User talk:SchreiberBike/Archive 6
This is an archive of past discussions with User:SchreiberBike. 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. |
Archive 1 | ← | Archive 4 | Archive 5 | Archive 6 | Archive 7 |
More redirects
I have identified these in Lycaenidae.Will you fix them please.
- Sipaea redirect to Nesiostrymon
- Sterosis redirect to Liphyra Westwood, 1864
- Sublysandra redirect to Polyommatus
- Tajuria berensis redirect to Tajuria berenis
- Terra redirect to Nesiostrymon Clench, 1964
- Tigrinota redirect to Arawacus
Always grateful for your help.Best regards Robert aka Notafly (talk) 16:15, 24 August 2018 (UTC)
- @Notafly: Got 'm. Let me know if I misunderstood anything or there's anything else I can help with. Keep up the good work. SchreiberBike | ⌨ 02:58, 30 August 2018 (UTC)
- Many thanks.All are correct.I imagine more redirects are likely since the blues are oversplit Best regards Notafly (talk) 11:54, 30 August 2018 (UTC)
disambig templates
Hi! I think the taxonomy templates work like this, for disambiguation. I'll use Lithocharis as an example.
- If there's a template "template:taxonomy/Lithocharis" that is used for lepidoptera, then there would need to be another such as "template:taxonomy/Lithocharis (beetle)" if one was needed for the beetle. The template name is used only for template disambiguation. The template name (the part after the slash, "Lithocharis" or "Lithocharis (beetle)") is used in the Speciesbox or Automatic taxobox. It doesn't necessarily have to be the same as the article name (but it might be less confusing that way.)
- If there's an article "Lithocharis" and an article "Lithocharis (beetle)", you can use the template "template:taxonomy/Lithocharis" for either one by specifying either "Lithocharis" or "Lithocharis (beetle)|Lithocharis" in the template's link field. In this case, if you want to use it for the beetle, the name "Lithocharis (beetle)" should not appear in the Speciesbox or Automatic taxobox, only "Lithocharis". The name in the Speciesbox or Automatic taxobox is for the template, not the article.
- It's not unusual to need a disambiguation name for both the template and article, in which case you need two templates (such as "template:taxonomy/Lithocharis" and "template:taxonomy/Lithocharis (beetle)", and in the link fields "Lithocharis" in one and "Lithocharis (beetle)|Lithocharis" in the other
Since there's not currently a template used for the lepidoptera Lithocharis, there really only needs to be one template, not both "template:taxonomy/Lithocharis" and "template:taxonomy/Lithocharis (beetle)"
...and, of course, I could be wrong on any of this. It's easy to get mixed up! Bob Webster (talk) 00:50, 3 September 2018 (UTC)
- @Bob: I am not comfortable at all with the automatic taxoboxes system. I saw that there was a link from the beetle species Lithocharis ochracea to its genus which went in error to the moth genus Euparyphasma. I was pleased enough with myself that I was able to change that to a red link instead of the error. I would be in your debt if you could clean up after me as you described above. I am not now able to figure it out for myself. Thank you, SchreiberBike | ⌨ 04:09, 3 September 2018 (UTC)
- It's all straight now (I think). Everything you did was correct from a content viewpoint, it just left an extra unused template file. I will point out that, while my explanation seemed perfectly clear when I wrote it, it sure is convoluted now!
- I'm happy to help with any template stuff I can. Feel free to let me know if you need anything or notice anything wrong. Bob Webster (talk) 04:53, 3 September 2018 (UTC)
- Thanks and keep up the good work. SchreiberBike | ⌨ 14:37, 3 September 2018 (UTC)
Redirect request from Notafly
Would you redirect Keraunogramma to Semanga Distant 1884 please. Best regards Notafly (talk) 16:08, 10 September 2018 (UTC)
- Got it. Thanx. SchreiberBike | ⌨ 18:00, 11 September 2018 (UTC)
- Many thanks Notafly (talk) 17:47, 12 September 2018 (UTC)
Autopatrolled granted
Hi SchreiberBike, I just wanted to let you know that I have added the "autopatrolled" permission to your account, as you have created numerous, valid articles. This feature will have no effect on your editing, and is simply intended to reduce the workload on new page patrollers. For more information on the autopatrolled right, see Wikipedia:Autopatrolled. Feel free to leave me a message if you have any questions. Happy editing! - TNT 💖 18:10, 13 October 2018 (UTC)
- @There'sNoTime: Thanks. It makes sense to me, but you should be aware that by the letter of the law I am not eligible. It has been proposed three times before. See the bottom of this page. Keep up the good work. SchreiberBike | ⌨ 04:54, 14 October 2018 (UTC)
October 2018
Hello, I'm Zackmann08. Thank you for your recent contributions to Pseudozarba mianoides. When you were adding content to the page, you added duplicate arguments to a template which can cause issues with how the template is rendered. In the future, please use the preview button before you save your edit; this helps you find these errors as they will display in red at the top of the page. Thanks! Zackmann (Talk to me/What I been doing) 06:54, 18 October 2018 (UTC)
Invitation to New AI-Labelling Campaign for Newcomer Sessions
Hello, I'm reaching out to you because I saw that you signed up as a labelling volunteer at Wikipedia:Labels/Edit quality. I'm starting a new project that builds on Edit quality, to predict Newcomer quality. That is, to predict the damagingness and goodfaithness of "sessions" (multiple related edits) of users within 1 day of their registration. With this AI trained, we could help automatically distinguish betewen productive and unproductive new users. If you wouldn't mind taking a look at this new labelling campaign and label a few sessions I would be very grateful. In addition if you have any feedback or discover any bugs in the process I would appreciate that too. You can find the project page at Wikipedia:Labels/Newcomer_session_quality or go directly to labels.wmflabs.org/ui/enwiki/ and look for the campaign titled "Newcomer Session quality (2018)". Thanks so much!
Maximilianklein (talk) 20:02, 29 October 2018 (UTC)
ArbCom 2018 election voter message
Hello, SchreiberBike. Voting in the 2018 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23.59 on Sunday, 3 December. All users who registered an account before Sunday, 28 October 2018, made at least 150 mainspace edits before Thursday, 1 November 2018 and are not currently blocked are eligible to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once.
The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail.
If you wish to participate in the 2018 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 18:42, 19 November 2018 (UTC)
Public holidays in Kurdistan listed at Redirects for discussion
An editor has asked for a discussion to address the redirect Public holidays in Kurdistan. Since you had some involvement with the Public holidays in Kurdistan redirect, you might want to participate in the redirect discussion if you have not already done so. -- Tavix (talk) 15:08, 30 November 2018 (UTC)
Heliconisa edit
Thanks very much for the edit on Heliconisa; I could not locate a similar article for a monotypic genus that also had an automatic taxobox, so was uncertain how it needed to be formatted. I'll make a note of this for future reference, I've seen a few other such cases and left them alone. Dyanega (talk) 01:09, 5 January 2019 (UTC)
- I'm slowly working out how and when to use {{Speciesbox}} and {{Automatic_taxobox}}; they are not self explanatory for me. Thanks for adding in the parentheses. I should have seen that. Keep up the good work. SchreiberBike | ⌨ 01:17, 5 January 2019 (UTC)
Precious anniversary
Five years! |
---|
Happy 2019 --Gerda Arendt (talk) 10:46, 19 January 2019 (UTC)
- @Gerda Arendt: Wow! Thank you for the reminder. Five years is a long time on the Internet. SchreiberBike | ⌨ 19:27, 19 January 2019 (UTC)
- six years now! --Gerda Arendt (talk) 08:36, 19 January 2020 (UTC)
- @Gerda Arendt: Thank you. Good to think of such things again. SchreiberBike | ⌨ 04:04, 21 January 2020 (UTC)
- yes, good for me ;) - last year was my successful year of thanks, DYK? (see my talk). --Gerda Arendt (talk) 09:08, 21 January 2020 (UTC)
- @Gerda Arendt: Thank you. Good to think of such things again. SchreiberBike | ⌨ 04:04, 21 January 2020 (UTC)
- six years now! --Gerda Arendt (talk) 08:36, 19 January 2020 (UTC)
Thank you for the nice words!
Thank you for the nice words! When writing a new article (or translating one) should I put references before or after punctuation marks on the english wikipedia? Have a nice day! Okimeolvx (talk) 08:30, 23 April 2019 (UTC)
- @Okimeolvx: Hi there! Wikipedia has a lot of rules, but mostly you don't need to worry about them. Just use your good judgement and do what seems right. You will get it right most of the time. If you do start reading the rules though you'll be able to make the articles match with Wikipedia's style and they will be easier to read. The specific rules about references and punctuation are at MOS:REFPUNCT. As you are able, read that whole WP:MOS page. It's a lot to absorb though, so don't feel like you need to know it all before you start. Let me know if there's any other questions you have or there's anything else I can do to help. Keep up the good work. SchreiberBike | ⌨ 19:02, 23 April 2019 (UTC)
copyedit request
Hi SchreiberBike, I created a draft of the first issue of the Tree of Life newsletter. If you're still interested in glancing it over for a c/e, it would be appreciated. Thanks, Enwebb (talk) 16:39, 4 May 2019 (UTC)
- @Enwebb: I generally followed WP:MoS style, but since you are starting the newsletter, you can set the style any way you want. Feel totally free to disagree with my choices and I'll try to follow your style in the future.
- I wanted to explain some of my choices: I capitalized article titles when used as article titles rather than as the name of a species – that's not always done, so your call. You've got
;<big> ... </big>
for the headings. Would you be comfortable using == ... == format instead? WP:ACCESSIBILITY favors that. For the dire whelk DYK, what is "being eaten" is unclear in the text, but that's how it was on the DYK. If you want to change that back, that makes sense; your call. I think the April DYKs section looks better showing rather than being behind the "show" button, but again, your call. I'm not good with tables, but if the tops of the "Newly recognized content" and "Newly nominated FAs" tables were vertically even, that would look better.
- I like to copy edit and I mostly do ok, but because I am dyslexic there are some kinds of errors (like spelling) that are invisible to me. Keep that in mind. Also, my health is uneven and I'm not always able to be involved the way I'd like to be, so be prepared for me to disappear if necessary. Thank you and keep up the good work. SchreiberBike | ⌨ 19:33, 4 May 2019 (UTC)
- SchreiberBike, Thanks for your time! I appreciate it and will consider all of your suggestions. As far as the vertical alignment of the tables, it must just be a display thing, because they look even to me on my mac and PC. Thanks again, and don't worry, I'm not expecting a standing commitment :) Enwebb (talk) 23:36, 4 May 2019 (UTC)
Editor of the Week
Mihran Hakobyan's Wikipedia Monument, located in Słubice, Poland |
SchreiberBike |
Editor of the Week for the week beginning June 2, 2019 |
Does "the small things on Wikipedia to make them a little bit better". like checking the capitalization of species common names and fixing them to match WP's editing. Displays vigilance and determination doing copy editing and other things. |
Recognized for |
Doing the little things to make WP better |
Submit a nomination |
Editor of the Week | ||
Your ongoing efforts to improve the encyclopedia have not gone unnoticed: You have been selected as Editor of the Week in recognition of your great contributions! (courtesy of the Wikipedia Editor Retention Project) |
User:Buster7 submitted the following nomination for Editor of the Week:
- Sometimes as I work on one gem I find another. While awarding User:AddWittyNameHere, I discovered SchreiberBike, a cohort of hers that deserves acknowledgement and credit for doing, in his words, "the small things on Wikipedia to make them a little bit better. Lately most of my effort has been spent checking the capitalization of species common names and fixing them to match Wikipedia's style. I'm working primarily on Lepidoptera now. While I do that, I do other stuff too or else I get bored. I've also adopted some delicious typos and sometimes do copy editing and other things". When the Editor of the Week award was first inaugurated, SchreiberBike was exactly the type of editor we had in mind. Imagine the mess Wikipedia would be without the vigilance and diligence this type of editor displays. Bravo and well-deserved! User:Adityavagarwal strongly supported this nomination.
You can copy the following text to your user page to display a user box proclaiming your selection as Editor of the Week:
{{User:UBX/EoTWBox}}
Thanks again for your efforts! ―Buster7 ☎ 00:44, 3 June 2019 (UTC)
- @Buster7:. Wow! Thank you. It's a little shocking. I don't edit Wikipedia to earn recognition, but still, it feels good to receive it. Keep up the good work and let me know if I can do anything to help. SchreiberBike | ⌨ 03:43, 4 June 2019 (UTC)
Congrats! and thanks for helping at John Henry Salter --Dick Bos (talk) 18:42, 1 July 2019 (UTC)
Gustav Adolf Closs aka Adolf Gustav Closs
I am sure you are right about Closs. They are most likely one and the same.I will change the page Best regards Notafly (talk) 20:55, 12 July 2019 (UTC)
- @Notafly: Thanks. It seemed likely. I've set up redirects both here and at Wikispecies. Keep up the good work. SchreiberBike | ⌨ 03:35, 24 July 2019 (UTC)
I have unreviewed a page you curated
Hi, I'm QueerEcofeminist. I wanted to let you know that I saw the page you reviewed, List of moths of the Iberian Peninsula, and have marked it as unpatrolled. If you have any questions, please ask them on my talk page. Thank you.
Message delivered via the Page Curation tool, on behalf of the reviewer.
QueerEcofeminist "cite! even if you fight"!!! [they/them/their] 15:02, 11 August 2019 (UTC)
New message from BigDwiki
Message added 05:14, 16 August 2019 (UTC). You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.
BigDwiki (talk) 05:14, 16 August 2019 (UTC)
Moved from User:SchreiberBike/Lepidoptera caps
COMMENT: there is a problem with this elimination of initial capitals from vernacular names. You can't tell if "small brown warbler" is a warbler that happens to be small and brown, a Brown Warbler that happens to be small, or a species called the Small Brown Warbler.
I'm not convinced of the wisdom of this as a general policy. Foiled circuitous wanderer (talk) 14:22, 24 August 2019 (UTC)
- Hi @Foiled circuitous wanderer: That's a legitimate opinion and one that's been discussed at length (See: WP:BIRDCON). However, for the last about five years, Wikipedia has been consistent in capitalizing as described at MOS:LIFE. Good writing is necessary throughout Wikipedia and where the descriptive parts of a name can be confusing, it's worth writing carefully to be clear what is descriptive and what is the name. Let me know if you have any other questions or ideas. Keep up the good work. SchreiberBike | ⌨ 19:29, 24 August 2019 (UTC)
- (talk page stalker) It should be clear from context whether a warbler that is small and brown is being referred to, or one particular species. If it isn't clear, rephrase until it is. However, while I am in generally in favor of using sentence case for vernacular names, I don't think it works very well for lepidopterans that have a definitive article in the vernacular name. Giving the vernacular name of Agrochola circellaris as "the brick" is more confusing than "The Brick", and there's really no way to rephrase the context to clarify (other than explicitly saying that "the brick" is a vernacular name for the species; e.g., "the brick, as it is commonly known, is found in Europe..."). Plantdrew (talk) 15:12, 25 August 2019 (UTC)
Help
Hello. Help expand for article Akane Yamaguchi from 山口茜. Thanks you. Ghyuw5 (talk) 03:06, 26 August 2019 (UTC)
- @Ghyuw5: What kind of help do you need? I know nothing about badminton and don't speak Chinese. Posting the same message on nine user pages is odd. SchreiberBike | ⌨ 03:14, 26 August 2019 (UTC)
- expand.Ghyuw5 (talk) 03:15, 26 August 2019 (UTC)
- You might be able to get some help at Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Badminton or Wikipedia:WikiProject Japan. SchreiberBike | ⌨ 03:18, 26 August 2019 (UTC)
- expand.Ghyuw5 (talk) 03:15, 26 August 2019 (UTC)
Neutral notice
This is a neutral notice to all registered editors who have contributed to Wikipedia talk:Manual of Style/Film over the past year (Sept. 15, 2018-present) that a Request for Comment has been posted here. --Tenebrae (talk) 15:03, 14 September 2019 (UTC)
Hipparchia hermione not alcyone
Hello again Schreiber Bike Rock grayling redirects to Hipparchia alcyone. The valid name in most sources including Fauna Europaea and Wikispecies is Hipparchia hermione and I think we should use this. Will you rename the page (I have changed the text and will add more) and fix the redirect. I see other language pages vary in this respect but not much can be done here (Or can it?) Very best regards Notafly (talk) 20:23, 15 October 2019 (UTC)
- @Notafly: Done. Glad to help. Not sure about other language editions of Wikipedia though. SchreiberBike | ⌨ 20:37, 15 October 2019 (UTC)
In the blink of an eye.Very many thanks Notafly (talk) 20:52, 15 October 2019 (UTC)
ANI report that may be of interest to you
Regarding misuse of automated tools: Wikipedia:Administrators'_noticeboard/Incidents#Bot_like_edits_from_User:BigDwiki. OhNoitsJamie Talk 23:05, 1 November 2019 (UTC)
Canelo Álvarez vs. Gennady Golovkin - apologies
I think I accidentally edited an older version of the article which also undid your edit. Sorry about that. S0091 (talk) 04:26, 3 November 2019 (UTC)
- No problem. Thanks for the note. Keep up the good work. SchreiberBike | ⌨ 04:27, 3 November 2019 (UTC)
Happy First Edit Day!
- Well, thank you. Keep up the good work. SchreiberBike | ⌨ 18:45, 17 November 2019 (UTC)
Invitation to join the Ten Year Society
Dear SchreiberBike/Archive 6,
I'd like to extend a cordial invitation to you to join the Ten Year Society, an informal group for editors who've been participating in the Wikipedia project for ten years or more.
Best regards, Chris Troutman (talk) 21:11, 17 November 2019 (UTC)
ArbCom 2019 election voter message
Google Code-In 2019 is coming - please mentor some documentation tasks!
Hello,
Google Code-In, Google-organized contest in which the Wikimedia Foundation participates, starts in a few weeks. This contest is about taking high school students into the world of opensource. I'm sending you this message because you recently edited a documentation page at the English Wikipedia.
I would like to ask you to take part in Google Code-In as a mentor. That would mean to prepare at least one task (it can be documentation related, or something else - the other categories are Code, Design, Quality Assurance and Outreach) for the participants, and help the student to complete it. Please sign up at the contest page and send us your Google account address to google-code-in-admins@lists.wikimedia.org, so we can invite you in!
From my own experience, Google Code-In can be fun, you can make several new friends, attract new people to your wiki and make them part of your community.
If you have any questions, please let us know at google-code-in-admins@lists.wikimedia.org.
Thank you!
--User:Martin Urbanec (talk) 21:58, 23 November 2019 (UTC)
November 2019 Tree of Life Newsletter
- November 2019—Issue 008
- Tree of Life
- Welcome to the Tree of Life newsletter!
King brown snake by Casliber |
News at a Glance |
|
Class is in Session in the Tree of Life |
In an interesting turn of events, this month's guest column is by my alter-ego, Elysia (Wiki Ed): *Puts on Wiki Education hat* Hi everyone, I'm Elysia and I work for Wiki Education. You may know me as Enwebb. I got a request last month to let you know how Wiki Education is intersecting with the Tree of Life subprojects. As one of Wiki Education's major goals is to improve topics related to the sciences, leading to our Communicating Science initiative, we end up supporting quite a few in the biological sciences. Here are the TOL-related courses active this term: What is the impact of student editors in Tree of Life? Altogether, these 16 courses have 347 student participants. As the end of the semester hasn't come yet, these numbers are still growing, but these students have:
Some of our best student work this semester (of any kind, not just biodiversity) has come from Agelaia's Behavioural Ecology course—you may remember this as the course that created WikiProject Diptera. The students have several Good Article nominations, including Dryomyza anilis, Anastrepha ludens, Aedes taeniorhynchus, Drosophila silvestris, Drosophila subobscura, and Ceratitis capitata. And while long-term participation from students is low, there's always the chance that we'll discover a Wikipedian. I had never edited before my Wikipedia assignment in 2017 and I'm still here nearly 20,000 edits later! After I poked around in the beginning of the semester, I had the realization that not many people write Wikipedia, and very few of those have a special interest in bats. If I didn't stick around to write the content, there was no guarantee that it would ever get done. Why are species articles suitable for students? Writing about taxonomic groups is a great fit for students, as it keeps them away from areas where new editors traditionally struggle. The notability policy is generous towards taxa, and there is little danger of a student's work getting removed for lack of notability; this is to be expected when students write biographies. Students may struggle with encyclopedic tone for biographies and stray towards promotional writing, but this is much less common when writing about a shrew or algae! Additionally, we're never going to run out of species to write about. Students have a bounty of stubs and redlinks to pick from. Creating a new article or expanding an existing one also takes a fairly predictable structure, with plenty of articles that students can model after. Don't students just create messes for volunteers to clean up? Our sincere hope is that, no, they don't, and we take several steps to try to minimize the burden on volunteer labor. With automatic plagiarism detection, alerts when students edit a Good or Featured Article, and notifications when students edit an article subject to discretionary sanctions, we try to stay ahead of problems as much as possible. We also review all student work at the end of each term. Ian, Shalor, and I are always happy to receive pings alerting us to student issues that need to be addressed. |
November DYKs |
|
You are receiving this because you added your name to the subscribers list of the WikiProject Tree of Life. If you no longer wish to receive the newsletter, please remove your name.
Question concerning placement of images
I’m curious. You edited the image I just placed on List of mammals of Brazil. You changed [[ to “ I will need to scout up the guides to find out what I did wrong. However, why did you not make the same change on all the other images? Thanks Johnson-Bob (talk) 22:24, 27 December 2019 (UTC)
- Thanks for the question. You had changed the caption from "Tayra" to "Eira barbara" and Wikipedia style is to italicize scientific names. If you go to the page Tayra, you'll see that Eira barbara is in italics there. It's the same for all species. Keep up the good work. SchreiberBike | ⌨ 00:30, 28 December 2019 (UTC)
- (talk page stalker)Not just Wikipedia style, either—though that is obviously the most relevant thing here—it's an actual binomial nomenclature thing supported by both ICZN & ICN. AddWittyNameHere 00:36, 28 December 2019 (UTC)
Theodor Gottlieb von Scheven
Greetings SchreiberBike Will you take a look at Theodor Gottlieb von Scheven. The added templates -living person (he died in 1810) and notability (he described the well known moth Zygaena lonicera) are (unwittingly) unjust to this early naturalist.I hope they will be removed or worse the page deleted.No doubt more will be added to this page but not by me my German isn't up to it. Best regards Notafly (talk) 20:14, 28 December 2019 (UTC)
- It looks like AddWittyNameHere has done excellent work there. Thanks to Witty. SchreiberBike | ⌨ 06:00, 29 December 2019 (UTC)
December 2019 Tree of Life Newsletter
- December 2019—Issue 009
- Tree of Life
- Welcome to the Tree of Life newsletter!
Apororhynchus by Mattximus |
Cactus wren by CaptainEek |
News at a Glance |
|
Editor Spotlight: Plantdrew |
We're joined this month by long-time editor Plantdrew, who's currently engaged in streamlining the taxonomic structure of Wikipedia articles via the automated taxobox system. How did you become a Wikipedian? What are your particular interests (besides the obvious of "plants")?
What projects are keeping you busy around the 'pedia at present?
What's your favorite plant?
What's your background like? How did you come to have a special interest in biology?
What's something that would surprised TOL editors about your life off-wiki?
Anything else you'd like us to know?
|
December DYKs |
|
You are receiving this because you added your name to the subscribers list of the WikiProject Tree of Life. If you no longer wish to receive the newsletter, please remove your name.
Neutral notice
As an editor who commented at Wikipedia talk:Manual of Style/Film between Jan. 1, 2019, and today, you may wish to join a discussion at that page, here.--Tenebrae (talk) 23:54, 9 January 2020 (UTC)
George Hamilton, 3rd Earl of Abercorn
Dear SchreiberBike. Thanks for correcting mistakes on the article George Hamilton, 3rd Earl of Abercorn, to which I contributed and which is therefore on my watchlist. I agree with all the other corrections you made but have doubts about replacing the BR HTML tag with BR/. I thought Wikipedia uses HTML5, which does not require closure for the BR. I have heard that some people maintain that BR does confuse the Source Editor's syntax highlighting, but I have always used just unclosed BR and did not notice anything going wrong with the syntax highlighting, which I have always on. Can you please explain why BR/ is necessary? I have used BR a lot. I want to be sure and understand why, before I change all that. With many thanks Johannes Schade (talk) 12:23, 16 January 2020 (UTC)
- Hi @Johannes Schade: Thanks for your note. I typically make that edit because I use this syntax highlighter which is available under Preferences/Gadgets/Editing. I don't know how many other people use it, but I find it quite helpful and I suspect more people would use it if they knew about it. One particularity of the highlighter is that it differentiates between a <br> and a <br/>. As it says in the documentation "For performance reasons, the highlighter requires all tags to be valid XML. For example, make sure that if you start a
<p>
tag you end it with</p>
, and use<br/>
instead of<br>
." Hence, I do it because it helps some people and doesn't hurt anything. Thank you. SchreiberBike | ⌨ 21:09, 16 January 2020 (UTC)- Dear SchreiberBike. Thank you for the precise description, which allowed me to understand that the syntax highlighter that you use is not the normal one that comes with the Source Editor of the English Wikipedia but an alternative one that is offered as a Gadget. I habitually use the normal one, which comes with the editor but is by default switched off and needs to be switched on by clicking the fourth button on the top of the editor that shows a pen and displays the tooltip text "Syntax highlighting" when the mouse hovers over it. The editor remembers this switching on as your choice and will thereafter always highlight the text in the editor window. This normal syntax highlighter does not require closing the BR tag. Following your description I have tried the alternative highlighter, which was new to me. The two highlighters can be easily be distinguished from each other by the way they highlight: the normal one colours the letters of the text, not their background, whereas the alternative highlighter colours the background of the letters as a highlighter pen would do on a printed text. The choice of the highlighter tool is of course personal, I feel that both do their job well enough. However, the alternative one requires BR closure and is therefore not strictly HTML5-compatible. Please try the normal highlighter. I would be very interested to hear what you think. Best regards Johannes Schade (talk) 09:13, 17 January 2020 (UTC)
- @Johannes Schade: In my mind, the normal highlighter is the new highlighter; I'd used the old one for quite a while before the new one came around. I experimented with the new one when it came out and I've experimented with it more today. It has been improved since then, but for me, it still has some deal killers. When I use it with Firefox, it doesn't support spell checking (a necessity for me as a dyslexic). When I use it with Chrome, the ctrl+f function is erratic and Chrome doesn't have a "match case" function. Also, it doesn't as clearly mark unclosed tags or formatting. I'm willing to try new things, but the new highlighter hasn't worked for me. If it's not causing problems, I'll keep changing to <br/>. SchreiberBike | ⌨ 06:39, 18 January 2020 (UTC)
- Dear SchreiberBike. Thank you for your interesting reply. I suspected so much: the normal highlighter is a new highlighter, whereas "Remember the dot"'s highlighter is older. I did not know this as I myself am a novice on Wikipedia and have therefore not seen the time when the new highlighter was new. It seems the new syntax highlighter comes from an JavaScript editor called CodeMirror. I have difficulties to understand some of your comments. I use Chrome and the new highlighter but do not seem to experience erratic behaviour of ctrl+f, which seems well to always pop up the Find Bar as it should. I agree that Chrome's Find Bar could do with a case-sensitivity toggle. I would use that from time to time. — Okey, I have understood why you and some others change <br> to <br/>, which first seemed to me a very weird correction. If I understand you right you do not even intend to correct <br> to <br/> you just change it so that it becomes acceptable to your highlighter and it is probably also fine with you if people continue to write <br> and not <br/> in their contributions to Wikipedia as this is the normal way of HTML5. This "a" but also "b" seems to be part of the Wikipedia philosophy, which is inclusive, accommodating, and tolerant even if this makes Wikipedia a bit chaotic. Thanks for your time Johannes Schade (talk) 10:48, 18 January 2020 (UTC)
- @Johannes Schade: In my mind, the normal highlighter is the new highlighter; I'd used the old one for quite a while before the new one came around. I experimented with the new one when it came out and I've experimented with it more today. It has been improved since then, but for me, it still has some deal killers. When I use it with Firefox, it doesn't support spell checking (a necessity for me as a dyslexic). When I use it with Chrome, the ctrl+f function is erratic and Chrome doesn't have a "match case" function. Also, it doesn't as clearly mark unclosed tags or formatting. I'm willing to try new things, but the new highlighter hasn't worked for me. If it's not causing problems, I'll keep changing to <br/>. SchreiberBike | ⌨ 06:39, 18 January 2020 (UTC)
- Dear SchreiberBike. Thank you for the precise description, which allowed me to understand that the syntax highlighter that you use is not the normal one that comes with the Source Editor of the English Wikipedia but an alternative one that is offered as a Gadget. I habitually use the normal one, which comes with the editor but is by default switched off and needs to be switched on by clicking the fourth button on the top of the editor that shows a pen and displays the tooltip text "Syntax highlighting" when the mouse hovers over it. The editor remembers this switching on as your choice and will thereafter always highlight the text in the editor window. This normal syntax highlighter does not require closing the BR tag. Following your description I have tried the alternative highlighter, which was new to me. The two highlighters can be easily be distinguished from each other by the way they highlight: the normal one colours the letters of the text, not their background, whereas the alternative highlighter colours the background of the letters as a highlighter pen would do on a printed text. The choice of the highlighter tool is of course personal, I feel that both do their job well enough. However, the alternative one requires BR closure and is therefore not strictly HTML5-compatible. Please try the normal highlighter. I would be very interested to hear what you think. Best regards Johannes Schade (talk) 09:13, 17 January 2020 (UTC)
Thanks for great editing!
The Copyeditor's Barnstar | ||
Your edits and explanations are always very helpful and constructive, and you have an amazing eye for detail! Thanks, it is great working with you! RLO1729 (talk) 03:13, 25 January 2020 (UTC) |
- Thank you. The pleasure is mutual. Don't hesitate to call again if I can help. SchreiberBike | ⌨ 03:39, 25 January 2020 (UTC)
January 2020 Tree of Life Newsletter
- January 2020—Issue 010
- Tree of Life
- Welcome to the Tree of Life newsletter!
Megarachne by Ichthyovenator |
Wolf by LittleJerry |
News at a Glance |
|
Vital Articles | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
The vital articles project on English Wikipedia began in 2004 when an editor transferred a list from Meta-Wiki: List of articles every Wikipedia should have. The first incarnation of the list became what is now level 3. As of 2019, there are 5 levels of vital articles:
Each level is inclusive of all previous levels, meaning that the 1,000 Level 3 articles include those listed on Levels 2 and 1. Below is an overview of the distribution of vital articles, and the quality of the articles. While the ultimate goal of the vital articles project is to have Featured-class articles, I also considered Good Articles to be "complete" for the purposes of this list. Animals (1,148 designated out of projected 2,400)
Plants, fungi, and other organisms (510 designated out of projected 1,200)
Many articles have yet to be designated for Tree of Life taxonomic groups, with 1,942 outstanding articles to be added. Anyone can add vital articles to the list! Restructuring may be necessary, as the only viruses included as of yet are under the category "Health". The majority of vital articles needing improvement are level 5, but here are some outstanding articles from the other levels:
· Abiogenesis · Death · Cell · Human evolution · Organism · Zoology · Cattle · Dog · Reptile · Flower · Nut · Seed · Algae · Eukaryote · Biodiversity · Extinction · Photosynthesis
· Sexual dimorphism · Feather · Fur · Hair · Gill · Plant anatomy · Plant morphology · Berry · Leaf · Root · Stoma · Shrub · Plant stem · Bark · Trunk · Epidermis · Ground tissue · Meristem · Vascular tissue · Vascular cambium · Hypha · Mycelium |
January DYKs |
|
You are receiving this because you added your name to the subscribers list of the WikiProject Tree of Life. If you no longer wish to receive the newsletter, please remove your name.
Your submission at Articles for creation: Carol L. Boggs has been accepted
The article has been assessed as Start-Class, which is recorded on the article's talk page. You may like to take a look at the grading scheme to see how you can improve the article.
You are more than welcome to continue making quality contributions to Wikipedia. If your account is more than four days old and you have made at least 10 edits you can create articles yourself without posting a request. However, you may continue submitting work to Articles for Creation if you prefer.
- If you have any questions, you are welcome to ask at the help desk.
- If you would like to help us improve this process, please consider .
Thank you for helping improve Wikipedia!
MurielMary (talk) 09:12, 6 February 2020 (UTC)- Thank you. SchreiberBike | ⌨ 19:00, 6 February 2020 (UTC)
February 2020 Tree of Life Newsletter
- February 2020—Issue 011
- Tree of Life
- Welcome to the Tree of Life newsletter!
Segnosaurus by FunkMonk |
Danuvius guggenmosi by Dunkleosteus77 |
News at a Glance |
|
The spread of coronavirus across Wikipedia | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
With the outbreak of a novel coronavirus dominating news coverage, Wikipedia content related to the virus has seen much higher interest. Tree of Life content of particular interest to readers has included viruses, bats, pangolins, and masked palm civets. Viruses saw the most dramatic growth in readership: Coronavirus, which was the 105th most popular virus article in December 2019 with about 400 views per day, averaged over a quarter million views each day of January 2020. Total monthly viewership of the top-10 virus articles ballooned from about 1.5 million to nearly 20 million.
From October 2019 – December 2019, the top ten most popular bat articles fluctuated among 16 different articles, with the December viewership of those 10 articles at 209,280. For January 2020, three articles broke into the top-10 that were not among the 16 articles of the prior three months: Bat as food, Horseshoe bat, and Bat-borne virus. Viewership of the top-10 bat articles spiked nearly 300% to 617,067 in January. While bats have been implicated as a possible natural reservoir of SARS-CoV-2, an intermediate host may be the bridge between bats and humans. Pangolins have been hypothesized as the intermediate host for the virus, causing a large spike in typical page views of 2-3k each day up to more than 60k in a day. Masked palm civets, the intermediate host of SARS, saw a modest yet noticeable spike in page views as well, from 100 to 300 views per day to as many as 5k views per day. With an increase in viewers came an increase in editors. In an interview, longtime virus editor Awkwafaba identified the influx of editors as the biggest challenge in editing content related to the coronavirus. They noted that these newcomers include "novices who make honest mistakes and get tossed about a bit in the mad activity" as well as "experienced editors who know nothing about viruses and are good researchers, yet aren't familiar with the policies of WP:ToL or WP:Viruses." Disruption also increased, with extended confirmed protection (also known as the 30/500 rule, which prevents editors with fewer than 30 days tenure and 500 edits from making edits and is typically used on a very small subset of Wikipedia articles) temporarily applied to Coronavirus and still active on Template:2019–20 coronavirus outbreak data. New editors apparently seeking to correct misinformation continuously edited the article Bat as food to remove content related to China: Videos of Chinese people eating bat soup were misrepresented to be current or filmed in China, when at least one such video was several years old and filmed in Palau. However, reliable sources confirm that bats are eaten in China, especially Southern China, so these well-meaning edits were mostly removed. Another level of complexity was added by the fluctuating terminology of the virus. Over a dozen moves and merges were requested within WikiProject Viruses. To give you an idea of the musical chairs happening with article titles, here are the move histories of two articles: Severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2
Awkwafaba noted that "the main authorities, WHO and ICTV, don't really have a process for speedily naming a virus or disease." Additionally, they have different criteria for naming. They said, "I remember in a move discussion from the article then called Wuhan coronavirus that a virus name cannot have a geographical location in it, but this is a WHO disease naming guideline, and not an ICTV virus naming rule. ICTV may have renamed Four Corners virus to Sin Nombre orthohantavirus but there are still plenty of official virus species names that don't abide by WHO guidelines." |
February DYKs |
|
You are receiving this because you added your name to the subscribers list of the WikiProject Tree of Life. If you no longer wish to receive the newsletter, please remove your name.
Athetis hongkongensis edits
many thanks for your edits. There is one major point of issue - the classification of Noctuidae; Athetis is not (nor has been, if ever) in Acronictinae (which was redefined in a much stricter sense in, &/or following, work by Zahiri, and others). Please see my comment at https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:WikiProject_Lepidoptera#Article_and_task_requests for a more detailed list of references that give the situation more completely. Many thanks. HKmoths (talk) 07:47, 8 March 2020 (UTC)
- @HKmoths: Thank you for fixing my error. I am a copy editor rather than a biologist and I added the stub template to match the other articles for that genus. Keep up the good work. SchreiberBike | ⌨ 04:11, 10 March 2020 (UTC)
March 2020 Tree of Life Newsletter
- March 2020—Issue 012
- Tree of Life
- Welcome to the Tree of Life newsletter!
Argentinosaurus by Slate Weasel and Jens Lallensack |
Coalition for Epidemic Preparedness Innovations by Britishfinance |
News at a glance |
|
A new WikiProject responding to the pandemic | ||
The newest Tree of Life WikiProject is about a taxon that is dominating the headlines, Severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2, and its many effects. We interviewed Another Believer, the founder of WikiProject COVID-19. This interview has been edited for length. Find the full interview here.
Number of participants of WikiProject Covid-19
Thank you to Another Believer for your time, both in this interview and in this project. Interested readers can join WikiProject COVID-19. And please stay safe and healthy out there. --Awkwafaba |
March DYKs |
|
You are receiving this because you added your name to the subscribers list of the WikiProject Tree of Life. If you no longer wish to receive the newsletter, please remove your name.
Alec H. Chisholm
Dear SchreiberBike, your edits on Alec H. Chisholm make the article look and read so much better - thank you for your sterling efforts! James Jamesmcardle(talk) 22:11, 3 April 2020 (UTC)
- @Jamesmcardle: Thank you so much. If you have any questions or disagreements, feel free to bring them up with me. I may be inadvertently changing Australian to US English, so if anything looks wrong, revert as needed. Keep up the good work. SchreiberBike | ⌨ 22:14, 3 April 2020 (UTC)
Genus Psaliodes
Hi SchreiberBike, about a year ago you merged Psaliodes fervescens with the genus page, Psaliodes. However, the references provided on the article page do not support that it is indeed monotypic. Perhaps a point of confusion is that the North American Moth Photographers Group (MPG) lists a single species only for North America north of Mexico. The references that do not draw from MPG list many more species worldwide. Is there a newer classification that would contradict this? 'Cheers, Loopy30 (talk) 22:32, 12 April 2020 (UTC)
- @Loopy30: Thanks for your note. I can't say I remember doing that one, but most likely my reason for doing it was at Lepidoptera and Some Other Life Forms (Savela). I see from LepIndex, and the other sources linked in the article, that Savela is in the minority in thinking it is monotypic. I suspect that all the others are copied from LepIndex, which has not been updated in a while. I am not aware of any recent articles on the subject explaining why Savela made the choice he did. If you think LepIndex and the others are probably right, I will get to work on fixing the genus article to match the other sources. Thank you, SchreiberBike | ⌨ 23:01, 12 April 2020 (UTC)
- At the Savela link you provide, which is also ref #1 of the article, the entry draws from two sources that both only cover North America north of Mexico. I do not believe that the information there is incorrect, just not complete in a worldwide scope. As the type species was collected in Brazil, if the sole North American species was now found to be monotypic, it would be then given a new genus name and could not use the name Psaliodes. Happy Easter, Loopy30 (talk) 23:35, 12 April 2020 (UTC)
- I'll work on it tonight. SchreiberBike | ⌨ 23:43, 12 April 2020 (UTC)
- Thanks for that. I fear that while many of Savela's listings may support the presence of a species in a particular genus, it is not complete enough to be sufficient to determine the absence of additional species. See also Ninodes which appears to be in the same situation. Loopy30 (talk) 12:02, 13 April 2020 (UTC)
- @Loopy30: I'll look into that tonight. Let me know if you find any others. SchreiberBike | ⌨ 23:59, 15 April 2020 (UTC)
- Thanks for that. I fear that while many of Savela's listings may support the presence of a species in a particular genus, it is not complete enough to be sufficient to determine the absence of additional species. See also Ninodes which appears to be in the same situation. Loopy30 (talk) 12:02, 13 April 2020 (UTC)
- I'll work on it tonight. SchreiberBike | ⌨ 23:43, 12 April 2020 (UTC)
- At the Savela link you provide, which is also ref #1 of the article, the entry draws from two sources that both only cover North America north of Mexico. I do not believe that the information there is incorrect, just not complete in a worldwide scope. As the type species was collected in Brazil, if the sole North American species was now found to be monotypic, it would be then given a new genus name and could not use the name Psaliodes. Happy Easter, Loopy30 (talk) 23:35, 12 April 2020 (UTC)
April 2020 Tree of Life Newsletter
- April 2020—Issue 013
- Tree of Life
- Welcome to the Tree of Life newsletter!
Danuvius guggenmosi by Dunkleosteus77, reviewed by J Milburn |
Lythronax by FunkMonk, Lythronaxargestes and IJReid |
News at a glance |
|
Tree of Life's growing featured content | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Inspired by a March 2020 post at WikiProject Medicine detailing the growth of Featured Articles over time, we decided to reproduce that table here, adding a second table showing the growth of Good Articles. Tree of Life articles are placed in the "Biology" category for FAs, which has seen a growth of 381% since 2008. Only two other subjects had a greater growth than Biology: Business, economics, and finance; and Warfare. Percentage Growth in FA Categories, 2008–2019, Legend: Considerably above average, Above average, Average Below average , Considerably below average, Poor
*subset of natural sciences Unsurprisingly, the number of GAs has increased more rapidly than the number of FAs. Organisms, which is a subcategory of Natural sciences, has seen a GA growth of 755% since 2008, besting the Natural sciences overall growth of 530%. While Warfare had far and away the most significant growth of GAs, it's a clear outlier relative to other categories. |
April DYKs |
|
You are receiving this because you added your name to the subscribers list of the WikiProject Tree of Life. If you no longer wish to receive the newsletter, please remove your name.
MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 02:40, 5 May 2020 (UTC)
St. Francis satyr butterfly
My apologies for not checking before accepting that we already had an article. Theroadislong (talk) 21:51, 7 May 2020 (UTC)
- @Theroadislong: Thanks for your note. It's not a problem. We'll get it fixed. SchreiberBike | ⌨ 21:55, 7 May 2020 (UTC)
A barnstar for you!
The Editor's Barnstar | |
Thanks for fixing all my typos and copy editing on Atriplex cinerea. Legend. Ben (talk) 13:40, 20 May 2020 (UTC) |
- @Ben Stone: Thank you so much. I had made the typo "Ausralian" in something I was writing, then as I often do, I looked to see if anyone else had made that typo in Wikipedia. I found it in Atriplex cinerea and did some other copy editing while I was there. Keep up the good work. SchreiberBike | ⌨ 02:57, 21 May 2020 (UTC)
accidental duplication
Not sure how but I accidentally duplicated [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Leptarthus_brevirostris this page.I merged the content.Now the duplicate has to go.Would you be so good as to fix this for me.Very best regards Notafly (talk) 13:47, 1 June 2020 (UTC) PS It showed as a red link here List of soldierflies and allies of Great Britain.
- @Notafly: I resolved it I think. It's a common misspelling I found on line. Leptarthus vs. Leptarthrus. So now Leptarthus brevirostris redirects to Leptarthrus brevirostris. I also fixed the misspelling at List of soldierflies and allies of Great Britain. Glad to help. SchreiberBike | ⌨ 18:35, 1 June 2020 (UTC)
- Very many thanks.Would you also redirect Dioctria baumhaueri to Dioctria hyalipennis please. I will soon address the issues raised on that page now partially mergedNotafly (talk) 20:27, 1 June 2020 (UTC)
- @Notafly: Fixed. Keep up the good work. SchreiberBike | ⌨ 22:06, 1 June 2020 (UTC)
- Thank you again.As always warm regards Notafly (talk) 18:20, 2 June 2020 (UTC)
- @Notafly: Fixed. Keep up the good work. SchreiberBike | ⌨ 22:06, 1 June 2020 (UTC)
- Very many thanks.Would you also redirect Dioctria baumhaueri to Dioctria hyalipennis please. I will soon address the issues raised on that page now partially mergedNotafly (talk) 20:27, 1 June 2020 (UTC)
May 2020 Tree of Life Newsletter
- May 2020—Issue 014
- Tree of Life
- Welcome to the Tree of Life newsletter!
Gigantorhynchus by Mattximus |
News at a glance |
|
Interview with Jts1882 | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
This month we're joined by Jts1882, who is active in depicting evolutionary relationship of taxa via cladograms. Part of this includes responding to cladogram requests, where interested editors can have cladograms made without using the templates themselves. How did you come to be interested in systematics? Are you interested in systematics broadly, or is there a particular group you're most fond of? As long as I can remember I’ve been interested in nature, starting with the animals and plants in the garden, school grounds, and local wood, and then more general wildlife worldwide. An interest in how things are classified grew from this. I like things to be organised and understanding the relationships between things and systems (not just living things) is a big part of that. Biology was always my favourite subject in school and took up a disproportionate part of my time. My interest in systematics is broad as I’d like to comprehend the whole tree of life, but the cat family is my favourite group. What's the background behind cladogram requests? I see that it isn't a very old part of the Tree of Life Well I can’t take any credit for the cladogram requests page, although I help out there sometimes. It was created by IJReid and there are several people who have helped there more than me. I think the motivation is that creating cladograms requires a knowledge of the templates that is daunting for many editors. It was one way of helping people who want to focus on content creation. My main contribution to the cladograms is converting the {{clade}} template to use a Lua module. The template code was extremely difficult to follow and had to be repetitive (I can only admire the efforts of those who got the thing to work in the first place). The conversion to Lua made it more efficient, allowed larger and deeper cladograms, plus facilitating the introduction of new features. The cladogram request page was recently the venue for discussion on making time calibrated cladograms, which is now possible, if not particularly user friendly. What advice do you have for an editor who wants to learn how to make cladograms? The same advice I would give to someone facing any computer problem, just try it out. Start by taking existing code for a cladogram and make changes yourself. The main advice would be to format it properly so indents match the brackets vertically. Of course, not everyone wants to learn and if someone prefers to focus on article content there is the cladogram request page. Examples of cladograms Jts1882 has created, showing different proposed clades for Neoaves
Do you have any personal projects or goals you're working towards on Wikipedia? As I said I like organisation and systems. So I find efforts like the automated taxobox system and {{taxonbar}} appealing. I would like to see more reuse of the major phylogenetic trees on Wikipedia with more use of consensus trees on the higher taxa. Too often they get edited based on one recent report and/or without proper citation. Animals and bilateria are examples where this is a problem. Towards this I have been working on a system of phylogeny templates that can be reused flexibly. The {{Clade transclude}} template allows selective transclusion, so the phylogenetic trees on one page can be reused with modifications, i.e. can be pruned and grafted, used with or without images, with or without collapsible elements, etc. I have an example for the Angiosperm Phylogeny Group classification (see {{Phylogeny/APG IV}}) and one for squamates that also includes collapsible elements (see {{Phylogeny/Squamata}}). A second project is to have a modular reference system for taxonomic resources. I have made some progress along this lines with the {{BioRef}} template. This started off simply as a way of hardlinking to Catalog of Fishes pages and I’ve gradually expanded it to cover other groups (e..g. FishBase, AmphibiaWeb and Amphibian Species of the World, Reptile Database, the Mammalian Diversity Database). The modular nature is still rudimentary and needs a rewrite before it is ready for wider use. What would surprise your fellow editors to learn about your life off-Wikipedia? I don’t think there is anything particularly surprising or interesting about my life. I’ve had an academic career as a research scientist but I don't think anyone could guess the area from my Wikipedia edits. I prefer to work on areas where I am learning at the same time. This why I spend more time with neglected topics (e.g. mosses at the moment). I start reading and then find that I’m not getting the information I want. Anything else you'd like us to know? My interest in the classification of things goes beyond biology. I am fascinated by mediaeval attempts to classify knowledge, such as Bacon in his The Advancement of Learning and Diderot and d’Alembert in their Encyclopédie. They were trying to come up with a universal scheme of knowledge just as the printing press was allowing greater dissemination of knowledge. With the internet we are seeing a new revolution in knowledge dissemination. Just look at how we could read research papers on the COVID virus within weeks of its discovery. With an open internet, everyone has access, not just those with the luxury of books at home or good libraries. Sites like the Biodiversity Heritage Library allow you to read old scientific works without having to visit dusty university library stack rooms, while the taxonomic and checklist databases provide instant information on millions of living species. In principle, the whole world can now find out about anything, even if Douglas Adams warned we might be disinclined to do so. This is why I like Wikipedia, with all its warts, it’s a means of organising the knowledge on the internet. In just two decades it’s become a first stop for knowledge and hopefully a gateway to more specialised sources. Perhaps developing this latter aspect, beyond providing good sources for what we say, is the next challenge for Wikipedia. |
May DYKs |
|
You are receiving this because you added your name to the subscribers list of the WikiProject Tree of Life. If you no longer wish to receive the newsletter, please remove your name.
Enwebb (talk) 19:40, 3 June 2020 (UTC)
wrong move
Wikipedia:Atylotus plebeius No idea what I did but this should be Atylotus plebeius.Sorry I didn't ask Notafly (talk) 19:58, 4 June 2020 (UTC)
- I've been away from the internet for a couple of days, but I'll take a look at this soon. SchreiberBike | ⌨ 00:50, 8 June 2020 (UTC)
- @Notafly: If you put "{{Db-g7}}" on that page, it will be deleted. That's for "Author requests deletion". Also explain that it was an error in your edit summary. Hope that helps. SchreiberBike | ⌨ 02:49, 8 June 2020 (UTC)
Monotypic genera
Hi SchreiberBike, the example "The genus Nodocephalosaurus has a redirect from its sole species, Nodocephalosaurus kirtlandensis." at the guidelines would suggest that Hypocephalus_armatus should be at the genus. Shyamal (talk) 03:21, 7 July 2020 (UTC)
- @Shyamal: Nodocephalosaurus is the more typical case where the article is under the genus name for a monotypic genus, but when the genus name needs to be disambiguated, as a hypocephalus is an Egyptian funerary item, we put the article under the species name. The bottom of the guideline says "
The exception is when a monotypic genus name needs to be disambiguated. The article should then be at the species, since this is a more natural form of disambiguation.
" That means that rather than call the article Hypocephalus (genus), we call it Hypocephalus armatus. Does that make sense to you? If I'd been around when that decision was made, I would have argued to do it differently, but it has worked for a long time and I don't see a need for change. SchreiberBike | ⌨ 03:42, 7 July 2020 (UTC)- Ah ok, got it, thanks. Perhaps an example should be included so that folks like me get it more easily. I saw that Plantdrew also did something similar saying "Use natural disambiguation". Shyamal (talk) 03:59, 7 July 2020 (UTC)
draft
This began as a stub. It was almost immediately removed and retitled as a draft itself then retitled thus Draft:Eduard Enslin]. Now a review with a seven week wait is requested. I see no reason for this. Do you? Notafly (talk) 20:45, 8 July 2020 (UTC) I see you are helping Ettore (Hectonichus). Prolific isn't he.Very best regards Robert aka Notafly (talk) 20:45, 8 July 2020 (UTC) NB Fixed now He is here Eduard Enslin again
- I saw that it was fixed and I did some copy editing on it. Looks good. SchreiberBike | ⌨ 22:21, 8 July 2020 (UTC)
And very useful additions too.Many thanks.Between us all we are making good progress.Very best regards Notafly (talk) 20:14, 9 July 2020 (UTC)
Standards for zoological author names
Hi, in the absence of a list like the IPNI for zoological scientific names, there's always an issue as to how to present the names of authors. For spiders, we've always followed the usage of the World Spider Catalog, which is the source for spider names and taxonomy. Peter coxhead (talk) 08:20, 21 July 2020 (UTC)
- @Peter coxhead: Ok. I'll follow that for spiders (and go back and fix anything I've done beyond the two I saw that you caught). There are four people surnamed Lucas who have described Lepidoptera and I was casting my net widely, but I'll narrow my efforts. Thanks, SchreiberBike | ⌨ 15:57, 21 July 2020 (UTC)
June/July 2020 Tree of Life Newsletter
- June and July 2020—Issue 015
- Tree of Life
- Welcome to the Tree of Life newsletter!
Canada lynx by Sainsf |
News at a glance |
|
Categorizing life with DexDor |
DexDor is a WikiGnome with a particular interest in article categorization, including how organisms are categorized.
|
June DYKs |
|
July DYKs |
|
You are receiving this because you added your name to the subscribers list of the WikiProject Tree of Life. If you no longer wish to receive the newsletter, please remove your name.
Delivered on behalf of Enwebb (talk) 16:33, 1 August 2020 (UTC)
August 2020 Tree of Life Newsletter
- September 2021—Issue 016
- Tree of Life
- Welcome to the Tree of Life newsletter!
Horseshoe bat by Enwebb |
Black-and-red broadbill by AryKun |
Hoax taxon sniffed out after nearly fifteen years |
Cross posted from the Signpost On August 7, WikiProject Palaeontology member Rextron discovered a suspicious taxon article, Mustelodon, which was created in November 2005. The article lacked references and the subsequent discussion on WikiProject Palaeontology found that the alleged type locality (where the fossil was first discovered) of Lago Nandarajo "near the northern border of Panama" was nonexistent. In fact, Panama does not even really have a northern border, as it is bounded along the north by the Caribbean Sea. No other publications or databases mentioned Mustelodon, save a fleeting mention in a 2019 book that presumably followed Wikipedia, Felines of the World. The article also appeared in four other languages, Catalan, Spanish, Dutch, and Serbian. In Serbian Wikipedia, a note at the bottom of the page warned: "It is important to note here that there is no data on this genus in the official scientific literature, and all attached data on the genus Mustelodon on this page are taken from the English Wikipedia and are the only known data on this genus of mammals, so the validity of this genus is questionable." Editors took action to alert our counterparts on other projects, and these versions were removed also. As the editor who reached out to Spanish and Catalan Wikipedia, it was somewhat challenging to navigate these mostly foreign languages (I have a limited grasp of Spanish). I doubted that the article had very many watchers, so I knew I had to find some WikiProjects where I could post a machine translation advising of the hoax, and asking that users follow local protocols to remove the article. I was surprised to find, however, that Catalan Wikipedia does not tag articles for WikiProjects on talk pages, meaning I had to fumble around to find what I needed (turns out that WikiProjects are Viquiprojectes in Catalan!) Mustelodon remains on Wikidata, where its "instance of" property was swapped from "taxon" to "fictional taxon". How did this article have such a long lifespan? Early intervention is critical for removing hoaxes. A 2016 report found that a hoax article that survives its first day has an 18% chance of lasting a year.[1] Additionally, hoax articles tend to have longer lifespans if they are in inconspicuous parts of Wikipedia, where they do not receive many views. Mustelodon was only viewed a couple times a day, on average. Mustelodon survived a brush with death three years into its lifespan. The article was proposed for deletion in September 2008, with a deletion rationale of "No references given; cannot find any evidence in peer-reviewed journals that this alleged genus actually exists". Unfortunately, the proposed deletion was contested and the template removed, though the declining editor did not give a rationale. Upon its rediscovery in August 2020, Mustelodon was tagged for speedy deletion under CSD G3 as a "blatant hoax". This was challenged, and an Articles for Deletion discussion followed. On 12 August, the AfD was closed as a SNOW delete. WikiProject Palaeontology members ensured that any trace of it was scrubbed from legitimate articles. The fictional mammal was finally, truly extinct. At the ripe old age of 14 years, 9 months, this is the longest-lived documented hoax on Wikipedia, topping the previous documented record of 14 years, 5 months, set by The Gates of Saturn, a fictitious television show, which was incidentally also discovered in August 2020. How do we discover other hoax taxa? Could we use Wikidata to discover taxa are not linked to databases like ITIS, Fossilworks, and others?
|
Spotlight with Mattximus |
This month's spotlight is with Mattximus, author of two Featured Articles and 29 Featured Lists at current count.
I think I have a compulsion to make lists, it doesn't show up in my real life, but online I secretly get a lot of satisfaction making orderly lists and tables. It's a bit of a secret of mine, because it doesn't manifest in any other part of my life. My background is in biology, so this was a natural (haha) fit.
This experiment was just to see if I could get any random article to FA status, so I picked the very first alphabetical animal species according to the taxonomy and made that attempt. Technically, there isn't enough information for a species page so I just merged the species into a genus and went from there. It was a fun exercise, but doing it alone is not the most fun so it's probably on pause for the foreseeable future. Note: Aporhynchus is the first alphabetical taxon as follows: Animalia, Acanthocephala, Archiacanthocephala, Apororhynchida, Apororhynchidae, Apororhynchus
I would recommend getting a good article nominated, then a featured list up before tackling the FA. Lists are a bit more forgiving but give you a taste of what standards to expect from FA. The most time consuming thing is proper citations so make sure that is in order before starting either.
My personality in real life does not match my wikipedia persona. I'm not a very organized, or orderly in real life, but the wikipedia pages I brought to FL or FA are all very organized. Maybe it's my outlet for a more free-flowing life as a scientist/teacher.
The fact that wikipedia exists free of profit motive and free for everyone really is something special and I encourage everyone to donate a few dollars to the cause. |
August DYKs |
|
You are receiving this because you added your name to the subscribers list of the WikiProject Tree of Life. If you no longer wish to receive the newsletter, please remove your name.
Delivered on behalf of Enwebb (talk) 17:10, 2 September 2020 (UTC)
Endorsements
Please stop adding social media endorsements. Thank you. Lima Bean Farmer (talk) 01:52, 6 September 2020 (UTC)
- Hi @Lima Bean Farmer: I don't make a habit of adding such endorsements, but I often revert edits which remove content without explanation. I notice that you typically don't leave edit summaries. Please do! That's part of how we collaborate in building the encyclopedia. Without edit summaries it's hard to know if an edit improves the encyclopedia or if it's vandalism. Better yet if your edit summary links to the guideline you are following such as WP:ENDORSE. I wish you well as you work in controversial areas of Wikipedia and you should know that I'm a big fan of lima beans. SchreiberBike | ⌨ 03:41, 6 September 2020 (UTC)
- Thank you! I will try to make sure I add more edit summaries. I often just put something like “Twitter” or “Social media” endorsements and if people have questions I will answer them. My apologies, I most certainly am not committing vandalism. As a big fan of lima beans, you may be able to tell where I am from if I told you it’s the Lima bean capital of the world!Lima Bean Farmer (talk) 03:53, 6 September 2020 (UTC)
A bowl of strawberries to you!
Hi, thanks for correcting my page Noble Consort Cheng. Deidonata (talk)20:24,27.09.2020 (UTC) |
- @Deidonata: Thank you. That is so kind. Keep up the good work. SchreiberBike | ⌨ 00:22, 28 September 2020 (UTC)
Happy First Edit Day!
ArbCom 2020 Elections voter message
Adding the tiger and yak into the List of mammals of North America
Hi and good afternoon SchreiberBike, as you see i tried everything to provide a strong reliable source for the tiger and the yak to prove their former presence in North America but it looks like i failed. I am truly sorry for adding these two species. I should know by now that tigers and yaks were never present in North America vice versa. If and only i had found actual reliable sources for the yak and tiger that will demonstrate that they were in North America for 13,000 to 10,000 years, i would let them remain on the list because the source would make total sense. Unfortunately, i could not find a strong wealthy sources. That is all could say. Sincerely. Animalworlds314 (talk) 18:00, 28 November 2020 (UTC)
- @Animalworlds314: I'm sorry I missed your note above. I try to imagine what the reader is expecting on a page and in this case, I don't expect that they are interested in prehistoric creatures. Thanks and keep up the good work. SchreiberBike | ⌨ 22:37, 20 January 2021 (UTC)
Precious anniversary
Seven years! |
---|
--Gerda Arendt (talk) 08:20, 19 January 2021 (UTC)
- Thank you Gerda! SchreiberBike | ⌨ 22:28, 20 January 2021 (UTC)
Rewriting?
Hello. I'm helping with a contributor copyright investigation, and many of the articles are about Lepidoptera. I was wondering if you'd be interested in rewriting articles which contain (or are, in their entirety) copyright violations. An example is Artifodina strigulata, of which over 2/3 is a copyright violation. Others, such as Platyptilia isodactylus, may not require such complete revision, but will benefit from an eye for detail and familiarity with the subject area; I immediately thought of you. Cheers, BlackcurrantTea (talk) 07:54, 7 March 2021 (UTC)
Aubrey Koch
What was the point in changing all those headlines to lower case? As they were they reflected exactly the newspaper headline.Lexysexy (talk) 00:49, 12 April 2021 (UTC)
- @Lexysexy: It's standard Wikipedia style. See MOS:ALLCAPS, where it says "Reduce newspaper headlines and other titles from all caps to title case – or to sentence case if required by the citation style established in the article. For example, replace the headline or title "WAR BEGINS TODAY" with "War Begins Today" or, if necessary, "War begins today"." Does that make sense to you? Thanks, SchreiberBike | ⌨ 01:44, 12 April 2021 (UTC)
- Thanks for that, Schreib. My interprtation is that MOS says "This section is about using all caps in articles." I interpreted references as being external to "articles". I'll take advice, though, but it seems to me that a reference should reflect the original. Cheers.Lexysexy (talk) 06:57, 13 April 2021 (UTC)
Megalodon?
Is it really lowercase there? To me it looks like it should be capitalised. Ddum5347 (talk) 03:38, 7 May 2021 (UTC)
- Yep, that's its common name. It's lower case throughout the article. I'm following MOS:LIFE. SchreiberBike | ⌨ 03:42, 7 May 2021 (UTC)
- Really? Wow, interesting. It's sort of like "boa constrictor" being both the common name and latin name. Thanks for enlightening me. Ddum5347 (talk) 03:44, 7 May 2021 (UTC)
Macedonian Wars (lede)
You made a general statement about "Historians" instead of specific to the authors who hold certain views (way back when) - I'll be correcting this with alternative viewpoints soon. One source alone does not a general consensus in our discipline make. Just FYI. 104.169.22.74 (talk) 08:44, 23 June 2021 (UTC)
- The only edit I've made to Macedonian Wars was to disambiguate links to the disambiguation page Macedonia. I think you may be thinking of someone else. Thanks and keep up the good work. SchreiberBike | ⌨ 15:28, 23 June 2021 (UTC)
Flamenco
Hi, hope you are well. The reason I got rid of that edit which was introduced in July is that it seems to push a narrative contrary to academic consensus and impose it on the lead. Let me know what you think. I can open an account if you like so we can discuss further. 88.5.205.1 (talk) 21:15, 4 August 2021 (UTC)
- Here is my new Username. You can talk to me here or directly on the talk page of the relevant article since I have opened a discussion on the controversial edit. Cristodelosgitanos (talk) 21:22, 4 August 2021 (UTC)
- Hi @Cristodelosgitanos:. Getting a username generally makes you more credible, so thank you for that and welcome to Wikipedia. Also, I and many others are inclined to give less thought to reverting unexplained edits, so I appreciate you explaining why the changes were made. I know nothing about flamenco, so I don't have an opinion about the content. I mostly noticed that it was an IP editor making changes without explanation and undoing some grammar and style changes that made sense to me. I will look over the article again and reinstate some of those grammar/style changes. Keep up the good work and if there's anything I can do to help, please let me know. SchreiberBike | ⌨ 23:28, 4 August 2021 (UTC)
Jewelers/jeweler's
Hi! Concerning this change: [[2]]. You said it's not a possessive, but it is. jeweller's is short for jeweller's shop (jeweller is British, whereas jeweler is American, but that's irrelevant here), just as baker's is short for baker's shop, grocer's for grocer's shop, dry cleaner's for dry cleaner's shop, etc. It might look weird, but it's true. Someone else has changed it to jewellery store now, which is also fine. All the best —caoimhinoc (talk) 21:09, 16 August 2021 (UTC)
- @Caoimhin ceallach: Sorry for the delay. It looks wrong to my eye with the possessive, but your links to Wiktionary show that my eye is in the wrong. I don't feel strongly about it and I agree that the subsequent change to "jewellery store" is an improvement. Keep up the good work. SchreiberBike | ⌨ 16:49, 24 August 2021 (UTC)
List of University of Pennsylvania
Thanks for educating me and helping me retain a person on List, Bruce Marks, whom I believe is important due to unique way he became a Pennsylvania State Senator. I find it helpful to see on the list the connection to the List. In this case the List is University of Pennsylvania. Since this list concerns University of Pennsylvania, why not identify the year the person was due to graduate and if that person earned a degree. For example, President William Henry Harrison is an alumnus of University of Pennsylvania, Department of Medicine Class of 1795, BUT he only spent a single semester at Penn (in fall of 1791. See https://www.thedp.com/article/2017/01/william-henry-harrison-history ). I think it's important on quick glance to realize how tenuous that person's connection to University in question. Hence, I think adding the year the person affiliated with Penn (or any university) was due to graduate and if that person earned a degree is important information and see that on this and many similar lists it is is often provided. I agree that providing such should be consistent and it is often not consistent. I would rather future Wikipedia editors of all Lists of alumni of colleges add this information of year due to graduate band if they earned a degree. I see on some lists they do provide such info and in some they do not. It's helpful to aspire to add this info. I thank you in advance if you have time to reply to my post. You have literally made over a 100 times more edits than me so I know I will learn from you and that you are more knowledgeable about Wikipedia than me. Thanks again for taking the time to care. OneMoreByte (talk) 09:30, 24 August 2021 (UTC)
- Hi @OneMoreByte: I understand your points above, but they differ from the consensus for Wikipedia lists in general and List of University of Pennsylvania people in particular. That list, near the top in the hidden text says "Use a short one-line description of notability (no period)." That is common for Wikipedia lists in order to keep them from becoming unwieldy; people can always click on the link for more information. The list above is already over 300KB which causes issues described at WP:LENGTH. You might propose changing the consensus for this list by discussing that at Talk:List of University of Pennsylvania people. I imagine that would involve cutting the list into multiple smaller lists while adding more detail for each person. Also, another editor (@JohnFromPinckney:) is objecting specifically to inclusion of Bruce Marks. I disagree with their objection, but the case for including Marks is stronger when Marks' entry is similar to the others on the list. I hope that helps and if there's anything I can do to help, please let me know. SchreiberBike | ⌨ 17:31, 24 August 2021 (UTC)
- Thanks for prompt, thorough, and thoughtful reply. Indeed, I will follow through with your suggestions and
- (1) go through the Penn talk page [Talk:List of University of Pennsylvania people] and suggest list continue to be broken up due to WP:LENGTH considerations (as was done when Faculty was made a separate list; and
- (2) ask that the additional info of class year and whether they graduated be added as such does not add many kbs and provides great info.
- Thanks also for alerting me to John from Pinckney (from whom I have learned a lot) focus on Marks and need to placate him in order for Marks not to be reverted. OneMoreByte (talk) 18:38, 24 August 2021 (UTC)
Thanks for reverting my grammar correction: for some reason it didn't register with me that it was a quotation. Thanks for correcting my error! RomanSpa (talk) 21:37, 28 August 2021 (UTC)
- @RomanSpa: Thank you and keep up the good work. SchreiberBike | ⌨ 22:31, 28 August 2021 (UTC)
wrong usage of Template:Fraction
FTFY Torzsmokus (talk) 12:17, 1 September 2021 (UTC)
- @Torzsmokus: Yep, I screwed up there. Thank you. SchreiberBike | ⌨ 16:16, 1 September 2021 (UTC)
A barnstar for you!
The Barnstar of Diligence | |
I'm impressed you noticed my mistake so quickly. Turns out I was wrong about hyphenated adverbs. I suppose I should read the rest of the MOS more closely. Kudos for being such an assiduous copyeditor. Anon423 (talk) 20:19, 3 September 2021 (UTC) |
- @Anon423: Thank you. Keep up the good work. SchreiberBike | ⌨ 21:57, 3 September 2021 (UTC)
Apologies
Apologies for not following the rules on redirecting and deleting a page. I am relatively new to Wikipedia so excuse my ignorance. J0ngM0ng (talk) 16:06, 9 September 2021 (UTC)
- @J0ngM0ng: No problem. Wikipedia has so many rules that it's impossible for anyone to know them all. When in doubt, be bold and do what makes sense to you. If necessary others will correct you (hopefully in a kind way) and you can go on. Keep up the good work. SchreiberBike | ⌨ 19:57, 9 September 2021 (UTC)
A section copy edit request
Greetings,
Requesting some copy edit support @ newly added article section #2021 Minar-e-Pakistan mass sexual assault.
Thanks for the support
Bookku, 'Encyclopedias = expanding information & knowledge' (talk) 18:41, 19 September 2021 (UTC)
- Done @Bookku: See here. Why do you ask? I don't know of any interaction we've had before and I've never edited that article before. SchreiberBike | ⌨ 05:58, 24 September 2021 (UTC)
Several
Hey! I noticed that you said the word "several" does not mean seven. I both agree and disagree. It's meaning seems to vary a lot no matter where it's used. A lot of the time I"ve seen several as meaning seven (hence the seve part of several), however I've also seen it meaning a lot of something which was why I undid the edit. I do agree that many would be better to use there and I replaced it with that. I would've changed it to that however I couldn't think of a better word that fit until you proposed many. ― Blaze The WolfTalkBlaze Wolf#6545 19:44, 8 October 2021 (UTC)
- @Blaze The Wolf: When I saw your edit summary "several means 7", I Googled the question and it's pretty clear that the "seve" at the beginning of both words is just a coincidence. Seven, the number, has Germanic roots and several comes from Latin. I see that there are others who have thought the same as you, but I think that's either confusion or humor. Keep up the good work. SchreiberBike | ⌨ 19:51, 8 October 2021 (UTC)
- Oh interesting. Like I said I've always known several as meaning seven. DIdn't know it was just coincidence they sounded the same. ― Blaze The WolfTalkBlaze Wolf#6545 20:33, 8 October 2021 (UTC)