User talk:Faendalimas/Archive 2
WikiProject Amphibians and Reptiles assessment drive
[edit]At WikiProject Amphibians and Reptiles, in which you are listed as a member, we're working on a pretty massive backlog (1000+ articles!) of unassessed articles. We would appreciate it greatly if you would help assess the articles in the link. It's simple to do!
- Read over the article.
- On the discussion page, look for the {{AARTalk}} template. Add in a "class" and "importance" parameter if the template does not have them already. Example: {{AARTalk|class= |importance= }}
- For the class, fill in the article's quality using the WikiProject's quality scale: stub, start, C, B, GA, A, or FA. Most unassessed articles will probably be stubs or start class articles, and definitely B or lower.
- For the importance, fill in the article's importance to the WikiProject using the importance scale: low, mid, high, or top. Most unassessed articles will probably be low or mid importance.
- Then you're done!
It's not a difficult task, but there's a lot to get done. Our hope is that we can chip through the backlog and assess every article within the auspices of the project. Thanks, bibliomaniac15 00:31, 12 January 2011 (UTC)
Request sideneck picture
[edit]Looking for a good (clear, visually appealing) sideneck turtle picture for the Portal:Turtles. There is one on Feature Pictures, but I thought not very visually helpful as turtle color close to background of photo. Can you suggest one or two pics, please?TCO (talk) 18:06, 12 January 2011 (UTC)
Message for project members
[edit]Hello WP:TURTLE member, the project needs your help. We have recently created a portal (Portal:Turtles), and would like you to choose two or three captivating turtle images for its "Selected picture" section. These images must to be chosen from commons and have a small (three sentences or so) paragraph describing the species in the picture. When you have several that you like, please place the images and a possible caption on the portal's talk page (Portal talk:Turtles). Thank you so much project member!--NYMFan69-86 (talk) 16:07, 18 January 2011 (UTC)
OK flood over, got GA?
[edit]We are doing a little push to get 10 turtle GAs (or FA, FL) in 2 months. Howzabout pitching in and rocking one out? There are a lot of plum (notable, interesting) turlte articles to work on. Can make one your baby, get help, or just run it all yourself. but still have some fun with a little blitz. [1]
TCO (talk) 05:46, 23 January 2011 (UTC)
Which is the authority?
[edit]Hello Faendalimas. There's been some conflicting data regarding Specific and Generic synonymy for our little turtles. We have two sources listed under resources over on the project page, Fritz 2007 and Rhodin 2010, that offer seemingly nice lists...but they're almost always different for a given species. Which is the authority in your opinion? Rhodin because it's more recent? Or is this one of those situations where there's no hard and fast list of synonyms because there are different pools of thought? Are some names considered synonyms by some people and not others? NYMFan69-86 (talk) 03:22, 28 January 2011 (UTC)
- I'm not sure it's a conflict. More that we don't understand how to interpret the information. Fritz lists everything until the time it was published but Rhodin's is a subset with many not included. Exactly why I'm not sure. Regards, SunCreator (talk) 03:32, 28 January 2011 (UTC)
- I'm of the opinion that synonyms are essentially old classification names. So if Rodin leaves some out, just because he's newer, we should not leave them out, unless we have actual indications that they never were used. TCO (talk) 04:13, 28 January 2011 (UTC)
- ok this has to do with the way taxonomy, and in particular here nomenclature works. For a name to be valid it must meet the guidelines of the ICZN code. They also have a lot of definitions. Ok a synonym is a name that is applied to the same taxa as another name. A taxa is a rank, any rank not just species. Names have whats known as priority. If two people describe the same species then usually the older name is and always will be valid. You cannot re-describe something and overwrite the works of others the older name stands. There are however a lot of issues that arise to place an older name in synonomy, however there is only two ways to sink an older name, one is if the ICZN decides to do it, the other is by review. Rhodin's paper is the most recent comprehensive review of turtles and considers the validity of every name for every species of turtle. Therefore as a general rule you would follow that paper. Fritz, 2007, has been superceeded by the more recent paper. If Fritz decides to disagree then he can do so by publishing a further review, must present evidence to refute Rhodin and declare new arrangements. Invalid names are usually referred to as Nomen Nudem which means new name, or junior synonym, Nomen oblitum which means obsolete name or forgotten name. To use Galaps, for many years we called them Geochelone elephantopus, but then a number of authors demonstrated that Geochelone nigra was an older and hence more valid name so it has been adopted. However the even older name of Geochelone californiana is not used because it is a nomen oblitum ie it was never used. So synonyms are actually invalid names for various reasons, they are usually newer than the accepted name. An important point in nomenclature, Principal of Priority basically means the first name is the valid name, and unless otherwise demonstrated the oldest name is always the valid one. If Fritz and Rhodin differ for a given taxa then use the Prinipal of last reviewer, you follow the most recent review of the nomenclature. If you need more help give me the taxa in question and I can sort out which name you should be using. Cheers, Faendalimas (talk) 15:10, 28 January 2011 (UTC)
- That makes sense to me, Rhodin it is. For the information we present in the taxobox versus the prose, is what we did with Painted turtle acceptable? Like where we have Binomial name: Chrysemys picta "(Schneider, 1783)," Schneider is the authority. Then in the text we have "Originally described in 1783 by Johann Gottlob Schneider as Testudo picta, the painted turtle was called Chrysemys picta first by John Edward Gray in 1844." Does our wording here make sense and accurately describe the series of events?--NYMFan69-86 (talk) 21:06, 28 January 2011 (UTC)
- The genus Chrysemys was described by Gray, 1844 and the species picta by Schneider, 1783. The full name of a species technically includes the author and year and is written Chrysemys picts (Schneider, 1793). The brackets denote that this is not an original arrangement, it has been moved to a new genus and only the species authority is denoted. For convenience most literature leaves off the author except taxonomic literature. Of course you don't need to follow that either as Wikipedia is not taxonomic literature. You can put the genus authority in if you wish just make sure its clear that Gray, 1844 is identified as the Genus Authority and that the species was described by Schneider, 1783. Hope this helps, Cheers Faendalimas (talk) 21:31, 28 January 2011 (UTC)
- That help perfectly, thank you so much. --NYMFan69-86 (talk) 22:27, 28 January 2011 (UTC)
- The genus Chrysemys was described by Gray, 1844 and the species picta by Schneider, 1783. The full name of a species technically includes the author and year and is written Chrysemys picts (Schneider, 1793). The brackets denote that this is not an original arrangement, it has been moved to a new genus and only the species authority is denoted. For convenience most literature leaves off the author except taxonomic literature. Of course you don't need to follow that either as Wikipedia is not taxonomic literature. You can put the genus authority in if you wish just make sure its clear that Gray, 1844 is identified as the Genus Authority and that the species was described by Schneider, 1783. Hope this helps, Cheers Faendalimas (talk) 21:31, 28 January 2011 (UTC)
- That makes sense to me, Rhodin it is. For the information we present in the taxobox versus the prose, is what we did with Painted turtle acceptable? Like where we have Binomial name: Chrysemys picta "(Schneider, 1783)," Schneider is the authority. Then in the text we have "Originally described in 1783 by Johann Gottlob Schneider as Testudo picta, the painted turtle was called Chrysemys picta first by John Edward Gray in 1844." Does our wording here make sense and accurately describe the series of events?--NYMFan69-86 (talk) 21:06, 28 January 2011 (UTC)
- ok this has to do with the way taxonomy, and in particular here nomenclature works. For a name to be valid it must meet the guidelines of the ICZN code. They also have a lot of definitions. Ok a synonym is a name that is applied to the same taxa as another name. A taxa is a rank, any rank not just species. Names have whats known as priority. If two people describe the same species then usually the older name is and always will be valid. You cannot re-describe something and overwrite the works of others the older name stands. There are however a lot of issues that arise to place an older name in synonomy, however there is only two ways to sink an older name, one is if the ICZN decides to do it, the other is by review. Rhodin's paper is the most recent comprehensive review of turtles and considers the validity of every name for every species of turtle. Therefore as a general rule you would follow that paper. Fritz, 2007, has been superceeded by the more recent paper. If Fritz decides to disagree then he can do so by publishing a further review, must present evidence to refute Rhodin and declare new arrangements. Invalid names are usually referred to as Nomen Nudem which means new name, or junior synonym, Nomen oblitum which means obsolete name or forgotten name. To use Galaps, for many years we called them Geochelone elephantopus, but then a number of authors demonstrated that Geochelone nigra was an older and hence more valid name so it has been adopted. However the even older name of Geochelone californiana is not used because it is a nomen oblitum ie it was never used. So synonyms are actually invalid names for various reasons, they are usually newer than the accepted name. An important point in nomenclature, Principal of Priority basically means the first name is the valid name, and unless otherwise demonstrated the oldest name is always the valid one. If Fritz and Rhodin differ for a given taxa then use the Prinipal of last reviewer, you follow the most recent review of the nomenclature. If you need more help give me the taxa in question and I can sort out which name you should be using. Cheers, Faendalimas (talk) 15:10, 28 January 2011 (UTC)
- I'm of the opinion that synonyms are essentially old classification names. So if Rodin leaves some out, just because he's newer, we should not leave them out, unless we have actual indications that they never were used. TCO (talk) 04:13, 28 January 2011 (UTC)
Can you please check for fossil C.picta at MSU?
[edit]I am looking for a fossil picture of C.picta. I strongly suspect there is a sample at MSU museum as Holman is like the god of C.picta fossils and he was there for 40 years. Emailed curator and he said they would not take a photo, but that we could visit and do so. didn't answer when I asked him to check if they had a sample. this link discusses a database for samples. Can you see what C.picta samples they have? I'm not anywhere near there and would be sending another WPian to take the photo, so want to make sure there is something there! [2] TCO (talk) 22:11, 28 January 2011 (UTC)
Added template for SuggestBot
[edit]Hi,
Thanks for being one of SuggestBot's users! I hope you have found the bot's suggestions useful.
We are in the process of switching from our previous list-based signup process to using templates and userboxes, and I have therefore added the appropriate template to your user talk page. You should receive the first set of suggestions within a day, and since we'll be automating SuggestBot you will from then on continue to receive them regularly at the desired frequency.
We now also have a userbox that you can use to let others know you're using SuggestBot, and if you don't want to clutter your user talk page the bot can post to a sub-page in your userspace. More information about the userbox and usage of the template is available on User:SuggestBot/Getting Recommendations Regularly.
If there are any questions, please don't hesitate to get in touch with me on my user talk page. Thanks again, Nettrom (talk) 16:18, 4 February 2011 (UTC)
Articles you might like to edit, from SuggestBot
[edit]SuggestBot predicts that you will enjoy editing some of these articles. Have fun!
SuggestBot picks articles in a number of ways based on other articles you've edited, including straight text similarity, following wikilinks, and matching your editing patterns against those of other Wikipedians. It tries to recommend only articles that other Wikipedians have marked as needing work. Your contributions make Wikipedia better -- thanks for helping.
If you have feedback on how to make SuggestBot better, please tell me on SuggestBot's talk page. Thanks from Nettrom (talk), SuggestBot's caretaker.
P.S. You received these suggestions because your name was listed on the SuggestBot request page. If this was in error, sorry about the confusion. -- SuggestBot (talk) 11:19, 5 February 2011 (UTC)
Articles you might like to edit, from SuggestBot
[edit]SuggestBot predicts that you will enjoy editing some of these articles. Have fun!
SuggestBot picks articles in a number of ways based on other articles you've edited, including straight text similarity, following wikilinks, and matching your editing patterns against those of other Wikipedians. It tries to recommend only articles that other Wikipedians have marked as needing work. We appreciate that you have signed up to receive suggestions regularly, your contributions make Wikipedia better — thanks for helping!
If you have feedback on how to make SuggestBot better, please let us know on SuggestBot's talk page. Regards from Nettrom (talk), SuggestBot's caretaker. -- SuggestBot (talk) 11:49, 5 March 2011 (UTC)
Thanks
[edit]Thanks for the welcome back. Hows things going? ZooPro 14:02, 16 March 2011 (UTC)
Articles you might like to edit, from SuggestBot
[edit]SuggestBot predicts that you will enjoy editing some of these articles. Have fun!
SuggestBot picks articles in a number of ways based on other articles you've edited, including straight text similarity, following wikilinks, and matching your editing patterns against those of other Wikipedians. It tries to recommend only articles that other Wikipedians have marked as needing work. We appreciate that you have signed up to receive suggestions regularly, your contributions make Wikipedia better — thanks for helping!
If you have feedback on how to make SuggestBot better, please let us know on SuggestBot's talk page. Regards from Nettrom (talk), SuggestBot's caretaker. -- SuggestBot (talk) 12:14, 3 April 2011 (UTC)
Articles you might like to edit, from SuggestBot
[edit]SuggestBot predicts that you will enjoy editing some of these articles. Have fun!
SuggestBot picks articles in a number of ways based on other articles you've edited, including straight text similarity, following wikilinks, and matching your editing patterns against those of other Wikipedians. It tries to recommend only articles that other Wikipedians have marked as needing work. We appreciate that you have signed up to receive suggestions regularly, your contributions make Wikipedia better — thanks for helping!
If you have feedback on how to make SuggestBot better, please let us know on SuggestBot's talk page. Regards from Nettrom (talk), SuggestBot's caretaker. -- SuggestBot (talk) 10:57, 2 May 2011 (UTC)
Articles you might like to edit, from SuggestBot
[edit]SuggestBot predicts that you will enjoy editing some of these articles. Have fun!
SuggestBot picks articles in a number of ways based on other articles you've edited, including straight text similarity, following wikilinks, and matching your editing patterns against those of other Wikipedians. It tries to recommend only articles that other Wikipedians have marked as needing work. We appreciate that you have signed up to receive suggestions regularly, your contributions make Wikipedia better — thanks for helping!
If you have feedback on how to make SuggestBot better, please let us know on SuggestBot's talk page. Regards from Nettrom (talk), SuggestBot's caretaker. -- SuggestBot (talk) 12:17, 30 May 2011 (UTC)
Articles you might like to edit, from SuggestBot
[edit]SuggestBot predicts that you will enjoy editing some of these articles. Have fun!
SuggestBot picks articles in a number of ways based on other articles you've edited, including straight text similarity, following wikilinks, and matching your editing patterns against those of other Wikipedians. It tries to recommend only articles that other Wikipedians have marked as needing work. We appreciate that you have signed up to receive suggestions regularly, your contributions make Wikipedia better — thanks for helping!
If you have feedback on how to make SuggestBot better, please let us know on SuggestBot's talk page. Regards from Nettrom (talk), SuggestBot's caretaker. -- SuggestBot (talk) 15:51, 27 June 2011 (UTC)
Hello Faendalimas. I noticed you, or another editor created a Requests for Adminship page under your name, and I was wondering as to what the status of that request might be. Please note that new users are rarely successful at RfA and that the Wikipedia editing community sets an extremely high bar for potential administrator candidates. That being said, I strongly urge you to read Wikipedia:Guide to requests for adminship, Wikipedia:Adminship is not for new users, and Wikipedia:Not now, and ask you to reconsider whether you really do wish to go through with your candidacy; please understand that you stand very little to no chance of passing RfA at this point and that you are strongly discouraged from running for adminship. If you are still intent on running for adminship with that request and are absolutely positive this is what you want, please do let me know; otherwise, I'll go ahead and delete the RfA page for you in about a week or so from today. Eagles 24/7 (C) 00:38, 28 June 2011 (UTC)
- If you would like to go through with your request, you will need to transclude your RfA at WP:RFA by following the instructions at WP:RFA/N. However, I must warn you that with only 884 edits, it is unlikely that your request will succeed. The community likes to see at least 4,000 edits from candidates to show that they have a large amount of experience in their time here. It is entirely your decision, but please consider my advice. Eagles 24/7 (C) 00:52, 28 June 2011 (UTC)
Done deleted. Eagles 24/7 (C) 01:06, 28 June 2011 (UTC)
Articles you might like to edit, from SuggestBot
[edit]SuggestBot predicts that you will enjoy editing some of these articles. Have fun!
SuggestBot picks articles in a number of ways based on other articles you've edited, including straight text similarity, following wikilinks, and matching your editing patterns against those of other Wikipedians. It tries to recommend only articles that other Wikipedians have marked as needing work. We appreciate that you have signed up to receive suggestions regularly, your contributions make Wikipedia better — thanks for helping!
If you have feedback on how to make SuggestBot better, please let us know on SuggestBot's talk page. Regards from Nettrom (talk), SuggestBot's caretaker. -- SuggestBot (talk) 00:53, 26 July 2011 (UTC)
Talkback
[edit]
Message added 17:26, 13 August 2011 (UTC). You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.
Salvio Let's talk about it! 17:26, 13 August 2011 (UTC)
Feel free to join! Enrollment is always open. For starters, I'd recommend having a look at the TAXFORCE list of things to be done. Also, be sure and add the RSS feed to whatever feed reading system you use. That's our counter-vandalism device right there. :) Eventually you'll figure out which editors to trust (recent trusted ones that come to my mind would be Stemonitis, Smokeybjb, Dinoguy2, and several others). Bob the WikipediaN (talk • contribs) 02:58, 18 August 2011 (UTC)
Chelidae subfamily
[edit]Is Chelidinae, Chelodininae and Hydromedusinae written about in anything other then your own publications? I noticed it is not intutle taxonomy working group checklist and wonder how accepted it is. Regards, SunCreator (talk) 15:33, 18 August 2011 (UTC)
Categories
[edit]Wasn't aware you where doing cats. Sorry if anything I did was in conflict with what your doing. I'm making and assigning categories down to genus level and assigning the lowest level category to each turtle page. Let me know if that is a problem. Regards, SunCreator(talk) 18:57, 19 August 2011 (UTC)
- Chelodina has a subgenus called Chelodina? Regards, SunCreator (talk) 23:43, 24 August 2011 (UTC)
Articles you might like to edit, from SuggestBot
[edit]SuggestBot predicts that you will enjoy editing some of these articles. Have fun!
SuggestBot picks articles in a number of ways based on other articles you've edited, including straight text similarity, following wikilinks, and matching your editing patterns against those of other Wikipedians. It tries to recommend only articles that other Wikipedians have marked as needing work. We appreciate that you have signed up to receive suggestions regularly, your contributions make Wikipedia better — thanks for helping!
If you have feedback on how to make SuggestBot better, please let us know on SuggestBot's talk page. Regards fromNettrom (talk), SuggestBot's caretaker. -- SuggestBot (talk) 02:56, 23 August 2011 (UTC)
Articles you might like to edit, from SuggestBot
[edit]We are currently running a study on the effects of adding additional information to SuggestBot’s recommendations. Participation in the study is voluntary. Should you wish to not participate in the study, or have questions or concerns, you can find contact information in theconsent information sheet.
We have added information about the opportunity to make substantial valuable contributions to an article using a Low/Medium/High scale which goes from Low 
to High . The score is calculated by combining an article's readership and quality.
SuggestBot predicts that you will enjoy editing some of these articles. Have fun!
SuggestBot picks articles in a number of ways based on other articles you've edited, including straight text similarity, following wikilinks, and matching your editing patterns against those of other Wikipedians. It tries to recommend only articles that other Wikipedians have marked as needing work. We appreciate that you have signed up to receive suggestions regularly, your contributions make Wikipedia better — thanks for helping!
If you have feedback on how to make SuggestBot better, please let us know on SuggestBot's talk page. Regards fromNettrom (talk), SuggestBot's caretaker. -- SuggestBot (talk) 01:40, 21 September 2011 (UTC)
Pseudemydura umbrina
[edit]Is Pseudemydura umbrina montypic? or is there another, perhaps an extinct species? Regards, SunCreator (talk) 20:14, 11 October 2011 (UTC)
Articles you might like to edit, from SuggestBot
[edit]We are currently running a study on the effects of adding additional information to SuggestBot’s recommendations. Participation in the study is voluntary. Should you wish to not participate in the study, or have questions or concerns, you can find contact information in theconsent information sheet.
We have added information about the opportunity to make substantial valuable contributions to an article using a Low/Medium/High scale which goes from Low to High . The score is calculated by combining an article's readership and quality.
SuggestBot predicts that you will enjoy editing some of these articles. Have fun!
SuggestBot picks articles in a number of ways based on other articles you've edited, including straight text similarity, following wikilinks, and matching your editing patterns against those of other Wikipedians. It tries to recommend only articles that other Wikipedians have marked as needing work. We appreciate that you have signed up to receive suggestions regularly, your contributions make Wikipedia better — thanks for helping!
If you have feedback on how to make SuggestBot better, please let us know on SuggestBot's talk page. Regards fromNettrom (talk), SuggestBot's caretaker. -- SuggestBot (talk) 03:39, 19 October 2011 (UTC)
Etymology of scientific turtle names
[edit]Been getting into etymology, it is presently most interesting to me. If I recall correctly you once said it was quite easy to understand the meaning of the scientific turtle names. Today, I've been looking at the etymology of the Astrochelys yniphora, now in greek 'astro' equals star, 'chelys' seems to equal 'tortoise' (which is weird as not all tortoises use this and some turtles i.e Macrochelys are certainly not tortoises) it could also equal 'convex shell' which makes more logical sense. Question, is there a useful resource, or website to help solve the meanings? Are the names for turtles based on Greek words, ancient Greek words, Latin or any combination of those? What about yniphora, yni - phora? phora bearer, to bear, carrying; producing, transmission; directing, turning; originally to carry or to bear children, but then I have no idea about yni, maybe I'm not splitting yniphora correctly, help please! Regards, SunCreator (talk) 02:45, 29 October 2011 (UTC)
I am afraid it is not all so simple. The only requirement in the code is that a name uses the latin alphabet and is pronouncable, and not profane. In other words the language is whatever the authors want. You would have to look at the original description to determine the meaning of the name. For example I named a turtle Chelodina burrungandjii this name stems from the Janown (Aboriginal) word for the species, Burrungandj. Astrochelys, means Star Tortoise, referring to its shell structure of natural pyramiding. The word yniphora, is probably of Asian origin and is not greek. I would have to find the original description. Its common name though is the Ploughsheer Tortoise. Cheers Faendalimas talk 04:21, 29 October 2011 (UTC)
- John Edward Gray who is attributed Astrochelys in his "Hand-list of the specimens of shield reptiles in the British Museum (pdf)"(1873). If you look in the pdf on page 4 is gives the title Astrochelys, but there is no description about it.
- Text reads roughly as follows:
Astrochelys.
6. Testudo radiata, Gray, Cat. p. 9 ; Suppl. p. 5 ; Append, p. 4. (male) Animal and shell, adult, stuffed. Thorax concave. Anal lobes thickened, bent up. Madagascar. 46, 1, 22, 3. d. (female) . Young animal stuffed, and shell. Madagascar. 40, 12, 12, 51. (female) Skeleton of adult, and shell. Anal shields flat. Madagascar. 58, 11, 5, 1. e. Shell of adult. Madagascar. Presented by Gen. Hardwick. k. (female) . Like former, but dorsal shields worn, smooth. Madagascar. 43, 12, 7, 36. a. Dorsal shield only, without sternum. Madagascar. Presented by the Eoyal Society. i. Shell of adult.
Madagascar. 43, 12, 7, 42.
- yniphora naming was by french zoologist Léon Vaillant. Maybe the meaning is french? Located the orignal manuscript online. Fritz calls it "C. R. Acad. Sci. Paris, 101: 440" I'm guess that is a journal of Comptes rendus de l'Académie des sciences. Found it! (pdf) page 441 is where yniphora is used. Now translating "ces caracteres permettent de distinguer a première vue ce Chelonien des autres Tortues proprement dites actuellement connues; je proposerai de la designer sous le nom de Tesudo yniphora, faisant allusion a la forme speciale de la partie anterieure du plastron." => "these characters distinguish a first glance this Chelonians [from] other Turtles known at present; I propose to the designer by the name of Tesudo yniphora, referring to the special shape of the anterior part of the plastron.". Well got the meaning even if not from the word. Regards, SunCreator (talk) 13:54, 29 October 2011 (UTC)
- By the way, do you have a source for your claim "Astrochelys, means Star Tortoise"? Wikipedia requires verifiability. Regards, SunCreator (talk) 17:08, 29 October 2011 (UTC)
- Its basically a breakdown of the name, Gray always used Latin/ Greek. Chelys technically means turtle rather than tortoise, but in this case we use tortoise as its a land animal. In more modern papers taxonomists should give an etymology, however in older papers this was not required.so many of them just propose a name and leave it at that. The etymology is actually important as when a species is moved to another genus the gender of the species name may need to be corrected to match the genus name. Anyway, your reference to the meaning would be discussion and a dictionary. I doubt anyone would argue with it. Cheers, Faendalimas talk 19:09, 29 October 2011 (UTC)
Happened to notice this discussion. In Greek, υνί means ploughshare. The letter υ (upsilon) can be transliterated into the Roman alphabet as "y", hence "yni". Peter coxhead (talk) 15:07, 25 November 2011 (UTC)
Thank you
[edit]Thanks for your support in my request to change the name of the black mamba article, I really do appreciate it. I suppose you have a degree in some kind of science related to zoology/biology? If so, then that is why you understand why the move should be made. I think the system in place in Wikipedia is broken. In my opinion, people with expertise in zoology/herpetology or related science education or degree should be the ones making the decisions as to what happens and what is done to the zoological articles on Wikipedia. It's not fair that just anyone can come along and "oppose" - they might be high school students, people with no education, or people with totally irrelevant degrees. It's a travesty, IMO. Bastian (talk) 19:55, 31 October 2011 (UTC)
Articles you might like to edit, from SuggestBot
[edit]We are currently running a study on the effects of adding additional information to SuggestBot’s recommendations. Participation in the study is voluntary. Should you wish to not participate in the study, or have questions or concerns, you can find contact information in the consent information sheet.
We have added information about the opportunity to make substantial valuable contributions to an article using a Low/Medium/High scale which goes from Low to High . The score is calculated by combining an article's readership and quality.
SuggestBot predicts that you will enjoy editing some of these articles. Have fun!
SuggestBot picks articles in a number of ways based on other articles you've edited, including straight text similarity, following wikilinks, and matching your editing patterns against those of other Wikipedians. It tries to recommend only articles that other Wikipedians have marked as needing work. We appreciate that you have signed up to receive suggestions regularly, your contributions make Wikipedia better — thanks for helping!
If you have feedback on how to make SuggestBot better, please let us know on SuggestBot's talk page. Regards from Nettrom (talk), SuggestBot's caretaker. -- SuggestBot (talk) 16:13, 16 November 2011 (UTC)
Taxonomy page
[edit]Hello. Yes, implementing something that's been discussed. Removal of non-biological taxonomy subheadings to their own articles (if they don't already exist), but with a short "Non-scientific taxonomies" section to cover them. I think you'll agree the page is a nightmare of repetition and unclear half-definitions. When I get the time (soon) I'll re-write it and bring in more references. And of course, any help would be great. BC Myles (talk) 02:09, 28 November 2011 (UTC)
Articles you might like to edit, from SuggestBot
[edit]We are currently running a study on the effects of adding additional information to SuggestBot’s recommendations. Participation in the study is voluntary. Should you wish to not participate in the study, or have questions or concerns, you can find contact information in the consent information sheet.
We have added information about the opportunity to make substantial valuable contributions to an article using a Low/Medium/High scale which goes from Low to High . The score is calculated by combining an article's readership and quality.
SuggestBot predicts that you will enjoy editing some of these articles. Have fun!
SuggestBot picks articles in a number of ways based on other articles you've edited, including straight text similarity, following wikilinks, and matching your editing patterns against those of other Wikipedians. It tries to recommend only articles that other Wikipedians have marked as needing work. We appreciate that you have signed up to receive suggestions regularly, your contributions make Wikipedia better — thanks for helping!
If you have feedback on how to make SuggestBot better, please let us know on SuggestBot's talk page. Regards from Nettrom (talk), SuggestBot's caretaker. -- SuggestBot (talk) 13:22, 14 December 2011 (UTC)
Articles you might like to edit, from SuggestBot
[edit]We are currently running a study on the effects of adding additional information to SuggestBot’s recommendations. Participation in the study is voluntary. Should you wish to not participate in the study, or have questions or concerns, you can find contact information in the consent information sheet.
We have added information about the opportunity to make substantial valuable contributions to an article using a Low/Medium/High scale which goes from Low to High . The score is calculated by combining an article's readership and quality.
SuggestBot predicts that you will enjoy editing some of these articles. Have fun!
SuggestBot picks articles in a number of ways based on other articles you've edited, including straight text similarity, following wikilinks, and matching your editing patterns against those of other Wikipedians. It tries to recommend only articles that other Wikipedians have marked as needing work. We appreciate that you have signed up to receive suggestions regularly, your contributions make Wikipedia better — thanks for helping!
If you have feedback on how to make SuggestBot better, please let us know on SuggestBot's talk page. Regards from Nettrom (talk), SuggestBot's caretaker. -- SuggestBot (talk) 16:37, 11 January 2012 (UTC)