PDH
de Lange 2005
Hi Peta,
I don't suppose you have access to
- de Lange, P. J. et al (2005) "Vascular flora of Norfolk Island: some additions and taxonomic notes" New Zealand Journal of Botany 43: 563–596
I'm putting together a list of vascular plants of Norfolk Island. I've keyboarded the list in Flora of Australia 49, and had some good fun updating its taxonomy (e.g. Cronquist to APG, although most of the problems so far have been in the non-flowering plants). de Lange (2005) is an update to the Flora of Australia treatment that reports 75 new taxa, so it is pretty critical to the article. Unfortunately I can't get access to it. Hesperian 01:29, 30 November 2006 (UTC)
- Done and thanks! Hesperian 23:39, 3 December 2006 (UTC)
- Received with thanks. Hesperian 00:35, 4 December 2006 (UTC)
- Done and thanks! Hesperian 23:39, 3 December 2006 (UTC)
Renaming of Mountains
Hi Petaholmes,
I was wondering the reason for renaming the mountain and mountain range articles in Queensland from X, Queensland > X (Queensland). You performed the renaming in August. Can you point me to the guideline. The reason I ask is the mountains are in conflict with locality/suburb naming standards (to name one of many). Almost all other article types use the comma, not brackets. Can you comment? Thanks Rimmeraj 03:16, 30 November 2006 (UTC)
Orphaned fair use image (Image:HelenClark 2006 head shot.jpg)
Thanks for uploading Image:HelenClark 2006 head shot.jpg. I notice the 'image' page currently specifies that the image is unlicensed for use on Wikipedia and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, the image is currently orphaned, meaning that it is not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the image was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that images for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable under fair use (see our fair use policy).
If you have uploaded other unlicensed media, please check whether they're used in any articles or not. You can find a list of 'image' pages you have edited by clicking on the "my contributions" link (it is located at the very top of any Wikipedia page when you are logged in), and then selecting "Image" from the dropdown box. Note that any fair use images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. Oden 11:06, 1 December 2006 (UTC)
Science Collaboration of the month
|
You voted for
Please help to improve it to match the quality of an ideal Wikipedia science article. |
){kind=link}
){kind=link}
){kind=link}
This month's winner is RNA interference!
| RNA interference The Molecular and Cellular Biology WikiProject's current Collaboration of the Month article is RNA interference. |
Robert Ross (CEO) References
I just wanted to let you know that I added several references to the Robert Ross article and removed your verify template. If you feel the article still needs verification, please restore the template. Thanks, Dallben 03:56, 3 December 2006 (UTC)
Submitting recreation/rebuild effort for comment
Some time ago, you were the deletion nominator for this AFD for The Blind Pig (fiction). The article was nominated for deletion because it had "[n]o evidence of notability or encyclopedic merit". I do not contest that assertion, having had the article at the time of deletion restored to my userspace here by Rossami.
I've tried to retool this into something that meets guidelines and is properly cited. I am curious, as the original nominator, what your opinion is of its current sandbox state. Although this certainly wouldn't be "recreation of deleted content" were I to promote it into mainspace at this point, I'd like to avoid doing so against consensus. As an aside, the most commonly occurring title would be Tales From the Blind Pig, as noted in the lede, and so that is where I would promote the article if it earns the right to return to the project.
Thanks for your input! Feel free to respond either here or at my talk, at your option and convenience. Serpent's Choice 09:27, 3 December 2006 (UTC)
Capitalization of species articles
You gave no explanation for moving the species' articles from non-capitalized titles to capitalized titles. Please provide an explanation. Meanwhile, I've reverted the moves. --Nlu (talk) 11:34, 5 December 2006 (UTC)
Lake Pedder
Hi I am trying to drum up interest in doing a better job on Lake Pedder - (hmm I was one of the founding members of the TWS but thats another thread some other time) - as the Franklin Dam article is sort of in some shape - but the Pedder one I seem to be talking to myself - so I have put it on the WP Australia talk - and on the art itself - are you aware of any older (heheh) editors who might either have shown knoledge of or an interest in the controversies of the 60's and 70's rather than the more recent? SatuSuro 13:48, 5 December 2006 (UTC)
- Thanks for your reply - the issue about separating is the way that the ad-hoc development of the Franklin Dam and Franklin River articles has occurred - I'll wait and see - just hope there some other 50+ age editors who have good memories or were interested who might come out of the wood-work .... the thing is a good article about the Lake Pedder fiasco would have had good links and be instructive for the Franklin Dam issues - but unfortunately it has happened the other way around - ironically the two issues are still pertinent today - even with the wilderness national park created - there are on-going issues - political and ecological - that stretch long after the events. Anyways - when I start pulling out my materials, I'll no doubt bore yrself or others with various queries anyways, cheers! SatuSuro 03:47, 6 December 2006 (UTC)
Response to notability (?) concerns
It is difficult for me to directly respond to your objections without some idea about what guidelines or policies you feel the potential article does not meet. Insofar as your comment to me was that the "article does not explain" why it is a "useful inclusion", I presume that you feel it does not meet notability standards. If you are able to clarify, I may be able to respond (or improve the article) more directly. With that in mind, since this is (probably -- my research tools of web searches and interlibrary loans do not extend to print-format media created by this subculture) wholly internet-based content, WP:WEB is the guideline in force. I feel that the article asserts its notability under this standard in two ways (... redacted struck discussion for brevity ...) Do you have any more specific concerns I could attempt to address? Serpent's Choice 05:24, 6 December 2006 (UTC)
- Struck counter-arguments pending document request that may indicate in-print verifiability and additional independant coverage. Will let you know if that plays out. Serpent's Choice 08:44, 6 December 2006 (UTC)
Your input is requested
Your input would be appreciated at this Request for Comments. Kelly Martin (talk) 15:39, 6 December 2006 (UTC)
SmitFraud AfD
Hello. I removed the Deletion tag on the Smitfraud article. As someone who was once a victim of it, I can attest to it being real. I added some external links as well documenting it and cleaned up the article a little and started an entry on the respective talk page. Please let me know if this addresses your concerns with it. Nisanu 20:55, 7 December 2006 (UTC)
John Paul Mallete
Said article was deleted a few weeks ago, for A-7. However, John Paul Mallete has a high notability in all of ontario, so I must wonder why it was speedy deleted instead of going through the normal process.--AeomMai 22:34, 8 December 2006 (UTC)
Hi Peta,
Would you mind giving this a pre-FAC review? It is not quite finished, but the two remaining tasks are not likely to change the article very much.
Hesperian 07:18, 19 December 2006 (UTC)
- Saw your edits, thanks. Do you think it is appropriate for species article to provide external links to sequencing information? e.g. this, this and this; or better still, just this. If so, what is the most reputable and appropriate site to link to? Hesperian 00:30, 20 December 2006 (UTC)
- That would be great. According to this newsletter, they were planted in the mallee eucalypt section (100). BTW, I used to live in Canberra, and have made the walk up the hill from ANU to the botanic gardens many times. Enjoy.
- On a related note, in the taxonomic history section I wrote "It was lodged in the herbarium at Canberra"; I couldn't be more specific because I don't know the convoluted history of mergers between the ANU, CSIRO and other herbaria that resulted in the ANBG. In George 1988, Nelson's specimen is said to be lodged at "CANB", but its specimen number starts with "ANU". Does this make sense to you?
- Hesperian 00:55, 20 December 2006 (UTC)
- No worries; thanks again. Hesperian 00:59, 20 December 2006 (UTC)
Rodney Marks
Hi Peta
User:SandyGeorgia asked me to look at the validity of the references for Rodney Marks, an article that appears to have been suddenly constructed. I don't know for sure. Any intuitions on it?
Tony 13:02, 20 December 2006 (UTC)
- It's Rodney Marks (astrophysicist), Peta - thanks for looking. I cleaned it up extensively, but when I first encountered it (via a backlink to Tourette syndrome), it was very weasly, and claiming murder and some sort of US complicity, which doesn't seem supported by the references. I don't know the Australian sources, so don't know how good the refs are. The original author says murder is the most likely scenario, but I didn't find the references saying that. Sandy (Talk) 13:10, 20 December 2006 (UTC)
- I left more comments on the talk page, but I'm hoping you will have heard of this case, as there are several areas of concern in the article - statements that don't appear to be supported by the sources. Sandy (Talk) 13:38, 20 December 2006 (UTC)
a request from User: Vaoverland
Hi! I have been busy working on Wikipedia: WikiProject Virginia and several other projects with User: No1lakersfan most of this past year, partially in preparation amd supprt of the Jamestown 2007 event. He is now a high school senior hopping to gain admittance to one of Virginia's public university for the Fall 2007 semester. Following advice, he has done maintenance and reference adding work, as well spending time on articles. He is a good collaborator and I believe he would enhance our efforts with WP as an administrator and use the additional tools and powers wisely. Since you know me from our past communications, I wanted to request that you consider entering a vote, hopefully in support, if you agree with my judgment and recommendation at Wikipedia:Requests for adminship/No1lakersfan 2.
- Please feel free to communicate with me on my Talk page at User talk: Vaoverland if you have any questions or reservations. Best wishes for a safe and happy holiday season. Thanks, Mark in Historic Triangle of Virginia Vaoverland 23:21, 20 December 2006 (UTC)
dyk
Its backlogged.Bakaman 18:35, 29 December 2006 (UTC)
I noticed that this "article" has been prod'd. It isn't really an article, just a list of merge tags...thought it might interest you. Guettarda 21:46, 29 December 2006 (UTC)
Religious Perspectives on Dinosaurs
Hello, I'm leaving you this message because I notice you've made at least one edit to the Wikipedia article Religious perspectives on dinosaurs. The article has recently been nominated for deletion from Wikipedia, and there is considerable support for that position.
I'm hoping you'll help me support the continued existence of the Religious perspectives on dinosaurs article by registering a keep vote on the article's request for deletion page. The article contains some good information, and represents an unobtrusive way to present notable minority viewpoints about dinosaurs that cannot be elaborated on in the parent article. It shouldn't be deleted simply because it isn't "scientific."
DYK
Backlogged.Bakaman 22:49, 1 January 2007 (UTC)
Changing Images
Hi, why are you changing my image tags. They are fairinunse, they have a source and rationale and for some reason your deleting them. Why? Scorpio80 09:49, 2 January 2007 (UTC)
Germany FAC
Hi, I have tried to address the concerns you listed on the German FAC page. I could not act on all your suggestions, but I tried to do my best. Could you please take a look and say what you think. TSO1D 01:24, 3 January 2007 (UTC)
- Ok, I merged science and technology with culture. It's just a small paragraph in the middle of that section now. I gave more reasons for that on the FAC page. What about education though? You said that it should be merged, however I just don't see where. And I think it's a pretty useful and well-cited bit of text that is very relevant to Germany. What do you think? TSO1D 15:57, 3 January 2007 (UTC)
- I also added some references, and made other parts more compact, as you suggested. TSO1D 01:15, 5 January 2007 (UTC)
Old Sewall Wright page, prior to 4 January 2006
Hello Petaholmes! This log entry indicates you may be the administrator who deleted an old page on [1] on 4 Jan '06 to facilitate a merge with a better version that was then called Sewall G. Wright. On User_talk:Felsenst I noticed a question about some good stuff on the old page, and I thought the response that someone had provided to his question wouldn't work, I wonder if you could give me back the old text of the Jan-4 deleted page to look at? If you believe it is sensitive, you could send it to me by email. User:Felsenst is the real-life Joe Felsenstein from Univ of Washington, who we already have an article on. Since I assume the deletion was just part of a merger, this would not have been a controversial deletion. Thanks, EdJohnston 02:11, 3 January 2007 (UTC)
- Thanks again! EdJohnston 02:26, 3 January 2007 (UTC)
history of natural history
Peta, do you have any insight into the history of our understanding of the natural history of Australia? I've been reading some papers on phytogeography, and I don't know how old is too old. I know that Burbidge was working from the land bridges hypothesis, as were Johnson and Briggs in the sixties. But some later papers work from an assumption of continental drift, but I don't know if their concept of it is consistent with modern understanding. I don't want to make a fool of us all by adding outdated information. Can I assume that Flora of Australia 1 (1981) is working from a modern understanding of the natural history of Australia? How about Groves (1994), Australian Vegetation? How new does a paper have to be in order not to be out of date? Hesperian 11:49, 3 January 2007 (UTC)
- Thanks for that. It was the edit history of Natural history of Australia that led me to you (although I knew you would be behind it before I had even looked ;-) ). Hesperian 23:51, 4 January 2007 (UTC)
- Very much appreciated. That sounds okay, as I'm looking at biogeography (i.e. phytogeography) rather than natural history per se. I'll try to dig one up. Thanks again. Hesperian 00:24, 5 January 2007 (UTC)
Science Collaboration of the Month
| File:Chemistry-stub.png | As a regular contributor to Science Collaboration of the Month, we thought you might like to know that the current collaboration is
You are receiving this message because your username is listed on our list of regulars. To stop receiving these messages, simply remove your name! |
NCurse work 09:36, 4 January 2007 (UTC)
Hello Sir. I was not editorializing. This is true. Perhaps you could help me edit the article so that we can find a better place to put it. Thanks.
Flatbreads vs. Unleavened breads
As you have many thousand more edits than I, I turn to you for advice. I have been doing bunches of editing in the bread sections of wikipedia, including proposing and merging unleavened bread into flatbread, and subsequently, proposing merging the category for unleavened breads into the category for flatbreads.
It is obvious that a merge needs to happen, but more unclear than I thought which direction it needs to happen. I merged unleavened bread into flatbread because in American English unleavened bread has a distinctly religious connotation whereas flatbread refers to breads which are made without yeast in general. Trying to find online British dictionaries, it seems that is not the case. Looking through wikipedia policy on the matter, it looks like the jury is still out on which brand of English wins out. Does flatbread have a different (or any?) meaning in international English?
The other reason I thought to change it to flatbread is that there are many more links to flatbread than there are to unleavened bread as well as more articles in the category of flatbreads than there are in unleavened breads.
So, I guess I was wondering what the proper procedure is. I suppose I would continue to advocate for the original proposal, but wouldn't be crushed if it went the other direction. Thoughts? --Nleamy 07:01, 5 January 2007 (UTC)
SMH
Peta—Did you see the article? You're quoted by name; I'm quoted without name (not quite what I said, though). Tony 07:08, 7 January 2007 (UTC)
- Indeed, Page 22 of Spectrum in the SMH, well done. You can now claim notability and get yourself an article ;) --Steve (Slf67) talk 23:12, 7 January 2007 (UTC)
- I'll see if I can get a friend there to send me electronic copy, which I'll forward. Tony 00:27, 8 January 2007 (UTC)
- No, but my apparent comment on "bitchiness" was printed, fortunately without my name! Tony 00:48, 8 January 2007 (UTC)
- Here for something else - somebody clue me in ?? SandyGeorgia (Talk) 01:24, 8 January 2007 (UTC)
- No, but my apparent comment on "bitchiness" was printed, fortunately without my name! Tony 00:48, 8 January 2007 (UTC)
- I'll see if I can get a friend there to send me electronic copy, which I'll forward. Tony 00:27, 8 January 2007 (UTC)
Old habits
Peta, old habits die hard? :-) Remember to use the new FAR template (rather than FARC) on nominations - everything didn't get redirected properly in all the different places, so I moved the FARC to FAR. Best, SandyGeorgia (Talk) 01:24, 8 January 2007 (UTC)
Fair use image
You tagged Magic Kingdom - Mickey Mouse Music Revue poster.jpg with the no fair use template. Two things: you didn't notify me as it states to do in the template and what about the rest of the images in Category:Disney Theme Park posters? They are all in the same situation. I'll be updating the image with fair use text. --blm07 23:15, 8 January 2007 (UTC)
This issue has been brought up at Wikipedia:WikiProject Disney. blm07 01:56, 9 January 2007 (UTC)
Deleted image: Pentagon precollapse
Hi, you deleted Pentagon precollapse.jpg. Why didn't you tell me you had deleted it? Please don't just delete something someone puts on wikipedia, allow them time (and knowlege) to properly source it or change it before deciding to delete. Also, you said it violated OR - but its not my picture, and I gave the link to where I found it. Please undelete it and propose it for non-speedy deletion. Fresheneesz 02:45, 9 January 2007 (UTC)
- You still should have notified me. It was on the page The Pentagon before it was admittedly erroneously removed. Is this enough reason to undelete it? Fresheneesz 03:09, 9 January 2007 (UTC)
- I've tried to find a PD image of a good precollapse picture, but very few precollapse pictures are available. Also, for all I know, the image is in the PD (but probably not). Anyway, that picture is quite original and informative and something equivalent to it should be on wikipedia. Fresheneesz 03:13, 9 January 2007 (UTC)
- Actually, this page (http://www.cooperativeresearch.org/context.jsp?item=a1015pentagoncollapse) suggests that Jason Ingersoll released his pictures from that day to the public ___domain. This page (911review.com) says the image I uploaded came from Jason Ingersoll at 10:05am. Fresheneesz 03:23, 9 January 2007 (UTC)
Australia
You removed an interwiki link to the Lojban page in this edit. I assume you were just trying to revert the anon vandalism, and have restored the link. Chovain 23:32, 9 January 2007 (UTC)
Rename
As requested, I have changed your username. You can now log in to the renamed account. You may also like to recreate User:Petaholmes and request that the account be blocked, in order to prevent impersonation. Warofdreams talk 02:41, 10 January 2007 (UTC)
- Great - I didn't realise that the system now checks for former account names. This means that there is no need to recreate the old account or request a block. Warofdreams talk 03:13, 10 January 2007 (UTC)
- Welcome to the cowards club ;-) And about time too. Hesperian 06:19, 10 January 2007 (UTC)
importance to expand
I know there is a big list of articles in the NN categories, but I do not think, that moving articles from {{importance}} to {{expand}} is going to help. I am sorry, I am moving a whole bunch back. These articles are noteworthy (there is much info on them available), but do lack statements of importance (a requirement, stated in the text in the importance tag), the expand category is already covered by the stub-tag. --Dirk Beetstra T C 08:08, 10 January 2007 (UTC)
- I'm sorry, this sounds a bit frustrated. My excuses. It is just that people keep changing tags without a discussion. But let met expand a bit on this. The articles are stubby articles in the chemistry field. Most are simple, binary compound, I recognise many as very common starting materials in synthetic chemistry, or compounds closely related/similar to the mineral forms. Which makes these compounds notable, indeed. But, these articles are very small stubs, they do not tell why these are notable compounds. The stub (and hence expand) marks are in place, but since these articles are lacking any statement about why they are notable, they carry a notability-tag. They do not carry the {{nn}} (which would question their notability directly), they carry the {{importance}}, which implies non-notability, but states 'This article lacks information on the notability (importance) of the subject matter.', which is just the question that we are addressing here. I have, earlier in a similar discussion, asked the question, if the importance-tag needed grouping per discipline, but that was not a good idea (apparently). They have now been grouped by date, I guess that is a reasonable solution to make the NN-category more easy to handle.
- Still, a specialist in the field will have to go through all these articles, and decide whether these articles are notable (my expert guess is that at least 95% is), and tell why. But removing the importance-tag from the articles, does not make them suddenly notable, for that data has to be added, or maybe, the article is not important enough, and has to be AfD-d. I hope this explains. See you around! --Dirk Beetstra T C 08:39, 10 January 2007 (UTC)
- As I said earlier, the expand is already there in the stub. It may be that the importance tag is anti-social, but that is then in the text on the tag. And for wasting time, that goes both ways, we could have just been expanding articles without just retagging them twice. I am sorry. Happy editing. --Dirk Beetstra T C 22:51, 10 January 2007 (UTC)
Complaint
So you are an admin. OK. Where do I make a complaint about (1) your high handed deletion of the Ron Delezio article (2) your abuse of me about posting to your "sock puppet-like" old talk pages when all I was doing was clicking on your own links. Albatross2147 23:35, 11 January 2007 (UTC)
- I have restored the Ron Delezio article. Thank you for your guidance as to how it should be done. However I feel that you have demonstrated by your actions and statements (specifically I am an editor; I can make decisions. I don't need permission.) that you are unsuitable to be an Admin. Accordingly I would like to make a complaint about you and have your Adminship reconsidered. Where can I do this? Albatross2147 00:19, 12 January 2007 (UTC)
Who
- The name change has more to do with denying the amount of time I have spent on wp; now I look at my page and don't realise its me :) Anyway I'll finally get to the gardens next week since there is a herp show on; so I'll get the epica pictures are there any other banksia articles that need pics? --Peta 23:54, 11 January 2007 (UTC)
- I can identify with that :-) And I don't have half your edit count!
- What the heck is a "herp show"? I'm thinking (a) misspelling of "herb"; (b) herpetofauna, but why in a botanic garden?; (c) no idea.
- Oh gosh yes. There are about forty taxa we haven't got images for yet. There's a list at Wikipedia:WikiProject Banksia/Article notes#Species, subspecies and varieties. And the images we have are mostly of inflorescences, so you can't go wrong with photos of foliage, overall form, etc.
- Thanks, Hesperian 00:13, 12 January 2007 (UTC)
I added some references to the Ron Delezio article. Fundraising for charity (which is why Ron Delezio is the subject of media coverage) can be a notable activity. --TruthbringerToronto (Talk | contribs) 04:03, 12 January 2007 (UTC)
Wikipedia Fungus Collaboration as of Jan 2007
DYK there are no fungal Featured Articles on wikipedia at all? I've modelled this on the dinosaur collaboration which has yielded a few FAs. Please have a look and cast your vote and we'll try a concerted attempt at an FA. I figure your knowledge of the calculated work to go into an FA combined with an idea of what would be the best to work on would be good to get an idea. Link here......Fungi Collaboration
Hello. I'm not sure what your comment, "rm idoting cat", means.
I tagged this article specifically to populate the Fauna of Connecticut category. It may be a widespread species, but I am trying to define all of the fauna and flora of Connecticut (and thus have something to write about in the articles proper) by populating their respective categories. I was fascinated to discover that this species was anywhere near Connecticut, where I reside, and it motivated me to learn more about it. I do not see what harm it does to include this category tag, and there are plenty of other articles with many, many categories listed. Lastly, I do not know just how far this species roams, but, IMHO, it would only increase the quality of the article, and Wikipedia as a whole, to define such things. -- StAkAr Karnak 15:00, 12 January 2007 (UTC)
Aquinas & PSA Articles - Your AfD Proposal
Hey, u probarbly know me from Hesp. But anywho, I am just enquiring as to what exactly was wrong with the PSA Sports pages and the Aquinas daughter articles (if you AfD them aswell) you cited WP:NOT but what can be done to make them better or anything - you didnt quite explain about that and i am quite annoyed as to why i didnt get any warning or any notice from you or anything at all to explain it apart from WP: Not. Please clarify, thanks Smbarnzy 14:54, 13 January 2007 (UTC)
This month's MCB Collaboration of the Month article is Peripheral membrane protein!
| Peripheral membrane protein The Molecular and Cellular Biology WikiProject's current Collaboration of the Month article is Peripheral membrane protein. |
Building block theory
I wanted to tell you that I removed your prod from Building block theory. I'm curious to see if anyone else thinks it could be worth expanding—and as such, I think it should go through a normal AfD. Sorry for the inconvenience. CRGreathouse (t | c) 23:14, 14 January 2007 (UTC)
Trans fat FAC
Hi there Peta. Thanks for your comments about Trans fat. I have a few clarification questions that I've posted over at the FAC page. I would particularly appreciate your feedback on a proposal to fix the organization that's (currently) at the bottom of that page. -- cmhTC 13:48, 19 January 2007 (UTC)
FAR Protocols
When you submit an article to Wikipedia:Featured article review, as you did with Carl Sagan, please consider messaging the concerned projects and users, as written in the submitting instructions. I have done this for you in this case, but when many are submitted on the same day, it creates a lot of work for me. Thanks, Jeffpw 09:58, 22 January 2007 (UTC)
Article names for baronets
Hi PDH, I have moved John Eardley-Wilmot, 1st Baronet back to Sir John Eardley-Wilmot, 1st Baronet and also moved John Eardley-Wilmot, 2nd Baronet back to Sir John Eardley-Wilmot, 2nd Baronet, reverting your previous move.
As per Wikipedia:Naming conventions (names and titles)#Other_non-royal_names), baronets are an exception to the general principle of not including homorifics in article names. --BrownHairedGirl (talk) • (contribs) 02:18, 25 January 2007 (UTC)
Disambiguation pages
Hi again! Well done adding Edward Wilson (journalist) to the Edward Wilson disambiguation page.
However I just thought I should point you towards WP:MOSDAB, which recommends against piping article links in dab pages: I have tidied up that page (see diff), and thought I shoukd explain why. (It's good guidance, that WP:MOSDAB, and there are a lot of other useful poiunts in it, such as "Each bulleted entry should, in almost every case, have exactly one navigable (blue) link").
Hope this helps :) --BrownHairedGirl (talk) • (contribs) 02:41, 25 January 2007 (UTC)
Tassie devil
My revert of a red linked edit might be wrong, I am not a 100% sure I'd appreciate your checking it when you can, thanks SatuSuro 01:28, 26 January 2007 (UTC)
Sandalwood
A minor issue. Can you check the recent edits here, Sandalwood, and help find an edit that addresses naming of these plants. I think there is something brewing and this is caught up. My interest arises from WA connection. Could the 'english naming' conventions help to resolve this. Refer me on to others or policy if you like. I appreciate your contrib'ns to Australian stuff, now that I have been referred here. Fred 04:39, 26 January 2007 (UTC)
Your opinion on a threat made to me
A user by the name of Benjiwolf sent me this threat to have me banned. As far as I can see Benjiwolf is not an Sysop/Administator and could not ban me. Have a read of the threat and see if you think it is credible or if it is just someone trying to intimidate me. Advice on what to do would also be apreciated. Benjiwolf post
Stephen Jay Gould
The picture in Introduction to Evolution of Stephen Jay Gould seems to meet the license criteria. It has survived on the Stephen Jay Gould Wiki entry . Am I missing something or should it be deleted there as well? --Random Replicator 21:37, 29 January 2007 (UTC)
- Same confusion over Theodosius Dobzhansky photo and use in the Introduction to Evolution entry. --Random Replicator 21:46, 29 January 2007 (UTC)
Mallee
Evening,
If I may lean on you for some assistance once again, I have just posted Mallee (biogeographic region), having put quite a lot of time and effort into getting it structurally about right, so that I can base further articles on IBRA regions on it. Would you mind having a look and giving your opinion. I'm not really interested in spelling errors or poor expression (although by all means point them out or fix them yourself). I'm more interested in whether you think anything is missing or redundant; section headings, structure and ordering; categories; the title disambiguation; anything else you can think of that I would wish had been bedded down before I create another 50 articles like this one.
Thanks, Hesperian 12:34, 31 January 2007 (UTC)
- P.S. There's no need to suggest the article needs a map. I know; I'm working on it. Hesperian 12:47, 31 January 2007 (UTC)
It's evolved quite a bit in the last few days, and seems to have settled into a nice structure. I'm pretty happy with it now, so if you're busy or not much interested, don't put yourself out. Hesperian 12:17, 3 February 2007 (UTC)
- Thanks for that. I'm pretty happy with it now, except that I'm still trying to figure out how to turn my spatial data into a pretty picture. Hesperian 00:31, 5 February 2007 (UTC)
Andrew Jaspan
Which parts of the Andrew Jaspan article do you feel are in need of verification or correction? Ringbark 22:52, 31 January 2007 (UTC)
Science Collaboration of the Month
| File:Chemistry-stub.png | As a regular contributor to Science Collaboration of the Month, we thought you might like to know that the current collaboration is
You are receiving this message because your username is listed on our list of regulars. To stop receiving these messages, simply remove your name! |
Deletion Review
An editor has asked for a deletion review of Robert Benfer. Since you closed the deletion discussion for this article or speedy-deleted it, you might want to participate in the deletion review. Esn 04:48, 2 February 2007 (UTC)
Maybe leaving?
My best friend on Wikipedia just left & I'm kinda depressed. Don't know if I'm gonna stay here. All my "friends" never message me cause they're all too busy. I've just realised nobody likes me on here anyway, so what's the point of staying. Just letting you all know. I know you never really liked me, cause everytime I'd leave a message you'd never reply, so it doesn't matter. It's okay. Don't know what I'm doing right now, so yeah, I don't know... Spawn Man 07:25, 3 February 2007 (UTC)
Unspecified source for Image:Tuatara Hamilton Zoo.jpg
Thanks for uploading Image:Tuatara Hamilton Zoo.jpg. I noticed that the file's description page currently doesn't specify who created the content, so the copyright status is unclear. If you did not create this file yourself, then you will need to specify the owner of the copyright. If you obtained it from a website, then a link to the website from which it was taken, together with a restatement of that website's terms of use of its content, is usually sufficient information. However, if the copyright holder is different from the website's publisher, then their copyright should also be acknowledged.
As well as adding the source, please add a proper copyright licensing tag if the file doesn't have one already. If you created/took the picture, audio, or video then the {{GFDL-self}} tag can be used to release it under the GFDL. If you believe the media meets the criteria at Wikipedia:Fair use, use a tag such as {{fairusein|article name}} or one of the other tags listed at Wikipedia:Image copyright tags#Fair use. See Wikipedia:Image copyright tags for the full list of copyright tags that you can use.
If you have uploaded other files, consider checking that you have specified their source and tagged them, too. You can find a list of files you have uploaded by following this link. Unsourced and untagged images may be deleted one week after they have been tagged, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If the image is copyrighted under a non-free license (per Wikipedia:Fair use) then the image will be deleted 48 hours after 14:05, 5 February 2007 (UTC). If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you. —Angr 14:05, 5 February 2007 (UTC)
Years
 2006 in Australia:
|
| Other years |
| 2004 | 2005 | 2006 | 2007 | 2008 |
| By month |
| Jan - Feb - Mar - Apr - May - Jun Jul - Aug - Sep - Oct - Nov - Dec |
| By topic |
| politics - music - sport |
| By state |
| ACT - NSW - NT - Qld - SA - Tas - WA - Vic |
Yes, the {{yearbox}} is deplorable. Why not rip off the UK box? Something like this: Hesperian 11:00, 7 February 2007 (UTC)
- I'm pretty good with template code, and am happy to help out there, but I'm crap at the graphic design aspect. If you want help deciding what should go in it and how it should be laid out, I recommend cj as someone worth talking to. Longhair is also good, although personally I sometimes find his navigation boxes rather dense (in the "information per square centimetre" sense)- I guess my tastes are more... austere. Hesperian 11:28, 7 February 2007 (UTC)
this user has taken up defending a possible GM & big agro lobbiest
this user apparently is pro-GE tech...which i am as well...yet this user seems to agree with blankings and removals of counter arguments to GE tech...which i think is a wrong move...other users have tried to show that farmers may have been wrongly sued for GE crop pollen drifting to their land ( i wasnt the user that added these things, yet thought them a reasonable addition) and this user apparently feels we should hide that...another user has consistently just editted the GE pages and pesticide pages mainly removing any claims that may present a negative view even when these claims are referenced...i will look over this users contribs to see just where hes coming from...Benjiwolf 19:55, 7 February 2007 (UTC)
Hi, Peta; can you have a fresh look at Kakapo? I know it will need a copyedit, but before asking someone to put out the effort, I want to see if everything else is getting closer to "Keep" territory. There is new text and referencing work; if the article is improved enough, I can put out some requests for a copyedit. SandyGeorgia (Talk) 23:15, 7 February 2007 (UTC)
- Update on Kakapo sanctuaries. I got your message in the article's talk page. I looked again to one of 2006 papers about Kakapo and you are right. I have updated that four Kakapo sanctuary islands are Maud, Chalky (Te Kakahu), Codfish (Whenua Hou) and Anchor islands. Thanks. — Indon (reply) — 11:08, 8 February 2007 (UTC)
Good on you
There seems to be a complete absence of earlier problems around the placce- theres nothin on the pre alcoa take over of the darling scarp resistance here for instance - unfortunately its a regional thing - i'm good on west coast tas - but i was never a lonnie persson - (ie north/launceston) except for one wedding (theyve since divorced) - might have something but a bit short of the dollar on detail... unfortunately - 01:41, 8 February 2007 (UTC)
- Didnt meant say I wouldtn try to find stuff though - the perspecctive of being 50 + yr old on this wiki train - is memory of the issue you asked about was vitally important at the time in internal tasmanian state politics regardding the context of the green vvote and the dynamics of the state politicisns of the time (the recent abc radio national series on premiers past had vital points in it about what was happening... I unfortnuately or fortunately only knew field personally - that was enough :) )- and the relationship with business vis a vis current premiers probable links with gunns is and was important as tas state politics is more linked to what some historians or anthropologists would term as patron client relationships rather than anything to do with mainlanders notions of democracy (but dont quote me) SatuSuro 03:13, 8 February 2007 (UTC)
Kakapo map
Hi Peta - could be difficuolt to update that map, given that the islands are scattered all around NZ's coast. It might mean starting from scratch with it. I'll have a think about it and see what i can come up with. Is Chalky Island still a Kakapo sanctuary? Grutness...wha? 06:31, 8 February 2007 (UTC)
ttguy
any editor can make comments on anothers page if they see persistent patterns...and flagging another user for a blanking behavior is not "making threats"...just as some of his edits may be worthwhile doesnt mean he is not making many other edits that are questionable...i do feel ur behavior of telling ttguy to "report it here" was a threat however to try and eliminate any criticism of his edits...in any case my feelings are that he is oftentimes a reasonable editor...yet he is as i said an editor of narrow focus and he only tends to remove criticism of GM issues...he does not remove pro-GM statements...and his putting on a biography page "this scientist is a vivisectionist"...was a ridiculous smear...almost all scientists have at some point carried out a vivisection experiment...in fact most all american citizens have dissected frogs or cats in high school even...i could put "this person is a vivisectionist" on half the bios on wikipedia...ttguy has some very very questionable edits and he has removed criticisms of herbicides, pesticides, or some GM tech that were fully referenced, and even the articles they were referenced to were further referenced themselves to specific scientific studies...wiping clean all criticisms so that only the product manufacturers' descriptions and accolades stand is pathetic...and as i said just serves to further polarize the two sides...the other side becomes even more distrustful and suspicious when their critical comments are blanked and silenced...Benjiwolf 09:06, 8 February 2007 (UTC)
Great Walk Networking
You're more lenient than I - I was itching towards outright deletion for being nothing more than self-promotion. Thanks for your input. -- Longhair\talk 09:44, 8 February 2007 (UTC)
- I've been at them for a few days now requesting cites on notabililty. Let;s allow the AfD to run its' course. I don't want to push them into a corner and feel the wrath of a mob of angry bushwalkers thrust upon me. -- Longhair\talk 09:56, 8 February 2007 (UTC)
- OR tws founding members like me ; ) SatuSuro 09:58, 8 February 2007 (UTC)
- PDH I wont digress with too much autbiographical detail this time :) - but there is a big hole in the wa project at the moment regarding significant groups, people and issues - and the great walk issue is one which shows - very serious issues as there are few third party items about most of the groups I am in the process of creating stubs for - (I mean look at Tasmanian Conservation Trust - ...as an example of elsewhere V, N ? ...) but the impact on Perth - the local politics and newspapers and the consequent responses by the state government and alcoa and the woodchip companies are a huge piece of western australian history ( I think it was all happening at the time of the years just before the procreation of the average wikipedia editor - or while they were still in nappies ...:) ) - just like the tasmanian issues that I was talking about yesterday - and usually mainlanders (for tass issues) or you tothersiders (for wa issues) dont always get a handle on the issue easily! I will try to get a longer email in by end of weekend on some of the logistsic to you and longhair about all of this - Please note - I am not trying to contest the COI issue - there are indeed important points about that - I am trying to signal that there are things in west australian and tasmanian history that consumed local politics and peoples lives that do have for a range of strange quirks - limited materials in the area that you and longhair may want to see for V and N - and I'm prepared to go to some length to explain if need be. You can always ask for a rest - and I'll get back later :) SatuSuro 23:46, 8 February 2007 (UTC)
Wesley Clark
Replied to your image notes. Staxringold talkcontribs 02:11, 9 February 2007 (UTC)
Sound samples
Can I give you a flippant answer? Let's get around to dealing with unfree sound samples when we clean up the hundreds of thousands of images we're not commenting upon and have no verifiable copyright information for. Seriously, if they're around twenty seconds and they're being used to actually demonstrate the sound of the music, we're just on such better footing that I really don't pay any attention to them. Obviously, we can't be republishing anything someone could conceivably otherwise pay for, and there must be some point at which we say "that's too many", but, in general, people just don't go crazy with them. Jkelly 04:18, 9 February 2007 (UTC)
- I forgot to mention that I don't think that they get used by mirrors, but I really don't know. It's an interesting question. It's hard to imagine them wanting to deal with ogg files. Jkelly 04:24, 9 February 2007 (UTC)
Image request
send me all material you have to make a substitut of (Image:Sarracenia flower notitles.svg) and also the links of those images you want to substitut with no copyrigthed ones. that time you wrote me i couldnt fiind wichone you ment-LadyofHats 09:26, 9 February 2007 (UTC)
Fair Use help needed
Wikipedia:Featured article review/B movie SandyGeorgia (Talk) 17:06, 9 February 2007 (UTC)
Aaron Sorkin at FAC
Hello. I've tackled the issues you brought up about the Aaron Sorkin article. Would you mind either reinforcing your opposition to the Aaron Sorkin article on the FAC page, or striking out your opposition in favor of a Support?-BiancaOfHell 22:56, 10 February 2007 (UTC)
Re: Long time, no write
Hi Peta – sorry for my belated response. It's nice to hear from you :). I'd be happy to attempt a template for the Years in Australia series (some sort of succession template ought to do), though I'm cautious about deviating from the standard and it'd have to wait awhile. I've implemented a quick fix to {{Lighthouses of Victoria}}, which seems a superfluous template with only three linked articles. It'd be great to finally include an anniversaries section on P:AU – if you can check the days over, it could go on pretty much straight away. About 4-5 entries per day sounds like a fair size. I've been a bit slack with the portal lately, but I've been meaning to give it a face lift, so I could aim to have that done by the end of this month to 'relaunch' on 1 March with days in Australia included.--cj | talk 00:38, 11 February 2007 (UTC) PS: I forgot to compliment you on your new username – it's very succinct. I like it ;-).--cj | talk 00:42, 11 February 2007 (UTC)
Benjiwolf again
Peta, I am wondering if you can help out again with some issues with the Benjiwolf character. I want to report this guy for disruptive editing.
I have been working a bit on the Glyphosate article and have requested citations be provided for some to the claims that suggest that Glyphosate is highly toxic. Benjiwolf performed this edit on this work on 5th Feb [[2]]. This reverted some work of mine to put some perspective on the Glyphosate toxicity and also deleted {{fact}} tags . After explaining my reasoning on the Talk page [3] I put the {{fact}} tags back in [4]
Then on 10th Feb Benjiwolf peforms this [5] edit which again deleted my request for citations. Benjiwolf cunningly disguises the deletion of my fact tags by calling this edit "revert to last edit feb 6 / 9:37 by ttguy"
I have asked for references to back up these claims on Talk:Glyphosate#citations needed with disucssion continuing under Talk:Glyphosate#contentious???. I have also asked for Benjiwolfs cooperation on his talk page (11 Feb)
I have pointed him to Wikipedia policy pages - eg on this [6] edit I mention Wikipedia:Verifiability.
Dispite all this he has just come back with this [[7]] edit which he has labled as "removing vandalism" . As you can see he has deleted good faith edits which attempt to put the toxicity of glyphosate in context and has again dropped off {{fact}} tags where we could reasonably expect a citation to provide verifiability of claims. This is really starting to cheese me off. There is no way the edit I made is vandalism.
I have looked at the page on dealing with disruptive editors Dealing with disruptive editors which recomends the following - and I think I am up to number 4. But I note that a Request for Comment on a user wants you to have tried to have more than one editor resolve the dispute on the Talk page. So what I am asking is for you to try and talk some sense into the Benjiwolf person for me. My feeling is it will do no good but it is worth a shot. He seems to generate a bit of heat where ever he goes this guy judging by other peoples gripes on his talk page.
- From Dealing with disruptive editors
- 1. Assume good faith. Do not attack the author whom you suspect is a crank. However, revert uncited or unencyclopedic material. Use an edit summary which describes the problem in non-inflammatory terms.
- 2. If editor unreverts.
- Post to talk page asking for discussion and/or sources. Revert again if no response, along with edit summary.
- 3. Problems continue.
- Attempt to engage new editor in dialog. Refer to policies and guidelines as appropriate.
- 4. Talk page discussion fails to resolve the problem.
- Request an Wikipedia:Requests for comment or other impartial dispute resolution.
Your help would be appreciated. Ttguy 12:47, 12 February 2007 (UTC)
Hi there! I am actually going to start putting up ttguy up for repeated vandalism. He is continously removing factual material that is referenced. He keeps making new excuses as his last excuses fail. I have added several things to the glyphosate page. I have added information from several perspectives and i have added pro-monsanto statements and links to their home page. I have tried to maintain balance. TTguy repeatedly removes referenced material and i have asked him several times to stop. He will not comply. The latest incident happened when he removed a statement concerning glyphosate poisonings in Japan. The material was already in a reference. He removed it. Then i added as well an additional reference right next to the sentence. He tried to removed this. Now he is trying to remove other references so he can delete text. This is deliberate vandalism from a lobbiest. The page should maintain material from the pro-monsanto lobby (the product manufacturers) and people like ttguy. I myself have added information supportive of them. Yet as well this page can have info from sources that are not 100% in line with the product manufacturers line on glyphosate...i no longer consider his edits to be good faith...he has also smeared a scientist with "she is a vivisectionist"...this is ridiculous as almost every person in america has done experiments on ants, worms, frogs, whether living or dead...attack her on her science and not with pathetic smears ttguy...i can go thru half the scientist pages on wikipedia and add "this scientist is a vivisectionist"...some of ttguys edits are good faith...yet many are in bad faith as he has been called out with what he has been doing: repeatedly removing referenced material or placing "fact" citations next to sentences when it is all clearly in the references...to then try and remove the references themselves is even worse bad faith...as of this i have now started a policy of no longer adding material to the page from monsantos perspective unless his blanking behavior stops...i am forced into taking one side as of his clear lobbiest editting...Benjiwolf 16:31, 12 February 2007 (UTC)
Deprod comment
Hi, I've deprodded Cornucopia Institute. Even though it seemed unlikely, there's plenty of press coverage for it. --Mereda 14:16, 12 February 2007 (UTC)
Racism CfD
Your link to the noticeboard was self referential back to the CfD. Can you check I relinked it to what I think you intended. --Steve (Slf67) talk 23:58, 12 February 2007 (UTC)
Peter Jennings images
Hey there. Per your comments, I removed many of the FU images (the whole FU thing is so confusing to me...I wish Wikipedia had just not allowed FU images from the start, and then taken things on a case-by-case basis [such images of paintings]). I do believe though, that the TV screenshot meets FU 8: it's his last ever television broadcast, when he was quite sick and it was pretty eventful. However, if you still believe it fails FU 8, let me know and I'll remove it. Gzkn 07:16, 13 February 2007 (UTC)
style
i am an aggressive arguer, yet really the only editor i have come to strong disagreement in my hundreds upon hundreds of edits on a wide variety of pages: is ttguy and his editing style...anyways my strong wording is not indicative of my needing to "cool down"...i can be perfectly calm and even with a big smile yet argue my position very strongly...anyways...i stand by my calling several of Ttguys edits as "pathetic" edits...he has made several pathetic edits and in bad faith as a lobbiest, and i have not run across another editor like him in the many many i have come across...yet i have told him i think he is a decent guy, has made some good edits, and can in some cases be a valuable contributer to wikipedia, yet he would be much more valuable if he used talk pages and didnt just blank referenced material, and if he came to a more neutral position on the topics he mainly at this point just edits (herbicide/pesticide/GM crops pages)...yet when he blanks and removes references, strong language is needed when confronting a manufacturers lobbiest...he needs to come to a position of adding his own material supportive of his industry position, instead of removing other editors referenced material...i support any editor removing unreliable extremist material no matter which side they are on... yet he has repeatedly just done harm to several pages by removing valid, referenced material to further a manufacturing position silencing any material not flattering of the products...i strongly stand by my use of calling such edits "pathetic"...yet i have told him that i value his editing on these few pages he edits as the manufacturers position should be represented, but he needs to change the way he edits to using talk pages more before blanking, and not removing referenced material and reading thru the references more...if he had simply read thru the references most of this argument between him and I would not be taking place...and last on the glyphosate page i told him he needs to start bringing in his own studies and material to support monsantos positions...that material is out there...monsanto has carried out many studies supporting its positions...Benjiwolf 10:03, 13 February 2007 (UTC)
Philip Sharp and Philip Sharp (football referee): disambiguation
Hi, and thanks very much for sorting out the disambig on these. I am fairly new to Wikipedia, and have still to get my head round it all as of yet! Best wishes Refsworldlee(chew-fat)(eds) 12:54, 13 February 2007 (UTC)
plant morphology
here you got the diagram, do you also need the diagram of the parts of a flower or not?-LadyofHats 19:38, 13 February 2007 (UTC)
RNAi FAC
FYI, I moved RNA interference to FAC here, so please continue with any further comments/criticisms/glowing praise there ;) Opabinia regalis 06:19, 14 February 2007 (UTC)
It looks like right after you unblocked him, he went and added his photos to Sting and Bruce Springsteen, still without changing the licenses. He hasn't responded to the messages left for him, and he deletes the OrphanBot messages. I don't think he's interested in freely-licensing his photos; he's just looking for free advertising. Maybe you can do something about this? —Chowbok ☠ 16:37, 14 February 2007 (UTC)
Chaco
Hi, PDH. You commented about the lack of a "Park management" section, but the FAC was closed before I had time to respond. I've just added one now, though. Sorry for the delay. Saravask 05:01, 17 February 2007 (UTC)
Anne C. Lynch Botta
Hi, I'm just curious why you felt that all the "italics in quotes" needed to be changed in the Anne C. Lynch Botta article. I feel it makes the quotes stand out more, therefor making the article more visually appealing and interesting. Just curious, Thanks Epousesquecido 18:38, 19 February 2007 (UTC)
Aussie anthem lyrics
I written to the Australian Consulate in Los Angeles, seeing if they could shed light on what steps I, and American citizen, could get this issue about the lyrics sorted out. User:Zscout370 (Return Fire) 04:21, 21 February 2007 (UTC)
Environment
Yep. There are a lot of slippery issues here. For starters: what's the difference between an environmentalist (e.g Category:Australian environmentalists) and a conservationist (e.g. Category:Australian conservationists)? Hesperian 00:18, 22 February 2007 (UTC)
- Dont let him start on that :) I was trying to hammer that one out recently on hesps talk page from the perspecctive of the way the cataloguing librarians at NLA have decided to go with that - please note my cut and slap from the category when it was being started on hesps talk page - thanks SatuSuro 00:28, 22 February 2007 (UTC)
- At the risk of being a troublemaker - I really think (i've just put it to hesp) I really think the potential confusion over the use of the words of environment and conservation and all the rogue idiiot articles that seem to litter the landscape - there probably should be a post outlining the issue on the australian noticeboard - at least then no one can be accused of not going to the actual main talk ___location for the issue to be exposed for all its foibles... SatuSuro 00:35, 22 February 2007 (UTC)
Conservation / Environment
Very happy to have some direct input (criticism/guidance) on this if you want to use my talk page. If I've made a mess in my enthusiasm, I'm happy to clean it up. I thought the difference between ecology and environment and conservation was pretty obvious, so I would be interested in what the definitions are in the WP world re Australia. I don't think wanting to ensure an issue is covered makes it in breach of POV, but yes I am interested in seeing WP cover issues relevant to climate change, global warming, how they are caused, Australia's contribution, effects on Australia, possible solutions and fallacies and issues with proposed solutions at the Australian level as well as at the global level.dinghy 15:46, 22 February 2007 (UTC)
- The differences between environment and conservation are obvious, but the difference between environmentalist and conservationist are not. Well, not to me, anyhow. Hesperian 23:17, 22 February 2007 (UTC)
- It is my belief that the australia project has a mess in this area - and requires a project to sort it all out - unfortunately real life prevents me from even thinking about trying to encourage others to set it up - I only hope for the australia project sake that someone bites the bullet and does it before the terminology and apparent issues re cons and eviron dont turn around and bite the project SatuSuro 02:50, 27 February 2007 (UTC)
Effects of global warming on Australia page completely rewritten - 40 references
The article now has over 40 referenced statements and is based largely on a report prepared by Australia's premier scientific research organisation the CSIRO. The referencing of the article now compares very favourably with most other articles I have looked at. The article has no POV. The report on which it is based was prepared for the Business Round Table. It ought not be deleted now, even if it should have been before. Could each person who has recommended deletion please review and reconsider your view. Thanks. dinghy 07:01, 25 February 2007 (UTC)
Currency galleries
I am taking a look through them now. Some of the countries, like Belarus, should be OK. However, I have taken the liberty to remove the fair use photos and anything else that seems strange. I am having folks prune over the Commons and see if the licenses are correct. User:Zscout370 (Return Fire) 02:20, 27 February 2007 (UTC)
Storm
Just heard about the storm. Hope you're well and not too inconvenienced. Hesperian 01:19, 28 February 2007 (UTC)
- Judging by your extended absence, I guess you're well and truly inconvenienced :-( Looking forward to seeing you around here again. Here's something you might be interested in: [8]. Hesperian 00:19, 2 March 2007 (UTC)
Science Collaboration of the month
|
|
You voted for
Please help to improve it to match the quality of an ideal Wikipedia science article. |
Thanks, Peta!
Looking back at this, thanks! --Pete 07:33, 4 March 2007 (UTC)
Hello
Hi Peta. I'm back for more of the usual (No not your witty conversation). Would you be able to dig up any dinosaur or biological PDF files for me from your journal access thingys please? I've kinda run out of things to do & I really want to get writing again. Anything you send me is cool. Thanks Peta... :) Spawn Man 04:12, 5 March 2007 (UTC)
- Or anything to help with my current project - Archaeopteryx. Thanks, Spawn Man 04:30, 6 March 2007 (UTC)
- You can use my email user function - unless there's something I don't know about that I have to send you an email? Regards... Spawn Man 00:13, 7 March 2007 (UTC)
- KK - I'll send one now... :) Spawn Man 00:20, 7 March 2007 (UTC)
On this day
...has gone live on P:AU. Thanks for all the work you put into getting it up to standard. I hope all is well,--cj | talk 23:41, 5 March 2007 (UTC)
AfD
Could you chuck List of Iranian Ambassadors to Australia into that last one. Same author, same lack of notability. --Steve (Slf67) talk 06:17, 7 March 2007 (UTC)
Peta, are you interested in looking at this article? I came across it via a backlink to Tourette syndrome, and it appears to be a massive copyvio from more than one site. Someone else tagged it, not sure what to do next. It needs massive cleanup, but I suppose I shouldn't work on it 'til the copyvio is resolved? SandyGeorgia (Talk) 15:43, 8 March 2007 (UTC)
- Thanks, Peta; someone seems to be working on the copyvio issues, so I'll wait to see how that shakes out before working on cleanup. Best, SandyGeorgia (Talk) 21:38, 8 March 2007 (UTC)
Dryandra
- I split your message because I suspect the latter discussion may continue ;-)
Interesting news about the Dryandra - is it creating a lot of wikiwork? The storm didn't do any damage to me or my work; but my building was closed for a few days :)
- Most of the grunt work is done now; e.g. I've moved all the Dryandra stubs to Banksia. Now comes the hard part. Articles like Banksia and Ecology of Banksia have been completely rescoped and will need to be re-written. Hesperian 01:05, 9 March 2007 (UTC)
Cats and stuff
Anyway I'm here to talk categories; there seems to be a push on cfd to merge flora and fauna cats back into a bigger entity - Europe for example was listed on the 8th; and I think the US has been done already. There also seems to be a move to add endemic to the cats (see Category:Natural history of the Galápagos Islands; its also happening with bird cats); this would clear up some problems (millions of categories on an article), but I think it creates others (native, like in the case of animals in Australian and PNG, and naturalized species etc.). So do you think we should move the Australia cats to Endemic flora/fauna of state? Species with large distribution just get stuck in Mammals of Australia or something similar? Flora seems to be sorted. It's a mess. --Peta 00:38, 9 March 2007 (UTC)
- If you wanted a good rant on this, you've come to the right place. I'm very strongly opposed to it. I don't understand why the unattractiveness of the very bottom of an article trumps having a useful category. There is absolutely no reason why we shouldn't have a Category:Flora of Western Australia, and the most useful conception of that is to include all plant taxa that occur in Western Australia. Of course one doesn't want to include articles like flowering plant; but that is easily solved by including only endemic or lowest rank taxa. i.e. if a taxon occurs both in Western Australia and elsewhere, then you try to untangle that at subtaxon level if possible. e.g. Banksia isn't in Category:Flora of Western Australia because we can cherry-pick the WA Banksia species for that category. And Banksia integrifolia isn't in Category:Flora of Queensland because we can get a more accurate category membership by handling it at subspecies level, i.e. by including B. integrifolia subsp. integrifolia and B. integrifolia subsp. compar, but excluding B. integrifolia subsp. monticola.
- Of course this approach puts cosmopolitan species in lots of categories. I see that as entirely appropriate, even if it is ugly.
- Finally, the question of the size and boundaries of the geographical entities by which we categorise flora is a very thorny one. For botanical purposes, is the flora of Hawaii part of the flora of the U.S.? Should the flora of Macquarie Island be considered part of the flora of Tasmania just because it is politically a part of that state? Fortunately, this can of worms has already been untangled by botanists, resulting in the World Geographical Scheme for Recording Plant Distributions. I feel very strongly that the plants by distribution categories should be following that scheme, rather than the current adhoc/political approach. I have already done so for Category:Flora of Australia and made a start on New Zealand e.g. Category:Flora of the Chatham Islands. But I lack the political nous to convince the rest of Wikipedia to follow my lead.
- Hesperian 01:05, 9 March 2007 (UTC)
- I can second this - maybe not with eastern states but Flora of Tassie and WA are highliy importnat categories ecologically and quite distinctive. I can't see why they are picking on biology pages, some like George W. Bush have a helluva lot more categories.cheers, Casliber | talk | contribs 01:14, 9 March 2007 (UTC)