This is an archive of past discussions with User:Obsidian Soul. Do not edit the contents of this page. If you wish to start a new discussion or revive an old one, please do so on the current talk page.
Hi, and welcome to WikiProject Plants! Our scope includes any and all taxa of plants, botanists, and botany topics. We're glad to have you working with us on our project!
A few features that you might find helpful:
Our navigation box points to most of the useful pages within the project.
Images: There are articles that need images. You can search Wikimedia Commons for images. When you find one, add it to the Wikipedia article in the taxobox and remove the "needs-photo=yes" parameter from the project banner on the talk page of the article. You could also help identify plant photos on Commons.
Taxobox: We also have articles that need taxoboxes. See the taxobox usage guide for information on how to add a taxobox. When complete, don't forget to remove the "needs-taxobox=yes" parameter from the talk page banner.
My pleasure. And thank you for working on the neglected Musa articles! It's great to have so many people who inhabit the various corners of botany on Wikipedia. Keep up the great work. Rkitko(talk)18:42, 11 January 2011 (UTC)
Hi Obsidian Soul, I nominated Glischrochilus to be included in "did you know?" but then noticed that the sources about the attraction to beer aren't really reliable, being a pest controllor's website and a blog. I tried to look for different sources but didn't have any luck. Can you find anything better or should I withdraw the nomination? SmartSE (talk) 23:50, 25 January 2011 (UTC)
Hey, SmartSE. Some of the other more academic references in the article also mentions its common name as 'beer bugs' I think, but I didn't re-use them for those sentences. I'll go over them again and see if I can find one. I'll try searching online as well and in books we have here. If I still can't find any good sources for them, then feel free to withdraw the nomination, heh. Thanks for the heads up.--Obsidi♠nSoul02:26, 26 January 2011 (UTC)
Cool, I couldn't check the journals unfortunately so was a bit stuck. I'll keep an eye on the article. Good luck with finding something, I really like the hook (hopefully, not blowing my own trumpet)! SmartSE (talk) 20:10, 26 January 2011 (UTC)
The Bintang covers
Excuse me, I would like to request for your help. I understand you are in the WikiProjects Plants, but I'm just looking for assistance. I am still new to this Fair Use Rationale thing, and my images are in danger.
Bintang 2009 and its brethren (2008, 2007, 2006, 2005, 2004, 2003, 2002, 2001, 2000, 1999, 1998, 1997, 1996, 1995, 1992, 1991, 1990, 1989) seems to not have enough information for the Fair Use Rationale, and my talk page have been crammed again for that. I am hoping for some clarifications and pointers on how to have a concrete rationale. Thank you, from WHZhang (talk) 00:37, 31 January 2011 (UTC)
Hello WHZhang. According to the deletion notice, your pictures failed to pass A8: it doesn't significantly increase readers' understanding of the topic and is only used for illustration.
As mentioned earlier, you really can't just use FUR on anything. The picture has to be important to the article and must increase the reader's understanding of the topic (e.g. if it illustrates something that could not be explained through text). I really recommend getting the pictures appropriately licensed instead by getting an OTRS ticket like I recommended earlier. FUR is usually only used for historically significant or non-replaceable pictures that illustrates the subject matter and adds educational value to the article on which it is used. Also, as the editor who placed the templates recommended, please try asking questions first in Wikipedia:Media_copyright_questions --Obsidi♠nSoul02:14, 31 January 2011 (UTC)
GaiaRecycle
I have provided a list of new reference links to articles published by media/editors serving the waste management and recycling industries. All company press releases have been deleted from reference list. Also, other generic-type edits were made in text per your comments. Please approve this new version of the GaiaRecycle information as this company is making a significant contribution to the waste management and ecological recycling industries. Thank you. Pattie AdamsPattieadams (talk) 23:43, 31 January 2011 (UTC)
Sorry, but you should contact the reviewer in question. In this case, it's User_talk:CharlieEchoTango. I am not a reviewer and only helped submit the article per irc convo. Please also listen to what reviewers tell you. It will help you write an article that abides by major policies and help it getting accepted. No single editor controls wikipedia, thus you must try to follow the policies as best as you can or your article will be declined/deleted again and again (even if you convince one editor to approve it). Thank you.--Obsidi♠nSoul04:38, 1 February 2011 (UTC)
DYK for Glischrochilus
On 2 February 2011, Did you know? was updated with a fact from the article Glischrochilus, which you created or substantially expanded. The fact was ... that picnic beetles(example pictured) are attracted to beer? You are welcome to check how many hits the article got while on the front page (here's how, quick check) and add it to DYKSTATS if it got over 5,000. If you know of another interesting fact from a recently created article, then please suggest it on the Did you know? talk page.
Nice work with the article. I'll fire off an email to Dr. Wilby at the British Geological Survey to see if he might release the picture he drew with the ink under a creative commons licence. SmartSE (talk) 20:35, 6 February 2011 (UTC)
That would be awesome! :D Thanks. At the moment I'm reduced to scavenging 19th century illustrations LOL. The article is still not finished though, still have to add stuff on its history between Mantell, Pearce, and Owen. Need to research some more stuff too, some info are a bit contradictory.--Obsidi♠nSoul20:38, 6 February 2011 (UTC)
No probs, keep your fingers crossed. The article is certainly good enough for DYK - don't forget to nominate it within 5 days of starting to expand it, even if there are a few things you need to tweak still. SmartSE (talk) 20:53, 6 February 2011 (UTC)
It's too late for that unfortunately - I should have stalked you more closely! One thing though - have you sent an email to ask whether we can use this file? I noticed it is licenced under a non-commercial licence on tolweb which annoyinglu would mean that we can't use it :( SmartSE (talk) 21:49, 6 February 2011 (UTC)
Unfortunately still don't know the mechanics of DYK heh. No worries though. And yes on that picture, I got permission from the author and sent an OTRS along with his email of permission. OTRS haven't replied yet, so I don't know if there's any problem on their end. --Obsidi♠nSoul21:55, 6 February 2011 (UTC)
It's pretty simple, new or 5x expanded can be nominated within 5 days of the expansion/creation date. Cool - just wanted to check, seem to recall getting caught out by non-commercial licences before, that's all. OTRS should deal with it soon. SmartSE (talk) 21:58, 6 February 2011 (UTC)
Gotcha, thanks. :) DYK is really just a bonus though, heh. It's enough that the article has been expanded. I'll try to nominate Belemnotheutis later today after I finish the last section and start cleaning up.--Obsidi♠nSoul22:07, 6 February 2011 (UTC)
Got a reply, he's asking the copyright manager about it. He mentioned two other papers though that discuss the soft tissue finds:
Wilby, P.R., Hudson, J.D., Clements, R.G. and Hollingworth, N.T.J. 2004. Taphonomy and origin of an accumulate of soft-bodied cephalopods in the Oxford Clay Formation (Jurassic, England). Palaeontology, 47, 1159-1180.
Wilby, P.R., Duff, K., Page, K. and Martin, S. 2008. Preserving the unpreservable: a lost world rediscovered at Christian Malford, UK. Geology Today, 24, 95-98.
Can't find anything available freely. Do you know any wikipedian editor with society access to the Wiley Online Library?--Obsidi♠nSoul08:28, 8 February 2011 (UTC)
I'll see what I can do. I'll send you an email, can reply so I can forward them to you if someone has access? I'm making you sound like a naughty child... but you haven't nominated it for DYK yet. Do you need a hand with the template? SmartSE (talk) 11:20, 8 February 2011 (UTC)
Heh, cool thanks. :) As for the nomination. I should probably do that now. Was putting it off until I can write the History subsection but I guess I can do that while it's being considered.--Obsidi♠nSoul11:25, 8 February 2011 (UTC)
This is about "carbonic acid"and the following "remark" giving H+when equilibrium is attained. it fact fact,the author gives the result using a too crude approximation which yields totally different values for "carbonate concentrations " in aqueous .In fact,the relation giving H+ is treated by the author as a second order term in H+ but it is not and a secondary equation must be solved.This yields an undetermined expression which has to be solved by using the classical Hopital rule. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Beranay (talk • contribs) 15:09, 7 February 2011 (UTC)
Belemnotheutis taxonomy
I have to say I'm not too hot on extinct cephs so I can't really suggest anything beyond what the sources say. With regards to the three classifications, I would certainly give more weight to the first two, as Sepkoski's is not a specialist work on cephalopods. It would probably be best to bring this up at WikiProject Paleontology. WikiProject Cephalopods is effectively dead and has been for some time, I'm afraid. mgiganteus1 (talk) 16:03, 9 February 2011 (UTC)
desagreement
This concerns the declared "undid revision 411580909 " by Beranay talk 217122153158. This refers to the article "carbonic acid"and the following "remark" quoted in the subsequent article. I am sure there is an important error in this article.This is why I am trying again to have some exchange with this author, but without success. Why? Bera — Preceding unsigned comment added by Beranay (talk • contribs) 10:48, 11 February 2011 (UTC)
Sorry
This is about the text concerning "carbonic acid".Sorry for the misunderstanding.I thought it was allowed to write directly to the editor. A suggestion for the future would be to suppress clearly the possibility of writing through the "heart" of the text. Beranay — Preceding unsigned comment added by Beranay (talk • contribs) 10:02, 12 February 2011 (UTC)
Help Again
Hi again,
I have another question. Does it take a while for the picture to be updated on the corresponding community page on Facebook? I saw the logo was old on the WildTangent community page, http://www.facebook.com/pages/WildTangent/108372395854784, and that the page is from the Wikipedia article.
When you leave messages, please remember to "sign" your name, by putting ~~~~ (four tilde signs) at the end. This will add your name, and the date and time. You can also do this by clicking the 'sign' button, pictured to the right.
Facebook, and all kinds of other web-sites, copy Wikipedia pages. How they do it, and how often they update it, is entirely up to them; it is totally outside the control of Wikipedia. So, you'd have to ask for help on Facebook. Chzz ► 18:37, 15 February 2011 (UTC)TPS
Refs and stuff
Hi. We were talking about how to explain refs, and I think you were disconnected.
One thing I wanted to say was, that sometimes it can be best to show by example - just editing their draft, and banging in a couple of refs. That can help in conjunction with online help, too.
There's a similarity to http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/TED_Conference and they have not been deleted, so can you tell me what the next step is to getting the AFC to normal page status? Do I need to have it reviewed ? Do I need unbiased 3 rd parties to add material ?
On 16 February 2011, Did you know? was updated with a fact from the article Belemnotheutis, which you created or substantially expanded. The fact was ... that the 150-million-year-old ink of the extinct, squid-like Belemnotheutis(artist's rendition pictured) was used to draw a picture that paleontologists called "the ultimate self portrait"? You are welcome to check how many hits the article got while on the front page (here's how, quick check) and add it to DYKSTATS if it got over 5,000. If you know of another interesting fact from a recently created article, then please suggest it on the Did you know? talk page.
You removed a comment by Pieter Kuiper which addressed concerns about the rename. You didn't, heh. My mistake. :)
The duplicate was a copy-pasting error in an attempt to restore the message by Pieter Kuiper, which I duly corrected afterward.
I did address your question, it's an article name dispute isn't it? Please read my recommendations again. The help channel can not do the research for you and page moves are recommended to be done after a discussion rather than moving it unilaterally as you did in that article.
Again let me emphasize that helpers from IRC can not help with content disputes (we have no more authority to do so than everyone else). We can only help with editing problems. Your use of the template was inappropriate in the given context so I removed it, though I did try to give you the relevant policies involved in such disputes to help settle it. Again please try seeking comments from Wikipedia:WikiProject Saints instead or do a simple Wikipedia:Requests for comment.--Obsidi♠nSoul09:43, 17 February 2011 (UTC)
The Debt (2007 film)
Obsidian Soul: *Thanks!!!* for fixing the problem with the double-column listing of the cast members for the film. I couldn't figure it out, but now I've learned from your fix. Many thanks! NearTheZoo (talk) 18:49, 19 February 2011 (UTC)
Dear Obsidian Soul,
I wanted to stop by and say hello and thank you for all of your time and help. I'm so grateful for people like you that got involved - your patience and time that you all put into helping - I am incredibly touched by that.
Looking forward to seeing you around here in the future, in more pleasant circumstances! :)
You're welcome. :) Feel free to ask if you need help with editing again. Hope that experience hasn't soured you from Wikipedia, heh. They're quite common mistakes for newbies to make and our handling of them can be somewhat harsher than necessary.--Obsidi♠nSoul10:14, 25 February 2011 (UTC)
Hello, there is an upcoming, very informal discussion on IRC on the freenode channel ##chzzalphaconnect (quick webchat link) on the 6th March 2011 at 17:00 UTC concerning ways to improve help over IRC, and other matters relating to Wiki?edia channels in general, but mostly about #wikipedia-en-help.
This is just a friendly, informal chat. Nothing official, no fixed agenda. There is nothing 'secretive' about it - anyone is quite welcome. Some of you had a chat there, the other day. We wanted to invite them to carry on discussions, at a prearranged time - and thought it courteous to ask group contacts and channel founders too. Or if you signed up manually.
If you aren't at all interested, feel free to remove yourself from the names we've spammed this to, which is in User:123Hedgehog456/IRC informal chat users. If you didn't sign up, well, people have been adding loads of names to the list, so someone might have accidentally added your name.
Sorry, you should put that in your edit summary to make it clearer. It was already reverted before and I couldn't quite understand why you were changing a comment on the talk page of all places. I think we both assumed you were refactoring the comments of another user. Anyway, my apologies. I won't revert it again. --Obsidi♠nSoul19:54, 22 March 2011 (UTC)
No worries, it's been pointed out to me that I should have explanation of the bot on my user page to help clarify things. I gotta get around to that. — deflective (talk) 20:07, 22 March 2011 (UTC)
Do You Know Any Good Sources for Wikipedia-Legal Images?
Thanks for taking the time to provide the information on the Minamisanriku tsunami images I was trying to add to the article.
Do You Know Any Good Sources for Wikipedia-Legal Images?
Hello. There is a list of such sites which release free images here: Free image resources. Usually images taken by Federal employees in the United States are also under Public Domain which makes them usable by Wikipedia (Examples of which are images published by NASA). You can also try a Google search under advanced settings and choosing the option "labeled for commercial re-use with modification".
If nothing else, you can try emailing the copyright holders of the photos and ask them to release an image for free (usually under the CC-BY-SA license). The process of doing that is outlined here: Commons:OTRS. I suggest you create a user account in Wikipedia and Commons as you can't upload any free images you find yourself unless you are registered.--Obsidi♠nSoul06:44, 25 March 2011 (UTC)
Thanks for the tips! :-) I'll get an account too (am currently working from a few different computers, it would be less confusing to have a Wikipedia account).
I am so sorry. I've actually used this program before. This would have saved you all that time. (I have trouble using it now because it causes my connection to get clipped due to my geolocation.) This may be a fantastic resource for you in the future. Laurels to you and lemons to me. Anna Frodesiak (talk) 21:31, 26 March 2011 (UTC)
A bibingka for the most excellent and knowledgeable Obsidian Soul.
Wondering if you might advise about captions for other Philippine desserts here. I took pictures of them but I dont' know much about them other than I wanted to eat them but didn't have the money at the time. Thanks for your help on bibingka.--Tomwsulcer (talk) 22:24, 28 March 2011 (UTC)
Will do. :) Though some of them may be unfamiliar to me (different names in different languages/islands/regions here), but I'll try.--Obsidi♠nSoul22:25, 28 March 2011 (UTC)
Done. Might be a bit too long for the thumbs, feel free to reword. I'm also really not sure if "Maja ube" is the same as the dessert we call "Ube jam" here. I didn't mention it to be safe. And you're welcome re: bibingka. I really should write articles on all of them... but meh, a bit hard finding reliable sources on them. :) Anyway, cheers. --Obsidi♠nSoul23:01, 28 March 2011 (UTC)
There is information for you at User talk:Moray An Par. Please do not do anything to WP:out me again, like unnecessarily attacking me in the context of my having written an article thinking a person was put in prison in August 2010, and finding out a successful prosecution occured with a federal judgment, but that person was not yet captured, and only their husband was put in federal prison in August 2010. After discovering this, I began to edit with an IP, so as not to endanger myself. I am sure it was not your intent, but pointing out that an IP makes similar edits to an editor is not helpful. I already discussed the situation with other editors a few days ago, and began editing with an IP. My edits that you are deleting as "cut and paste" started off as cut and paste, and I am gradually modifying them to uniquely fit each article's topic. I do not understand your blanket deletions, when the content, even as a partial cuta and paste, is better than the content of the rest of the article. For example, in one article the content was deleted by another editor as "individual info does not belong here", leaving unsourced individual's info for others, but not the RS info on this particular individual, who is much more famous, appearing in CBS News 60 Minutes, Washington Post, and international press. Please discuss at talk pages of those articles, and if you would, discuss the content, not me, as this may WP:Out me, and endanger me. Thanks :) 71.121.31.183 (talk) 12:25, 30 March 2011 (UTC)
Copy-pasting extremely lengthy sections of it on every vaguely related topic you can think of (Notability, Bank fraud, Shell company, etc.), liberally peppering everything with wikilinks pointing to that article, and redirecting everything and everyone connected to that person comes off as scandal-mongering to me, sorry. Editing under your IP is also a bit useless at this point, anyone can immediately see who you are from just looking at your edits and looking at the articles in question. And frankly, the way you are using it is borderline sock-puppetry. You don't want your identity associated with the article, but you show something akin to obsession over it. I have shown it to an oversight and he recommended an AN/I.
But... I really really don't want to go there. I do not want drama, but seeing what you did, I simply can't just stand by and watch. So if possible, I ask you to revert all your additions on the rest of the other articles. We can't do it for you, hence why I require an administrator to go over all your edits and clean up. But if you do it yourself, I don't think we will need one. And rewrite the entire article into something less like an attack page or something you'd read in a tabloid. She is notable and your sources are good, but the way you write it is simply not neutral in any way whatsoever. To be honest, it sounds like you have an axe to grind with her in the way you are spamming it all over Wikipedia. The policies for biographies of living persons are extremely strict, even for fugitives/criminals.
I have no interest in the subject, and I'd rather not get drawn into this. So if you can fix the problems you've caused, I will be grateful. Otherwise, I really have no choice but to ask for admin help.--Obsidi♠nSoul12:46, 30 March 2011 (UTC)
Thanks for the thoughtful response. Regarding scandal mongering, I, and others, removed the circular linking and overlinking. I am trying to consider your "obsession over it" comment in a more general context regarding edits I made in other unrelated articles I have worked on, such as the articles on Traditional Chinese medicine, Louis Lesser], Acupuncture, and Acupunture. It is hard to be self-critical and to notice one's own obsessions gradually developed by step by step edits in an WP:FROG kind of manner, but I am trying follwing yours and others' comments. One may lose neutrality when one reads about conning the hardest hit of the impoverished in Bangladesh and Philippines (those facing bankrupcy) in order to buy the largest home in Beverly Hills, using a method of operation of pretense to Catholicism and a complete and utter reversal of "Mother Theresa in Bangladesh" and "Nobel prize for assisting Bangladeshis with microfinancing in Bangladesh" with the abuses of these peoples by this woman, then getting actually personally frightened after discovering that the recent prison conviction was only for the husband, with her and her underlings still on the loose. But I am trying as best to maintatin NPOV, and will try to keep in mind all comments by editors. 71.121.31.183 (talk) 14:42, 30 March 2011 (UTC)
Okay, fair enough. If it was only that article, I would have simply tagged it for NPOV and even fixed some of it. However adding it to as many pages as you can is quite disruptive. Yes, she's probably scum of the earth. Pyramid schemes and whatnot are still pretty common out here. But causes, no matter how just, don't belong to an encyclopedia.
It helps if you invite other people to look over it and fix the viewpoints. Avoid going into too much personal detail, including the name of her children for example and redirecting their names to her page is unnecessary and potentially libelous. Each person mentioned in that article is under the policies of WP:BLP, so avoid mentioning anyone who will potentially be adversely affected by association. Only state facts, as dispassionately as you can. It's not a newspaper article, it's an encyclopedic article. Avoid using too many scare quotes, while seemingly avoiding BLP issues by having other people say what you want to say, they still introduce excessive amounts of non-neutral POV into the article. Remember that sources are not neutral, so don't quote them on everything.
Have you removed your additions to other articles yet? That's all I really need to know right now. The article itself can be fixed, but if they're scattered all over wikipedia in extremely unlikely places, the problem becomes much more than simple NPOV. --Obsidi♠nSoul15:04, 30 March 2011 (UTC)
Anonymity and cut, paste, reword, and pare down bold editing style
I am trying to self reflect on your "obsession' comment and be responsive. I believe that relevant associated articles where content related to her activities are listed in the hat at the top of her article. Also, I was significant contributor to the Notabiloity article, which is highly related to her modus operandi. Do you object to my doing brief edits on these articles? If I do not do the edits now, while the content of the multiple RS is still in my head, I will be unlikely ever to come back to these topic areas once I have left, consistent with my past editing history of obsessing about a topic and all associated topics, then leaving forever after (see Traditional Chinese Medicine edit history, where I did about 600 edits over four months, then after another editor suggested I learn to write BLPs, I left to work solely on the current topic. After starting off completely NPOV, in fact, viewing her as being sort of humorous, as did the Washington Post and 60 Minutes. But then reading beyond these 1995 stories, such as about using Catholicism in duping people facing poverty in Bangladesh, a reverse mother Theresa, maintining a view that she was smoehow funny, and maintaining neutraility becomes difficult, though I am trying. 71.121.31.183 (talk) 16:16, 30 March 2011 (UTC)
IRC
Everyone thinks I killed you at IRC. That means you better go to #wikipedia-en-help and #wikipedia and tell everyone that your alive. Crazymonkey1123 (Jacob) (Shout!)16:37, 3 April 2011 (UTC)
Heh, you're welcome. :) I'm betting it's because the letter order 'w-r-k' is more familiar to English speakers in the word 'Work'. Brain sees the letters, automatically orders them in the most familiar sequence. --Obsidi♠nSoul04:09, 8 April 2011 (UTC)
On 13 April 2011, Did you know? was updated with a fact from the article Black marsh turtle, which you created or substantially expanded. The fact was ... that in Thailand, the smiling terrapin(pictured) is believed to contain the souls of people who died while trying to save others from drowning? You are welcome to check how many hits the article got while on the front page (here's how, quick check) and add it to DYKSTATS if it got over 5,000. If you know of another interesting fact from a recently created article, then please suggest it on the Did you know? talk page.
Hey, I'd like to put forward a proposal for a middle ground proposal for pending changes, one of the things I haven't figured out in my head is some reviewing criteria. As you've pointed out your dis-satisfaction with the reviewing criteria for pending changes, would you be happy to come up with some? Cheers. -- Eraserhead1 <talk> 11:21, 17 April 2011 (UTC)
Thank you!
The signature and timestamp button on the edit bar
You're welcome. :) Also please sign your messages by clicking the signature and timestamp button on the edit bar at the end of your messages (it will show up as --~~~~). Location of the button shown on picture at the right.--Obsidi♠nSoul06:45, 22 April 2011 (UTC)
Thanks for removing the watermark on this image. Part of the "H" in the right hand identification mark is still there though. Any way to zap it? thanks! – Kerαunoςcopia◁galaxies06:30, 22 April 2011 (UTC)
Oop, sorry, missed that. Do you have any of these in higher resolutions? It's a bit harder to clean them up as tiny images, heh. But yeah, uploaded a new version.--Obsidi♠nSoul06:34, 22 April 2011 (UTC)
Isn't that annoying? They're ridiculously small, even for fair-use. For a couple of the Australian War Memorial images, I have gone back to the originating website and found higher quality images and even larger images (though only slightly), but the watermarking is usually different and slightly less work to remove. For other war images, I've begun to find online PDF files of these images that are much larger, but I haven't put those in the Top 4. I may just throw them in a regular request since the instructions to get the PDF is a little lengthy. So, the answer is yes and no? Some of them, I can find larger images, some of them, I can't. – Kerαunoςcopia◁galaxies07:13, 22 April 2011 (UTC)
Aye, I've uploaded my share of PD-old war images captured from digitized 19th to early 20th century books myself. I use Foxit Reader, it has a tool for quickly snapshotting images in a given page in a PDF file. I can then paste it into an image editing program like GIMP or Photoshop. It's alright I guess, if there are really no other versions available.--Obsidi♠nSoul09:06, 22 April 2011 (UTC)
Ah, I misunderstood. You'd probably have to link it without having it show up, I guess, by using [[:File:Filename.fileextension]]. Otherwise, no idea. The graphic labs use templates for the jobs.--Obsidi♠nSoul09:03, 22 April 2011 (UTC)
DYK for Bumastus
On 23 April 2011, Did you know? was updated with a fact from the article Bumastus, which you created or substantially expanded. The fact was ... that the extinct trilobiteBumastus(artist's rendition pictured) was named after its resemblance to large grapes? You are welcome to check how many hits the article got while on the front page (here's how, quick check) and add it to DYKSTATS if it got over 5,000. If you know of another interesting fact from a recently created article, then please suggest it on the Did you know? talk page.
Hi,
I noticed you have removed the Etymological reference to the word Banana.
Unfortunately I cannot provide a reference to any published material.
However, the grammatical rules I described behind the formation of the word is a valid Sanskrit rule that dates back to thousands of years.
I can provide references to the rule if you like.
Even if you can't add the Etymological reference under the title "Etymology" then
I would like to see the section I added (or atleast acknowledged) as a "possible contender" for the name Banana.
I am hoping to hear from you soon.
Thank you. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Skchandon (talk • contribs) 18:51, 23 April 2011 (UTC)
Hello. I'm sorry but unless you can actually show that it has been proposed as a candidate for an etymon by an expert somewhere it just can not be added. Europeans (who named it 'banana'), did not encounter bananas in its native habitat (which is South and Southeast Asia). They first encountered bananas from Africa in 1516, where bananas had been introduced and nativized by Arab traders. Bananas in its native habitat have hundreds of very specific names, why would we call it something as vague as 'provisions of the forest'?
The grammatical rules may be correct, but the syllables used in banana is also quite common and the same can be said for a lot of other languages (in our own language for example, it can mean 'already husband', but that's a bit unlikely, eh? :P). And it's still original research and thus unacceptable I'm afraid.
I'm just glad that Wikipedia tends to stick to US & UK versions on English only. In dealing with Filipinos, their English tends to slide in some interesting ways and it seems like most people speak in a mix of Tagalog and English...Naraht (talk) 23:38, 24 April 2011 (UTC)
LOL watch it, mister. :P I'm Filipino actually, but yep, very true. Rarely used English words in the Philippines with homophones tend to result in rather hilarious malapropisms. I'm actually thinking 'Full-pledged' is a valid word in the Philippine English dialect. And yes, it's far more common for people to combine two or more languages in everyday speech (partly because the native versions of the words are extremely clunky or archaic and very rare). Started with Spanish when a lot of the Spanish vocabulary got integrated into Filipino languages (not just Tagalog)--Obsidi♠nSoul23:53, 24 April 2011 (UTC)
That's what we need, a wikipedia in Philippine English. :) I've learned at least one word in Spanish which seems to have made it into the Philippine Dialects that has come from dealing with the page on Fraternities and Sororities in the Philippines: Basura (which seems to show up about once a month in the vandalism). I also read a Filipino Fraternity bulletin board www.pinoyfraternity.com . I'm an Alpha Phi Omega brother in the USA. (So yeah, COI)Naraht (talk) 01:48, 25 April 2011 (UTC)
LOL, lawdy, no. It'd be a mess. And re:Spanish vocab, there are a lot more, though the spellings have since been 'nativized' to be more phonetic (a bit zealously too) in the 1970's or something during the most nationalistic decades of the Philippines (an effort to distance itself from Spain perhaps). A lot of native sounding words are actually from Spanish (particularly Castilian Spanish and a little Mexican Spanish). Words like kabayo which does not resemble anything European is actually from Spanish caballo (horse), and is quite close to its actual pronunciation (the same thing happened in Latin America except that they kept the spellings). Same thing with words like bintana (ventana - window), lamesa (la mesa - the table), kutsara (cuchara - spoon), balyena (ballena - whale), tonto (zonzo, pronounced 'thontho' - stupid), trabaho (trabajo - work), bale (vale - well), basta! (basta! - enough [of this]!) etc. etc.
The grammar is not retained though. Borrowed Spanish verbs tend to be 'frozen' in the infinitive form (-ar, e.g. cargar - to carry) or the unconjugated form (e.g. venta - sell). They are then actually conjugated with Filipino suffixes, prefixes, and infixes. So from Filipino karga (Spanish carga), you can get words like kinakarga (being loaded), kumakarga (carrying), kinarga (carried). Same thing with English, haha, though it is never treated as a formal language. English carry can become kineri (carry + infix -in-, 'carried'), English run can become nagrun (prefix nag- + run, 'ran'), English show can become shinoshow (duplication + infix -in-, '[in the process of] showing'). It's a bit fascinating really, a form of code-switching arising from two very different colonial masters, LOL. But I'm talking your ear off. Haha.
Well, I've always thought that the movement of the ll to y in Spanish is sort of fun. At least the Philippines can have Spelling Bee's a concept completely foreign to the Spanish (English: If it is hard to say, it should be hard to spell, of course even if it is easy to say, it should be hard to spell :) ) Yeah, Infixes. Probably one of the tougher concepts for Americans to deal. And infixing English words tends to give google translate heartburn. :) And thank you President Marcos...
Yup. I figure if I go just as nuts on Fraternities that I'm not a member of, I'm OK. And I really think I could make a complete article for the Oblation Run out of the Manila Bulletin and local news sources.Naraht (talk) 12:10, 25 April 2011 (UTC)
Yep. It's notable enough to merit one really. And yeah... Marcos' "Bagong Lipunan" (New Society) movement was a bit too successful. Serious revisionism right there. I don't even trust our history books anymore, much less our school textbooks. All glowing praises for national heroes and whatnot, with the exploits of, say, Lapu-Lapu being narrated down to exactly how he killed Magellan LOL. Impossible, to say the least. And IMO, the move to 'simplify' the Filipino alphabet by removing all traces of 'foreign' consonants (f, v, z, c, etc.) just resulted in a very ugly language (and schoolchildren used to spelling things exactly as they hear them). If they could have resurrected the long dead Baybayin system of writing (which only had 3 vowels and 15 consonants), they would have. And the worst thing was, it was done mostly by Tagalogs with little to no input from the (then) majority Visayan language speakers. Meh.--Obsidi♠nSoul13:52, 25 April 2011 (UTC)
Glad you think so. :) Surprised that the revisionism wasn't reverse under Corazon Aquino. I wouldn't mind if they had gotten rid of the "Ph" entirely in favor of an F. Not familiar with Baybayin. I think the Philippines would have done better if they'd gone with India's idea, take English as the official language and leave all of the other languages alone. BTW, I'd love to see an alternate history where the Philippines get the same treatment as Cuba. One naval base in perpetuity and otherwise immediate independence in the early 1900s.Naraht (talk) 14:17, 25 April 2011 (UTC)
Autopatroller
Hi Obsidian Soul, just wanted to let you know that I have added the autopatrolled right to your account, as you have created numerous, valid articles. This feature should have little to no effect on your editing, and is simply intended to reduce the workload on new page patrollers. For more information on the patroller right, see Wikipedia:Autopatrolled. Feel free to leave me a message if you have any questions. Happy editing! Feezo(send a signal | watch the sky) 04:57, 25 April 2011 (UTC)
Er... thanks... I guess. LOL. Since it benefits other users (NPP) more, I guess it doesn't violate my self-imposed rule to actively avoid getting any special user rights.--Obsidi♠nSoul08:15, 25 April 2011 (UTC)
Yep, unfortunately it's a choice between making it clear that not all jewel bugs are iridescent or making it seem like not all iridescence in jewel bugs are caused by structural colors. I blame the English language. ;D hehe. Cheers and thanks for reviewing.--Obsidi♠nSoul18:46, 29 April 2011 (UTC)
DYK for Scutelleridae
On 6 May 2011, Did you know? was updated with a fact from the article Scutelleridae, which you created or substantially expanded. The fact was ... that the iridescent metallic hues of some jewel bugs (Scutelleridae) (example pictured) are caused by structural colors instead of pigmentation? You are welcome to check how many hits the article got while on the front page (here's how, quick check) and add it to DYKSTATS if it got over 5,000. If you know of another interesting fact from a recently created article, then please suggest it on the Did you know? talk page.
Hi Obsidian Soul, I want to apologize for the sharp nature of my comments at ToL, I didnt mean for the comment to be aimed at anyone at all and was going for helpful, but failed really badly it seems!--Kevmin§07:10, 9 May 2011 (UTC)
Nah, I apologize too. Having a bad day at the moment and I do tend to misread stuff online for the worse when I do, heh. Text doesn't convey emotion that well. And yes it did help. It's something to learn from as well now that you pointed it out. Anyway cheers. :) --Obsidi♠nSoul07:15, 9 May 2011 (UTC)
It was mostly my fault for responding in such a pointed manner, I could have worded it a lot better!-Kevmin§18:04, 9 May 2011 (UTC)
Vandalism
I don't know why you have totally deleted the article on Bagoong! I have read your comments and studied what you did on the article and what a shame for a Filipino ( as you claimed to be)to do that. Some people started this topic many years ago. And I and many other editors continued building it, little by little. If you wanted to join in, you should have contributed but not totally erased all the work. Please don't use your technical expertise on Wikipedia to lord over others. Agreed that some are not yet referenced but it is in progress; people contribute the little time they have. But that is a a reason for you to remove the whole thing. I observed that you may have plagiariazed what was already written before.
On my contribution, I based it on a book written by the Philippine pioneer on the large scale production of bagoong. He also pioneered in the use of burnay for bagoong. And it is mentioned in the article. If you know of other pioneers, include it! You mentioned about NPOV but you don't follow what you preach. Before you deleted (in 2 or 3 stages) the whole article, you even put in a slur of "Holy Kamote" or "Holy Shi...." in English! You ridiculed it too with LOL! Are you really a Filipino? You don't seem to like the Lorenzana manufacturer who promoted the product worldwide.
Please restore the article and integrate yours if you may. I will surely report you to Wikipedia and other Filipino organizations if you don't! Lordarchitect (talk) 06:43, 11 May 2011 (UTC)
Also just realized this. "Holy Kamote" literally means "Holy Sweet Potato", it does not, in any way, mean "Holy shit". The closest English equivalent is "Holy Cow".-- Obsidi♠nSoul01:16, 13 May 2011 (UTC)
Please don't accuse me of "lording my 'expertise' over you" (in case you didn't notice, I've only been an active Wikipedian for about half a year). I've done all I possibly could to assume good faith and work with you.
I tried to warn you of the consequences of using sockpuppets before reporting you. Yet you persisted in trying to make it seem like a number of different editors were agreeing with you. Which is - to put it bluntly - lying. Di ako tanga, sorry.
I restored most of the information which were deleted during the initial cleanup, now properly referenced and neutrally worded.
I invited you to collaborate in improving the article, I have even explicitly told you that the information related to Lorenziana can be restored if and only if you can provide sufficient references proving that they are indeed a pioneering company in terms of modern production of bagoong.
For my outburst, in case it wasn't clear before, I apologize. Just take it as an honest reaction to the actual state of the article.
Tagalog:At oo, pilipino ako. Kung mas comportable kang magsalita tayo nang tagalog okay lang din. At sorry, walang epekto yang pangongonsyensa mo, heh. Alam kong tama yung ginawa ko. Binasa mo ba yung mga links sa mga polisiya na binigay ko sa yo? Kung merong mang libro, hindi rin yun acceptable kasi ang nagsulat eh ang kompanya din. Hindi rin accessible sa publiko, base sa anong sinabi mo dati, so di maverify ng kahit kanino.
Maitanong ko lang - meron ka bang koneksyon sa kompanya o wala? Bakit ba sobrang importante na ma-mention ang Lorenziana dun? Kung paid advertiser ka (or worse, owner ng kompanya), kailangan kitang babalaan na itigil yun. Dahil ang aims mo at ang aims nang Wikipedia ay magkasalungat. Hindi ka pupuwedeng mag-promote nang kahit ano dito sa Wikipedia. As simple as that. Yung mga claims mo is extremely unlikely din. Ginagamit na ang burnay noon pa, hindi ito inimbento ng Lorenziana. Meron ding fermented fish products sa ibang bansa na ginagawa sa parehong processo. Sinasabi mo bang ang Indonesia, Malaysia, China, Thailand, Vietnam, etc. lahat sila kinopya ang method ng Lorenziana? Sorry, pero mahirap yatang paniwalaan yun.
At pinigilan ba kitang i-improve yung article? Hindi. Inirequest ko lang na isulat mo yung information neutrally (hindi parang advertisement para sa Lorenziana) at magbigay ka nang references.
At oo, inimbita na kita nung una. Kung gusto mo, i-raise mo ang issue sa Wikipedia talk:Tambayan Philippines sa ibang mga pilipinong editors (i-'report' mo ako). Kung ang desisyon eh pabor sa iyo, hahayaan na kita at ang artikulo. Deal?
English: And yes, I am Filipino. If you're more comfortable speaking tagalog, it's alright as well. And sorry, trying to guilt me into agreeing with you won't help, heh. I know what I did was right. Have you actually read the links to Wikipedia policies that I've given you? If there ever was a book, it's not acceptable as a source either, because it was written by the company itself. It's also not accessible to the public, based on what you've told me before, so no one else can verify it except you.
I have to ask - are you or are you not connected to the company? Why is it so important that Lorenziana be mentioned in the article? If you're a paid advertiser (or worse, owner of the company), I must warn you to stop it now. Because your interests conflict with the aims of Wikipedia. You can not promote anything in Wikipedia. As simple as that. Your claims are also extremely unlikely. Burnay jars have been used long before the company, it was not invented by the company. There are also fermented fish products in other countries made with the same methods. Are you saying that Indonesia, Malaysia, China, Thailand, Vietnam, etc. all of them copied their methods from Lorenziana? Sorry, but that's a very controversial thing to claim.
And have I ever stopped you from improving the article? No. I just asked you to write the information neutrally (and not like an advertisement for Lorenziana) and to provide references for the claims you make.
And yes, I've invited you before. Please raise the issue in Wikipedia talk:Tambayan Philippines with the other Filipino editors ('report me', as you put it). If they decide that I was wrong in deleting those parts of the article, I will leave you and the article alone. Deal?
P.S. As for 'plagiarized', please see WP:OWN. No one owns anything on Wikipedia. The moment you wrote it on the page, you've given it away to the public. Read the disclaimers at the bottom of the edit boxes. I salvaged what I could from the previous edits though I can not, in good conscience, restore the parts about Lorenziana. Wasn't that what you wanted? Also I apologize for my Tagalog. It kinda sucks. I'm Bisaya--Obsidi♠nSoul07:39, 11 May 2011 (UTC)
On 12 May 2011, Did you know? was updated with a fact from the article Nauclea orientalis, which you created or substantially expanded. The fact was ... that bark extracts of Leichhardt trees(pictured) can be used to stun fish and make them easier to catch? You are welcome to check how many hits the article got while on the front page (here's how, quick check) and add it to DYKSTATS if it got over 5,000. If you know of another interesting fact from a recently created article, then please suggest it on the Did you know? talk page.
Weird... I see this. Doesn't seem to be caused by the top templates, as it always occurs on top of {{Sexual slang}} even when I move it. Meh, nvm, it's not really that format breaking. heh -- Obsidi♠nSoul10:09, 15 May 2011 (UTC)
"Newly hatched spiderlings are just as active as adults. 2 to 4 days after their first molt, spiderlings can already overpower mosquitoes four times their own size. Spiderlings may share prey they caught themselves or prey caught by their mother. They may also engage in cannibalism by preying on their own siblings.[13]"
Ok, thanks. :) BTW, it's not an offline source. The tick should have been green (), not which is only used if the source can not be accessed easily (e.g. paper publications or foreign language works).-- Obsidi♠nSoul01:56, 17 May 2011 (UTC)
I have corrected this, please excuse me I have done this a lot of times before but my head is not in the right place due to personal matters. mauchoeagle(c)02:04, 17 May 2011 (UTC)
Oh ok, heh. I assumed you were new to this, my bad. Anyway doesn't really matter as both ticks are for acceptance. Cheers and thanks.-- Obsidi♠nSoul02:06, 17 May 2011 (UTC)
On 23 May 2011, Did you know? was updated with a fact from the article Crossopriza lyoni, which you created or substantially expanded. The fact was ... that spiderlings of Crossopriza lyoni can catch mosquitoes four times their own size barely one week after hatching? You are welcome to check how many hits the article got while on the front page (here's how, quick check) and add it to DYKSTATS if it got over 5,000. If you know of another interesting fact from a recently created article, then please suggest it on the Did you know? talk page.
On 24 May 2011, Did you know? was updated with a fact from the article Palaeochiropteryx, which you created or substantially expanded. The fact was ... that the many examples of extinct 48-million year old batgenusPalaeochiropteryx(life restoration pictured) found in the Messel lake may have drowned after being rendered unconscious in flight by poisonous volcanic gases? You are welcome to check how many hits the article got while on the front page (here's how, quick check) and add it to DYKSTATS if it got over 5,000. If you know of another interesting fact from a recently created article, then please suggest it on the Did you know? talk page.
On 27 May 2011, Did you know? was updated with a fact from the article Tessaratomidae, which you created or substantially expanded. The fact was ... that some species of giant stink bugs(pictured) are edible? You are welcome to check how many hits the article got while on the front page (here's how, quick check) and add it to DYKSTATS if it got over 5,000. If you know of another interesting fact from a recently created article, then please suggest it on the Did you know? talk page.
My internet connection is currently down due to storms. I will not be able to reply within the next few days at least until they can fix the %$@$# connection. *sigh*.-- Obsidi♠nSoul06:01, 27 May 2011 (UTC)
On 29 May 2011, Did you know? was updated with a fact from the article Eurypterus, which you created or substantially expanded. The fact was ... that a fossil of the extinctsea scorpionEurypterus(restoration pictured) was once thought to be a catfish? You are welcome to check how many hits the article got while on the front page (here's how, quick check) and add it to DYKSTATS if it got over 5,000. If you know of another interesting fact from a recently created article, then please suggest it on the Did you know? talk page.
Hi ObsidianSoul. Remember me? I am KGSri. You helped me write a wiki article on Ramanathapuram C S Murugabhoopathy. I hope we could talk again. I need some help with uploading a photograph to the article. My teacher will be online sometime later this week/next week. He is the original owner of the photograph.
Great work on all the images, thanks! Just wanted to remind you to tag the above image with {{unfree frame delete}}. This will ask the admins to remove the previous unfree image, without destroying the upload history. : ) – Kerαunoςcopia◁galaxies21:23, 4 June 2011 (UTC)
Will do. Dunno much about commons templates so I usually just leave them to regulars there, heh. Will remember that for the future.-- Obsidi♠nSoul21:28, 4 June 2011 (UTC)
No worries, that's why I made it part of the instructions in the original request, since it's not expected that people would know about tagging the image. Anyways, it would probably never be done (I've only recently started tagging unfree frame images myself since no one else seemed to be doing it). Thanks for your help! – Kerαunoςcopia◁galaxies21:46, 4 June 2011 (UTC)
Andrew Cunanan wiki
Hello, why did you undo what i put down for Andrew Cunanan, the american serial killer? It is part of an English project, and I did get my information from two websites, but one contributed more information than the other.
Thanks, Vpearsall — Preceding unsigned comment added by Vpearsall (talk • contribs) 17:42, 5 June 2011 (UTC)
Hello, I'm sorry for doing that but it was necessary. Reasons are listed below:
First and foremost is giving undue weight to what really amounts as speculation from a single source. An example: "He found it fun, and would get a high from killing, leading him to kill anyone he would meet on the sidewalk." < that is not factual. It is a subjective assumption presented as fact. Unless the information is from trained criminologists working firsthand on the evidence and proven in the court of law, that statement should be removed. Even then, things like 'he found it fun' is completely unverifiable by its very nature. We are not mindreaders. Please read WP:DUE.
The tone is not neutral and probably originally sensationalist given the commercial nature of the source. Please read WP:NPOV.
While speculations on his motivations are fine, they should be clearly labelled as such. The other factual information can be restored, but please try to use reliable sources and use more than one. The subject is deceased and a criminal, but the article is still a biography and great care should be taken on the statements made in them.-- Obsidi♠nSoul00:25, 6 June 2011 (UTC)
I'm sorry, now I've made a mess of your answer! I'll stay away from the page for a few minutes so you can clean up in peace. -- John of Reading (talk) 09:13, 17 June 2011 (UTC)
LOL, no worries, I'm lagging big-time and when that happens, subsection edit buttons often get displaced. Appreciate the attempt at fixing though. :) -- Obsidi♠nSoul09:20, 17 June 2011 (UTC)
Weird though, the source inverts the aerofoil on the upstroke, which would be impossible unless the animal's appendages somehow rotates 360 degrees. I'm going to interpret that as either a mistake on the author's part or a second example.-- Obsidi♠nSoul14:11, 19 June 2011 (UTC)
Re your edit to Amoebozoa: I would be wary of using too much from Cavalier-Smith on classification. Note that he is in a very small minority (perhaps only of himself!) in rejecting the major division between Eubacteria and Archaea and in accepting openly paraphyletic taxa. At the least anything from him needs full referencing because it cannot be assumed to be a consensus of any kind. The introduction to Thomas Cavalier-Smith seems accurate in this respect. Of course, this doesn't mean that he's wrong. Peter coxhead (talk) 08:01, 24 June 2011 (UTC)
Yep. Figured as much. The existence of taxa he created (they were listed in Category:Missing taxobox), gave me the wrong impression that it was widely used in Amoebozoa articles. Only when I started digging deeper did I realize it was pretty much a big contradictory mess, heh. So I'm leaving it all up to people more involved in it, I guess. I was only cleaning up stubs and adding taxoboxes and whatnot per Stemonitis' suggestion in Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Palaeontology#Merging genus stubs into family articles. Feel free to revert. :) -- Obsidi♠nSoul19:50, 24 June 2011 (UTC)
I'm not touching it! Your description "a big contradictory mess" is absolutely right. There are more than enough muddles elsewhere (e.g. biological nomenclature articles) to keep me (un)happy. Peter coxhead (talk) 22:44, 24 June 2011 (UTC)
Haha, well I guess we'll just wait until someone whacks us over the mess and imposes a system then. :P Seeing that I know next to nothing on amoebae, I'll be more liable to botch it up even further (already did, probably). Besides, I'm always leery of touching anything past the phylum rank. My offer of helping fix taxoboxes once people agree on a system to use still stands though. Though given that WikiProject Microbio is far too small a project for too vast a subject area, that might take a while. :(-- Obsidi♠nSoul00:19, 25 June 2011 (UTC)
IRC help
Hi there OS. If you have the time/interest, any help in the help channel is appreciated. Every single helped newbie counts! --KFP (contact | edits) 19:31, 25 June 2011 (UTC)
Heh, I know. I miss IRC desperately really but I'm avoiding it in the meantime (and any kind of stress really) due to very serious health problems. :( Once I can ascertain that it's not what I'm afraid of, I'll be back assuredly. -- Obsidi♠nSoul20:25, 25 June 2011 (UTC)
Been nearly a year now, hence why I'm becoming desperate for a correct diagnosis and treatment. :[ Anyway, thanks.-- Obsidi♠nSoul00:11, 26 June 2011 (UTC)
Apologies for that. You might want to clarify that it is not the same as the movie though. If it has another name in Urdu or something you can include that in parenthesis.-- Obsidi♠nSoul19:52, 28 June 2011 (UTC)
You're welcome. :) Remember to fix it as soon as possible before it gets deleted. Biographical articles have rather strict policies that have to be followed. If needed you can remove the information you can not reference for now, and leave only those that you can.-- Obsidi♠nSoul19:52, 28 June 2011 (UTC)
Really no idea at this point. *sigh* I'm beginning to think the US records once considered all Hawaiians to be Asian-American. But again, unless they remove him from that article he was in with Mendonca, we can't really remove it. I found a genealogical site that might explain it though, partially cross-confirmed in here.
His father seems to be Elmelindo T. Smith, Sr., who was born in the Philippines in 1907 and died in in California in 1992. Given the time and place of birth and the peculiar combination of his name ('Elmelindo' and 'Smith'), Elmelindo Sr. is very likely to have been Filipino-American. Elmelindo, Jr. had two other brothers and two sisters and a wife and children that might still be living. And given that they haven't complained yet... :P
Hello and thanks for your feedback on my article on Tracey Moberly. I will take a look at the POV issues and try to get rid of them. I have a couple of questions...
- on the talk page for the article, three notices have been posted and I am wondering if there is anything I have to do about them. In particular the warning on policy regarding biographies of living persons. I am sure there is nothing potentially libellous in the piece, and it is carefully sourced. Is this just a general notice that gets automatically applied to living person biogs?
- regarding photographs, where can I find wikipedia guidelines over fair use, copyright etc?
People don't need to be able to google the discussions, wikipedia help gives returns that are much more correct for such a limited purpose when the discussions are noindexed, please point me the the guideline - noticeboards in general are supposed to be noindexed. Are there some previous discussion you have been involved in regarding this where a precedent was set that you can link me to? Off2riorob (talk) 15:20, 3 July 2011 (UTC)
Making the Help Desk visible externally is a rather obvious requirement for the help desk to be a help desk. The receptionist is in front of the building entrance, not shoved in the back of a broom closet, no? It's searchable because of its intended purpose.
It is not a personal issue - all noticeboards are better noindexed - all sorts of stuff returns in search results that has no place in returning there. I care less about the comments about me from today but that is the trigger that brought me to check on the situation - I will continue with discussion on the talkpage, thanks for the link. Off2riorob (talk) 15:42, 3 July 2011 (UTC)
I can't help but grit my teeth at that response. Haha. Get off that pedestal, mate. You != Consensus. Other than that, no comment.-- Obsidi♠nSoul15:51, 3 July 2011 (UTC)
Grit your teeth as much as you like - I am not your mate and I am not consensus and I am far from considering myself on any pedestal. Off2riorob (talk) 15:58, 3 July 2011 (UTC)
Help desk: interlanguage links
Hi Obsidian Soul,
Thank you for your comment. Unfortunately Jayron32 closed it before I could respond, which response I copy below
Thanks Obsidian. I've looked at Wikipedia:Dispute resolution and left a note on my Talk page agreeing to a RFC. But I see this not so much as content dispute as a user problem, as I suggest above. The essential element of the user concerned's quibble is that interlanguage links are uncommon. I've already given examples of where I use them and if anyone looking in can give other example that would be useful. Bear in mind the user is attacking a Wikipedia facility (interlanguage links) with an agreed policy about their use. It's not just about content. He saying they shouldn't be used. That, for example, I should crreate stubs in the English wikipedia. But the subjects involved aren't notable in English letters and their stubs would be deleted on those grounds. FightingMac (talk) 15:37, 3 July 2011 (UTC)
I see you've now clashed above with the user I refer to and I'll make a comment about that in a moment. Meanwhile an unfortunate consequence of your good faith remarks is that the discussion got closed off when in fact the issue really isn't about content but about abuse.
Concerning civility, I can briefly remark that what this concerns is a user who came into an article I was editing, removed a couple of in-line interlanguage links I had placed there, on the spurious grounds that they were not RS (but they weren't being used as sources), and then followed me to another article I was editing and did the same thing, reverting my restores, ignoring my arguments and finally reverting a compromise edit of mine suggested at Help:Interlanguage_links#Purpose without the discussion I requested on the Talk page and issuing me with a 3R edit warring notice.
If that's not uncivil then I don't know what is. And it hasn't stopped there. He has come close to hounding me, interrogating me over my edit history because of some wierd conviction I once edit-warred him as a sock-puppet over Roman Polanski and Frédéric Mitterrand. As you have seen he followed me to the Help desk, even though I took great care not to mention his user name, that is to say presumably he was searching on my user name, and then he takes up, in what I think you will readily accept was in an uncivil manner, the question of Google searching the Help desk with you, Google searching being apparently something that torments him as I mentioned in my Help request replying to him.
It's all very well but when someone shits on your front lawn, you *are* allowed to complain. You phrase it right, like "someone is defecating on my front lawn and its adjectival intolerable", but you do complain.
The fact is this user has real form for this kind of incivility. I suspect you will be inclined to agree based on the his performance in the section above.
I would be glad if you could use your influence as an administrator to help me deal with this problem.
Yep. Got it no worries. And please don't emulate me, I'm just stressed at the moment and volatile. The closing was appropriate, complaints about user behavior is also dealt with elsewhere. The Help Desk is really just for quick questions on editing and it's best if debates don't happen there as a lot of new editors frequent that board and long discussions can disrupt the questions and answers. But yeah, he seems to enjoy hunting imaginary sockpuppets, probably paranoia. If you believe he is harassing you, I recommend you report him to the appropriate noticeboards. See Wikipedia:Harassment#Dealing with harassment.
I must point out that I believe your earlier edits of interwikilinking almost all the bluelinks in a given article were inappropriate. They should be done in moderation and you should notify users if possible that clicking the link will take them to a foreign-language page. Not everyone can speak French.
I do not want to be involved in this any longer. I regret even attempting to mediate. I have an appointment with a neurologist tomorrow for something rather serious and I'd rather forget about this and him. Apologies.-- Obsidi♠nSoul19:05, 3 July 2011 (UTC)
Thanks for this Obsidian Soul. The compromise link I suggested following Help:Interlanguage_links#Purpose formatting as Michèle Sabban (see French Wikipedia article) does notify the user, nevertheless it was reverted without discussion by Off2riorob and an edit-warring notice sent to me.
You might like to know I applied for a Third opinion and got one favourable to me. I really hope all went well with you yesterday. I had a crisis myself involving a urologist a couple of years ago which I got through (minus a bladder well past its sell by date as it happened but the new arrangements are a decided improvement on the sorry sate of affairs the old arrangements had come to) and one does somehow struggle through. I hope and trust it shall be the same with you. Thank you again for your efforts. I'm sorry that my adversary proved to be quite so singularly unpleasant. I should perhaps not have been quite so confrontational with him and I do aplogise it rubbed off on you. FightingMac (talk) 22:23, 4 July 2011 (UTC)
Still scheduled for more tests myself. :( This is the second neuro I've been to and they still can't identify what's wrong and are reluctant to recommend a CT scan because it's heinously expensive in our part of the world. Meanwhile, it's crippling my work and my life *sigh*. Still hoping for an early diagnosis.
As for the help desk issue, no worries and no comment, LOL. I really want to stay out of that one, if only because I'm certainly not an uninvolved editor by now, heh. Anyway cheers :) -- Obsidi♠nSoul22:32, 4 July 2011 (UTC)
Thank yiou
Thank you very much for help with the editing of my article. Wikipedia has definitely not been the easiest thing to figure out. Appreciate your time and comments.
You're welcome, though to be fair, all I did was remove an already complied with maintenance tag. :) Cheers, and don't be afraid to ask for help when you run into problems.-- Obsidi♠nSoul21:40, 5 July 2011 (UTC)
Very helpful user
Thank you for solving my problem at the Help desk. Very quick and helpful. Loopus9 21:41, 5 July 2011 (UTC) — Preceding unsigned comment added by Loopus9 (talk • contribs)
Hello, sorry to bother you again. I'm looking to customize my signature more. I want to make a drop shadow for my signature. Does Wikipedia support CSS, or only wiki markup? Thank you. - Lukep91318:58, 6 July 2011 (UTC)
Maybe it's better to move some of the discussion off the RSN board. Anyway, I don't think your analogy with not having read a book is an appropriate one. The situation would be more similar to someone just reading a chapter's heading within the book rather than the chapter itself. Books are written differently than papers. A book can contain self-contained chapters. I would certainly expect someone to read the relevant chapter that they're citing from, though not necessarily the whole book. Though again, in the interest of accessibility I'd say it's fine to cite non-controversial, non-contentious claims after only having read a portion of a chapter. But as soon as someone asks about it, folks need to go out and do the actual reading.Volunteer Marek (talk) 06:18, 13 July 2011 (UTC)
FWIW, I do agree with you that using abstracts solely should be avoided as much as possible (completely, really, if possible). But some studies are simply very difficult to access, either because they are out of print, printed only in paper, expensive, or simply difficult to understand to someone not versed in the field it tackles (hence why even if you do have access to the full paper, the only thing that might make sense to you would be the abstract). I'm only contending the assertion that the abstract (whether by itself, or part of the whole) can be considered wholly unreliable. They can be (and is almost always) self-contained as well. So for non-controversial, non-contentious, and unambiguous claims, I don't see the problem with it - hence the comparison to book chapters. In your specific case, I think that is obviously not the case. However, you are extending your arguments to include all abstracts, which I disagree with.
Thanks User:Obsidian Soul, I went through Manila to Cebu with no problems, but on the way back I caused problems but got the special treatment and pushed upto the front of the line at the Airport. Told a security to go shove it! Other than that, I enjoyed my time and want to go back but not through Manila! Adamdaley (talk) 07:06, 13 July 2011 (UTC)
User:Obsidian Soul, no not that. I had a suitcase, a backpack, sportsbag and another bag and there was no way for my girl to get inside without a ticket. So she was allowed as far as "Information Desk" inside the main entrance. Adamdaley (talk) 12:50, 13 July 2011 (UTC)
Can you be so kind as to provide a reason that you are not responding to my comments? I asked you kindly what “spoil the kitten-eating monsters” means or refers to, and so far I haven't a clue what it is. If you're purposely ignoring me and amusingly looking at my comments to see my funny responses just to piss me off, then I will depart from your talk page. Just please provide a reason why. And why are you trying to be sarcastic and piss me off: “You're excused.” “They don't exist? No, really? ” I really don't want to piss anyone off, and I really don't want to start a fight, but what the hell is your problem? I mean, why are you teasing me saying “They don't exist? No, really? ”? I mean, what the hell are you trying to accomplish? I am trying to find out what “spoil the kitten-eating monsters” means. Why? Just for the fun of it. I mean, why not? Am I restricted to a certin number of metaphors in the original mediokre vocabulary that I was born with (nothing)? I really don't want to piss anyone off, but you, sir (or madam), are pushing the line here, and just to let you know, I'm getting very angry. The purpose of me being here is to see if you would be so kind as to provide me with the definition of “spoil the kitten-eating monsters”. Look, some people say that I usually take things very offensively, and yes, that is true. So am I missing what you're saying, or what? If you are indeed trying to piss me off, then please read Wikipedia:No personal attacks, one of the basic pillars of Wikipedia. Also, please don't be a dick. I really don't see why you are trying to play this strange “game”. I would like to request your point of view: when you were typing the comment, how did you think I would react? Were you suprised when I reacted? Or is this a joke? Or do you just personally hate me? If your anger is on my user signature, then please forgive and forget, as I have shrinked my username to normal size. It is still a work-in-progress. Honestly, if you're still mad, just get over it. Look, I'm sorry if I pissed you off in any way at any point it time, but you're just going to have to accept it. Anyway: please be so kind as to bring me an explanation as to why you won't tell me what “spoil the kitten-eating monsters” is? I apperciate all the trouble you have been through, and I thank you for any and all help. Thanks again, Apersonwhohas beeneditingWikipediasinceThursday,October28, 2010.05:50, 16 July 2011 (UTC)
Do you, like only answer the first question that precedes a question mark in a person's comment? Oh, I guess my previous question is the only one out of many being answered, right? Are you a Bot? Why do you hate me so much? Why are you not responding? Are you like, taking a WikiSince10.28.2010Break? What's your problem? Why are you unresponsive? Why can't you respond to a simple question? Are you a dick? Why are you trying to piss me off? Please see this whole section, where in the eight comments I have written, and the thirty-two questions I have asked, only two of them have been answered, both with very sarcastic and crude humor. I really don't want to piss you off, but (quoting from above) “what the hell is your problem?” Please tell me what “spoil the kitten-eating monsters” means. Aperson who has been editing Wikipedia since Thursday, October 28, 2010.17:13, 16 July 2011 (UTC)
Mail
Hello, Obsidian Soul. Please check your email; you've got mail! It may take a few minutes from the time the email is sent for it to show up in your inbox. You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{You've got mail}} or {{ygm}} template.
I have read your comments here and I absolutely agree with everything you are saying. It is so good to find someone else on Wiki who understands this stuff. --Shakesomeaction (talk) 22:20, 16 July 2011 (UTC)
Please read what Calmer Waters has posted in your talk page. Everything, not just the reason why I am not replying. Thank you.-- Obsidi♠nSoul13:06, 17 July 2011 (UTC)
On 19 July 2011, Did you know? was updated with a fact from the article Snowmastodon site, which you created or substantially expanded. The fact was ... that the first Columbian mammoth(artist's restoration pictured) found at the Snowmastodon site, an Ice Age fossil dig near Denver, was initially dug out by a construction worker using a bulldozer? You are welcome to check how many hits the article got while on the front page (here's how, quick check) and add it to DYKSTATS if it got over 5,000. If you know of another interesting fact from a recently created article, then please suggest it on the Did you know? talk page.
Uhh what? The only thing the user can't delete off their talk page are sanctions, MfD tags, and speedy deletion tags. If the user deletes a discussion already in effect, consider taking it to WP:WQA or WP:DR or your own talk page.--v/r - TP02:01, 19 July 2011 (UTC)
Yes it's a case of etiquette, and no thanks, taking them to Yet Another Noticeboard does not fix the problem. I dislike bureaucratic approaches to simple problems. Do you remove long discussions in your talk page a few hours (or even minutes) after replying to them and leaving the posters flailing around for diffs just so they know what you wrote? Since 10.28.2010 leaves talkback templates which is nice, but on clicking them, I often don't see where the discussion went at all. This is considering the importance of the things being discussed in Since 10.28.2010's talk page. I wonder how much you know of the issues in question.-- Obsidi♠nSoul02:09, 19 July 2011 (UTC)
I've been paying attention. The point is you can't enforce a considerate etiquette if it's not supported by policy. It's the difference between asking a favor and enforcing a policy. There is no policy to enforce. At this point, you can ask nicely that they quit interfering with the flow of the discussion or take it somewhere where they cant interfere with the flow of the discussion.--v/r - TP02:14, 19 July 2011 (UTC)
You mean lump more problems for the user already straining under the number of things being piled up against him including a (very unwarranted, imo) indefinite block? No thanks. If it can be solved by simply telling him, then I tell him. At no point did I say that he is required to do this.-- Obsidi♠nSoul02:20, 19 July 2011 (UTC)
Many thanks or the barnstar. Please keep posting at the resource exchange if you need more articles in the future. I'm always eager to help wikipedians access scholarly sources. GabrielF (talk) 03:17, 19 July 2011 (UTC)
Not plants but they look like plants ...
... and, as dear old BBC puts it so elegantly, "Stick insects survive one million years without sex." Sadly, our Wikipedia article for the genus Timema has been just a stub; they weren't getting any action in here either. But now I'm working to get them into DYK, where perhaps some cute guy stick insects will catch sight of them and natural history will be made. It was fun working with you on Snowmastodon site, where you did magnificent stuff, so if you'd like to join me, come on and pitch in. I wish we had a photo. Sharktopustalk17:53, 19 July 2011 (UTC)
You're welcome. Though I hope you included the others who contributed as well to the article, heh. There were at least two others IIRC. Anyway, still needs reworking of the order of subsections and the wording, but I've been very busy IRL lately. I'm just glad I managed to convince someone to donate a pic of them. :) Will see if I can improve it further while still pending for review in DYK. -- Obsidi♠nSoul09:40, 25 July 2011 (UTC)
sign
I would just like to drop a friendly line that I have changed my username. I believe that you were requesting that I change my username at the Help Desk. Thank you. PS: I would like to sincerely, officially, and formally apologize, on any past disagreements and/or misunderstandings that we have had in the past. I've placed a request for mentorship for User:Worm That Turned (for myself). I hope we can have a new and refreshed relationship here at Wikipedia. Hmm, what say you? Thanks again, Aneditor since 10.28.2010.02:42, 20 July 2011 (UTC)
Apologies accepted and I apologize as well for any manifestations of my notoriously short temper, heh. :) Good luck with your mentorship. -- Obsidi♠nSoul10:17, 20 July 2011 (UTC)
Thank you. Apologizing for my short temper as well (see notice #4number four #3 on my user talk page). Mentorship is going...well, it's the first day, so I can't really tell. Thank you again, Aneditor since 10.28.2010.14:59, 20 July 2011 (UTC)
Thank you!
Thanks for your article donation to Wikiproject Abandoned Drafts, we really appreciate it! Hopefully someone will adopt your draft and make something really nice out of it. Feel free to advertise the Wikiproject elsewhere. The more people that know about us, the more drafts that will be donated and the more users there will be to adopt the drafts in the Wikiproject. Again, thank you! SilverserenC08:23, 21 July 2011 (UTC)
Haha, it does. But you're very welcome. :) I have a lot on my plate at the moment, and it would simply have languished in my sandbox for a few more months. Had a hard time finding the WikiProject though, I suggest you guys also put links in the usual policy and help pages (like Wikipedia:Userspace draft) and as an alternative to deletion of stale drafts. It's a very good idea, I must say.-- Obsidi♠nSoul08:53, 21 July 2011 (UTC)
Okay, plugged in there and i've also made a talk page section over at WP:STALEDRAFT to ask how it can be included in there. I guess i'll just have to look around otherwise and see where else it would be appropriate to add a link to the project. And thanks. :3 SilverserenC09:07, 21 July 2011 (UTC)
DYK for East African Highland bananas
On 21 July 2011, Did you know? was updated with a fact from the article East African Highland bananas, which you created or substantially expanded. The fact was ... that East African Highland bananas are so important as staple food crops in Uganda that 'Matoke', the traditional meal made from steamed bananas, is synonymous with the word "food"? You are welcome to check how many hits the article got while on the front page (here's how, quick check) and add it to DYKSTATS if it got over 5,000. If you know of another interesting fact from a recently created article, then please suggest it on the Did you know? talk page.
Hi, I've now moved the inline external links to the 'external link' section. One quick question - how does the 'new unreviewed article' tag get removed from the article, now that it's been reviewed? Thanks again for your feedback! — Preceding unsigned comment added by Butcherscross (talk • contribs) 22:51, 25 July 2011 (UTC)
Hey, sorry, didn't notice your reply until now. Any uninvolved editor (which means you're excluded, heh) can remove it once they can ascertain that no major issues exist with it. I have removed it. Cheers. :) Feel free to ask me if you need help with anything else. -- Obsidi♠nSoul21:10, 29 July 2011 (UTC)
That's great! Many thanks, Obsidian! It feels like a 'proper' article now that the hatnote has been removed! Thanks yet again for your friendly advice & feedback.Butcherscross (talk) 23:40, 29 July 2011 (UTC)
Obviously, I have work to do. Many of the references I have are from sources outside Wikipedia (Washington Secretary of State, Washington Department of Agriculture, etc.). Do I internally reference to the external references provided?
URL98902 (talk) 14:37, 22 July 2011 (UTC)
Er... I only did it once. :S And I found it by checking a particular vandal's edit history after he vandalized several other more prominent pages. But thanks, heh.-- Obsidi♠nSoul20:19, 24 July 2011 (UTC)
Thanks. :) Though Ruigeroeland and Kevmin and did the bulk of the work, heh. And hey, ever got the hang of IRC yet? Haven't been back there for a while. Hope KFP and the others aren't getting swamped or something.-- Obsidi♠nSoul09:34, 25 July 2011 (UTC)
The syntax of irc was all a bit too much for me, it seems I' m a slave of windowed systems. But outreach and community activities continue as does some GLAM work. AshLin (talk) 10:04, 25 July 2011 (UTC)
A barnstar for you!
The Teamwork Barnstar
You are a teamwork titan! A collaboration conquering hero! It has been a pleasure and an honor to work with you on articles such as Snowmastodon site and Timema. Not just hard work but creative insight. Not just creative insight but hard work. You go, Obsidian! Oh yeah, come take a look at Paederus too. They are mighty cool. Sharktopustalk23:55, 29 July 2011 (UTC)
LOL, I currently have turtles, ferns, and wildflowers on my plate (edit: no, not turtle soup.). ;D But we'll see, looks v. interesting. Thanks-- Obsidi♠nSoul01:51, 30 July 2011 (UTC)
Duuuude, you already gave me a barnstar for Cyclemys before, haha. But thanks. :) Still currently expanding S. leytensis. Will eventually completely replace the problematic text currently on it.-- Obsidi♠nSoul19:07, 31 July 2011 (UTC)
I was trying to figure out how to add unranked things to the auto taxoboxes. I wasn't successful, so I changed it to a normal one. On a lot of the pages, I've just been smoothing inconsistancies (which, from what you said, sounds like the purpose of the auto taxoboxes). The source would be Wikipedia itself. I'll try to do better, though. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Ushakaron (talk • contribs) 20:24, 31 July 2011 (UTC)
Yeah, heh. Common mistakes for new editors really. Don't worry. You can reply in your own talk page. I watchlist every page I edit. -- Obsidi♠nSoul20:33, 31 July 2011 (UTC)
auto taxoboxes
So, based on what you said, a helpful thing I could do is figure out how to use those auto taxoboxes and then make every article have one?
P.S. are you a Wikipedia official or something, or just someone trying to help out?
Ushakaron (talk) 20:36, 31 July 2011 (UTC)
DYK for Timema
On 2 August 2011, Did you know? was updated with a fact from the article Timema, which you created or substantially expanded. The fact was ... that some species of the stick insect genus Timema(example pictured) have not had sex for over a million years? You are welcome to check how many hits the article got while on the front page (here's how, quick check) and add it to DYKSTATS if it got over 5,000. If you know of another interesting fact from a recently created article, then please suggest it on the Did you know? talk page.
Hurray! Thanks for your help on this article. It looks so good, I was thinking of trying to get this one or Snowmastodon site accepted as a good article. Have you ever done that process? I have not. Sharktopustalk00:33, 2 August 2011 (UTC)
\o/ And thanks for inviting me to help, lol. And no, haven't ever done a GA, and honestly don't want to. It's a massive time sink, imo. It's enough that I bring articles as close as I can, then move on to another, heh.-- Obsidi♠nSoul00:53, 2 August 2011 (UTC)
I submitted it to GAN,[2] so let's see what happens. I didn't see a place on the nomination form to specify who worked on it, so let's keep track to make sure that you get credit too, IFF it goes anywhere at all. Sharktopustalk22:53, 3 August 2011 (UTC)
Just back from massive travel inundation -- it actually got GA reviewed! I went over to check it out and let you know, but I see you already saw and already fixed most of what was wrong. WTG! I will now go back and see if I can add more two-cents-worth. Sharktopustalk19:21, 16 August 2011 (UTC)
Hey, just dropping you a note that you were taken in by a troll on the help desk. Per WP:DENY, I removed the troll's question, however I also had to remove your good faith response to it. I hope you don't mind. It was This guy. --Jayron3212:04, 3 August 2011 (UTC)
Thanks for bringing the matter to my attention but i would like to point out that I did not start the original article on the subject. I only made few grammatical corrections somewhere and added the lead section which you require. Aside from that I couldn't really say it was my article but then you were right to point out that the article, indeed, contains copyrighted materials. I have visited the website and confirmed your observations. A great many thanks once again.Levekks (talk) 15:31, 3 August 2011 (UTC)
DYK for Palaeontinidae
On 3 August 2011, Did you know? was updated with a fact from the article Palaeontinidae, which you created or substantially expanded. The fact was ... that fossils of extinct giant cicadas(pictured) were once misidentified as the oldest known butterflies? You are welcome to check how many hits the article got while on the front page (here's how, quick check) and add it to DYKSTATS if it got over 5,000. If you know of another interesting fact from a recently created article, then please suggest it on the Did you know? talk page.
I emailed oversight to have those edits suppressed, and in the meantime, I revdel'ed them to prevent them from being seen by anybody other than admins. I actually edit-conflicted with you in removing the information. No wonder his account got hijacked.... Reaper Eternal (talk) 18:52, 4 August 2011 (UTC)
Thanks. Her*, but yeah. Sheesh. Still it should've been easy to get it back if she still has her email. I think she's just a wee bit too technologically challenged, imo. :/ -- Obsidi♠nSoul18:57, 4 August 2011 (UTC)
"The IP user 199.33.32.40 immediately added a sentence after your edits. Hence the difference. See his changes.-- Obsidi♠n Soul"
Hi, unfortunately that's not it, 199.33.32.40 was me, at the computer I used when I was at the public library. I did not reinsert the "lifted" that I had removed from someone's earlier version, thinking lifted unneutral. Nevertheless, when I put "Laurence Tribe" in the wikipedia searchbar, a version of the article with [lifted] appears, although it's not the latest version. Thanks.24.7.28.186 (talk) 05:39, 7 August 2011 (UTC)
Rain lily or rainlily
(As Habranthus robustus is just coming into flower in my greenhouse, it seemed a good time to look at the Wikipedia articles. Here I can only grow them in pots or else they have to be dug up for the winter which they don't seem to like.) I notice that the articles on Habranthus, Cooperia and Zephyranthes use "rain lily" with a space in the hatnotes and for the title of the disambiguation page Rain lily, but "rainlily" or "rainlilies" in the bold text. It's a very minor point, but perhaps should be made more consistent? I don't know which is more common. Peter coxhead (talk) 11:03, 7 August 2011 (UTC)
Heh, out here they've become naturalized and are beginning to send up blooms at the beginning of the rainy season. They are generally scraggly or disappear altogether during the dry months, so their flowering always comes as a nice surprise (kinda 'huh? they're still alive?', haha).
Anyway yep noticed it too, but then again, they have dozens of common names, all various configurations of mixing 'rain' 'lily' 'magic' 'fairy', etc. heh. By Google search, 'rain lily' seems to get more hits, and frankly I prefer it. More immediately recognizable than 'rainlily', imo. Both are fine for me though, feel free to change them. I'm thinking of also fixing the other articles on Zephyranthes in a bit.-- Obsidi♠nSoul11:47, 7 August 2011 (UTC)
Just noticed this. It is entirely correct, but based on your comment I guess you're not aware of the basis for the difference: If brackets are not used, the species-genus combination is the same as in the original description. If brackets are used, the species-genus combination is not the same as in the original description. For example, when Gray described the giant Asian pond turtle in 1860, he described it as Geoemyda grandis. If that was still the species-genus combination used today, his name and year would not be in brackets, but since the species has been moved to the genus Heosemys, brackets are be used. Like all rules in zoological taxonomic nomenclature, this is governed by the ICZN; specifically article 51.3 of the Code. Cheers, 212.10.88.174 (talk) 19:10, 11 August 2011 (UTC)
Actually yes. I'm pretty sure I was already aware of that when I did that, LOL. Stemonitis told me about authorities and whatnot on my... um... third species article ever, I think. Which was a long time ago before this. I was referring to online sources because I did not want to research taxonomic history just so I can decide whether to place parentheses or not, LOL. I was basically doing drive-by corrections on several turtle species (I was correcting the list of genera on Geoemydidae IIRC), and not lingering on any one of them for longer than I have to. Was basing it all on what sources say, especially since the taxobox gave no indication of it having a synonym. See this other edit of mine, for example. Knowing that it was originally described under the genus Heosemys, I noticed that the auth Taylor, 1820 not having parenthesis was wrong, and thus corrected it.
And yes, that was actually correct. The original name given to that by Gray was Geoemyda grandis. It was transferred to the genus Heosemys, hence, of course, the parentheses. If I had known that beforehand, I wouldn't have had to compare online sources. :P Though in hindsight... would probably have been faster if I just looked at synonyms LOL.
Thank you. Sure, I re-edited the sentences. I hope it fits together good now. The article is really outdated in its information (1988 report used is quite old by scientific standards...something new about the vegetable must have come up in the past 10 years alone). Sadly, it seems not many seem to care about sweet potato. Best of wishes.--MarshalN20 | Talk03:19, 12 August 2011 (UTC)
Meh x2, given that the projections are slightly different, I may have to wing it anyway. I'll be using the topo map, it's the only one with enough res and detail to show rivers. Gimme about a day or two.-- Obsidi♠nSoul23:57, 13 August 2011 (UTC)
Ok, done a version. Thoughts? Feel free to request any changes, I can [mostly] change just about anything in it at the moment. Colors, labels, etc.-- Obsidi♠nSoul01:50, 16 August 2011 (UTC)
Nice. One suggestion, maybe the cut out square could be a different colour then the green for the present area because communicating maybe hindered. Regards, SunCreator(talk)22:05, 16 August 2011 (UTC)
I think I have a neutral objective point of view, because I know very well how Christianity has spread by force around the world.
What about the colonization and the forced Christianization of the Animist people in Central and North Philippines by the Spanish Christians from 1565 to 1898 ?
Do you deny it and claim that the Philippines from 0% Christians became 90% Christians (16th-21th century) by the own will of the enslaved Filipinos without anyone forcing Christianity upon the enslaved people as was done in North/Central/South America/The Caribbean by the Spanish conquistadors? --85.130.32.11 (talk) 15:20, 15 August 2011 (UTC) — Preceding unsigned comment added by 85.130.32.11 (talk) 12:04, 15 August 2011 (UTC)
Thank you for your reply. I appreciate it and I'm sorry if I have insulted you in some way.
I admit I've made a mistake about the Lumad, but the same can't be said about the Tagalogs; Cebuanos; Ilocanos, who were mainly Animists and some Muslims before the Spanish colonization. I'm not a Filipino, but I'm a former Christian - I know this religion very well, and also the tactics Christian Missionaries use to falsify the history and to force/lure by material benefits ignorant poor non-Christians to their religion, to gain more souls, because Christianity is declining everywhere except in Africa and Asia. The Missionaries give aid only to those who convert to Christianity.
You still haven't answered my question: Why the Philippines are ~90% Christian (16th century - 0% Christian), given the fact that the country was under Spanish yoke for 4 centuries, if no forced Christianization has taken place during that time ?
P.S.: Please have in mind, that many Christian web sites, including many articles on Wikipedia are edited by Christian bigots who try to spread hatred about other religions and to demonise non-Christians.
Christian right-wing, fascist, nationalist, missionary and other hate sites against all non-Christans [in English]:
www.atlasshrugs2000.typepad.com/
www.christianpersecution.info/
www.gatesofvienna.blogspot.com/
www.faithfreedom.org/
www.tundratabloids.com/
www.vladtepesblog.com/
www.frontline.org.za/
www.altermedia.info/
www.stormfront.org/
www.foxnews.com/
www.cbn.com/
www.jihadwatch.org/
www.persecution.com/
www.michellemalkin.com/
www.brusselsjournal.com/
www.christiantoday.com/
www.jewwatch.com/
www.prophetofdoom.net/
www.englishdefenceleague.org/
Thank you for your answer. I'm also against generalizations, and also against forced convertions,hipocrisy, bigotry, spreading hatred against other religions. When I was a Christian, Christians tried to brainwash me to hate Muslims, Jews, Atheists; spreading their hateful false propaganda and demonizing non-Christians.
Now, alhamdulillah, as a Muslim, I respect all people, religions and Atheists and I expect from them to respect Islam, but I still see on a everyday basis, only ignorant Christians (not Atheists, Jewish, Buddhists, Hindus, Sikhs, Animists) spitting hatred and insults against my religion.
It certainly looks like the article is coming along nicely! I'll have a read through it later today. I have a few dead-tree sources that might prove useful - will take a look. Cheers, mgiganteus1 (talk) 19:48, 16 August 2011 (UTC)
My main problem at the moment, believe it or not, is the arrangement of subsections LOL. I've been arranging and rearranging it for quite some time now and am still not quite satisfied with it. Too many sections overlap in their subject matter. 'Reproduction and life cycle' for example, could be under 'Ecology', 'Behavior' or 'Biology'. The problem is choosing which.
Also there are still two more things I'll be adding to it. One on cephalopod hearing and another on the use of their giant axons in medical research. Anyway, whatever you can help with will be greatly appreciated. :) -- Obsidi♠nSoul19:53, 16 August 2011 (UTC)
Hello, thanks for replying to my question about Olympus µ article naming. I have added a move request on the talk page of one of the articles, and added a question at the talk page of WikiProject Photography, but have still got no reply. If this continues for much longer now I think I'll have to just perform the move myself. JIP | Talk20:13, 24 August 2011 (UTC)
How do I become a moderator?
Hello, I wish to become a moderator. I have just logged on to see that my friend had used my computer and changed an article that I had previously added to. That was not be vandalising. I have been a member for quite a while now, What are the requirements that I must fulfill in order to become a moderator? — Preceding unsigned comment added by GreenNintendo (talk • contribs) 11:25, 25 August 2011 (UTC)
Hi. Wikipedia does not have 'moderators'. We have administrators who are trusted users with access to additional editing tools. Even then, they are more like janitors than moderators as like everyone else in Wikipedia they can not tell others what to do. Please see Wikipedia:Requests for adminship for more information. Suffice to say, no, you can't be anywhere close to an admin at this point. You need to be a highly trusted user with a proven track record of constructive edits and a high degree of familiarity with Wikipedia guidelines and policies. And in case, you're wondering, no, I am not an administrator nor do I have any desire to be one.
In the future, please do secure your computer. If you're on a shared computer, remember to always log out and have a strong password.-- Obsidi♠nSoul12:13, 25 August 2011 (UTC)
Vithimiris
Hello, and thank you for the feedback. Of course my English is not very good, I am not an English speaker. I´ll do my best to improve it in my article(s), and make the text smooth. As for the "our" word, which you have found inappropriate, it obviously meant "pertaining to our, that is human, knowledge". In this meaning, the "our" stands in opposition to "feline", "canine", "porcine", and so on. But so be it, and I will avoid using it in the future. Thanks again for your effort.
Romanus451 (talk) 11:55, 25 August 2011 (UTC)
The problem with using 'our' is that it gives the impression that it refers to the author or a group to which the author belongs to specifically. As such it's better to either directly identify the source (as you have done in some parts by naming the specific person) or reword it to be completely impersonal. And you're welcome of course. :)-- Obsidi♠nSoul12:04, 25 August 2011 (UTC)
Thanks, but how can I reply?
It is recommend that editors "reply" with a thank you or follow-up to a response to a Request-for-Feedback as you have provided me, however I can find no information about how to do that. I even took the question to Google and still can't figure it out. First of all, thank you, and secondly can you enlighten me as to how I can reply in-line to your response on the Feedback page? Melgomac (talk) 13:13, 25 August 2011 (UTC)
Sorry, the unsigned response immediately above this text was from me -- I had meant to write it in a new section below, which is now done! Again, sorry, newbie here. Melgomac (talk) 13:15, 25 August 2011 (UTC)
The page is "protected" so I can only view it and its sections. Although you prefer that I reply here, I would like to know in the future how to reply there (for other people). Can you further explanation as to how I can edit a sub-section on a protected page? How were you able to respond to a feedback request? Perhaps it's the same method for me to reply to that reply. --Melgomac (talk) 14:56, 25 August 2011 (UTC)
In other words there is no "[edit]" link on the top right of the section to click on, I assume because it is protected. I also don't have the "edit" option next to "read" on the because it's protected. The directions on the page for "replying" to a feedback given, say, well...just reply to it. That's helpful! :-) --Melgomac (talk) 14:59, 25 August 2011 (UTC)
I just noticed it myself. Apparently it was protected recently (just this August) by an admin, User:Sphilbrick. I've dropped a note in his talk page about its necessity.
You can still actually edit the individual subpages. Click on the date that your request was submitted in, it will lead you to an unprotected page (in your case, it's Wikipedia:Requests for feedback/2011 August 25). I do agree however that it's very confusing, particularly since no mention of it is given anywhere in the page.-- Obsidi♠nSoul15:21, 25 August 2011 (UTC)
Understood and thank you for pursuing it with an admin and for your help overall of course. With respect to the article I penned, there were thousands of references online but I pretty carefully chose just 33 of them to be thorough. I see sometimes people put references in the "Notes" or "Footnotes" category instead, and sometimes they put the references inline, sometimes not and in just in a list at the end. It seems like there isn't rhyme or reason for this. Any comment about that for my edification? Lastly, can you give your opinion as to whether this subject person meets the notability guidelines? Thanks Obsidian! --Melgomac (talk) 18:11, 25 August 2011 (UTC)
Here's a better way to approach it. Find one or two reliable references for every sentence or two in the article then place them immediately after said sentence(s). Please do not lump all references at the end of the article. It will look very bad and does not help verifiability at all (how can a user determine if a given information is true if he doesn't know which reference refers to what information?). 33 references is not a small amount. The article would look like a single paragraph followed by a long list of successive superscripted numbers.
Use only one ==References== section and immediately below it, place a {{Reflist}} template, nothing else is required. All the references you placed in the body of the article will automatically be listed there. Again see WP:Referencing for beginners, I've also placed an easier tutorial in your talk page (click the [show] button on the right side of the collapsible table).
Also try to divide the text of the article into subsections, make it easier to read. The best way to learn really, is to learn by example, try looking around in Wikipedia for good examples of other biographies. See how they were structured, how they were coded, how they were worded, etc.
Inline references are required. Articles which do not do this are tagged for the problem. Articles which use a Footnotes section in addition to a References section are quite complex, and definitely not necessary in short articles (neither are they necessary in long articles either). They are only usually used when the original author used different pages of the same books and wanted to point out specifically which page was used in which sentence.
The number of references also matters little. What matters is the quality of the references. Reliable independent sources which offers significant coverage of the subject and proves the preceding sentence, groups of sentences, or paragraphs, are preferred.-- Obsidi♠nSoul19:21, 25 August 2011 (UTC)
If you read certain items in reliable sources 20-30 years ago and thus you know they are findable in those sources but the sources are not findable online but would be findable if you went to the Library of Congress to find those sources, how does one reference those sources without, for example, knowing the specific publication date? The attributed content would be verifiable, just not with a few clicks of the mouse as people have become spoiled to expect in the age of the internet (whereas it was not so easy 20 years ago); not every source is easy to verify as would be a CNN article from a year ago. Should readers and editors assume good faith until someone does verify that relatively difficult-to-obtain source and not delete the assertion in question until then? --Melgomac (talk) 02:13, 26 August 2011 (UTC)
Offline sources are perfectly acceptable. :) Various articles routinely use paper magazines, books, newspapers, etc. which haven't ever been online. Just make sure to reference them properly so that anyone who would want to access them would find them with no problems. A standard format is: Author (Date). Title. Volume (Issue):Pages, Publisher. ISBN/ISSN/doi/etc.
Same as the person above, I can't see how to edit the feedback page, so thanks for your review and your note about referencing! Teppic74 (talk) 14:30, 25 August 2011 (UTC)
I've just re-read our recent conversation and I can see how my comments could've been taken badly. I thought I coulld relieve the tension with what was supposed to be a bit of banter. Of course, without the accompanying body language/facial expressions, that doesn't work. Anyway, thanks for being gracious enough to accept my apology. Ykraps (talk) 07:20, 26 August 2011 (UTC)
Obsidian Soul -- I forgot to thank you earlier for your positive comments about my writing during the discussion on Ykraps' talk page. I really appreciate it. Thanks again! Gildir (talk) 18:31, 26 August 2011 (UTC)
No problem. Just keep in mind what I said, the AP right basically means intrinsic trust, and it is a bit necessary to keep up with the new page patrol backlog.-- Obsidi♠nSoul18:27, 27 August 2011 (UTC)
Thanks for the feedback on User:jean_yury/Gamigo ag. I'll move it over as soon as I do one last check on spelling/grammar. (my first reply to feedback, sorry if I'm doing it wrong) —Preceding undated comment added 17:25, 28 August 2011 (UTC).
Can you please check it for any information which is not based on fact i.e. any descriptive words etc?
Does this need more citation? 'Davina was freelance consulting on sustainability for companies including United Parcel Service (UPS), McDonald’s and The Smith Family, experimenting with recyclables including old CD’s, bubble wrap, plastic bags to make them renewable [9][10]'
In addition, in 'Other Activities', should I take this whole section out, even though it is factual? Ms Reichman really has a career in fashion/marketing and this section is just as a side note? Could anyone assist here on what to do please?
Thank you.
Hi Obsidian Soul, on review of recent happenings on the wiki I came across this edit of yours at a reference desk. I have removed the image you included there with an edit to the archived page, which is still transcluded in public display. I feel that your usage of the image constituted a personal attack. The "GN" image is used on this project in the context of editors self-identifying on their user pages. Even that is a little debatable, but the userbox wars were long ago. Using the phrase, and especially the accompanying image, to label an editor not yourself, now that's a different story. Even the phrase is problematic, it's in kind-of use but Grammar Nazi is a redirect after all. That and especially associating with the identifiable image of the Nazi flag, you seem to be associating an editor with the symbols and actions of that regime. I'm going to go way out on a limb here and suggest that you've never lived under Nazi occupation (neither have I, but a parent has some stories). I don't think it's acceptable to draw parallels between Wikipedia editors and ruthless mass-murderera - so I removed the graphical part of it.
If you dispute the removal, I'm not exactly sure where to go for resolution, so your ideas are welcome. I don't see anything really worth escalating, but if you feel my resaoning is incorrect we should discuss it. Regards! Franamax (talk) 22:15, 7 September 2011 (UTC)
Well of course it was a personal insult. Did you read what the guy said? And have you seen his talk page? Anyway, I've always viewed 'Grammar Nazi' as not quite that insulting, not even part of Godwin's law. It is after all, used by some editors to self-identify their own habits. It implies totalitarian control rather than anything related to the Holocaust. Anyway apologies for that, but I apologize only for the use of the term and the picture alone.
The guy deserved everything said to him. Whatever way you look at it, the guy is RUDE, protestations of innocence otherwise. I take it you've never come across much trolling behavior? It hasn't escalated anyway so it's water under the bridge. Delete the whole subsection if you want, but please don't defend his actions.-- Obsidi♠nSoul23:37, 7 September 2011 (UTC)
Heh, read over my post and point me to where I defended the editor. ;) You were pretty much bang-on in the thread IMO. The image use was my only big problem. Use of the phrase, well, after Seinfeld did the soup-nazi episode, yeah things did change a bit. But still, a lot of readers (not myself, and Mom was just a 10-year-old)) might have very clear memories of the symbolism of that flag and that term as specifically applied. As in remembering when they saw a loved one last; and other readers may have done a lot of reading on the topic and have a quite different idea than you on what "Nazi" connotes. So I'd just urge you going forward to really think it over when you have the idea to use it in project and project talk spaces applied to another editor. No particular problem with what you were saying, just the way you said it. :) Regards. Franamax (talk) 00:04, 8 September 2011 (UTC)
Aye, completely understand that, heh. My own grandparents (deceased) were rather touchy with the Japanese Imperial Rising Sun flag due to WW2 atrocities. I guess, we've been anesthetized somewhat, never having seen it firsthand. Anyway won't use the image or phrase again. I just have a rather nasty temper (understatement). ;d Cheers. -- Obsidi♠nSoul00:41, 8 September 2011 (UTC)
Philippine English
Hello sir Obsidian Soul. I'm quite new to editing wikipedia articles and I have to turn to you since you are one of the watchers of this article. I see that you are helping newbies and most importatntly, a Filipino as well. My concern is about the entries I added
("Brownout",
"Center Island";
"Gives";
"Ice water";
"Stay in, Stay out";
"Trainor";
"Tuck out") or check it out here
http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Philippine_English&diff=next&oldid=448887461. I believe you will agree with me and quite aware that those words and phrases missing in the list are in rampant use during casual or official conversations in our country. My entries have always been removed by someone else without any kind of messages/explanations; and what's frustrating is not even one or two of my entries are accepted to remain. If my small contributions are unacceptaple then so be it, at least a word from someone like you you dear sir will suffice to enlighten and delight me.115.146.232.122 Rogborgs (talk) 08:56, 8 September 2011 (UTC)
Greetings Obsidian Soul.(ok, no addressing you "sir" hehe!) That was very encouraging, and for that I will surely follow your advice. You got a point there about that list getting way too long and shouldn't be there in the first place if you ask me. New words will pop up faster than our legislators can create beneficial bills, it will be so crowded with entries. It occurred to me though that If perhaps a designated Wiktionary page/guide dedicated for colloquialisms on words and phrases, by country, I'd say PH is tops and will have a field day filling the list. Anywayz, I'm glad that you won't mind more questions but I'll do my homework. Your enlightening reply is more than enough to delight me. I really appreciate the heads up, thanks so much; my respect.Rogborgs (talk) 01:09, 10 September 2011 (UTC)
Laccognathus
No problem! I'm excited to see activity sparking on this desolate topic. I discovered it through Yahoo! Alert this evening, which I have set to notify me when new species are discovered, and I usually get excited when one is prehistoric. Bob the WikipediaN(talk • contribs) 02:25, 13 September 2011 (UTC)
Sure thing; easiest way to get them to me is to email me; I'll bounce an email back at you, and then you can attach. I use three mail clients, so I'll be sure to receive it right away. Bob the WikipediaN(talk • contribs) 03:04, 14 September 2011 (UTC)
I had a read through the one on L. grossi last night and updated that article. I would have liked to have gotten more out of that overly intense physical description, but unfortunately it's written in a diction and style that's difficult for me to take in and comprehend meaningfully. Bob the WikipediaN(talk • contribs) 17:09, 14 September 2011 (UTC)
T. blondi edit
Obsidian,
I understand you removing my edit to the the Goliath Birdeater page, but I just want to clarify something.
In captivity, Madagascar hissing cockroaches are generally frowned upon for use as feeders by members in the tarantula hobby, like me. The reason being, they have a very very very hard shell, and unless the spider is fully mature, could break a fang when biting into one. This has been documented several times.
It has been however, proven that Blaptica Dubia roaches are the most nutrious feeder insect one can find, and it is highly recommended that they be used as the staple diet for the goliath.
I can direct you to Arachnoboards and the American Tarantula society if you want confirmation of this.
My edit was not vandilism or something unconstructive, I was merely trying to prevent the spread of misinformation.
Oof, I'm really sorry for that. I retracted my warning and undid my revision of your edit.
But yes, please do include a source recommending that Blaptica dubia be fed to T. blondi instead. That way, your edits won't be mistaken for vandalism. Feel free to edit the page again, I'll help fix your additions and will answer any questions you might have on editing.
Thanks so much for the info on adding refs. Heretofore, I've only done some correcting of typographical errors & misspellings, cleaning up syntax & grammar, etc. I was afraid that I'd lose all the work I'd done to add to that section, so decided to save it as it was and get back to the problem of adding refs later. Your info was just what I needed. Thx! — Preceding unsigned comment added by TrishB (talk • contribs) 20:04, 18 September 2011 (UTC)
Thanks for fixing it up the beautiful rewrite. I had an awful time with all those body parts. I was making sections akin to "Engine" "Wires" "Chassis" "Horn". :)
By the way, the neck is fine. The venom left me with a bit of vertigo, so I fall over a lot. But I've been wearing a motorcycle helmet around the house, so all is well. Best, Anna Frodesiak (talk) 10:39, 21 September 2011 (UTC)
FunkMonk pointed it out, heh. It seems Downs et al. considers the criteria used by Vorobyeva to be possibly not enough to diagnose a new species, in light of the morphological differences in the 22 specimens of L. embryi recovered in Canada. They recommended investigating possible synonymy with L. panderi, but meh, should be alright to leave it as is.-- Obsidi♠nSoul09:44, 23 September 2011 (UTC)
I'd say Downs et al. needs to do said research if they want anyone to honor that opinion from a scientific standpoint; I'd think Vorobyeva would know what she's talking about better than they do. Bob the WikipediaN(talk • contribs) 17:46, 23 September 2011 (UTC)
Regarding your question about the DYK cutoff changing to 4 days: this must have been a typo on my part when I wrote up the instructions for the checklists (which I think we're getting rid of soon anyway, and going back to the way things were before). I just fixed it. Thanks for pointing this out. rʨanaɢ (talk) 16:32, 21 September 2011 (UTC)
Credits for this nomination included two editors who made one minor edit each (Berton and Rcej). No big deal, but please avoid - "rewards" will lose their meaning if given indiscriminately. Cheers. Materialscientist (talk) 04:15, 23 September 2011 (UTC)
Thanks for the barnstar. It's nice to see what I do is recognized and I am always open to help (as long as the question is not about MediaWiki or other technical aspects I don't have any idea of). :) Toshio Yamaguchi (talk) 18:11, 25 September 2011 (UTC)
There is a new ZooKeys issue with a whole bunch of Paleo articles. All texts and images from ZooKeys are free to use (CC-BY-3.0). You might be intested? See: [3] I also notified User:Kevmin. Cheers! Ruigeroeland (talk) 09:10, 26 September 2011 (UTC)
Yep, all articles are. I have been faithfully adding everything related to Lepidoptera from ZooKeys articles. All others can be freely used, but I think most have not been added on wikipedia though.Ruigeroeland (talk) 11:45, 26 September 2011 (UTC)
Well, if you use too much text, you could add a template saying you used text from a cc source. See for an example Cosmopterix. The template is found in the references section. Someone pointed out I had to use that when using too much text from a cc source without rewriting. Cheers and happy editing! Ruigeroeland (talk) 06:38, 27 September 2011 (UTC)
I think we can—it was published in 1920, before January 1, 1923, the cutoff date for public domain. Feel free to upload it; it would be better to have a copy under Wikimedia servers. Goodvac (talk) 02:00, 28 September 2011 (UTC)
from the Help Page where we met, and thank you for your assistance at that Sculpture Review thing. And thanks for not going the DELETE route. Which is always, as Duane Eddy once put it, Forty Miles of Bad Road. I went to the association link that you put up, but I am a simple guy. Prefers short sentences. And could not quite figure it out other than many of its precepts seemed to be based on Christian principles. I am a strong Separation of Church and Me kind of fellow. Anyway, thank you for your help. Life is good. Einar aka Carptrash (talk) 19:18, 30 September 2011 (UTC)
Haha, I still can't figure out when they changed their name though. Somewhere between the 1970's to 1980's. Meh. I think it's good enough for now. Definitely safe from the Wikilawyers anyway. And I'm more of the Forcibly Separated from the Church meself. :P The AWWWGOBBLEDEGOOKCHURCHTHINGIE is really just a fancy name for people with too much free time. -- Obsidi♠nSoul21:06, 30 September 2011 (UTC)
I've always assumed that "wikipedia editor" is synonymous for "someone with too much time on their hands". Viva la difference! Meanwhile, a dear friend called me. Her cat walked over her keyboard (of her APPLE computer) and everything is too big. I suggest "command -" didn't work, I suggested "View - smaller" didn't work. Any other ideas? I am actually a luddite so any more is beyond me. And you? Carptrash (talk) 22:17, 30 September 2011 (UTC)
I've never touched an Apple computer, so the following might not work, heh. If the increase in font size affects only her browser, then "Cmd -" (or "Cmd mousewheel") should have worked (provided her browser is new enough, e.g. Firefox). If it affects everything (not just webpages), try setting display resolution back to the original size. This might help.-- Obsidi♠nSoul22:47, 30 September 2011 (UTC)
As it turned out I had to go over to Joan's Place [4] and do it. Your suggestion was one of the promising ones - that did not work. Finally somewhere deep in the viscera of the Preferences there was a "Hmmmm. Let's try this." and it worked. Thanks for looking into it. Now if you could suggest something about the problems in the Middle East, we could all get a good night's sleep. I'm off to the Dixon Players presentation of Lucky Stiff, which I somehow managed to dodge being in, and then I can call it a day. Night. whatever. Carptrash (talk) 23:50, 30 September 2011 (UTC)
On 8 October 2011, Did you know? was updated with a fact from the article Fairyfly, which you created or substantially expanded. The fact was ... that fairyflies include the smallest known insects, smaller than a single-celled Paramecium? The nomination discussion and review may be seen at Template:Did you know nominations/Fairyfly.You are welcome to check how many hits the article got while on the front page (here's how, quick check) and add it to DYKSTATS if it got over 5,000. If you know of another interesting fact from a recently created article, then please suggest it on the Did you know? talk page.
Hello Obsidian Soul! 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. Global message delivery 12:38, 26 October 2011 (UTC)
I saw your recent discussions over scientific names and your getting, justifiably, upset over some of the comments. I support your views on this thought you may like to know you have people on your side there.
Also, I dealt with carapace for my artical on Turtle shell which you fixed a bit, thanks for that, I am wondering though how to do the same for Plastron, any suggestions would be appreciated. The balance of the artical is a little different. Cheers, Faendalimastalk08:36, 11 November 2011 (UTC)
It gets frustrating sometimes how guidelines are applied without deference as to the subject matter or applicability, and how people keep dragging down scientific articles to the least common denominator of the average mainstream article. Meh. Avoiding any further discussions with that atm.
Anyway, yeah, I can see the problems with plastron. Dunno honestly, imho, the most widespread usage is undoubtedly for turtles. The others are more or less dictionary definitions or non-notable. I think plastron should be redirected to turtle shell with a {{See also}} hatnote on the subsection (or a {{Redirect}} hatnote at the top) for the plastron pointing to a disambiguation page where the other meanings for plastron can be placed.-- Obsidi♠nSoul17:24, 11 November 2011 (UTC)
West Indies Mahogany
From Clyde A. Hill FLS,FRS (Fellow, Linnean Society of London 1979 & Fellow, Royal Geographic Society, 1978)
Hello, Obsidian Soul
Please reconsider my submission of my opening paragraph to Swietenia mahagoni. That species is the Type for Swietenia. S. mahagoni alone, historically is (at today's dollar value) a billion dollar industry. It had a significant impact which I will describe in following paragraphs. My opening paragraph was to insure that I had the footnotes correctly entered and the red flag showing up said that I had not done something. After that has been set up satisfactorily I will enter the text explaining S. mahagoni's relationship with humankind. Those paragraphs have a dozen footnotes themselves. I have already published in Wikipedia, S. humilis. That piece solves the confusion of the Pacific Coast Mahogany which was in the nature of the geography. The bulge, as I explained it. All the pieces of that puzzle were in the literature, they just needed to be fitted together. The botanical aspects of the three species I will enter into Wikispecies. After I have covered the three species of Swietenia, each in their own Wikipedia "page" I will do the genus.
Please replace and correct my footnote situation for my opening paragraph to the West Indies Mahogany. I will be most grateful for your help. Thank you. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Clyde A. Hill (talk • contribs) 16:27, 13 November 2011 (UTC)
I'm sorry but it's inappropriate to describe the genus in a species page, unless of course, it's for comparison purposes. And even then, it should be placed in the taxonomy section, not the lead section (which introduces the subject of the article). Your previous edit to S. mahagoni described all three species.
To put it simply - you are editing the wrong article. Of course, you are more than welcome to improve all the articles, but please do apply the correct descriptions to the correct articles. In other words, describe S. humilis in Swietenia humilis, S. mahagoni in Swietenia mahagoni, S. macrophylla in Swietenia macrophylla, and all three in Swietenia. But please do not confuse the scope of the different articles. We have separate articles for each taxon here in Wikipedia, with the exception of monotypic taxa.
I am, of course, happy to correct any formatting errors you may have (the previous error was because you missed a closing </ref> tag). Again as long as the edits are in the correct article. Please feel free to contact me if you encounter the citation error again.-- Obsidi♠nSoul16:41, 13 November 2011 (UTC)
West Indies Mahogany.
Thanks for making the footnotes work. Have entered both clarifications but they are probably not in proper form. Also appreciate your guidelines. I have one more paragraph to add to the Discovery section. I like Wikipedia's motto. "Wikipedia is a place to inform and educate. It is not a technical journal." Thanks again. CAH — Preceding unsigned comment added by Clyde A. Hill (talk • contribs) 01:00, 18 November 2011 (UTC)
You're welcome. :) And yep, we're scientific, but not quite a journal, heh. Try to word your text as if you were explaining to a well-educated high school student. i.e. Explain the context, but don't overexplain. Also wikilinking is always helpful for unfamiliar terms.-- Obsidi♠nSoul02:14, 18 November 2011 (UTC)
What happened? I entered a new paragraph Enter The Naturalists: and it vanished. I hit the Preview button, it showed up. I moved to the save button and the whole thing wasn't there anymore. Can you rescue it or will I have to put it all back in? Thanks. CAH — Preceding unsigned comment added by Clyde A. Hill (talk • contribs) 00:17, 19 November 2011 (UTC)
This is an archive of past discussions with User:Obsidian Soul. Do not edit the contents of this page. If you wish to start a new discussion or revive an old one, please do so on the current talk page.
Done -- The Egyptian Liberal (talk) 11:06, 19 January 2011 (UTC)
Hello! Your submission of Scutelleridae at the Did You Know nominations page has been reviewed, and there still are some issues that may need to be clarified. Please review the comment(s) underneath your nomination's entry and respond there as soon as possible. Thank you for contributing to Did You Know! — Rod talk 17:39, 29 April 2011 (UTC)
), not 
which is only used if the source can not be accessed easily (e.g. paper publications or foreign language works).-- Obsidi♠nSoul 01:56, 17 May 2011 (UTC)
-- Obsidi♠n Soul 01:27, 16 July 2011 (UTC)
Acknowledged on my talk page. Thanks, A user who has been editing Wikipedia since Thursday, October 28, 2010. 01:34, 19 July 2011 (UTC)
,_Northern_Hawaiian_waters.jpg){kind=link}
Bob the WikipediaN (talk • contribs) 02:25, 13 September 2011 (UTC)
Hello. You have a new message at Anna Frodesiak's talk page. 11:08, 21 September 2011 (UTC)
