Content deleted Content added
No edit summary |
MalnadachBot (talk | contribs) m Fixed Lint errors. (Task 12) |
||
| (104 intermediate revisions by 36 users not shown) | |||
Line 21:
==Adminship==
Congratulations, on your promotion. [[User:Alkivar|<font color="#FA8605">'''ALKIVAR'''</font>]]™[[
:Thank you. [[User:Gdr|Gdr]] 22:26, 2005 Apr 16 (UTC)
Line 286:
Hi, the [http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Eastern_Reef_Egret&diff=14243561&oldid=14236405 last edit] by Gdrbot on [[Eastern Reef Egret]] stuffed up the taxobox's image; Don't get me wrong - the bot seems very useful as the conversion from old to new style is definitely useful, but there seems to be a small bug in the bit that removed the <nowiki>"fledglings]]"</nowiki> bit of the image link, and probably also the bit that removed the "thumb" attrib from the image, and possibly also in the bit that works out what the caption should be (although all these may be related) - i.e. I think [http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Eastern_Reef_Egret&diff=0&oldid=14243561 this edit] does what you wanted. -- All the best, [[User:Nickj|Nickj]] [[User talk:Nickj|(t)]] 02:03, 26 May 2005 (UTC)
:Yes, my code made a mess of several taxobox images by (a) removing "thumb" (because thumbnail images look bad in taxoboxes) but not adding a width; and (b) mangling image markup when the image caption included a wiki link. Other articles affected were [[Babirusa]], [[Painted tongue]], [[Clown Triggerfish]], [[Sidewinder (snake)]], [[Marsh Warbler]], [[Tree Swallow]], [[White-winged Tern]], [[Green Sandpiper]], [[Great Tit]], [[Emberizidae]], [[Mahi-mahi]], [[yam (vegetable)|Yam]], [[Hooded Vulture]], [[Black-tailed Godwit]], [[Cyclura]], [[Oriental Small-clawed Otter]], [[Phyllodactylus angustidigitus]], [[Black Eagle]], [[Vampire bat]], [[Sedge Warbler]], [[Phelsuma modesta leiogaster]], [[Rodrigues day gecko]], [[Madagascar day gecko]], [[Sambar Deer]]. I've fixed all of these.
:Please let me know if the bot made other mistakes; I'll fix them. [[User:Gdr|Gdr]] 07:23, 2005 May 26 (UTC)
Line 314:
== Barnstar ==
[[Image:
Your many improvements to taxoboxes, both with and without bots, is quite impressive. Looking through your other contributions, you've certainly done a lot for Wikipedia, in both your work and your suggestions. You're a valuable member of the Wikipedia community, and I'm grateful for all you've done. – [[User:Quadell|Quadell]] <sup>([[User_talk:Quadell|talk]]) ([[Wikipedia:Image sleuthing|sleuth]])</sup> 20:28, May 31, 2005 (UTC)
Line 472:
:No, the bot was working as intended. Can you explain in more detail what the problem is? Which articles have been ruined? I checked the articles you listed above and they seem fine to me. [[User:Gdr|Gdr]] 21:56, 2005 Jun 17 (UTC)
::I have already stated the problem clearly: '''<nowiki>[[Latin language|Latin]]</nowiki>''' is being changed to simply [[Latin]]. Stop this robot assisted vandalism at once! --[[User:Jpbrenna|Jpbrenna]] 22:02, 17 Jun 2005 (UTC)
:But you haven't explained ''why'' it's a problem. I don't understand yet. [[User:Gdr|Gdr]] 22:05, 2005 Jun 17 (UTC)
::Go to the [[Talk:Latin]] page. There is still no community consensus (the vote is 11-6 and not closed) on whether the article should be moved to Latin language should be moved with a redirect to [[Latin (disambiguation)]], in the manner of [[Greek (disambiguation)|Greek]] and [[Spanish (disambiguation)|Spanish]]. What will happen if (more likely ''when'') it does? You will have to change everything back. So why not wait? Who asked you to make these changes? Not I, and I do not like your changing articles that I have created or contributed to without notifying me.
--[[User:Jpbrenna|Jpbrenna]] 22:57, 17 Jun 2005 (UTC)
:(1) The vote at [[Talk:Latin]] was from December 2004; I read it before making any changes and the situation looked settled to me. (2) If [[Latin]] is moved I will change the links back. Until then I don't yet understand what the problem is. (3) No one asked me to make these changes. That's not how Wikipedia works. Who would have the authority? (4) If you do not want your writing to be edited mercilessly, do not submit it. See [[Wikipedia:Ownership of articles]]. [[User:Gdr|Gdr]] 23:03, 2005 Jun 17 (UTC)
:*You do not understand. '''You''' have to give reasons as to why <nowiki>[[Latin language|Latin]]</nowiki> is wrong, to change it, not others as to why <nowiki>[[Latin]]</nowiki> is wrong, so the '''original''' <nowiki>[[Latin language|Latin]]</nowiki> is kept. <nowiki>[[Latin]]</nowiki> being wrong might be controversial, <nowiki>[[Latin language|Latin]]</nowiki> is not. It's undeniably right. There is a saying that goes: ''Don't fix it if it ain't broken'', and it applies nicely here. Your bot was correcting no wrong, while at the same time potential disruption was being introduced. [[User:Isilanes|Isilanes]] 16:44, 10 October 2006 (UTC)
== Pretzels and Graphics ==
Hi! Congrats on the Admin! I've seen you on a couple of Naval Battle Pages and I'm trying a big upgrade to the naval actions in the [[Russo-Japanese War]]. I was just looking at some of your work on ''JUTLAND'' so I thought I'd say Hi, great job! Where did the fleet battle maps come from for that project. The Japanese course at Tsushima looks like a pretzel on LSD, so this is something of a challange to replicate electronically. Fortunately, the Russians just sortof curved around in a big bend, so the matter shouldn't be too hard to resolve. Is something like that suitable for paintshop pro? Just happen to have two versions of that hanging around. Thanx [[User:Fabartus| [[User:fabartus]] || [[User_talk:fabartus|TalktoMe]]]] 06:09, 18 Jun 2005 (UTC)
:I drew the Jutland maps in [[OmniGraffle]]. [[User:Gdr|Gdr]] 07:22, 2005 Jun 18 (UTC)
== DYK ==
I just updated DYK as I saw it wasn't updated in over 2 days and you last visited almost a week ago. Any chance I could get access to the bot as well? Between the two of us updating should be a breeze. - [[User:MacGyverMagic|Mgm]]|[[User talk:MacGyverMagic|<sup>(talk)</sup>]] 08:03, Jun 22, 2005 (UTC)
== Gdrbot ==
Note my questions at the technical village pump and the help desk. I'm not getting this bot to do my bidding. - [[User:MacGyverMagic|Mgm]]|[[User talk:MacGyverMagic|<sup>(talk)</sup>]] 09:57, Jun 26, 2005 (UTC)
:You should e-mail me explaining what you've done and what the problem is. Please let me know (1) Operating system, Python version. (2) Have you managed to get any pywikipedia code to work? (3) What happens when you run dykbot.py? Gdr 10:30, 2005 Jun 26 (UTC)
1) Windows 98. Python seems to be 2.3.4
2) No, but have managed to get several error codes earlier that prompted me to download wikipedia.py, config.py and login.py. Anything else I need.
3) Traceback (most recent call last):
File "<stdin>", line 1, in ?
NameError: name 'dykbot' is not defined.
I think you'd best run me through the motions of running a python file. I also have problems finding out how to run login.py and how to make that work. - [[User:MacGyverMagic|Mgm]]|[[User talk:MacGyverMagic|<sup>(talk)</sup>]] 10:39, Jun 26, 2005 (UTC)
*That CVS application has too many executables. Do I need to click one of them, or do I need to click something on the sourceforge site to download the whole kaboodle at once? - [[User:MacGyverMagic|Mgm]]|[[User talk:MacGyverMagic|<sup>(talk)</sup>]] 14:26, Jun 26, 2005 (UTC)
*It's only got a link for when you don't have CVS and Unix commands. But never mind, I downloaded some files from June 20. Now it says I need to run cmd.exe in the start menu run command. I don't seem to have it. Sorry to keep bothering ya.
*Good news! I got login to work. It asked me for a password and it seemed to connect to Wikipedia. DYKbot however, ran through a number of lines when I executed it without giving me a chance to read suggests or actually do anything. That last is to be expected. (I need to add the --for-real argument, but I was hoping I could preview before acting on the bots suggestions. - [[User:MacGyverMagic|Mgm]]|[[User talk:MacGyverMagic|<sup>(talk)</sup>]] 15:06, Jun 26, 2005 (UTC)
*More good news! I've finally been able to make two bot edits (adding interwiki links) but it still gets stuck on dykbot because it encounters a locked page. Even when I set my bot username to my admin account, it's still stuck (the password is the same). Why does it need to edit a locked page anyway if for-real is shut off? - [[User:MacGyverMagic|Mgm]]|[[User talk:MacGyverMagic|<sup>(talk)</sup>]] 15:46, Jun 26, 2005 (UTC)
== Bot ==
Thanks for telling me. I'll try it first thing tomorrow morning. Has your Gdrbot got admin powers or did you run DYK bot another way? - [[User:MacGyverMagic|Mgm]]|[[User talk:MacGyverMagic|<sup>(talk)</sup>]] June 28, 2005 21:43 (UTC)
==Another bot problem==
Hi Gdr - 'fraid your bot has added incorrect brackets to a lot of animal taxoboxes, changing '''{{((}}Taxobox section binomial''' to '''{{((}}Taxobox section binomial parens''' when it shouldn't have done (e.g. [http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Long-billed_Curlew&diff=16186663&oldid=14692031 Long-billed Curlew]). The cases where brackets are ''not'' used are taxa where the species' current scientific name is the same as the scientific name it was first given by its describing author; in the above case ''Numenius americanus'' was so named by Bechstein in 1812 (I've corrected this instance and also for Slender-billed Curlew). Brackets are only used where the taxon has been reclassified by a later author - thus e.g. ''Numenius arquarta'' (Linnaeus, 1758) was first described by Linnaeus as ''Scolopax arquarta'' Linnaeus, 1758; later it was transferred to ''Numenius'', and the brackets indicate that a revision has been made. - [[User:MPF|MPF]] 29 June 2005 22:54 (UTC)
:Nomialbot was only restoring the parentheses that were there before it accidentally and incorrectly removed them. In the case of [[Long-billed Curlew]] the parentheses were originally added to the article by [[User:Big iron]] — see [http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Long-billed_Curlew&diff=8951147&oldid=5317599]. When Nomialbot updated the taxobox it also removed the parentheses because of a programming error on my part [http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Long-billed_Curlew&diff=14692031&oldid=14210991]. So I went through and restored the parentheses again in the edit you referred to.
:So it's not my fault! [[User:Gdr|Gdr]] 2005-06-29 23:04:00 (UTC)
::Thanks! Sorry about the false accusation! - [[User:MPF|MPF]] 29 June 2005 23:34 (UTC)
:That's OK. If you're determined to check some more articles for this error, you can see a list of articles using parentheses in the taxobox authority by looking at [[Special:Whatlinkshere/Template:Taxobox section binomial parens]] and [[Special:Whatlinkshere/Template:Taxobox section trinomial parens]]. There are more than 1,500 of them and I expect many are making the same mistake. [[User:Gdr|Gdr]] 2005-06-29 23:44:36 (UTC)
::Thanks! That'll be a bit of a nightmare task as it involves checking each one against a major text that gives basionyms . . . [[User:MPF|MPF]] 30 June 2005 10:32 (UTC)
== Wikifying dates. ==
No I'm not using a bot (though perhaps I should - I looked at pywikipediabot, and it seemed far to complicated). I use search and replace and then check the diff of each article. I do chunks of about 90 articles in a hit. Typically I will then either rollback or re-edit about 3-7 articles, often cricketing ones, or albums, which both can use dates in a special way, references, quotes or wikilinks. generally this takes about 10-12 mins, in this case it was a bit longer, as I had real-life (tm) concerns to take care of as well (running a 135 ppm laser printer as it happens). See my user page for some details on this miniproject. Funnily enough, although there are many problems with changing dates, that's the first problem of that type I've seen - thanks for telling me about it, and for fixing it. [[User:Rich Farmbrough|Rich Farmbrough]] 30 June 2005 20:22 (UTC)
Far too complicated?
<pre><nowiki>
#!/usr/bin/python
import sys
import wikipedia
page = wikipedia.Page(wikipedia.Site('en'), sys.argv[1])
text = page.get()
months = 'January|February|...|December'
text = re.sub(r'(\s)(\d+) (' + months + r')(,?\s)([12]\d\d\d)([,.]?\s)', r'\1[[\2 \3]]\4[[\5]]\6', text)
# etc for other date patterns
wikipedia.showDiff(page.get(), text)
if wikipedia.input('OK? [yN]') == 'y':
page.put(text, 'robot-assisted date formatting')
</nowiki></pre>
[[User:Gdr|Gdr]] 2005-06-30 21:01:59 (UTC)
== Criteria used to revise categories? ==
Hi,
I noticed that you have changed the categories applied to the article on [[Carniolan honeybee]]s. What sets the standards for and authorizes how these articles are recategorized? [[User:Patrick0Moran|P0M]] 30 June 2005 23:35 (UTC)
:There's some advice at [[Wikipedia:Categorization]]. For the particular case of living things, see [[Wikipedia:WikiProject Tree of Life]]. There's a general principle that articles should not be in both a category its parent; for example since [[Carniolan honeybee]] is in [[:Category:Bees]] it doesn't need to be in [[:Category:Hymenoptera]] or [[:Category:Insects]]. [[User:Gdr|Gdr]] 2005-07-01 10:01:24 (UTC)
==Just a word of thanks==
Appreciate the work you do, fixing up formatting and such whenever I create a new entry for a WWII ship :) Thanks [[User:Sherurcij|Sherurcij]] July 1, 2005 16:02 (UTC)
== Redirectbot ==
Hello, I saw your bot making redirects for animal scientific names. I'd like to run this bot on the Dutch Wikipedia too. Can you help me? [[User:Ucucha|Ucucha]]<small> See [http://www.geocities.com/mammal_taxonomy/index.html Mammal Taxonomy]</small> 4 July 2005 13:46 (UTC)
:Sorry, my code is not ready for other people to use. And I don't think it would work on the Dutch Wikipedia, because of the different way taxoboxes are constructed. However, I might be able to help if you can explain what you are trying to do. [[User talk:Gdr|Gdr]] 4 July 2005 16:16 (UTC)
::I thought it might be possible to let the bot make redirects for the text in <nowiki>{{Taxobox section binomial simple}} of {{Taxobox section binomial parens}}</nowiki> [[:nl:Sjabloon:Taxobox section binomial simple]], parameter "binomial_name". I thought that was the way your bot worked too, but maybe I'm wrong. [[User:Ucucha|Ucucha]]<small> See [http://www.geocities.com/mammal_taxonomy/index.html Mammal Taxonomy]</small> 4 July 2005 17:02 (UTC)
==Gdrbot and zoologists==
It seems that your bot is adding names to the [[List of zoologists by author abbreviation]] haphazardly and in a strange order. ''Odhner'' is clearly not the engineer [[Wilgott Theophil Odhner|Willgodt Odhner]] (there was also a zoologist Teodor Odhner), and De Geer already has an entry at D, but was just added at C, just before Cuvier. And these are just names I noticed because they are Swedish. [[User:Uppland|Uppland]] 5 July 2005 21:43 (UTC)
:Thanks for letting me know. I was misled by the redirect at [[Odhner]]. And De Geer is misspelled under D. The other mistakes were my fault. [[User talk:Gdr|Gdr]] 5 July 2005 21:56 (UTC)
::I assumed, in the case of De Geer, that the author abbreviation differed from the actual name for some reason, but I have no access to sources for these abbreviations. If you do, could you perhaps double-check Gyllenhaal? The surname is always spelled with two A's, but the abbreviation is given as "Gyllenhal". [[User:Uppland|Uppland]] 6 July 2005 08:09 (UTC)
:Correcting myself: there are actually ''two'' (semi-distantly related) zoologists Odhner: [[Teodor Odhner]], who studied [[trematode]]s, and [[Nils Hjalmar Odhner]], who studied [[mollusk]]s. I'll turn the redirect into a dab page. [[User:Uppland|Uppland]] 6 July 2005 08:47 (UTC)
== Dates in taxoboxes ==
Is there a reason why Gdrbot is not linking in dates in taxoboxes? I can't think of one. For instance, [[Malacostraca]] which used to have "[[Pierre André Latreille|Latreille]], [[1802]]" now has "[[Pierre André Latreille|Latreille]], 1802". I don't think that's an improvement. It must be just as easy to link the dates in, mustn't it? --[[User:Stemonitis|Stemonitis]] 6 July 2005 07:33 (UTC)
:It's my personal preference. I don't think that linking these dates provides useful context for the taxon. If we had pages like [[1802 in zoology]] then it would be a different matter. [[User talk:Gdr|Gdr]] 6 July 2005 10:55 (UTC)
== Help desk wikiproject ==
I have created a new Wikiproject which aims to bring computer veterans and people who need help with software tools they use on Wikipedia together. I'm writing this to you because I saw you on the bot list and wanted to know if you would be willing to help. There is already an open case: [[Wikipedia:WikiProject help desk/20050702 Dmcdevit|WikiProject help desk/20050702 Dmcdevit]]. The Windows tool that [[User:Dmcdevit|Dmcdevit]] uses to perform Transwikis has broken since the software upgrade. [[User:Triddle|Triddle]] July 6, 2005 22:33 (UTC)
== Jane Austen ==
Thanks for your answer at WP:RD about Mrs. Bennet. I am grateful. [[User:PedanticallySpeaking|PedanticallySpeaking]] July 8, 2005 20:43 (UTC)
== [[Naturalism (art)]] ==
I called it unlikely because there's no artistic movement known as "naturalism"; the new article that you've started looks to me rather like a dictionary definition. I haven't tagged it for Wiktionary (I probably would have done if there hadn't been this story behind it, but I don't want you to think that I'm acting out of sour grapes), but is there really any chance that the article will become a genuine article, without repeating the contents of other articles on relevant movements? --[[User:Mel Etitis|Mel Etitis]] ([[User talk:Mel Etitis|<span style="color:green;">Μελ Ετητης</span>)]] 18:34, 11 July 2005 (UTC)
:I added the red link to the [[naturalism]] because when I was disambiguating references to naturalism I found several that referred to naturalism in art; see [[Special:Whatlinkshere/Naturalism (art)]] for a list. Hence the need for an article on the subject. Yes, it's only a dictionary definition at the moment, but certainly an encyclopedic article could be written on the subject, covering the history of naturalism in art, giving examples of artists and movements that have adopted naturalism, and so on. [[User talk:Gdr|Gdr]] 12:50, 12 July 2005 (UTC)
==[[Jynx]]==
Would you please unmove Jynx? It's an obscure reference (most people who look for wrynecks look for "wrynecks," not a genus name) and it's messing up Pokémon articles because they are now linking to a species of bird. [[User:Almafeta|Almafeta]] 20:17, 11 July 2005 (UTC)
*I'd be willing to do it for you, with your approval. [[User:Almafeta|Almafeta]] 20:18, 11 July 2005 (UTC)
I think it's fine the way it is. The genus of birds is real, the Pokémon is fictional. I don't think it's too much to ask for Pokémon articles to link to [[Jynx (Pokémon)]]. [[User talk:Gdr|Gdr]] 20:21, 11 July 2005 (UTC)
*The amount of work that that change caused was mean to inflict. Anyhow, I changed Jynx to a disambiguation page, which I hope will be a fair compromise. [[User:Almafeta|Almafeta]] 21:14, 11 July 2005 (UTC)
I don't want to get into an edit war, so I'll leave it there. [[User talk:Gdr|Gdr]] 21:18, 11 July 2005 (UTC)
==Tv characters in wheelchairs==
Thanks very much for your reply to my query at [[WP:RD]]. I am grateful. I should have recalled Dark Angel as I watched it from the beginning. (Its premiere was opposite the first Gore-Bush debate and was far more believeable than what either of those gents said.) [[User:PedanticallySpeaking|PedanticallySpeaking]] 17:17, July 13, 2005 (UTC)
== Nomialbot and image width ==
I saw this in the nomialbot "bugs":
200px is too narrow for a picture in a taxobox. Change this to 250px.
I think you might want to discuss such a thing with WP:TOL first, as far as I know, the sizes for images are 250px for genera and higher taxa (300px for plants) and 200 px for species (250 for plants). [[User:Circeus|Circeus]] 17:02, July 15, 2005 (UTC)
:Of course I would discuss these changes at [[Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Tree of Life]] before making any sort of wholesale change, as I did with previous runs. [[User talk:Gdr|Gdr]] 15:26, 16 July 2005 (UTC)
==Elizabeth II renaming (round XXXIV)==
You may have noticed *mega sigh* that yet another user has dragged up the ''lets rename [[Elizabeth II of the United Kingdom]]'' farce, only 9 days after the ''last'' vote ended. (What next? A vote every day on the issue next?) I have proposed instead this vote on [[Talk:Elizabeth II of the United Kingdom]] page:
'''''That Wikipedia stop wasting time on endless revoting on this (goddamned) issue and ban votes on this issue from this page for at least six months.'''''
Hopefully this will put this nonsense to bed for at least 6 months. Your (hopefully final) vote would be welcome. [[User:Jtdirl|<span style="color:#006666;">'''Fear'''</span><span style="color:#FF6600;">'''''ÉIREANN'''''</span>]][[Image:Ireland coa.png|20px]]\[[user_talk:Jtdirl|<sup style="color:blue;">(caint)</sup>]] 21:13, 19 July 2005 (UTC)
== Wikilinks on dab pages ==
Gdr, I removed the wikilinks from the [[Herod]] dab page. I did not touch the content, if that was why you were reverting my edits. I have been editing dab pages across Wikipedia to better match the [[Wikipedia:Manual of Style (disambiguation pages)|style policy for dab pages]]. The wikilink issue is minor, but some pages have needed a lot of editing (originally I got into it because I wanted to read about [[field (mathematics)]] but got this [http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Field&oldid=18030869 cluttered '''Field''' dab page] instead). Sometimes wikilinks are necessary (I've left some of them in [[Field]], for example) because I don't know if removing them in every case is better. I apologize if I offended you by my earlier content edits to the Herod page. I'm just trying to help. - [[User:Grubber|grubber]] 10:02, 2005 July 28 (UTC)
:The policy about no wikilinks on disambiguation pages is foolish. Someone reaching the page [[Herod]] may well be looking for the article [[Massacre of the Innocents]] or any of the other articles linked there. [[User talk:Gdr|Gdr]] 11:08, 28 July 2005 (UTC)
::I disagree with it being foolish. If I type "Herod" into the search bar, I am probably looking for an article about some name Herod, not an article about the Massacre of the Innocents or about a temple in Jerusalem. The idea is that we want to get someone to the right page based on ''what they typed''. If someone knows enough to associate Herod with the Massacre of the Innocents, they would have (a) typed "Massacre of the Innocents" or something similar or (b) know enough to click on the right Herod, read what they want and continue to the page on MoI.
:: I notice you have quoted policy and asked others to live according to it, and I ask the same from you. Even if you disagree with the policy, the correct place to debate it is [[Wikipedia talk:Manual of Style (disambiguation pages)]] not [[Herod]]; pending a change in policy, it is proper to leave Herod as I edited it. I will not touch the words and content, but the format should be consistent with the rest of Wikipeida. - [[User:Grubber|grubber]] 11:21, 2005 July 28 (UTC)
I'm sorry to see that you refuse to follow Wikipedia policy. There are cases when wikilinks are needed (or cannot be removed justifiably) but [[Herod]] does not fit that case. Your unilateral policy decision is not compatible with the Wikipedia spirit. As an admin user, I would expect you to follow what you preach. I'm sorry you don't see it that way. - [[User:Grubber|grubber]] 11:50, 2005 July 28 (UTC)
Another user expressed the same concern you have and started a discussion in [[Wikipedia talk:Manual of Style (disambiguation pages)]]. It would be nice for you to join the conversation, even though we disagree. :) - [[User:Grubber|grubber]] 17:39, 2005 July 28 (UTC)
== Template sharks ==
See [[Template_talk:Sharks]]. [[User:Stefan|Stefan]] 13:31, July 28, 2005 (UTC)
== Shark taxonomy: finally my answer ==
*At last I'm able to reply all your suggestion and questions that you sent to me.
First let me answer your question about "Equinodermata".
Of course that Equinodermata is specially used by latin people and being a
latin one I considered my 'mistake' mixing latin names with English names.
But, if you can spare some time seeing those links bellow you will find some scientific papers in English language with the word Equinodermata.
As I'm sure that you well know for publishing any scientific paper in any specialized publication, paper must be submit to a former review in order to assure the institution or publisher scientific credibility. And what we find in these papers is that the word Equinodermata is accepted as English text.
Although I consider my mistake I don't think this question is really 'a big one'. If you search the web or scientific publications for Equinodermata I'm sure that you find a great number of examples that both Equinodermata and Echinodermata are used and accept today in any language.
[http://www.marinebiodiversity.ca/en/pdfs/Final%20Report%20DFO%20Sept%202002.pdf]
[http://www.icm.csic.es/scimar/PDFs/sm68n2285.pdf]
[http://www.meeresschule.com/cgi-bin/abstracts/gastbuch.asp]
[http://www.baybenthos.versar.com/docs/ChesBayBIBI.PDF]
[http://cc.msnscache.com/cache.aspx?q=2059607280423&lang=en-US&FORM=CVRE5]
[http://www.cmima.csic.es/divu/CACO/ca/diario.htm]
[http://www.rsnz.org/publish/nzjmfr/2005/033a.pdf]
[http://www.uantof.cl/recursos_mar/mortiz/papers/MEPS.pdf]
Next I' would like to thank you the good work that you have done with Shark taxonomy and with Shark articles in general.I see that you are very busy in this group.
During the last 4 months I've been working in this without receiving any information that my work was not in Wikipedia format. I finished the last table for the extant species and two days before I receive your suggestion to convert all this work in a more suitable Wikipedia way. You even invite me to search help in Wiki Tree of Life, which I've done.
For my surprise less then 24 hours, all you suggest for me to do was done by you without consulting me, without waiting for the opinion of WTL and without discussion how to do it with me and of course with anyone who could help in this matter.
You simply pick Shark taxonomy convert the tables in lists merge those lists according to each group creating such big pages that are somehow difficult to understand for the general readers who seek basic information and at the same time to poor for specialized ones with lots of scientific names that links nowhere (fish description in Wikipedia is still very poor). As for the fossil species (I’ve only describe the fossil Hexanchiformes) the volume of data in some orders is so big that I was thinking to separate from extant species in different tables. You didn’t consider the idea of asking me what to do with the missing fossil orders.
Although in generally I accept the idea of centralize all information about each group in a single page, I totally disagree the way you did it.
If it was necessary to change the tables to lists or shorter the information, should be me not you to do the work. Suggesting is not the same as impose or 'I’ll do the suggesting for you'. With this kind of behavior I’m not used to work with, neither can I have any guarantee that in future the same thing happens again. So please consider my participation in Wikipedia finish, thanks to you.
As for Equinodermata taxonomy, no need for me to put sd tags for wrong Wikipedia format because I'm sure that you will convert the taxa tables to lists and to your English Echinodermata ... whatever you want.--[[User:JPPINTO|JPPINTO]] 22:50, 28 July 2005 (UTC)
:That's one of the joys of working on Wikipedia: other people may edit your work. As it says at the bottom of the page every time you make an edit, '''If you do not want your writing to be edited mercilessly and redistributed at will, do not submit it.'''
:Don't worry about misspelling Echinodermata. It will be easy to correct.
:I'm sorry that you feel upset. I hope you don't actually leave Wikipedia. What can I do to make amends? [[User talk:Gdr|Gdr]] 23:02:11, 2005-07-28 (UTC)
==ENTOMOLOGISTS==
Thanks very much for the much-needed and cleverly done edits.Never quite got paragraphs. Would you look at my other contributions Camillo Rondani and Hermann Loew especially. I really appreciate what you do so well. Evidently not everybody does Musca
==British monarchy==
You've been working hard on those tables, haven't you? Nice job. [[User:Deb|Deb]] 08:47, 31 July 2005 (UTC)
==Explain what your bots are allowed to do?==
I have been doing a lot of looking around in wikipedia recently, to bad I have not used the time to write articles instead of beeing upset about your bots removing templates, anyway I have learned a lot, maybe good after all.
Can you please explain what this means:
I copy out of context from [[Wikipedia:Bots]]
'''Current policy on running bots'''
1. Sysops should block bots, without hesitation, if they are unapproved, '''doing something the operator didn't say they would do''', messing up articles or editing too rapidly
User:Gdrbot, fixing redirects, disambiguating, moving pages between categories, running User:Gdr/Yearbot and User:Gdr/Nomialbot. Gdr 16:21, 2005 May 18 (UTC)
Does this mean that you can:
01:18, July 27, 2005 Gdrbot m (nomialbot - removing Template:Sharks; use :Category:Sharks instead)
Just asking?
fixing redirects, disambiguating, moving pages between categories, does not sound like '''removing''' templates like that. If it is after discussion and agreement, I would have no objection, but this was not done in the accepted procedure and it was done with a bot, that I do not think is allowed to do mass deletes?? [[User:Stefan|Stefan]] ??:??, August 1, 2005 (UTC)
:You're quite right, I shouldn't have used the bot to make these changes. Would you like me to restore the templates using the bot? [[User talk:Gdr|Gdr]] 14:20:19, 2005-08-01 (UTC)
:: I have already done that '''by hand''', see the vote for deletion that I have set up for that template, I think we should have a real vote, then you can use you bot to remove it, if you win :-) [[User:Stefan|Stefan]] 14:37, August 1, 2005 (UTC)
:Since you clearly care about the template, I won't vote against you. [[User talk:Gdr|Gdr]] 14:47:14, 2005-08-01 (UTC)
:: Thanks, but feel free to do that! I like that template, but if a majority wants it gone I will live with that!
==Dutch Ship Designation==
Browsing through the Dutch Navy articles, I noticed two things. 1) The use of the prefix HNLMS to indicate a ship of the Royal Netherlands Navy and 2) A rather terse remark in the [[Royal Netherlands Navy]] article indicating HNLMS is actually incorrect and anglo-centric. Going back through the history of the [[HNLMS De Zeven Provinciën (F802)|''De Zeven Provinciën'' (F802)]] article, I noticed you made the change from "Hr.Ms." to "HNLMS", so I was wondering what the rationale was for doing this. [[User:Jeroen94704|Jeroen]] 09:34, August 2, 2005 (UTC)
:HNLMS is the usual English translation of Hr.Ms and Zr.Ms., widely used in English-language works on naval history. "Anglo-centric" seems a bit unfair: it's just a translation. However, if there's consensus that the Dutch spelling is preferred then we could certainly make a change (as long as its done consistently). I suggest we continue this discussion at [[Wikipedia talk:Naming conventions (ships)]]. [[User talk:Gdr|Gdr]] 09:40:03, 2005-08-02 (UTC)
== Envelope paradox ==
Hi Gdr,
You must be busy but please check the talk page. I think the solution to third paradox is wrong. Do you think I should "be bold" and go ahead and remove the section which I think is wrong, without first discussing on the talk page?[[User:Tkalayci|Tkalayci]] 16:05, 2 August 2005 (UTC)
:Yes, be bold. But if argument 2 is meant to be applied before you open either envelope, it needs to say so. (Because the statement of the paradox at the top of the article made it clear that you opened one envelope.) If it is meant to be so applied, then paradox 3 is easy to resolve, because you can only make argument 2 before you open either envelope, and you can only make argument 1 after you open an envelope! [[User talk:Gdr|Gdr]] 16:21:58, 2005-08-02 (UTC)
::I'm afraid I disagree, but it doesn't matter now, I've added my explanation to the main article without modifying yours (that's as bold as I will get). If mine is nonsense, someone will delete it anyway. (by the way, I forgot to log in and it revealed my secret anon IP lol, good thing that I didn't do much stupid things with the IP). Take care.[[User:Tkalayci|Tkalayci]] 17:30, 2 August 2005 (UTC)
== Thanks for the cleanup... ==
Thanks for cleaning up my various [[Animal]] entries. I seem to be good at either creating or editing/wikifying, but never on the same article. :) [[User:Wikibofh|Wikibofh]] 00:04, August 3, 2005 (UTC)
== Wikiproject Year Survey ==
Hey there. I just noticed you voted, and since you are the first person that I didn't have to ask to do so I was wondering where you heard about it? Maybe its just vanity but I hope this survey will have an impact outside of those who are "very interested" in Years standards. - [[User:Trevor macinnis|Trevor macinnis]] 00:24, 3 August 2005 (UTC)
==Recent Changes to the Spider article ==
Hi. Could you please revert your recent changes to the taxonomy chart? I know they were well-intentioned, but you just created a goo-gob of links to articles that do not exist. Thanks. [[User:Patrick0Moran|P0M]] 01:56, 3 August 2005 (UTC)
:That was the whole point! That means (a) these red links may tempt people to write the articles; (b) having links for both scientific and common names makes it easy to see when an article has been written at one name without a redirect at the other; (c) when someone does write an article on one of these families, they don't have to remember to edit [[spider]] to add a link. [[User talk:Gdr|Gdr]] 02:00:12, 2005-08-03 (UTC)
I really don't like this idea. If there is an article for Lycosidae and an article for Wolf Spiders they will be about the same subject, no? Then somebody will insist, reasonably, that since they both say the same thing they should be combined. Before you do things like this you should at least bring the subject up on the discussion page. [[User:Patrick0Moran|P0M]] 02:06, 3 August 2005 (UTC)
:The scientific name of a taxon should be a redirect to the name of the article that describes that taxon. So [[Lycosidae]] should be a redirect to [[wolf spider]] (I just added it). That's how it works throughout Wikipedia. (For example, [[Chrysomelidae]] is a redirect to [[leaf beetle]]; [[Spheniscidae]] is a redirect to [[penguin]], and so on.) Having links for both scientific and common names makes it easy to see when an article has been written at one name without a redirect at the other. [[User talk:Gdr|Gdr]] 02:17:05, 2005-08-03 (UTC)
I guess it's o.k. if you don't leave readers feeling like they're in the spin cycle of a washing machine. There are several many-to-one mappings between English common names and proper scientific names. It can definitely be useful to ferret these problems out. Sometimes one person writes an article about tarantulas and another person writes an article about bird (eating) spiders, or something like that, and things can get out of hand. It would be a kindness in the future if you would warn other contributors when you make edits of such far-reaching impact, however. [[User:Patrick0Moran|P0M]] 06:07, 3 August 2005 (UTC)
==[[Pearl Kite]]==
Just a query as to the removal of the genus author. My understanding is that we know put the genus authority in the taxobox of monospecific genera. As it is, the genus authority no longer appears in the article, and I don't think it is reasonable to assume it's the same person as the species author.
I'm impressed by the amount of effort you've put into adding authorities, but slightly baffled by this one. [[User:Jimfbleak|jimfbleak]] 05:32, 3 August 2005 (UTC)
:My thinking was as follows: the genus is monotypic (it's bold). The species name is original (no parentheses around authority). Therefore the genus and species were named at the same time by the same author. So naming the author of the genus is duplicating information unnecessarily.
:However, now I think about it, I see a flaw in my reasoning. The genus may have been named before the species was named, but all other species have since been moved out of the genus. So it's just possible that the genus and species were named at different times. (Though I don't know an example where this has happened.)
:So I won't object if you put the authority back on the genus. [[User talk:Gdr|Gdr]] 05:38:14, 2005-08-03 (UTC)
| |||