User talk:Mikeham

Blundell book

Bought the Graeme Blundell book "King: The Life and Comedy of Graham Kennedy" online from Dymock's. Chose the TNT courier option with "no signature requred". Arrived in three days, guess I can't complain - $AUS40.

485 pages.

Great book. But by page 265 we've just left 1968. It's all good, and you can see that Blundell has had to cut and cut and cut, and so the first half is all IMT.

But it's depressing reading. Kennedy, it seems, hated the work, and suffered very badly.

Blundell very properly says nothing overt about Kennedy's sexuality, but the subtext is clear.

In his later years, Kennedy's closest companion was a dog, Henry. He was devastated when Henry died.

But a dog, however faithful, is just a dog.

Kennedy was brilliant at his craft. But he was a frightened, nervous man, who never found love, and was unhappy all his life.

Bert Newton

Well, I see Adam Carr threw a hissy fit over my not-very-good-first-attempt-at-Wikipedia on the Bert Newton page:

Adam Carr (cut and copyedit, remove much rubbish and sychophancy)

(hey Adam, the correct spelling is "sycophancy" - no "h").

It was my *first* ever Wiki effort, Adam. You don't seem to be a very nice guy, Adam. You can catch more flies with sugar than vinegar, Adam.

From a quick look at Adam's Talk page, some people might think that Adam lacks certain basic social skills. I, of course, couldn't possibly comment.

Adam slashed and burned my feeble effort: I don't think he likes Bert very much, and he certainly doesn't like me.

I seethed over Adam's attack on me for a while.

But when (eventually) I calmed down and looked at his edits, I saw his point: I was often wrong and he was often right (not in everything, and he trashed a lot of stuff that should have remained), but (and I hate to say it) the page IS better.

My guess is that Adam Carr will never understand that most people coming to Wiki are ordinary folks, wanting to do their best, eager to learn and eager to contribute.

Yes, I'm new on Wiki. Everyone I've met so far has been kind, generous, helpful and encouraging --- with one exception: Adam Carr.

Hinch

Hi. I just wanted to say what a great contribution you made to the Derryn Hinch article I began as a stub some time back. My seed has grown into a wonderful tree. Well done. -- Longhair | Talk 21:23, 21 Mar 2005 (UTC)

Zig & Zag

I barely remember Zig & Zag, but your rendidition of their classic song slowly brings it all back.

Sorry to see you've caught the ire of Adam Carr whilst updating the Bert Newton article. Most of us here can edit happily and communicate without 'hissy fitting'. Stick to those you work well with and ignore the rest. Any trouble makers usually burn out and leave of their own accord, or simply get banned. Keep up the good work, regardless of what anyone thinks. -- Longhair | Talk 22:40, 24 Mar 2005 (UTC)

Weird

It might just look like I've been everywhere and done everything before you, but if you take a look at my contributions page, you'll note the bulk of Australian prison information was created by myself as a project to get them all online. It's almost done. Perhaps you and I are simply attracted to the same content? ;) Your additions to Morwell made me smile. I could just imagine Hinch living it there in total ignorance of ill feeling toward him. You're welcome to build on my prior work. That's why I put it there. -- Longhair | Talk 23:49, 8 Jun 2005 (UTC)

No worries

Hey Mike! No problem, and glad to see you took care of the German link as well. Actually I have just taken responsibility for disambiguating links to English and seven other pages. It's kind of a dull housekeeping task, but sometimes I'm in the mood for that sort of thing. If you're interested in this, look here and here. Best regards, --Tkynerd 20:29, 30 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Hey again Mike, no problem -- and I encourage you to get involved in working on disambiguation if it interests you. There is lots and lots of work to do. Happy New Year, by the way! --Tkynerd 17:24, 1 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Orphaned fair use image (Image:Lane and Kennedy split screen 1968.jpg)

Thanks for uploading Image:Lane and Kennedy split screen 1968.jpg. The image description page currently specifies that the image is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, the image is currently orphaned, meaning that it is not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the image was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that images for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable under fair use (see our fair use policy).

If you have uploaded other unlicensed media, please check whether they're used in any articles or not. You can find a list of 'image' pages you have edited by clicking on the "my contributions" link (it is located at the very top of any Wikipedia page when you are logged in), and then selecting "Image" from the dropdown box. Note that any fair use images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. This is an automated message from BJBot 14:39, 4 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

License tagging for Image:Lane and Randi.ogg

Thanks for uploading Image:Lane and Randi.ogg. Wikipedia gets thousands of images uploaded every day, and in order to verify that the images can be legally used on Wikipedia, the source and copyright status must be indicated. Images need to have an image tag applied to the image description page indicating the copyright status of the image. This uniform and easy-to-understand method of indicating the license status allows potential re-users of the images to know what they are allowed to do with the images.

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

This is an automated notice by OrphanBot. If you need help on selecting a tag to use, or in adding the tag to the image description, feel free to post a message at Wikipedia:Media copyright questions. 17:08, 13 February 2007 (UTC)

License tagging for Image:Graham Kennedy speaks about Douglas McClelland 17 April 1975.ogg

Thanks for uploading Image:Graham Kennedy speaks about Douglas McClelland 17 April 1975.ogg. Wikipedia gets thousands of images uploaded every day, and in order to verify that the images can be legally used on Wikipedia, the source and copyright status must be indicated. Images need to have an image tag applied to the image description page indicating the copyright status of the image. This uniform and easy-to-understand method of indicating the license status allows potential re-users of the images to know what they are allowed to do with the images.

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

This is an automated notice by OrphanBot. If you need help on selecting a tag to use, or in adding the tag to the image description, feel free to post a message at Wikipedia:Media copyright questions. 19:07, 29 April 2007 (UTC)

Graham Kennedy

Hi Mike, on 11th May I believe you added a quote from Blundell's book under Benefactors, mentioning "$150,000 dollars". Is this superfluity ("$" as well as "dollars") a typo or an exact quote - in which case we should add "(sic)" after it? Cheers, Ian Rose 01:39, 4 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Gerald Stone

Hi there Mike Could you please have a look back at this article. Looking at what you have done, I don't think you understand the difference between references and external links. References provide the information that was used in writing an article. As many can be listed as are used in creating an article. External links provide additional information about the subject. Ususally only a couple are needed especially for such a short biographical article.

As this is your own work, you are the best person to work out which is actually a reference and which one is actually an external link. I would have thought it appropriate for example to provide an exteral link to 60 Minutes website as an external link, regardless of weather that website provided any information for the article. Ga rr ie 06:15, 5 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Non-Free rationale for File:Lane and Randi.jpg

Thanks for uploading or contributing to File:Lane and Randi.jpg. I notice the file page specifies that the file is being used under Non-Free content criteria but there is not a suitable explanation or rationale as to why each specific use in Wikipedia is acceptable. Please go to the file description page and edit it to include a Non-Free rationale.

If you have uploaded other Non-Free media, consider checking that you have specified the Non-Free rationale on those pages too. You can find a list of 'file' pages you have edited by clicking on the "my contributions" link (it is located at the very top of any Wikipedia page when you are logged in), and then selecting "File" from the dropdown box. Note that any non-free media lacking such an explanation will be deleted one week after they have been tagged, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If the file is already gone, you can still make a request for undeletion and ask for a chance to fix the problem. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you. Sfan00 IMG (talk) 10:13, 29 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]