I'll leave these articles to you. If you need help to move an article over an existing name (such as a redirect) for some reason, leave a note on my talk page. -- Donald Albury 12:38, 5 January 2011 (UTC)
Your addition to
Idotea balthica has been removed, as it appears to have added
copyrighted material to Wikipedia without
permission from the copyright holder. For
legal reasons, we cannot accept copyrighted text or images borrowed from other websites or printed material; such additions will be deleted. You may use external websites or publications as a source of information, but not as a source of article content such as sentences or images. Wikipedia takes copyright violations very seriously and persistent violators will be
blocked from editing.
VernoWhitney (
talk) 17:24, 6 January 2011 (UTC)
- Thank You! OK, I will change the text using the information from the mentioned sourses, but changing the sentences. Ykvach 20:58, 6 January 2011 (UTC)
Copyright problems with Voordelta
Hello. Concerning your contribution, Voordelta, please note that Wikipedia cannot accept copyrighted text or images obtained from other web sites or printed material, without the permission of the author(s). This article or image appears to be a direct copy from http://www.ecomare.nl/en/ecomare-encyclopedie/regions/north-sea/southern-north-sea/voordelta-e/. As a copyright violation, Voordelta appears to qualify for deletion under the speedy deletion criteria. Voordelta has been tagged for deletion, and may have been deleted by the time you see this message.
If you believe that the article or image is not a copyright violation, or if you have permission from the copyright holder to release the content freely under the Creative Commons Attribution/Share-Alike License (CC-BY-SA) then you should do one of the following:
- If you have permission from the author, leave a message explaining the details at
Talk:Voordelta and send an email with the message to permissions-en
wikimedia.org. See
Wikipedia:Requesting copyright permission for instructions. - If a note on the original website states that it is licensed under the CC-BY-SA license, leave a note at Talk:Voordelta with a link to where we can find that note.
- If you hold the copyright to the material: send an e-mail from an address associated with the original publication to permissions-enwikimedia.org or a postal message to the
Wikimedia Foundation permitting re-use under the
CC-BY-SA and
GFDL, and note that you have done so on
Talk:Voordelta.
- If you have permission from the author, leave a message explaining the details at
Talk:Voordelta and send an email with the message to permissions-en
However, for textual content, you may simply consider rewriting the content in your own words. While contributions are appreciated, Wikipedia must require all contributors to understand and comply with its copyright policy. Wikipedia takes copyright concerns very seriously, and persistent violators will be blocked from editing. Thank you. Vejvančický ( talk | contribs) 12:21, 3 February 2011 (UTC)
- Thank You! Sorry, I really used the text from the mentioned site. Now I have changed the information in the article. I think it should be OK, please check it... --
Ykvach 17:32, 3 February 2011 (UTC)
- It is OK now. Please, respect Wikipedia rules, your user talk page is full of copyvio warnings. Thanks for your understanding. -- Vejvančický ( talk | contribs) 15:46, 3 February 2011 (UTC)
Hi, can you please add reasoning to the relevant talk pages for moving articles to use the fish's common names, as per WikiProject Fishes guidelines? Kat ( talk) 11:43, 19 September 2011 (UTC)
- Hi! Thank You for the message! At this time I have no idea what should be necessary to add. The guidelines look very logical. But if I will have any idea, I will add it! Yours --
Ykvach (
talk) 13:08, 19 September 2011 (UTC)
- Hmm, maybe some reference supporting the common name as being very common or no other ones being used? To be honest, I'm not sure what would qualify either, unless there really are multiple common names being used for one species, but that would work to support not moving the article. I think even a "moved in accordance with WikiProject Fishes guidelines" might be better than nothing.
Kat (
talk) 13:36, 19 September 2011 (UTC)
- Sometime it is difficult to find the original reference to common name. But, we can use the rule, which is accepted by scientific journals, to use the vernacular names according to FishBase, www.fishbase.org (or any mirror). If the FishBase has no data about the verancular name of the fish, please use the scientific name, or add the reference (because in some cases the FishBase has not the full data about some species!). Would it be OK to add as a rule for Wiki? --
Ykvach (
talk) 13:54, 19 September 2011 (UTC)
- Yes, whatever is currently used in scientific journals works well. Actually, FishBase uses a lot of uncommon names as common names, especially for the aquarium fish (I am a fish keeper and FishBase is my favourite species reference, so I use it often). There was a discussion about this in the WikiPriject Fishes
archive. This is one of the reasons I personally support use of scientific names for species pages: common names are different in various parts of the world and change over short periods of time, while scientific names are the same everywhere.
Kat (
talk) 14:46, 19 September 2011 (UTC)
- You said below that FishBase uses the common names used in scientific papers, if this is the case, then I have to go back on what I said previously because many of these names are only common for a very small number of people! Kat ( talk) 13:15, 11 October 2011 (UTC)
- Yes, whatever is currently used in scientific journals works well. Actually, FishBase uses a lot of uncommon names as common names, especially for the aquarium fish (I am a fish keeper and FishBase is my favourite species reference, so I use it often). There was a discussion about this in the WikiPriject Fishes
archive. This is one of the reasons I personally support use of scientific names for species pages: common names are different in various parts of the world and change over short periods of time, while scientific names are the same everywhere.
Kat (
talk) 14:46, 19 September 2011 (UTC)
- Sometime it is difficult to find the original reference to common name. But, we can use the rule, which is accepted by scientific journals, to use the vernacular names according to FishBase, www.fishbase.org (or any mirror). If the FishBase has no data about the verancular name of the fish, please use the scientific name, or add the reference (because in some cases the FishBase has not the full data about some species!). Would it be OK to add as a rule for Wiki? --
Ykvach (
talk) 13:54, 19 September 2011 (UTC)
- Hmm, maybe some reference supporting the common name as being very common or no other ones being used? To be honest, I'm not sure what would qualify either, unless there really are multiple common names being used for one species, but that would work to support not moving the article. I think even a "moved in accordance with WikiProject Fishes guidelines" might be better than nothing.
Kat (
talk) 13:36, 19 September 2011 (UTC)
You recently moved Scorpaena papillosa to Red rock cod. There are nearly a dozen other common names for this fish. You also moved Red scorpionfish. This species has a very wide distribution, and so likely has other common names.
I much prefer the scientific name for the reason KittyKat states. If you have numerous sources showing a certain common name is predominantly used, fine. Otherwise, please avoid such moves. I intend on changing the above two back. Thank you for your understanding. Cheers. Anna Frodesiak ( talk) 15:30, 4 October 2011 (UTC)
- Hallo! I have moved these articles about scorpionfishes to vernaculare names according the rules of Wiki. As mentioned: Use the common name for any species that satisfies at least one of the following criteria: 1(i) The species has a single common name that is widely used and never used for any other species. While the species in question may have additional common names, those names are rarely used. Example: Greenland halibut. FishBase uses one vernacular name, which is most commonly used in scientific literature. Actually, in ichthiological scientific publication one of the rule is to use the vernacular and scientific names of fishes according to FishBase. My opionion is in the mentioned cases better to use vernacular names. -- Ykvach ( talk) 07:42, 5 October 2011 (UTC)
- Hello. I see. According to the rules of Wiki, you shouldn't have moved them in the first place. The reason is that
Scorpaena cardinalis and
Pseudophycis bachus are also called the red rock cod.
[1]
[2] Plus, Eastern Red Scorpionfish, is another name for
Scorpaena cardinalis. Also,
Scorpaena notata is also regionally called red scorpionfish. Actually, I would guess that lots of species are called red scorpionfish. So, I really think renaming such articles to red rock cod and Red Scorpionfish will cause confusion. Are you confused now? I am. Scientific names avoid all that.
Anna Frodesiak (
talk) 13:47, 5 October 2011 (UTC)
- Hallo Anna! Yes, I agree with you in the case of Scorpaena papillosa. This species has a lot of English names, and the name used in FishBase, red rock cod, also used for the other scorpionfishes. Scorpaena papillosa lives in Australia, I have never seen it, and I cannot discuss about what name is most common for this species. But I disagree about Scorpaena scrofa. This species is common in European waters, and good known as Red scorpionfish. Another name, Large-scaled scorpion fish, I found in Wiki for the first time. Now in FishBase I have found the other several vernacular names, such as Orange scorpionfish, which are probably used for this species somewhere. But I have never met it. Red scorpionfish is really main vernacular name of this species, also used in FAO documentation. Therefore I would like to use it as the article title. In the discussion on the page of WikiProject I used only Scorpaena scrofa. -- Ykvach ( talk) 14:04, 5 October 2011 (UTC)
- Hello. I see. According to the rules of Wiki, you shouldn't have moved them in the first place. The reason is that
Scorpaena cardinalis and
Pseudophycis bachus are also called the red rock cod.
[1]
[2] Plus, Eastern Red Scorpionfish, is another name for
Scorpaena cardinalis. Also,
Scorpaena notata is also regionally called red scorpionfish. Actually, I would guess that lots of species are called red scorpionfish. So, I really think renaming such articles to red rock cod and Red Scorpionfish will cause confusion. Are you confused now? I am. Scientific names avoid all that.
Anna Frodesiak (
talk) 13:47, 5 October 2011 (UTC)
- Hello my friend. I must say that I don't quite understand why you don't like the scientific names? Best,
Anna Frodesiak (
talk) 14:23, 5 October 2011 (UTC)
- No, You didnot understand me... I have nothing against the scientific names. It must be used in the cases where it is necessary. But common names are more useful for many of people. If the scientific name is adequate, it must be used. Actually, this is agree with the rules of Wiki, to use the comon name for the titles of articles. Also I would like to say, that scientific names are not very "stable". There are a lot of taxonomic revisions with the further name changes, which make confused even scientists. And I am trying to put all known scientific synonyms in the articles about fishes. And sometime it is very complecated. In this view vernacular names are more stable, then scientific. If someone called the species Red scorpionfish, it will be Red scorpionfish everytime, despite it was called Scorpaena barbata, S. barbata, S. lutea, S. natalensis, Scorpaenopsis natalensis, Sebastapistes scorfa. And despite, someone will probable describe it with any new scientific name, it will be Red scorpionfish! Ykvach ( talk) 14:46, 5 October 2011 (UTC)
- Hello my friend. I must say that I don't quite understand why you don't like the scientific names? Best,
Anna Frodesiak (
talk) 14:23, 5 October 2011 (UTC)
- I'm so sorry. I'm confused again.
- Please give me the link to your quoted guideline: "...1(i) The species has a single common name that is widely used and never used for any other species. While the species in question may have additional common names, those names are rarely used. Example: Greenland halibut...." I can't find it. I can find:
- Please tell me which species red scorpionfish is? I see at least two species called that. Are you saying we should pick one, and make a disambiguation page for the other(s)? Anna Frodesiak ( talk) 15:05, 5 October 2011 (UTC)
- Hallo! This is a link: guidelines. Someone posted the FishBase link to another species, named Red scorpionfish. Probably, we can make the disambination page, such as in case of Sardine, where to describe all Red scorpionfishes, also all Red rock cod. At this time we could wait for another ideas in WikiProject Fish page. Ykvach ( talk) 15:25, 5 October 2011 (UTC)
- Ah, I see. Thanks for the link. Strange place for guidelines. According to the section "Article titles", it's not really about primary sources saying what name is common. If various sources show the same name for different species, then the page ought not be moved, and a dab page/hatnote should be considered. A google search should determine which are appropriate candidates. I looked at your other page moves, and they seem fine.
- By the way, how does
http://www.marinespecies.org/ compare to fishbase? Cheers,
Anna Frodesiak (
talk) 16:04, 5 October 2011 (UTC)
- According to the WoRMS... It have much more mistakes, then FishBase (this one also has mistakes). I can say it as ichthyologist and found some mistakes related to my work. Another database related to marine life is SeaLife (about marine invertebrates), which is new, but useful. Ykvach ( talk) 17:39, 5 October 2011 (UTC)
- By the way, how does
http://www.marinespecies.org/ compare to fishbase? Cheers,
Anna Frodesiak (
talk) 16:04, 5 October 2011 (UTC)
- I'm not quite sure what you mean? Which is more complete? Which has more mistakes? Best, Anna Frodesiak ( talk) 02:41, 6 October 2011 (UTC)
- FishBase is more complete. Ykvach ( talk) 05:10, 6 October 2011 (UTC)
Hey Ykvach, I'm posting this message on your talk page because I noticed that you've recently created the new article Tuzly's Lagoon National Park--However, I think the article seems to contain a few errors: the article does not contain in-line citations, and so doesn't follow Wikipedia style guidelines. It would be great if you could also clean-up the related article Kumbrabow State Forest.
Kind regards and happy editing! Jipinghe ( talk) 04:45, 4 October 2011 (UTC)
- Thank You for the message! All the information in this article is taken from the Decree of the President of Ukraine No 1, 2010 (see "Source"). Because there ia only one source, I donot think it needs to be in-line cited. In any case, this article needs to be complete. I have forgotten to mention it as Stub... -- Ykvach ( talk) 06:50, 4 October 2011 (UTC)
Um... why have you moved Clownfish to Amphiprioninae, and was there a discussion before you made this rather radical move? -- Epipelagic ( talk) 08:32, 11 October 2011 (UTC)
- Hallo!
Clownfish is usually used for the genus
Amphiprion, but the subfamily consists also the genus
Premnas,
Maroon clownfish. I laso made a lot of changes in interwikis, because the page
Amphiprioninae had a lot of mistakes in interwiki, bacause it was named as
Clownfish and this names was linked to the genus in many cases.
Ykvach (
talk) 17:02, 13 October 2011 (UTC)
- Epipelagic, I can confirm that "clownfish" is used as a common name for the genus
Amphiprion and the genus
Premnas with regards to home aquaria.
Amphiprioninae also has a better information about clownfish than Amphiprion, which contains only a list of species that is already contained on Amphiprioninae. Ykvach, if you start a discussion on this subject to make sure the move stays, please let me know as I support it.
Kat (
talk) 09:05, 14 October 2011 (UTC)
- Hallo friends! I think, it is nevermind how to call the articles, but we might to make two defferent articles: about
Amphiprioninae and
Amphiprion as genus. Last one might describe the main characteristics of the genus. I just wanted to make it as stub to describe it later. If you think
Clownfish is better for
Amphiprioninae, OK, let it be. But in this case I donot know how to call
Amphiprion. The genus
Premnas consists of only one species,
Maroon clownfish, so the name is clear. Please make changes according your ideas, I will be in expedition for several weeks and cannot discuss, sorry. Thank You! --
Ykvach (
talk) 11:48, 14 October 2011 (UTC)
- I would call each of these by scientific name, then redirect clownfish to
Amphiprioninae or create a clownfish disambiguation page and point clownfish to that.
Kat (
talk) 14:01, 14 October 2011 (UTC)
- I vote for Disambination page! Thank You, Kat!
Ykvach (
talk) 14:28, 14 October 2011 (UTC)
- You should start a discussion on the clownfish talk page :) Kat ( talk) 13:35, 15 October 2011 (UTC)
- I vote for Disambination page! Thank You, Kat!
Ykvach (
talk) 14:28, 14 October 2011 (UTC)
- I would call each of these by scientific name, then redirect clownfish to
Amphiprioninae or create a clownfish disambiguation page and point clownfish to that.
Kat (
talk) 14:01, 14 October 2011 (UTC)
- Hallo friends! I think, it is nevermind how to call the articles, but we might to make two defferent articles: about
Amphiprioninae and
Amphiprion as genus. Last one might describe the main characteristics of the genus. I just wanted to make it as stub to describe it later. If you think
Clownfish is better for
Amphiprioninae, OK, let it be. But in this case I donot know how to call
Amphiprion. The genus
Premnas consists of only one species,
Maroon clownfish, so the name is clear. Please make changes according your ideas, I will be in expedition for several weeks and cannot discuss, sorry. Thank You! --
Ykvach (
talk) 11:48, 14 October 2011 (UTC)
- Epipelagic, I can confirm that "clownfish" is used as a common name for the genus
Amphiprion and the genus
Premnas with regards to home aquaria.
Amphiprioninae also has a better information about clownfish than Amphiprion, which contains only a list of species that is already contained on Amphiprioninae. Ykvach, if you start a discussion on this subject to make sure the move stays, please let me know as I support it.
Kat (
talk) 09:05, 14 October 2011 (UTC)
 New page patrol – Survey Invitation Hello Ykvach! The WMF is currently developing new tools to make new page patrolling much easier. Whether you have patrolled many pages or only a few, we now need to know about your experience. The survey takes only 6 minutes, and the information you provide will not be shared with third parties other than to assist us in analyzing the results of the survey; the WMF will not use the information to identify you.
Please click
HERE to take part. You are receiving this invitation because you have patrolled new pages. For more information, please see NPP Survey. Global message delivery 13:58, 26 October 2011 (UTC) |
Hi. When you change IW-link order on sv.wiki, see to it that it follows this order. -- Tegel ( talk) 19:25, 11 November 2011 (UTC)
The reason I restored the category is that there is a dispute. That means speedy deletion is not an appropriate means of deleting the category. Try WP:CfD instead. — Malik Shabazz Talk/ Stalk 21:30, 15 November 2011 (UTC)
Greetings! A stub template or category which you created has been nominated for renaming or deletion at Wikipedia:Stub types for deletion. The stub type most likely doesn't meet Wikipedia requirements for a stub type, through failure to meet standards relating to the name, scope, current stub hierarchy or likely size, as explained at Wikipedia:Stub. Please feel free to make any comments at WP:SFD regarding this stub type, and in future, please consider proposing new stub types first at Wikipedia:WikiProject Stub sorting/Proposals! This message is a boilerplate, left here as a courtesy, and should not be considered personal in nature.
Nice catch on Mytiloida! I just removed the Mya photo and had not gotten back to add an image there. Would you be interested in joining WikiProject Bivalvia? This is a new project. We could use another knowledgeable and interested person. Check it out. Shellnut ( talk) 16:27, 5 January 2012 (UTC)
- Thank You! Sorry for Mya! It was my mistake :) I will participate in the project. I have already made some corrections in the pages about Mytilids. The pages about
Mytilus,
Mytilidae,
Mytiloida,
Mussels, had a lot of mistakes in interwiki... --
Ykvach (
talk) 16:31, 5 January 2012 (UTC)
- Cool! Go to the project page and add yourself to the list. Welcome aboard!!! There is a lot of work to be done as the Bivalvia has not been touched much for years. We have got the higher level taxonomy up to date with the World Register of Marine Species and current literature, but below Order everything needs looked at. Shellnut ( talk) 20:30, 5 January 2012 (UTC)
.jpg)
|
Welcome!
A big Welcome to WikiProject Bivalves for you, a new member! We are a new WikiProject, small but mighty and we look forward to working with you to improve coverage of the bivalves. |
Shellnut ( talk) 22:14, 5 January 2012 (UTC)
Hallo! I'm sorry, all the pics of this species I have are already uploaded on Commons. I agree with your edit, the pic now is better! Regards-- Etrusko25 ( talk) 13:35, 3 March 2012 (UTC)
- Thank You! But I think the previous version was also good. Could you, please, upload both versions? -- Ykvach ( talk) 13:46, 3 March 2012 (UTC)
| Science lovers wanted! | |
|---|---|
 |
Hi! I'm serving as the wikipedian-in-residence at the Smithsonian Institution Archives until June! One of my goals as resident, is to work with Wikipedians and staff to improve content on Wikipedia about people who have collections held in the Archives - most of these are scientists who held roles within the Smithsonian and/or federal government. I thought you might like to participate since you are interested in the sciences! Sign up to participate here and dive into articles needing expansion and creation on our to-do list. Feel free to make a request for images or materials at the request page, and of course, if you share your successes at the outcomes page you will receive the SIA barnstar! Thanks for your interest, and I look forward to your participation! SarahStierch ( talk) 03:57, 21 April 2012 (UTC) |
Hello Ykvach,
I'm part of a team that is researching ways to help Wikipedia editors find interesting content to contribute to Wikipedia. More specifically, we are investigating whether content from news sources can be used to enhance Wikipedia editing. We have created a tool, called wikiFeed, that allows you to specify Twitter and/or RSS feeds from news sources that are interesting to you. wikiFeed then helps you make connections between those feeds and Wikipedia articles. We believe that using this tool may be a lot of fun, and may help you come up with some ideas on how to contribute to Wikipedia in ways that interest you. Please participate! To do so, complete this survey and follow this link to our website. Once you're there, click the "create an account" link to get started.
For more information about wikiFeed, visit our project page. If you have any questions, please feel free to ask via my talk page, or by email at wikifeedcc@gmail.com. We appreciate your time and hope you enjoy playing with wikiFeed!
Thanks! WorldsApart ( talk) 21:00, 25 July 2012 (UTC)
Message added 23:24, 20 August 2012 (UTC). You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.
The Bushranger One ping only 23:24, 20 August 2012 (UTC)
Check out Template talk:Infobox cape. 71.191.109.92 ( talk) —Preceding undated comment added 02:59, 9 October 2012 (UTC)
Please check if this edit is correct. Thanks in advance, They ( talk) 15:02, 13 October 2012 (UTC)
|
The Bivalve Barnstar | |
| This spiny Spondylus Barnstar is awarded to you Ykvach, in recognition of your 2012 work on the subject of bivalve mollusks as part of Wikipedia:WikiProject Bivalves, which is one year old today. Your efforts are much appreciated! Invertzoo ( talk) 18:25, 1 January 2013 (UTC) |
Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that you've added some links pointing to disambiguation pages. Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.
It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot ( talk) 11:58, 27 January 2013 (UTC)
Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Acanthocephala, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Tegument ( check to confirm | fix with Dab solver). Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.
It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot ( talk) 13:02, 3 February 2013 (UTC)
This is a seriously impressive list! Well done. How long did it take you to make it? Andrew 327 16:46, 3 February 2013 (UTC)
- Hallo! Thank you! But, to be true, I have taken the list from the German wiki. But it consists a lot of mistakes, so I have corrected some of them. Now I plan to finish this work, to correct all the mistakes and present the list as a table (same as the
List of fish of the Black Sea, which is really good done). So, now it is just a draft... but useful draft. Best wishes. --
Yuriy Kvach (
talk) 17:03, 3 February 2013 (UTC)
- Still, impressive work and a good contribution to the project.
Andrew
327 17:10, 3 February 2013 (UTC)
- Thank You, Andrew! I have started the correction in my page: User:Ykvach/List of fish of the North Sea. It will be really good, You'll see. -- Yuriy Kvach ( talk) 17:12, 3 February 2013 (UTC)
- Still, impressive work and a good contribution to the project.
Andrew
327 17:10, 3 February 2013 (UTC)
Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Spinycheek sleepers, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Shizuoka ( check to confirm | fix with Dab solver). Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.
It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot ( talk) 14:27, 14 March 2013 (UTC)
Hi, and thanks for your work. Please note that we don't normally link years, dates, or common terms. Cheers. Tony (talk) 03:34, 11 April 2013 (UTC)
Would you be interested to help me on this project? https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Global_Economic_Map
I am trying to duplicate this economic report for all 196 countries. Would you be willing to contribute by duplicating this model for another country?
United States: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:Mcnabber091/Economy_of_the_United_States
China: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:Mcnabber091/sandbox
Mcnabber091 ( talk) 05:14, 13 April 2013 (UTC)
- I am not sure I can help you, because I am not an economist, and understand in economy very bad... Sorry! -- Yuriy Kvach ( talk) 06:15, 13 April 2013 (UTC)
Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Common roach, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Victoria ( check to confirm | fix with Dab solver). Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.
It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot ( talk) 11:22, 23 June 2013 (UTC)
Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Linguistic imperialism, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Russian ( check to confirm | fix with Dab solver). Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.
It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot ( talk) 09:33, 11 November 2013 (UTC)
Category:Introduced saltwater fish, which you created, has been nominated for possible deletion, merging, or renaming. If you would like to participate in the discussion, you are invited to add your comments at the category's entry on the Categories for discussion page. Thank you. DexDor ( talk) 21:54, 17 January 2014 (UTC)
Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that you've added some links pointing to disambiguation pages. Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.
It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot ( talk) 08:57, 28 March 2014 (UTC)
Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Khadzhyder Lagoon, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Bezymyanka. Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.
It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot ( talk) 08:58, 5 July 2014 (UTC)
Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Bublyk Semen Pavlovych, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Great Famine. Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.
It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot ( talk) 09:01, 16 July 2014 (UTC)
Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that you've added some links pointing to disambiguation pages. Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.
It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot ( talk) 08:54, 23 July 2014 (UTC)
Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Mytilaster, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Gmelin. Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.
It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot ( talk) 09:24, 14 August 2014 (UTC)
Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Northern whitefin gudgeon, you added links pointing to the disambiguation pages Ilmen, Ladoga and Odra. Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.
It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot ( talk) 15:33, 5 November 2014 (UTC)
Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Don whitefin gudgeon, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Don River. Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.
It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot ( talk) 10:03, 12 November 2014 (UTC)
Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Hretska Ploshcha, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Market Square. Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.
It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot ( talk) 09:09, 6 January 2015 (UTC)
"Odessa Museum of Regional History" is the idiomatic way to say "Museum [in Odessa] of the history of Odessa Region" in English -- the region in question is implied by the location. "Odessa Museum of the Regional History", on the other hand, is not idiomatic English, and, for a native English speaker, raises the question "Odessa Museum of the Regional History of where?" If you are going to translate names, please use the correct local idiomatic form. -- The Anome ( talk) 21:59, 27 February 2015 (UTC)
- Thank You! Probably the correct title might be the Museum of the Regional History of Odessa. What do you think? --
Yuriy Kvach (
talk) 18:48, 28 February 2015 (UTC)
- You're welcome! Yes, that might also be acceptable, but it's not quite as idiomatic as "Odessa Museum of Regional History". The ambiguity in that formulation would be whether "of Odessa" referred to its location or the region the history attaches to: the first version elegantly allows the confusion to be elided in a way that the English reader would understand without needing to think about it: that the museum is in Odessa (from word ordering) and that the region in question was the region containing Odessa. --
The Anome (
talk) 01:31, 2 March 2015 (UTC)
- Ok, thank You for your consultation! I will leave in the presented form. -- Yuriy Kvach ( talk) 09:11, 2 March 2015 (UTC)
- You're welcome! Yes, that might also be acceptable, but it's not quite as idiomatic as "Odessa Museum of Regional History". The ambiguity in that formulation would be whether "of Odessa" referred to its location or the region the history attaches to: the first version elegantly allows the confusion to be elided in a way that the English reader would understand without needing to think about it: that the museum is in Odessa (from word ordering) and that the region in question was the region containing Odessa. --
The Anome (
talk) 01:31, 2 March 2015 (UTC)
Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Benthophilinae, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Eichwald. Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.
It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot ( talk) 09:01, 3 March 2015 (UTC)
Would you please, instead of edit warring, familiarize yourself with WP:RS. What you try to sell us as sources is not accepted in the English Wikipedia as reliable sources. If you are unhappy with this, please start discussion at the talk page of the article. Additionally, your edits clearly represent POV pushing. If you continue reverting, your account may be blocked from editing. Thank you for understanding.-- Ymblanter ( talk) 13:54, 1 April 2015 (UTC)
- I do not understand what edits do you mean! I could provide any link.-- Yuriy Kvach ( talk) 09:43, 21 November 2015 (UTC)
Hi,
You appear to be eligible to vote in the current
Arbitration Committee election. The
Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia
arbitration process. It has the authority to enact binding solutions for disputes between editors, primarily related to serious behavioural issues that the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the ability to impose
site bans,
topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The
arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail. If you wish to participate, you are welcome to
review the candidates' statements and submit your choices on
the voting page. For the Election committee,
MediaWiki message delivery (
talk) 14:25, 24 November 2015 (UTC)
Would you please stop moving pages on cities on territories not controlled by Ukraine without discussion. Ukraine does not control them, the new names are not locally recognized, and moves are therefore controvercial. These cities juct can not be moved without discussion. If you continue, blocks will be handed out. Thank you for understanding.-- Ymblanter ( talk) 12:09, 5 July 2016 (UTC)
- OK, sorry! Did you organise the discussion anywhere? --
Yuriy Kvach (
talk) 14:27, 5 July 2016 (UTC)
- No, we had a discussion for non-controversial RM's (and those cities were moved), but not for these ones.--
Ymblanter (
talk) 14:30, 5 July 2016 (UTC)
- Since you do not seem to get it, I opened a topic about you at ANI: Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents#Moves by User:Ykvach. You are welcome to defend your behaviour there.-- Ymblanter ( talk) 13:18, 14 July 2016 (UTC)
- No, we had a discussion for non-controversial RM's (and those cities were moved), but not for these ones.--
Ymblanter (
talk) 14:30, 5 July 2016 (UTC)
Чи не могли Ви бути так ласкаві допомогти з Talk:Sviatoshyn#St Nicholas church питанням.
TimeWaitsForNobody ( talk) 22:53, 5 November 2016 (UTC)
- Вітаю! Мабуть ні, я не знаю цієї церкви... -- Yuriy Kvach ( talk) 06:23, 9 November 2016 (UTC)
ArbCom Elections 2016: Voting now open!
Hello, Ykvach. Voting in the 2016 Arbitration Committee elections is open from Monday, 00:00, 21 November through Sunday, 23:59, 4 December to all unblocked users who have registered an account before Wednesday, 00:00, 28 October 2016 and have made at least 150 mainspace edits before Sunday, 00:00, 1 November 2016.
The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail.
If you wish to participate in the 2016 election, please review the candidates' statements and submit your choices on the voting page. MediaWiki message delivery ( talk) 22:08, 21 November 2016 (UTC)
Template:Fauna of Ukraine, 8(3) has been
nominated for deletion. You are invited to comment on the discussion at
the template's entry on the Templates for discussion page.
Frietjes (
talk) 21:33, 28 November 2016 (UTC)
Hi, please place a comment in support of the move Dnipropetrovsk to Dnipro at Talk:Dnipropetrovsk if you support it. Ales sandro ( talk) 15:52, 19 July 2017 (UTC)
Hello, Ykvach. Voting in the 2017 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23.59 on Sunday, 10 December. All users who registered an account before Saturday, 28 October 2017, made at least 150 mainspace edits before Wednesday, 1 November 2017 and are not currently blocked are eligible to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once.
The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail.
If you wish to participate in the 2017 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. MediaWiki message delivery ( talk) 18:42, 3 December 2017 (UTC)
Hello, Ykvach. Voting in the 2018 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23.59 on Sunday, 3 December. All users who registered an account before Sunday, 28 October 2018, made at least 150 mainspace edits before Thursday, 1 November 2018 and are not currently blocked are eligible to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once.
The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail.
If you wish to participate in the 2018 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. MediaWiki message delivery ( talk) 18:42, 19 November 2018 (UTC)
|
| Hello! Voting in the
2019 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23:59 on Monday, 2 December 2019. All
eligible users are allowed to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once.
The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail. If you wish to participate in the 2019 election, please review
the candidates and submit your choices on the
voting page. If you no longer wish to receive these messages, you may add |
|
| Hello! Voting in the
2020 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23:59 (UTC) on Monday, 7 December 2020. All
eligible users are allowed to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once.
The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail. If you wish to participate in the 2020 election, please review
the candidates and submit your choices on the
voting page. If you no longer wish to receive these messages, you may add |
Hello, Ykvach,
You've been an editor on Wikipedia for quite a while but I need to remind you that you can't simply put {{db}} on a page and have it deleted. You have to have a valid reason. Please review Criteria for Speedy Deletion for the existing criteria for speedy deletion. Whether you are using CSD, PROD or AFD, you need to indicate why a page should be deleted. If you still have questions, I encourage you to ask at the Teahouse. Liz Read! Talk! 04:33, 3 January 2021 (UTC)
Speedy deletion nomination of Category:Velyka Mykhailivka Raion
A tag has been placed on Category:Velyka Mykhailivka Raion requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section C1 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because the category has been empty for seven days or more and is not a disambiguation category, a category redirect, a featured topics category, under discussion at Categories for discussion, or a project category that by its nature may become empty on occasion.
If you think this page should not be deleted for this reason, you may contest the nomination by visiting the page and clicking the button labelled "Contest this speedy deletion". This will give you the opportunity to explain why you believe the page should not be deleted. However, be aware that once a page is tagged for speedy deletion, it may be deleted without delay. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag from the page yourself, but do not hesitate to add information in line with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. Liz Read! Talk! 16:37, 5 January 2021 (UTC)
|
| Hello! Voting in the
2021 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23:59 (UTC) on Monday, 6 December 2021. All
eligible users are allowed to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once.
The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail. If you wish to participate in the 2021 election, please review
the candidates and submit your choices on the
voting page. If you no longer wish to receive these messages, you may add |
Category:Wikipedians from Odessa has been nominated for renaming
Category:Wikipedians from Odessa has been nominated for renaming. A discussion is taking place to decide whether this proposal complies with the categorization guidelines. If you would like to participate in the discussion, you are invited to add your comments at the category's entry on the categories for discussion page. Thank you. — Michael Z. 15:40, 21 July 2022 (UTC)
Please do not move anything. The consensus prior to February was to keep old names of thos which were not controlled by the central government. Whereas it will obviously will need to be re-evaluated once the war is over and the situation has stabilized, it does not make sense to start a new discussion now. Ymblanter ( talk) 14:35, 18 September 2022 (UTC)
- OK, I have ceased! -- Yuriy Kvach ( talk) 14:37, 18 September 2022 (UTC)
...thus competent actions! Thanks! ☆☆☆—Pietadè Talk 19:40, 2 October 2022 (UTC)
Hello! Voting in the 2022 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23:59 (UTC) on Monday, 12 December 2022. All eligible users are allowed to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once.
The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail.
If you wish to participate in the 2022 election, please review
the candidates and submit your choices on the
voting page. If you no longer wish to receive these messages, you may add {{
NoACEMM}} to your user talk page.
MediaWiki message delivery (
talk) 01:11, 29 November 2022 (UTC)
Hello! Voting in the 2023 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23:59 (UTC) on Monday, 11 December 2023. All eligible users are allowed to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once.
The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail.
If you wish to participate in the 2023 election, please review
the candidates and submit your choices on the
voting page. If you no longer wish to receive these messages, you may add {{
NoACEMM}} to your user talk page.
MediaWiki message delivery (
talk) 00:39, 28 November 2023 (UTC)
Hello, Ykvach,
I've noticed you are doing a lot of recategorization of towns in the Ukraise so I thought I'd check in with you about this. If you could tell me why some of these towns went from urban to rural classification, that would be helpful. Thank you very much for your cooperation. Liz Read! Talk! 17:12, 19 March 2024 (UTC)
- Hello! The towns in Ukraine had official name "urban-type settlement" (from the Soviet times). But now they have got the name selyshche, which means 'rural settlement', see Populated_places_in_Ukraine#Rural_settlements. Now we are providing the necessary changes in the Ukrainian wiki, but I have started the change it also in the English one -- Yuriy Kvach ( talk) 17:25, 19 March 2024 (UTC)
- Indeed, urban-type settlement were deprecated in Ukraine in January, we are now doing the changed reflecting this. Ymblanter ( talk) 21:46, 19 March 2024 (UTC)
I am sorry to say this, but if you keep move-warring I will have to ask for a topic ban for you. All these moves are controversial and have to go through a RM. Please move them back and open individual RMs (ideally not all at once so that they could get sufficient attention). Ymblanter ( talk) 09:54, 11 April 2024 (UTC)
- OK, sorry, I have move it back! -- Yuriy Kvach ( talk) 10:20, 11 April 2024 (UTC)
Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. An automated process has detected that when you recently edited Reni urban hromada, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Reni. Such links are usually incorrect, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of unrelated topics with similar titles. (Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.)
It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, -- DPL bot ( talk) 17:53, 21 April 2024 (UTC)
I'll leave these articles to you. If you need help to move an article over an existing name (such as a redirect) for some reason, leave a note on my talk page. -- Donald Albury 12:38, 5 January 2011 (UTC)
Your addition to
Idotea balthica has been removed, as it appears to have added
copyrighted material to Wikipedia without
permission from the copyright holder. For
legal reasons, we cannot accept copyrighted text or images borrowed from other websites or printed material; such additions will be deleted. You may use external websites or publications as a source of information, but not as a source of article content such as sentences or images. Wikipedia takes copyright violations very seriously and persistent violators will be
blocked from editing.
VernoWhitney (
talk) 17:24, 6 January 2011 (UTC)
- Thank You! OK, I will change the text using the information from the mentioned sourses, but changing the sentences. Ykvach 20:58, 6 January 2011 (UTC)
Copyright problems with Voordelta
Hello. Concerning your contribution, Voordelta, please note that Wikipedia cannot accept copyrighted text or images obtained from other web sites or printed material, without the permission of the author(s). This article or image appears to be a direct copy from http://www.ecomare.nl/en/ecomare-encyclopedie/regions/north-sea/southern-north-sea/voordelta-e/. As a copyright violation, Voordelta appears to qualify for deletion under the speedy deletion criteria. Voordelta has been tagged for deletion, and may have been deleted by the time you see this message.
If you believe that the article or image is not a copyright violation, or if you have permission from the copyright holder to release the content freely under the Creative Commons Attribution/Share-Alike License (CC-BY-SA) then you should do one of the following:
- If you have permission from the author, leave a message explaining the details at
Talk:Voordelta and send an email with the message to permissions-enwikimedia.org. See
Wikipedia:Requesting copyright permission for instructions.
- If a note on the original website states that it is licensed under the CC-BY-SA license, leave a note at Talk:Voordelta with a link to where we can find that note.
- If you hold the copyright to the material: send an e-mail from an address associated with the original publication to permissions-enwikimedia.org or a postal message to the
Wikimedia Foundation permitting re-use under the
CC-BY-SA and
GFDL, and note that you have done so on
Talk:Voordelta.
- If you have permission from the author, leave a message explaining the details at
Talk:Voordelta and send an email with the message to permissions-en
However, for textual content, you may simply consider rewriting the content in your own words. While contributions are appreciated, Wikipedia must require all contributors to understand and comply with its copyright policy. Wikipedia takes copyright concerns very seriously, and persistent violators will be blocked from editing. Thank you. Vejvančický ( talk | contribs) 12:21, 3 February 2011 (UTC)
- Thank You! Sorry, I really used the text from the mentioned site. Now I have changed the information in the article. I think it should be OK, please check it... --
Ykvach 17:32, 3 February 2011 (UTC)
- It is OK now. Please, respect Wikipedia rules, your user talk page is full of copyvio warnings. Thanks for your understanding. -- Vejvančický ( talk | contribs) 15:46, 3 February 2011 (UTC)
Hi, can you please add reasoning to the relevant talk pages for moving articles to use the fish's common names, as per WikiProject Fishes guidelines? Kat ( talk) 11:43, 19 September 2011 (UTC)
- Hi! Thank You for the message! At this time I have no idea what should be necessary to add. The guidelines look very logical. But if I will have any idea, I will add it! Yours --
Ykvach (
talk) 13:08, 19 September 2011 (UTC)
- Hmm, maybe some reference supporting the common name as being very common or no other ones being used? To be honest, I'm not sure what would qualify either, unless there really are multiple common names being used for one species, but that would work to support not moving the article. I think even a "moved in accordance with WikiProject Fishes guidelines" might be better than nothing.
Kat (
talk) 13:36, 19 September 2011 (UTC)
- Sometime it is difficult to find the original reference to common name. But, we can use the rule, which is accepted by scientific journals, to use the vernacular names according to FishBase, www.fishbase.org (or any mirror). If the FishBase has no data about the verancular name of the fish, please use the scientific name, or add the reference (because in some cases the FishBase has not the full data about some species!). Would it be OK to add as a rule for Wiki? --
Ykvach (
talk) 13:54, 19 September 2011 (UTC)
- Yes, whatever is currently used in scientific journals works well. Actually, FishBase uses a lot of uncommon names as common names, especially for the aquarium fish (I am a fish keeper and FishBase is my favourite species reference, so I use it often). There was a discussion about this in the WikiPriject Fishes
archive. This is one of the reasons I personally support use of scientific names for species pages: common names are different in various parts of the world and change over short periods of time, while scientific names are the same everywhere.
Kat (
talk) 14:46, 19 September 2011 (UTC)
- You said below that FishBase uses the common names used in scientific papers, if this is the case, then I have to go back on what I said previously because many of these names are only common for a very small number of people! Kat ( talk) 13:15, 11 October 2011 (UTC)
- Yes, whatever is currently used in scientific journals works well. Actually, FishBase uses a lot of uncommon names as common names, especially for the aquarium fish (I am a fish keeper and FishBase is my favourite species reference, so I use it often). There was a discussion about this in the WikiPriject Fishes
archive. This is one of the reasons I personally support use of scientific names for species pages: common names are different in various parts of the world and change over short periods of time, while scientific names are the same everywhere.
Kat (
talk) 14:46, 19 September 2011 (UTC)
- Sometime it is difficult to find the original reference to common name. But, we can use the rule, which is accepted by scientific journals, to use the vernacular names according to FishBase, www.fishbase.org (or any mirror). If the FishBase has no data about the verancular name of the fish, please use the scientific name, or add the reference (because in some cases the FishBase has not the full data about some species!). Would it be OK to add as a rule for Wiki? --
Ykvach (
talk) 13:54, 19 September 2011 (UTC)
- Hmm, maybe some reference supporting the common name as being very common or no other ones being used? To be honest, I'm not sure what would qualify either, unless there really are multiple common names being used for one species, but that would work to support not moving the article. I think even a "moved in accordance with WikiProject Fishes guidelines" might be better than nothing.
Kat (
talk) 13:36, 19 September 2011 (UTC)
You recently moved Scorpaena papillosa to Red rock cod. There are nearly a dozen other common names for this fish. You also moved Red scorpionfish. This species has a very wide distribution, and so likely has other common names.
I much prefer the scientific name for the reason KittyKat states. If you have numerous sources showing a certain common name is predominantly used, fine. Otherwise, please avoid such moves. I intend on changing the above two back. Thank you for your understanding. Cheers. Anna Frodesiak ( talk) 15:30, 4 October 2011 (UTC)
- Hallo! I have moved these articles about scorpionfishes to vernaculare names according the rules of Wiki. As mentioned: Use the common name for any species that satisfies at least one of the following criteria: 1(i) The species has a single common name that is widely used and never used for any other species. While the species in question may have additional common names, those names are rarely used. Example: Greenland halibut. FishBase uses one vernacular name, which is most commonly used in scientific literature. Actually, in ichthiological scientific publication one of the rule is to use the vernacular and scientific names of fishes according to FishBase. My opionion is in the mentioned cases better to use vernacular names. -- Ykvach ( talk) 07:42, 5 October 2011 (UTC)
- Hello. I see. According to the rules of Wiki, you shouldn't have moved them in the first place. The reason is that
Scorpaena cardinalis and
Pseudophycis bachus are also called the red rock cod.
[1]
[2] Plus, Eastern Red Scorpionfish, is another name for
Scorpaena cardinalis. Also,
Scorpaena notata is also regionally called red scorpionfish. Actually, I would guess that lots of species are called red scorpionfish. So, I really think renaming such articles to red rock cod and Red Scorpionfish will cause confusion. Are you confused now? I am. Scientific names avoid all that.
Anna Frodesiak (
talk) 13:47, 5 October 2011 (UTC)
- Hallo Anna! Yes, I agree with you in the case of Scorpaena papillosa. This species has a lot of English names, and the name used in FishBase, red rock cod, also used for the other scorpionfishes. Scorpaena papillosa lives in Australia, I have never seen it, and I cannot discuss about what name is most common for this species. But I disagree about Scorpaena scrofa. This species is common in European waters, and good known as Red scorpionfish. Another name, Large-scaled scorpion fish, I found in Wiki for the first time. Now in FishBase I have found the other several vernacular names, such as Orange scorpionfish, which are probably used for this species somewhere. But I have never met it. Red scorpionfish is really main vernacular name of this species, also used in FAO documentation. Therefore I would like to use it as the article title. In the discussion on the page of WikiProject I used only Scorpaena scrofa. -- Ykvach ( talk) 14:04, 5 October 2011 (UTC)
- Hello. I see. According to the rules of Wiki, you shouldn't have moved them in the first place. The reason is that
Scorpaena cardinalis and
Pseudophycis bachus are also called the red rock cod.
[1]
[2] Plus, Eastern Red Scorpionfish, is another name for
Scorpaena cardinalis. Also,
Scorpaena notata is also regionally called red scorpionfish. Actually, I would guess that lots of species are called red scorpionfish. So, I really think renaming such articles to red rock cod and Red Scorpionfish will cause confusion. Are you confused now? I am. Scientific names avoid all that.
Anna Frodesiak (
talk) 13:47, 5 October 2011 (UTC)
- Hello my friend. I must say that I don't quite understand why you don't like the scientific names? Best,
Anna Frodesiak (
talk) 14:23, 5 October 2011 (UTC)
- No, You didnot understand me... I have nothing against the scientific names. It must be used in the cases where it is necessary. But common names are more useful for many of people. If the scientific name is adequate, it must be used. Actually, this is agree with the rules of Wiki, to use the comon name for the titles of articles. Also I would like to say, that scientific names are not very "stable". There are a lot of taxonomic revisions with the further name changes, which make confused even scientists. And I am trying to put all known scientific synonyms in the articles about fishes. And sometime it is very complecated. In this view vernacular names are more stable, then scientific. If someone called the species Red scorpionfish, it will be Red scorpionfish everytime, despite it was called Scorpaena barbata, S. barbata, S. lutea, S. natalensis, Scorpaenopsis natalensis, Sebastapistes scorfa. And despite, someone will probable describe it with any new scientific name, it will be Red scorpionfish! Ykvach ( talk) 14:46, 5 October 2011 (UTC)
- Hello my friend. I must say that I don't quite understand why you don't like the scientific names? Best,
Anna Frodesiak (
talk) 14:23, 5 October 2011 (UTC)
- I'm so sorry. I'm confused again.
- Please give me the link to your quoted guideline: "...1(i) The species has a single common name that is widely used and never used for any other species. While the species in question may have additional common names, those names are rarely used. Example: Greenland halibut...." I can't find it. I can find:
- Please tell me which species red scorpionfish is? I see at least two species called that. Are you saying we should pick one, and make a disambiguation page for the other(s)? Anna Frodesiak ( talk) 15:05, 5 October 2011 (UTC)
- Hallo! This is a link: guidelines. Someone posted the FishBase link to another species, named Red scorpionfish. Probably, we can make the disambination page, such as in case of Sardine, where to describe all Red scorpionfishes, also all Red rock cod. At this time we could wait for another ideas in WikiProject Fish page. Ykvach ( talk) 15:25, 5 October 2011 (UTC)
- Ah, I see. Thanks for the link. Strange place for guidelines. According to the section "Article titles", it's not really about primary sources saying what name is common. If various sources show the same name for different species, then the page ought not be moved, and a dab page/hatnote should be considered. A google search should determine which are appropriate candidates. I looked at your other page moves, and they seem fine.
- By the way, how does
http://www.marinespecies.org/ compare to fishbase? Cheers,
Anna Frodesiak (
talk) 16:04, 5 October 2011 (UTC)
- According to the WoRMS... It have much more mistakes, then FishBase (this one also has mistakes). I can say it as ichthyologist and found some mistakes related to my work. Another database related to marine life is SeaLife (about marine invertebrates), which is new, but useful. Ykvach ( talk) 17:39, 5 October 2011 (UTC)
- By the way, how does
http://www.marinespecies.org/ compare to fishbase? Cheers,
Anna Frodesiak (
talk) 16:04, 5 October 2011 (UTC)
- I'm not quite sure what you mean? Which is more complete? Which has more mistakes? Best, Anna Frodesiak ( talk) 02:41, 6 October 2011 (UTC)
- FishBase is more complete. Ykvach ( talk) 05:10, 6 October 2011 (UTC)
Hey Ykvach, I'm posting this message on your talk page because I noticed that you've recently created the new article Tuzly's Lagoon National Park--However, I think the article seems to contain a few errors: the article does not contain in-line citations, and so doesn't follow Wikipedia style guidelines. It would be great if you could also clean-up the related article Kumbrabow State Forest.
Kind regards and happy editing! Jipinghe ( talk) 04:45, 4 October 2011 (UTC)
- Thank You for the message! All the information in this article is taken from the Decree of the President of Ukraine No 1, 2010 (see "Source"). Because there ia only one source, I donot think it needs to be in-line cited. In any case, this article needs to be complete. I have forgotten to mention it as Stub... -- Ykvach ( talk) 06:50, 4 October 2011 (UTC)
Um... why have you moved Clownfish to Amphiprioninae, and was there a discussion before you made this rather radical move? -- Epipelagic ( talk) 08:32, 11 October 2011 (UTC)
- Hallo!
Clownfish is usually used for the genus
Amphiprion, but the subfamily consists also the genus
Premnas,
Maroon clownfish. I laso made a lot of changes in interwikis, because the page
Amphiprioninae had a lot of mistakes in interwiki, bacause it was named as
Clownfish and this names was linked to the genus in many cases.
Ykvach (
talk) 17:02, 13 October 2011 (UTC)
- Epipelagic, I can confirm that "clownfish" is used as a common name for the genus
Amphiprion and the genus
Premnas with regards to home aquaria.
Amphiprioninae also has a better information about clownfish than Amphiprion, which contains only a list of species that is already contained on Amphiprioninae. Ykvach, if you start a discussion on this subject to make sure the move stays, please let me know as I support it.
Kat (
talk) 09:05, 14 October 2011 (UTC)
- Hallo friends! I think, it is nevermind how to call the articles, but we might to make two defferent articles: about
Amphiprioninae and
Amphiprion as genus. Last one might describe the main characteristics of the genus. I just wanted to make it as stub to describe it later. If you think
Clownfish is better for
Amphiprioninae, OK, let it be. But in this case I donot know how to call
Amphiprion. The genus
Premnas consists of only one species,
Maroon clownfish, so the name is clear. Please make changes according your ideas, I will be in expedition for several weeks and cannot discuss, sorry. Thank You! --
Ykvach (
talk) 11:48, 14 October 2011 (UTC)
- I would call each of these by scientific name, then redirect clownfish to
Amphiprioninae or create a clownfish disambiguation page and point clownfish to that.
Kat (
talk) 14:01, 14 October 2011 (UTC)
- I vote for Disambination page! Thank You, Kat!
Ykvach (
talk) 14:28, 14 October 2011 (UTC)
- You should start a discussion on the clownfish talk page :) Kat ( talk) 13:35, 15 October 2011 (UTC)
- I vote for Disambination page! Thank You, Kat!
Ykvach (
talk) 14:28, 14 October 2011 (UTC)
- I would call each of these by scientific name, then redirect clownfish to
Amphiprioninae or create a clownfish disambiguation page and point clownfish to that.
Kat (
talk) 14:01, 14 October 2011 (UTC)
- Hallo friends! I think, it is nevermind how to call the articles, but we might to make two defferent articles: about
Amphiprioninae and
Amphiprion as genus. Last one might describe the main characteristics of the genus. I just wanted to make it as stub to describe it later. If you think
Clownfish is better for
Amphiprioninae, OK, let it be. But in this case I donot know how to call
Amphiprion. The genus
Premnas consists of only one species,
Maroon clownfish, so the name is clear. Please make changes according your ideas, I will be in expedition for several weeks and cannot discuss, sorry. Thank You! --
Ykvach (
talk) 11:48, 14 October 2011 (UTC)
- Epipelagic, I can confirm that "clownfish" is used as a common name for the genus
Amphiprion and the genus
Premnas with regards to home aquaria.
Amphiprioninae also has a better information about clownfish than Amphiprion, which contains only a list of species that is already contained on Amphiprioninae. Ykvach, if you start a discussion on this subject to make sure the move stays, please let me know as I support it.
Kat (
talk) 09:05, 14 October 2011 (UTC)
New page patrol – Survey Invitation Hello Ykvach! The WMF is currently developing new tools to make new page patrolling much easier. Whether you have patrolled many pages or only a few, we now need to know about your experience. The survey takes only 6 minutes, and the information you provide will not be shared with third parties other than to assist us in analyzing the results of the survey; the WMF will not use the information to identify you.
Please click
HERE to take part. You are receiving this invitation because you have patrolled new pages. For more information, please see NPP Survey. Global message delivery 13:58, 26 October 2011 (UTC) |
Hi. When you change IW-link order on sv.wiki, see to it that it follows this order. -- Tegel ( talk) 19:25, 11 November 2011 (UTC)
The reason I restored the category is that there is a dispute. That means speedy deletion is not an appropriate means of deleting the category. Try WP:CfD instead. — Malik Shabazz Talk/ Stalk 21:30, 15 November 2011 (UTC)
Greetings! A stub template or category which you created has been nominated for renaming or deletion at Wikipedia:Stub types for deletion. The stub type most likely doesn't meet Wikipedia requirements for a stub type, through failure to meet standards relating to the name, scope, current stub hierarchy or likely size, as explained at Wikipedia:Stub. Please feel free to make any comments at WP:SFD regarding this stub type, and in future, please consider proposing new stub types first at Wikipedia:WikiProject Stub sorting/Proposals! This message is a boilerplate, left here as a courtesy, and should not be considered personal in nature.
Nice catch on Mytiloida! I just removed the Mya photo and had not gotten back to add an image there. Would you be interested in joining WikiProject Bivalvia? This is a new project. We could use another knowledgeable and interested person. Check it out. Shellnut ( talk) 16:27, 5 January 2012 (UTC)
- Thank You! Sorry for Mya! It was my mistake :) I will participate in the project. I have already made some corrections in the pages about Mytilids. The pages about
Mytilus,
Mytilidae,
Mytiloida,
Mussels, had a lot of mistakes in interwiki... --
Ykvach (
talk) 16:31, 5 January 2012 (UTC)
- Cool! Go to the project page and add yourself to the list. Welcome aboard!!! There is a lot of work to be done as the Bivalvia has not been touched much for years. We have got the higher level taxonomy up to date with the World Register of Marine Species and current literature, but below Order everything needs looked at. Shellnut ( talk) 20:30, 5 January 2012 (UTC)
|
|
Welcome!
A big Welcome to WikiProject Bivalves for you, a new member! We are a new WikiProject, small but mighty and we look forward to working with you to improve coverage of the bivalves. |
Shellnut ( talk) 22:14, 5 January 2012 (UTC)
Hallo! I'm sorry, all the pics of this species I have are already uploaded on Commons. I agree with your edit, the pic now is better! Regards-- Etrusko25 ( talk) 13:35, 3 March 2012 (UTC)
- Thank You! But I think the previous version was also good. Could you, please, upload both versions? -- Ykvach ( talk) 13:46, 3 March 2012 (UTC)
| Science lovers wanted! | |
|---|---|
|
Hi! I'm serving as the wikipedian-in-residence at the Smithsonian Institution Archives until June! One of my goals as resident, is to work with Wikipedians and staff to improve content on Wikipedia about people who have collections held in the Archives - most of these are scientists who held roles within the Smithsonian and/or federal government. I thought you might like to participate since you are interested in the sciences! Sign up to participate here and dive into articles needing expansion and creation on our to-do list. Feel free to make a request for images or materials at the request page, and of course, if you share your successes at the outcomes page you will receive the SIA barnstar! Thanks for your interest, and I look forward to your participation! SarahStierch ( talk) 03:57, 21 April 2012 (UTC) |
Hello Ykvach,
I'm part of a team that is researching ways to help Wikipedia editors find interesting content to contribute to Wikipedia. More specifically, we are investigating whether content from news sources can be used to enhance Wikipedia editing. We have created a tool, called wikiFeed, that allows you to specify Twitter and/or RSS feeds from news sources that are interesting to you. wikiFeed then helps you make connections between those feeds and Wikipedia articles. We believe that using this tool may be a lot of fun, and may help you come up with some ideas on how to contribute to Wikipedia in ways that interest you. Please participate! To do so, complete this survey and follow this link to our website. Once you're there, click the "create an account" link to get started.
For more information about wikiFeed, visit our project page. If you have any questions, please feel free to ask via my talk page, or by email at wikifeedcc@gmail.com. We appreciate your time and hope you enjoy playing with wikiFeed!
Thanks! WorldsApart ( talk) 21:00, 25 July 2012 (UTC)
Message added 23:24, 20 August 2012 (UTC). You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.
The Bushranger One ping only 23:24, 20 August 2012 (UTC)
Check out Template talk:Infobox cape. 71.191.109.92 ( talk) —Preceding undated comment added 02:59, 9 October 2012 (UTC)
Please check if this edit is correct. Thanks in advance, They ( talk) 15:02, 13 October 2012 (UTC)
|
|
The Bivalve Barnstar | |
| This spiny Spondylus Barnstar is awarded to you Ykvach, in recognition of your 2012 work on the subject of bivalve mollusks as part of Wikipedia:WikiProject Bivalves, which is one year old today. Your efforts are much appreciated! Invertzoo ( talk) 18:25, 1 January 2013 (UTC) |
Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that you've added some links pointing to disambiguation pages. Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.
It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot ( talk) 11:58, 27 January 2013 (UTC)
Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Acanthocephala, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Tegument ( check to confirm | fix with Dab solver). Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.
It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot ( talk) 13:02, 3 February 2013 (UTC)
This is a seriously impressive list! Well done. How long did it take you to make it? Andrew 327 16:46, 3 February 2013 (UTC)
- Hallo! Thank you! But, to be true, I have taken the list from the German wiki. But it consists a lot of mistakes, so I have corrected some of them. Now I plan to finish this work, to correct all the mistakes and present the list as a table (same as the
List of fish of the Black Sea, which is really good done). So, now it is just a draft... but useful draft. Best wishes. --
Yuriy Kvach (
talk) 17:03, 3 February 2013 (UTC)
- Still, impressive work and a good contribution to the project.
Andrew
327 17:10, 3 February 2013 (UTC)
- Thank You, Andrew! I have started the correction in my page: User:Ykvach/List of fish of the North Sea. It will be really good, You'll see. -- Yuriy Kvach ( talk) 17:12, 3 February 2013 (UTC)
- Still, impressive work and a good contribution to the project.
Andrew
327 17:10, 3 February 2013 (UTC)
Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Spinycheek sleepers, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Shizuoka ( check to confirm | fix with Dab solver). Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.
It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot ( talk) 14:27, 14 March 2013 (UTC)
Hi, and thanks for your work. Please note that we don't normally link years, dates, or common terms. Cheers. Tony (talk) 03:34, 11 April 2013 (UTC)
Would you be interested to help me on this project? https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Global_Economic_Map
I am trying to duplicate this economic report for all 196 countries. Would you be willing to contribute by duplicating this model for another country?
United States: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:Mcnabber091/Economy_of_the_United_States
China: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:Mcnabber091/sandbox
Mcnabber091 ( talk) 05:14, 13 April 2013 (UTC)
- I am not sure I can help you, because I am not an economist, and understand in economy very bad... Sorry! -- Yuriy Kvach ( talk) 06:15, 13 April 2013 (UTC)
Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Common roach, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Victoria ( check to confirm | fix with Dab solver). Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.
It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot ( talk) 11:22, 23 June 2013 (UTC)
Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Linguistic imperialism, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Russian ( check to confirm | fix with Dab solver). Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.
It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot ( talk) 09:33, 11 November 2013 (UTC)
Category:Introduced saltwater fish, which you created, has been nominated for possible deletion, merging, or renaming. If you would like to participate in the discussion, you are invited to add your comments at the category's entry on the Categories for discussion page. Thank you. DexDor ( talk) 21:54, 17 January 2014 (UTC)
Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that you've added some links pointing to disambiguation pages. Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.
It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot ( talk) 08:57, 28 March 2014 (UTC)
Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Khadzhyder Lagoon, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Bezymyanka. Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.
It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot ( talk) 08:58, 5 July 2014 (UTC)
Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Bublyk Semen Pavlovych, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Great Famine. Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.
It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot ( talk) 09:01, 16 July 2014 (UTC)
Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that you've added some links pointing to disambiguation pages. Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.
It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot ( talk) 08:54, 23 July 2014 (UTC)
Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Mytilaster, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Gmelin. Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.
It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot ( talk) 09:24, 14 August 2014 (UTC)
Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Northern whitefin gudgeon, you added links pointing to the disambiguation pages Ilmen, Ladoga and Odra. Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.
It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot ( talk) 15:33, 5 November 2014 (UTC)
Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Don whitefin gudgeon, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Don River. Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.
It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot ( talk) 10:03, 12 November 2014 (UTC)
Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Hretska Ploshcha, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Market Square. Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.
It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot ( talk) 09:09, 6 January 2015 (UTC)
"Odessa Museum of Regional History" is the idiomatic way to say "Museum [in Odessa] of the history of Odessa Region" in English -- the region in question is implied by the location. "Odessa Museum of the Regional History", on the other hand, is not idiomatic English, and, for a native English speaker, raises the question "Odessa Museum of the Regional History of where?" If you are going to translate names, please use the correct local idiomatic form. -- The Anome ( talk) 21:59, 27 February 2015 (UTC)
- Thank You! Probably the correct title might be the Museum of the Regional History of Odessa. What do you think? --
Yuriy Kvach (
talk) 18:48, 28 February 2015 (UTC)
- You're welcome! Yes, that might also be acceptable, but it's not quite as idiomatic as "Odessa Museum of Regional History". The ambiguity in that formulation would be whether "of Odessa" referred to its location or the region the history attaches to: the first version elegantly allows the confusion to be elided in a way that the English reader would understand without needing to think about it: that the museum is in Odessa (from word ordering) and that the region in question was the region containing Odessa. --
The Anome (
talk) 01:31, 2 March 2015 (UTC)
- Ok, thank You for your consultation! I will leave in the presented form. -- Yuriy Kvach ( talk) 09:11, 2 March 2015 (UTC)
- You're welcome! Yes, that might also be acceptable, but it's not quite as idiomatic as "Odessa Museum of Regional History". The ambiguity in that formulation would be whether "of Odessa" referred to its location or the region the history attaches to: the first version elegantly allows the confusion to be elided in a way that the English reader would understand without needing to think about it: that the museum is in Odessa (from word ordering) and that the region in question was the region containing Odessa. --
The Anome (
talk) 01:31, 2 March 2015 (UTC)
Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Benthophilinae, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Eichwald. Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.
It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot ( talk) 09:01, 3 March 2015 (UTC)
Would you please, instead of edit warring, familiarize yourself with WP:RS. What you try to sell us as sources is not accepted in the English Wikipedia as reliable sources. If you are unhappy with this, please start discussion at the talk page of the article. Additionally, your edits clearly represent POV pushing. If you continue reverting, your account may be blocked from editing. Thank you for understanding.-- Ymblanter ( talk) 13:54, 1 April 2015 (UTC)
- I do not understand what edits do you mean! I could provide any link.-- Yuriy Kvach ( talk) 09:43, 21 November 2015 (UTC)
Hi,
You appear to be eligible to vote in the current
Arbitration Committee election. The
Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia
arbitration process. It has the authority to enact binding solutions for disputes between editors, primarily related to serious behavioural issues that the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the ability to impose
site bans,
topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The
arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail. If you wish to participate, you are welcome to
review the candidates' statements and submit your choices on
the voting page. For the Election committee,
MediaWiki message delivery (
talk) 14:25, 24 November 2015 (UTC)
Would you please stop moving pages on cities on territories not controlled by Ukraine without discussion. Ukraine does not control them, the new names are not locally recognized, and moves are therefore controvercial. These cities juct can not be moved without discussion. If you continue, blocks will be handed out. Thank you for understanding.-- Ymblanter ( talk) 12:09, 5 July 2016 (UTC)
- OK, sorry! Did you organise the discussion anywhere? --
Yuriy Kvach (
talk) 14:27, 5 July 2016 (UTC)
- No, we had a discussion for non-controversial RM's (and those cities were moved), but not for these ones.--
Ymblanter (
talk) 14:30, 5 July 2016 (UTC)
- Since you do not seem to get it, I opened a topic about you at ANI: Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents#Moves by User:Ykvach. You are welcome to defend your behaviour there.-- Ymblanter ( talk) 13:18, 14 July 2016 (UTC)
- No, we had a discussion for non-controversial RM's (and those cities were moved), but not for these ones.--
Ymblanter (
talk) 14:30, 5 July 2016 (UTC)
Чи не могли Ви бути так ласкаві допомогти з Talk:Sviatoshyn#St Nicholas church питанням.
TimeWaitsForNobody ( talk) 22:53, 5 November 2016 (UTC)
- Вітаю! Мабуть ні, я не знаю цієї церкви... -- Yuriy Kvach ( talk) 06:23, 9 November 2016 (UTC)
ArbCom Elections 2016: Voting now open!
Hello, Ykvach. Voting in the 2016 Arbitration Committee elections is open from Monday, 00:00, 21 November through Sunday, 23:59, 4 December to all unblocked users who have registered an account before Wednesday, 00:00, 28 October 2016 and have made at least 150 mainspace edits before Sunday, 00:00, 1 November 2016.
The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail.
If you wish to participate in the 2016 election, please review the candidates' statements and submit your choices on the voting page. MediaWiki message delivery ( talk) 22:08, 21 November 2016 (UTC)
Template:Fauna of Ukraine, 8(3) has been
nominated for deletion. You are invited to comment on the discussion at
the template's entry on the Templates for discussion page.
Frietjes (
talk) 21:33, 28 November 2016 (UTC)
Hi, please place a comment in support of the move Dnipropetrovsk to Dnipro at Talk:Dnipropetrovsk if you support it. Ales sandro ( talk) 15:52, 19 July 2017 (UTC)
Hello, Ykvach. Voting in the 2017 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23.59 on Sunday, 10 December. All users who registered an account before Saturday, 28 October 2017, made at least 150 mainspace edits before Wednesday, 1 November 2017 and are not currently blocked are eligible to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once.
The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail.
If you wish to participate in the 2017 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. MediaWiki message delivery ( talk) 18:42, 3 December 2017 (UTC)
Hello, Ykvach. Voting in the 2018 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23.59 on Sunday, 3 December. All users who registered an account before Sunday, 28 October 2018, made at least 150 mainspace edits before Thursday, 1 November 2018 and are not currently blocked are eligible to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once.
The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail.
If you wish to participate in the 2018 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. MediaWiki message delivery ( talk) 18:42, 19 November 2018 (UTC)
|
| Hello! Voting in the
2019 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23:59 on Monday, 2 December 2019. All
eligible users are allowed to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once.
The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail. If you wish to participate in the 2019 election, please review
the candidates and submit your choices on the
voting page. If you no longer wish to receive these messages, you may add |
|
| Hello! Voting in the
2020 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23:59 (UTC) on Monday, 7 December 2020. All
eligible users are allowed to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once.
The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail. If you wish to participate in the 2020 election, please review
the candidates and submit your choices on the
voting page. If you no longer wish to receive these messages, you may add |
Hello, Ykvach,
You've been an editor on Wikipedia for quite a while but I need to remind you that you can't simply put {{db}} on a page and have it deleted. You have to have a valid reason. Please review Criteria for Speedy Deletion for the existing criteria for speedy deletion. Whether you are using CSD, PROD or AFD, you need to indicate why a page should be deleted. If you still have questions, I encourage you to ask at the Teahouse. Liz Read! Talk! 04:33, 3 January 2021 (UTC)
Speedy deletion nomination of Category:Velyka Mykhailivka Raion
A tag has been placed on Category:Velyka Mykhailivka Raion requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section C1 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because the category has been empty for seven days or more and is not a disambiguation category, a category redirect, a featured topics category, under discussion at Categories for discussion, or a project category that by its nature may become empty on occasion.
If you think this page should not be deleted for this reason, you may contest the nomination by visiting the page and clicking the button labelled "Contest this speedy deletion". This will give you the opportunity to explain why you believe the page should not be deleted. However, be aware that once a page is tagged for speedy deletion, it may be deleted without delay. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag from the page yourself, but do not hesitate to add information in line with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. Liz Read! Talk! 16:37, 5 January 2021 (UTC)
|
| Hello! Voting in the
2021 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23:59 (UTC) on Monday, 6 December 2021. All
eligible users are allowed to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once.
The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail. If you wish to participate in the 2021 election, please review
the candidates and submit your choices on the
voting page. If you no longer wish to receive these messages, you may add |
Category:Wikipedians from Odessa has been nominated for renaming
Category:Wikipedians from Odessa has been nominated for renaming. A discussion is taking place to decide whether this proposal complies with the categorization guidelines. If you would like to participate in the discussion, you are invited to add your comments at the category's entry on the categories for discussion page. Thank you. — Michael Z. 15:40, 21 July 2022 (UTC)
Please do not move anything. The consensus prior to February was to keep old names of thos which were not controlled by the central government. Whereas it will obviously will need to be re-evaluated once the war is over and the situation has stabilized, it does not make sense to start a new discussion now. Ymblanter ( talk) 14:35, 18 September 2022 (UTC)
- OK, I have ceased! -- Yuriy Kvach ( talk) 14:37, 18 September 2022 (UTC)
...thus competent actions! Thanks! ☆☆☆—Pietadè Talk 19:40, 2 October 2022 (UTC)
Hello! Voting in the 2022 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23:59 (UTC) on Monday, 12 December 2022. All eligible users are allowed to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once.
The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail.
If you wish to participate in the 2022 election, please review
the candidates and submit your choices on the
voting page. If you no longer wish to receive these messages, you may add {{
NoACEMM}} to your user talk page.
MediaWiki message delivery (
talk) 01:11, 29 November 2022 (UTC)
Hello! Voting in the 2023 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23:59 (UTC) on Monday, 11 December 2023. All eligible users are allowed to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once.
The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail.
If you wish to participate in the 2023 election, please review
the candidates and submit your choices on the
voting page. If you no longer wish to receive these messages, you may add {{
NoACEMM}} to your user talk page.
MediaWiki message delivery (
talk) 00:39, 28 November 2023 (UTC)
Hello, Ykvach,
I've noticed you are doing a lot of recategorization of towns in the Ukraise so I thought I'd check in with you about this. If you could tell me why some of these towns went from urban to rural classification, that would be helpful. Thank you very much for your cooperation. Liz Read! Talk! 17:12, 19 March 2024 (UTC)
- Hello! The towns in Ukraine had official name "urban-type settlement" (from the Soviet times). But now they have got the name selyshche, which means 'rural settlement', see Populated_places_in_Ukraine#Rural_settlements. Now we are providing the necessary changes in the Ukrainian wiki, but I have started the change it also in the English one -- Yuriy Kvach ( talk) 17:25, 19 March 2024 (UTC)
- Indeed, urban-type settlement were deprecated in Ukraine in January, we are now doing the changed reflecting this. Ymblanter ( talk) 21:46, 19 March 2024 (UTC)
I am sorry to say this, but if you keep move-warring I will have to ask for a topic ban for you. All these moves are controversial and have to go through a RM. Please move them back and open individual RMs (ideally not all at once so that they could get sufficient attention). Ymblanter ( talk) 09:54, 11 April 2024 (UTC)
- OK, sorry, I have move it back! -- Yuriy Kvach ( talk) 10:20, 11 April 2024 (UTC)
Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. An automated process has detected that when you recently edited Reni urban hromada, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Reni. Such links are usually incorrect, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of unrelated topics with similar titles. (Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.)
It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, -- DPL bot ( talk) 17:53, 21 April 2024 (UTC)