Location via proxy:   [ UP ]  
[Report a bug]   [Manage cookies]                

AusPolSci

Joined 15 September 2021

This is an old revision of this page, as edited by Ohnoitsjamie (talk | contribs) at 03:13, 2 February 2022 (ew). The present address (URL) is a permanent link to this revision, which may differ significantly from the current revision.


Latest comment: 2 years ago by Ohnoitsjamie in topic Edit-warring





Corruption Page

Clarified and expanded on the international comparison section.

Included mentions of Australias neigbours status on ICAC.

Included a section to cover the federal ICAC.

Included references and description of Helen Haines ICAC bill

I am happy to receive feedback, comments, queries etc. on the changes I have made.


Scott Morrison Page changes

Changes to the details for the vaccine rollout.

The exsting content appeared to be written in the present tense, I assume it was written during the early stages of the Vaccine rollout.

I provided the definitive statistics with references to his own transcripts and newspaper articles

I am happy to receive feedback, comments, queries etc. on the changes I have made.


Morrison Government Page changes

Changes to the details for the $130 billion JobKeeper package.

I have provided the corrected amount which was $70 billion, this correction was announced by Scott Morrison on May 24.

I am happy to receive feedback, comments, queries etc. on the changes I have made.


Car Park Rorts Scandal

I have provided links and citations in the places I think are most appropriate.

I am happy to receive feedback, comments, queries etc. on the changes I have made.

I have additional content and references to include, I will wait a day to allow for comments on these changes before continuing


Regards


Scott Morrison and French President Page changes (Reversion and Update)


This change was primarily a reversion of the deletion made by Hi DTH89.
I wrote the following to DHT89 to explain the changes.

<<<BEGIN SNIP COPY>>> I am responding to your deletion of my content: You wrote "Not really relevant, and Twitter isn't really a reliable source"
1. Regarding: "Twitter isn't really a reliable source"

I think you may not be aware of who Bevan Shields is

  • The twitter reference was to Bevan Shields.
  • Bevan Shield is the editor of the Sydney Morning Herald,
  • Bevan Shield is a "Blue Tick" account.
  • Bevan Shield is the person in the video
  • Bevan Shield is the person asking the questions.
  • Wikipedia pages have many links to twitter pages.

If you would like, I can add further references to the content, I can suggest multiple news sites such as, The Sydney Morning Herald, The Age, The Guardian, The ABC, The BBC.

2. Regarding "Not really relevant",

  • AUKUS could not happen if Australia did not cancel the contract.
  • The breaking of the contract with France for the most expensive military purchse/contract is a very significant event
  • Both events are joined and neither event can be understood without the other event


Noting the concerns, you have raised are not related to accuracy or other significant concern, I am confident this can be resolved quickly.

While I know you deleted my content without first talking to me, I would prefer to wait a day before I reinstate my changes.


<<<END SNIP COPY>>>

HarrySullivan1968 (talk) 12:52, 15 September 2021 (UTC)Reply

HarrySullivan1968, you are invited to the Teahouse!

 

Hi HarrySullivan1968! Thanks for contributing to Wikipedia.
Be our guest at the Teahouse! The Teahouse is a friendly space where new editors can ask questions about contributing to Wikipedia and get help from experienced editors like Bsoyka (talk).

We hope to see you there!

Delivered by HostBot on behalf of the Teahouse hosts

16:03, 15 September 2021 (UTC)

Edit-warring

  You currently appear to be engaged in an edit war. This means that you are repeatedly changing content back to how you think it should be although other editors disagree. Users are expected to collaborate with others, to avoid editing disruptively, and to try to reach a consensus, rather than repeatedly undoing other users' edits once it is known that there is a disagreement.

Points to note:

  1. Edit warring is disruptive regardless of how many reverts you have made;
  2. Do not edit war even if you believe you are right.

If you find yourself in an editing dispute, use the article's talk page to discuss controversial changes and work towards a version that represents consensus among editors. You can post a request for help at an appropriate noticeboard or seek dispute resolution. In some cases, it may be appropriate to request temporary page protection. If you engage in an edit war, you may be blocked from editing. OhNoitsJamie Talk 03:13, 2 February 2022 (UTC)Reply