On 2 January 2016, Did you know was updated with a fact from the article Cockroach, which you recently created, substantially expanded, or brought to good article status. The fact was ... that a few cockroach species (example pictured) are kept as pets, and several species are raised as food for insectivorous pets? The nomination discussion and review may be seen at Template:Did you know nominations/Cockroach. You are welcome to check how many page hits the article got while on the front page ( here's how, live views, daily totals), 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. |
Cas Liber ( talk · contribs) 12:01, 2 January 2016 (UTC)
The article Cockroach you nominated as a good article has passed ; see Talk:Cockroach for comments about the article. Well done! If the article has not already been on the main page as an "In the news" or "Did you know" item, you can nominate it to appear in Did you know. Message delivered by Legobot, on behalf of Dunkleosteus77 -- Dunkleosteus77 ( talk) 22:43, 2 January 2016 (UTC)
Hello. I was think about working on beetle. Its already built and this book is available, so maybe it can work out like mantis did. LittleJerry ( talk) 21:38, 26 December 2015 (UTC)
I just found and added the template named "diversity of fish" (but simply headed "Fish"). It's a ragbag without taxonomic knowledge, and it seriously needs tidying up, but it contains many useful links to incorporate into the article. Chiswick Chap ( talk) 10:21, 3 January 2016 (UTC)
Done. Chiswick Chap ( talk) 08:13, 11 January 2016 (UTC)
Hello, Chiswick Chap. Ornithological Dictionary; or Alphabetical Synopsis of British Birds, an article you either created or significantly contributed to, 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!) 20:28, 9 January 2016 (UTC) |
Hi there, I'm pleased to inform you that I've begun reviewing the article Islamic geometric patterns you nominated for GA-status according to the criteria. This process may take up to 7 days. Feel free to contact me with any questions or comments you might have during this period. Message delivered by Legobot, on behalf of Dharmadhyaksha -- Dharmadhyaksha ( talk) 13:21, 13 January 2016 (UTC)
Many thanks for your comments at the recent PR for Isabella Beeton. I have dropped the good lady into FAC for comments and thoughts. If you have time for any, I'd be delighted to hear with them. Cheers – SchroCat ( talk) 15:05, 16 January 2016 (UTC)
Hi Chiswick Chap! I am planning to take Bovidae to FAC, an article on which we once worked together. Would you like to take a look at it, especially at the parts you have added, and then we may proceed to FAC? Sainsf <^> Talk all words 06:27, 17 January 2016 (UTC)
On 19 January 2016, Did you know was updated with a fact from the article Ornithological Dictionary; or Alphabetical Synopsis of British Birds, which you recently created, substantially expanded, or brought to good article status. The fact was ... that the Ornithological Dictionary; or Alphabetical Synopsis of British Birds is George Montagu's best-known work, and the one that established his reputation as a pioneer of British ornithology? The nomination discussion and review may be seen at Template:Did you know nominations/Ornithological Dictionary; or Alphabetical Synopsis of British Birds. You are welcome to check how many page hits the article got while on the front page ( here's how, daily totals), 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. |
— HJ Mitchell | Penny for your thoughts? 00:01, 19 January 2016 (UTC)
The article Islamic geometric patterns you nominated as a good article has passed ; see Talk:Islamic geometric patterns for comments about the article. Well done! If the article has not already been on the main page as an "In the news" or "Did you know" item, you can nominate it to appear in Did you know. Message delivered by Legobot, on behalf of Dharmadhyaksha -- Dharmadhyaksha ( talk) 05:41, 19 January 2016 (UTC)
Always amazes me that whenever there's a war film on TV on TCM or Film4 or whatever it almost always seems to be 1955-1958. 1957 in particular really seemed to be the hot point for war films! ♦ Dr. Blofeld 10:50, 23 January 2016 (UTC)
As part of my "lead improvement" effort I have just expanded the lead for Gas stove. Without spending much time on research, it seems to me that the part of the Gas stove article that mentions Aga Stoves is wrong. Surely Agas, Rayburns etc were developed as solid fuel stoves superior to old kitchen ranges, and any use of them fuelled by gas or oil was a much later development? Have you any thoughts on this? Cwmhiraeth ( talk) 19:23, 27 January 2016 (UTC)
On 28 January 2016, Did you know was updated with a fact from the article Mylossoma duriventre, which you recently created, substantially expanded, or brought to good article status. The fact was ... that the silver mylossoma, an Amazon basin fish, feeds on fruit and seeds? The nomination discussion and review may be seen at Template:Did you know nominations/Mylossoma duriventre. You are welcome to check how many page hits the article got while on the front page ( here's how, daily totals), 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. |
— Coffee // have a cup // beans // 00:01, 28 January 2016 (UTC)
Cwmhiraeth: nice work: it's starting to look rather smart. Do you think the Phylogeny with its emphasis on Diversity should go immediately after (or before) the Diversity section? It would made sense, I think. Anything else I can help with? Chiswick Chap ( talk) 11:56, 12 January 2016 (UTC)
@ User:Cwmhiraeth: This is what was deleted. Much of it, including the references, may well be useful in the article: Chiswick Chap ( talk) 21:40, 13 January 2016 (UTC)
In nearly all teleost fish, the sexes are separate, and in most species the females spawn eggs that are fertilized externally, typically with the male inseminating the eggs after they are laid. Development then proceeds with a free-swimming larval stage. [1] However other patterns of ontogeny exist, with one of the commonest being sequential hermaphroditism. In most cases this involves protogyny, fish starting life as females and transitioning to males at some stage, triggered by some internal or external factor. This may be advantageous as females become less prolific as they age while male fecundity increases with age. Protandry, where a fish transitions from male to female, is much less common than protogyny. [2]
Most teleost families use external rather than internal fertilization. [3] Of the oviparous teleosts, most (79%) do not provide parental care. [4] Viviparity, ovoviviparity, or some form of parental care for eggs, whether by the male, the female, or both parents is seen in a significant fraction (21%) of the 422 teleost families; no care is likely the ancestral condition. [4] Viviparity is relatively rare and is found in about 6% of teleost species; male care is far more common than female care. [4] [5] Male territoriality "preadapts" a species for evolving male parental care. [6] [7]
There are a few examples of fish that self-fertilise. The mangrove rivulus is an amphibious, simultaneous hermaphrodite, producing both eggs and spawn and having internal fertilisation. This mode of reproduction may be related to the fish's habit of spending long periods out of water in the mangrove forests it inhabits. Males are occasionally produced at temperatures below 19 °C (66 °F) and can fertilise eggs that are then spawned by the female. This maintains genetic variability in a species that is otherwise highly inbred. [8]
Some teleost species show no signs of mate selection beyond the correct sex and species, while others display male preference for higher female fecundity, which is usually related to size. In many species, females select for better nest sites which are usually occupied by larger males. In species showing male parental care on dense spawning grounds, males on adjacent territories often fight among themselves, most likely for females. [3] Some species, like the desert pupfish, exhibit lek mating, wherein males aggregate along spawning territories and compete to entice visiting females that survey prospective mates. [9] [10]
FWIW, I've created a new article Modes of reproduction which I hope sorts out some of the mess on that topic. I've trimmed the other articles to point to it. Chiswick Chap ( talk) 12:56, 14 January 2016 (UTC)
{{
cite journal}}
: Cite has empty unknown parameter: |1=
(
help)
The article English cuisine you nominated as a good article has passed ; see Talk:English cuisine for comments about the article. Well done! If the article has not already been on the main page as an "In the news" or "Did you know" item, you can nominate it to appear in Did you know. Message delivered by Legobot, on behalf of Worm That Turned -- Worm That Turned ( talk) 12:02, 29 January 2016 (UTC)
Hello, Chiswick Chap. Henry Worsley (explorer), an article you either created or significantly contributed to, 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!) 01:13, 2 February 2016 (UTC) |
Hi Chiswick,
This is Aryaman Kochhar and I made a contribution recently to the Digital art page of Wikipedia. My contribution was removed shortly after as you said it was not constructive enough. I would like to know what I can do to make future contributions more constructive and educational. I have gone over Wikipedia's policies to familiarise myself with them. I wanted to know if you had any input/advice on contributions and what makes them fruitful. Thanks. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Aryaman96 ( talk • contribs) 21:08, 5 February 2016 (UTC)
Thanks, Chiswick, you're very helpful! Deletion of Alice non lo sa is not a shock for a me, but I think that is unfair that it is not on Wikipedia and other less important albums (such as those I alluded to) are on it. Anyway, I thought that notability of the singer would mean notabilty of his official studio albums, but it seems this is not true. So, which are the parameters to decide if an album is worthy of a page on Wikipedia? -- Almicione ( talk) 17:41, 6 February 2016 (UTC)
Hello, I'm BracketBot. I have automatically detected that your edit to English cuisine may have broken the syntax by modifying 1 "[]"s. If you have, don't worry: just edit the page again to fix it. If I misunderstood what happened, or if you have any questions, you can leave a message on my operator's talk page.
It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, BracketBot ( talk) 20:47, 7 February 2016 (UTC)
Hi there, I'm pleased to inform you that I've begun reviewing the article M. C. Escher you nominated for GA-status according to the criteria. This process may take up to 7 days. Feel free to contact me with any questions or comments you might have during this period. Message delivered by Legobot, on behalf of Feitlebaum -- Feitlebaum ( talk) 00:20, 10 February 2016 (UTC)
The references to mulled wine on this page are incorrect.
The 1660 edition of The Accomplisht Cook does not contain a recipe entitled Mulled Wine.
The A Taste of Wine website is incorrect to allege the recipe they quote "in full" is mulled wine, by modern definition and understanding.
The recipe mentioned by the A Taste of Wine website is for Ipocras and the recipe from the 1660 edition of The Accomplisht Cook (p261), in full, is:
"To Make Ipocras: Take to a gallon of wine, three ounces of cinamon, two ounces of slic't ginger, a quarter of an ounce of cloves, an ounce of mace, twenty corns of pepper, an ounce of nutmegs, three pound of sugar, and two quarts of cream."
No mention of mixing it in a pot, neither is there mention of heating it.
Ipocras was named after the medieval Latin name, vinum Hippocraticum (wine of Hippocrates), because it was filtered through "Hippocrates' sleeve", a conical bag of cotton, linen, or flannel, used as a filter or strainer.[OED]
I have not made any changes to the page, but will do so if required. — Preceding
unsigned comment added by
82.47.37.199 (
talk) 16:07, 10 February 2016 (UTC)
The article M. C. Escher you nominated as a good article has been placed on hold . The article is close to meeting the good article criteria, but there are some minor changes or clarifications needing to be addressed. If these are fixed within 7 days, the article will pass; otherwise it may fail. See Talk:M. C. Escher for things which need to be addressed. Message delivered by Legobot, on behalf of Feitlebaum -- Feitlebaum ( talk) 02:00, 11 February 2016 (UTC)
The article M. C. Escher you nominated as a good article has passed ; see Talk:M. C. Escher for comments about the article. Well done! If the article has not already been on the main page as an "In the news" or "Did you know" item, you can nominate it to appear in Did you know. Message delivered by Legobot, on behalf of Feitlebaum -- Feitlebaum ( talk) 14:41, 11 February 2016 (UTC)
The Original Barnstar | ||
You really did a remarkable job with your work at M. C. Escher. Perhaps this barnstar is a bit late, considering when you nominated the article, but you're just as deserving, nonetheless. Keep up the good work! Feitlebaum ( talk) 14:58, 11 February 2016 (UTC) |
Sorry if I haven't been active much lately. I've been busy. We can discuss cicada and teleost the end of this week? LittleJerry ( talk) 23:49, 15 February 2016 (UTC)
Chiswick Chap and Cwmhiraeth, what do we do next for Teleost? I think maybe we should add a little more on evolution showing trend in teleost evolution and the differences in the major clades. I also think maybe we could have someone with more experience with fish articles look it over. Any other thoughts? LittleJerry ( talk) 21:11, 19 February 2016 (UTC)
I think it's pretty much ready as far as content goes. Has anyone checked the quality of the references, and that we haven't overused primary sources? Chiswick Chap ( talk) 09:12, 7 March 2016 (UTC)
Cwmhiraeth: We now have 2 Supports, and two reviewers who've indicated they're interested, some weeks ago. What to do? Are you good at gentle reminders, and would that be wise? Chiswick Chap ( talk) 08:00, 12 April 2016 (UTC) Cwmhiraeth: OK, we have movement, with comments which I think are your bit? Chiswick Chap ( talk) 19:36, 18 April 2016 (UTC)
Cwmhiraeth: now 4 supports, and 1 reviewer who made one comment, I replied, no response. Do we ping? Chiswick Chap ( talk) 21:01, 3 May 2016 (UTC)
I beg your pardon, C.C., but I was still working on the illustrations.
But I would be grateful, if you improve the structure of the text. Have a nice Sunday :) -- Ulamm ( talk) 11:25, 14 February 2016 (UTC)
I do rather object to IPs, who in these cases are not really IPs but ex-editors acting anonymously, belligerantly delinking, unnecessarily tagging articles, and otherwise disrupting things. I am particularly talking about White-bellied cinclodes and also about Bosques Petrificados de Jaramillo National Park, although in the latter case I believe I know who the editor concerned is. Its not that I am right or they are wrong, but they are treating these articles as battlefields rather than parts of a cooperative project. I find it unpleasant and distracting. Cwmhiraeth ( talk) 13:59, 17 February 2016 (UTC)
Hello, Chiswick Chap.
You are invited to join
WikiProject Food and drink, a WikiProject and resource dedicated to improving Wikipedia's coverage of
food,
drink and
cuisine topics. |
On 23 February 2016, Did you know was updated with a fact from the article Henry Worsley (explorer), which you recently created, substantially expanded, or brought to good article status. The fact was ... that Henry Worsley attempted to complete the first solo and unaided crossing of the Antarctic, but died with only 30 miles to go? The nomination discussion and review may be seen at Template:Did you know nominations/Henry Worsley (explorer). You are welcome to check how many page hits the article got while on the front page ( here's how, daily totals), 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. |
Cas Liber ( talk · contribs) 00:02, 23 February 2016 (UTC)
Thank you for taking time to review the article on Bruce Chatwin. I appreciated your comments--they were excellent--very helpful and it made the experience quite positive. (This is the first article I've worked on, so I didn't know what to expect.) I plan to continue to work on the article and, if you have the time and inclination in the future, would welcome any feedback you have to offer. If not, no hard feelings. Thanks again! Notachatterbox ( talk) 19:54, 28 February 2016 (UTC)
Thank you CC for your input re Medge Olivares. I am new at Wikipedia and am looking into possibility of deleting my page altogether . . . if you can help in this regard, I will appreciate it :)
Medge Olivares (
talk) 18:39, 29 February 2016 (UTC)
Good evening,
Following your revert on my last modification of the
Durvillaea page, I've been looking for a justification to put binomial nomenclature synonyms between quotations. I found none in the
International Code of Zoological Nomenclature. Moreover, I don't remember seeing latin name synonyms between quotations elsewhere. Would you please mind to provide a justification or a link to one?
Kind regards,
Silk666 (
talk) 21:55, 29 February 2016 (UTC)
@ Silk666 I don't know if I can tell from a piece of text, but I almost imagined there was a certain amount of aggression in your tone here, which I find entirely inappropriate in the context.
However, to answer you plainly in good faith, the quotation marks indicate that the name is not valid. If you know a better and shorter way to indicate that something is an invalid synonym, feel free to change it, I have no attachment to punctuation. In the short space of a caption, we need to indicate both what Hooker called the plant in the original plate, and what it is now called, without arousing confusion as to which is which. Quotation marks achieve this perfectly. I think you'll find that quotation marks are in fact the usual way to indicate this, but no matter. Actually, now that we have both names and a "now", the quotes are redundant. Without the linked modern name, it was another matter. Chiswick Chap ( talk) 22:06, 29 February 2016 (UTC)
Hi there, I'm pleased to inform you that I've begun reviewing the article Mrs Beeton's Book of Household Management you nominated for GA-status according to the criteria. This process may take up to 7 days. Feel free to contact me with any questions or comments you might have during this period. Message delivered by Legobot, on behalf of Sainsf -- Sainsf ( talk) 04:01, 1 March 2016 (UTC)
The article Mrs Beeton's Book of Household Management you nominated as a good article has passed ; see Talk:Mrs Beeton's Book of Household Management for comments about the article. Well done! If the article has not already been on the main page as an "In the news" or "Did you know" item, you can nominate it to appear in Did you know. Message delivered by Legobot, on behalf of Sainsf -- Sainsf ( talk) 11:22, 1 March 2016 (UTC)
Hi there, I'm pleased to inform you that I've begun reviewing the article Philosophie Zoologique you nominated for GA-status according to the criteria. This process may take up to 7 days. Feel free to contact me with any questions or comments you might have during this period. Message delivered by Legobot, on behalf of Sainsf -- Sainsf ( talk) 04:01, 2 March 2016 (UTC)
Hi there, I'm pleased to inform you that I've begun reviewing the article Mathematics and architecture you nominated for GA-status according to the criteria. This process may take up to 7 days. Feel free to contact me with any questions or comments you might have during this period. Message delivered by Legobot, on behalf of Sainsf -- Sainsf ( talk) 04:40, 2 March 2016 (UTC)
The article Philosophie Zoologique you nominated as a good article has passed ; see Talk:Philosophie Zoologique for comments about the article. Well done! If the article has not already been on the main page as an "In the news" or "Did you know" item, you can nominate it to appear in Did you know. Message delivered by Legobot, on behalf of Sainsf -- Sainsf ( talk) 12:41, 2 March 2016 (UTC)
The article Mathematics and architecture you nominated as a good article has passed ; see Talk:Mathematics and architecture for comments about the article. Well done! If the article has not already been on the main page as an "In the news" or "Did you know" item, you can nominate it to appear in Did you know. Message delivered by Legobot, on behalf of Sainsf -- Sainsf ( talk) 16:02, 2 March 2016 (UTC)
Hi there, I'm pleased to inform you that I've begun reviewing the article The Modern Cook you nominated for GA-status according to the criteria. This process may take up to 7 days. Feel free to contact me with any questions or comments you might have during this period. Message delivered by Legobot, on behalf of Sainsf -- Sainsf ( talk) 04:41, 6 March 2016 (UTC)
The article The Modern Cook you nominated as a good article has passed ; see Talk:The Modern Cook for comments about the article. Well done! If the article has not already been on the main page as an "In the news" or "Did you know" item, you can nominate it to appear in Did you know. Message delivered by Legobot, on behalf of Sainsf -- Sainsf ( talk) 10:41, 6 March 2016 (UTC)
Thank you for your reply.
You asked me to let you know what was causing me to stumble so you could fix it.
Well... English is my second language. Maybe it's enough to stumble :-)
How would you rephrase this part: "having two copies of each gene would make to honest signalling"?
Thanks,
--
Stankot (
talk) 16:12, 6 March 2016 (UTC)
The "notable people", especially all the minor modern "actors" has been bothering me too for some time. You're Chiswick and I'm Fulham - we should be able to bring a WP:NPOV to Hammersmith! Edwardx ( talk) 21:45, 6 March 2016 (UTC)
Hi there, I'm pleased to inform you that I've begun reviewing the article John Marley (geologist) you nominated for GA-status according to the criteria. This process may take up to 7 days. Feel free to contact me with any questions or comments you might have during this period. Message delivered by Legobot, on behalf of FunkMonk -- FunkMonk ( talk) 21:21, 7 March 2016 (UTC)
The article John Marley (geologist) you nominated as a good article has passed ; see Talk:John Marley (geologist) for comments about the article. Well done! If the article has not already been on the main page as an "In the news" or "Did you know" item, you can nominate it to appear in Did you know. Message delivered by Legobot, on behalf of FunkMonk -- FunkMonk ( talk) 11:21, 8 March 2016 (UTC)
All DOI identifiers beginning 10.4172 are OMICS Group, a predatory open access publisher. These sources are not reliable per WP:RS. This does not mean the science is wrong - plenty of well-meaning and sincere scientists are taken in by these predatory journals - but the source is unreliable and should not be used. Guy ( Help!) 13:53, 4 March 2016 (UTC)
[2] discussion! I would say, however, that there are exceptions, and cases need to be considered on their merits. For instance, old opinions are useful when giving the history of something, as long as one uses them to give a picture of what was thought and when. Chiswick Chap ( talk) 17:47, 5 March 2016 (UTC)
The Special Barnstar | |
Keep up the great work you do on here. So many great articles. Thankyou also for uploading a photograph for Maud Carpenter! ♦ Dr. Blofeld 20:57, 8 March 2016 (UTC) |
Hi Chiswick Chap, I intended to continue the Osteichthyes cladogram as a second tree starting with Acanthomorpha, so having two trees might have extended the page too much so I opted to hide it. However I did not get time to start the second tree, so that's why it looked like it was unnecessary to hide the cladogram. Sorry for the inconvenience. Videsh Ramsahai ( talk) 13:19, 22 March 2016 (UTC)
Hi, Chiswick Chap. I'm working on your suggestion/correction that the links I have been adding to items in the Linda Hall Library's digital collections ought to have gone into the bibliography section of the authors' pages rather than external links. I hope you'll be patient with me while I fuss about it; there will be a lot of correcting to do if you're right, so since you're the one who stuck his chin out to address it, I hope that you have a little more time to work through this with me. I'm putting my link addition on the back burner.
The reason that I've been putting the links in "External links" is that they are links to pages and objects outside of Wikipedia. They are to digitized books, but they are unlikely to be books that have been consulted or needed in the making of the page that is a history of their authors; also, they are scanned versions of titles of which there are likely to be several scanned versions (for example, at the NYPL or Hathi Trust or Google Books) and also transcribed versions, and so a person who finds links at the bottom of a Wikipedia article may have a preference for a certain library's interface, BUT Our scanned copy is not The scanned copy. Also, if you look at the Project Gutenberg template for adding links, you'll see that it's tagged for External Links. Most of the time, when I am linking to our digitized books, particularly on the pages of very well-known authors that get lots of attention, there are already many links to scanned books in the "External Links." This is the gist of my due diligence. I've omitted a bit that might end up being irrelevant.
There is another element: I think that what we do in our library when we make rare books available online is valuable, but there is also an element of self-promotion when placing links to my (mostly benevolent, non-profit, existing-for-the-promotion-of-science-and-dialogue) Library's site. It seems clearer to the user who wants to see other things relating to the article that I am sending them to my library when the link is in "External Links." This might be one of the irrelevant bits, but I'm adding it as evidence that I'm not trying to be an argumentative jerk but just trying to get this right.
Well wishes. Thank you for your help. MaryBowser ( talk) 19:37, 25 March 2016 (UTC)
Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Fredmans epistlar, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Rhetorical figure. Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.
It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot ( talk) 09:55, 26 March 2016 (UTC)
Hello, Chiswick Chap. The following articles that you've either created or significantly contributed to: have been nominated to appear on Wikipedia's Main Page as part of Did you know . Thank you. APersonBot ( talk!) 00:17, 27 March 2016 (UTC) |
Hello, Chiswick Chap. Antlion, an article you either created or significantly contributed to, 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!) 00:40, 30 March 2016 (UTC) |
Hi Chiswick Chap: A recent edit you performed here has been reverted. You may want to check it out. North America 1000 06:09, 1 April 2016 (UTC)
| ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Project News
Article alerts Wikipedia:WikiProject Food and drink/Article alerts Lorem ipsum dolor sit amet, consectetur adipiscing elit, sed do eiusmod tempor incididunt ut labore et dolore magna aliqua. Ut enim ad minim veniam, quis nostrud exercitation ullamco laboris nisi ut aliquip ex ea commodo consequat. Duis aute irure dolor in reprehenderit in voluptate velit esse cillum dolore eu fugiat nulla pariatur. Excepteur sint occaecat cupidatat non proident, sunt in culpa qui officia deserunt mollit anim id est laborum. Curabitur pretium tincidunt lacus. Nulla gravida orci a odio. Nullam varius, turpis et commodo pharetra, est eros bibendum elit, nec luctus magna felis sollicitudin mauris. Integer in mauris eu nibh euismod gravida. Duis ac tellus et risus vulputate vehicula. Donec lobortis risus a elit. Etiam tempor. Ut ullamcorper, ligula eu tempor congue, eros est euismod turpis, id tincidunt sapien risus a quam. Maecenas fermentum consequat mi. Donec fermentum. Pellentesque malesuada nulla a mi. Duis sapien sem, aliquet nec, commodo eget, consequat quis, neque. Aliquam faucibus, elit ut dictum aliquet, felis nisl adipiscing sapien, sed malesuada diam lacus eget erat. Cras mollis scelerisque nunc. Nullam arcu. Aliquam consequat. Curabitur augue lorem, dapibus quis, laoreet et, pretium ac, nisi. Aenean magna nisl, mollis quis, molestie eu, feugiat in, orci. In hac habitasse platea dictumst. Fusce convallis, mauris imperdiet gravida bibendum, nisl turpis suscipit mauris, sed placerat ipsum urna sed risus. In convallis tellus a mauris. Curabitur non elit ut libero tristique sodales. Mauris a lacus. Donec mattis semper leo. In hac habitasse platea dictumst. Vivamus facilisis diam at odio. Mauris dictum, nisi eget consequat elementum, lacus ligula molestie metus, non feugiat orci magna ac sem. Donec turpis. Donec vitae metus. Morbi tristique neque eu mauris. Quisque gravida ipsum non sapien. Proin turpis lacus, scelerisque vitae, elementum at, lobortis ac, quam. Aliquam dictum eleifend risus. In hac habitasse platea dictumst. Etiam sit amet diam. Suspendisse odio. Suspendisse nunc. In semper bibendum libero. Proin nonummy, lacus eget pulvinar lacinia, pede felis dignissim leo, vitae tristique magna lacus sit amet eros. Nullam ornare. Praesent odio ligula, dapibus sed, tincidunt eget, dictum ac, nibh. Nam quis lacus. Nunc eleifend molestie velit. Morbi lobortis quam eu velit. Donec euismod vestibulum massa. Donec non lectus. Aliquam commodo lacus sit amet nulla. Cras dignissim elit et augue. Nullam non diam. Pellentesque habitant morbi tristique senectus et netus et malesuada fames ac turpis egestas. In hac habitasse platea dictumst. Aenean vestibulum. Sed lobortis elit quis lectus. Nunc sed lacus at augue bibendum dapibus. |
| |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Food and drink articles by quality and importance
|
– Sent by Northamerica1000 using mass messaging on 17:00, 1 April 2016 (UTC)
On 5 April 2016, Did you know was updated with a fact from the article Entomophily, which you recently created, substantially expanded, or brought to good article status. The fact was ... that insects that pollinate plants include butterflies, moths, beetles, flies (example pictured), wasps, and ants? The nomination discussion and review may be seen at Template:Did you know nominations/Entomophily. You are welcome to check how many page hits the article got while on the front page ( here's how, daily totals), 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. |
Cas Liber ( talk · contribs) 09:07, 5 April 2016 (UTC)
The Writer's Barnstar | |
Thanks to the GA Cup, I could go through your superb articles! Taking up one more to review! Wanna see more from you. Sainsf <^> Feel at home 13:58, 5 April 2016 (UTC) |
Hi there, I'm pleased to inform you that I've begun reviewing the article The Good Huswifes Jewell you nominated for GA-status according to the criteria. This process may take up to 7 days. Feel free to contact me with any questions or comments you might have during this period. Message delivered by Legobot, on behalf of Sainsf -- Sainsf ( talk) 14:01, 5 April 2016 (UTC)
Now that you did all this work on Flora Antarctica and its spin-off articles, you may wish to insert link to these in the List of florilegia and botanical codices. Kind regards, Dwergenpaartje ( talk) 14:34, 5 April 2016 (UTC)
The article The Good Huswifes Jewell you nominated as a good article has passed ; see Talk:The Good Huswifes Jewell for comments about the article. Well done! If the article has not already been on the main page as an "In the news" or "Did you know" item, you can nominate it to appear in Did you know. Message delivered by Legobot, on behalf of Sainsf -- Sainsf ( talk) 15:21, 6 April 2016 (UTC)
Thank you for your contributions to Wikipedia. It appears that you copied or moved text from Fly into Insects in literature. While you are welcome to re-use Wikipedia's content, here or elsewhere, Wikipedia's licensing does require that you provide attribution to the original contributor(s). When copying within Wikipedia, this is supplied at minimum in an edit summary at the page into which you've copied content. It is good practice, especially if copying is extensive, to also place a properly formatted {{ copied}} template on the talk pages of the source and destination. The attribution has been provided for this situation, but if you have copied material between pages before, even if it was a long time ago, please provide attribution for that duplication. You can read more about the procedure and the reasons at Wikipedia:Copying within Wikipedia. Thank you. — Diannaa ( talk) 02:05, 8 April 2016 (UTC)
On 10 April 2016, Did you know was updated with a fact from the article Advertising in biology, which you recently created, substantially expanded, or brought to good article status. The fact was ... that both animals and plants self-advertise? The nomination discussion and review may be seen at Template:Did you know nominations/Advertising in biology. You are welcome to check how many page hits the article got while on the front page ( here's how, daily totals), 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.
Cas Liber ( talk · contribs) 00:57, 10 April 2016 (UTC)
Thanks for removing all that unsourced material and the cleanup! Sainsf <^> Feel at home 05:27, 11 April 2016 (UTC)
@ Sainsf: Why do we need a list of all the deer species in the article? It isn't needed here, and would make more sense as a list article really (i.e. we call it with a "main" link). I'd suggest instead that we illustrate the cladogram with representative species (at say 70px scale, no captions). This would allow us to tidy up the (far too numerous) images, too. Chiswick Chap ( talk) 10:04, 11 April 2016 (UTC)
On 11 April 2016, Did you know was updated with a fact from the article Agriculture in Wales, which you recently created, substantially expanded, or brought to good article status. The fact was ... that the Welsh Mountain sheep (pictured), a traditional part of Welsh agriculture, was described by the agriculturalist Arthur Young as "the most despicable of all types"? The nomination discussion and review may be seen at Template:Did you know nominations/Agriculture in Wales. You are welcome to check how many page hits the article got while on the front page ( here's how, daily totals), 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.
Cas Liber ( talk · contribs) 12:11, 11 April 2016 (UTC)
Just a very quick note to say many thanks for your help over at Deer. Great editing - much appreciated. DrChrissy (talk) 22:08, 11 April 2016 (UTC)
Hi, I have carefully rewritten the section. Removed the claims that were improperly sourced and added better sources. It seems we can have either the images or the timeline in this section. Sainsf <^> Feel at home 18:29, 13 April 2016 (UTC)
Thank you for your recent work on the subject article; it has been greatly improved by your efforts. Cheers. -- Seduisant ( talk) 04:21, 12 April 2016 (UTC)
On 14 April 2016, Did you know was updated with a fact from the article Antlion, which you recently created, substantially expanded, or brought to good article status. The fact was ... that many antlion larvae dig pit traps to catch prey? The nomination discussion and review may be seen at Template:Did you know nominations/Antlion. You are welcome to check how many page hits the article got while on the front page ( here's how, Antlion), 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) 12:41, 14 April 2016 (UTC)
Hi there, I'm pleased to inform you that I've begun reviewing the article Fredmans epistlar you nominated for GA-status according to the criteria. This process may take up to 7 days. Feel free to contact me with any questions or comments you might have during this period. Message delivered by Legobot, on behalf of Crisco 1492 -- Crisco 1492 ( talk) 15:20, 16 April 2016 (UTC)
..on the Banbury cake article. Still, there are a number of other similar cakes besides Eccles, and perhaps we could list THOSE is a See Also section. If you agree, let me know and I'll do that. Thanks again. LiPollis ( talk) 10:07, 17 April 2016 (UTC)
Thanks. The same editor added self-published books by the same author to 2 other articles, which I've removed. Doug Weller talk 12:28, 17 April 2016 (UTC)
Hello Chiswick Chap,
Thank you for your message. I write here because I do not know how I can reach you. I hope you read this. Excuse me if I have made a mistake. I want to make no advertising. I make scientific photo-documentaries about animals, especially insects. How do I put a link in Wikipedia? Please help me. I do not advertise. I want to write only the information in wikipedia. Mostly these are very specific biological information. Therefore, I have on my website a special section "Photo-Reports". Here, the information is free, so no advertising, no spam. Should I delete my name (naturbildarchiv-guenter)? Should I do anything different? Please help me. With best regards Roland Günter
Hier in Deutsch, da mein Englisch nicht sehr gut ist: (Ich habe gelesen, dass du über gute Deutschkenntnisse verfügst.)
Sehr geehrter Chiswick Chap, Vielen Dank für deine Nachricht. Ich schreibe hier, weil ich nicht weiß, wie ich dich erreichen kann. Ich hoffe, das ist so in Ordnung. Entschuldige bitte, wenn ich mit meinen Link-Setzungen einen Fehler gemacht habe, das tut mir leid. Ich möchte keine Werbung machen. Ich erstelle wissenschaftliche Foto-Dokumentationen über verschiedene Tierarten, insbesondere über Insektenarten, wie sie meistens bisher noch nicht gemacht wurden. Diese möchte ich Wikipedia (auch der englischen Wikipedia, da ich von England aus sehr viel Interesse an meinen Arbeiten signalisiert bekomme), zur Verfügung stellen. Wie soll ich einen entsprechenden Link in Wikipedia platzieren? Bitte hilf mir. Ich habe bei diesem Vorhaben keine wirtschaftlichen Interessen. Ich möchte Wikipedia nur diese Informationen zur Verfügung stellen, in der Regel sehr spezielle und rein biologische Informationen. Dafür habe ich extra auf meiner Website einen eigenen Menüpunkt "Bildreportagen" erstellt. In dieser Rubrik sind die Informationen frei zugänglich, ohne weitere Werbung - auch keine Werbung für mich. Sollte ich meinen Namen (naturbildarchiv-guenter) entfernen? Soll ich sonst irgendetwas anders machen? Bitte hilf mir und sage mir, was ich tun kann. Mit freundlichen Grüßen Roland Günter — Preceding unsigned comment added by Rofus-rofus ( talk • contribs) 22:18, 17 April 2016 (UTC)
Danke schön. I'm sure you intended to be helpful. However, I don't think the Bildreportagen are specially appropriate for the encyclopedia. I hope this is not too disappointing. Chiswick Chap ( talk) 07:29, 18 April 2016 (UTC)
Thank you for the answer.
Yes, it is a bit disappointing. I do not understand this assessment. In the German Wikipedia, this is handled differently.
See an example here:
https://de.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mohn-Mauerbiene
I receive many emails asking to make these entries in the English Wikipedia. What a pity! Please think about your decision again.
With best regards
R. Günter — Preceding
unsigned comment added by
84.57.88.106 (
talk) 13:50, 18 April 2016 (UTC)
PS: And by the way: the Photo-Reports include the most current scientific knowledge about the insects and show it in pictures. That's good for Wikipedia ?! Best regards, R. Günter — Preceding unsigned comment added by 84.57.88.106 ( talk) 15:21, 18 April 2016 (UTC)
Hi there, I'm pleased to inform you that I've begun reviewing the article Underwater camouflage you nominated for GA-status according to the criteria. This process may take up to 7 days. Feel free to contact me with any questions or comments you might have during this period. Message delivered by Legobot, on behalf of LT910001 -- LT910001 ( talk) 02:01, 18 April 2016 (UTC)
Hi! I have nominated the subject list for FL. Could you find some time out and give your comments here? §§ Dharmadhyaksha§§ { Talk / Edits} 09:10, 18 April 2016 (UTC)
-- Gerda Arendt ( talk) 05:25, 19 April 2016 (UTC)
Hallo Chiswick Chap!
You say that humans are not thought to have a magnetic sense, but there is a chemical (a cryptochrome) in the eye which could serve this function...
But it doesn't :)
--
Stankot (
talk) 16:48, 19 April 2016 (UTC)
There are baroreceptors in your blood vessels but can you say that you have a sense of blood pressure? -- Stankot ( talk) 08:33, 20 April 2016 (UTC)
The sentence I quote is from Wikipedia's Magnetoreception -- Stankot ( talk) 09:52, 20 April 2016 (UTC)
The article Fredmans epistlar you nominated as a good article has passed ; see Talk:Fredmans epistlar for comments about the article. Well done! If the article has not already been on the main page as an "In the news" or "Did you know" item, you can nominate it to appear in Did you know. Message delivered by Legobot, on behalf of Crisco 1492 -- Crisco 1492 ( talk) 16:21, 20 April 2016 (UTC)
I saw your edit to this article. Surely that only applies to Common Cuckoo? I'm not convinced that it is relevant to all the many other cuckoo species, but since you are a very experienced editor, I'm raising the question here rather than just undoing the edit, cheers, Jimfbleak - talk to me? 05:39, 21 April 2016 (UTC)
I just wanted to thank you with your help on all the insect pages that my students worked on this semester. Your careful watching of these pages really helped make their edits much more meaningful, and the content on these pages so much better. We really appreciate you helping us to make the pages for insects better! -- Cprather3 ( talk) 15:16, 21 April 2016 (UTC)
About !vote in WP:Articles for deletion/SaleCycle I hadn't read that it should be used only once in a discussion. Maybe in WP's world is common but for me sounds odd: if it's a !vote then why count it??, maybe is because the bots (I recently read a little bit about them) but it seems twisted treat them like its opposite. Anyway... Thanks! Edelmoral ( talk) 01:00, 22 April 2016 (UTC)
The Editor of the Week initiative has been recognizing editors since 2013 for their hard work and dedication. Editing Wikipedia can be disheartening and tedious at times; the weekly Editor of the Week award lets its recipients know that their positive behaviour and collaborative spirit is appreciated. The response from the honorees has been enthusiastic and thankful.
The list of nominees is running short, and so new nominations are needed for consideration. Have you come across someone in your editing circle who deserves a pat on the back for improving article prose regularly, making it easier to understand? Or perhaps someone has stepped in to mediate a contentious dispute, and did an excellent job. Do you know someone who hasn't received many accolades and is deserving of greater renown? Is there an editor who does lots of little tasks well, such as cleaning up citations?
Please help us thank editors who display sustained patterns of excellence, working tirelessly in the background out of the spotlight, by submitting your nomination for Editor of the Week today!
Sent on behalf of Buster Seven Talk for the Editor of the Week initiative by MediaWiki message delivery ( talk) 06:18, 22 April 2016 (UTC)
The intent of the link was to provide Stork's translation to the reader in an easy way. For reading purposes only, not downloading. Some readers will be interested in the text but not in downloading the entire book. No offence intended. I added this message to an existing section the first time. Oops! Pfa ( talk) 16:52, 25 April 2016 (UTC)
The link I added took the reader directly to the Ulla text, where a person could easily discover the name of the book and download a digital version. Yes, the reader can page through the current link. ("Ulla" is about forty pages into the book.) But the current link doesn't even make clear that it contains "Ulla". In my opinion the original link was more useful, but you created the article. I will defer to your judgment. Pfa ( talk) 17:53, 25 April 2016 (UTC)
The links I added for “Ulla” and “Haga” were for translations by Charles Grafton Chapman (1909) and Charles Wharton Stork (1917). They are taken from books available at the Internet Archive.
The links I set up were via Google Books, and I’m not aware that any subscription is necessary. Every computer has different software, search engines etc. They may not work for you. Stork’s translations of the two pieces are available in a different format at the Poetry Nook website. His lyrics could be linked via the Poetry Nook site and his 1917 book via the Sources section.
“To Ulla” is an 1897 translation by Olga Flinch, a native of Copenhagen. Her five translations of Bellman may not be the best, but her four page essay might be of use as a replacement for Reference #1 (The Bellman Society), which has expired. A recording of her essay and translations is available through Librivox and linked to the CMB Wiki. My link to “To Ulla” is once again via Google Books. Pfa ( talk) 18:52, 25 April 2016 (UTC)
Understood. Pfa ( talk) 19:26, 25 April 2016 (UTC)
Chiswick Chap, Batik and Ikat is not Islamic art. Firstly, I'm Native Indonesian, I'm from Indonesia, you can track my IP. And I know there's no Islam in Indonesia from the beginning of century. Islam is a new religion of Indonesia. Meanwhile Batik and Ikat are art from my ancestors long long time ago, from 2000 BCE. Don't associate my ancestors with Islam, they're all Animist.
140.0.116.58 ( talk) 15:43, 1 May 2016 (UTC)
There's over 300 ethnic groups in Indonesia, they all are very very very different, not the same. 140.0.116.58 ( talk) 15:54, 1 May 2016 (UTC)
Hi Chiswick Chap, I hope that you're well :). We've interacted a couple of time, only the (now quite quiet) Anatomy and in a few GA reviews. I admire the quality and brevity of your writing, and were wondering if you'd be interested in collaborating with me to bring Dissection to GA status? I skimmed by it, and it seems to have most of the major components already there - images, text, references and may thus need just some careful dissection of the prose and expansion. Would you be interested? -- Tom (LT) ( talk) 00:19, 2 May 2016 (UTC)
As a minor matter of style, could we name all refs like "ref name=Smith1984" rather than "ref name=:1"? I know some tools use numbers but they are less good for humans. Would be helpful. Chiswick Chap ( talk) 07:50, 5 May 2016 (UTC)
Thank you for your input on David Rothenberg (Activist) - it's very salient. I have started incorporating some of the sources you pointed out as well as some of the ones pointed out earlier. It will take me some time as I haven't read all of them yet, while I have read his memoirs. By the way, his memoirs are cited properly with their own independent sources, so it's not just his ramblings as many are. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Sapiopath ( talk • contribs) 09:57, 4 May 2016 (UTC)
Thank you for your contribution on the WikiProject Plants article Linnaea amabilis at 17:51, 21 December 2014. I noticed that you moved the original page from the title Kolkwitzia amabilis to the current one, Linnaea amabilis, following the alteration of the taxonomy status suggested by an anonymous user (82.41.33.206).
However, according to various sources such as Flora of China ( Kolkwitzia amabilis), the accepted genus of the plant is still Kolkwitzia. Most webpages, both in English and Chinese (China is the original and major habitat of such plant), use the name Kolkwitzia amabilis. I was quite confused at the name provided by English Wikipedia, so I studied the reference listed on that page ( Twins are not alone). In my opinion, this paper only made a mere suggestion, rather than stating a consensus. In terms of clarity, the name of Kolkwitzia amabilis is more suitable to be the main title of the entry.
I am not quite clear about the convention of modifying an article enlisted by the WikiProject Plants, so I would like to discuss if it is appropriate to modify the name back to the original one. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Peiyangium ( talk • contribs) 04:46, 5 May 2016 (UTC)
Now that I have finished my sojourn in Wales (though I live there anyway) I am back to more normal activity. Do you fancy a collaborative effort? I have a couple of ideas but am open to suggestions. Cwmhiraeth ( talk) 12:26, 5 May 2016 (UTC)
What is with you? Why would you start deleting my photos, and call one of my favorite Bee Images:"SPAM". You've got some explaining you do pal....... Pocketthis ( talk) 17:28, 9 May 2016 (UTC)
Is this one immersed enough for you? :-)
It reminds me of a kamikaze Pilot that just crashed into a Yellow Aircraft Carrier. Hope you appreciate the humor.- Pocketthis ( talk) 22:35, 9 May 2016 (UTC)
Hello Chiswick Chap: I've copy edited List of ancient dishes to address some of the concerns you stated in this edit. Check out the article now, and please feel free to pitch-in to expand it as you have already done. I moved the hidden comment you posted to the 477–1500 AD section. More on the article's talk page... North America 1000 12:01, 19 May 2016 (UTC)
I have run the toolbox checks (on the right of the FLC page for LWT) and it shows two dead links, refs 3 and 4. Can you take a look. Dudley Miles ( talk) 10:15, 22 May 2016 (UTC)
Dudley Miles - the section headings now have a problem (a bot has just fixed part of it) - the Nature Reserves section is empty and precedes rather than contains the rest of the material. Chiswick Chap ( talk) 07:45, 23 May 2016 (UTC)
Hi Chiswick Chap, you reverted my removal of Baptistery of Leurent on the baptistery article. Can't make sense of your edit summary since it certainly wasn't a blue link. Expound? Julia\ talk 21:07, 25 May 2016 (UTC)
Hi there, I'm pleased to inform you that I've begun reviewing the article Mediterranean cuisine you nominated for GA-status according to the criteria. This process may take up to 7 days. Feel free to contact me with any questions or comments you might have during this period. Message delivered by Legobot, on behalf of Sainsf -- Sainsf ( talk) 13:40, 30 May 2016 (UTC)
The article Mediterranean cuisine you nominated as a good article has passed ; see Talk:Mediterranean cuisine for comments about the article. Well done! If the article has not already been on the main page as an "In the news" or "Did you know" item, you can nominate it to appear in Did you know. Message delivered by Legobot, on behalf of Sainsf -- Sainsf ( talk) 05:41, 3 June 2016 (UTC)
Sorry about the duplicate refs in this article. Thanks for catching the error. --- Steve Quinn ( talk) 00:49, 6 June 2016 (UTC)
I won't mind helping on another invert article. Not now, but somewhere down the line. Are dragonfly, cicada or millipede manageable? LittleJerry ( talk) 21:34, 11 May 2016 (UTC)
Cwmhiraeth: What else do we need to do on Fly? Chiswick Chap ( talk) 13:07, 3 June 2016 (UTC)
In honour of June 19, World Bogus Wikipedia Page Detection Day! HappyValleyEditor ( talk) 23:05, 19 June 2016 (UTC) |
Well, thanks. All part of a day's work. Chiswick Chap ( talk) 07:17, 20 June 2016 (UTC)
Hi there, I'm pleased to inform you that I've begun reviewing the article Food in England you nominated for GA-status according to the criteria. This process may take up to 7 days. Feel free to contact me with any questions or comments you might have during this period. Message delivered by Legobot, on behalf of Sainsf -- Sainsf ( talk) 07:01, 22 June 2016 (UTC)
The article Food in England you nominated as a good article has passed ; see Talk:Food in England for comments about the article. Well done! If the article has not already been on the main page as an "In the news" or "Did you know" item, you can nominate it to appear in Did you know. Message delivered by Legobot, on behalf of Sainsf -- Sainsf ( talk) 09:01, 22 June 2016 (UTC)
Hi Chiswick Chap, I am new on this, so apologies if I am making any mistake. Thank you for your edits on the edits I did on the kin selection page. Nevertheless please note that, as it is now, it does not reflect the attribution of credits (through citation) in focus here. For instance, there we can read now that "Those papers were mostly ignored until they were cited[15] by Martin Nowak, Corina Tarnita, and E. O. Wilson". In fact those papers were not cited by those authors neither in this study nor in subsequent ones (what is quite surprising, as E. O. Wilson was the editor of the PNAS paper [1] -this info is printed in the paper- therefore this author was aware of the existence of this work and, by having to direct its reviewing process, certainly knew its content very well). Wladuk ( talk) 11:34, 22 June 2016 (UTC)Wladuk
Yeah, basically lol ... I discovered your talk page archiving while perusing the edits of 24.136.29.223, who often added unsigned talk page comments out of chronological order; they'd edited the talk page for the Bessemer process which is on my watchlist. One of my pet peeves is non-standard talk page management, and I'm a control freak, so that's why I've been going through your talk page archiving efforts, fixing them when necessary. I've seen non-standard talk page archiving cause some really, really weird things, so that's why I'm not a fan of it. Graham 87 12:30, 22 June 2016 (UTC)
I have done a bit more to the article Fly, including expanding the lead. Do you think it is ready for GAN? Cwmhiraeth ( talk) 12:24, 28 June 2016 (UTC)
Thank you very much for appreciating my little edit! (^_^)FilBenLeafBoy(^_^)( Let's TALK!) 16:38, 3 July 2016 (UTC)
That is a really impressive page! Thank you for adding it. Since you mentioned it on my talk page, I read it through trying to think of comments. I can only come up with two vague ones, which please ignore if they don't prompt any useful thoughts. One is to wonder whether Fitness landscape would be appropriate in a See also section. The other is to say that I didn't understand "Therefore, any talk of functions must be posterior to natural selection, function cannot be defined in the manner advocated by Reiss and Richard Dawkins". Sminthopsis84 ( talk) 15:00, 2 August 2016 (UTC)
I see that you have removed names of Inspired Teacher-highest civilian award in the republic of India /info/en/?search=Inspired_Teacher I would like to appeal this edit. You should undo this. If you check other civilian awards, like /info/en/?search=Bharat_Ratna list of recipients are presented in the page itself. I find your edit as an insult. -- Iflex ( talk) 07:56, 3 August 2016 (UTC)
Hello. Would you be interested in helping me bring European hare to FA? Its already a GA. I feel like it make need a bit more expanding and rearrangements. LittleJerry ( talk) 22:41, 12 August 2016 (UTC)
Hi Chiswick Chap. Some time round about April last year, we discussed obtaining an image of an "average face" to complement the Averageness article. At the time I could find no examples that could be used in Wikipedia, either on Wiki Commons, the internet, or from laboratories working on average faces.
But now I have found one that would seem to be available for use in Wikipedia at [ [4]]. It is copyrighted by the "Face Research Laboratory" (at the University of Glasgow, Scotland), but the caption states that it can be used by anyone for non-commercial purposes. I presume that it would therefore be available to be used in Wikipedia.
I have no idea how to upload work that is not my own. I presume you are more familiar with the rules and requirements for uploading this, very suitable image, into the Averageness article. It looks, not surprisingly, like any of the other average faces that are available on the internet - Judith Langlois having shown that any one 32-face average face looks almost identical to any other 32-face average.
Can I leave this with you? if you think it is worthwhile replacing the photograph of Jessica Alba with a real average face? The text would need adjusting, but that would hardly be a problem. Oggmus ( talk) 11:05, 13 August 2016 (UTC)
Cheers Oggmus ( talk) 19:00, 23 August 2016 (UTC)
On 21 August 2016, Did you know was updated with a fact from the article Fly, which you recently created, substantially expanded, or brought to good article status. The fact was ... that flies (crane fly pictured) have a single pair of wings for flight, the hind wings being modified into tiny gyroscopic organs known as " halteres"? The nomination discussion and review may be seen at Template:Did you know nominations/Fly. You are welcome to check how many page hits the article got while on the front page ( here's how, Fly), 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.
Cas Liber ( talk · contribs) 00:01, 21 August 2016 (UTC)
We have another enthusiast! Cwmhiraeth ( talk) 20:01, 30 August 2016 (UTC)
I don't intend for this to be very major, but I recently found this paper on roaring (type 461 for page) and expanded on roar (utterance). Maybe you could check it out, I may not have done it enough justice. Animal communication interests you right? LittleJerry ( talk) 22:25, 10 September 2016 (UTC)
Actually, yes, you're right on reflection, that is a better image, I was focusing too much on the underside matching the "sky". Why the overridden thumbnail size, though? -- McGeddon ( talk) 12:34, 21 September 2016 (UTC)
Hi. I was wondering if you would be interested in contributing articles to Wikipedia:The 1000 Challenge (Nordic)? It needs contributors to increase diversity of content from different countries and bring about large scale improvements. The idea at some point will be to host a National Contest related to your country of interest. Thanks. -- MediaWiki message delivery ( talk) 13:15, 21 September 2016 (UTC)
That was a good one. Friggin' socks laying everywhere... - LouisAragon ( talk) 19:44, 22 September 2016 (UTC)
I agree that the source is probably a secondary rather than primary one. Having no experience editing Wikipedia, I lazily figured that a secondary source would suffice. You're right, though, and I'll look for the original.
Something else worth mentioning: As far as I can tell, while no images in Wikimedia commons make the relationship between fractals and Hindu temples as explicit, the images here could be a decent substitute if I fail: /info/en/?search=Kandariya_Mahadeva_Temple — Preceding unsigned comment added by Nabel12 ( talk • contribs) 17:38, 13 October 2016 (UTC)
So an update: The work Ashish Nangia cited is the likely source of the picture. However, so far I've only been able to locate the second volume. https://archive.org/details/IndianArchitecture Nabel12 ( talk) 17:52, 13 October 2016 (UTC)
The second volume of the same work is in the public domain according to the archive.org link I posted.
Obviously, if you're right, you're justified in deleting it; however, I think I still have good reason to believe it's in the public domain. Nabel12 ( talk) 18:01, 13 October 2016 (UTC)
I've failed to find a full online copy of the work, even after a thorough search, so unfortunately for me you're justified in deleting it. I apologize for the hassle I put you through.
Nabel12 ( talk) 18:31, 13 October 2016 (UTC)
Just one more thing, though I won't bother including such in the article: There is an interesting Hindu-Buddhist mathematical and narrative/artistic tradition describing both fractals and recursion:
Nabel12 (
talk) 18:43, 13 October 2016 (UTC)
Also pinging Cwmhiraeth. Hi guys, here's another one of your FAC nominations at TFA, I'm working on the TFA text now. - Dank ( push to talk) 21:01, 19 October 2016 (UTC)
@ Chiswick Chap: Regarding your edit summary "well, it's a rather well-cited section for WP:OR - do you mean the last few sentences": I mean passages such as: "This means, after sufficient duration as differences assert, all concepts will attract and coalesce as pink noise and entropy increases (see also: Big Crunch, self-organized criticality). The theory is applicable to all organizationally closed or homeostatic processes that produce enduring and coherent products (where spins have a fixed average phase relationship and also in the sense of Nicholas Rescher's coherence theory of truth with the proviso that the sets and their members exert repulsive forces at their boundaries) through interactions: evolving, learning and adapting." That is WP:OR as far as I can see. Biogeographist ( talk) 15:22, 20 October 2016 (UTC)
An off-the-wall suggestion: would you want to mention in some way that there are other traditions that consider human embryology? This is not my kind of topic. :-) Sminthopsis84 ( talk) 23:59, 22 October 2016 (UTC)
Hello Quick Draw McGraw, I am still working on the addition. Just put in her picture. Unlike many, she has well over 200 references to choose from! -- Po Kadzieli ( talk) 19:30, 26 October 2016 (UTC)
Hello again, so soon: Do you know how to put in coordinates? We need them for the Lillie Bridge Depot that goes from Lillie Bridge (Fulham) all the way to Beaumont Avenue by West Kensington tube station. If you can help, I shall be most grateful.-- Po Kadzieli ( talk) 20:01, 26 October 2016 (UTC)
Hi there, I'm pleased to inform you that I've begun reviewing the article Evolutionary developmental biology you nominated for GA-status according to the criteria. This process may take up to 7 days. Feel free to contact me with any questions or comments you might have during this period. Message delivered by Legobot, on behalf of Pbsouthwood -- Pbsouthwood ( talk) 14:00, 1 November 2016 (UTC)
The article Evolutionary developmental biology you nominated as a good article has passed ; see Talk:Evolutionary developmental biology for comments about the article. Well done! If the article has not already been on the main page as an "In the news" or "Did you know" item, you can nominate it to appear in Did you know. Message delivered by Legobot, on behalf of Pbsouthwood -- Pbsouthwood ( talk) 09:01, 2 November 2016 (UTC)
Hello, I'm ReferenceBot. I have automatically detected that an edit performed by you may have introduced errors in referencing. It is as follows:
Please check this page and fix the errors highlighted. If you think this is a false positive, you can report it to my operator. Thanks, ReferenceBot ( talk) 00:23, 8 November 2016 (UTC)
Thank you so much for your help wth this -- Michael Goodyear ( talk) 16:54, 10 November 2016 (UTC)
patterns in nature | |
---|---|
... you were recipient no. 301 of Precious, a prize of QAI! |
-- Gerda Arendt ( talk) 07:44, 11 November 2016 (UTC)
Hi. I noticed you deleted references to the Mexican freetail bat flying at 100 mph. Thanks. I read this reference yesterday and thought it was a rather an extraordinary claim. What do think is going on here? DrChrissy (talk) 17:02, 11 November 2016 (UTC)
You say here that: "all navboxes shd be closed when >1 are present". I agree with that, apart from the single exception that the rule shouldn't apply if the article happens to be the main topic of the template. An example would be here. Is the matter set out in a guideline somewhere? -- Epipelagic ( talk) 09:15, 14 November 2016 (UTC)
Hi there, I'm pleased to inform you that I've begun reviewing the article Natural selection you nominated for GA-status according to the criteria. This process may take up to 7 days. Feel free to contact me with any questions or comments you might have during this period. Message delivered by Legobot, on behalf of Dunkleosteus77 -- Dunkleosteus77 ( talk) 03:01, 18 November 2016 (UTC)
I removed a line from this article that perpetuates the myth that dissection was restricted in the Middle Ages by a papal bull by Boniface VIII. You seem to have reverted the article so that it includes the erroneous claim again, saying that my edit was an "unexplained deletion of cited text and citation". It was not "unexplained" - I cited Katherine Park, "Myth 5 - That the Medieval Church Prohibited Dissection" in Ronald L. Numbers, Galileo Goes to Jail and Other Myths about Science and Religion (Harvard University Press, 2010) pp. 43-49, who details how this myth arose and shows why it is still repeated in generalist histories. The cited work in the original footnote actually notes that Boniface's decree "targetted funerary customs rather than the nascent practices of autopsy and dissection" but then goes on to claim it still "had a chilling effect on the spread of dissection" but gives no evidence to support this. The extensive evidence of the spread of dissection in the same article shows that there was no such "chilling effect" and Park and other historians of science note that no-one in the period ever cites Boniface's decree in relation to dissection. The claim in the article cited is baseless and is disputed by historians of science who specialise in the history of anatomy. A baseless repetation of the myth is not evidence that the myth is true. The claim about Boniface should be removed. — Preceding unsigned comment added by TimONeill ( talk • contribs) 22:37, 22 November 2016 (UTC)
Hi, do you think grasshopper would be an easy FAC? LittleJerry ( talk) 19:44, 24 November 2016 (UTC)
Hi there, I'm pleased to inform you that I've begun reviewing the article Flea you nominated for GA-status according to the criteria. This process may take up to 7 days. Feel free to contact me with any questions or comments you might have during this period. Message delivered by Legobot, on behalf of FunkMonk -- FunkMonk ( talk) 17:01, 28 November 2016 (UTC)
The article Natural selection you nominated as a good article has passed ; see Talk:Natural selection for comments about the article. Well done! If the article has not already been on the main page as an "In the news" or "Did you know" item, you can nominate it to appear in Did you know. Message delivered by Legobot, on behalf of Dunkleosteus77 -- Dunkleosteus77 ( talk) 00:02, 29 November 2016 (UTC)
Thanks for the thorough review. It was an enjoyable experience (who would have thought :-) ) and the one that resulted in article improvements as to its focus. Thanks again! K.e.coffman ( talk) 18:56, 3 December 2016 (UTC)
The article Flea you nominated as a good article has passed ; see Talk:Flea for comments about the article. Well done! If the article has not already been on the main page as an "In the news" or "Did you know" item, you can nominate it to appear in Did you know. Message delivered by Legobot, on behalf of FunkMonk -- FunkMonk ( talk) 19:21, 3 December 2016 (UTC)
Hello, Chiswick Chap. Flea, 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, 4 December 2016 (UTC)
Well, I think I have finished writing what I needed to add into the article. Perhaps the only thing we can do now is give it a nice clean, perhaps expand the lead to reflect on the new information and nominate it for GA. Burklemore1 ( talk) 07:36, 8 December 2016 (UTC)
@ Burklemore1: I think it's about ready. I will have little availability over the holiday period but apart from that we can go to GAN whenever. Chiswick Chap ( talk) 08:48, 16 December 2016 (UTC)
Hi there, I'm pleased to inform you that I've begun reviewing the article Fungi in human culture you nominated for GA-status according to the criteria. This process may take up to 7 days. Feel free to contact me with any questions or comments you might have during this period. Message delivered by Legobot, on behalf of Cwmhiraeth -- Cwmhiraeth ( talk) 14:01, 15 December 2016 (UTC)
The article Fungi in human culture you nominated as a good article has passed ; see Talk:Fungi in human culture for comments about the article. Well done! If the article has not already been on the main page as an "In the news" or "Did you know" item, you can nominate it to appear in Did you know. Message delivered by Legobot, on behalf of Cwmhiraeth -- Cwmhiraeth ( talk) 11:01, 18 December 2016 (UTC)
Season's Greetings | ||
Wishing you and yours a Happy Holiday Season, and all best wishes for the New Year! Adoration of the Kings (Gerard David, London) is my Wiki-Christmas card to all for this year. Johnbod ( talk) 10:26, 22 December 2016 (UTC) |
Hope you had a nice Christmas. Do you think grasshopper is about ready? I was also thinking about brown bear. I've been tempted to bring to FA, but for now I'm willing to focus on GA status. LittleJerry ( talk) 23:23, 28 December 2016 (UTC)