User talk:Cephas

Welcome to commons Cephas. What better way than starting off with a Quality Image promotion could there be? :-) --QICbot (talk) 12:07, 12 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Hello friend. A nice 2024 for you. This map have to be updated after the split of Ardea plumifera and A. brachyrhyncha (Thanks for your maps on these two). Good updated map at Birds of the World. Thanks. Hector Bottai (talk) 17:19, 24 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Hi, this map is being used in a current Featured Article Candidate at the English Wikipedia and a question came up about the base map that was used. Can you confirm if File:Mexico template.svg was use as the base for this?

Thanks! Grungaloo (talk) 16:19, 31 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Pinging @Grungaloo I confirm that Mexico template.svg is the base map, but wait before any modification: since it is for a FA, I will make a better and more precise map. --Cephas (talk) 16:26, 31 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Hello friend, hope everything is fine. This map do not reflect current distribution in two isolated areas. See Birds of the World for correction. Thanks. Hector Bottai (talk) 11:06, 29 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Great, thanks.--Hector Bottai (talk) 17:33, 30 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Hello. This map is lacking an isolated population south of the Amazon (see Birds of the World), important because HBW/Birdlife claims to be a separate species Phaethornis major. Thanks Hector Bottai (talk) 17:32, 30 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Pinging @Hector Bottai. Hello Hector, I have questions about this map: I can use BOW for it, or combine maps of P. bourcieri and P. major of IUCN. I would prefer the last solution since updates are more recent on IUCN. What do you think? Also, once done, should I replace the actual map considering all Wps are not using the same classification?--Cephas (talk) 22:01, 30 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Hello. At this moment the split of P. major is weak. I would do only one map for bourcieri combining both as iucn and replace current. May be a different colour for P. major area would be perfect. Should this change in the future, we change. Thanks. Hector Bottai (talk) 23:48, 30 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks!!--Hector Bottai (talk) 21:22, 7 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Hello. This map is lacking the population of southwest Ecuador and nortwest Peru (see Phaethornis porcullae at IUCN), important because HBW/Birdlife claims to be a separate species Phaethornis porcullae. As in P. bourcieri, I think the best solution at this moment is merge both in one (griseogularis) with the porcullae area in different colour. Both maps are good at IUCN. Thanks. Hector Bottai (talk) 21:28, 6 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks, perfect.--Hector Bottai (talk) 21:58, 17 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Hello. This map needs to be updated, see very new one at Birds of the World. Thanks. Hector Bottai (talk) 21:51, 17 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Great! Thanks. --Hector Bottai (talk) 20:53, 26 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Hello friend. Missing map for this species, good either IUCN or BOW. Thanks. Hector Bottai (talk) 17:29, 19 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks!--Hector Bottai (talk) 02:01, 27 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Hello! This map needs update. This species is no longer endemic to Perú, but also present in south Ecuador. See IUCN and BOW. Thanks. Hector Bottai (talk) 16:06, 24 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks!--Hector Bottai (talk) 20:25, 16 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

File:Carum carvi 15-p.bot-carum.carvi-09.jpg has been listed at Commons:Deletion requests so that the community can discuss whether it should be kept or not. We would appreciate it if you could go to voice your opinion about this at its entry. If you created this file, please note that the fact that it has been proposed for deletion does not necessarily mean that we do not value your kind contribution. It simply means that one person believes that there is some specific problem with it, such as a copyright issue. Please see Commons:But it's my own work! for a guide on how to address these issues. Please remember to respond to and – if appropriate – contradict the arguments supporting deletion. Arguments which focus on the nominator will not affect the result of the nomination. Thank you! Afrikaans ∙ العربية ∙ беларуская ∙ беларуская (тарашкевіца) ∙ български ∙ ပအိုဝ်ႏဘာႏသာႏ ∙ বাংলা ∙ bosanski ∙ català ∙ čeština ∙ dansk ∙ Deutsch ∙ Deutsch (Sie-Form) ∙ Zazaki ∙ ދިވެހިބަސް ∙ Ελληνικά ∙ English ∙ Esperanto ∙ español ∙ eesti ∙ فارسی ∙ suomi ∙ français ∙ galego ∙ עברית ∙ hrvatski ∙ magyar ∙ հայերեն ∙ Bahasa Indonesia ∙ íslenska ∙ italiano ∙ 日本語 ∙ 한국어 ∙ 조선말 ∙ македонски ∙ മലയാളം ∙ Bahasa Melayu ∙ မြန်မာဘာသာ ∙ norsk bokmål ∙ Plattdüütsch ∙ Nederlands ∙ norsk nynorsk ∙ norsk ∙ occitan ∙ polski ∙ پښتو ∙ português ∙ português do Brasil ∙ română ∙ русский ∙ sicilianu ∙ slovenčina ∙ slovenščina ∙ shqip ∙ српски / srpski ∙ svenska ∙ ไทย ∙ Türkçe ∙ українська ∙ Tiếng Việt ∙ 中文 ∙ 中文（简体） ∙ 中文（繁體） ∙ +/−

Wkee4ager (talk) 18:29, 26 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Missing a map for this species. It was previously Tachyphonus rufiventer. Good maps at BOW (as Loriotus) and also IUCN (as Islerothraupis rufiventer). Thanks. Hector Bottai (talk) 20:28, 16 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

This was speedy!!!--Hector Bottai (talk) 22:54, 16 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Surprised..we are also missing Loriotus cristatus, a very common bird, also previously Thachyphonus cristatus. Good map at BOW. Thanks. Hector Bottai (talk) 20:49, 16 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Muchas gracias!--Hector Bottai (talk) 14:19, 17 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Hi, I was wondering if you could you make the circle in your nice map (https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Nemosia_rourei_map.svg) thicker? The article (Cherry-throated tanager) is currently a Good Article nominee in the English Wikipedia, and the reviewer requrested a thicker line to improve accessibility. I am not allowed to overwrite the file, otherwise I would have done it myself. Thanks! Jens Lallensack (talk) 18:57, 14 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Pinging @Jens Lallensack, Hello, I have also done https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Nemosia_rourei_map_2.svg. Tell me what you think of both maps. --Cephas (talk) 20:47, 14 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

This is much better, thank you very much! I have to mention that the ICZN map is not up-to-date; the bird is currently known from only two localities (it disappeared from the easternmost location on your map; the two small little dots are a single population; but it definitely occurs in Santa Teresa, which is marked as "possibly extant" in the ICZN map. However, as we usually follow the ICZN regarding range maps, I do not think that this needs to be changed now. Jens Lallensack (talk) 04:46, 15 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Colaptes mexicanoides is split from C. auratus (IOC 14.2), existent maps for auratus are all outdated. Additionally missing map for Colaptes chrysoides. Good maps for the three taxa at IUCN. Thanks. Hector Bottai (talk) 17:00, 14 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Great, thanks.--Hector Bottai (talk) 21:56, 16 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Xenops mexicanus is split from Xenops genibarbis (IOC 14.2). The best distribution I found according the description of the subespecies ranges is this: SACC 996 Thanks Hector Bottai (talk) 19:09, 14 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Pheugopedius schulenbergi is split from Pheugopedius euophrys (IOC 14.2). The map for euophrys is fine. Good maps for both at IUCN. IOC 14.2 is in the air, lot of taxonomic changes. Take it easy. Thanks. Hector Bottai (talk) 21:16, 14 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Ramphocinclus sanctaeluciae (St. Lucia only) is split from Ramphocinclus brachyurus (now Martinica only) (IOC 14.2). Both distributions are shown at IUCN R. brachyurus. Thanks. Hector Bottai (talk) 19:57, 15 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Arremon nigriceps is split from Arremon abeillei (IOC 14.2). Good maps at IUCN for both. A comment, I am first editing all these changes at Wikispecies. Thanks Hector Bottai (talk) 20:58, 15 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Atlapetes taczanowskii is split from Atlapetes schistaceus (IOC 14.2). A. schistaceus map is OK, good map at IUCN for taczanowskii. Thanks. Hector Bottai (talk) 22:06, 15 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Some contents have been listed at Commons:Deletion requests so that the community can discuss whether they should be kept or not. We would appreciate it if you could go to voice your opinion about this at their entry. If you created these pages, please note that the fact that they have been proposed for deletion does not necessarily mean that we do not value your kind contribution. It simply means that one person believes that there is some specific problem with them, such as a copyright issue. Please see Commons:But it's my own work! for a guide on how to address these issues. Please remember to respond to and – if appropriate – contradict the arguments supporting deletion. Arguments which focus on the nominator will not affect the result of the nomination. Thank you! Afrikaans ∙ العربية ∙ беларуская ∙ беларуская (тарашкевіца) ∙ български ∙ ပအိုဝ်ႏဘာႏသာႏ ∙ বাংলা ∙ bosanski ∙ català ∙ čeština ∙ dansk ∙ Deutsch ∙ Deutsch (Sie-Form) ∙ Zazaki ∙ ދިވެހިބަސް ∙ Ελληνικά ∙ English ∙ Esperanto ∙ español ∙ eesti ∙ فارسی ∙ suomi ∙ français ∙ galego ∙ עברית ∙ hrvatski ∙ magyar ∙ հայերեն ∙ Bahasa Indonesia ∙ íslenska ∙ italiano ∙ 日本語 ∙ 한국어 ∙ 조선말 ∙ македонски ∙ മലയാളം ∙ Bahasa Melayu ∙ မြန်မာဘာသာ ∙ norsk bokmål ∙ Plattdüütsch ∙ Nederlands ∙ norsk nynorsk ∙ norsk ∙ occitan ∙ polski ∙ پښتو ∙ português ∙ português do Brasil ∙ română ∙ русский ∙ sicilianu ∙ slovenčina ∙ slovenščina ∙ shqip ∙ српски / srpski ∙ svenska ∙ ไทย ∙ Türkçe ∙ українська ∙ Tiếng Việt ∙ 中文 ∙ 中文（简体） ∙ 中文（繁體） ∙ +/−

Affected:

• File:Edificio Jenaro Valverde Marín.jpg

Best regards, Rubýñ ^(Scold) 04:12, 16 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Dear friend, I need to apologize because my wrong orientation. Different than the fully accepted split of mexicanoides, the split of cafer is only accepted by Birdlife (not perceived by me) and not by IOC or Clements which are the taxonomies followed by most of the Wikis. In reality current map of auratus should be the overlap of these two maps auratus + cafer. Again my excuses. Hector Bottai (talk) 01:11, 17 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I thought about it, but figured I'd do it anyway, both maps will probably be useful. I'll modify the current .svg map for auratus. Cephas (talk) 09:16, 17 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]