This is a synonym for morphology, that's all. But description itself is not, because you may describe other things about the animal than its morphology, such as its dentition, its behavioural or migratory patterns, its biochemistry, the physics of its blubber. I'm not dead set that this is the perfect term, but it has been used and continues to be used in biology, outside of the molecular realm that appears to think morphology does not exist. I'm all for conformity on Wikipedia, frankly, and I appreciate the tremendous amount of work done by dedicated editors who do nothing but pick at all the little details related to lack of homogeneity in articles. I think you're insane to do it without compensation, but I do appreciate it. In this case, though, I think the text describes only the physical description, and precisely the physical description, this is acceptable use biologically, and it clearly lets the reader know what is in this section. Description is too vague, and could be the decription of anything not covered in other sections--life history, rearing habits, pod behaviour, inner ears, whatever. I think it is necessary in this case and should be the default value. Please do respond on my talk page, as I'm rather busy, but would like to resolve this issue. KP Botany 21:14, 30 March 2007 (UTC)
![]() |
You voted for
Infrared and this article is now the current
Science Collaboration of the Month! Please help to improve it to match the quality of an ideal Wikipedia science article. |
NCurse work 19:45, 1 April 2007 (UTC)
SuggestBot predicts that you will enjoy editing some of these articles. Have fun!
SuggestBot picks articles in a number of ways based on other articles you've edited, including straight text similarity, following wikilinks, and matching your editing patterns against those of other Wikipedians. It tries to recommend only articles that other Wikipedians have marked as needing work. Your contributions make Wikipedia better -- thanks for helping.
If you have feedback on how to make SuggestBot better, please tell me on SuggestBot's talk page. Thanks from ForteTuba, SuggestBot's caretaker.
P.S. You received these suggestions because your name was listed on the SuggestBot request page. If this was in error, sorry about the confusion. -- SuggestBot 04:40, 3 April 2007 (UTC)
Hello Casliber and many thanks again. And congrats on the sysop. Always glad for another fellow DYK Wikipedian. Best regards, Blnguyen ( bananabucket) 06:24, 3 April 2007 (UTC)
Cheers. Alastair Haines 23:43, 3 April 2007 (UTC)
It needs some references for Humphrey - all those quoted in the Humphrey the whale article seem to be from books for children with a reading age of 4-6 (no kidding and not sources I feel particularly like trying to defend at FAR). I've been able to find some for the general "he was rescued twice" statements but nothing for the method (specifically I can't find anything for "oikami" which is worrying as it should be an easy key word to track down when combined with Humphrey). If you can find anything it would be handy, otherwise I think we'll have to cut that section back. Cheers, Yomangani talk 00:20, 4 April 2007 (UTC)
Hey there, I've been doing alot of work on this article so thanks for your recommendations on how to get it up to "Good article" status- I was just wondering about what these sort of requirements might be today! I'll try to have a look into where I might find sources with info. regarding their relation to Whistlers in the future but in the meantime what do you think is needed simply to bump this article to "B class"? Cheers, Kotare 10:14, 5 April 2007 (UTC)
Thanks for the advice. I would say that the only time I've really lost my temper was after the failure of my first RfA, when I complained at an editor ( KazakhPol) who gave what I saw as an uncivil oppose vote. However, I apologised to him and he accepted my apology, and there has been no further conflict. A couple of times I've also had people take issue with my comments on XfDs, but in all cases I've been able to resolve these amicably and civilly. I've never had anything remotely resembling an edit war, or anything like that. I've also been involved in resolving other people's disputes as a member of the AMA. So in my case, I would expect inexperience to be more of an issue than incivility. Wal ton Vivat Regina! 16:18, 5 April 2007 (UTC)
Just saw Thescelosaurus was promoted; thanks for keeping up on these things, Cas. You know, we've got a lot of work to do on Deinonychus, but I was considering eventually nominating an Australian dinosaur, based on your comments on the collaboration talk page about there being a distinct bias toward Northern Hemisphere genera. Do you think a dinosaur like Minmi might work as a collaboration, Cas? Firsfron of Ronchester 05:57, 12 April 2007 (UTC)
Thanks so much for the Triple Crown barnstar thingy! It's pretty damn cool. I'm glad someone has seen & enjoyed my work. Thanks, Spawn Man 03:10, 13 April 2007 (UTC). P.S. I'm off to expand Neck frill. :)
Hi mate! I loved the Platypus article, some of it was even relevant to my thesis! Alex's NewArtBot recommended my Generic antecedents for DYK ... and it went through! I'm working on some time consuming but valuable refinement of someone's great work to do with Language families. Your dinosaur collection sustains me with mind-expanding, nicely phrased reading material when I need a break. I wonder if I can get some language articles up to the same level. Cheers. Alastair Haines 21:13, 13 April 2007 (UTC)
Hi, and thanks for your contributions to the Mother Teresa article. I'm going to suggest that the reference to her ranking in Gallup's List of Widely Admired People be moved elsewhere in the article since the sentence in question refers to events after her death and the Gallup ranking was for 1999, prior to her death. Also, can you please provide a cite? Thanks! Majoreditor 17:55, 14 April 2007 (UTC)
Someone deleted my work on Leonard Sax and removed the history of edits so I can't revert it. Two questions: how do we get it back, and how do I protect my work from this kind of action in future? As I said, sorry to bother you, cheers. Alastair Haines 09:25, 15 April 2007 (UTC)
...Is awarding barnstars!
![]() |
The Tireless Contributor Barnstar | |
10,000 edits, and not a sign of an AWB edit amongst them! For reaching 10K, proving your true dedication to various WikiProjects (Dinosaurs, Flowers, and Mould) in improving thousands of articles, I award you this Tireless Contributor Barnstar. Just as this star spins eternally, you never seem to stop! Firsfron of Ronchester 17:26, 17 April 2007 (UTC) |
Hi Casliber -
I think the article on Amanita phalloides is much improved. Well done! I'd renominated it soon for a GA Review.
Here are some points you may want to consider:
It's very close now. For the sake of fairness I wont review it again. I think many of the fungal articles tend to infere that the fruiting body is the fungus, rather than being part of the organism. I'll repost this also to Talk:Amanita phalloides MidgleyDJ 09:09, 18 April 2007 (UTC)
Thanks for the tip-off mate, I've RSVPed. ;) Alastair Haines 10:45, 19 April 2007 (UTC)
Hello Casliber, thank you for supporting
my RfA!
I was promoted with a final tally of 68/12/0.
Also, please wish a Happy Birthday to
Her Majesty the Queen.
Vivat Regina!
Hi Cas!
I've recently worked on the comments made during peer review for this article. You had indicated on the talk page that more could be included in the paleobiology section concerning the genus' herding behavior and sexual dimorphism. I haven't been able to scrape much together on this. Have you found anything? Firsfron of Ronchester 00:33, 23 April 2007 (UTC)
Hi Cas! Thanks for your vote at AfD. The discussion is an educational one for us all. AfD is a good process. What would concern me is if I'd written up a screen full of sourced information and it was nominated as an AfD. Someone is trying to be tidy, someone else is suspicious about motives, most seem to have a balanced, progressive understanding of how to promote expansion of an encyclopedia built on voluntary contributions. Great stuff! Alastair Haines 04:14, 24 April 2007 (UTC)
Hey we try to keep the geo features articles sep from the nat park arts except for the bleeding obvious (vis a vis john cleese and etc) - problem is if you do indeed go trawling through the tassie project arts and you may well find some more like that - that would not do :( - where possible the tas project always likes help - not deleting or merging but populating (bit like population - there are more tasmanian born people in melbourne than there are in tasmania etc) - cheers Satu Suro 14:02, 25 April 2007 (UTC)
Yeah - I remember trying to get interest in a re-write of Lake Pedder - waited for almost a year for a response :( parts of the Tassie project are glacial/almost geological in movement :| Satu Suro 23:44, 25 April 2007 (UTC)
I didn't really base my sig on anyone. To my knowledge Starblind did the gradient first; I know one person who apparently based it on mine; and can't really think of any others. >Radiant< 15:25, 26 April 2007 (UTC)
Thanks for the calvary picture, and for your work on saving the article. That was fun :) Kla'quot 03:42, 27 April 2007 (UTC)
![]() |
The Fauna Barnstar | |
Heres your award: for keeping the humpback whale article afloat, and also the various other contributions you have made to fauna articles in general. there was no fish barnstar I could find, so I hope this will do. Thanks, —ÅñôñÿMôús Dîššíd3nt 06:42, 27 April 2007 (UTC) |
Hey mate, sorry about this, a user placed a tag on a stub I wrote -- Hypotheticals. He put nothing on the talk page, so I reverted with a note for him to comment on the talk page. He altered the tag and put something on the talk page, questioned my objectivity and told me what he thought could be improved. I invited him to change text directly, pointed him to resources, said I'd evaluate his text once he'd provided some, said I disagreed with his tag and reverted his second tag. He then placed a third tag and threatened to report me if I reverted. I pointed out that he had already made three changes to support his view but I'd report him and risk interupting his editing over trivia, but nor would I be bullied. I reverted. He reported. The admins gave me a final warning without discussion to discover my side. I called them on that and I don't think they liked it. I asked who evaluated their decisions, but the link they gave is very confusing. Any suggestions? Should I just ignore it? Alastair Haines 08:21, 27 April 2007 (UTC)
Yeah sure. Theres an archived deletion debate, and it was almost unanimous delete. Heres the link: 20 to 1: Spectacular Dummy Spits. Tell me what you think. Thanks, —ÅñôñÿMôús Dîššíd3nt 22:43, 27 April 2007 (UTC)
For the record I can now say I've met Jimbo :) cheers, Cas Liber | talk | contribs 01:49, 29 April 2007 (UTC)
Happy 11k, Cas Liber! That's huge! I don't know how you do it; you don't even use AWB! Firsfron of Ronchester 07:16, 5 May 2007 (UTC)
Dear Casliber, your message was so charming, and your flattery so gracious, that I am morally committed to oblige you ;) Thank you so much for the beautiful words - I'll cherish them in a very, very special place :) When I read your assessment of the graphical quality of your page, I began to tremble inside, fearing an utter mess; but to my great surprise, I found a well designed, pleasant userpage. This makes things easier on me, so right now, sit back, relax, and await the results, which I hope will be ready in a matter of hours... after I get a little sleep, that is! ;) I'll get back to you as soon as I come up with something worthy of you, k, sweetie? Later! Cheers, Phaedriel - 13:39, 2 May 2007 (UTC)
Hey, I want to thank you for the copyedit you gave to the article Plymouth Colony a few weeks ago. I have made some more extensive revisions and additions to the article, and I was wondering if you would be so kind as to look over the article again and give it some work? I have added sections on prior settlements, Social history, and economy and expanded the government section some. Your work has been very beneficial to the article, and I plan to take this to peer review soon, and would like to have your help in prepping it for that, and possibly reaching Featured status sometime down the road. Thanks again for your prior work, and thanks in advance for any help you can give in the near future! -- Jayron32| talk| contribs 05:52, 3 May 2007 (UTC)
Well, my dear gentleman, I've struggled for the last 6 hours or so with your userpage and I hope you like the results of my modest efort! :) I used the basic layout of my own userpage, since I know you liked it, with some modifications to suit the contents of yours, and the same green color theme you selected. I've made two versions for you to chose from: here you have Version 1, which is basically redistributing your contents within the new layout, and following your wish of reformatting the awards sections like I did at my userpage. And here you have Version 2, which I modelled with pop-up contents like my own, for the larger sections of your userpage. If you like any of them, just copy the code straight into your userpage; or if you want me to retouch them in any way, just let me know and I'll fix whatever your heart desires :) I used the Georgia font, which is one of my favorite; of course, if you prefer a different one, you can either change it yourself, or ask me to replace it with another one of your choice.
By the way, it's great to see that we have so many good friends in common, like BInguyen, Spawn Man and Firsfron (tho I haven't talked with him too much yet, unfortunately; and the first two ones seem to have vanished in the last days...) I definitely hope we cross our paths pretty often from today on, dear Casliber - it's been a great pleasure to meet you! Have a beautiful day! :) Love, Phaedriel - 06:08, 3 May 2007 (UTC)
Thanks for the barnstar, I'll do the funguy map in the next couple of days. It look fairly straight forward do want the three variants as per the link. Gnan garra 13:33, 3 May 2007 (UTC)
What a fantastic idea, Cas! Can I use it? It offers many excellent possibilities, tho one should decide what time frame to use in order to assign sunset/sunrise.... Hey, I'm off to work on it at my sandbox - I'll let you know when I come up with something. ;) And by the way, dear - thanks so much for the beautiful star, which I will treasure forever. As beautiful as it is tho, it is but a symbol of much more wonderful thing: our newfound friendship. Hugs! Phaedriel - 02:45, 4 May 2007 (UTC)
If you don't want to do that, I can just update the lists that haven't been touched since I created them last week. I think there's only a few that have been edited. Yomangani talk 23:49, 4 May 2007 (UTC)
Actually be careful as it is only spp of genus Amazona cheers, Cas Liber | talk | contribs 23:53, 4 May 2007 (UTC)
Hi the FA nomination has been re-set, kindly re-cast your vote at Wikipedia:Featured article candidates/Toronto Raptors. Thank you. Chensiyuan 04:29, 5 May 2007 (UTC)
I know, you guys are just trucking along. Sorry to hear about Spawn. And Wikipedia is nice, but don't neglect your family man! One day someone will come along and invent a better online encyclopedia, but you don't get to invent a new family! Sheep81
I don;t find it offensive either; I just asked because I didn't think that suggestive usernames were allowed on
Wikipedia.
--
Andrew4793
t
c
14:16, 5 May 2007 (UTC)
--
Andrew4793
t
c
14:19, 5 May 2007 (UTC)
G'day Cas,
I've been frogging over the past few days, and the fungi season has definitely started! I have a coral fungi that I thought you would like for wiki, plus I also have a puff ball which I will upload later, will leave a message here when it is uploaded. Saw lots of fungi over the last few days, but only photographed the really interesting ones as I was using my small memory card, and wanted to leave some space for frogs.
http://www.flickr.com/photos/52507572@N00/465979784/?rotated=1&cb=1177065560324
Thanks. -- liquidGhoul 10:41, 20 April 2007 (UTC)
This is a synonym for morphology, that's all. But description itself is not, because you may describe other things about the animal than its morphology, such as its dentition, its behavioural or migratory patterns, its biochemistry, the physics of its blubber. I'm not dead set that this is the perfect term, but it has been used and continues to be used in biology, outside of the molecular realm that appears to think morphology does not exist. I'm all for conformity on Wikipedia, frankly, and I appreciate the tremendous amount of work done by dedicated editors who do nothing but pick at all the little details related to lack of homogeneity in articles. I think you're insane to do it without compensation, but I do appreciate it. In this case, though, I think the text describes only the physical description, and precisely the physical description, this is acceptable use biologically, and it clearly lets the reader know what is in this section. Description is too vague, and could be the decription of anything not covered in other sections--life history, rearing habits, pod behaviour, inner ears, whatever. I think it is necessary in this case and should be the default value. Please do respond on my talk page, as I'm rather busy, but would like to resolve this issue. KP Botany 21:14, 30 March 2007 (UTC)
![]() |
You voted for
Infrared and this article is now the current
Science Collaboration of the Month! Please help to improve it to match the quality of an ideal Wikipedia science article. |
NCurse work 19:45, 1 April 2007 (UTC)
SuggestBot predicts that you will enjoy editing some of these articles. Have fun!
SuggestBot picks articles in a number of ways based on other articles you've edited, including straight text similarity, following wikilinks, and matching your editing patterns against those of other Wikipedians. It tries to recommend only articles that other Wikipedians have marked as needing work. Your contributions make Wikipedia better -- thanks for helping.
If you have feedback on how to make SuggestBot better, please tell me on SuggestBot's talk page. Thanks from ForteTuba, SuggestBot's caretaker.
P.S. You received these suggestions because your name was listed on the SuggestBot request page. If this was in error, sorry about the confusion. -- SuggestBot 04:40, 3 April 2007 (UTC)
Hello Casliber and many thanks again. And congrats on the sysop. Always glad for another fellow DYK Wikipedian. Best regards, Blnguyen ( bananabucket) 06:24, 3 April 2007 (UTC)
Cheers. Alastair Haines 23:43, 3 April 2007 (UTC)
It needs some references for Humphrey - all those quoted in the Humphrey the whale article seem to be from books for children with a reading age of 4-6 (no kidding and not sources I feel particularly like trying to defend at FAR). I've been able to find some for the general "he was rescued twice" statements but nothing for the method (specifically I can't find anything for "oikami" which is worrying as it should be an easy key word to track down when combined with Humphrey). If you can find anything it would be handy, otherwise I think we'll have to cut that section back. Cheers, Yomangani talk 00:20, 4 April 2007 (UTC)
Hey there, I've been doing alot of work on this article so thanks for your recommendations on how to get it up to "Good article" status- I was just wondering about what these sort of requirements might be today! I'll try to have a look into where I might find sources with info. regarding their relation to Whistlers in the future but in the meantime what do you think is needed simply to bump this article to "B class"? Cheers, Kotare 10:14, 5 April 2007 (UTC)
Thanks for the advice. I would say that the only time I've really lost my temper was after the failure of my first RfA, when I complained at an editor ( KazakhPol) who gave what I saw as an uncivil oppose vote. However, I apologised to him and he accepted my apology, and there has been no further conflict. A couple of times I've also had people take issue with my comments on XfDs, but in all cases I've been able to resolve these amicably and civilly. I've never had anything remotely resembling an edit war, or anything like that. I've also been involved in resolving other people's disputes as a member of the AMA. So in my case, I would expect inexperience to be more of an issue than incivility. Wal ton Vivat Regina! 16:18, 5 April 2007 (UTC)
Just saw Thescelosaurus was promoted; thanks for keeping up on these things, Cas. You know, we've got a lot of work to do on Deinonychus, but I was considering eventually nominating an Australian dinosaur, based on your comments on the collaboration talk page about there being a distinct bias toward Northern Hemisphere genera. Do you think a dinosaur like Minmi might work as a collaboration, Cas? Firsfron of Ronchester 05:57, 12 April 2007 (UTC)
Thanks so much for the Triple Crown barnstar thingy! It's pretty damn cool. I'm glad someone has seen & enjoyed my work. Thanks, Spawn Man 03:10, 13 April 2007 (UTC). P.S. I'm off to expand Neck frill. :)
Hi mate! I loved the Platypus article, some of it was even relevant to my thesis! Alex's NewArtBot recommended my Generic antecedents for DYK ... and it went through! I'm working on some time consuming but valuable refinement of someone's great work to do with Language families. Your dinosaur collection sustains me with mind-expanding, nicely phrased reading material when I need a break. I wonder if I can get some language articles up to the same level. Cheers. Alastair Haines 21:13, 13 April 2007 (UTC)
Hi, and thanks for your contributions to the Mother Teresa article. I'm going to suggest that the reference to her ranking in Gallup's List of Widely Admired People be moved elsewhere in the article since the sentence in question refers to events after her death and the Gallup ranking was for 1999, prior to her death. Also, can you please provide a cite? Thanks! Majoreditor 17:55, 14 April 2007 (UTC)
Someone deleted my work on Leonard Sax and removed the history of edits so I can't revert it. Two questions: how do we get it back, and how do I protect my work from this kind of action in future? As I said, sorry to bother you, cheers. Alastair Haines 09:25, 15 April 2007 (UTC)
...Is awarding barnstars!
![]() |
The Tireless Contributor Barnstar | |
10,000 edits, and not a sign of an AWB edit amongst them! For reaching 10K, proving your true dedication to various WikiProjects (Dinosaurs, Flowers, and Mould) in improving thousands of articles, I award you this Tireless Contributor Barnstar. Just as this star spins eternally, you never seem to stop! Firsfron of Ronchester 17:26, 17 April 2007 (UTC) |
Hi Casliber -
I think the article on Amanita phalloides is much improved. Well done! I'd renominated it soon for a GA Review.
Here are some points you may want to consider:
It's very close now. For the sake of fairness I wont review it again. I think many of the fungal articles tend to infere that the fruiting body is the fungus, rather than being part of the organism. I'll repost this also to Talk:Amanita phalloides MidgleyDJ 09:09, 18 April 2007 (UTC)
Thanks for the tip-off mate, I've RSVPed. ;) Alastair Haines 10:45, 19 April 2007 (UTC)
Hello Casliber, thank you for supporting
my RfA!
I was promoted with a final tally of 68/12/0.
Also, please wish a Happy Birthday to
Her Majesty the Queen.
Vivat Regina!
Hi Cas!
I've recently worked on the comments made during peer review for this article. You had indicated on the talk page that more could be included in the paleobiology section concerning the genus' herding behavior and sexual dimorphism. I haven't been able to scrape much together on this. Have you found anything? Firsfron of Ronchester 00:33, 23 April 2007 (UTC)
Hi Cas! Thanks for your vote at AfD. The discussion is an educational one for us all. AfD is a good process. What would concern me is if I'd written up a screen full of sourced information and it was nominated as an AfD. Someone is trying to be tidy, someone else is suspicious about motives, most seem to have a balanced, progressive understanding of how to promote expansion of an encyclopedia built on voluntary contributions. Great stuff! Alastair Haines 04:14, 24 April 2007 (UTC)
Hey we try to keep the geo features articles sep from the nat park arts except for the bleeding obvious (vis a vis john cleese and etc) - problem is if you do indeed go trawling through the tassie project arts and you may well find some more like that - that would not do :( - where possible the tas project always likes help - not deleting or merging but populating (bit like population - there are more tasmanian born people in melbourne than there are in tasmania etc) - cheers Satu Suro 14:02, 25 April 2007 (UTC)
Yeah - I remember trying to get interest in a re-write of Lake Pedder - waited for almost a year for a response :( parts of the Tassie project are glacial/almost geological in movement :| Satu Suro 23:44, 25 April 2007 (UTC)
I didn't really base my sig on anyone. To my knowledge Starblind did the gradient first; I know one person who apparently based it on mine; and can't really think of any others. >Radiant< 15:25, 26 April 2007 (UTC)
Thanks for the calvary picture, and for your work on saving the article. That was fun :) Kla'quot 03:42, 27 April 2007 (UTC)
![]() |
The Fauna Barnstar | |
Heres your award: for keeping the humpback whale article afloat, and also the various other contributions you have made to fauna articles in general. there was no fish barnstar I could find, so I hope this will do. Thanks, —ÅñôñÿMôús Dîššíd3nt 06:42, 27 April 2007 (UTC) |
Hey mate, sorry about this, a user placed a tag on a stub I wrote -- Hypotheticals. He put nothing on the talk page, so I reverted with a note for him to comment on the talk page. He altered the tag and put something on the talk page, questioned my objectivity and told me what he thought could be improved. I invited him to change text directly, pointed him to resources, said I'd evaluate his text once he'd provided some, said I disagreed with his tag and reverted his second tag. He then placed a third tag and threatened to report me if I reverted. I pointed out that he had already made three changes to support his view but I'd report him and risk interupting his editing over trivia, but nor would I be bullied. I reverted. He reported. The admins gave me a final warning without discussion to discover my side. I called them on that and I don't think they liked it. I asked who evaluated their decisions, but the link they gave is very confusing. Any suggestions? Should I just ignore it? Alastair Haines 08:21, 27 April 2007 (UTC)
Yeah sure. Theres an archived deletion debate, and it was almost unanimous delete. Heres the link: 20 to 1: Spectacular Dummy Spits. Tell me what you think. Thanks, —ÅñôñÿMôús Dîššíd3nt 22:43, 27 April 2007 (UTC)
For the record I can now say I've met Jimbo :) cheers, Cas Liber | talk | contribs 01:49, 29 April 2007 (UTC)
Happy 11k, Cas Liber! That's huge! I don't know how you do it; you don't even use AWB! Firsfron of Ronchester 07:16, 5 May 2007 (UTC)
Dear Casliber, your message was so charming, and your flattery so gracious, that I am morally committed to oblige you ;) Thank you so much for the beautiful words - I'll cherish them in a very, very special place :) When I read your assessment of the graphical quality of your page, I began to tremble inside, fearing an utter mess; but to my great surprise, I found a well designed, pleasant userpage. This makes things easier on me, so right now, sit back, relax, and await the results, which I hope will be ready in a matter of hours... after I get a little sleep, that is! ;) I'll get back to you as soon as I come up with something worthy of you, k, sweetie? Later! Cheers, Phaedriel - 13:39, 2 May 2007 (UTC)
Hey, I want to thank you for the copyedit you gave to the article Plymouth Colony a few weeks ago. I have made some more extensive revisions and additions to the article, and I was wondering if you would be so kind as to look over the article again and give it some work? I have added sections on prior settlements, Social history, and economy and expanded the government section some. Your work has been very beneficial to the article, and I plan to take this to peer review soon, and would like to have your help in prepping it for that, and possibly reaching Featured status sometime down the road. Thanks again for your prior work, and thanks in advance for any help you can give in the near future! -- Jayron32| talk| contribs 05:52, 3 May 2007 (UTC)
Well, my dear gentleman, I've struggled for the last 6 hours or so with your userpage and I hope you like the results of my modest efort! :) I used the basic layout of my own userpage, since I know you liked it, with some modifications to suit the contents of yours, and the same green color theme you selected. I've made two versions for you to chose from: here you have Version 1, which is basically redistributing your contents within the new layout, and following your wish of reformatting the awards sections like I did at my userpage. And here you have Version 2, which I modelled with pop-up contents like my own, for the larger sections of your userpage. If you like any of them, just copy the code straight into your userpage; or if you want me to retouch them in any way, just let me know and I'll fix whatever your heart desires :) I used the Georgia font, which is one of my favorite; of course, if you prefer a different one, you can either change it yourself, or ask me to replace it with another one of your choice.
By the way, it's great to see that we have so many good friends in common, like BInguyen, Spawn Man and Firsfron (tho I haven't talked with him too much yet, unfortunately; and the first two ones seem to have vanished in the last days...) I definitely hope we cross our paths pretty often from today on, dear Casliber - it's been a great pleasure to meet you! Have a beautiful day! :) Love, Phaedriel - 06:08, 3 May 2007 (UTC)
Thanks for the barnstar, I'll do the funguy map in the next couple of days. It look fairly straight forward do want the three variants as per the link. Gnan garra 13:33, 3 May 2007 (UTC)
What a fantastic idea, Cas! Can I use it? It offers many excellent possibilities, tho one should decide what time frame to use in order to assign sunset/sunrise.... Hey, I'm off to work on it at my sandbox - I'll let you know when I come up with something. ;) And by the way, dear - thanks so much for the beautiful star, which I will treasure forever. As beautiful as it is tho, it is but a symbol of much more wonderful thing: our newfound friendship. Hugs! Phaedriel - 02:45, 4 May 2007 (UTC)
If you don't want to do that, I can just update the lists that haven't been touched since I created them last week. I think there's only a few that have been edited. Yomangani talk 23:49, 4 May 2007 (UTC)
Actually be careful as it is only spp of genus Amazona cheers, Cas Liber | talk | contribs 23:53, 4 May 2007 (UTC)
Hi the FA nomination has been re-set, kindly re-cast your vote at Wikipedia:Featured article candidates/Toronto Raptors. Thank you. Chensiyuan 04:29, 5 May 2007 (UTC)
I know, you guys are just trucking along. Sorry to hear about Spawn. And Wikipedia is nice, but don't neglect your family man! One day someone will come along and invent a better online encyclopedia, but you don't get to invent a new family! Sheep81
I don;t find it offensive either; I just asked because I didn't think that suggestive usernames were allowed on
Wikipedia.
--
Andrew4793
t
c
14:16, 5 May 2007 (UTC)
--
Andrew4793
t
c
14:19, 5 May 2007 (UTC)
G'day Cas,
I've been frogging over the past few days, and the fungi season has definitely started! I have a coral fungi that I thought you would like for wiki, plus I also have a puff ball which I will upload later, will leave a message here when it is uploaded. Saw lots of fungi over the last few days, but only photographed the really interesting ones as I was using my small memory card, and wanted to leave some space for frogs.
http://www.flickr.com/photos/52507572@N00/465979784/?rotated=1&cb=1177065560324
Thanks. -- liquidGhoul 10:41, 20 April 2007 (UTC)