User talk:Andykusama

Welcome...

Hello, Andykusama, and welcome to Wikipedia! Thank you for your contributions. I hope you like this place and decide to stay. Here are some pages you might find helpful:

Please sign your name on talk pages using four tildes (~~~~); this will automatically produce your username and the date. If you need help, check out Wikipedia:Questions, ask me on my talk page, or click here to ask a question on your talk page. Again, welcome! Bahudhara (talk) 01:17, 16 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]

A page you started (Magill Youth Training Centre) has been reviewed!

Thanks for creating Magill Youth Training Centre, Andykusama!

Wikipedia editor Cwmhiraeth just reviewed your page, and wrote this note for you:

A well-written article and a useful addition to Wikipedia.

To reply, leave a comment on Cwmhiraeth's talk page.

Learn more about page curation.

Cwmhiraeth (talk) 09:30, 7 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Magill Youth Training Centre has been nominated for Did You Know

Hello, Andykusama. Magill Youth Training Centre, an article you either created or to which you significantly contributed,has been nominated to appear on Wikipedia's Main Page as part of Did you know. You can see the hook and the discussion here. You are welcome to participate! Thank you. APersonBot (talk!) 12:01, 7 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]

DYK for Magill Youth Training Centre

On 14 March 2018, Did you know was updated with a fact from the article Magill Youth Training Centre, which you recently created, substantially expanded, or brought to good article status. The nomination discussion and review may be seen at Template:Did you know nominations/Magill Youth Training Centre. You are welcome to check how many page hits the article got while on the front page (here's how, Magill Youth Training Centre), and it may be added to the statistics page if the total is over 5,000. Finally, if you know of an interesting fact from another recently created article, then please feel free to suggest it on the Did you know talk page.

Gatoclass (talk) 00:20, 14 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Roslyn Oades moved to draftspace

An article you recently created, Roslyn Oades, is not suitable as written to remain published. It needs more citations from reliable, independent sources. (?) Information that can't be referenced should be removed (verifiability is of central importance on Wikipedia). I've moved your draft to draftspace (with a prefix of "Draft:" before the article title) where you can incubate the article with minimal disruption. When you feel the article meets Wikipedia's general notability guideline and thus is ready for mainspace, please click on the "Submit your draft for review!" button at the top of the page. TheBirdsShedTears (talk) 04:07, 9 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Your submission at Articles for creation: Roslyn Oades has been accepted

Roslyn Oades, which you submitted to Articles for creation, has been created.

Congratulations, and thank you for helping expand the scope of Wikipedia! We hope you will continue making quality contributions.

The article has been assessed as Start-Class, which is recorded on its talk page. Most new articles start out as Stub-Class or Start-Class and then attain higher grades as they develop over time. You may like to take a look at the grading scheme to see how you can improve the article.

Since you have made at least 10 edits over more than four days, you can now create articles yourself without posting a request. However, you may continue submitting work to Articles for creation if you prefer.

If you have any questions, you are welcome to ask at the help desk. Once you have made at least 10 edits and had an account for at least four days, you will have the option to create articles yourself without posting a request to Articles for creation.

If you would like to help us improve this process, please consider leaving us some feedback.

Thanks again, and happy editing!

— The Most Comfortable Chair 16:30, 2 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Mark Aldridge moved to draftspace

Thanks for your contributions to Mark Aldridge. Unfortunately, I do not think it is ready for publishing at this time because it needs more sources to establish notability and Per WP:POLOUTCOMES, failed political candidates are generally not notable. . I have converted your article to a draft which you can improve, undisturbed for a while.

Please see more information at Help:Unreviewed new page. When the article is ready for publication, please click on the "Submit the draft for review!" button at the top of the page OR move the page back. TarnishedPath^talk 06:35, 13 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Hi TarnishedPath! Thanks for reviewing the page! I'm happy to flesh it out further with additional sources and further substantiate notability, however I suspect it's already at a point of notability, despite the fact that he is a failed political candidate for the reasons below. I'll hold off submitting it for review pending further feedback from yourself and if there is a specific aspect of the page which you think still requires further development, let me know!

Unsuccessful candidate:

- Despite being failed political candidate, the "perennial" nature of his candidature (10 elections) is itself is what establishes notability, as per other Australian perennial candidate pages eg. Alex Bhathal (7 elections) Teresa van Lieshout (10 elections) Jim Saleam (~7 elections) Riccardo Bosi (5 elections) who generally have no other notability. His status as a repeatedly failed candidature is specifically mentioned in a number of news sources, demonstrating that he is notable for his repeated failures, for example:

Title: Failed SA and Federal Political Candidate Mark Aldridge Loses Gun Licence [....]

"Mark Aldridge — who has run in a number of state and federal elections, both as an independent and One Nation candidate"

https://www.abc.net.au/news/2021-01-23/failed-political-candidate-mark-aldridge-loses-gun-licence/13085212

-

Title: Former political candidate Mark Aldridge vows to fight assault and firearms charges

"Mark Marshall Aldridge, 51, who has run as an independent candidate in numerous state and federal elections, fronted the Elizabeth Magistrates Court on Thursday."

https://www.adelaidenow.com.au/news/south-australia/former-political-candidate-mark-aldridge-vows-to-fight-assault-and-firearms-charges/news-story/4ccfb41e03bdf5656f8606f037fdbd81

-

"CrossCheck also singles out Mark Aldridge, who has unsuccessfully run at federal and state elections as an independent and One Nation candidate,"

https://www.theguardian.com/australia-news/2024/mar/01/south-australia-first-nations-voice-to-parliament

-

Also I would suggest WP:POLOUTCOMES "Candidates who are running or unsuccessfully ran for a national legislature or other national office are not viewed as having presumptive notability and are often deleted or merged into lists of campaign hopefuls" would not be suitable as it does not cover the breadth of his attempts (or other elements of notability)

As director of National Party:

- WP:POLOUTCOMES "Leaders of registered political parties at the national level are sometimes considered notable despite their party's lack of electoral success". During 2022 Federal Election, Mark Aldridge was the National Director of Australian Federation Party, which later became Trumpet of Patriots (now referenced in article). This is a very significant national party, albeit that he was director in its former name. He is also the leader of a new party United Voice Australia Party (however this second party has not run at a National Election)

For general notability requirements:

Wikipedia:Notability (people)

: "People are presumed notable if they have received significant coverage in multiple published secondary sources that are reliable, intellectually independent of each other, and independent of the subject." He has been the central focus on numerous federal and local news coverage already cited in the page (in addition to dozens of passing references). This is spanning multiple years so he is not

Wikipedia:Notability (people)#People notable for only one event

National sources directly focused on Mark Aldridge include:

https://www.abc.net.au/news/2018-02-19/nick-xenophons-sa-best-lodges-complaint-against-mark-aldridge/9460418

https://www.abc.net.au/news/2021-01-23/failed-political-candidate-mark-aldridge-loses-gun-licence/13085212

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dwKci3blvbQ (7News)

https://au.news.yahoo.com/federal-candidate-threatens-legal-action-over-arrest-18565336.html

https://www.facebook.com/7NEWSAdelaide/videos/south-australian-candidate-quits-clive-palmers-party/1192804068715380/ (7News - also https://www.facebook.com/reel/2437124599993216)

Local sources directly focused on Mark Aldridge include:

https://www.adelaidenow.com.au/news/south-australia/former-political-candidate-mark-aldridge-vows-to-fight-assault-and-firearms-charges/news-story/4ccfb41e03bdf5656f8606f037fdbd81

https://www.adelaidenow.com.au/messenger/north-northeast/the-aldridge-family-could-soon-hold-two-mayoralties-in-the-northern-suburbs/news-story/ab53bc59575ae912500d38849e76b9ec&ved=2ahUKEwipkJCmodWPAxV3yjgGHb5aAOA4ChDF9AEoAHoECA4QAQ&usg=AOvVaw0ZOb3VwnuFdy3NLiYL_thc

https://www.adelaidenow.com.au/news/sa-election-2018/sa-election-2018-tarnia-george-sa-best-candidate-for-ramsay-complains-about-mark-aldridges-campaign/news-story/31b46af37443fa79a0740422e9dabea1

https://www.abc.net.au/listen/programs/adelaide-breakfast/march-for-australia/105719748

Summary:

There are in total now 30 sources, almost all of which directly mention Mark Aldridge and many of them are centrally focused on Mark Aldridge.

There is definitely scope for the article to be improved, including further details about his animal welfare (which has a whole range of sources), the details of the gun charges and details of the landmark defamation case that he lost. Although I think these are secondary to the substantive basis for notability which is his repeated and controversial failed candidacies.

Thanks again for reviewing the pages, keep up the great work!

Andy Andykusama (talk) 08:18, 13 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]

I've added further details about his defamation case (may need some rewording) and firearms charges. Andykusama (talk) 09:26, 13 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]

You say that Alex Bhathal, Teresa van Lieshout, Jim Saleam and Riccardo Bosi are notable because they are perennial candidates. A couple of those (van Lietshout and Bhathal) have previously been nominated for WP:AFD. See Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Alex Bhathal and Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Teresa van Lieshout and the reason they survived deletion is not because they were perennial candidates, but because they had coverage outside of running for elections. The Greens doing their very best to white-ant their own candidate in the case of Bhathal and van Lietshout continually doing all sorts of attention seeking stuff that gets coverage. Those are my assessments anyway.

In your comments above you state that is similar for Aldridge and have provided sources. I'd suggest that once you have the article in a shape which you like, making usage of all those sources you list above, that you submit the article through WP:AFC using the template at the top of the draft in order to get a independent opinion.

Cheers, TarnishedPath^talk 10:54, 13 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]

@TarnishedPath thanks for your feedback and for your time to review the links, I appreciate it. Andykusama (talk) 10:57, 13 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]

AfC notification: Draft:Mark Aldridge has a new comment

I've left a comment on your Articles for Creation submission, which can be viewed at Draft:Mark Aldridge. Thanks! MCE89 (talk) 04:26, 14 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]

@MCE89 thanks for reviewing. I've removed that section as I couldn't find secondary sources for it. Andykusama (talk) 05:33, 14 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Your submission at Articles for creation: Mark Aldridge has been accepted

Mark Aldridge, which you submitted to Articles for creation, has been created.

Congratulations, and thank you for helping expand the scope of Wikipedia! We hope you will continue making quality contributions.

The article has been assessed as Start-Class, which is recorded on its talk page. Most new articles start out as Stub-Class or Start-Class and then attain higher grades as they develop over time. You may like to take a look at the grading scheme to see how you can improve the article.

Since you have made at least 10 edits over more than four days, you can now create articles yourself without posting a request. However, you may continue submitting work to Articles for creation if you prefer.

If you have any questions, you are welcome to ask at the help desk. Once you have made at least 10 edits and had an account for at least four days, you will have the option to create articles yourself without posting a request to Articles for creation.

Thanks again, and happy editing!

MCE89 (talk) 13:22, 14 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]

@MCE89 thank you!! Andykusama (talk) 22:40, 14 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]

@MCE89 and @Andykusama, I've been performing a bit of clean up of the article and I just removed two references to WP:DAILYMAIL (see Special:Diff/1312400848). MCE you should have picked that up in your review and Andy, please be aware that you should not use that source under any circumstances in any article. TarnishedPath^talk 12:45, 20 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for removing those — I mentioned that references to the Daily Mail needed to be taken out when I accepted the draft, but it slipped my mind to go back and check that had actually been done. My bad, and thanks for doing the clean up. MCE89 (talk) 14:18, 20 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]

No worries. TarnishedPath^talk 14:25, 20 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks @TarnishedPath for clean up and DYK nomination. Noted re: Daily Mail.

I also wanted to check: Previously you had removed a line that said he was the son of the Mayor of Salisbury - was that because it was not a suitable detail? Or because the source wasn't suitable? (from memory it was a paywalled advertiser) It seems appropriate to put into the new personal life section, so I can reinsert with a couple of different sources if that's appropriate. Andykusama (talk) 00:50, 21 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]

You only need one source as long as there's no problems with the reliability. However, I recall that fact being covered in the article already? TarnishedPath^talk 01:05, 21 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Links to draft articles

Please do not introduce links to draft articles in actual articles, as you did to Smart city and five other articles. Since a draft is not yet ready for the main article space, it is not in shape for ordinary readers, and links from articles should not go to a draft. Such links are contrary to the Manual of Style. These links have been removed. Thank you. - Arjayay (talk) 13:09, 28 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]

@Arjayay noted, thank you! Andykusama (talk) 20:51, 28 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]