Talk:Easterfest

message: The line in AGMF 2006: contains Naarah (singer) from Alabaster Box
1) Alabaster Box links to a disambiguation page - 
:a) Alabaster Box (band) - which has an artist 'Naarah' - Naarah Seagrott: Vocals - this appears to be the correct link
:b) An album by CeCe Winans
Deleted the red link to 'Naarah' - as per Wiki cleanup policies and redirected the band links to the correct place.
FoolesTroupe (talk) 12:38, 18 January 2008 (UTC)
thread_title: Killing Artist Red Links

message: Correcting my citation.
Rai o sunshine (talk)  —Preceding comment was added at 11:36, 18 January 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  No personal vendetta just personal corrections 

message: As the organisers of the festival, we understand that there are some real community concerns with the festival being located right in the centre of Toowoomba City.  The three major problems are noise, parking and camping facilities.  
In the interest of keeping this article factual, we understand that these concerns should be included as part of the factual reality of the event.  They shouldn't however be laced throughout the whole article.
Also, it appears several contributors who post their community concerns regarding noise or camping also post regular comments about the festival that are simply not true.  For example, the infastructure hired in to set up the festival is mostly sourced from the Toowoomba region where as this article makes regular statements that equipment is mainly sourced from outside the region. It also states that the event 'no longer represents traditional acoustic gospel music'.  The event, right from its inception claimed in all advertising material that it showcased almost every style of music.  Something that has not changed in its 10 year history.
Sourcing community concerns from local message boards does not form the basis of a balanced article.
We don't dispute that there are community concerns, however, it is unfair for this entire article to be laced with factually wrong comments that seem to be written mostly by a small group of contributors who have these community concerns.
As a not-for-profit community organisation who is staffed mostly with over 1,000 volunteers, we wish to see this article return to a factual account worthy of an encyclopedia.
We would like to see these issues resolved, and our first step is to air our opinion on this discussion page.  If things are unable to be resolved through discussions on this page then we will need to take the next step of inviting a moderator to assess the situation.
Easterfest (talk) 21:25, 17 January 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: You don't start mediation by insulting and abusing people.
FoolesTroupe (talk) 11:05, 18 January 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  Wikipedia should not be used as an avenue for a personal vendetta against any individual or organisation. 

message: Yeah that was me - and considering what I've experienced I believe I've been VERY restraint.
Rai o sunshine (talk) 12:48, 17 January 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  corrcting some of MY edits 

message: "Why is this article so based around the neagative aspects of the event, such as concerns, etc. Is it possible to talk about how the event is alot of fun to alot of people."
"Wikipedia is not an advertising service. Promotional articles about yourself, your friends, your company or products, or articles created as part of a marketing or promotional campaign"
"Wikipedia is not a space for personal promotion or the promotion of products, services, Web sites, fandoms, ideologies, or other memes. If you're here to tell readers how great something is, or to get exposure for an idea or product that nobody's heard of yet, you're in the wrong place."
"Direct links to documents that require external applications (such as Flash or Java) to view the relevant content, unless the article is about such rich media. If you do link to such material make a note of what application is required."
For more information, please see Wikipedia:Spam.
FoolesTroupe (talk) 04:28, 4 January 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  Wiki Policy SPAM

message: 2005 dates are outdated. Take for example Grammy Awards, they do not include all the artists and all the artists shouldn't be included. It is too hefty and many of them are not well known.
Rebecca Rowland 05:11, 11 April 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Don't include artists of 2005

message: I found :Image:Agmf.png and noticed that the file's description page currently doesn't specify who created the content, so the copyright status is unclear. Someone will need to specify the owner of the copyright. If it was obtained it from a website, then a link to the website from which it was taken, together with a restatement of that website's terms of use of its content, is usually sufficient information. However, if the copyright holder is different from the website's publisher, then their copyright should also be acknowledged.
As well as adding the source, please add a proper copyright licensing tag if the file doesn't have one already. If you created/took the picture, audio, or video then the  tag can be used to release it under the GFDL. If you believe the media meets the criteria at Wikipedia:Fair use, use a tag such as  or one of the other tags listed at Wikipedia:Image copyright tags#Fair use. See Wikipedia:Image copyright tags for the full list of copyright tags that you can use.
If there are other files on this page, consider checking that they have specified their source and are tagged properly, too. Unsourced and untagged images may be deleted one week after they have been tagged, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If the image is copyrighted under a non-free license (per Wikipedia:Fair use) then the image will be deleted 48 hours after 02:40, 28 May 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Unspecified source for [[:Image:Agmf.png]]

message: :Image:Agmf.png is being used on this article. I notice the image page specifies that the image is being used under fair use but there is no explanation or rationale as to why its use in Wikipedia articles constitutes fair use. In addition to the boilerplate fair use template, you must also write out on the image description page a specific explanation or rationale for why using this image in each article is consistent with fair use.
Please go to the image description page and edit it to include a fair use rationale.
If there is other other fair use media, consider checking that you have specified the fair use rationale on the other images used on this page.  Note that any fair use images uploaded after 4 May, 2006, and lacking such an explanation will be deleted one week after they have been uploaded, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you.Betacommand (talk • contribs • Bot) 02:40, 28 May 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Fair use rationale for Image:Agmf.png

message: I have sufficient training to understand the difference between dB(A) & dB(C). I have personally walked and driven around town with a sound meter, been abused by AGMF representatives, and offered to assist them in making the sound level (which is well above accepted level to cause deafness to patrons on site!) tolerable, and have met personally with the Toowoomba council person in charge of monitoring the sound levels (who has agreed with me), The Toowoomba Mayor, even SMSing her at her home reporting the sound levels to her, written to Politicans, etc.
I quote from the nonsensical gibberish personally written by the Minister for Environment & Multiculturalism:
I also quote from one of my letters to The Qld Attorney General and Minister for Justice.
I refer you particularly to numbers 1, 3, 4 & 6.
Number 3 & 4 seems to be very relevant to the AGMF - there have been previous public false claims over the years of 'no noise complaints' - extremely annoying and frustrating false claims when not only have I personally made complaints, but have talked with many others of the public who have also told me that they even had their sanity questioned and told they were the only complainant when they rang up to complain - and that no record seemed to be kept of any of their complaints.
I note that recently, Researchers at University College London analysed responses from a few thousand people. A nagging sense of being unfairly treated at work or at home can raise a person's risk of heart attack; it was reported. People with the strongest feelings of being treated unfairly were 55 percent more likely than those in the moderate [annoyance] category and twice as likely as those in the low category to have serious heart disease, the study found. A buildup of frustration, suppressed anger, humiliation, and other such negative feelings can impact the nervous system, harm the health, impair the efficiency of bodily processes, and damage the heart (and other parts of the body). Stress causes bodily breakdown over a period of time. This is hardly news. It should be noted that the notion of "injustice" causes no impact on the body itself, until its owner gets pissed off. Then you see stress, which in turn impacts bodily function in well-documented ways. Fairness is an important factor in promoting a healthier society, the U.K. team concluded. They published their findings in the Journal of Epidemiology and Community Health.
One of the people I have been consulting with internationally has made the following brief comments.
Annoying!!!! This particular festival (which serves no alcohol) goes on for several days for many hours each day (and past children's bedtimes) over the Easter Weekend Holiday period.
Inside!!!!! a 100 year old standard sort of Queenslander - wood frame, weather board clad, lined house with corrugated iron roof (unusually also with ceiling insulation!) with all doors and windows shut at several hundred meters distance and shielded by other houses and trees - I have observed objects like VHS cassettes 'dance' on shelves, pictures fall off the nails on the walls, and feelings in my chest of panic attack or heart attack at around 70 dB(C)+ observed -levels were at least 5-15dB(C) higher outside the house - depending on the 'musical' content, and apparently also according to Mr Pidgeon depending on where any particular set (of several at the AGMF) of loudspeakers were aimed - obviously the house fabric (construction materials) is providing some degree of high frequency filtering, but can do very little to affect the very high low frequency sound levels. This obnoxious and highly disturbing level of sound continues unabated (in spite of repeated complaints to all various attempted contacts) for hours at a time for several days.
Simultaneous levels of 90 dB(C)+ and 60 dB(A) were observed under the streetlight after dark next to the Olive 'Peace Tree' in East Creek Park - a few hundred meters away from Queens Park. Similar levels were also recorded at various times over the whole weekend between houses several hundred meters from the source which should have shielded the noise - but because of the massive boost given to bass frequencies, and the massive wattage of amplification used, there was no noticeable attenuation with distance - something that is to be expected with high levels of low and ultra low frequencies. Levels approaching the 90 dB(C) level were also noted at the far south end of East Creek Park - a considerable distance further - no noticeable drop-off in level was noted over that distance, which makes me believe that the topology may also have an amplifying effect. I have also clearly heard the 'music' at The Hospital Casualty Entrance, where I dropped a friend having a panic attack. I have personally heard of reliable reports of the sound "miles away". Thus the concept of "topology external to the emitting site affecting perceived sounds levels" also seriously needs dealing with in the Legislation. The use of dB(C) instead of dB(A) would simplify this too.
When personally measuring the sound levels next to the 'Peace Tree', I also learnt something new as a practicing musician with a long term practical interest in Gospel Music - I hadn't previously realised that "Gospel Music" could now include a rock band (with amplified drum solos!) heard far away at 90 dB(C)+ with a female 'singer' "Orgasming for Christ" in full Janis Joplin style. You just had to be there, really.
As a matter of comparative reference, on the very same site used for this several day long 'music festival', I have personally witnessed a group of a dozen to 20 black powder enthusiasts performing the 'standing', 'advancing', and 'retreating' 3 rank firing drills - nice and noisy close up, but totally unable to be heard any distance off site!
At one stage before calling The Mayor directly on her personal mobile, I measured an amplified lengthy drum solo at over 90 dB(C) several hundred meters off the emitting premises, and in an area shielded by houses and trees. The sound was echoing off the surrounding houses!
Funnily enough though - a local Policeman did claim that I could lodge an "Assault by Noise" criminal charge (people have been found guilty of assault by breathing smoke and spitting!) - and gave explicit details of how to ensure that I would not be turned away before I got to meet the Sergeant in Charge who would have to take my complaint seriously. The Mayor seemed rather nervous when I mentioned this in the face to face meeting, because, the Council being the licensing authority for the 'Noise Permit' that would seem to imply that the Council may be dragged in as an 'accomplice' (or sued by the festival organisation for allowing them to suffer loss!). Great fun for spectators probably, but noting just how much 'mating of elephants' it recently took to get a Queensland Police Officer in charge of someone who died in their custody in goal even put on a charge, I have dim hopes of the Public Prosecutor really taking the case seriously, due to all the local politics doubtless involved. Then there might be even a 'legal precedent', and the whole mess would be more difficult to deal with easily later on.
End Quote
FoolesTroupe (talk) 11:13, 18 December 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Vandalizations of matters of fact

message: I have endeavoured to make this article more balanced and factual. Some issues related to this festival are clearly very important to some people. I don't want to initiate an "edit war" or remove factual content, so I thought I'd let you know what changes I have made and why.
*I removed a sentence about "Fundy Fest" from the introduction. Perhaps it could be placed in the body of the article, but I think it is more of a personal reference rather than a matter of fact. It probably should have a cited source if it's in the article.
*I removed references to 'long term' as the festival is held over the Easter weekend once a year which is not a particularly long period (though I'm sure it would seem long term with the constant noise from morning to late at night over three consecutive days).
*I changed a citation to an article on the Toowoomba City Council web site rather than using a source from "Journey Online".
*I removed some adjectives which did not seem to contribute too much to the factual nature of the content but rather expressed personal opinion.
*I moved the "Community Concerns" section towards the end of the article. I think this section is certainly justified, but it should not be the primary focus of the article.
Bobgnops (talk) 06:57, 28 December 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Edit war Allegations

message: QUOTE:
Wikipedia:NOT#DIRECTORY ; "Directories, directory entries, electronic program guide, or a resource for conducting business. For example, an article on a radio station generally should not list upcoming events, current promotions, phone numbers, current schedules, etc."
UNQUOTE
This raises the serious question whether upcoming artists for each year should really be listed at all in this article about a privately owned (Organisers claim it is a Non-profit) business that generates a lot of revenue.
FoolesTroupe (talk) 15:09, 30 December 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Wiki Policy - Wikipedia:NOT#DIRECTORY 

message: As per http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:LINKSPAM, this whole page was originally written as just a giant unbalanced glowing ('best band in the whole world', etc) advert for the Festival - which is AFAIK a privately owned for profit business.
I have researched the history of the event locally and added readily available concerns conveyed to me by others, as well as from my own personal experiences.
FoolesTroupe (talk) 15:29, 30 December 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Wiki policy - Advertisements masquerading as articles 

message: Why is this article so based around the neagative aspects of the event, such as concerns, etc.  Is it possible to talk about how the event is alot of fun to alot of people.  —Preceding unsigned comment added by Skam127 (talk • contribs) 21:42, 1 January 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  Negativity 

message: For improving this article out of site with the recent aditionsSkam127 (talk) 13:13, 4 January 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  Congrats to Foolestroupe 

message: This page has been heavily edited by a local resident who wishes for the festival to relocate outside the city of Toowoomba.  As such the entire tenure of this article is laced with negative personal comments and assumptions.  In addition many, of these comments are completely inaccurate and subjective by nature.
Easterfest is attended by tens of thousand of local and visitors and as such should have an article on wikipedia, however, it should be far more balanced and broad ranging than the current dominance by one contributor's personal negative viewpoint.
According to the article's history page, the same individual contributor routinely deletes all editing that he does not agree with.
	
We as the organisers of the festival understand that a festival of this size will cause some negative issues and community concerns.  These concerns should be included on this page so long as they are sourced from a credible media source and not just the views of an individual or a small number of the community.
We trust that the editing of this page will become more balanced, less biased and factually credible.
We do not consider it our role as the organisers of the event to edit our own article, but we do respectfully ask that those who do edit our article do not use wikipedia as an avenue for their personal vendetta against the event.
-----------------------------------
"This page has been heavily edited by a local resident who wishes for the festival to relocate outside the city of Toowoomba."
Above unsigned comments claimed to be by the Festival organisers - clearly reflect COI - I also consider this to be a a personal attack (I will not mention defamation)! and the anonymous commenter obviously is mistaken as I don't even live in Toowoomba!!! I absolutely DO NOT WISH IT TO BE RELOCATED either!!!
FoolesTroupe (talk) 12:01, 17 January 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  Commencing the first step towards dispute resolution 

message: I've added a  tag to the community concerns section, which is very negative and poorly sourced. Could editors who believe this section shouldn't be deleted please explain why. Otherwise, I'll delete the section in the next few days. Addhoc (talk) 17:00, 18 January 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: Hi Rai o sunshine, have a look at the No original research and Verifiability policies. Unless references are added to the community concerns section that substantiate the content, the section is going to be removed. These references cannot be yahoo groups, or scanned telephone bills, but instead should be, for example, newspaper, or magazine articles. Addhoc (talk) 14:07, 19 January 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  Community concerns section 

message: I've removed the content that lacked reliable sources. If editors want to reintroduce this material, please supply a source in accordance with the verifiability and no original research policies. Thanks! Addhoc (talk) 14:07, 20 January 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: I'm not enthused about the $6.9 million figure either. If that was an estimate before the event, then ok, but it isn't relevant now. The relevant figure is of course what the actual figure was. I'll remove the sentence. Addhoc (talk) 13:39, 25 January 2008 (UTC)

text: -P
FoolesTroupe (talk) 00:25, 27 January 2008 (UTC)

text: Wow. You talk a lot. And in circles. But that's neither here nor there. If Addhoc feels a TCC publication is not a reputable source, then I'll abide by that. See how I manage to do that - have something I put in taken away and NOT chuck a shitfit? It's easier than it looks, dude. Try it for yourself! Lenky (talk) 13:42, 27 January 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  Content removal 

message: Just reinstated festival's informal nickname as "Christian Big Day Out", as referenced by the Sydney Morning Herald and The Courier Mail. Reputable sources, both of them. Lenky (talk) 02:39, 30 January 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: Sadly, as Media Watch has often demonstrated, just because a newspaper prints a press release, does not 'validate or verify' it - and the bigger the newspaper - the less checking they do of 'entertainment & community' events. There have already been 2 examples of this in this article for this organiser. FoolesTroupe (talk) 02:57, 5 February 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: I'm sure you'll forgive me for taking the word of Australia's oldest continuously-published paper over yours, FoolesTroupe. Have a nice day! Lenky (talk) 06:16, 5 February 2008 (UTC)
thread_title: Re-adding content

message: Media:Insert formula here
um i dont know if anyone has raised this issue previously, but i believe the first agmf was held in 1998, not 1999. 2008 is its 10th anniversary. im not currently a member and i dont know how any of this works, but could someone fix that up and possibly ad more information?  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 122.105.178.233 (talk) 08:14, 24 March 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  first AGMF?