User talk:Divingpetrel

This user may have left Wikipedia. Divingpetrel has not edited Wikipedia since 31 March 2018. As a result, any requests made here may not receive a response. If you are seeking assistance, you may need to approach someone else.

Welcome

Welcome!

Hello, Divingpetrel, and welcome to Wikipedia! Thank you for your contributions. I hope you like the place and decide to stay. Here are some pages that you might find helpful:

The five pillars of Wikipedia
Tutorial
How to edit a page and How to develop articles
How to create your first article (using the Article Wizard if you wish)
Manual of Style

I hope you enjoy editing here and being a Wikipedian! Please sign your messages on discussion pages using four tildes (~~~~); this will automatically insert your username and the date. If you need help, check out Wikipedia:Questions, ask me on my talk page, or ask your question on this page and then place {{help me}} before the question. Again, welcome! jonkerz ♠ 07:40, 27 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Binomials and common names

Hi there. Please try to leave the binomial in place when adding a common name, like so. Cheers, mgiganteus1 (talk) 19:49, 1 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Fish taxonomy

Hi, Myliobatiformes is recognized as a valid order by almost all current sources, based on strong phylogenetic evidence. The reason that FishBase doesn't list it is because it sources that part of its taxonomy to Last and Stevens (1994), and no one has yet updated it because the site is mostly run by volunteers. I've made a proposal to address the taxonomic issue here and your input would be appreciated. For the time being however, would you be willing to hold off on changing the higher-level fish taxonomies? I don't believe that FishBase reflects the most accurate taxonomy available. -- Yzx (talk) 00:40, 7 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Since I haven't had any response to my proposal, I think I'm just going to make the changes to the Fish Project guidelines. Since this affects you, do you have any thoughts before I do this? -- Yzx (talk) 18:43, 12 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for asking my input. My main interest, as you may have noticed is more along the lines of the actual taxon authorities rather than the taxonomy, though I do try to make some corrections regarding species as I find them. If you feel that there is another, more accurate, resource out there, I have no issues with that and it would help to have a single resource that everyone is working from. -- Divingpetrel (talk) 19:47, 12 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]

An Award for You

		The Exceptional Newcomer Award
		I Anna Frodesiak (talk), hereby present to you this lovely award for your excellent contributions. Keep up the good work! :)

Anna Frodesiak (talk) 22:46, 2 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Anna, Thank you for the award. It is nice to know that the work is appreciated. Again, thanks. Divingpetrel (talk) 17:31, 3 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Can barnstars be seconded? If not, well, maybe I should give you another one... Wonderful stuff, thank you. Gurt Posh (talk) 22:24, 30 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you Gurt.

Autopatrolled?

Hi, I've been noticing over a period of time that you create a bunch of decent stubs. I'd be glad to grant to you the status of "autopatrolled", which actually mainly affects new page patrollers rather than you. Shall I? LadyofShalott 04:06, 5 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]

I am assuming that the page patrollers are looking for unacceptable content? That would be fine with me. Thank you.

Done :) LadyofShalott 16:44, 5 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Page moves

Hi Divingpetrel, please see Help:How to move a page. Melchoir (talk) 03:49, 25 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you. I am getting ready to knock off for the night and will review this on the morrow.Divingpetrel (talk) 03:59, 25 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]

No prob! I've fixed up Nemacheilus scaturigina, Triplophysa paradoxa, Schistura multifasciata, Nemacheilus kullmanni, Schistura himachalensis, Schistura baluchiorum, Angora loach, and Afronemacheilus abyssinicus. I think that's all. Melchoir (talk) 04:13, 25 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you Melchior. I gave it a try with Nemacheilus sikmaiensis - Schistura sikmaiensis. Much easier than what I was doing. Thanks for the advice and assistance.

Glad I could help! :-) Melchoir (talk) 21:20, 26 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Interlanguage links

Hello again! That's a lot of cyprinids. I've noticed that for most of the articles you're working on, there are already mirror articles in Catalan and Spanish, and sometimes other languages as well. I went back and added interlanguage links where I could, from Delminichthys through Leucalburnus satunini. I just found the links by Googling, for example, "Gobiocypris rarus site:wikipedia.org -site:en.wikipedia.org".

If it's not too much trouble, I wonder if you could add these links to future articles yourself? I'm sure our Spanish friends would appreciate the help! Thanks, Melchoir (talk) 03:36, 5 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Sure, I will work on it. I believe that an easier method would be to just Google Wikipedia and that takes you to a page where you can search all language versions of Wikipedia without all of the extra typing. I have used that extensively in the past. ThanksDivingpetrel (talk) 00:30, 6 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]

New Page Patrol survey

New page patrol – Survey Invitation

Hello Divingpetrel! The WMF is currently developing new tools to make new page patrolling much easier. Whether you have patrolled many pages or only a few, we now need to know about your experience. The survey takes only 6 minutes, and the information you provide will not be shared with third parties other than to assist us in analyzing the results of the survey; the WMF will not use the information to identify you.

If this invitation also appears on other accounts you may have, please complete the survey once only.
If this has been sent to you in error and you have never patrolled new pages, please ignore it.

Please click HERE to take part.
Many thanks in advance for providing this essential feedback.

You are receiving this invitation because you have patrolled new pages. For more information, please see NPP Survey

Pteronotropis

I'm posting this message on your talk page because I noticed that you've recently created the new article Pteronotropis--The content seems well-organized.However, I noticed there are some holes that may need filling: the article does not contain in-line citations, and so doesn't follow Wikipedia style guidelines. Jipinghe (talk) 03:59, 26 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Weird changes in fish articles

Do you have any idea who's pasting all kinds of weird stuff into fish stubs? I've spotted three so far: Luxilus coccogenis, Popeye Shiner‎, and Etheostoma neopterum. It seems to be class-work. Anyway, it looks like you're active on a lot of fish articles, so I thought I'd ask you about it. Thanks.— alf.laylah.wa.laylah (talk) 01:13, 21 November 2011 (UTC)[reply]

I really don't know who that individual is. I generally do not deal with conservation information, dealing mostly with taxonomic considerations, particularly the identity of the taxon authorities as well as range information where I either create the article or feel that it would help improve the article.Divingpetrel (talk) 01:23, 21 November 2011 (UTC)[reply]

OK, sorry to bother you with it. Keep up the great work!— alf.laylah.wa.laylah (talk) 01:25, 21 November 2011 (UTC)[reply]

No problem. Thank you.Divingpetrel (talk) 01:30, 21 November 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Speedy deletion nomination of Pyrrhulina

If this is the first article that you have created, you may want to read the guide to writing your first article.
You may want to consider using the Article Wizard to help you create articles.

A tag has been placed on Pyrrhulina requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section A7 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because the article appears to be about a person, organization (band, club, company, etc.) or web content, but it does not indicate how or why the subject is important or significant: that is, why an article about that subject should be included in an encyclopedia. Under the criteria for speedy deletion, such articles may be deleted at any time. Please see the guidelines for what is generally accepted as notable.

If you think that this notice was placed here in error, contest the deletion by clicking on the button labelled "Click here to contest this speedy deletion". Doing so will take you to the talk page where you will find a pre-formatted place for you to explain why you believe the page should not be deleted. You can also visit the page's talk page directly to give your reasons, but be aware that once tagged for speedy deletion, if the page meets the criterion, it may be deleted without delay. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag yourself, but don't hesitate to add information to the page that would render it more in conformance with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. If the page is deleted, you can contact one of these administrators to request that the administrator userfy the page or email a copy to you. Thehistorian10 (talk) 19:28, 11 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Proposed deletion of Pyrrhulina

The article Pyrrhulina has been proposed for deletion because of the following concern:

such a genus does not exist

While all contributions to Wikipedia are appreciated, content or articles may be deleted for any of several reasons.

You may prevent the proposed deletion by removing the {{proposed deletion/dated}} notice, but please explain why in your edit summary or on the article's talk page.

Please consider improving the article to address the issues raised. Removing {{proposed deletion/dated}} will stop the proposed deletion process, but other deletion processes exist. In particular, the speedy deletion process can result in deletion without discussion, and articles for deletion allows discussion to reach consensus for deletion. Thehistorian10 (talk) 08:50, 12 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Contested. LadyofShalott 13:29, 12 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you Lady. This has been going on for a few days now. I fail to understand what Historian is doing. I checked the link to Fishbase that I included in the article and it takes me to a list of Pyrrhulina species, I Googled "Pyrrhulina" and came up with plenty of references including Fishbase, aquarist sites, Encyclopedia of Life, and scientific papers that all refer to it. I hope that it is an honest mistake, but twice?.Divingpetrel (talk) 01:07, 13 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Yeah, I'm almost hoping he'll take it to AfD. I did a Google book search on Pyrrhulina earlier - there's no lack of sources we can use if need be. There seem to be some other odd edits from the account as well. LadyofShalott 01:17, 13 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Osteogeneiosus militaris

This is an automated message from CorenSearchBot. I have performed a web search with the contents of Osteogeneiosus militaris, and it appears to include material copied directly from http://ispecies.org/?q=osteogeneiosus+militaris&submit=Go.

It is possible that the bot is confused and found similarity where none actually exists. If that is the case, you can remove the tag from the article. The article will be reviewed to determine if there are any copyright issues.

If substantial content is duplicated and it is not public domain or available under a compatible license, it will be deleted. For legal reasons, we cannot accept copyrighted text or images borrowed from other web sites or printed material. You may use such publications as a source of information, but not as a source of sentences. See our copyright policy for further details. (If you own the copyright to the previously published content and wish to donate it, see Wikipedia:Donating copyrighted materials for the procedure.) CorenSearchBot (talk) 19:18, 31 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]

This tag was applied in error - ispecies copied my work (almost immediately after I posted it) and even credited it as having come from Wikipedia (might want to change search bot parameters).Divingpetrel (talk) 19:32, 31 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]

New articles

		The Bio-star
		Thanks for increasing Wikipedia coverage of Biology-related topics with your creation of the new pages Dolichancistrus and Etsaputu relictum. Your efforts are greatly appreciated. Northamerica1000^(talk) 02:49, 13 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Thank youDivingpetrel (talk) 03:09, 13 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Synodontis euptera

Thanks for sorting that out. I wasn't quite sure what to do about it. CarrieVS (talk) 19:32, 11 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Your Welcome.

Loricariid taxonomy

Hi, I see you have made several changes to loricariid taxonomy based on FishBase. However, FishBase is at odds with what current taxonomists follow in the Loricariidae. FishBase references Ferraris 2007, the checklist of catfishes, a work that was outdated on its date of publication in terms of loricariids. This publication does not follow Armbruster 2004 (on phylogenetics of Hypostominae) because Armbruster 2004 was simply published too late to be included in this checklist. Therefore, many of the changes you have included do not follow what loricariid taxonomists currently follow. Please refer to Armbruster's loricariid taxa list found here: http://www.auburn.edu/academic/science_math/res_area/loricariid/fish_key/TAXALIST/taxalist.html as well as PlanetCatfish, an aquarist website that also follows up-to-date taxonomy (based on Armbruster's work). Although his website is still outdated, it is more up to date than Ferraris 2007 and even includes some of the text from his publications. MiltonT (talk) 21:19, 14 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Milton, Thank you for the information, however I am pretty much done with loricariids except for new species. I know that people take issue with Fishbase and I also am aware that taxonomy, whether for fish, flies or fungi, will always remain a contentious matter, but for my purposes Fishbase works quite well and there are several out-of-date articles out there. It is constantly updated, covers every family of fish and, most importantly for me, provides comparatively detailed information regarding original sources and taxon authorities. I have to go now, so I again thank you for your message.Divingpetrel (talk) 23:58, 27 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Smile!

A smile for you

You’ve just received a random act of kindness! Mike Restivo (talk) 17:03, 2 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you.Divingpetrel (talk) 23:56, 2 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Fish articles

Hey, great work on all the fish-related articles lately! I just wanted to ask that while you're at it, it would be a huge help to tag the article talk pages for WikiProject Fishes by adding {{WikiProject Fishes}}. You are more than welcome to join that project too! Steven Walling • talk 23:48, 12 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]

I could do that, it wouldn't be a problem. As for joining the project, my interests are more on taxonomy (particularly the taxon authorities) than the fishes themselves and thus I shall eventually mostly depart the realm of fishes into that of amphibians. I thank you for the invitation though.Divingpetrel (talk) 23:56, 12 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks! There is also a WikiProject Tree of Life covering taxonomy, of course. :) Steven Walling • talk 00:03, 13 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]

For clear stubs, it would be good to go ahead and add the assessment in the tag like this: {{WikiProject Fishes |class=Stub}}. Thank you for all your work creating these articles! LadyofShalott 04:39, 29 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]

A barnstar for you!

	The Writer's Barnstar
	For all your hard work contributing articles on aquatic taxonomy. Thanks! Press on. --IShadowed 02:15, 9 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Thank youDivingpetrel (talk) 02:35, 9 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Moving pages

Hi, and thank you for your contributions to Wikipedia. It appears that you recently tried to give Profundulidae a different title by copying its content and pasting either the same content, or an edited version of it, into another page with a different name. This is known as a "cut and paste move", and it is undesirable because it splits the page history, which is needed for attribution and various other purposes. Instead, the software used by Wikipedia has a feature that allows pages to be moved to a new title together with their edit history.

In most cases, once your account is four days old and has ten edits, you should be able to move an article yourself using the "Move" tab at the top of the page. This both preserves the page history intact and automatically creates a redirect from the old title to the new. If you cannot perform a particular page move yourself this way (e.g. because a page already exists at the target title), please follow the instructions at requested moves to have it moved by someone else. Also, if there are any other pages that you moved by copying and pasting, even if it was a long time ago, please list them at Wikipedia:Cut and paste move repair holding pen. Profundulus Thank you for the information and correction. I obviously did not read the instructions thoroughly as I have had problems regarding moving pages to titles that already exist. As for other pages, possibly Spratellomorpha, Barbatula sawadai, Barbatula potaninorum, Barbucca diabolica, I did not do nearly as many once someone directed me to the Move function and I see that Melchior went in and cleaned up after me. Again thank you (you appear to have forgotten the tildes after your post so I am not sure who you are) Divingpetrel (talk) 20:34, 14 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Platypanchax modestus

A tag has been placed on Platypanchax modestus, requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under the criteria for speedy deletion, because it is a redirect to itself.

If you can fix this redirect to point to an existing Wikipedia page, please do so and remove the speedy deletion tag. However, please do not remove the speedy deletion tag unless you also fix the redirect. Feel free to leave a note on my talk page if you have any questions about this. R'n'B (call me Russ) 10:03, 21 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Ways to improve Llanolebias stellifer

Hi, I'm Wikishagnik. Divingpetrel, thanks for creating Llanolebias stellifer!

I've just tagged the page, using our page curation tools, as having some issues to fix. Please Cite sources using the Cite error: There are <ref> tags on this page without content in them (see the help page). template

The tags can be removed by you or another editor once the issues they mention are addressed. If you have questions, you can leave a comment on my talk page. Or, for more editing help, talk to the volunteers at the Teahouse.

Speedy deletion declined: Lepidogalaxias salamandroides

Hello Divingpetrel. I am just letting you know that I declined the speedy deletion of Lepidogalaxias salamandroides, a page you tagged for speedy deletion, because of the following concern: When you tried to make the same move in July you were told to try WP:RM; please start a move discussion. Thank you. — Malik Shabazz ^Talk/_Stalk 04:48, 11 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Greetings Shabazz. If you can give me a bit more information on starting a move discussion I would appreciate it. As to your contention that I was told to start a move discussion back in July, I have looked through my talk page and can find no message regarding this issue advising me to start said discussion. I have been trying to figure out how to do this the proper way and would definitely appreciate some guidance. Thank youDivingpetrel (talk) 05:13, 11 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Hi. To start the move discussion, begin a new section at the bottom of Talk:Lepidogalaxias following the instructions at WP:Requested moves#Requesting a single page move. Thank you. — Malik Shabazz ^Talk/_Stalk 05:25, 11 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you. I will look into this tomorrow. I appreciate the assistance.Divingpetrel (talk) 05:32, 11 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Excellent

Hi Divingpetrel, I have come across a large number of your articles of late and I just wanted to say thanks a million for doing the good work! Kindest regards and happy wiki-ing, (MrNiceGuy1113 (talk) 07:27, 2 December 2012 (UTC))[reply]

Thank you for the kind words. I very much appreciate it.Divingpetrel (talk) 15:21, 2 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Ways to improve Lepidobero sinensis

Hi, I'm Ana Bykova. Divingpetrel, thanks for creating Lepidobero sinensis!

I've just tagged the page, using our page curation tools, as having some issues to fix. Thank you for making a wiki page, it looks great. Please refer to the tags added to find out how you could improve it. Best wishes,

Anastasia Bykova (talk) 02:54, 29 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]

The tags can be removed by you or another editor once the issues they mention are addressed. If you have questions, you can leave a comment on my talk page. Or, for more editing help, talk to the volunteers at the Teahouse.

Might as well add here that I enjoy your little articles very much. I think your hard work is exceptional. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Ana Bykova (talk • contribs) 03:23, 29 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Sculpins

	Sculpin Award
	For your prolific work on sculpins! Rosiestep (talk) 03:04, 30 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you very much.Divingpetrel (talk) 03:19, 30 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]

About Yssolebias martae and so on

Hi Divingpetrel, and first off thanks for creating all those great articles! (I particularly like the way you include the full name of the authorities in red-links. Dunno how, but I've ended up specialising in biographies of zoologists... to the extent tha I specialise in anything. )

As for Y. martae: "with only one specimen (the type) known" - would that one specimen be the holotype?
--Shirt58 (talk) 03:15, 1 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you for the kind words. I am glad that you appreciate the use of the red-links to show the full names. I am somewhat proud of coming up with the idea, though I am sure that others have thought of it as well. And yes that is the holotype and I have just changed the article to reflect that.

Again, ThanksDivingpetrel (talk) 03:26, 1 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

January 2013

Hello, I'm Andreasmperu. I noticed that you recently removed some content from Homaloptera maxinae without explaining why. In the future, it would be helpful to others if you described your changes to Wikipedia with an edit summary. If this was a mistake, don't worry, I restored the removed content. If you think I made a mistake, or if you have any questions, you can leave me a message on my talk page. Thanks! Andreasm ^{just talk to me} 03:59, 4 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

So maybe moving the page is the appropiate action to follow, in order to get a redirect to the new title but preserving the page history. Regards, Andreasm ^{just talk to me} 04:13, 4 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Recent edits to Neolamprologus meeli

Hello, and thank you for your recent contributions. I appreciate the effort you made for our project, but unfortunately I had to undo your edit(s) because I believe the article was better before you made that change. Feel free to contact me directly if you have any questions. Thank you! Amit (talk) 08:48, 1 June 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Monotrete

Hello,

I wonder why you want to remove information on taxonomic uncertainty surrounding the genus Monotrete, including the reference to Eschmeyer? If Wikipedia only contains information from FishBase, then one can look FishBase directly. I also wonder why do you want to change automatic taxoboxes/speciesboxes into taxoboxes? This seems a backward change to me. Best wishes, Micromesistius (talk) 21:44, 12 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]

A barnstar for you!

	The Original Barnstar
	Just as the award title says: recognising your particularly fine contributions to Wikipedia,and to let you know that your hard work is seen and appreciated. (ps: started Akihito vanuatu - could you have a little look at that? I get a little bit fuddled about "type species" and whatnot) Shirt58 (talk) 18:02, 26 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you. As for the "type species", that is of importance when dealing with the genus level. It is the species upon which the genus is established. So if two species in a genus are determined to not be closely related and one of them is the "type species", the type is retained in the genus and the other one would be re-classified into another genus. Hope this helps.Divingpetrel (talk) 20:23, 26 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]

A fish for you!!!

	WikiProject Fishes Award
	Thanks for all of your contributions to the WikiProject fishes!!! Ensignricky Talk 19:01, 31 August 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you very much.Divingpetrel (talk) 00:44, 1 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]

"Redundant" deletions

Hello. I have reverted your changes in Oplopomus oplopomus, and partially in Oplopomus. Textual descriptions of taxonomies are not "redundant". Not everyone can read the information of the taxobox as presented.

IMO, we should not remove similar information in other articles. Our readers are not specialists, and thus explicitly describing the relationships of the taxon in text, as well as their type species, localities, original authors, synonyms, etc. are desirable, in addition to what is already present in the taxobox.

Same with the links to the current valid names of type species/genera in non-monotypic taxa, as well as synonyms. Especially when they are not explained in-text, as in Gobius oplopomus (= Oplopomus oplopomus) in the Oplopomus article. By removing the link, you are making it far more difficult for our readers to identify what the accepted name of G. oplopomus currently is.

Regards.-- OBSIDIAN†SOUL 00:33, 15 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]

The lead paragraph is also always treated as discrete from the body of the article. It's a summary of the contents. Thus information repeated in the lead (including repeated linked terms) is not "redundant".-- OBSIDIAN†SOUL 00:40, 15 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you, Divingpetrel!

One of the binomial authorities for Xenomedea rhodopyga (and authority for many other fishies) now has an article. This couldn't have happened without your ongoing great work. Thanks again. Pete AU aka --Shirt58 (talk) 11:49, 9 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you Pete. That is one of the results that I hoped for when I started this. I have noticed several new articles regarding taxon authorities (I have contributed a small number - all translations from other language sites), but I do not know how many of them are a result of my work. It is nice to know that in at least this case the new article resulted from my efforts. Again, many thanksDivingpetrel (talk) 02:18, 10 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Lonchopishtus → Lonchopisthus

You recently started Lonchopishtus. Could you please move it to the correct spelling Lonchopisthus (note typo in current article name: Lonchopishtus). I have already corrected the genus spelling in the article text and taxobox; the only things that remain are to move the article to the correct name and correct the spelling in the genus list of Opistognathidae. Regards, 62.107.209.193 (talk) 17:50, 19 April 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Disambiguation link notification for May 6

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.

Blackfin darter (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver)

added a link pointing to Duck River

Egg-mimic darter (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver)

added a link pointing to Duck River

Striated darter (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver)

added a link pointing to Duck River

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 08:49, 6 May 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Speedy deletion nomination of Gorogobius

If this is the first article that you have created, you may want to read the guide to writing your first article.
You may want to consider using the Article Wizard to help you create articles.

A tag has been placed on Gorogobius requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section A7 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because the article appears to be about a person or group of people, but it does not indicate how or why the subject is important or significant: that is, why an article about that subject should be included in an encyclopedia. Under the criteria for speedy deletion, such articles may be deleted at any time. Please read more about what is generally accepted as notable.

If you think this page should not be deleted for this reason, you may contest the nomination by visiting the page and clicking the button labelled "Click here to contest this speedy deletion". This will give you the opportunity to explain why you believe the page should not be deleted. However, be aware that once a page is tagged for speedy deletion, it may be removed without delay. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag from the page yourself, but do not hesitate to add information in line with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. If the page is deleted, and you wish to retrieve the deleted material for future reference or improvement, then please contact the deleting administrator, or if you have already done so, you can place a request here. Amortias (T)(C) 20:17, 31 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]

ArbCom elections are now open!

Hi,
You appear to be eligible to vote in the current Arbitration Committee election. The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to enact binding solutions for disputes between editors, primarily related to serious behavioural issues that the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the ability to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail. If you wish to participate, you are welcome to review the candidates' statements and submit your choices on the voting page. For the Election committee, MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 16:45, 24 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]

ArbCom Elections 2016: Voting now open!

Hello, Divingpetrel. Voting in the 2016 Arbitration Committee elections is open from Monday, 00:00, 21 November through Sunday, 23:59, 4 December to all unblocked users who have registered an account before Wednesday, 00:00, 28 October 2016 and have made at least 150 mainspace edits before Sunday, 00:00, 1 November 2016.

The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail.

If you wish to participate in the 2016 election, please review the candidates' statements and submit your choices on the voting page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 22:08, 21 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Ways to improve Xenocharax

Hi, I'm Robvanvee. Divingpetrel, thanks for creating Xenocharax!

I've just tagged the page, using our page curation tools, as having some issues to fix. This stub could use more references.

The tags can be removed by you or another editor once the issues they mention are addressed. If you have questions, you can leave a comment on my talk page. Or, for more editing help, talk to the volunteers at the Teahouse. Rob van vee 17:29, 5 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Thalassenchelys foliaceus listed at Redirects for discussion

An editor has asked for a discussion to address the redirect Thalassenchelys foliaceus. Since you had some involvement with the Thalassenchelys foliaceus redirect, you might want to participate in the redirect discussion if you have not already done so. — billinghurst sDrewth 10:42, 30 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]

ArbCom 2017 election voter message

Hello, Divingpetrel. Voting in the 2017 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23.59 on Sunday, 10 December. All users who registered an account before Saturday, 28 October 2017, made at least 150 mainspace edits before Wednesday, 1 November 2017 and are not currently blocked are eligible to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once.

The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail.

If you wish to participate in the 2017 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 18:42, 3 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]

ArbCom 2018 election voter message

Hello, Divingpetrel. Voting in the 2018 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23.59 on Sunday, 3 December. All users who registered an account before Sunday, 28 October 2018, made at least 150 mainspace edits before Thursday, 1 November 2018 and are not currently blocked are eligible to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once.

The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail.

If you wish to participate in the 2018 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 18:42, 19 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]

ArbCom 2018 election voter message

Hello, Divingpetrel. Voting in the 2018 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23.59 on Sunday, 3 December. All users who registered an account before Sunday, 28 October 2018, made at least 150 mainspace edits before Thursday, 1 November 2018 and are not currently blocked are eligible to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once.

The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail.

If you wish to participate in the 2018 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 18:42, 19 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Speedy deletion nomination of Category:Arapaimidae

A tag has been placed on Category:Arapaimidae indicating that it is currently empty, and is not a disambiguation category, a category redirect, a featured topics category, under discussion at Categories for discussion, or a project category that by its nature may become empty on occasion. If it remains empty for seven days or more, it may be deleted under section C1 of the criteria for speedy deletion.

If you think this page should not be deleted for this reason you may contest the nomination by visiting the page and clicking the button labelled "Contest this speedy deletion". This will give you the opportunity to explain why you believe the page should not be deleted. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag from the page yourself. Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 15:34, 19 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Speedy deletion nomination of Category:Neosebastidae

A tag has been placed on Category:Neosebastidae indicating that it is currently empty, and is not a disambiguation category, a category redirect, a featured topics category, under discussion at Categories for discussion, or a project category that by its nature may become empty on occasion. If it remains empty for seven days or more, it may be deleted under section C1 of the criteria for speedy deletion.

If you think this page should not be deleted for this reason you may contest the nomination by visiting the page and clicking the button labelled "Contest this speedy deletion". This will give you the opportunity to explain why you believe the page should not be deleted. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag from the page yourself. Qwerfjkl talk 18:22, 5 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Speedy deletion nomination of Category:Caracanthidae

A tag has been placed on Category:Caracanthidae indicating that it is currently empty, and is not a disambiguation category, a category redirect, a featured topics category, under discussion at Categories for discussion, or a project category that by its nature may become empty on occasion. If it remains empty for seven days or more, it may be deleted under section C1 of the criteria for speedy deletion.

If you think this page should not be deleted for this reason you may contest the nomination by visiting the page and clicking the button labelled "Contest this speedy deletion". This will give you the opportunity to explain why you believe the page should not be deleted. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag from the page yourself. Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 16:45, 13 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Speedy deletion nomination of Category:Apistidae

A tag has been placed on Category:Apistidae indicating that it is currently empty, and is not a disambiguation category, a category redirect, a featured topics category, under discussion at Categories for discussion, or a project category that by its nature may become empty on occasion. If it remains empty for seven days or more, it may be deleted under section C1 of the criteria for speedy deletion.

If you think this page should not be deleted for this reason you may contest the nomination by visiting the page and clicking the button labelled "Contest this speedy deletion". This will give you the opportunity to explain why you believe the page should not be deleted. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag from the page yourself. Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 05:04, 14 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Speedy deletion nomination of Category:Perryenidae

A tag has been placed on Category:Perryenidae indicating that it is currently empty, and is not a disambiguation category, a category redirect, a featured topics category, under discussion at Categories for discussion, or a project category that by its nature may become empty on occasion. If it remains empty for seven days or more, it may be deleted under section C1 of the criteria for speedy deletion.

If you think this page should not be deleted for this reason you may contest the nomination by visiting the page and clicking the button labelled "Contest this speedy deletion". This will give you the opportunity to explain why you believe the page should not be deleted. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag from the page yourself. Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 01:35, 24 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Speedy deletion nomination of Category:Parabembridae

A tag has been placed on Category:Parabembridae indicating that it is currently empty, and is not a disambiguation category, a category redirect, a featured topics category, under discussion at Categories for discussion, or a project category that by its nature may become empty on occasion. If it remains empty for seven days or more, it may be deleted under section C1 of the criteria for speedy deletion.

If you think this page should not be deleted for this reason you may contest the nomination by visiting the page and clicking the button labelled "Contest this speedy deletion". This will give you the opportunity to explain why you believe the page should not be deleted. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag from the page yourself. Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 01:04, 3 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]

"Naga-buna" listed at Redirects for discussion

An editor has identified a potential problem with the redirect Naga-buna and has thus listed it for discussion. This discussion will occur at Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2022 July 7#Naga-buna until a consensus is reached, and anyone, including you, is welcome to contribute to the discussion. TraderCharlotte (talk) 23:01, 7 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Speedy deletion nomination of Category:Comephoridae

A tag has been placed on Category:Comephoridae indicating that it is currently empty, and is not a disambiguation category, a category redirect, a featured topics category, under discussion at Categories for discussion, or a project category that by its nature may become empty on occasion. If it remains empty for seven days or more, it may be deleted under section C1 of the criteria for speedy deletion.

If you think this page should not be deleted for this reason you may contest the nomination by visiting the page and clicking the button labelled "Contest this speedy deletion". This will give you the opportunity to explain why you believe the page should not be deleted. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag from the page yourself. Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 01:21, 8 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Nomination of Rama rama for deletion

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Rama rama 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/Rama rama 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.

Traumnovelle (talk) 05:39, 16 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Speedy deletion nomination of Category:Parascorpididae

A tag has been placed on Category:Parascorpididae indicating that it is currently empty, and is not a disambiguation category, a category redirect, under discussion at Categories for discussion, or a project category that by its nature may become empty on occasion. If it remains empty for seven days or more, it may be deleted under section C1 of the criteria for speedy deletion.

If you think this page should not be deleted for this reason you may contest the nomination by visiting the page and removing the speedy deletion tag. Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 19:37, 19 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]