Jump to content

User talk:Lark999

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Welcome

[edit]

Hello, Lark999, and Welcome to Wikipedia!

Thank you for your contributions to this free encyclopedia. If you decide that you need help, check out Getting Help below, ask at the help desk, or place {{Help me}} on your talk page and ask your question there. Please remember to sign your name on talk pages by clicking or by typing four tildes (~~~~); this will automatically produce your username and the date. Also, please do your best to always fill in the edit summary field. Below are some useful links to help you get started. Happy editing! KylieTastic (talk) 11:50, 14 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Your submission at Articles for creation: Bulbine favosa has been accepted

[edit]
Bulbine favosa, which you submitted to Articles for creation, has been created.

Congratulations, and thank you for helping expand the scope of Wikipedia! We hope you will continue making quality contributions.

The article has been assessed as Start-Class, which is recorded on its talk page. Most new articles start out as Stub-Class or Start-Class and then attain higher grades as they develop over time. You may like to take a look at the grading scheme to see how you can improve the article.

Since you have made at least 10 edits over more than four days, you can now create articles yourself without posting a request. However, you may continue submitting work to Articles for creation if you prefer.

If you have any questions, you are welcome to ask at the help desk. Once you have made at least 10 edits and had an account for at least four days, you will have the option to create articles yourself without posting a request to Articles for creation.

If you would like to help us improve this process, please consider leaving us some feedback.

Thanks again, and happy editing!

Tol (talk | contribs) @ 22:52, 12 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Your submission at Articles for creation: Xylaria Hypoxilon Var Rosa Tincta (May 14)

[edit]
Your recent article submission to Articles for Creation has been reviewed! Unfortunately, it has not been accepted at this time. The reason left by KylieTastic was:
This submission is not adequately supported by reliable sources. Reliable sources are required so that information can be verified. If you need help with referencing, please see Referencing for beginners and Citing sources.
Please check the submission for any additional comments left by the reviewer. You are encouraged to edit the submission to address the issues raised and resubmit after they have been resolved.
KylieTastic (talk) 11:50, 14 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Teahouse logo
Hello, Lark999! Having an article draft declined at Articles for Creation can be disappointing. If you are wondering why your article submission was declined, please post a question at the Articles for creation help desk. If you have any other questions about your editing experience, we'd love to help you at the Teahouse, a friendly space on Wikipedia where experienced editors lend a hand to help new editors like yourself! See you there! KylieTastic (talk) 11:50, 14 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Your submission at Articles for creation: Xylaria Polymorpha var Corylus Fuscus (May 14)

[edit]
Your recent article submission to Articles for Creation has been reviewed! Unfortunately, it has not been accepted at this time. The reason left by KylieTastic was:
This submission is not adequately supported by reliable sources. Reliable sources are required so that information can be verified. If you need help with referencing, please see Referencing for beginners and Citing sources.
Please check the submission for any additional comments left by the reviewer. You are encouraged to edit the submission to address the issues raised and resubmit after they have been resolved.
KylieTastic (talk) 11:51, 14 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Your thread has been archived

[edit]
Teahouse logo

Hi Lark999! The thread you created at the Wikipedia:Teahouse, what to do about my xylaria hypoxilon discoveries, has been archived because there was no discussion for a few days.

You can still read the archived discussion. If you have follow-up questions, please create a new thread.


See also the help page about the archival process. The archival was done by Lowercase sigmabot III, and this notification was delivered by Muninnbot, both automated accounts. You can opt out of future notifications by placing {{bots|deny=Muninnbot}} on top of the current page (your user talk page). Muninnbot (talk) 19:01, 18 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Your submission at Articles for creation: Eustis Lake beardtongue has been accepted

[edit]
Eustis Lake beardtongue, which you submitted to Articles for creation, has been created.

Congratulations, and thank you for helping expand the scope of Wikipedia! We hope you will continue making quality contributions.

The article has been assessed as Stub-Class, which is recorded on its talk page. It is commonplace for new articles to start out as stubs and then attain higher grades as they develop over time. You may like to take a look at the grading scheme to see how you can improve the article.

Since you have made at least 10 edits over more than four days, you can now create articles yourself without posting a request. However, you may continue submitting work to Articles for creation if you prefer.

If you have any questions, you are welcome to ask at the help desk. Once you have made at least 10 edits and had an account for at least four days, you will have the option to create articles yourself without posting a request to Articles for creation.

If you would like to help us improve this process, please consider leaving us some feedback.

Thanks again, and happy editing!

PK650 (talk) 11:25, 21 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Concern regarding Draft:Xylaria Hypoxilon Var Rosa Tincta

[edit]

Information icon Hello, Lark999. This is a bot-delivered message letting you know that Draft:Xylaria Hypoxilon Var Rosa Tincta, a page you created, has not been edited in at least 5 months. Drafts that have not been edited for six months may be deleted, so if you wish to retain the page, please edit it again or request that it be moved to your userspace.

If the page has already been deleted, you can request it be undeleted so you can continue working on it.

Thank you for your submission to Wikipedia. FireflyBot (talk) 03:36, 30 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Concern regarding Draft:Xylaria Polymorpha var Corylus Fuscus

[edit]

Information icon Hello, Lark999. This is a bot-delivered message letting you know that Draft:Xylaria Polymorpha var Corylus Fuscus, a page you created, has not been edited in at least 5 months. Drafts that have not been edited for six months may be deleted, so if you wish to retain the page, please edit it again or request that it be moved to your userspace.

If the page has already been deleted, you can request it be undeleted so you can continue working on it.

Thank you for your submission to Wikipedia. FireflyBot (talk) 03:36, 30 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

I have sent you a note about a page you started

[edit]

Hi Lark999. Thank you for your work on Philodromus rufus ssp. pacificus. Another editor, Memer15151, has reviewed it as part of new pages patrol and left the following comment:

Articles should be written from a neutral point of view; I would remove "important" and rephrase the "Appearance" section to read something like "...is a distinguishing feature from its parent species" other than "...is notable because". Regardless, thank you for creating the article!

To reply, leave a comment here and begin it with {{Re|Memer15151}}. (Message delivered via the Page Curation tool, on behalf of the reviewer.)

UserMemer (chat) Tribs 00:07, 3 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@Memer15151: bad habit... ty for reviewing !
wont use that language in future. Lark999 (talk) 15:05, 3 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I have sent you a note about a page you started

[edit]

Hi Lark999. Thank you for your work on Philodromus rufus pacificus. Another editor, CFA, has reviewed it as part of new pages patrol and left the following comment:

Subspecies are not inherently notable. Please cite independent sources with significant coverage to establish notability.

To reply, leave a comment here and begin it with {{Re|CFA}}. (Message delivered via the Page Curation tool, on behalf of the reviewer.)

C F A 14:40, 4 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@CFA: I have cited more sources with coverage and records to establish notability. if I must add more just let me know! Lark999 (talk) 15:03, 4 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I have sent you a note about a page you started

[edit]

Hi Lark999. Thank you for your work on Acorynus luzonicus. Another editor, Memer15151, has reviewed it as part of new pages patrol and left the following comment:

See tags placed on article. iNaturalist observations can be wrong. Also, I would consider adding a speciesbox. Good start, though, thanks for creating this article.

To reply, leave a comment here and begin it with {{Re|Memer15151}}. (Message delivered via the Page Curation tool, on behalf of the reviewer.)

UserMemer (chat) Tribs 17:42, 4 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@Memer15151: I also helped with the identification of this observation and have also deep dived. its definitely luzonicus!
http://gaga.biodiv.tw/9501bx/546.htm Lark999 (talk) 22:20, 5 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
also see:https://www.pinterest.com/pin/acorynus-luzonicus-lanhsuanus-shibata-1982--584623595379392375/
which I cant site but also is.
there are multiple subspecies and they are distinct. the one shown in the observation just has smaller spots. Lark999 (talk) 22:22, 5 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
info on subspecies :https://www.biodiversitylibrary.org/item/22250#page/115/mode/1up
takes an insane amount of time to load tho. Lark999 (talk) 22:23, 5 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Wikipedia is a tertiary source. We rely mostly on secondary sources. If no secondary sources that are considered to be reliable analyze the observation, it will not be appropriate to include it in the article. Although I do believe that your analysis of the photograph shows that it is the species, it would be classified as original research, which is not allowed on Wikipedia. I would say the statement could be kept if a subject-matter expert IDs the observation as sp. luzonicus. In summary, it would not be appropriate to analyze the observation yourself and make a conclusion without confirmation from a reliable source or subject-matter expert; doing so would result in original research. UserMemer (chat) Tribs 00:42, 6 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

CS1 error on Novius pumilus

[edit]

Hello, I'm Qwerfjkl (bot). I have automatically detected that this edit performed by you, on the page Novius pumilus, may have introduced referencing errors. They are as follows:

  • A bare URL error. References show this error when one of the URL-containing parameters cannot be paired with an associated title. Please edit the article to add the appropriate title parameter to the reference. (Fix | Ask for help)

Please check this page and fix the errors highlighted. If you think this is a false positive, you can report it to my operator. Thanks, Qwerfjkl (bot) (talk) 19:48, 8 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk:Lark999&oldid=1261936979"