Wikipedia

User talk:Invertzoo/Archive 72

< User talk:Invertzoo
Latest comment: 10 years ago by EdwardsBot in topic The Signpost: 25 December 2013
Archive 65←Archive 70Archive 71Archive 72Archive 73Archive 74Archive 75


ARCHIVE PAGE 72: December 2013

Wikimedia NYC Meetup- "Queens Open History Edit-a-Thon" at Queens Library! Friday December 6

 
 Please join Queens Open History Edit-a-Thon on December 6, 2013!
Everyone gather at Queens Library to further Wikipedia's local outreach
for borough articles on the history and the communities.
Drop-ins welcome 10am-7pm!--Pharos (talk) ~~~~~

The Signpost: 04 December 2013

Latest comment: 10 years ago1 comment1 person in discussion

The Wikipedia Library Survey

Latest comment: 10 years ago1 comment1 person in discussion

As a subscriber to one of The Wikipedia Library's programs, we'd like to hear your thoughts about future donations and project activities in this brief survey. Thanks and cheers, Ocaasi t | c 15:31, 9 December 2013 (UTC)

The Signpost: 11 December 2013

Latest comment: 10 years ago1 comment1 person in discussion

File:Bathyacmaea secunda-en.svg

Latest comment: 10 years ago5 comments2 people in discussion

Revised and updated. Thoughts? Also, I take it no word from Sasaki et al... I am not surprised, but of course am disappointed. KDS4444Talk 10:29, 15 December 2013 (UTC)

Hi KDS4444. It looks great to me now. I would totally support its nomination. Yes, I heard nothing back from Sasaki. I too was disappointed; in general most academics have responded to my enquiries. Too bad, he had a chance to influence this; now he will just have to accept it the way it is, whether he likes it or not. Let me know if and when you re-nom it, ad I will write in support of it. Invertzoo (talk) 15:59, 15 December 2013 (UTC)
Yeah, I too am bummed that Sasaki appears to be so unavailable. What's the point of putting your contact information on your publications if you are going to ignore any attempt by people to contact you regarding the contents of those publications, especially when your e-mail address is given as the correspondence address for the article?? What is the point? It appears that the article has two co-authors: Takashi Okutani and Katsunori Fujikura. No email contact info is given for either, but if they are academics, I suspect they are findable out there somewhere. Do you suppose it is worth trying to track down one of them for a second opinion? I have been able to locate mailing addresses in Japan for all three, but email for only the elusive Sasaki. Perhaps it is time for a letter or two to Japan? Or am I being ridiculous...
Am relieved that you approve of the new version of the anatomical image— I will be putting it up for a second consideration before the week is out, and will notify you when I have done so. Thank you!
(Now, you may well ask, what would the point be of writing letters to Japan if I am going to offer the image up for featured picture consideration this week? Because I can always change the image later, of course, and would gladly do so even long after the image failed or passed candidacy a second time. That's the kind of guy I am, I guess.) KDS4444Talk 21:53, 18 December 2013 (UTC)
Okay, I have nominated the image a second time! It's off and running! Wikipedia:Featured picture candidates/Bathyacmaea secunda (revised, 2nd nomination) KDS4444Talk 22:07, 24 December 2013 (UTC)
OK! Good! Invertzoo (talk) 22:17, 24 December 2013 (UTC)

The Signpost: 18 December 2013

Latest comment: 10 years ago1 comment1 person in discussion

Cirripedia

Latest comment: 10 years ago2 comments2 people in discussion

Thank you for the welcome. My Notochthamaline article was my first contribution, and my very first foray into html language. I have two more articles in the same creation queue. Since then, I have been clicking on my red links which is putting my newly created articles directly into articlespace.

I plan to pretty much fully fill out the Cirripedia. I am doing this with an eye to help anyone planning to set about any study involving barnacles, not just specialists thereof. I know synonymy and references can be a total mess to research, so I want to make it easier to go deeper as well as provide research basics. I have two questions:

1) Would it help to provide type locality and holotype repository at species level? I have found this useful in my own studies.

2) If a genus is monotypic, would it be necessary to make separate article for its species, or can they be combined until second species is described?

Yes, I know some gastropods munch on barnacles. Really, that is minor. Since Jurassic times, crabs have been the main driving force behind barnacle evolution in the middle/upper shelf/littoral habitats. Neferkheperre (talk) 01:51, 27 December 2013 (UTC)

Thanks for your interesting reply. I am glad my guys don't generally do too much damage to your guys overall! You had a couple of good questions:
1) Yes, it would help to provide info on type locality and holotype repository, especially since those pieces of info are easily sourced to the original publication.
2) When a species is considered to be monotypic, it is only necessary to create the genus article, and cover the species within that article. I don't know if you know how to make a redirect page (?) (if not, I can tell you how). With monotypic genera it is good to create a redirect page to the genus from the binomial name of the species.
3) In any taxon article (actually in any article) it is good to start the intro (or lede) with a simple general statement so that a non-specialist can at least understand what the article is supposed to be about. For example, I put "Catophragminae is a subfamily of acorn barnacles" at the beginning of that article. Sometimes I might even put "is a taxonomic subfamily of acorn barnacles" in case anyone really doesn't know their way around biological taxonomy.
4) Actually this is not HTML you are editing in. It is simpler than that; it is "Wiki markup" aka "Wikitext language".
All good wishes, Invertzoo (talk) 02:26, 27 December 2013 (UTC)
Latest comment: 10 years ago1 comment1 person in discussion

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that you've added some links pointing to disambiguation pages. Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.

My Fair Lady (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver)
added links pointing to Show Me and Without You
Abida attenuata (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver)
added a link pointing to Terrestrial
Abida bigerrensis (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver)
added a link pointing to Terrestrial
Abida cylindrica (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver)
added a link pointing to Terrestrial

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 08:57, 27 December 2013 (UTC)

The Signpost: 25 December 2013

Latest comment: 10 years ago1 comment1 person in discussion
Retrieved from "https://en.wiki.x.io/w/index.php?title=User_talk:Invertzoo/Archive_72&oldid=1142302059"