User talk:Jeanloujustine

Hello, Jeanloujustine! Welcome to Wikipedia! Thank you for your contributions. You may benefit from following some of the links below, which will help you get the most out of Wikipedia. If you have any questions you can ask me on my talk page, or place {{helpme}} on your talk page and ask your question there. Please remember to sign your name on talk pages by clicking or by typing four tildes "~~~~"; this will automatically produce your name and the date. If you are already excited about Wikipedia, you might want to consider being "adopted" by a more experienced editor or joining a WikiProject to collaborate with others in creating and improving articles of your interest. Click here for a directory of all the WikiProjects. Finally, please do your best to always fill in the edit summary field when making edits to pages. Happy editing! Randykitty (talk) 16:25, 10 January 2013 (UTC)[reply] Getting Started The five pillars of Wikipedia • Tutorial • Your first article How to: edit a page • upload an image Getting Help Frequently Asked Questions New contributors' help page Where to: ask questions • make requests Request administrator attention Policies and Guidelines Neutral point of view • Reliable sources Verifiability • Citing sources • No original research What Wikipedia is not • Biographies of living persons Simplified Manual of Style • Three-revert rule Copyrights • Policy for non-free content • Image use policy External links • Spam • Vandalism • Sock puppetry Deletion policy • Conflict of interest • Notability The Community Community Portal • Adopt-a-user program Assume good faith • Civility • Etiquette No personal attacks • Resolving disputes Build consensus • Village pump Signpost • IRC channels • Mailing lists Things to do Be bold in editing • Help develop an article Maintenance • Peer review • Requested articles Join a WikiProject • Translating articles Cleaning up: General • Spam • Vandalism Miscellaneous Categories • Disambiguity • Stubs User pages • Talk pages Useful templates • Tools • User scripts

Hi Jeanloujustine. Thanks for your contribution to Fish gill. However, your addition did not cite any sources. Verifiability is Wikipedia policy, so please see if you can provide at least one reliable source. Otherwise your addition has little encyclopaedic value, and is liable to be removed. Thanks. --Epipelagic (talk) 20:18, 28 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Excellent. Thank you very much! --Epipelagic (talk) 08:24, 29 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Hi, just wanted to say thanks for all the fish images that you've been adding. Wish there were more scientists like you. -- Yzx (talk) 20:35, 9 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]

That's probably because I am only an amateur ichthyologist ;) Jeanloujustine (talk) 20:56, 9 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, I'm BracketBot. I have automatically detected that your edit to Threadfin bream may have broken the syntax by modifying 1 "()"s. If you have, don't worry: just edit the page again to fix it. If I misunderstood what happened, or if you have any questions, you can leave a message on my operator's talk page.

List of unpaired brackets remaining on the page:

• ]s. A study conducted in [[New Caledonia]] has shown that the [[Fork-tailed threadfin bream]] (''[[Nemipterus furcosus]]'' harboured 25 species of parasites, including [[nematode]]s, [[cestode]]

Thanks, BracketBot (talk) 11:31, 2 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, I'm BracketBot. I have automatically detected that your edit to Geoplanidae may have broken the syntax by modifying 2 "[]"s. If you have, don't worry: just edit the page again to fix it. If I misunderstood what happened, or if you have any questions, you can leave a message on my operator's talk page.

List of unpaired brackets remaining on the page:

• 297-fig-3 Platydemus manokwari.png|''Platydemus manokwari'', detail of dorsal longitudinal stripe]]

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, BracketBot (talk) 20:49, 30 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Archaeoparasitology, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Roman (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) 08:52, 27 April 2014 (UTC)[reply]

The article Alain Chabaud has been proposed for deletion because of the following concern:

Copy paste of essay which is the only source. Tone is entirely inappropriate - article would need to be re-written from scratch.

While all constructive contributions to Wikipedia are appreciated, content or articles may be deleted for any of several reasons.

You may prevent the proposed deletion by removing the {{proposed deletion/dated}} notice, but please explain why in your edit summary or on the article's talk page.

Please consider improving the article to address the issues raised. Removing {{proposed deletion/dated}} will stop the proposed deletion process, but other deletion processes exist. In particular, the speedy deletion process can result in deletion without discussion, and articles for deletion allows discussion to reach consensus for deletion. Яehevkor ✉ 11:16, 30 April 2014 (UTC)[reply]

The page was written from an obituary - obituaries rarely use a neutral tone, especially when they are about scientists who have had a great reputation and have influenced a generation of researchers. And you cannot expect to have many obituaries written about a single scientist, so the "single source" criterion is clearly biased. The mention "This article appears to be written like an advertisement" is certainly inappropriate - the man is dead.

I easily found a dozen mentions of works by Professor Chabaud in Wikipedia (English) - doesn't that count? And I linked a dozen pages to this page.

Anyway, I will be delighted if someone rewrites the page from its source.

--Jeanloujustine (talk) 14:56, 30 April 2014 (UTC)[reply]

		The Original Barnstar
		For your recent expansion of fish species articles. Thank you and keep up the good work. :) Anna Frodesiak (talk) 11:06, 4 June 2014 (UTC)[reply]

I saw your nice photos and thought I'd start it. The species in the gallery are not listed in the taxonomy section. Perhaps you could shed some light. Many thanks, Anna Frodesiak (talk) 23:15, 7 June 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Nice beginning! For improving the article, you should read the major paper on this group (access is free):

Moravec & de Buron - A synthesis of our current knowledge of philometrid nematodes, a group of increasingly important fish parasites. PDF

Jeanloujustine (talk) 21:03, 14 June 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you kindly. I'll download and read it. Best wishes, Anna Frodesiak (talk) 21:24, 14 June 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Haptor, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Clamp. 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) 09:34, 3 September 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, I'm BracketBot. I have automatically detected that your edit to Onchocercidae may have broken the syntax by modifying 2 "[]"s. If you have, don't worry: just edit the page again to fix it. If I misunderstood what happened, or if you have any questions, you can leave a message on my operator's talk page.

List of unpaired brackets remaining on the page:

• from Madagascar. '''Parasite, 21,''' 47 {{doi|10.1051/parasite/2014046}} {{PMID|25224723}}</ref>]]

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, BracketBot (talk) 20:47, 17 September 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for creating Pseudorhabdosynochus, Jeanloujustine!

Wikipedia editor Animalparty just reviewed your page, and wrote this note for you:

Great start. A word of caution: citing your own work is allowed per WP:SELFCITE as long not unduly promotional. I feel it's fine in this case, but notice you've added self-cites and pictures to some fish articles, which may be unwarranted or undue emphasis, especially in very short articles.

To reply, leave a comment on Animalparty's talk page.

Learn more about page curation.

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Pseudorhabdosynochus, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Tegument. 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) 09:15, 29 January 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Susan Lim (parasitologist), you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Taxonomy. 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, 6 February 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Satyu Yamaguti, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Macassar. 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) 09:34, 13 February 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Alexandr Vladimirovich Gussev, you added links pointing to the disambiguation pages Morphology and Development. 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) 09:00, 25 February 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Louis Euzet, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Life cycle. 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, 18 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Alain Chabaud, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Trypanosome. 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, 27 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]

{{unblock}}

This account is not blocked directly. What message appears when you try to edit? —Jeremy v^_^v ^Bori! 16:47, 15 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Sorry - that was the VPN again. When I use the VPN, my IP address is blocked. Everything is fine now. Please delete this whole deblock part if you wish. Jeanloujustine (talk) 16:13, 16 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Pseudorhabdosynochus yucatanensis, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Progreso. 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) 16:38, 19 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for creating Pseudorhabdosynochus justinella, Jeanloujustine!

Wikipedia editor Animalparty just reviewed your page, and wrote this note for you:

Please keep in mind WP:NOTJOURNAL and Make technical articles understandable. Articles shouldn't be written like scientific papers, nor for specialists. Congratulations on the eponymous species though!

To reply, leave a comment on Animalparty's talk page.

Answer here: [1]

Learn more about page curation.

	The Tireless Contributor Barnstar
	Thank you for making all those pages about species. It brings me joy seeing them come up on Wikipedia. I hope one of your species becomes the 5 millionth article. All the very best. Calaka (talk) 11:43, 16 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks ! Jeanloujustine (talk) 12:06, 16 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]

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) 16:53, 24 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Remember that when adding medical content please only use high-quality reliable sources as references. We typically use review articles, major textbooks and position statements of national or international organizations. WP:MEDHOW walks you through editing step by step. A list of resources to help edit health content can be found here. The edit box has a build in citation tool to easily format references based on the PMID or ISBN. We also provide style advice about the structure and content of medicine-related encyclopedia articles. The welcome page is another good place to learn about editing the encyclopedia. If you have any questions, please feel free to drop me a note. Doc James (talk · contribs · email) 18:46, 9 March 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Hey there! I saw that you added very nice images to one of the Philometra articles I created a while back. Just so you know, I've also created Philometra lagocephali, Philometra gerrei, Philometra otolithi, Philometroides eleutheronemae, and Philometra sphyraenae. I know you weren't involved with the description of the last 4 species, but if you have the resources and time to improve the articles in any way, that would be amazing! Thank you, FoCuS contribs; talk to me! 18:13, 22 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Hi

Did you know about Wikiversity Journal of Medicine? It is an open access, peer reviewed medical journal, with no publication charges. We welcome you to have a look. Feel free to participate.

You can participate in any one or more of the following ways:

• Publish an article to the journal.
• Sign up as a peer reviewer of potential upcoming articles. If you do not have expertise in these subjects, you can help in finding peer reviewers for current submissions.
• Sign up as an editor, and help out in open tasks.
• Outreach to potential contributors, with can include (but is not limited to) scholars and health professionals. In any mention of Wikiversity Journal of Medicine, there may be a reference to this Contribute-page. Example presentation about the journal.
• Add a post-publication review of an existing publication. If errors are found, there are guidelines for editing published works.
• Apply to become the treasurer of the journal
• Join the editorial board.
• Share your ideas of what the journal would be like in the future as separate Wikimedia project.
• Donate to Wikimedia Foundation.
• Translate journal pages into other languages. Wikiversity currently exists in the following other languages
  • Ceština, Deutsch, Español, Français, Italiano, 한국어, Português, Slovenšcina, Suomi, Svenska, Ελληνικά, Русский, العربية, 日本語
• Sign up to get emails related to the journal, which are sent to updateswijoumed.org. If you want to receive these emails too, state your interest at the talk page, or contact the Editor-in-chief at haggstrom.mikaelwikiversityjournal.org.
• Spread the word to anyone who could be interested or could benefit from it.

The future of this journal as a separate Wikimedia project is under discussion and the name can be changed suitably. Currently a voting for the same is underway. Please cast your vote in the name you find most suitable. We would be glad to receive further suggestions from you. It is also acceptable to mention your votes in the wide-reachwikiversityjournal.org email list. Please note that the voting closes on 16th August, 2016, unless protracted by consensus, due to any reason.

-from Diptanshu.D (talk · contribs · count) and others of the Editorial Board, Wikiversity Journal of Medicine.

Diptanshu^Talk 10:33, 7 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Pseudorhabdosynochus argus, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Heron Island. 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) 09:02, 15 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, Jeanloujustine. 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)[reply]

Hi User:Jeanloujustine, just wondered can you make an edit to Maiorana page please? That the name is Norman French in origin, on page 326 of this source Della Calabria illustrata the book states that the fleur-de-lis in the coat of arms of the family also indicates a Norman origin. I just don't do edits on that scale, because more than likely no one will edit the page for many months, leaving my mistakes (that become Wikipedia's mistakes) on show. You'd just have to blank the page then change categories to Norman and "Maiorana is an Italian surname" to "Maiorana is a Norman French surname" (Good examples of Norman names are Banister (surname) and Molyneux). Hope you can help, thanks.--Theo Mandela (talk) 22:13, 18 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, Jeanloujustine. 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)[reply]

Thanks for creating Lepotrema amansis.

I have just reviewed the page, as a part of our page curation process.

Hi. If possible, kindly add the relevant wikiproject banners to the talkpage of the article. It is suggested to see the talkpage of similar articles for reference. Regards.

To reply, leave a comment here and ping me.

Message delivered via the Page Curation tool, on behalf of the reviewer.

—usernamekiran(talk) 21:42, 30 October 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Category:Employees of the National Museum of Natural History (France), which you created, has been nominated for possible deletion, merging, or renaming. A discussion is taking place to see if it abides 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. Pichpich (talk) 01:18, 5 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, Jeanloujustine. 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)[reply]

Checking in Google Scholar, I see that he's notable under our rule WP:PROF. However, for the English WP it is necessary to show this in the actual article. Please add a basic bio with degrees and positions and most important publications. DGG ( talk ) 05:05, 26 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]

I see you've create a string of incomplete articles and used an edit summary describing them as drafts. If you want to create a draft, you can preface the title of an article with "Draft:" when creating it, and it will be created in the draft space where you can work on it until you are ready to move it to mainspace. This is preferable to creating multiple incomplete articles in mainspace and finishing them after. Natureium (talk) 22:40, 30 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]

An article you recently created, Microcotyle brevis, does not have enough sources and citations as written to remain published. It needs more citations from reliable, independent sources. (?) Information that can't be referenced should be removed (verifiability is of central importance on Wikipedia). I've moved your draft to draftspace (with a prefix of "Draft:" before the article title) where you can incubate the article with minimal disruption. When you feel the article meets Wikipedia's general notability guideline and thus is ready for mainspace, please click on the "Submit your draft for review!" button at the top of the page. CASSIOPEIA^(talk) 17:53, 1 December 2018 (UTC)[reply]

An article you recently created, Microcotyle branchiostegi, does not have enough sources and citations as written to remain published. It needs more citations from reliable, independent sources. (?) Information that can't be referenced should be removed (verifiability is of central importance on Wikipedia). I've moved your draft to draftspace (with a prefix of "Draft:" before the article title) where you can incubate the article with minimal disruption. When you feel the article meets Wikipedia's general notability guideline and thus is ready for mainspace, please click on the "Submit your draft for review!" button at the top of the page. CASSIOPEIA^(talk) 17:54, 1 December 2018 (UTC)[reply]

An article you recently created, Microcotyle bothi, does not have enough sources and citations as written to remain published. It needs more citations from reliable, independent sources. (?) Information that can't be referenced should be removed (verifiability is of central importance on Wikipedia). I've moved your draft to draftspace (with a prefix of "Draft:" before the article title) where you can incubate the article with minimal disruption. When you feel the article meets Wikipedia's general notability guideline and thus is ready for mainspace, please click on the "Submit your draft for review!" button at the top of the page. CASSIOPEIA^(talk) 17:54, 1 December 2018 (UTC)[reply]

An article you recently created, Microcotyle arripis, does not have enough sources and citations as written to remain published. It needs more citations from reliable, independent sources. (?) Information that can't be referenced should be removed (verifiability is of central importance on Wikipedia). I've moved your draft to draftspace (with a prefix of "Draft:" before the article title) where you can incubate the article with minimal disruption. When you feel the article meets Wikipedia's general notability guideline and thus is ready for mainspace, please click on the "Submit your draft for review!" button at the top of the page. CASSIOPEIA^(talk) 17:54, 1 December 2018 (UTC)[reply]

An article you recently created, Microcotyle argenticus, does not have enough sources and citations as written to remain published. It needs more citations from reliable, independent sources. (?) Information that can't be referenced should be removed (verifiability is of central importance on Wikipedia). I've moved your draft to draftspace (with a prefix of "Draft:" before the article title) where you can incubate the article with minimal disruption. When you feel the article meets Wikipedia's general notability guideline and thus is ready for mainspace, please click on the "Submit your draft for review!" button at the top of the page. CASSIOPEIA^(talk) 17:54, 1 December 2018 (UTC)[reply]

An article you recently created, Microcotyle poronoti, does not have enough sources and citations as written to remain published. It needs more citations from reliable, independent sources. (?) Information that can't be referenced should be removed (verifiability is of central importance on Wikipedia). I've moved your draft to draftspace (with a prefix of "Draft:" before the article title) where you can incubate the article with minimal disruption. When you feel the article meets Wikipedia's general notability guideline and thus is ready for mainspace, please click on the "Submit your draft for review!" button at the top of the page. Please do not create unsourced article. The major expansion tag is not a protection Dom from Paris (talk) 11:31, 3 December 2018 (UTC)[reply]

An article you recently created, Microcotyle pomacanthi, does not have enough sources and citations as written to remain published. It needs more citations from reliable, independent sources. (?) Information that can't be referenced should be removed (verifiability is of central importance on Wikipedia). I've moved your draft to draftspace (with a prefix of "Draft:" before the article title) where you can incubate the article with minimal disruption. When you feel the article meets Wikipedia's general notability guideline and thus is ready for mainspace, please click on the "Submit your draft for review!" button at the top of the page. Please do not create unsourced articles even with an in use tag. Wait until they are sourced there is no need to hurry the publication Dom from Paris (talk) 11:33, 3 December 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Hi I have seen some rather odd editing patterns that may give the impression that you are using mutliple accounts or are editing in collaboration with another editor. User:Bouguerche has only edited pages that you have also edited. The edits do not seem to be problematic but if you are using MULTIPLE ACCOUNTS there has to be a very good reason for this. Dom from Paris (talk) 11:42, 3 December 2018 (UTC)[reply]

I have a single account but I am training a new contributor. Please do not move my edits to draft space too fast - one hour seems acceptable!11:51, 3 December 2018 (UTC)

OK that's not a problem for the other contributor, but you must not create unsourced articles. If you have the source for the information that you are including in the article then add it when you publish the article if you do not have the source then wait until you do before publishing. This is a recurrant problem with your creations and I am not the only new pages reviewer to have draftified your articles. An inuse tag is not an protection against move to draft space if there are no sources whatsoever. This way of editing creats extra work for other editors which could be avoided. Verifiability is one of the WP:FIVE PILLARS. Dom from Paris (talk) 12:11, 3 December 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for creating Microcotyle poronoti.

A New Page Patroller Insertcleverphrasehere just tagged the page as having some issues to fix, and wrote this note for you:

Note that articles require MULTIPLE sources. One isn't enough because then we don't have info that is verifiable to multiple sources. When creating these stubs, make sure you include at minimum two references. Thank you.

The tags can be removed by you or another editor once the issues they mention are addressed. If you have questions, you can reply over here and ping me. Or, for broader editing help, you can talk to the volunteers at the Teahouse.

Delivered via the Page Curation tool, on behalf of the reviewer.

— Insertcleverphrasehere ^{(or here)} 11:14, 4 December 2018 (UTC)[reply]

It seems to me that some patrollers underestimate the value of the Taxonbar. This species has a taxonbar with 6 numbered references (in addition to Wikidata itself) meaning that the species is registered in at least 6 international databases.

Also, for some species, there will be one and only one bibliographic reference, if the species has not been found again after its first description. That happens with A LOT of species. 16:25, 4 December 2018 (UTC) jeanloujustine

@Insertcleverphrasehere: I would tend to agree with Jeanloujustine. I know it is just an essay but WP:SPECIESOUTCOMES suggests that so long as they have a Valid name (zoology) and one reference that describes them they are inherantly notable. I draftified those that had no sources at all. It might be worth trying to get this into a notability guideline somewhere to avoid unneccessary debate. cheers. Dom from Paris (talk) 16:42, 4 December 2018 (UTC)[reply]

jeanloujustine Domdeparis, Ok. I'll make sure to check the Taxonbar in future. As a generalist reviewer, it is sometimes hard to keep up on all the different ways that refs are sometimes included. At least one inline ref is still necessary IMO though. Thanks. — Insertcleverphrasehere ^{(or here)} 17:28, 4 December 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Jeanloujustine, I just wanted to let you know that I have added the "autopatrolled" permission to your account, as you have created numerous, valid articles. This feature will have no effect on your editing, and is simply intended to reduce the workload on new page patrollers. For more information on the autopatrolled right, see Wikipedia:Autopatrolled. Feel free to leave me a message if you have any questions. Happy editing! Beeblebrox (talk) 20:58, 27 December 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for that. Anyway, I am always happy when my new pages are patrolled and edited. There is always something to learn from other contributors! Jeanloujustine (talk) 14:14, 28 December 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Jean-Lou, in response to this change ("No "in" here which would have a completely different meaning according to the International Code of Zoological Nomenclature."), I am looking for some guidance on zoological authorship. As far as I was aware, authorship is not affected by recombinations or rank changes, except for the addition of parentheses for changed combinations. While I know it is part of the botanical code to include authors for new combinations, it seems rare, on Wikipedia at least, to include the recombination authors for animal taxa. It is not against ICZN to use them, but it also does not appear to be mandated either. Can you help me understand what the difference between these taxon names would be / how they would be completely different?

1. Paramicrocotyle victoriae (Woolcock, 1936) Caballero & Bravo-Hollis, 1972
2. Paramicrocotyle victoriae (Woolcock, 1936)^[1] or
3. Paramicrocotyle victoriae (Woolcock, 1936) in Caballero & Bravo-Hollis, 1972^[1]

Thanks for your patience! I want to make sure I am understanding this correctly. —Hyperik ⌜talk⌟ 20:56, 18 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]

>>> This is a system of conventions, which are very simple.

The system of the ICZN uses a simple convention: parentheses or no parentheses. In Wikipedia or any publication, we can add references, but these references are simply a complement and should not interfere with the simple system.

The use of "small" marks for the names of the authors is not compulsory at all, but give a "professional" aspect.

Paramicrocotyle victoriae (Woolcock, 1936) Caballero & Bravo-Hollis, 1972

This is correctly written. The species has been described by Woolcock in 1936 but it was, at this time, described in a different genus (note that this system does not say which one), and Caballero & Bravo-Hollis, later (here 1972) transferred this species to the genus Paramicrocotyle. Note also that they might be right or wrong - this is simply a convention to explain what they thought about the nomenclature of this animal.

Anyway, this shows all the available information, in a compact form.

It is possible to add the reference to Woolcock and the reference to Caballero & Bravo-Hollis here, but the ICZN code does not deal with this - it is simply a matter of publication style (some journals would add it, some would prefere it later in the text). In Wikipedia, it is a good idea to add it here.

So, my preferred way of writing all this in a very compact form in Wikipedia would be:

Paramicrocotyle victoriae (Woolcock, 1936) Caballero & Bravo-Hollis, 1972^[2][1]

(the references are added after the "small" mark)

Note that Paramicrocotyle victoriae (Woolcock, 1936) is the same as above, and is not wrong, but here we do not know who transferred the species to this genus Paramicrocotyle - we have only half of the information.

Paramicrocotyle victoriae (Woolcock, 1936)^[1]

Very weird, because this means that the species was described by Woolcock in a different genus and then we have a reference to Caballero & Bravo-Hollis. An example where the Wikipedia reference adds confusion, no information.

Paramicrocotyle victoriae (Woolcock, 1936) in Caballero & Bravo-Hollis, 1972^[1]

"in" has a very special (and rare) usage; "Dupont in Cuvier" means that in a book authored by Cuvier, there was a chapter, or a page, which was in fact authored by Dupont (and there is probably some discussion about this somewhere). This is generally only for old books. For this particular case, that would mean that in a book by Caballero & Bravo-Hollis (published in 1972) there was a part published by Woolcock in 1936 - so this is simply absurd.

I hope this is clear... Botany is similar, but not exactly the same, so my comments should not be used for botanical nomenclature, which I do not know.

Jeanloujustine (talk) 22:15, 18 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Many thanks for taking the time to respond so thoroughly. The "in" makes sense to me now. I will say that I don't find this example confusing or weird at all: Paramicrocotyle victoriae (Woolcock, 1936)^[1] and would probably prefer it myself, for brevity/compactness, in taxoboxes. The parentheses already indicate it's not the original combination, so it's expected (by me, at least), that the ref would be for where that particular new name first originated. I see your point though, too. —Hyperik ⌜talk⌟ 23:04, 18 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]

I would like to note that if you managed to perpetuate this kind of formatting in more than 50 articles, then that makes more than 50 articles that require layout and formatting cleanup. Sections like "Diagnosis" don't belong into species articles at all; that's a part of the standard section "Description" (which should not be called "Morphology"). It is unnecessary and undesirable to lead in any statement with phrasing like "According to Zhang, Yang & Xia..." - that's what the reference at the end of the sentence is for, and name-dropping is as surplus to requirement in taxonomic articles as it is in ones on pop culture. "Etymology" belongs at the top of the article, not below the description. And so on an so forth. Apart from that, you also reverted a number of unrelated and independently desirable changes like wikilinks to common names.

I am going to reinstitute these changes and would ask you not to revert them again without good reason. "All my other articles look like this" isn't one. We are trying to achieve a consistent structure for species articles, and wanting to preserve little walled gardens of skewed layout is not a reasonable motivation for ignoring that. --Elmidae (talk · contribs) 19:21, 21 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Re the short description, not sure if we even have standards for that yet, and "worms" is presumably as good as "fish parasite", so I've retained that. --Elmidae (talk · contribs) 19:26, 21 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]

• Having slept on it, I realize that this came over as needlessly combative; sorry, long day. I certainly don't want to put down your excellent contributions. But please let's at least talk over bringing the overall structure of these articles in line with general practice. It's an ongoing process, and guarding incidentals of "your" stuff / ownership actions don't help. Cheers! --Elmidae (talk · contribs) 17:29, 22 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]

hi, I just reviewed and approved the article, to be approved it needs to have all references[2], please add text and reference when you are ready, thank you--Ozzie10aaaa (talk) 10:54, 26 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]

You are frightening a beginner here (User:Bouguerche) [this is not me and we are in two different continents]... in fact you deleted a paragraph exactly TWO minutes after it was created. Please allow at least a few minutes to look at references, add them, double -check. Jeanloujustine (talk) 10:59, 26 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]

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 {{NoACEMM}} to your user talk page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 00:15, 19 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. An automated process has detected that when you recently edited Platydemus manokwari, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Barcoding (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver). 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) 10:58, 21 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]

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 {{NoACEMM}} to your user talk page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 02:28, 24 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Hi. I see in a recent addition to Gregarina garnhami you included material from a webpage that is available under a compatible Creative Commons Licence. That's okay, but you have to give attribution so that our readers are made aware that you copied the prose rather than wrote it yourself. It's also required under the terms of the license. I've added the attribution for this particular instance. Please make sure that you follow this licensing requirement when copying from compatibly-licensed material in the future. — Diannaa (talk) 15:27, 26 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]

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 {{NoACEMM}} to your user talk page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 00:30, 23 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]

An automated process has detected that when you recently edited Hassalstrongylus dollfusi, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Spicule.

(Opt-out instructions.) --DPL bot (talk) 05:59, 13 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]

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) 01:08, 29 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

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) 00:41, 28 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

An automated process has detected that when you recently edited Microplana scharffi, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page 18S.

(Opt-out instructions.) --DPL bot (talk) 19:53, 24 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you for your contributions. It seems that you have added Creative Commons licensed text to one or more Wikipedia articles, such as Heteracanthocephalidae. You are welcome to import appropriate Creative Commons licensed content to articles, but in order to meet the Wikipedia guideline on plagiarism, such content must be fully attributed. This requires not only acknowledging the source, but acknowledging that the source is copied. There are several methods to do this described at Wikipedia:Plagiarism#Compatibly licensed sources, including the usage of an attribution template. Please make sure that any Creative Commons content you have already imported is fully attributed. Thank you. -- Diannaa (talk) 21:06, 25 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Hello! Voting in the 2024 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23:59 (UTC) on Monday, 2 December 2024. 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 2024 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) 00:29, 19 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]