User talk:Shyamal

Push to talk Private email

Kalidasa

Hi. Please see my note at Talk:Kalidasa albiflos. This may be something to discuss. Dyanega (talk) 17:12, 2 January 2024 (UTC)

Let me know what the best option for now would be. I assumed that iNaturalist having pushed it and the fact that it was a 3 year old paper without any published responses made it a legit change. Shyamal (talk) 02:18, 3 January 2024 (UTC)

I don't know. My inclination is to revert to lanata and explain the situation by citing the Code, but that probably runs afoul of the "no original research" prohibition. I've actually consulted with the Commission about this case; it is not unanimous agreement as to whether an application MUST be submitted, but there is no dispute that the Code says in the meantime, the junior homonym is to be maintained if it is in prevailing use. Prior to 2020, albiflos had not been used as a valid name since 1906, so lanata most definitely was in prevailing usage. It's a shame that iNat uncritically accepted the change in designation, as it makes it harder to prevent people from using albiflos. The last point is that with the next Code edition, the process of protecting primary junior homonyms will not require an application, and will allow for the resurrection of names incorrectly replaced - meaning that the name WILL become lanata again once the next Code edition comes out, and the more the name albiflos is promoted, the harder that transition back to lanata is going to be. But, WP is not a crystal ball. So, it's a quandary. Revert, or just leave an explanation on the talk page? Dyanega (talk) 18:14, 3 January 2024 (UTC)

Happy New Year

Wishing my talk page watchers a very happy New year! Shyamal (talk) 14:16, 3 January 2024 (UTC)

Nomination of V. B. Banjkowski for deletion

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article V. B. Banjkowski is suitable for inclusion in Wikipedia according to Wikipedia's policies and guidelines or whether it should be deleted.

The article will be discussed at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/V. B. Banjkowski until a consensus is reached, and anyone, including you, is welcome to contribute to the discussion. The nomination will explain the policies and guidelines which are of concern. The discussion focuses on high-quality evidence and our policies and guidelines.

Users may edit the article during the discussion, including to improve the article to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the article-for-deletion notice from the top of the article until the discussion has finished.

X (talk) 08:36, 18 February 2024 (UTC)

Wikiedu!

Apologies. I posted that in the wrong place. I'm a complete novice trying to "be bold" as the training recommends.Fauxbeagle (talk) 16:35, 23 February 2024 (UTC)

I checked your user page and saw you wrote: "Some qualified people feel daunted by the system while a few feel it is infra dig to collaborate with commoners. I am happy to help anyone in the former category." I am in that category and sending you this email with a link as a low-stakes practice.

You've inspired me to put my toes in Wikipedia's waters. My students are also doing a Wiki-edu assignment.Fauxbeagle (talk) 16:33, 23 February 2024 (UTC)

@Fauxbeagle: Wonderful to see! Will try and help your students with their assignments. Shyamal (talk) 05:54, 24 February 2024 (UTC)

Many thanks, as ever.108.12.218.234 (talk) 14:12, 24 February 2024 (UTC)