— ERcheck ( talk) 13:31, 4 January 2007 (UTC)
This is regarding your proposal to merge fruiting body into sporocarp. There's been a bunch of low-level and scattered discussion as to what to do with the articles fruiting body, sporocarp, basidiocarp, and ascocarp. I have a comprehensive plan for these articles at Talk:Sporocarp. Have a look at this proposal and weigh in on it if you have an opinion. Peter G Werner 17:34, 12 January 2007 (UTC)
Hello, I am an admin on Wiktionary and am wondering whether you could help with a couple of questions about Indonesian translation. In particular, could you provide good Indonesian translations for the various definitions of listen? (See the sample sentences there for more information.) Also, I am looking for the Indonesian word for minute, in the sense of "a unit of time" or "sixty seconds". Could you help?
Hello, I am an admin on Wiktionary and am wondering whether you could help with a couple of questions about Indonesian translation. In particular, could you provide good Indonesian translations for the various definitions of listen? (See the sample sentences there for more information.) Also, I am looking for the Indonesian word for minute, in the sense of "a unit of time" or "sixty seconds". Could you help?
Hi, I noticed that you left a comment at the embryo discussion page. I'm curious. You say that the term "embryology" is usually restricted to apply to early vertebrate development, whereas an "embryo" is a life cycle stage found in all animals, land plants, and some algae and protists. Do you have any cite for this distinction? I had never heard of such a distinction before.
There are quite a few books and articles about "vertebrate embryology", but there are also plenty of books and articles about "invertebrate embryology". Ferrylodge 01:54, 18 February 2007 (UTC)
Blocking me at wiktionary for only "adding a internal link to a header" for a week is a little extreme. Will you please unblock me from wiktionary? The block makes no sense at all. I thought I was doing a job I thought I could not get blocked for doing but I guess I was wrong:) I am going to look over the policies and guidlines of the place before editing more. Again unblock me. Have a nice week and god bless:) -- James, La gloria è a dio 17:37, 18 March 2007 (UTC)
Hello, I would like to know why you feel this image actually belongs, aside from the very minor fact that the ant is walking on moss. It does not demonstrate moss very accurately as 95% of the moss in the picture is completely out of focus, and the subject of the photo is quite clearly the ant.
Please consider these before restoring images that are not representative of the article they are placed in. Just because Fir0002 makes some darn nice images does not mean their pics are above Wikipedia guidelines.
I personally believe that it does not belong. If you disagree, bring it up on the talk page of the Moss article, don't just revert my edit. Thank you. -- KirinX 15:34, 3 April 2007 (UTC)
You supported The History of Tom Jones, a Foundling, which has been selected as the Novels WikiProject's new Collaboration of the Month. Please help improve this article towards featured article standard. :: Kevinalewis : (Talk Page)/ (Desk) 08:57, 4 April 2007 (UTC)
Just so you know, you are very close to violating 3RR on Moss [1] [2] [3], please stop reverting peoples edits for a day or so. It is fine to revert somebody, but not over and over, there is a discussion on the talk page about the image. HighInBC(Need help? Ask me) 13:46, 4 April 2007 (UTC)
Indeed. But discussing is the first step, it is also important to let that discussion come to a conclusion. HighInBC(Need help? Ask me) 21:21, 4 April 2007 (UTC)
Sorry for my late response, I thought we were done. No, not hypocritical, the image is available in the history. HighInBC(Need help? Ask me) 19:25, 9 April 2007 (UTC)
Dear EncycloPetey, Thank you for the posting in my userpage...I am travelling now, I will be back to my home tomorrow...Though I added Parrot and Listen sections (I have yet to learn to add Malayalam fonts to Wiktionary), units of time put me in a dilemma, because Malayalm units of time doesn't follow the seconds-minute-hour pattern. Even though we can say "nazhika" means seconds, it is not...The Malayalam units of time, like nazhika, vinazhika and phases of time like yāma have their own units of time. I will try to get more reference and information about the subject before adding information to the Units of Time, thank you so much for the mail. Best wishes, -- Cyril Thomas 23:35, 14 April 2007 (UTC)
Hello! I'm a Wiktionary administrator who's glad to see you're still active in Wikimedia. We're in the proces of clearing out the last 50 images and audio files on Wiktionary, and moving them all to Commons. Long, long ago (Jan 2004), you uploaded a couple of images on Wiktionary. Would you mind uploading these two to Commons?
When you do, please let me know so I may delete the versions on Wiktionary without losing any information. Also, if the file names have to change, please let me know what the new names are. I'd do this myself except that Commons has no migration tool that accomodates Wiktionary, so the image would appear under my name rather than yours, and I don't wish to take credit for your work. Thanks, -- EncycloPetey 20:30, 17 July 2007 (UTC)
Noting that you were trying to remove those images from Wiktionary, I went back to check (by clicking on that link) and they are removed. It shows a link saying that they are missing, you could upload them (which is correct). So I figured, since you don't want any more uploads to Wiktionary (it does make more sense to use Commons) I'd see what happens. Using that link indicates that the page is restricted to sysops, which in this case is valid. But I felt that the PHP source of the page should be edited so that rather than just blandly saying it's a restricted page, it should also say that uploads should be directed to Wikimedia Commons, and have a link to the upload page there.
I was going to suggest this on Wiktionary, so I went to the main page, then went to the discussion page for the main page and discovered someone has locked the discussion page too! While I can understand locking the main page (and it's unfortunate, I was the one who thought up the Quick Index that appears there; if it had been locked at that time I couldn't have done it), I think it doesn't make sense to lock the discussion page, and I recommend the discussion page for the main page on Wikitionary be unlocked.
Paul Robinson (Rfc1394)
07:33, 18 July 2007 (UTC)
I have removed the offending link on this page. - Andre Engels 12:30, 18 July 2007 (UTC)
Thanks for the improved fountain! — Tamfang 03:48, 19 July 2007 (UTC)
Thanks for uploading Image:Phaeoceros_spores.jpg. The image has been identified as not specifying the source and creator of the image, which is required by Wikipedia's policy on images. If you don't indicate the source and creator of the image on the image's description page, it may be deleted some time in the next seven days. If you have uploaded other images, please verify that you have provided source information for them as well.
For more information on using images, see the following pages:
This is an automated notice by OrphanBot. For assistance on the image use policy, see Wikipedia:Media copyright questions. 11:04, 31 July 2007 (UTC)
Dear Mr. EncycloPetey:
I recently learn that you had put a block on my account for the copyright violation an on-line web based dictionary. I understand this is serious and have just now found a way to contact you. The addition of copyrighted material was a mistake. Not to sound like I am trying to excuse it but it was very innocent. When I work on dictionary entries I typically copy the contents into Notepad, fill in the changes and than recopy it into the text area after I am finished. I found the parole definition wanting so I went to look at various definitions in other sources to make sure that the stated definition was correct. I placed a copy of one definition in place of the Wiktionary definitions as a reference, so that I don't have to keep flipping back and for between pages. When the storm hit, I quickly copied and pasted the translations that I had been working on, onto the same page as the copied definition. When the Internet finally came back on a few moments later, I quickly pasted all of the contents of the Notepad into the text area and saved it so that I wouldn't have to retype all of my translations. I forgot that the copied definition was still there. I was unaware that I had pasted copyrighted material until you brought it to my attention. I really am sorry and I do promise to be more circumspect next time, but I honestly didn't mean to put banned material onto the website. How would that benefit me? I hope that you will let me continue to contribute to Wiktionary and remove the block. I will change my editing habits in the future. Sincerely, Andy85719 03:19, 1 August 2007 (UTC)
-- Allen3 talk 21:04, 17 August 2007 (UTC)
Hi; sorry it's been a while since I last updated DYK and it looks like I made a bit of a mess with the nominator templates; fixed now. DYK gets updated around every 6 hours, so feel free to submit as many good new or recently expanded articles as you can muster.--
Peta
00:11, 23 August 2007 (UTC)
Lists, as you requested. The lists were all generated by category intersections using AWB. Let me know if your spot-checks turn up anything out of place. Cheers, -- Rkitko ( talk) 14:28, 24 August 2007 (UTC)
You made changes to Dianella tasmanica's taxobox.. I haven't checked them, but if your changes are correct then they need to made to Dianella too. — Pengo —The preceding signed but undated comment was added at 13:41, August 26, 2007 (UTC).
That was quick :-)) I'll agree Anise is a "lowish B" - I did think a bit about it, but came to the conclusion that it's definitely better than a Start, the criteria for B-ness aren't that high :
Sure there's "some gaps" on the botany side, it's a way from GA-ness, but hiving off some of the introduction and expanding it a bit would solve that. I was in the middle of a post to the Plants Talk page that might clarify what I was up to ;-/ Cheers FlagSteward 23:09, 26 August 2007 (UTC)
You're doing an excellent job with the importance ratings, they're better than 99% right on target, in my opinion--some of the best ratings work on Wikipedia. I'm not going to rate my own articles for now on. KP Botany 03:32, 28 August 2007 (UTC)
Hm - interesting! I'd been told that the fossil ranges were not displaying in the right places, with some dinosaurs coming up as preCambrian. I've not had the chance to get on an apple so thought it would be better to remove the template until I'd tested it - although perhaps my meddling inadvertently fixed it by mistake! I'll take a look at it this evening and see what my browser makes of it, then possibly restore it. Thanks for the heads up!
Verisimilus T 10:27, 3 September 2007 (UTC)
![]() |
The Bio-star | |
For your work on plant and related core articles, have this Bio Barnstar. Circeus 14:53, 4 September 2007 (UTC) |
You supported The Firm (novel), which has been selected as the Novels WikiProject's new Collaboration of the Month. Please help improve this article towards featured article standard. :: Kevinalewis : (Talk Page)/ (Desk) 15:09, 4 September 2007 (UTC)
Hey bud, any thoughts on this one? Cheers! bd2412 T 02:27, 5 September 2007 (UTC)
Thanks. [4] I did not think they would just be on UCMP, but of course they would be. KP Botany 04:11, 7 September 2007 (UTC)
Hey, can you explain the "Suborder:Incertae sedis" thing to me. I got that off of wikispecies, and just presumed it to be accurate. Cheers! Murderbike 00:33, 9 September 2007 (UTC)
Hola
I've uploaded a photo of a flower that looks similar to the images of Calendulae already existin in Commons, but I don't know much of flowers. Might you identify it? Muchas gracias. -- Javierme 22:10, 9 September 2007 (UTC)
![]() |
The Original Barnstar | |
For I much appreciated your work on Marchantiophyta, which was very helpful for my Taxonomy of the Flora exam. Aelwyn 20:31, 10 September 2007 (UTC) |
As best as I can recall at this remove, I think the plan was to create a redirect from {{ Brytophta-stub}} to {{ Brytophte-stub}}, given that was the form used in the "source", the better to cope with the fuzziness of that application. But evidently I didn't, and also didn't double-check any of the edits in that particular short "batch" of edits. At any rate, operator error of some permutation. My bad. Alai 15:33, 14 September 2007 (UTC)
Nice edits but... are you following me? ;-) (just kidding, I enjoy very much cooperating with others). SOLANUM caule inermi herbaceo foliis pinnatis incisis, racemis simplicibus means NIGHTSHADE, (with a) herbaceous stem without spines (=inermis), pinnate incised leaves, simple racemes. Is incised a word used for the shape of leaves in English? How should it be translated? And what about inermis, any more technical term than without spines? Is the translation worth including? Species in latin means type or kind, whether it was already used in a modern sense I don'know. And, BTW, what do you think about moving the discussion about Top priority stubs to
Wikipedia:WikiProject_Plants/Collaboration, as I have proposed? All in all it was you who started it! Bye!
Aelwyn
15:18, 19 September 2007 (UTC)
It is wrong:"Ferns do not have cotyledons, but they have true leaves." Because true leaves is a botanical term. See cotyledon in [5], true leaves, true leaf, or true leaf -- Ricardo 17:22, 22 September 2007 (UTC)
I don't know if you have some practical experience in plant propagation. However some plants, for example Fabaceae, have firstly two leaves (cotyledons leaves) very different to the others, which are typical compound leaves. Ferns have the same kind of leaves during all life, so this term can't be used by ferns because it is not meanigful. All ferns leaves are always "true leaves" because leaves of ferns have always the same shape. -- Ricardo 21:53, 22 September 2007 (UTC)
We are used this term with a different mean and both are correct. I used this term mainly for plant propagation, and you are used it for plant anatomy. -- Ricardo 22:17, 22 September 2007 (UTC)
I rewrote the hook for Plant physiology as the DKY editors wanted the text to refer to the accompanying picture. Please review the new hook and change it as you desire. Regards, -- Mattisse 18:38, 23 September 2007 (UTC)
I'm on it. Thanks for the ping -- Samir 00:38, 25 September 2007 (UTC)
Hey there, I just saw your comment on Librarianofages' talk page. Thanks for the chuckle! But, um, what about viruses and prions?? :)
Anyhow, I'm not sure if you saw the CFD notice that was posted at Category:Speciesist articles shortly after you left your note for Librarianofages. But I thought you might like to know that the category is about to be deleted. Such a shame. Cgingold 12:33, 25 September 2007 (UTC)
-- Carabinieri 19:42, 26 September 2007 (UTC)
Hi Petey,
I've updated DYK as you asked, but I don't have the time to inform the article creators and nominators. Could you do that? Below, I've pasted the relevant info. -
Mgm|
(talk)
21:58, 29 September 2007 (UTC)
Thanks for your contributions! Nishkid64 ( talk) 06:01, 30 September 2007 (UTC)
Cheers, DarkFalls talk 06:15, 1 October 2007 (UTC)
-- Andrew c [talk] 17:16, 1 October 2007 (UTC)
-- Andrew c [talk] 17:18, 1 October 2007 (UTC)
Cheers, DarkFalls talk 01:17, 2 October 2007 (UTC)
-- Allen3 talk 15:50, 2 October 2007 (UTC)
Hi - pardon me, but I have made an error in creating an article, Freedmen's Savings Bank. The actual name is "Freedman's Savings Bank" - is it a problem? Is it possible to remedy this problem. Thanks, K a r n a 22:36, 2 October 2007 (UTC)
Thanks for the DYK nomination for pseudoforest! I hope you don't mind that I suggested tweaking it a little. I had already been thinking of nominating it myself, but your nom spurred me to work harder at making my prose readable. — David Eppstein 04:46, 3 October 2007 (UTC)
-- Wizardman 19:33, 3 October 2007 (UTC)
-- Allen3 talk 01:22, 4 October 2007 (UTC)
Hi EncycloPetey...Nice to know you will be involved too with this project. If you've looked the creation time, I created this project just today, and still is very much in the discussion phase. There has been a suggestion that we generate a taskforce on plant evo-devo rather than as a separate project. What is your opinion? Also, I propose the users start mentioning their area of expertise, or atleast, the area they are most comfortable with, so that coordination between each other becomes easier. What do you say? Gauravm1312 02:42, 4 October 2007 (UTC)
Thanks for starting the next update (which is now overdue). I noticed that you included three that were related to the United States. I'm not sure if you follow WT:DYK, but there has been a lot of criticism about over-Americanization of DYK, and I wanted to warn you to be cautious about that. (No more than two per country is the usual rule of thumb.) I realize most of the oldest entries are American, which makes it harder, so we may have to use three. Rigadoun (talk) 18:03, 4 October 2007 (UTC)
Generally it's been my feeling that one-day expired nominations can be included, as the supply of decent articles varies substantially from day to day, so that backlogs of usable items are common. Moreover, often problems are only noticed at the last minute, meaning that good-faith efforts to fix the articles result in an article that becomes usable only when technically expired. Could you possibly join the discussion at the talk page about this? Regards, Espresso Addict 14:13, 5 October 2007 (UTC)
Espresso Addict updated the main page. Can you check to make sure you can see it? I can't think why it would be blocked. Rigadoun (talk) 16:06, 5 October 2007 (UTC)
As Rigadoun suggested, the problem looks to have been the expletives in the edit summary, so I'm hoping that all should be well. Shout if there's a problem! Cheers, Espresso Addict 16:15, 5 October 2007 (UTC)
-- Allen3 talk 23:14, 5 October 2007 (UTC)
Re: your great idea at plants. You might be interested in this recent news story http://www.abc.net.au/news/stories/2007/10/05/2052512.htm. I left the title off, it was a bit rude. The complexity of the relationships is mind boggling. Cheers, Cygnis insignis 04:50, 6 October 2007 (UTC)
I am currently trying to write a 'wiki' page on Agroecosystem Analysis. I would truely value any input you may have towards the subject. Please feel free to pass on the topic to anyone you know who might have an interest in agroecosystems. I am completely new to this format and am learning as I go. Thanks for your time!
-- Carabinieri 00:08, 8 October 2007 (UTC)
-- Allen3 talk 16:32, 8 October 2007 (UTC)
becouse the file you gave me was a png it ended being easier to create a new one than editing the one you gave me. if you need anything changed let me know - LadyofHats 17:57, 8 October 2007 (UTC)
-- Elkman (Elkspeak) 04:31, 12 October 2007 (UTC)
-- GeeJo (t)⁄ (c) • 21:10, 13 October 2007 (UTC)
-- GeeJo (t)⁄ (c) • 09:57, 14 October 2007 (UTC)
-- GeeJo (t)⁄ (c) • 16:49, 14 October 2007 (UTC)
hi, i couldnt find another image from the Cornus sericea seed. i didnt want to make a direct copy so i was looking for other seeds diagrams wich may contain what you were looking for. from those i made 2 diagrams:
![]() |
![]() |
I do not know weather this are the ones you need, or if it "must" be the same kind of seed you mention. Please let me know.- LadyofHats 18:42, 14 October 2007 (UTC)
ok it is changed- LadyofHats 15:44, 23 October 2007 (UTC)
How is a conservation status relevant to an organism that became extinct 400 million years ago? By the same token, is it necessary to include a cross, which is understood by a small proportion of the readership, when the "fossil range" makes it clear that the genus is not extant? For the division, I could follow the argument, but it seems redundant as is. Taxoboxes rapidly become cluttered and including redundant information seems a step in the wrong direction.
Verisimilus T 14:36, 23 October 2007 (UTC)
-- Allen3 talk 16:33, 24 October 2007 (UTC)
-- Allen3 talk 16:33, 24 October 2007 (UTC)
-- Allen3 talk 16:33, 24 October 2007 (UTC)
That comment let's people know where they stand right away. I like it!
I came here because of the liverwort article, which I enjoyed.
I have seen liverwort growing in an old greenhouse. Can you tell me, is deliberate culture of liverworts practical? Thanks, Wanderer57 20:41, 24 October 2007 (UTC)
Hi there, just a note to let you know that if you had any questions about the article I'm not going to be editing as much as normal over the next few days so I might not respond immediately. Tim Vickers 21:07, 24 October 2007 (UTC)
I noticed that this article has been marked "under review" by you for over a week. Might I suggest that you either decide to pass, fail or put on hold the articles or remove the "under review" notice so that others may review the article? Cheers, CP 21:25, 27 October 2007 (UTC)
hoy, i was wondering if you have a more acurate source for a new diagram of a procaryote cell, i was left rather unconfortable with the idea of the old one not being complete or acurate enough.. do you have anything i could use?- LadyofHats 10:29, 26 October 2007 (UTC)
I'm sorry, but the article has failed GA review. I have left constructive comments on the talk page, and I wish you and the other contributors well in your efforts to improve this article. Please do not hesitate to contact me if I can be of any assistance whatsoever. Have a wiki day! Mmoyer 03:10, 30 October 2007 (UTC)
Thanks for doing the switchover for this very helpful work. :: Kevinalewis : (Talk Page)/ (Desk) 09:50, 1 November 2007 (UTC)
![]() |
The E=mc² Barnstar | |
I, BorgQueen, award this barnstar to User:EncycloPetey for the tireless work on scientific articles. Please keep up the good work. 06:16, 2 November 2007 (UTC) |
By the way, I agree with your view on
WP:ACID. We need to change the system.
BorgQueen
06:16, 2 November 2007 (UTC)
I just added a new one, with the updated information, to the page. Cheers, heyjude. 02:43, 5 November 2007 (UTC)
Hi there, would you have any use for the admin tools? You seem very well-qualified if you wished to apply. Tim Vickers 22:20, 6 November 2007 (UTC)
See Wikipedia:Requests for adminship. Tim Vickers 22:34, 6 November 2007 (UTC)
Would you be able to search through all the articles currently assessed for WP:PLANTS and determine which ones are actually redirects? I've been finding assessments on redirect pages, and this seems like cleanup that could be automated--moving the assessment to the target talk page, or removing it if the target already has an assessment template. I'd do this myself except that I have so idea how to go about doing such a search or automating the replacement. -- EncycloPetey 16:38, 6 November 2007 (UTC)
-- PFHLai 07:49, 10 November 2007 (UTC)
-- PFHLai 08:16, 10 November 2007 (UTC)
...for reverting vandalism on my page Jackaranga 02:43, 13 November 2007 (UTC)
Hi Pete, re Liguus ... I got a bit confused by the current hook, as my reading of the article was that it wasn't clear that the colour/collecting caused the extinction .. and I wasn't sure that I wanted to make collecting sound appealing. Be that as it may (as these are minor failings as the article is the truth, not so much the hook),... Im not an admin so cannot make the change... but I don't object to it. Vic aka Victuallers 16:08, 13 November 2007 (UTC)
Hi there. I've linked the DYK item to some more articles as you suggested - all except the link to shell which I piped through to gastropod shell, see what you think - I've purged the changes through. Bobo . 16:14, 13 November 2007 (UTC)
And at the risk of putting a complete kibosh on your current 100% support rate, your Request for adminship is going rather well. Hopefully I'm not out of the realms of fortune to be wishing you premature congratulations on what I have witnessed from you in the past is going to be a very well-used set of tools - just a shame that this correction to the DYK column wasn't needed tomorrow, otherwise you could have done it yourself! What timing.
Congratulations. Bobo . 16:35, 13 November 2007 (UTC)
Hope I'm not too late, but I've been sick most of this past weekend and so haven't tried to do anything that involved too much thinking.
Could you photocopy some portions of the following article for me?
The portions I'm interested in are:
Thanks, -- EncycloPetey 16:23, 13 November 2007 (UTC)
Welcome to the DYK team!! Blnguyen ( bananabucket) 01:46, 14 November 2007 (UTC)
Congratulations! You are now an administrator! Secretlondon 01:48, 14 November 2007 (UTC)
-- Zzyzx11 (Talk) 15:56, 14 November 2007 (UTC)
No problem, I don't hold it against you. I moved the article into the namespace instead of copy-pasting. Is this proper form, or should I copy-paste next time? Also, in the case of an article which took so much work, it would probably be better to alert the author next time, though I realize this isn't always possible. Have a nice day! - Oreo Priest 17:08, 14 November 2007 (UTC)
Hi EncycloPetey, you might have noticed that your nomination was one of several others I made over that last week, this was partly spurred by the threat of IPs being allowed to create new pages, but also has a more general objective. This other reason for this effort was that I have been a little disturbed by a growing attitude that admins are more than just editors with a few more buttons on their toolbars and are instead "senior editors" with greater authority. I decided that the best way of dealing with this idea was to greatly expand the pool of admins to include a wider diversity of the pool of editors.
Since you have now passed the selection, could you in turn select and nominate some people you trust - I'd suggest aiming for about three over the next month or so. Of those who are selected, could you ask them in turn to select and nominate three candidates. Such a chain of trust should result, over time, in a greatly enlarged pool of admins and thus provide a simple and effective way of spreading the responsibility - perhaps to the point where becoming an admin is seen as normal and expected, rather than a major achievement. I hope you'll be able to help me with this. Thank you. Tim Vickers 22:11, 14 November 2007 (UTC)
Could you give a look to my last image the Image:Flagellum base diagram.svg.i had troubles finding good sources and i am not sure i got everything right - LadyofHats 20:11, 15 November 2007 (UTC)
Don't understand why you have reverted links to external sites which were added this evening (eg, tracking, orchids, ferns etc). All links were to non-commercial sites. The sites do not sell anything. They are purely informational in nature. They do have ads, which help to pay hosting costs. Have read guidelines for creating links to external sites and the links seem to be in line with this. The external sites have plenty of relevant supplementary information of value to visitors to Wikipedia. Please enlighten me. There must be something I am not understanding. Thank you very much!
With all due respect, you do need to take a much closer look at those websites. The Home Pages of those sites do not have a lot of info, as they are portals to the rest of each site, gateways to the extensive information behind it. They are most definitely not commercial sites with "mostly ad space". They do not exist for the purpose of placing ads. They are not commercial sites. They are packed with information, purely for the information's sake. Those sites were created and are maintained purely for the sharing of information, for the love of it, over many years. Truly a labour of love. Without any expectation of monetary return. (Hmmm, similar to Wikipedia?) The sole purpose of the ads is to offset hosting costs. The sites are not vehicles for ads. That is not their purpose. Having read "Wikipedia:External_links#Links normally to be avoided" the only possible criteria that could be used against these sites is #6, "Links to sites with objectionable amounts of advertising". And IF these sites come under that, well that is indeed a first in the many years that they have been online!! Normally the response to the sites is one of gratitude for sharing the information. I do undertand the concept of controlling spammers, as I have to deal with large number sof them on a daily basis in forums I administer. Spamming, I respectuflly submit, is most definitely not happening here, in my opinion. Perhaps the effort I am making in this inquiry is an indication of the sincerety of these claims? Thank you for taking the time to read my remarks.
Congratulations on your successful request for adminship. I am glad you passed, and you are welcome for the support. For information on using your new tools, see the school for new admins; you will find it very useful. Good luck! Acalamari 02:52, 23 November 2007 (UTC)
can you please unblock so i can add more well produced enteries? the raccoon from wiktionary thank you please inform that semperblotto does not like me as he calls me a vandal
this is urgent i got blocked by semperblotto why? the raccoon from wiktionary? maybe you could inform when i'am getting unblocked? -- Alaop ( talk) 23:19, 24 November 2007 (UTC)
Hi :-) I saw all your work on the plant stubs recently. Thanks for creating those other two stub types and updating the BotanyBot subpage. Much appreciated. I also wanted to check in and see if you had grabbed the pdf file off my website. I don't want to keep it up there for long since it technically is breaking copyright - publishing on the internet - but, how else is one to send a large file like that? Hope all is well. Cheers, Rkitko ( talk) 00:16, 25 November 2007 (UTC)
Do you know whether the importance ranking of Core is used only by the 1.0 assessment team (and realted teams) or whether it is general to all assessment projects? -- EncycloPetey ( talk) 17:38, 25 November 2007 (UTC)
My, these are a bit of a mess. I took a look around to see what families could be split from existing orders, and discovered that the problem is worse than that. Currently, the Rosales stub category includes all the Pittosporum stubs, but that genus is in the Apiales under APG II. The Malvales stub category includes many members of the Oxalidales. The Malpighiales includes lots of Cucurbitales. All of these seem to be the result of Polbot, so not only are the stubs wrong...the taxoboxes will be wrong as well. :P
I think a new {{ Cucurbitales-stub}} and {{ Oxalidales-stub}} will greatly reduce the size of some of the larger rosid stub categories, but it will involve hunting down the articles and fixing taxoboxes. I won't have much time for stub sorting the next couple of weeks, but have put in some notes, ideas, and suggestions on User:BotanyBot/Plant_stubs. And by the way, I don't think I ever properly thanked you for setting up that page. The Stub Sorting group used to keep track of the sizes of all the stub categories, but it just became too much work to maintain. I always thought it was a useful idea, so I'm glad to see it resurrected for the plant stubs, at least. -- EncycloPetey ( talk) 05:23, 26 November 2007 (UTC)
There is a DRV discussion here related to the Japanese citrus category that may benefit from your input in view of your contributions to the Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Plants. Thanks. -- Jreferee t/ c 20:38, 26 November 2007 (UTC)
Hi, the defination of genetic drift and mutuation has been copied from the article evolution, which is currently a featured article (recently featured). you might wish to raise the issue there also. i will try my best to re-write this whole article. Sushant gupta 14:21, 14 November 2007 (UTC)
firstly congrats you are now an admin, also can you please re-reviw the page. thanks, Sushant gupta ( talk) 10:45, 25 November 2007 (UTC)
No problem. I'll get right on that tomorrow, or depending when I get home tonight. I decided to take a small trip down to Cincinnati for a half-weekend for some sight-seeing and photography. I'll let you know when it's complete. Cheers, Rkitko ( talk) 13:57, 1 December 2007 (UTC)
Cariniana,
Couratari,
Eschweilera,
Gustavia (genus), and
Lecythis Done. And re: adminship, I appreciate the thought. I think the tools could be useful in some cases and I wouldn't mind helping clear backlogs where needed. Thanks!
Rkitko (
talk)
15:14, 2 December 2007 (UTC)
Hi,
Please revert any IPA redirects you think are inappropriate, or let me know if there's a particular category of article you object to changing. Readers have been complaining for years that the IPA is inaccessible, but I'm only trying to do this in cases where all the reader needs is help with a few symbols, such as 'the following chart uses symbols from the IPA'. That's the vast majority of cases, but I can't spend much time with any one article, so I've probably redirected the link where I shouldn't have. kwami 07:01, 3 December 2007 (UTC)
Thanks! That's good to hear. All the best Tim Vickers 18:52, 3 December 2007 (UTC)
You supported Sons and Lovers, which has been selected as the Novels WikiProject's new Collaboration of the Month. Please help improve this article towards featured article standard. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Kevinalewis ( talk • contribs) 10:25, 4 December 2007 (UTC)
Second time I've been accused of being uncivil in this RfA. I'm probably not helping TH at this point, but I think people (you and others) are pushing too hard to get perfection in a candidate, and using 'civility' as a way to throw off criticism of your opposition. In my view, long-term constructive editors with no history of vandalism or other abuse should enjoy the presumption of trustworthiness - and the trustworthiness of a user in the eyes of the community is what we are here to determine. Not 'is this user too wordy' or 'I disagree with the admin school and oppose because user participates'. Particularly not because someone failed to answer your optional question, or answered correctly but not in exactly the precise manner you were hoping for - many of these difficult questions with many answers are traps, intentionally or not. I won't be apologizing for criticizing your oppose, and I don't agree that my criticism has been uncivil. Avruch Talk 21:20, 6 December 2007 (UTC)
To quote WP:CIVIL: "For some people, it may be crucial to receive an apology from those who have offended them. For this reason, a sincere apology is often the key to the resolution of a conflict: an apology is a symbol of forgiveness. An apology is very much recommended when one person's perceived incivility has offended another."
Conversation ended. Please do not escalate this to WP:HARASS. I have asked you to stay away and not bother me, and you have already chosen once to disregard my request. Instead, you have returned to fan the flames of incivility. Please do not return to my talk page and please leave me alone. -- EncycloPetey 00:41, 7 December 2007 (UTC)
Hello EncycloPetey. This message is being sent to inform you that there currently is a discussion at Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents regarding an issue that you may be involved with. You are free to comment at the discussion, but please remember to keep your comments within the bounds of the civility and " no personal attack" policies. Thank you.
Good morning! I tried your "E-mail this user" link and just got This user has not specified a valid e-mail address, or has chosen not to receive e-mail from other users.. Do you have an alternative e-mail address you could swap in? That would tell us if it was a problem with the software or a problem with one specific e-mail address. Tim Vickers ( talk) 17:13, 7 December 2007 (UTC)
I've been sorting out the Salicaceae stubs, and now am updating taxonomy for all of Polbot's entries categorized in Category:Malpighiales stubs. I've come across two genera with many species that could use a bot fix. Neither genus is in the Malpighiales under APG II, so both the taxobox and stub need to be corrected for all the pages in the genera:
The latter also needs a genus page, and needs to have the genus link corrected. Right now, the genus for all these entries points to NASA via redirect. Should we use Nasa (genus), or commandeer Nasa from redirect to article, with a disambig link for the space agency? -- EncycloPetey ( talk) 03:51, 8 December 2007 (UTC)
Having seen your comment on the talk page, please have a look at the CFBS article now that I've finished adding the details of the rolling stock. Mjroots ( talk) 17:15, 11 December 2007 (UTC)
Sorry about jumping the gun. Dec 6 had no suitable hooks left. Dec 7 has some problem hooks but, you're right, there are a few suitable ones left. Maybe we should have ADYK (almost did you know) and not put it on the main page! Chergles ( talk) 23:42, 11 December 2007 (UTC)
If you like, I can handle passing out the credits, so that you don't have to congratulate yourself ;) -- EncycloPetey ( talk) 04:10, 12 December 2007 (UTC)
Mama always told her children that, when gifted with a delightful trinket or somesuch, one must immediately despatch a note of thanks to the donor. So, Mr EncycloPetey, one is most grateful for the small colourful addition that you contributed to one's User Page in reference to the Mold cape. One tries one's best to make this world a better place, be it by one's contributions to this establishment, or simply by one's glittering presence, which shines a little light on the drab and dreary lives of those around.
Princess Venetia di Cannoli ( talk) 10:05, 12 December 2007 (UTC)
I'm sorry to see that you took that off your user page. It was the singlemost memorable item the first time I visited your user page. I mention this because we just had what I would rate as Wiktionary's best edit ever. -- EncycloPetey ( talk) 05:47, 12 December 2007 (UTC)
I don't mind that you removed this from Next Update, but just to let you know you forgot to add it back to the nominations page, T:TDYK. Cirt ( talk) 23:27, 13 December 2007 (UTC).
-- Cirt ( talk) 05:15, 14 December 2007 (UTC)
-- Cirt ( talk) 05:15, 14 December 2007 (UTC)
-- Cirt ( talk) 05:15, 14 December 2007 (UTC)
![]() |
The 25 DYK Medal | |
Congratulations! Here's a medal for you in appreciation of your hardwork in creating, expanding and nominating 25+ articles for DYK. Keep up the good work, EncycloPetey ... I understand there are quite a few notable topics who still need an article! -- Victuallers ( talk) 17:46, 14 December 2007 (UTC) |
Did you know that one other DYK contributor was so keen to get a medal that he stubbed his toe? Victuallers ( talk) 17:46, 14 December 2007 (UTC)
DYK overdue! Chergles ( talk) 01:41, 15 December 2007 (UTC)
Thanks for uploading
Image:Iapt.gif. The media description page currently specifies that it is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a
claim of fair use. However, it is currently
orphaned, meaning that it is not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the media was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed.
You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that media for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see
our policy for non-free media).
If you have uploaded other unlicensed media, please check whether they're used in any articles or not. You can find a list of 'image' pages you have edited by clicking on the " my contributions" link (it is located at the very top of any Wikipedia page when you are logged in), and then selecting "Image" from the dropdown box. Note that all non-free media not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. BetacommandBot ( talk) 20:54, 15 December 2007 (UTC)
Welcome to Wikipedia. Although everyone is welcome to make constructive contributions to Wikipedia, at least one of your recent edits, such as the one you made to
Image:Iapt.gif, did not appear to be constructive and has been
reverted or removed. Please use
the sandbox for any test edits you would like to make, and take a look at the
welcome page to learn more about contributing to this encyclopedia. Thank you.
βcommand
21:10, 15 December 2007 (UTC)
Please stop. You should not have blocked a user you were in a dispute with, Betacommand did everything right (if a bit abrasively), and your block was not within policy. You also need to stop these sort of comments, as a whole they are starting to run into WP:AGF problems. So please calm down. Prodego talk 21:51, 15 December 2007 (UTC)
Your block was completely outside policy in that (a) Betacommand did nothing that would warrant blocking and (b) you clearly blocked him for his conduct in an dispute with you. I would hope you would appreciate that blocks should be issued by uninvolved admins wherever possible. Betacommand's hostility in response to your block is regretable but I'm afraid people do tend to be angry when on the receiving end of an improper use of the block button. I suggest you apologise to Betacommand for one of the more absurd blocks I have seen, and then he can apologise for the language he used to respond to it. WjB scribe 22:59, 15 December 2007 (UTC)
I've filled the next update page. Would you transclude it to the main page? Don't block me by mistake :) Archtransit ( talk) 21:35, 15 December 2007 (UTC)
Ok, but consider moving to the main page and let me or others award the credits to the hook authors. Archtransit ( talk) 22:01, 15 December 2007 (UTC)
Ok, I remove one. Archtransit ( talk) 22:06, 15 December 2007 (UTC)
Thank you. I think DYK helps article building. When I learned of DYK, I created some articles but now I try to let others get credit and gain enthusiasm. Archtransit ( talk) 22:27, 15 December 2007 (UTC)
Hi EncyclopPetey. I can see you've had a few problems with your blocks that you've made so far (I know there's only been about 5). Would you be interested in letting me mentor you to make sure everythings OK with respect to you tools? I can keep a check to make sure you're doing everything right, and give you advice if there's any concerns. You can also ask me any questions that you might have, and I'll help you wherever I can. What do you think? Ryan Postlethwaite 23:35, 15 December 2007 (UTC)
Very well, if Ryan is going to offer guidance on blocking I will leave this in his hands - I do think you should consider apologising to Betacommand but ultimately that's up to you. WjB scribe 00:05, 16 December 2007 (UTC)
Hi EncycloPetey, I want to talk through with you the problems with your block of Betacommand ( talk · contribs). The situation arose because you removed tags that BetacommandBot had added, leading to Betacommand reverting your edits as vandalism. This was obviously wrong, he shouldn’t have reverted you and then warned you for vandalism, it obviously wasn’t vandalism. I think the block was initially made in good faith, you blocked what you thought was a bot making edits that weren’t within the scope of it’s bot request. The problems came when the block was reverted as a good faith mistake, and you changed your story in an attempt to justify the block – This wasn’t the correct thing to do. You claimed that Betacommand was harassing you, yet all he was doing was reverting your edits to images which many would argue were wrong. This in effect meant you were in a content dispute with Betacommand and given your new reasoning for the block, you blocked him to stop him reverting you. If you look at the blocking policy, you will note that administrators should never block another user that they are in an edit dispute with – quite simply, you are nowhere near neutral enough to make the block. If a block was required, you should have reported it to WP:AN/I and let an uninvolved administrator make the block – in this case however, a block wasn’t even required, and problems could have been solved through discussion. When you’ve blocked someone like this, you have to expect them to be upset, and further problems came when you kept posting to his page – it antagonised the situation. In a nutshell, this became a serious matter when you changed your story, and said you blocked Betacommand for harassing you – edit disputes are not won by blocking the other party, and this kind of block is considered an extremely serious matter and grounds for further action if the behaviour continues. The advice I can give you if anything like this occurs again is to discuss the situation before acting, either with me, or with uninvolved admins on one of the noticeboards. In all your future blocks, you should be a neutral party and only make blocks with a deep foundation in policy. If I was you, I would concentrate on other admin areas and only block users where you are 100% certain a block is required such as for a vandalism only account. I hope this gives you some advice and will help you when making block decisions in the future. Best regards, Ryan Postlethwaite 17:57, 16 December 2007 (UTC)
I've been working on algae, but I messed up one of the references in the intro. You'll see it immediately. Please help! -- ♦♦♦Vlmastra♦♦♦ ( talk) 19:45, 16 December 2007 (UTC)
I just wanted to notify everyone that participated in the original CfD and the deletion review that there is a new CfD to reverse the proposed changes to the taxobox categories. Justin chat 05:16, 18 December 2007 (UTC)
-- Carabinieri ( talk) 22:22, 19 December 2007 (UTC)
Thank you for your support in my RfA. It was definitely a dramatic debate! I paid close attention to everything that was said, and, where possible, I will try to incorporate the (constructive) criticism towards being a better administrator. I'm taking things slowly for now, partially because it's the holiday season and there are plenty of off-wiki distractions. :) I'm also working my way through the Wikipedia:New admin school and double-checking the relevant policies, and will gradually phase into the use of the new tools. My main goals are to help out with various backlogs, but I also fully intend to keep on writing articles, as there are several more that I definitely want to get to WP:FA status! Thanks also for the puzzle on my talkpage, though I'll be honest that I haven't had a chance to work on it yet! I'll definitely take a look when I get some more time though. Unless you'd like to give a hint to speed things along? :) -- El on ka 10:56, 20 December 2007 (UTC)
Hi, thank you for your constructive criticisms on the Introduction to Evolution article. I am somewhat pleased with my orchid addition to counter the lack of plants. Give it a read if you get a chance. Also, I added variations in maize to artificial selection. Stumbled across an interesting web site on preserving genetic variations in corn. We stuck on necks out and went for the F/A status after making the edits. The commentary page should make for some interesting reading. Wish us luck! Cheers. -- Random Replicator ( talk) 15:50, 20 December 2007 (UTC)
-- Royalbroil 01:38, 21 December 2007 (UTC)
-- Royalbroil 06:20, 21 December 2007 (UTC)
I've signed up to review IAPT, nothing much is llikely to happen for a few days due to the festivities, but at least it's on the list. Merry Christmas, Jimfbleak ( talk) 14:45, 24 December 2007 (UTC)
Hey, thanks for the additional Colura refs. Appreciate it. I'll get around to expanding on the genus page perhaps after we tackle the collaboration project. The purpose of my message, though, is this. I got the idea to check out the WP:PLANTS assessment and noticed an odd unassessed-class/mid-importance article. Did a quick AWB intersection of the categories to find out that it was the Victoria amazonica article. Flipped on over to the talk page and... you had assessed the class three minutes earlier. And that same thing happened before, where you were getting to those talk pages and assessing the oddities faster than I. How do you do it?? :-) Rkitko ( talk) 01:01, 25 December 2007 (UTC)
I actually thought when i got up this morning that my changes had been too interventionist, so I've restored the text prior to my all edits, and commented on the talk page. Jimfbleak ( talk) 06:41, 25 December 2007 (UTC)
Glad to see you've decided to take up this article, WP:DINO looks forward to your comments! Sheep81 ( talk) 09:31, 27 December 2007 (UTC)
Dear EncycloPetey, here is a little note to say thank you for your kind support on my request for adminship which succeeded with a final result of (72/19/6).
Now that I am a sysop, do not hesitate to contact me with any queries you have. I would be glad to help you along with the other group of kind and helpful administrators.
Thank you again and I look forward to editing alongside you in the future. — E talk 12:24, 28 December 2007 (UTC)
I protected the page itself, didnt' realize that didn't work. I'll go and take care of uploading it then. Wizardman 18:45, 29 December 2007 (UTC)
Yo, what name is this image on Commons? Because it was deleted while still linked in an article but the name is different. Lara ❤ Love 19:14, 29 December 2007 (UTC)
I note that you have made no recent edits to IATP. Are you happy for me to review it as it stands? My intention is to clear this within the next two days anyway. Jimfbleak ( talk) 08:51, 30 December 2007 (UTC)
Do you really want to be part of a project that evaluates and gives recommendations and ranks and declares the importance of articles without having read the content? I don't to want to be involved with a group of people who work that way -- but I am new here. Perhaps you can sum up the advantages there are to being part of a project like that so that I can better understand the situation that put you there and keeps you working within the project.
I really like the upload page for commons uploads. It says It's all about freedom'. Have you seen that? Thanks -- Carol 01:19, 31 December 2007 (UTC)
— ERcheck ( talk) 13:31, 4 January 2007 (UTC)
This is regarding your proposal to merge fruiting body into sporocarp. There's been a bunch of low-level and scattered discussion as to what to do with the articles fruiting body, sporocarp, basidiocarp, and ascocarp. I have a comprehensive plan for these articles at Talk:Sporocarp. Have a look at this proposal and weigh in on it if you have an opinion. Peter G Werner 17:34, 12 January 2007 (UTC)
Hello, I am an admin on Wiktionary and am wondering whether you could help with a couple of questions about Indonesian translation. In particular, could you provide good Indonesian translations for the various definitions of listen? (See the sample sentences there for more information.) Also, I am looking for the Indonesian word for minute, in the sense of "a unit of time" or "sixty seconds". Could you help?
Hello, I am an admin on Wiktionary and am wondering whether you could help with a couple of questions about Indonesian translation. In particular, could you provide good Indonesian translations for the various definitions of listen? (See the sample sentences there for more information.) Also, I am looking for the Indonesian word for minute, in the sense of "a unit of time" or "sixty seconds". Could you help?
Hi, I noticed that you left a comment at the embryo discussion page. I'm curious. You say that the term "embryology" is usually restricted to apply to early vertebrate development, whereas an "embryo" is a life cycle stage found in all animals, land plants, and some algae and protists. Do you have any cite for this distinction? I had never heard of such a distinction before.
There are quite a few books and articles about "vertebrate embryology", but there are also plenty of books and articles about "invertebrate embryology". Ferrylodge 01:54, 18 February 2007 (UTC)
Blocking me at wiktionary for only "adding a internal link to a header" for a week is a little extreme. Will you please unblock me from wiktionary? The block makes no sense at all. I thought I was doing a job I thought I could not get blocked for doing but I guess I was wrong:) I am going to look over the policies and guidlines of the place before editing more. Again unblock me. Have a nice week and god bless:) -- James, La gloria è a dio 17:37, 18 March 2007 (UTC)
Hello, I would like to know why you feel this image actually belongs, aside from the very minor fact that the ant is walking on moss. It does not demonstrate moss very accurately as 95% of the moss in the picture is completely out of focus, and the subject of the photo is quite clearly the ant.
Please consider these before restoring images that are not representative of the article they are placed in. Just because Fir0002 makes some darn nice images does not mean their pics are above Wikipedia guidelines.
I personally believe that it does not belong. If you disagree, bring it up on the talk page of the Moss article, don't just revert my edit. Thank you. -- KirinX 15:34, 3 April 2007 (UTC)
You supported The History of Tom Jones, a Foundling, which has been selected as the Novels WikiProject's new Collaboration of the Month. Please help improve this article towards featured article standard. :: Kevinalewis : (Talk Page)/ (Desk) 08:57, 4 April 2007 (UTC)
Just so you know, you are very close to violating 3RR on Moss [1] [2] [3], please stop reverting peoples edits for a day or so. It is fine to revert somebody, but not over and over, there is a discussion on the talk page about the image. HighInBC(Need help? Ask me) 13:46, 4 April 2007 (UTC)
Indeed. But discussing is the first step, it is also important to let that discussion come to a conclusion. HighInBC(Need help? Ask me) 21:21, 4 April 2007 (UTC)
Sorry for my late response, I thought we were done. No, not hypocritical, the image is available in the history. HighInBC(Need help? Ask me) 19:25, 9 April 2007 (UTC)
Dear EncycloPetey, Thank you for the posting in my userpage...I am travelling now, I will be back to my home tomorrow...Though I added Parrot and Listen sections (I have yet to learn to add Malayalam fonts to Wiktionary), units of time put me in a dilemma, because Malayalm units of time doesn't follow the seconds-minute-hour pattern. Even though we can say "nazhika" means seconds, it is not...The Malayalam units of time, like nazhika, vinazhika and phases of time like yāma have their own units of time. I will try to get more reference and information about the subject before adding information to the Units of Time, thank you so much for the mail. Best wishes, -- Cyril Thomas 23:35, 14 April 2007 (UTC)
Hello! I'm a Wiktionary administrator who's glad to see you're still active in Wikimedia. We're in the proces of clearing out the last 50 images and audio files on Wiktionary, and moving them all to Commons. Long, long ago (Jan 2004), you uploaded a couple of images on Wiktionary. Would you mind uploading these two to Commons?
When you do, please let me know so I may delete the versions on Wiktionary without losing any information. Also, if the file names have to change, please let me know what the new names are. I'd do this myself except that Commons has no migration tool that accomodates Wiktionary, so the image would appear under my name rather than yours, and I don't wish to take credit for your work. Thanks, -- EncycloPetey 20:30, 17 July 2007 (UTC)
Noting that you were trying to remove those images from Wiktionary, I went back to check (by clicking on that link) and they are removed. It shows a link saying that they are missing, you could upload them (which is correct). So I figured, since you don't want any more uploads to Wiktionary (it does make more sense to use Commons) I'd see what happens. Using that link indicates that the page is restricted to sysops, which in this case is valid. But I felt that the PHP source of the page should be edited so that rather than just blandly saying it's a restricted page, it should also say that uploads should be directed to Wikimedia Commons, and have a link to the upload page there.
I was going to suggest this on Wiktionary, so I went to the main page, then went to the discussion page for the main page and discovered someone has locked the discussion page too! While I can understand locking the main page (and it's unfortunate, I was the one who thought up the Quick Index that appears there; if it had been locked at that time I couldn't have done it), I think it doesn't make sense to lock the discussion page, and I recommend the discussion page for the main page on Wikitionary be unlocked.
Paul Robinson (Rfc1394)
07:33, 18 July 2007 (UTC)
I have removed the offending link on this page. - Andre Engels 12:30, 18 July 2007 (UTC)
Thanks for the improved fountain! — Tamfang 03:48, 19 July 2007 (UTC)
Thanks for uploading Image:Phaeoceros_spores.jpg. The image has been identified as not specifying the source and creator of the image, which is required by Wikipedia's policy on images. If you don't indicate the source and creator of the image on the image's description page, it may be deleted some time in the next seven days. If you have uploaded other images, please verify that you have provided source information for them as well.
For more information on using images, see the following pages:
This is an automated notice by OrphanBot. For assistance on the image use policy, see Wikipedia:Media copyright questions. 11:04, 31 July 2007 (UTC)
Dear Mr. EncycloPetey:
I recently learn that you had put a block on my account for the copyright violation an on-line web based dictionary. I understand this is serious and have just now found a way to contact you. The addition of copyrighted material was a mistake. Not to sound like I am trying to excuse it but it was very innocent. When I work on dictionary entries I typically copy the contents into Notepad, fill in the changes and than recopy it into the text area after I am finished. I found the parole definition wanting so I went to look at various definitions in other sources to make sure that the stated definition was correct. I placed a copy of one definition in place of the Wiktionary definitions as a reference, so that I don't have to keep flipping back and for between pages. When the storm hit, I quickly copied and pasted the translations that I had been working on, onto the same page as the copied definition. When the Internet finally came back on a few moments later, I quickly pasted all of the contents of the Notepad into the text area and saved it so that I wouldn't have to retype all of my translations. I forgot that the copied definition was still there. I was unaware that I had pasted copyrighted material until you brought it to my attention. I really am sorry and I do promise to be more circumspect next time, but I honestly didn't mean to put banned material onto the website. How would that benefit me? I hope that you will let me continue to contribute to Wiktionary and remove the block. I will change my editing habits in the future. Sincerely, Andy85719 03:19, 1 August 2007 (UTC)
-- Allen3 talk 21:04, 17 August 2007 (UTC)
Hi; sorry it's been a while since I last updated DYK and it looks like I made a bit of a mess with the nominator templates; fixed now. DYK gets updated around every 6 hours, so feel free to submit as many good new or recently expanded articles as you can muster.--
Peta
00:11, 23 August 2007 (UTC)
Lists, as you requested. The lists were all generated by category intersections using AWB. Let me know if your spot-checks turn up anything out of place. Cheers, -- Rkitko ( talk) 14:28, 24 August 2007 (UTC)
You made changes to Dianella tasmanica's taxobox.. I haven't checked them, but if your changes are correct then they need to made to Dianella too. — Pengo —The preceding signed but undated comment was added at 13:41, August 26, 2007 (UTC).
That was quick :-)) I'll agree Anise is a "lowish B" - I did think a bit about it, but came to the conclusion that it's definitely better than a Start, the criteria for B-ness aren't that high :
Sure there's "some gaps" on the botany side, it's a way from GA-ness, but hiving off some of the introduction and expanding it a bit would solve that. I was in the middle of a post to the Plants Talk page that might clarify what I was up to ;-/ Cheers FlagSteward 23:09, 26 August 2007 (UTC)
You're doing an excellent job with the importance ratings, they're better than 99% right on target, in my opinion--some of the best ratings work on Wikipedia. I'm not going to rate my own articles for now on. KP Botany 03:32, 28 August 2007 (UTC)
Hm - interesting! I'd been told that the fossil ranges were not displaying in the right places, with some dinosaurs coming up as preCambrian. I've not had the chance to get on an apple so thought it would be better to remove the template until I'd tested it - although perhaps my meddling inadvertently fixed it by mistake! I'll take a look at it this evening and see what my browser makes of it, then possibly restore it. Thanks for the heads up!
Verisimilus T 10:27, 3 September 2007 (UTC)
![]() |
The Bio-star | |
For your work on plant and related core articles, have this Bio Barnstar. Circeus 14:53, 4 September 2007 (UTC) |
You supported The Firm (novel), which has been selected as the Novels WikiProject's new Collaboration of the Month. Please help improve this article towards featured article standard. :: Kevinalewis : (Talk Page)/ (Desk) 15:09, 4 September 2007 (UTC)
Hey bud, any thoughts on this one? Cheers! bd2412 T 02:27, 5 September 2007 (UTC)
Thanks. [4] I did not think they would just be on UCMP, but of course they would be. KP Botany 04:11, 7 September 2007 (UTC)
Hey, can you explain the "Suborder:Incertae sedis" thing to me. I got that off of wikispecies, and just presumed it to be accurate. Cheers! Murderbike 00:33, 9 September 2007 (UTC)
Hola
I've uploaded a photo of a flower that looks similar to the images of Calendulae already existin in Commons, but I don't know much of flowers. Might you identify it? Muchas gracias. -- Javierme 22:10, 9 September 2007 (UTC)
![]() |
The Original Barnstar | |
For I much appreciated your work on Marchantiophyta, which was very helpful for my Taxonomy of the Flora exam. Aelwyn 20:31, 10 September 2007 (UTC) |
As best as I can recall at this remove, I think the plan was to create a redirect from {{ Brytophta-stub}} to {{ Brytophte-stub}}, given that was the form used in the "source", the better to cope with the fuzziness of that application. But evidently I didn't, and also didn't double-check any of the edits in that particular short "batch" of edits. At any rate, operator error of some permutation. My bad. Alai 15:33, 14 September 2007 (UTC)
Nice edits but... are you following me? ;-) (just kidding, I enjoy very much cooperating with others). SOLANUM caule inermi herbaceo foliis pinnatis incisis, racemis simplicibus means NIGHTSHADE, (with a) herbaceous stem without spines (=inermis), pinnate incised leaves, simple racemes. Is incised a word used for the shape of leaves in English? How should it be translated? And what about inermis, any more technical term than without spines? Is the translation worth including? Species in latin means type or kind, whether it was already used in a modern sense I don'know. And, BTW, what do you think about moving the discussion about Top priority stubs to
Wikipedia:WikiProject_Plants/Collaboration, as I have proposed? All in all it was you who started it! Bye!
Aelwyn
15:18, 19 September 2007 (UTC)
It is wrong:"Ferns do not have cotyledons, but they have true leaves." Because true leaves is a botanical term. See cotyledon in [5], true leaves, true leaf, or true leaf -- Ricardo 17:22, 22 September 2007 (UTC)
I don't know if you have some practical experience in plant propagation. However some plants, for example Fabaceae, have firstly two leaves (cotyledons leaves) very different to the others, which are typical compound leaves. Ferns have the same kind of leaves during all life, so this term can't be used by ferns because it is not meanigful. All ferns leaves are always "true leaves" because leaves of ferns have always the same shape. -- Ricardo 21:53, 22 September 2007 (UTC)
We are used this term with a different mean and both are correct. I used this term mainly for plant propagation, and you are used it for plant anatomy. -- Ricardo 22:17, 22 September 2007 (UTC)
I rewrote the hook for Plant physiology as the DKY editors wanted the text to refer to the accompanying picture. Please review the new hook and change it as you desire. Regards, -- Mattisse 18:38, 23 September 2007 (UTC)
I'm on it. Thanks for the ping -- Samir 00:38, 25 September 2007 (UTC)
Hey there, I just saw your comment on Librarianofages' talk page. Thanks for the chuckle! But, um, what about viruses and prions?? :)
Anyhow, I'm not sure if you saw the CFD notice that was posted at Category:Speciesist articles shortly after you left your note for Librarianofages. But I thought you might like to know that the category is about to be deleted. Such a shame. Cgingold 12:33, 25 September 2007 (UTC)
-- Carabinieri 19:42, 26 September 2007 (UTC)
Hi Petey,
I've updated DYK as you asked, but I don't have the time to inform the article creators and nominators. Could you do that? Below, I've pasted the relevant info. -
Mgm|
(talk)
21:58, 29 September 2007 (UTC)
Thanks for your contributions! Nishkid64 ( talk) 06:01, 30 September 2007 (UTC)
Cheers, DarkFalls talk 06:15, 1 October 2007 (UTC)
-- Andrew c [talk] 17:16, 1 October 2007 (UTC)
-- Andrew c [talk] 17:18, 1 October 2007 (UTC)
Cheers, DarkFalls talk 01:17, 2 October 2007 (UTC)
-- Allen3 talk 15:50, 2 October 2007 (UTC)
Hi - pardon me, but I have made an error in creating an article, Freedmen's Savings Bank. The actual name is "Freedman's Savings Bank" - is it a problem? Is it possible to remedy this problem. Thanks, K a r n a 22:36, 2 October 2007 (UTC)
Thanks for the DYK nomination for pseudoforest! I hope you don't mind that I suggested tweaking it a little. I had already been thinking of nominating it myself, but your nom spurred me to work harder at making my prose readable. — David Eppstein 04:46, 3 October 2007 (UTC)
-- Wizardman 19:33, 3 October 2007 (UTC)
-- Allen3 talk 01:22, 4 October 2007 (UTC)
Hi EncycloPetey...Nice to know you will be involved too with this project. If you've looked the creation time, I created this project just today, and still is very much in the discussion phase. There has been a suggestion that we generate a taskforce on plant evo-devo rather than as a separate project. What is your opinion? Also, I propose the users start mentioning their area of expertise, or atleast, the area they are most comfortable with, so that coordination between each other becomes easier. What do you say? Gauravm1312 02:42, 4 October 2007 (UTC)
Thanks for starting the next update (which is now overdue). I noticed that you included three that were related to the United States. I'm not sure if you follow WT:DYK, but there has been a lot of criticism about over-Americanization of DYK, and I wanted to warn you to be cautious about that. (No more than two per country is the usual rule of thumb.) I realize most of the oldest entries are American, which makes it harder, so we may have to use three. Rigadoun (talk) 18:03, 4 October 2007 (UTC)
Generally it's been my feeling that one-day expired nominations can be included, as the supply of decent articles varies substantially from day to day, so that backlogs of usable items are common. Moreover, often problems are only noticed at the last minute, meaning that good-faith efforts to fix the articles result in an article that becomes usable only when technically expired. Could you possibly join the discussion at the talk page about this? Regards, Espresso Addict 14:13, 5 October 2007 (UTC)
Espresso Addict updated the main page. Can you check to make sure you can see it? I can't think why it would be blocked. Rigadoun (talk) 16:06, 5 October 2007 (UTC)
As Rigadoun suggested, the problem looks to have been the expletives in the edit summary, so I'm hoping that all should be well. Shout if there's a problem! Cheers, Espresso Addict 16:15, 5 October 2007 (UTC)
-- Allen3 talk 23:14, 5 October 2007 (UTC)
Re: your great idea at plants. You might be interested in this recent news story http://www.abc.net.au/news/stories/2007/10/05/2052512.htm. I left the title off, it was a bit rude. The complexity of the relationships is mind boggling. Cheers, Cygnis insignis 04:50, 6 October 2007 (UTC)
I am currently trying to write a 'wiki' page on Agroecosystem Analysis. I would truely value any input you may have towards the subject. Please feel free to pass on the topic to anyone you know who might have an interest in agroecosystems. I am completely new to this format and am learning as I go. Thanks for your time!
-- Carabinieri 00:08, 8 October 2007 (UTC)
-- Allen3 talk 16:32, 8 October 2007 (UTC)
becouse the file you gave me was a png it ended being easier to create a new one than editing the one you gave me. if you need anything changed let me know - LadyofHats 17:57, 8 October 2007 (UTC)
-- Elkman (Elkspeak) 04:31, 12 October 2007 (UTC)
-- GeeJo (t)⁄ (c) • 21:10, 13 October 2007 (UTC)
-- GeeJo (t)⁄ (c) • 09:57, 14 October 2007 (UTC)
-- GeeJo (t)⁄ (c) • 16:49, 14 October 2007 (UTC)
hi, i couldnt find another image from the Cornus sericea seed. i didnt want to make a direct copy so i was looking for other seeds diagrams wich may contain what you were looking for. from those i made 2 diagrams:
![]() |
![]() |
I do not know weather this are the ones you need, or if it "must" be the same kind of seed you mention. Please let me know.- LadyofHats 18:42, 14 October 2007 (UTC)
ok it is changed- LadyofHats 15:44, 23 October 2007 (UTC)
How is a conservation status relevant to an organism that became extinct 400 million years ago? By the same token, is it necessary to include a cross, which is understood by a small proportion of the readership, when the "fossil range" makes it clear that the genus is not extant? For the division, I could follow the argument, but it seems redundant as is. Taxoboxes rapidly become cluttered and including redundant information seems a step in the wrong direction.
Verisimilus T 14:36, 23 October 2007 (UTC)
-- Allen3 talk 16:33, 24 October 2007 (UTC)
-- Allen3 talk 16:33, 24 October 2007 (UTC)
-- Allen3 talk 16:33, 24 October 2007 (UTC)
That comment let's people know where they stand right away. I like it!
I came here because of the liverwort article, which I enjoyed.
I have seen liverwort growing in an old greenhouse. Can you tell me, is deliberate culture of liverworts practical? Thanks, Wanderer57 20:41, 24 October 2007 (UTC)
Hi there, just a note to let you know that if you had any questions about the article I'm not going to be editing as much as normal over the next few days so I might not respond immediately. Tim Vickers 21:07, 24 October 2007 (UTC)
I noticed that this article has been marked "under review" by you for over a week. Might I suggest that you either decide to pass, fail or put on hold the articles or remove the "under review" notice so that others may review the article? Cheers, CP 21:25, 27 October 2007 (UTC)
hoy, i was wondering if you have a more acurate source for a new diagram of a procaryote cell, i was left rather unconfortable with the idea of the old one not being complete or acurate enough.. do you have anything i could use?- LadyofHats 10:29, 26 October 2007 (UTC)
I'm sorry, but the article has failed GA review. I have left constructive comments on the talk page, and I wish you and the other contributors well in your efforts to improve this article. Please do not hesitate to contact me if I can be of any assistance whatsoever. Have a wiki day! Mmoyer 03:10, 30 October 2007 (UTC)
Thanks for doing the switchover for this very helpful work. :: Kevinalewis : (Talk Page)/ (Desk) 09:50, 1 November 2007 (UTC)
![]() |
The E=mc² Barnstar | |
I, BorgQueen, award this barnstar to User:EncycloPetey for the tireless work on scientific articles. Please keep up the good work. 06:16, 2 November 2007 (UTC) |
By the way, I agree with your view on
WP:ACID. We need to change the system.
BorgQueen
06:16, 2 November 2007 (UTC)
I just added a new one, with the updated information, to the page. Cheers, heyjude. 02:43, 5 November 2007 (UTC)
Hi there, would you have any use for the admin tools? You seem very well-qualified if you wished to apply. Tim Vickers 22:20, 6 November 2007 (UTC)
See Wikipedia:Requests for adminship. Tim Vickers 22:34, 6 November 2007 (UTC)
Would you be able to search through all the articles currently assessed for WP:PLANTS and determine which ones are actually redirects? I've been finding assessments on redirect pages, and this seems like cleanup that could be automated--moving the assessment to the target talk page, or removing it if the target already has an assessment template. I'd do this myself except that I have so idea how to go about doing such a search or automating the replacement. -- EncycloPetey 16:38, 6 November 2007 (UTC)
-- PFHLai 07:49, 10 November 2007 (UTC)
-- PFHLai 08:16, 10 November 2007 (UTC)
...for reverting vandalism on my page Jackaranga 02:43, 13 November 2007 (UTC)
Hi Pete, re Liguus ... I got a bit confused by the current hook, as my reading of the article was that it wasn't clear that the colour/collecting caused the extinction .. and I wasn't sure that I wanted to make collecting sound appealing. Be that as it may (as these are minor failings as the article is the truth, not so much the hook),... Im not an admin so cannot make the change... but I don't object to it. Vic aka Victuallers 16:08, 13 November 2007 (UTC)
Hi there. I've linked the DYK item to some more articles as you suggested - all except the link to shell which I piped through to gastropod shell, see what you think - I've purged the changes through. Bobo . 16:14, 13 November 2007 (UTC)
And at the risk of putting a complete kibosh on your current 100% support rate, your Request for adminship is going rather well. Hopefully I'm not out of the realms of fortune to be wishing you premature congratulations on what I have witnessed from you in the past is going to be a very well-used set of tools - just a shame that this correction to the DYK column wasn't needed tomorrow, otherwise you could have done it yourself! What timing.
Congratulations. Bobo . 16:35, 13 November 2007 (UTC)
Hope I'm not too late, but I've been sick most of this past weekend and so haven't tried to do anything that involved too much thinking.
Could you photocopy some portions of the following article for me?
The portions I'm interested in are:
Thanks, -- EncycloPetey 16:23, 13 November 2007 (UTC)
Welcome to the DYK team!! Blnguyen ( bananabucket) 01:46, 14 November 2007 (UTC)
Congratulations! You are now an administrator! Secretlondon 01:48, 14 November 2007 (UTC)
-- Zzyzx11 (Talk) 15:56, 14 November 2007 (UTC)
No problem, I don't hold it against you. I moved the article into the namespace instead of copy-pasting. Is this proper form, or should I copy-paste next time? Also, in the case of an article which took so much work, it would probably be better to alert the author next time, though I realize this isn't always possible. Have a nice day! - Oreo Priest 17:08, 14 November 2007 (UTC)
Hi EncycloPetey, you might have noticed that your nomination was one of several others I made over that last week, this was partly spurred by the threat of IPs being allowed to create new pages, but also has a more general objective. This other reason for this effort was that I have been a little disturbed by a growing attitude that admins are more than just editors with a few more buttons on their toolbars and are instead "senior editors" with greater authority. I decided that the best way of dealing with this idea was to greatly expand the pool of admins to include a wider diversity of the pool of editors.
Since you have now passed the selection, could you in turn select and nominate some people you trust - I'd suggest aiming for about three over the next month or so. Of those who are selected, could you ask them in turn to select and nominate three candidates. Such a chain of trust should result, over time, in a greatly enlarged pool of admins and thus provide a simple and effective way of spreading the responsibility - perhaps to the point where becoming an admin is seen as normal and expected, rather than a major achievement. I hope you'll be able to help me with this. Thank you. Tim Vickers 22:11, 14 November 2007 (UTC)
Could you give a look to my last image the Image:Flagellum base diagram.svg.i had troubles finding good sources and i am not sure i got everything right - LadyofHats 20:11, 15 November 2007 (UTC)
Don't understand why you have reverted links to external sites which were added this evening (eg, tracking, orchids, ferns etc). All links were to non-commercial sites. The sites do not sell anything. They are purely informational in nature. They do have ads, which help to pay hosting costs. Have read guidelines for creating links to external sites and the links seem to be in line with this. The external sites have plenty of relevant supplementary information of value to visitors to Wikipedia. Please enlighten me. There must be something I am not understanding. Thank you very much!
With all due respect, you do need to take a much closer look at those websites. The Home Pages of those sites do not have a lot of info, as they are portals to the rest of each site, gateways to the extensive information behind it. They are most definitely not commercial sites with "mostly ad space". They do not exist for the purpose of placing ads. They are not commercial sites. They are packed with information, purely for the information's sake. Those sites were created and are maintained purely for the sharing of information, for the love of it, over many years. Truly a labour of love. Without any expectation of monetary return. (Hmmm, similar to Wikipedia?) The sole purpose of the ads is to offset hosting costs. The sites are not vehicles for ads. That is not their purpose. Having read "Wikipedia:External_links#Links normally to be avoided" the only possible criteria that could be used against these sites is #6, "Links to sites with objectionable amounts of advertising". And IF these sites come under that, well that is indeed a first in the many years that they have been online!! Normally the response to the sites is one of gratitude for sharing the information. I do undertand the concept of controlling spammers, as I have to deal with large number sof them on a daily basis in forums I administer. Spamming, I respectuflly submit, is most definitely not happening here, in my opinion. Perhaps the effort I am making in this inquiry is an indication of the sincerety of these claims? Thank you for taking the time to read my remarks.
Congratulations on your successful request for adminship. I am glad you passed, and you are welcome for the support. For information on using your new tools, see the school for new admins; you will find it very useful. Good luck! Acalamari 02:52, 23 November 2007 (UTC)
can you please unblock so i can add more well produced enteries? the raccoon from wiktionary thank you please inform that semperblotto does not like me as he calls me a vandal
this is urgent i got blocked by semperblotto why? the raccoon from wiktionary? maybe you could inform when i'am getting unblocked? -- Alaop ( talk) 23:19, 24 November 2007 (UTC)
Hi :-) I saw all your work on the plant stubs recently. Thanks for creating those other two stub types and updating the BotanyBot subpage. Much appreciated. I also wanted to check in and see if you had grabbed the pdf file off my website. I don't want to keep it up there for long since it technically is breaking copyright - publishing on the internet - but, how else is one to send a large file like that? Hope all is well. Cheers, Rkitko ( talk) 00:16, 25 November 2007 (UTC)
Do you know whether the importance ranking of Core is used only by the 1.0 assessment team (and realted teams) or whether it is general to all assessment projects? -- EncycloPetey ( talk) 17:38, 25 November 2007 (UTC)
My, these are a bit of a mess. I took a look around to see what families could be split from existing orders, and discovered that the problem is worse than that. Currently, the Rosales stub category includes all the Pittosporum stubs, but that genus is in the Apiales under APG II. The Malvales stub category includes many members of the Oxalidales. The Malpighiales includes lots of Cucurbitales. All of these seem to be the result of Polbot, so not only are the stubs wrong...the taxoboxes will be wrong as well. :P
I think a new {{ Cucurbitales-stub}} and {{ Oxalidales-stub}} will greatly reduce the size of some of the larger rosid stub categories, but it will involve hunting down the articles and fixing taxoboxes. I won't have much time for stub sorting the next couple of weeks, but have put in some notes, ideas, and suggestions on User:BotanyBot/Plant_stubs. And by the way, I don't think I ever properly thanked you for setting up that page. The Stub Sorting group used to keep track of the sizes of all the stub categories, but it just became too much work to maintain. I always thought it was a useful idea, so I'm glad to see it resurrected for the plant stubs, at least. -- EncycloPetey ( talk) 05:23, 26 November 2007 (UTC)
There is a DRV discussion here related to the Japanese citrus category that may benefit from your input in view of your contributions to the Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Plants. Thanks. -- Jreferee t/ c 20:38, 26 November 2007 (UTC)
Hi, the defination of genetic drift and mutuation has been copied from the article evolution, which is currently a featured article (recently featured). you might wish to raise the issue there also. i will try my best to re-write this whole article. Sushant gupta 14:21, 14 November 2007 (UTC)
firstly congrats you are now an admin, also can you please re-reviw the page. thanks, Sushant gupta ( talk) 10:45, 25 November 2007 (UTC)
No problem. I'll get right on that tomorrow, or depending when I get home tonight. I decided to take a small trip down to Cincinnati for a half-weekend for some sight-seeing and photography. I'll let you know when it's complete. Cheers, Rkitko ( talk) 13:57, 1 December 2007 (UTC)
Cariniana,
Couratari,
Eschweilera,
Gustavia (genus), and
Lecythis Done. And re: adminship, I appreciate the thought. I think the tools could be useful in some cases and I wouldn't mind helping clear backlogs where needed. Thanks!
Rkitko (
talk)
15:14, 2 December 2007 (UTC)
Hi,
Please revert any IPA redirects you think are inappropriate, or let me know if there's a particular category of article you object to changing. Readers have been complaining for years that the IPA is inaccessible, but I'm only trying to do this in cases where all the reader needs is help with a few symbols, such as 'the following chart uses symbols from the IPA'. That's the vast majority of cases, but I can't spend much time with any one article, so I've probably redirected the link where I shouldn't have. kwami 07:01, 3 December 2007 (UTC)
Thanks! That's good to hear. All the best Tim Vickers 18:52, 3 December 2007 (UTC)
You supported Sons and Lovers, which has been selected as the Novels WikiProject's new Collaboration of the Month. Please help improve this article towards featured article standard. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Kevinalewis ( talk • contribs) 10:25, 4 December 2007 (UTC)
Second time I've been accused of being uncivil in this RfA. I'm probably not helping TH at this point, but I think people (you and others) are pushing too hard to get perfection in a candidate, and using 'civility' as a way to throw off criticism of your opposition. In my view, long-term constructive editors with no history of vandalism or other abuse should enjoy the presumption of trustworthiness - and the trustworthiness of a user in the eyes of the community is what we are here to determine. Not 'is this user too wordy' or 'I disagree with the admin school and oppose because user participates'. Particularly not because someone failed to answer your optional question, or answered correctly but not in exactly the precise manner you were hoping for - many of these difficult questions with many answers are traps, intentionally or not. I won't be apologizing for criticizing your oppose, and I don't agree that my criticism has been uncivil. Avruch Talk 21:20, 6 December 2007 (UTC)
To quote WP:CIVIL: "For some people, it may be crucial to receive an apology from those who have offended them. For this reason, a sincere apology is often the key to the resolution of a conflict: an apology is a symbol of forgiveness. An apology is very much recommended when one person's perceived incivility has offended another."
Conversation ended. Please do not escalate this to WP:HARASS. I have asked you to stay away and not bother me, and you have already chosen once to disregard my request. Instead, you have returned to fan the flames of incivility. Please do not return to my talk page and please leave me alone. -- EncycloPetey 00:41, 7 December 2007 (UTC)
Hello EncycloPetey. This message is being sent to inform you that there currently is a discussion at Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents regarding an issue that you may be involved with. You are free to comment at the discussion, but please remember to keep your comments within the bounds of the civility and " no personal attack" policies. Thank you.
Good morning! I tried your "E-mail this user" link and just got This user has not specified a valid e-mail address, or has chosen not to receive e-mail from other users.. Do you have an alternative e-mail address you could swap in? That would tell us if it was a problem with the software or a problem with one specific e-mail address. Tim Vickers ( talk) 17:13, 7 December 2007 (UTC)
I've been sorting out the Salicaceae stubs, and now am updating taxonomy for all of Polbot's entries categorized in Category:Malpighiales stubs. I've come across two genera with many species that could use a bot fix. Neither genus is in the Malpighiales under APG II, so both the taxobox and stub need to be corrected for all the pages in the genera:
The latter also needs a genus page, and needs to have the genus link corrected. Right now, the genus for all these entries points to NASA via redirect. Should we use Nasa (genus), or commandeer Nasa from redirect to article, with a disambig link for the space agency? -- EncycloPetey ( talk) 03:51, 8 December 2007 (UTC)
Having seen your comment on the talk page, please have a look at the CFBS article now that I've finished adding the details of the rolling stock. Mjroots ( talk) 17:15, 11 December 2007 (UTC)
Sorry about jumping the gun. Dec 6 had no suitable hooks left. Dec 7 has some problem hooks but, you're right, there are a few suitable ones left. Maybe we should have ADYK (almost did you know) and not put it on the main page! Chergles ( talk) 23:42, 11 December 2007 (UTC)
If you like, I can handle passing out the credits, so that you don't have to congratulate yourself ;) -- EncycloPetey ( talk) 04:10, 12 December 2007 (UTC)
Mama always told her children that, when gifted with a delightful trinket or somesuch, one must immediately despatch a note of thanks to the donor. So, Mr EncycloPetey, one is most grateful for the small colourful addition that you contributed to one's User Page in reference to the Mold cape. One tries one's best to make this world a better place, be it by one's contributions to this establishment, or simply by one's glittering presence, which shines a little light on the drab and dreary lives of those around.
Princess Venetia di Cannoli ( talk) 10:05, 12 December 2007 (UTC)
I'm sorry to see that you took that off your user page. It was the singlemost memorable item the first time I visited your user page. I mention this because we just had what I would rate as Wiktionary's best edit ever. -- EncycloPetey ( talk) 05:47, 12 December 2007 (UTC)
I don't mind that you removed this from Next Update, but just to let you know you forgot to add it back to the nominations page, T:TDYK. Cirt ( talk) 23:27, 13 December 2007 (UTC).
-- Cirt ( talk) 05:15, 14 December 2007 (UTC)
-- Cirt ( talk) 05:15, 14 December 2007 (UTC)
-- Cirt ( talk) 05:15, 14 December 2007 (UTC)
![]() |
The 25 DYK Medal | |
Congratulations! Here's a medal for you in appreciation of your hardwork in creating, expanding and nominating 25+ articles for DYK. Keep up the good work, EncycloPetey ... I understand there are quite a few notable topics who still need an article! -- Victuallers ( talk) 17:46, 14 December 2007 (UTC) |
Did you know that one other DYK contributor was so keen to get a medal that he stubbed his toe? Victuallers ( talk) 17:46, 14 December 2007 (UTC)
DYK overdue! Chergles ( talk) 01:41, 15 December 2007 (UTC)
Thanks for uploading
Image:Iapt.gif. The media description page currently specifies that it is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a
claim of fair use. However, it is currently
orphaned, meaning that it is not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the media was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed.
You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that media for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see
our policy for non-free media).
If you have uploaded other unlicensed media, please check whether they're used in any articles or not. You can find a list of 'image' pages you have edited by clicking on the " my contributions" link (it is located at the very top of any Wikipedia page when you are logged in), and then selecting "Image" from the dropdown box. Note that all non-free media not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. BetacommandBot ( talk) 20:54, 15 December 2007 (UTC)
Welcome to Wikipedia. Although everyone is welcome to make constructive contributions to Wikipedia, at least one of your recent edits, such as the one you made to
Image:Iapt.gif, did not appear to be constructive and has been
reverted or removed. Please use
the sandbox for any test edits you would like to make, and take a look at the
welcome page to learn more about contributing to this encyclopedia. Thank you.
βcommand
21:10, 15 December 2007 (UTC)
Please stop. You should not have blocked a user you were in a dispute with, Betacommand did everything right (if a bit abrasively), and your block was not within policy. You also need to stop these sort of comments, as a whole they are starting to run into WP:AGF problems. So please calm down. Prodego talk 21:51, 15 December 2007 (UTC)
Your block was completely outside policy in that (a) Betacommand did nothing that would warrant blocking and (b) you clearly blocked him for his conduct in an dispute with you. I would hope you would appreciate that blocks should be issued by uninvolved admins wherever possible. Betacommand's hostility in response to your block is regretable but I'm afraid people do tend to be angry when on the receiving end of an improper use of the block button. I suggest you apologise to Betacommand for one of the more absurd blocks I have seen, and then he can apologise for the language he used to respond to it. WjB scribe 22:59, 15 December 2007 (UTC)
I've filled the next update page. Would you transclude it to the main page? Don't block me by mistake :) Archtransit ( talk) 21:35, 15 December 2007 (UTC)
Ok, but consider moving to the main page and let me or others award the credits to the hook authors. Archtransit ( talk) 22:01, 15 December 2007 (UTC)
Ok, I remove one. Archtransit ( talk) 22:06, 15 December 2007 (UTC)
Thank you. I think DYK helps article building. When I learned of DYK, I created some articles but now I try to let others get credit and gain enthusiasm. Archtransit ( talk) 22:27, 15 December 2007 (UTC)
Hi EncyclopPetey. I can see you've had a few problems with your blocks that you've made so far (I know there's only been about 5). Would you be interested in letting me mentor you to make sure everythings OK with respect to you tools? I can keep a check to make sure you're doing everything right, and give you advice if there's any concerns. You can also ask me any questions that you might have, and I'll help you wherever I can. What do you think? Ryan Postlethwaite 23:35, 15 December 2007 (UTC)
Very well, if Ryan is going to offer guidance on blocking I will leave this in his hands - I do think you should consider apologising to Betacommand but ultimately that's up to you. WjB scribe 00:05, 16 December 2007 (UTC)
Hi EncycloPetey, I want to talk through with you the problems with your block of Betacommand ( talk · contribs). The situation arose because you removed tags that BetacommandBot had added, leading to Betacommand reverting your edits as vandalism. This was obviously wrong, he shouldn’t have reverted you and then warned you for vandalism, it obviously wasn’t vandalism. I think the block was initially made in good faith, you blocked what you thought was a bot making edits that weren’t within the scope of it’s bot request. The problems came when the block was reverted as a good faith mistake, and you changed your story in an attempt to justify the block – This wasn’t the correct thing to do. You claimed that Betacommand was harassing you, yet all he was doing was reverting your edits to images which many would argue were wrong. This in effect meant you were in a content dispute with Betacommand and given your new reasoning for the block, you blocked him to stop him reverting you. If you look at the blocking policy, you will note that administrators should never block another user that they are in an edit dispute with – quite simply, you are nowhere near neutral enough to make the block. If a block was required, you should have reported it to WP:AN/I and let an uninvolved administrator make the block – in this case however, a block wasn’t even required, and problems could have been solved through discussion. When you’ve blocked someone like this, you have to expect them to be upset, and further problems came when you kept posting to his page – it antagonised the situation. In a nutshell, this became a serious matter when you changed your story, and said you blocked Betacommand for harassing you – edit disputes are not won by blocking the other party, and this kind of block is considered an extremely serious matter and grounds for further action if the behaviour continues. The advice I can give you if anything like this occurs again is to discuss the situation before acting, either with me, or with uninvolved admins on one of the noticeboards. In all your future blocks, you should be a neutral party and only make blocks with a deep foundation in policy. If I was you, I would concentrate on other admin areas and only block users where you are 100% certain a block is required such as for a vandalism only account. I hope this gives you some advice and will help you when making block decisions in the future. Best regards, Ryan Postlethwaite 17:57, 16 December 2007 (UTC)
I've been working on algae, but I messed up one of the references in the intro. You'll see it immediately. Please help! -- ♦♦♦Vlmastra♦♦♦ ( talk) 19:45, 16 December 2007 (UTC)
I just wanted to notify everyone that participated in the original CfD and the deletion review that there is a new CfD to reverse the proposed changes to the taxobox categories. Justin chat 05:16, 18 December 2007 (UTC)
-- Carabinieri ( talk) 22:22, 19 December 2007 (UTC)
Thank you for your support in my RfA. It was definitely a dramatic debate! I paid close attention to everything that was said, and, where possible, I will try to incorporate the (constructive) criticism towards being a better administrator. I'm taking things slowly for now, partially because it's the holiday season and there are plenty of off-wiki distractions. :) I'm also working my way through the Wikipedia:New admin school and double-checking the relevant policies, and will gradually phase into the use of the new tools. My main goals are to help out with various backlogs, but I also fully intend to keep on writing articles, as there are several more that I definitely want to get to WP:FA status! Thanks also for the puzzle on my talkpage, though I'll be honest that I haven't had a chance to work on it yet! I'll definitely take a look when I get some more time though. Unless you'd like to give a hint to speed things along? :) -- El on ka 10:56, 20 December 2007 (UTC)
Hi, thank you for your constructive criticisms on the Introduction to Evolution article. I am somewhat pleased with my orchid addition to counter the lack of plants. Give it a read if you get a chance. Also, I added variations in maize to artificial selection. Stumbled across an interesting web site on preserving genetic variations in corn. We stuck on necks out and went for the F/A status after making the edits. The commentary page should make for some interesting reading. Wish us luck! Cheers. -- Random Replicator ( talk) 15:50, 20 December 2007 (UTC)
-- Royalbroil 01:38, 21 December 2007 (UTC)
-- Royalbroil 06:20, 21 December 2007 (UTC)
I've signed up to review IAPT, nothing much is llikely to happen for a few days due to the festivities, but at least it's on the list. Merry Christmas, Jimfbleak ( talk) 14:45, 24 December 2007 (UTC)
Hey, thanks for the additional Colura refs. Appreciate it. I'll get around to expanding on the genus page perhaps after we tackle the collaboration project. The purpose of my message, though, is this. I got the idea to check out the WP:PLANTS assessment and noticed an odd unassessed-class/mid-importance article. Did a quick AWB intersection of the categories to find out that it was the Victoria amazonica article. Flipped on over to the talk page and... you had assessed the class three minutes earlier. And that same thing happened before, where you were getting to those talk pages and assessing the oddities faster than I. How do you do it?? :-) Rkitko ( talk) 01:01, 25 December 2007 (UTC)
I actually thought when i got up this morning that my changes had been too interventionist, so I've restored the text prior to my all edits, and commented on the talk page. Jimfbleak ( talk) 06:41, 25 December 2007 (UTC)
Glad to see you've decided to take up this article, WP:DINO looks forward to your comments! Sheep81 ( talk) 09:31, 27 December 2007 (UTC)
Dear EncycloPetey, here is a little note to say thank you for your kind support on my request for adminship which succeeded with a final result of (72/19/6).
Now that I am a sysop, do not hesitate to contact me with any queries you have. I would be glad to help you along with the other group of kind and helpful administrators.
Thank you again and I look forward to editing alongside you in the future. — E talk 12:24, 28 December 2007 (UTC)
I protected the page itself, didnt' realize that didn't work. I'll go and take care of uploading it then. Wizardman 18:45, 29 December 2007 (UTC)
Yo, what name is this image on Commons? Because it was deleted while still linked in an article but the name is different. Lara ❤ Love 19:14, 29 December 2007 (UTC)
I note that you have made no recent edits to IATP. Are you happy for me to review it as it stands? My intention is to clear this within the next two days anyway. Jimfbleak ( talk) 08:51, 30 December 2007 (UTC)
Do you really want to be part of a project that evaluates and gives recommendations and ranks and declares the importance of articles without having read the content? I don't to want to be involved with a group of people who work that way -- but I am new here. Perhaps you can sum up the advantages there are to being part of a project like that so that I can better understand the situation that put you there and keeps you working within the project.
I really like the upload page for commons uploads. It says It's all about freedom'. Have you seen that? Thanks -- Carol 01:19, 31 December 2007 (UTC)