copies are to be found in WorldCat, the Internet Archive, Google Books, or via BookFinder.com. I hope you can help. —DocWatson42 (talk) 04:34, 2 December 2024 (UTC)[reply] Suspension of autopatrolled permission due to inactivity Hello Cgoodwin. Following talk) 11:37, 14 May 2025 (UTC)[reply ] The World Destubathon Hello. You're invited to participate in The World Destubathon. We're aiming to destub a lot of articles and also improve longer stale articles. It commenced yesterday on Monday June 16 and will run until Sunday July 13. There is over $3300 going into it, with $500 the top prize and $300 top prize for doing articles on populated places and geography. If you are interested in winning something to save you money in buying books for future content, or just see it as a good editathon opportunity to see a lot of articles improved for subjects which interest you, sign up on the page in the participants section if interested. Even if you can only manage a few articles they would be very much appreciated and help make the content produced as diverse and broad as possible! Feel free to invite others who you think might want to contribute.♦ Dr. Blofeld 09:31, 17 June 2025 (UTC)[reply] Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk:Cgoodwin&oldid=1296024509"