DO NOT EDIT OR POST REPLIES TO THIS PAGE. THIS PAGE IS AN ARCHIVE.
This archive page covers approximately the dates between December 12, 2012 and June 24, 2013.
Post replies to the main talk page, copying or summarising the section you are replying to if necessary.
![]() | On 12 December 2012, Did you know? was updated with a fact from the article Brachynotus sexdentatus, which you created or substantially expanded. The fact was ... that the Mediterranean crab Brachynotus sexdentatus also lived in Swansea Docks, where the water was warmed by a power station? The nomination discussion and review may be seen at Template:Did you know nominations/Brachynotus sexdentatus. You are welcome to check how many hits the article got while on the front page ( here's how, quick check) and it will be added to DYKSTATS if it got over 5,000. If you know of another interesting fact from a recently created article, then please suggest it on the Did you know? talk page. |
The DYK project ( nominate) 00:02, 12 December 2012 (UTC)
I've now added Prototulbaghia to the list of genera at Allioideae#Genera. I guess it's a slight piece of SYNTH because Vosa uses the old family Alliaceae rather than the APG's Asparagaceae: Allioideae, but it seems ok to me. Given this addition, I don't think that the entry is needed in the See also section, but I leave it to you. Peter coxhead ( talk) 12:14, 13 December 2012 (UTC)
{{#tag:ref|Example footnote.<ref>Author, 2012</ref>|group=Note}}
in the running prose, with separate {{reflist|group=Note}}
and {{reflist}}
mark-ups at the end of the document. If that explanation isn't clear (which wouldn't surprise me), have a look at
Centuria Insectorum to see how it works in practice. It took me a long time to find out how to get that effect, and I'm not sure it's properly documented anywhere. --
Stemonitis (
talk)
17:34, 14 December 2012 (UTC)Hi Stemonitis, would you happen to have access to the Proceedings of the Royal Society B? I would love to get a copy of The pygmy right whale Caperea marginata: the last of the cetotheres for integration into the Cetotheriidae article [1].-- Kev min § 14:00, 20 December 2012 (UTC)
Shall I leave it to you to expand this rather pathetic article, or are you only good at reverting for no good reason? Paul venter ( talk) 19:11, 20 December 2012 (UTC)
I am currently writing an article that I intended to call Capitulum (or "Capitulum (zoology)" or somesuch name). Capitulum is according to WoRMS a monoypic genus in the family Pollicipidae which has the species Capitulum mitella (Linnaeus, 1758). Wikipedia does not currently have that family. We have a family Pollicipedidae and that contains a genus Pollicipes and the species Pollicipes mitella (Linnaeus, 1758). WoRMS also has this species and there is no mention of it being synonymous with Capitulum mitella. I think it is a mess and am unsure how to proceed. (My main source, the NHM, uses Capitulum mitella.) Cwmhiraeth ( talk) 07:36, 21 December 2012 (UTC)
I have been thinking about the article Acropora secale that I wrote recently. At first I thought the distribution of this coral was in the western part of the Indian Ocean as mentioned in WoRMS but I later discovered from my other two sources that it was much more widespread than that. If I had stuck with WoRMS, the article would have been misleading/incomplete.
Then there is the word Coenenchyme. I have made a stub article for that because it was a term I kept coming across but which didn't seem to be defined in Wikipedia. The source for the stub was a site about octocorals and I was uncertain whether the term was only used about them or was used about Anthozoa in general. I now have a copy of "Invertebrate Zoology" by Barnes but that did not use the term at all. My "Zoology" by Dorit, Walker, Barnes used it specifically about octocorals but that was not conclusive. A book source for the Acropora secale article used it several times and that species is a stony coral. So I am still confused and the Coenchyme stub may be misleading/incomplete.
And then there is my recent article on Biorhiza pallida. This was disrupted when on the main page as a DYK by an editor that I think is a sockpuppet who keeps targeting me. His comments on the talk page of the article are a bit incoherent but part of the point he is trying to make is that the article is erroneous/incomplete because I have not used readily available sources about this "well-studied gall wasp". Anoher point is that all members of the tribe create oak apples but my book source states that the term "oak apple" is specific to this species and that it is incorrect to use it about other galls.
I'm not sure why I am writing this, but these things have been on my mind and you always provide sage commentary. Cwmhiraeth ( talk) 10:18, 6 January 2013 (UTC)
Thank you for attending
the second Oxford Meetup, and it was a pleasure meeting with you again. We hope to keep this as a regular event, every two months, on the first Sunday of the month (in order not to clash with London [second Sunday] and Reading [third Sunday]). I have created a page about
the third Oxford Meetup; please sign up if you think that you are able to attend - if the date or venue are unsuitable, please comment at
its discussion page.
Please spread the word to anybody else who you think might be interested. The next UK meetup is Reading, 20 January 2013. -- Redrose64 ( talk) 19:45, 13 January 2013 (UTC)
Hi Stemonitis.
Your thoughts?
-- Shirt58 ( talk) 13:46, 26 February 2013 (UTC)
Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Parasanaa donovani, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Bush-cricket ( check to confirm | fix with Dab solver). 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) 00:57, 25 April 2013 (UTC)
I have been approached by User:Osborne with a request to move this page to Smyrnium olusatrum L.. See User talk:Brendanconway for my discussion with him. I looked back at the page history and noted that you had moved the article in the opposite direction on 10 October 2005. I would be grateful if you and Osborne could discuss this further on the talk page for Alexanders.--Fil e Éireann 21:36, 26 April 2013 (UTC)
Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Eupithecia, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Black-eyed susan ( check to confirm | fix with Dab solver). 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) 16:51, 5 May 2013 (UTC)
Done. --
Stemonitis (
talk)
17:41, 5 May 2013 (UTC)
Hi there :) A question regarding your removal of my edit in the lead of the crayfish page and replacing it with a hatnote. If you feel that what I wrote shouldn't be in the lead, I was wondering why then the second paragraph deserve to be there? It is completely analogous to what I wrote. Both are about the term crayfish referring to another species (and family even). ~ Xiphosurus ( talk) 20:04, 6 May 2013 (UTC)
Hello, Stemonitis, and thank you for your contributions!
An article you worked on List of Carex species, appears to be directly copied from http://www.theplantlist.org/browse/A/Cyperaceae/Carex/. Please take a minute to make sure that the text is freely licensed and properly attributed as a reference, otherwise the article may be deleted.
It's entirely possible that this bot made a mistake, so please feel free to remove this notice and the tag it placed on List of Carex species if necessary. MadmanBot ( talk) 09:07, 11 May 2013 (UTC)
Hello Stemonitis, I am Bastaco and I would like to know why you restore this way the article I modified concerning Allogalathea elegans? If I can make some observations, the introduction is too short and your comment about aquarium has no need to be in the introduction because it's a species description, so I would not write it in the intro but in a special part inside the article. And doing two descriptions parts with twice the same info is not very nice also.
So the way you did it, it's not very constructive and it's not really following the spirit of wikipedia. I accept the modification in my articles but only if it's done correctly, so could you please, give do something about it. Thanks and best regards. Bastaco — Preceding unsigned comment added by Bastaco ( talk • contribs) 08:23, 12 May 2013 (UTC)
Hello. I noticed that you took out the page numbers on your edit to Eriogonum alatum. Was that intentional? Asarelah ( talk) 04:15, 14 May 2013 (UTC)
You have a point. But I had actually linked it because ghost shrimp encompasses a number of species - whereas the latin name that follows applies strictly only to the Cameroon ghost shrimp. I did not see the point of broring down to that level, as I suspect that Linnaeus was not on board on that specific cruise, so there is no telling which of the various ghost shrimps the chef aborad the scurvy-plagued ship adopted into the cuisine. Perhaps in fact all refrences to the biological creature should be downplayed as we are after all taking about a river that needed to get a nme to be entered into the logs - it could have ended up as "Pristine River", "Grass River" or "Blue River", had the quartermaster not run out of provisions and been forced to improvise by supplementing with local produce. But I see you list crustaceans among your interests (to me they constitute a item a in the protein food group) ;-) What do you think? Rui ''Gabriel'' Correia ( talk) 10:28, 15 May 2013 (UTC)
And while I have your attention, why do the the names of birds get written in caps whereas that is not the case for other creatures? Why the Yellow-tailed rat, but the yellow-tailed Cockatoo? Rui ''Gabriel'' Correia ( talk) 10:35, 15 May 2013 (UTC)
Hello, I'm
BracketBot. I have automatically detected that
your edit to
Campylobacter mucosalis may have broken the
syntax by modifying 2 "[]"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.
List of unpaired brackets remaining on the page
|
---|
|
Thanks, BracketBot ( talk) 14:10, 16 May 2013 (UTC)
Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Campylobacter mucosalis, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Anaerobic ( check to confirm | fix with Dab solver). 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) 00:28, 20 May 2013 (UTC)
Commonly called "Sand Fleas" in my part of NW Florida, caught, played with, and fished with for the last 50 years. Learn something new every day, never knew what I thought was their butt was their head! Question: We find much fewer square species, always thought they were the males, obviously wrong about that too! Are they another species? 98.174.41.183 ( talk) 18:58, 21 May 2013 (UTC) -- 98.174.41.183 ( talk) 18:58, 21 May 2013 (UTC)
The page Helmet Jellyfish has some good information, but it just seems to be written, wrong. You'll understand once you read it. I'm not that good at re-wording information and thought that you might be able to do it. LieutenantLatvia ( talk) 19:19, 28 May 2013 (UTC)
Thank you for cleaning up the article on Albunione yoda. One of your edits was the removal of the Íllustrations section. I always think illustrations in species articles are very useful. There is no illustration available on wiki commons (or elsewhere), and the publication does not provide photographs that I can myself use to make a drawing from. I cannot copy it because that would be copyright infringement. But the document is available on the web, so what is wrong with having a link. Regards, Dwergenpaartje ( talk) 15:09, 3 June 2013 (UTC)
Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Rineloricaria lanceolata, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Bloodworm ( check to confirm | fix with Dab solver). 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) 11:39, 5 June 2013 (UTC)
I'm sorry that you were unable to attend
the fifth Oxford Meetup. I intended to send this message on Monday, but I've been a bit busy, sorry.
Several of us would like to continue with the monthly plan, since trying to make a two-monthly cycle fit into the University terms doesn't work very well. A page has been created about the sixth Oxford Meetup; please sign up if you think that you are able to attend - if the date or venue are unsuitable, please comment at its discussion page.
Please spread the word to anybody else who you think might be interested. The next UK meetups are at: London, 16 June; Manchester, 22 June; and Coventry, 7 July. -- Redrose64 ( talk) 14:25, 5 June 2013 (UTC)
A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Resident Evil (disambiguation) is suitable for inclusion in Wikipedia according to Wikipedia's policies and guidelines or whether it should be deleted.
The article will be discussed at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Resident Evil (disambiguation) until a consensus is reached, and anyone is welcome to contribute to the discussion. The nomination will explain the policies and guidelines which are of concern. The discussion focuses on high-quality evidence and our policies and guidelines.
Users may edit the article during the discussion, including to improve the article to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the article-for-deletion notice from the top of the article.
![]() | On 7 June 2013, Did you know? was updated with a fact from the article Carex aboriginum, which you created or substantially expanded. The fact was ... that the Idaho- endemic sedge Carex aboriginum was not seen again for nearly 90 years after its initial discovery? The nomination discussion and review may be seen at Template:Did you know nominations/Carex aboriginum. You are welcome to check how many hits the article got while on the front page ( here's how, quick check) and it will be added to DYKSTATS if it got over 5,000. If you know of another interesting fact from a recently created article, then please suggest it on the Did you know? talk page. |
Graeme Bartlett ( talk) 00:04, 7 June 2013 (UTC)
Saw your comment about not listing ne conservation status. How was the rest of my edit? I tried to add sources and more info as well as reorganizing and adding some info so it would read more clearly and concisely. Wgfcrafty ( talk) 17:59, 8 June 2013 (UTC)
I usually do that, but suddenly stopped because it sounds like it should be "R from scientific name" because the destination is a common name. Is my brain backward? Anna Frodesiak ( talk) 08:03, 9 June 2013 (UTC)
![]() So for those who haven't heard about the Recruitment Centre yet, you may be wondering why there is a Good article icon with a bunch of stars around it (to the right). The answer? WikiProject Good articles will be launching a Recruitment Centre very soon! The centre will allow all users to be taught how to review Good article nominations by experts just like you! However, in order for the Recruitment Centre to open in the first place, we need some volunteers:
NOTE: If you are interested in becoming a recruiter but do not meet the 15 review requirement, you can still add your name to the list of recruiters and put your status as "Not Available" until you have reviewed enough nominations.
If you have any questions please do not hesitate to contact me. I look forward to seeing this program bring new reviewers to the Good article community and all the positive things it will bring along. A message will be sent out to all recruiters regarding the date when the Recruitment Centre will open when it is determined. The message will also contain some further details to clarify things that may be a bit confusing.-- Dom497 ( talk) This message was sent out by -- EdwardsBot ( talk) 21:04, 10 June 2013 (UTC) |
Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Maui's dolphin, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Taranaki ( check to confirm | fix with Dab solver). 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) 12:15, 12 June 2013 (UTC)
Hi, I am wondering, All trilobite articles have Low importance and Stub or Start class quality. Even the Olenellus article is rated that way. Is it that uninteresting a topic and is the quality that poor? I mean some articles in those classes are much better and much more elaborate than others, and even well known trilobites or orders do not rise above low importance... The Trilobite article itself is not rated, perhaps this is curious. I would like to know what you think on this topic. I've made a proposal for the importance rating here. Regards, Dwergenpaartje ( talk) 17:00, 16 June 2013 (UTC)
Ah, I see. Thanks for the explanation. The rating was hiding, that figures. I still think that higher importance ranking for taxa above family would make sense and would be motivating for editors. Also start-class quality ranking is not very gratifying if one puts a lot of effort in the articles. It makes you feel that whatever you do, you will stay a wiki-looser. Pity. Regards, Dwergenpaartje ( talk) 21:42, 16 June 2013 (UTC)
Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Alucita, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Superfamily ( check to confirm | fix with Dab solver). 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) 11:18, 21 June 2013 (UTC)
Placed this image in Crab. Is this a "berried" crab or are those "zoea"? AshLin ( talk) 17:47, 22 June 2013 (UTC)
I notice you assisted User:Incnis Mrsi move Holmia (disambiguation) to Holmia. This has also forced the renaming of the original Holmia article to the new name Holmia (genus). I have three issues with this:
Dwergenpaartje ( talk) 21:59, 23 June 2013 (UTC)
<TITLE>
(disambiguation)"; there should never be a redirect from "<TITLE>
" to "<TITLE>
(disambiguation)".