Jump to content

User talk:Mgiganteus1/Archive 4

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
< User talk:Mgiganteus1

This is an old revision of this page, as edited by 202.180.108.136 (talk) at 22:58, 22 April 2011. The present address (URL) is a permanent link to this revision, which may differ significantly from the current revision.

Welcome!

Hello, Mgiganteus1/Archive 4, and welcome to Wikipedia! Thank you for your contributions. I hope you like the place and decide to stay. Here are a few good links for newcomers:

I hope you enjoy editing here and being a Wikipedian! Please sign your name on talk pages using four tildes (~~~~); this will automatically produce your name and the date. If you need help, check out Wikipedia:Where to ask a question, ask me on my talk page, or place {{helpme}} on your talk page and someone will show up shortly to answer your questions. Again, welcome!  --Bachrach44 23:19, 18 January 2006 (UTC)

Barnstar

The Nessie Barnstar
Thank you for editing Cryptozoology article to Wikipedia standards! Gniniv (talk) 09:33, 24 August 2010 (UTC)

The Signpost: 23 August 2010

The Signpost: 30 August 2010

DYK for Microhyla nepenthicola

— Rlevse • Talk • 12:02, 3 September 2010 (UTC)

The Signpost: 6 September 2010

The Signpost: 13 September 2010

ANI discussion

Hello. This message is being sent to inform you that there currently is a discussion at an ANI thread, regarding an issue with which you may have been involved, here. Thank you ---- Steve Quinn (talk) 18:27, 20 September 2010 (UTC)

The Signpost: 20 September 2010

Wikipedia:Pending changes/Straw poll on interim usage

Hi. As you recently commented in the straw poll regarding the ongoing usage and trial of Pending changes, this is to notify you that there is an interim straw poll with regard to keeping the tool switched on or switching it off while improvements are worked on and due for release on November 9, 2010. This new poll is only in regard to this issue and sets no precedent for any future usage. Your input on this issue is greatly appreciated. Off2riorob (talk) 23:41, 20 September 2010 (UTC)

The Signpost: 27 September 2010

Orphaned non-free image File:Promachoteuthis sloani.jpg

⚠
⚠

Thanks for uploading File:Promachoteuthis sloani.jpg. The image description page currently specifies that the image is non-free 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 for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).

If you have uploaded other unlicensed media, please check whether they're used in any articles or not. You can find a list of "file" 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 "File" from the dropdown box. Note that any non-free images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. Skier Dude (talk 04:31, 2 October 2010 (UTC)

Automatic taxobox on binomial name

Mgiganteus1/Archive 4
Scientific classification Edit this classification
Missing taxonomy template (fix): Histiophryne psychedelica
Binomial name
Histiophryne psychedelica
Pietsch, Arnold, & Hall, 2009

Alright, thanks for the notice when you reverted. I assume the problem was just the visual one. Before I commit the edit, how does this look? Bob the Wikipedian (talk • contribs) 00:41, 3 October 2010 (UTC)

Good catch. Do we have a solution for that yet? Bob the Wikipedian (talk • contribs) 00:47, 3 October 2010 (UTC)

The Signpost: 4 October 2010

Undescribed Nepenthes

Hi. I added the category "Species without scientific names" to File:N. sp. Sumatra.jpg and three other pictures you uploaded to Commons. Is it possible that when these species are formally described, we'd know about it and be able to recategorize the pictures? —JerryFriedman (Talk) 05:03, 9 October 2010 (UTC)

There was no hurry on your reply, and I'm glad you're following this. I hope to know when the undescribed species I uploaded gets described, but unfortunately, I don't know about the others I categorized. Anyway, the category is available for exciting pictures like these. —JerryFriedman (Talk) 20:34, 11 October 2010 (UTC)

Helping out

The Helping Hand Barnstar
Thank you, so much, for assisting a new user with Marcello Catalano - fantastic.  Chzz  ►  05:13, 10 October 2010 (UTC)

The Signpost: 11 October 2010

Baiji article

Hi there, Mgiganteus1.

I'm doing some research on the environmental impact of the Three Gorges Dam in China; I read in that article that the Baiji is "functionally extinct." When I read over the article for the Baiji, though, I found this change http://en.wikipedia.org/enwiki/w/index.php?title=Baiji&oldid=389333568, where you removed the extinct species box from the baiji article.

Do you have some sources that definitively indicate whether this species is extinct? I'd greatly appreciate anything you might have.

Cheers, NehpestTheFirst (talk) 19:48, 12 October 2010 (UTC)

The Signpost: 18 October 2010

Thanks!

You sir, are good. Much appreciation with the formatting fixes you did to Painted turtle. Much smoother, much prettier. Thanks again.  :-) NYMFan69-86 (talk) 01:51, 20 October 2010 (UTC)

Responded on my talk page.--NYMFan69-86 (talk) 02:04, 20 October 2010 (UTC)

Orphaned non-free image File:Nepenthes petiolata2.gif

⚠
⚠

Thanks for uploading File:Nepenthes petiolata2.gif. The image description page currently specifies that the image is non-free 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 for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).

PLEASE NOTE:

  • I am a bot, and will therefore not be able to answer your questions.
  • I will remove the request for deletion if the file is used in an article once again.
  • If you receive this notice after the image is deleted, and you want to restore the image, click here to file an un-delete request.
  • To opt out of these bot messages, add {{bots|deny=DASHBot}} to your talk page.
  • If you believe the bot has made an error, please turn it off here and leave a message on my owner's talk page.


Thank you. DASHBot (talk) 05:50, 20 October 2010 (UTC)


The Terminator

I won't be reverting you there, but for the record "make love" is not a euphemism! It's a poetic expression, and that's not at all the same thing. Polisher of Cobwebs (talk) 05:48, 21 October 2010 (UTC)

The Signpost: 25 October 2010

Capitalisation of animal names

I was intending to move Myanmar Snub-nosed Monkey to Myanmar snub-nosed monkey, when I spotted your earlier edit note: "mammal names often are [capitalised], especially those of more obscure species". I have never heard this before, except where the animal's name contains a person or place name. Do you have any evidence to back up your claim? Regards, Bazonka (talk) 19:31, 28 October 2010 (UTC)

rv Moomin

"rv; author was Swedish-Finn". Well, I am completely aware of this. Tove Jansson being a Swedish-Finn means, to be precise, that Swedish was her mother tongue and that she was a citizen of the Republic of Finland (from 1917). The books were written in Swedish and were later translated (by other people) into Finnish, and into English, German, French... The Finnish names and book titles are products of translation just like the English or German ones. With this beginning of this article an impression is given, that the Finnish names would in some way be "original", even more so than the Swedish one, which is certainly not the case. // 90.190.125.134 (talk) 20:46, 31 October 2010 (UTC)

Apologies for the hasty revert and thank you for the explanation. I agree with your reasoning and have reverted myself. mgiganteus1 (talk) 21:37, 31 October 2010 (UTC)

I have restored Moomin to the way it was before User:90.190.125.134 edited it. This article and all Tove Jansson related articles are heavy targets for nationalistic edit-wars between pro-Swedish and pro-Finnish editors (90+% of the time from single-purpose IP accounts from Northwestern Europe). The concern displayed by User:90.190.125.134 for which language version is more "original" or more "official" is stereotypical of this petty issue. Although the argument for listing the Swedish translation before the Finnish one certainly has some weight to it, I believe that the order of these translations was determined alphabetically so as to avoid bias (F-for-Finnish comes before S-for-Swedish). Either way, the complete removal of any mention of the Finnish title is certainly not warranted. The books were written in Finland and they were written in Swedish (by a Swedish-Finn woman) and this is the English Wikipedia. All three languages (English, Finnish, and Swedish) are appropriate for translations and an alphabetical order avoids bias. If an editor wishes to alter the consensus version of the article (as it stood before 90.190.125.134's edit) with respect the nationalistic aspects of it, then they are welcome to do so at the talk page of the article. -Thibbs (talk) 03:06, 1 November 2010 (UTC)

Apart from any other argumentation, which I won't get into, the common, stereotypical biased view of the Finnish versions as being the "original" ones is maintained by this part of the article. Finnish as a language (not relevant) and Finland as a country (highly relevant) are confused with each other in this bias and in the discussion on the relevance of Finnish in this context. But more importantly, if you look up the revision history, after the discussion you had on the talk page in the Spring of 2009 the order between the languages was clearly (1) Swedish, (2) Finnish. Although this is still a quite strange solution, I could agree on that one. However, this solution was later changed in various directions by various edits, among others by "single purpose IP accounts", and these edits were never reverted or changed. My point is that there has never been any consensus on the version you call "consensus version", but on an - in this respect - quite different one. // 90.190.125.134 (talk) 06:56, 1 November 2010 (UTC)

As I noted before, your argument that the Swedish name should precede the Finnish one certainly has some force to it. I disagree with you that the order of the translations in the first line implies that the books were written in Finnish first, and frankly I believe the order of these names is only primarily a concern for nationalism-minded editors, however you may be correct and in the interest of assuming good faith I'd be willing to entertain the suggestion that the order of the translations be reversed if you would be willing to make a suggestion at the appropriate talk page. Cluttering up Mgiganteus1's talk page does neither of us any good. Please suggest the change on the Moomin talk page and then we can discuss it in an open and transparent manner before all editors. -Thibbs (talk) 11:35, 1 November 2010 (UTC)

The Signpost: 1 November 2010

The Signpost: 8 November 2010

The Signpost: 15 November 2010

The Signpost: 22 November 2010

Globsters

I was going to merge the others where appropriate, as I think that these names have been made up by Wikipedia editors - unless of course I can find them in reliable sources, eg the few reliable books written on the subject. Dougweller (talk) 09:12, 23 November 2010 (UTC)

The Signpost: 29 November 2010

Journals

Hi, I just see that you reverted my edits to several carnivorous plant magazines (actually, some while I was editing, which I didn't notice up till now). There has been a long-standing consensus to call academic journals "journals" and other periodicals #newspapers" or "magazines". There are some archived discussions at the WPJournals talk page, for example. Likewise, the "journals" categories are for academic journals, not magazines. Hope this explains and that my edits can now be restored (which I'll leave up to you). Thanks. --Crusio (talk) 21:36, 4 December 2010 (UTC)

Hey there. Saw this conversation and was wondering when a magazine becomes an academic journal. Of all the CP publications, I would argue that the Carnivorous Plant Newsletter is an academic journal. It regularly publishes peer-reviewed research. An informal perusal of the most recent issues I've received show at least one of the articles among the handful in each issue is peer-reviewed original research. That seems to make it an academic journal, not a magazine. What do you think? Rkitko (talk) 02:07, 6 December 2010 (UTC)

Paper

Sorry about the change at Carnivorous Plant Newsletter‎, earlier. The size of the paper is a nice piece of descriptive information in the context of going from a stenciled product. ---- Steve Quinn (talk) 17:27, 5 December 2010 (UTC)

No need to apologise. This is all very much subjective. :-) mgiganteus1 (talk) 00:22, 6 December 2010 (UTC)

The Signpost: 6 December 2010

OCLC Number

Hello, Mgiganteus1. You have new messages at Template_talk:Infobox_book#OCLC_Number.
You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.

Squid

1.) The term is "Branchial" heart, 2.) I doubt you could ever write an article about something that only gets 432 unique Google hits, 3.) this is the only page on the whole project that even mentions such a thing. I forgot to put the rationale in when I used unlink. Ten Pound Hammer, his otters and a clue-bat • (Otters want attention) 20:39, 10 December 2010 (UTC)

The Signpost: 13 December 2010

The Signpost: 20 December 2010

The Signpost: 27 December 2010

RE: revert on Drosera regia

With regard to your reversion of my edits to Drosera regia, what "inconsitency" in formatting are you concerned about? My edits added a number of additional PMIDs/DOIs/JSTOR links, which I don't want to lose. Rjwilmsi 00:51, 2 January 2011 (UTC)

The Signpost: 3 January 2011

The Signpost: 10 January 2011

Santanachelys gaffneyi

Can you quote the specific part from WP:Fauna name that is relevant to naming this Santanachelys. Thanks. Regards, SunCreator (talk) 00:19, 12 January 2011 (UTC)

Thanks. Regards, SunCreator (talk) 00:38, 12 January 2011 (UTC)

The Signpost: 17 January 2011

Author abbreviation

Reverted. In fact, given there are grounds for retaining this form as it uses two initials - will discuss with colleagues. It's just a shame that it does not agree with the authority form originally used to publish the author for the first time. Attenboroughii (talk) 18:28, 24 January 2011 (UTC)

The Signpost: 24 January 2011


Disputed non-free use rationale for File:Bigfin squid May 2001.jpg

Thank you for uploading File:Bigfin squid May 2001.jpg. However, there is a concern that the rationale provided for using this file on Wikipedia may not meet the criteria required by Wikipedia:Non-free content. This can be corrected by going to the file description page and adding or clarifying the reason why the file qualifies under this policy. Adding and completing one of the templates available from Wikipedia:Non-free use rationale guideline is an easy way to ensure that your file is in compliance with Wikipedia policy. Please be aware that a non-free use rationale is not the same as an image copyright tag; descriptions for files used under the non-free content policy require both a copyright tag and a non-free use rationale.

If it is determined that the file does not qualify under the non-free content policy, it might be deleted by an administrator within a few days in accordance with our criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions, please ask them at the media copyright questions page. Thank you. J Milburn (talk) 09:43, 30 January 2011 (UTC)

The Signpost: 31 January 2011

File:Bigfin squid May 2001.jpg listed for deletion

A file that you uploaded or altered, File:Bigfin squid May 2001.jpg, has been listed at Wikipedia:Files for deletion. Please see the discussion to see why this is (you may have to search for the title of the image to find its entry), if you are interested in it not being deleted. Thank you. J Milburn (talk) 10:08, 1 February 2011 (UTC)

Caesium spelling

Even more important than your explanation here, Wikipedia's formal style-guide picked that as the standard spelling to use...you can just point at WP:CAES. DMacks (talk) 16:10, 2 February 2011 (UTC)

The Signpost: 7 February 2011

Belemnotheutis taxonomy

Heya, since you probably know a lot more about it than me (and taxonomy in general) heh, I'd like to ask you opinion on where to place Belemnotheutis. Whatever gets decided will also affect other articles (Acanthoteuthis and possibly Phragmoteuthis and Permoteuthis as well). I'm going crazy trying to figure out which authority is more widely used.

There are three classifications AFAIK:

  • A separate order Belemnotheutida, by Engeser and Reitner 1981 (used by authorities like Donovan and Doguzhaeva)
  • A suborder (currently used), by Doyle et al. 1994
  • Under Phragmoteuthida by Sepkoski, Jr. 2002 (though Acanthoteuthis remains in Belemnitida for some reason)

Further compounded by two different spellings of the family: Belemnotheutidae and Belemnotheutididae

Whatever decision made will affect the classification of probably the rest of belemnoids given automatic taxoboxes so it might be best to take this into a wikiproject discussion but I can't decide whether to ask in Wikiproject Cephalopoda or in Paleontology. Can you please advise? Thanks.--Obsidi♠nSoul 15:31, 9 February 2011 (UTC)

Hmk, thanks. Paleontology is not specialized either, so I may not get a reply, they're more focused on vertebrates. :( But I'll try, hopefully an editor somewhere specializes in belemnites and is watching that talk page. At the moment I have to revise the restoration again tho. >.< Heh. --Obsidi♠nSoul 16:19, 9 February 2011 (UTC)

Avatar References

Hi there! — Preceding unsigned comment added by Halemane (talk • contribs) 14:23, 12 February 2011 (UTC)

I had hid the references in Avatar's article. Allow me to explain why.

You see, Wikipedia's all about getting information. Let's see this from the point-of-view of a person (who doesn't know much about Wikipedia and isn't a Wikipedian) who wants information about Avatar.

He's read the article and he's scrolling down to the External Links section of the article. He has to then scroll down a quarter of the page, literally! It's highly improbable that he gives a damn about the references. I mean, References are mostly for us Wikipedians to confirm the validity of the statements.

Now if it's hid, the section becomes smaller and it can still be viewed like a normal References section without any problems at all!

What say? Halemane (talk) 07:44, 12 February 2011 (UTC)

Well, It wasn't a collapsible list. It was a scrolling list. Even the links between inline cites and the reference list work if it's a scrolling list. That's why I don't happen to see what the problem with a scrolling reference list is.
And, I'm just a few months old on Wikipedia. And, you have been here quite a while and have done thousands of edits. Please do make me understand what's wrong with a scrolling list. I'm just a budding Wikipedian and an eager learner : ) Halemane (talk) 16:56, 12 February 2011 (UTC)

Vegetable Lamb of Tartary

cheers to your edit. can you believe there is such a thing as a 'vegetable lamb'? lol. Decora (talk) 00:36, 13 February 2011 (UTC)

The Signpost: 14 February 2011

DYK for Belemnotheutis

Materialscientist (talk) 06:04, 16 February 2011 (UTC)

Grimpoteuthis

Hello Mgiganteus1. To answer the question you've asked in your edit summary, I have absolutely no idea why the NOAA website would be blacklisted. It did however report as a blacklisted site while I was formatting the refs with the Reflinks tool. I usually remove anything that reports as such, in an effort to keep my edit as clean and as "on-track" as possible, but have no problem with the fact that you've restored it... simply because I can't provide a reason beyond my trust for the tool. If I'm able to come up with any answers on the Reflinks talk page, I'll make sure to let you know. Have yourself a great day Mgiganteus1, and happy editing! :)  -- WikHead (talk) 08:30, 17 February 2011 (UTC)

You're most certainly welcome. If you're interested in viewing my question and/or any feedback it might generate, feel free to keep an eye on my post at User talk:Dispenser/Reflinks#Blacklisted reports. Cheers! :)  -- WikHead (talk) 09:15, 17 February 2011 (UTC)

The Signpost: 21 February 2011

ok

comeover to the talk page, if you do not response i will ask you to be blocked for vandalism, im the only one participating on the talk page, such reverts are a waste of the participants time--Lutfi.Saad (talk) 22:17, 25 February 2011 (UTC)

The Signpost: 28 February 2011

Maxberg specimen

I noticed your request in the edit summary to have all instances of Archaeopteryx placed in italics in the Maxberg specimen article and have done so. I've also removed the CE template, as the missing italics, according to your summary, were the reason for it. I'm just wondering what prevented yourself from placing all five occurances of Archaeopteryx in the text in italics rather then place a template. Either would have taken about the same amount of time! If you want a job done, why don't you do it yourself rather then complain about it and wait for somebody else to do it? A bit of non-constructive attitude, don't you think? Calistemon (talk) 23:56, 1 March 2011 (UTC)

The Signpost: 7 March 2011

The Signpost: 14 March 2011

Needless Deleting

I wasn't the person that posted the Japan entry on "the big one" but I resent your reckless deleting of it. You do not own that page or any other page. If you really think it absolutely needs a citation, why not CONTRIBUTE to Wikipedia, instead of just hacking away at it. Here's a good starting place: Google this in quotes: "the big one hits japan". The first result begins with the sentence: "I spent most of the first 18 years of my life in Japan and the idea of the Big One striking was as much a part of life as eating and breathing." —Preceding unsigned comment added by 99.55.119.102 (talk) 22:50, 15 March 2011 (UTC)

Tank Man

I wouldn't class the Sunday Express as a "reliable source". This tabloid "newspaper" seems to be the only source claiming the Tank Man as Wang Weilin. -94.193.172.19 (talk) 15:12, 16 March 2011 (UTC)

Alien 2 (Italian film)

Tell me please, where you found a "little connection" to the Alien in this film? Where is no any Helen Repley (watch "cast" in imdb), no any space ships from the first movie (watch this movie), so where you found it? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 193.33.26.116 (talk) 05:49, 21 March 2011 (UTC)

The Signpost: 21 March 2011

The Signpost: 28 March 2011

The Signpost: 4 April 2011

Am I supposed to alert you to replies to your note?

Am I supposed to alert you to replies to your note?

And if so, is this the right way?

(It is not a big reply, mostly thanks) JonRichfield (talk) 17:51, 7 April 2011 (UTC)

The Signpost: 11 April 2011

April 2011

Hello. Regarding the recent revert you made to Bristol Stool Scale: you may already know about them, but you might find Wikipedia:Template messages/User talk namespace useful. After a revert, these can be placed on the user's talk page to let them know you considered their edit was inappropriate, and also direct new users towards the sandbox. They can also be used to give a stern warning to a vandal when they've been previously warned. Thank you. Thank you for reverting vandalism. Please remember to warn the user, as you forgot here. Crazymonkey1123 (Jacob) T/S 03:29, 15 April 2011 (UTC)

Italic title

You maid Epitaphium italic, ok. What's the rule then for the composer's other work Bright Angel (Waterhouse), where only part of the article name is a title. This is just an example for many operas, symphonies, plays, you name it. --Gerda Arendt (talk) 10:30, 16 April 2011 (UTC)

The Signpost: 18 April 2011

File:HSV-2 Swift-side.gif listed for deletion

A file that you uploaded or altered, File:HSV-2 Swift-side.gif, has been listed at Wikipedia:Files for deletion. Please see the discussion to see why this is (you may have to search for the title of the image to find its entry), if you are interested in it not being deleted. Thank you. Common Good (talk) 19:38, 19 April 2011 (UTC)

Sea Serpent

How about being a little politer in the future, as edit sumamries such as this [1] are unconstructive. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 202.180.108.136 (talk) 22:50, 22 April 2011 (UTC)

Thanks for the message [2]. Best wishes.
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/enwiki/w/index.php?title=User_talk:Mgiganteus1/Archive_4&oldid=425415555"