User talk:Wloveral

---

Welcome!

Hello, Wloveral, and welcome to Wikipedia! Thank you for your contributions. I hope you like the place and decide to stay. Here are some pages that you might find helpful:

• The five pillars of Wikipedia
• Tutorial
• How to edit a page
• How to write a great article
• Manual of Style

I hope you enjoy editing here and being a Wikipedian! Please sign your messages on discussion pages using four tildes (~~~~); this will automatically insert your username and the date. If you need help, check out Wikipedia:Questions, ask me on my talk page, or ask your question and then place {{helpme}} before the question on your talk page. Again, welcome! --ragesoss (talk) 05:50, 18 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

That's quite a formidable timeline. I think it would be more appropriate as a separate article... we have quite a few science timelines, but we usually try to have history of... articles be prose rather than timelines. Would you mind if I moved it to "Timeline of zoology"?--ragesoss (talk) 22:02, 18 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I've moved it to Timeline of zoology, and did some example formatting. Important terms (especially species and people's names as well as important concepts) can be linked to relevant articles using square brackets. Years should be linked; only BC needs to be specified, as numbers like 1 and 1800 automatically link to the article about the year. References (the more the better) can be placed in footnotes using ref tags: <ref>Reference</ref>. Hope that helps. Good editing!--ragesoss (talk) 22:39, 18 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

It may intrest you to know that it is considered likely that the verdict against him was justified. Your essay in John Overall implied he was innocent. Garnet acknowledged himself justly condemned for his concealment of the plot. It was in fact the king, who had forbidden his being tortured, that directed he should be hanged until he was dead and that the cruelties of drawing and quartering should be omitted - not the crowd. Interesting things, indeed! --SECisek (talk) 19:29, 28 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

• Tanks for your edition in this page.Jo Lorib (talk) 00:16, 14 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

The article Angelo Moreira de Costa Lima has been speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This was done because the article seemed to be about a real person, organization (band, club, company, etc.), or web content, but it did not indicate how or why the subject is notable, that is, why an article about that subject should be included in Wikipedia. Under the criteria for speedy deletion, articles that do not indicate the notability of the subject may be deleted at any time. If you can indicate why the subject is really notable, you are free to re-create the article, making sure to cite any verifiable sources.

Please see the guidelines for what is generally accepted as notable, and for specific types of articles, you may want to check out our criteria for biographies, for web sites, for musicians, or for companies. Feel free to leave a note on my talk page if you have any questions about this. J Milburn (talk) 21:53, 15 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Article re-created as Ângelo Moreira da Costa Lima. --Wloveral (talk) 16:59, 21 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Hey there. I saw you just created the article. I had started on it a week or so ago, but then went on vacation. I just saw you beat me too it! I took out the Legacy section (for that legacy type thing, it needs to be more of what he left behind/cultural references). I also touched up the references. It would be better if you switched it over to inline citations instead. Just some thoughts on the article. Other than that it looks good! Deflagro ^C/_T 21:06, 17 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I see you've tagged this article for a significant rewrite (?).

I already found this article, as it was, interesting and useful . .so it would be good to see what you make of it. If there is anything someone much less familiar with Darrell Posey (the person, his works, and his contributions ) can do.. please let me know :-)

In the meantime:

1. perhaps you might have access to a photo of Darrell Posey that you are able to upload, use under Wikipedia GFDLicence, and include within the article?

2. perhaps you may have considered using Template:Infobox Scientist at the beginning of the article . summarising and presenting all/most of his vital statistics right up front, for readers/users quick/ready access??

3. perhaps you will be Wikifying and reinserting into the article the useful 'review' of Posey, D (Ed) (1999) Cultural and Spiritual Values of Biodiversity .. which would seem to have been a significant contribution to the field???

4. perhaps Darell's role in arranging the congress out of which came the important "Deceleration of Belem " should still be discussed .. but a seperate article just on that Declartion, it's text, and it's significance might be more useful?

Just a few comments .. in strong support of seeing biographies such as this included and made publicly accessible on Wikipedia (I'd like to see a few more Australian ones myself! Bruceanthro (talk) 01:59, 16 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

20-April-2008: I have slightly trimmed the article "1616" for wordy phrases, but the ground-rules for notable events haven't been pre-defined for fair consideration by other users, and hence, there needs to be more discussion about how to trim the text. See new topic: Talk:1616#Cleanup_April_2008.

Some users believe that yearly articles should be massive essays, as in article "1345" (whereas others advise to move essays to decade-level or century articles), so there is a vast range of opinions about the scope of contents. I agree that "1616" seems too detailed, especially about the event of marriage-then-visit-shah.

However, also slowing progress is the slow response of the Wikipedia servers, so I try to make many changes in one edit/save, and revising articles on Wikipedia seems like an extravagance, so I let a lot of problems just slide. There are many people changing hundreds of articles to adjust one word and similar vast menial waste. -Wikid77 (talk) 13:11, 20 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Brazilian scientists; Brazilian biologists; Brazilian zoologists; Brazilian entomologists; History of Brazil; History of Amazonia; Ethnobiology; History of Science; Pirates.

This is just to remind myself. Let no article be an orphan. --Wloveral (talk) 00:38, 22 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Hi - I see you have recently created one or more new stub types. As it states at Wikipedia:Stub, at the top of most stub categories, and in many other places on Wikipedia, it is recommended that new stub types are proposed prior to creation at Wikipedia:WikiProject Stub sorting/Proposals, in order to check whether the new stub type is already covered by existing stub types, whether it is named according to stub naming guidelines, whether it is otherwise correctly formatted, whether it reaches the standard threshold for creation of a new stub type, and whether it crosses existing stub type hierarchies. Your new stub type is currently listed at WP:WSS/D - please feel free to make any comments there as to any rationale for this stub type. And please, in future, consider proposing new stub types first! Grutness...wha? 01:47, 22 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Wloveral!
We thank you for uploading Image:Dr. Novães 4.jpg, but there is a problem. Your image is currently missing information on its copyright status. Wikipedia takes copyright very seriously. Unless you can help by adding a copyright tag, it may be deleted by an Administrator. If you know this information, then we urge you to add a copyright tag to the image description page. We apologize for this, but all images must confirm to policy on Wikipedia.

If you have any questions, please feel free to ask them at the media copyright questions page. Thanks so much for your cooperation.
This message is from a robot. --John Bot III (talk) 19:02, 25 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Wloveral!
We thank you for uploading Image:Bill Overal.jpg, but there is a problem. Your image is currently missing information on its copyright status. Wikipedia takes copyright very seriously. Unless you can help by adding a copyright tag, it may be deleted by an Administrator. If you know this information, then we urge you to add a copyright tag to the image description page. We apologize for this, but all images must confirm to policy on Wikipedia.

If you have any questions, please feel free to ask them at the media copyright questions page. Thanks so much for your cooperation.
This message is from a robot. --John Bot III (talk) 17:44, 26 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I'd be happy to make one for you, did you have a picture in mind for it? xenocidic (talk) 00:07, 28 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

• {{User:Xenocidic/UBX/butterfly}}

If you point me to a different picture you would prefer, I can change it. xenocidic (talk) 00:13, 28 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

The Wikimedia Commons would be a good place to look for alternate images: http://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/Category:Lepidoptera . Since I don't know much about butterflies, you would probably have greater luck finding one to your liking. =) Just drop me a note when you find one. xenocidic (talk) 00:23, 28 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

It's quite a beautiful specimen. I actually copied the entire userbox from the WikiProject you're a member of (this is allowed per the GPL), but if you want a different picture, different colours, different message, etc., just let me know! I'll add the userbox to the Animals category now. Happy editing, xenocidic (talk) 00:28, 28 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

No trouble at all. I love to create userboxes. It's actually pretty easy to just take userboxes that already exist and modify them to taste. Here's what I've come up with so far, let me know if you want me to change it at all - different picture, text, colours, etc.

• {{User:Xenocidic/UBX/brazilhistory}}

If you have any other ideas or requests for userboxes that don't exist, just drop by and let me know. xenocidic (talk) 01:05, 28 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I'm not too sure about the wording... any suggestions, or does that look ok?

• {{User:Xenocidic/UBX/rainforest}}

Let me know on my talk page if you want anything changed (or feel free to modify it yourself). Best regards, xenocidic (talk) 03:57, 28 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I'm off for the evening, so any changes or new userboxes I'll take care of in the morning =) xenocidic (talk) 04:00, 28 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Here's what I've come up with... again, any changes at all, let me know! =) xenocidic (talk) 12:50, 28 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

• {{User:Xenocidic/UBX/amateurarch}}

Cool. Glad you like it. Let me know if you had any further questions or requests! P.S. You've got "User:Bluedenim/Tropical rainforests" on your page twice. Not sure if that was intentional =) Happy userboxing! xenocidic (talk) 20:16, 28 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I hope I can do something to bring the Neotropical Araceae together. They are my hobby. BTW, what is Polbot and how does it generate pages?--Wloveral (talk) 20:05, 28 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

It's great to have you with us! The Araceae in general need work, so anything you can do will be an improvement. Let me know if there's anything I can do to assist you. Polbot (talk · contribs) is a bot account that parsed data from the IUCN Redlist website and formatted it to Wikipedia guidelines. I run another bot account, BotanyBot (talk · contribs), that went through Polbot's contributions and fixed errors that were a factor of the IUCN's taxonomy. I still have a long list of families that need to be altered. So if you run into any, let me know and I'll make the changes quickly. Polbot finished its autogeneration of pages a while ago, though, so you won't see any new ones. Cheers, Rkitko ^(talk) 21:13, 28 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Hey there. I"m not sure if you were aware, but the Spiders WikiProject has a userbox you can use:

• {{User WPSpiders}}

Happy editing! xenocidic (talk) 01:49, 29 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Wloveral - I'm not 100% sure, but I don't think you'd have any real problems with that category. The rules are a little bit stricter for stub categories (like the Brazilian scientists one) than they are for general "permanent" categories, and I think that one like a "history of the Amazon" one should be OK, so long as it is used for things specifically relating to the Amazon itself (Category:History of the Amazon basin) might be a better title, since there is an article which specifies the Amazon Basin as a specific region). It would need to havbe a link in it to a parent category (best would probably be Category:History of South America), and it probably wouldn't hurt to have links to Category:History of Brazil and Category:History of Peru as well. It might be best to suggest this category to a WikiProject that works on articles to do with this area, like Wikipedia:WikiProject Brazil, which would have more information on whether such a category would be worthwhile. Your category seems to have been deleted - but because it was empty rather than any other reason (you put articles into categories by adding category links to the articles, not by adding the article names by editing the category, BTW - have a look at Help:Categories and Wikipedia:Categorization). Hope that helps - Grutness...wha? 02:27, 30 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

{{help}}

Why is there not an image placeholder for animals? We have several hundred South American butterflies to wiki. The text pages (with taxobox) can be generated from our database, but uploading the associated copyright-free images will take months. The image placeholder would be a big help in this case. --Wloveral (talk) 19:58, 1 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Someone over at WP:Requested images could knock one up...... Dendodge.Talk^Help 20:00, 1 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

(ec)There is nothing stopping you creating one, be my guest or the people at WP:Requested images could make one for you. Hell even I could make one, if it is so desired.--Kerotan^{Leave Me a Message} Have a nice day :) 20:02, 1 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Well, its not perfect, since I don't have the same software and ability as the others that made the place holders for people, but I gave it my best shot and will most likely try and improve it in a few days. And yes I am not entirely sure why its that colour, that is something I am going to work on. but the most important question of all, it it usable?--Kerotan^{Leave Me a Message} Have a nice day :) 21:39, 1 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

As you can see, I have improved the colour somewhat, I am still struggling on making the file a SVG file, and then I will work on the template.--Kerotan^{Leave Me a Message} Have a nice day :) 00:25, 2 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Hi there, thanks for dropping me a line, and sorry for the slowish reply, so after a little investigation, I fiddled around with your sandbox, and I wonder if this is the desired effect that you wanted?. If not don't hesitate to tell me, but my reply might be a little slow again, since my sister wants to use this PC.--20:06, 4 May 2008 (UTC)

I am glad I could help and yes, I will design that user box, also about the piped parameters, they have always confused me something awful as well, since each feature like "thumb" and the size seem to have a specific hierarchy that I can never seen quite to figure out, and oh how so many parameters there are... I will get right on that user box right away, as soon as my little sister is content with my efforts on this assignment that she has me doing.--Kerotan^{Leave Me a Message} Have a nice day :) 21:07, 4 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

		The Original Barnstar
		I am giving you this barnstar for your excellent contributions to just about everything related with Brazil. KerotanLeave Me a Message Have a nice day :) 21:54, 1 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

So your first barnstar, take the token gesture of a picture of a star for what you while, the message behind this award is that I think that your a fairly awesome wikipedian, who I haven't seen around before (unsurprisingly perhaps, Articles on video games have little over lap with Brazil's exciting biology), but I think that the time is now that your efforts are appreciated. The question of if you think you need praise for good contributions on wikipedia is another story altogether...--Kerotan^{Leave Me a Message} Have a nice day :) 21:54, 1 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

A new May 2008 issue of the WikiProject History of Science newsletter is hot off the virtual presses. Please feel free to make corrections or add news about any project-related content you've been working on. You're receiving this because you are a participant in the History of Science WikiProject. You may read the newsletter or unsubscribe from this notification by following the link. Yours in discourse--ragesoss (talk) 23:46, 2 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Bill I just go the Newsletter and saw you page. When I started Timeline of Entomology I found several problems.Who to put in and who to leave out was one, but more difficult were the polymaths and Chinese, Japanese, Russian and other "foreign" entomologists.I still have big problems with the Japanese but found a few useful papers.Valerie Portaile d'Histoire ...[1] was a big help.Do you watch this site? I've a few suggestions - Burmeister for a start.Is it best to just work on you page, e-mail you or put a note here. How about a few pics too.Best wishes from Ireland Robert aka Notafly (talk) 09:54, 4 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Yes Gallica is a terrific resource.Vive la France.There is a lot about these days if you know where to look.For the Brazilian entomologists try DEI Zalf [2] a site by Reinhard Gaedicke and Erich Groll who also list people with only a passing interest in entomology.I'll be in touch when I've thought more about your site and have suggestions.I'm uploading images at the moment.Long promised but I broke my shoulder last year.I wish I had fine memories of Brazil.I've been to Africa as far south as Chad but no further. All the best RobertNotafly (talk) 20:09, 4 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Hey there, I am have finished tinkering with the userbox that you asked me to make, and here it is.:

Produced from: <div style="float:left; border:1px solid #000000; margin:1px;"> {| cellspacing="0" style="width:238px; background:#33AADD;" | style="width:45px; height:45px; background:#3399EE; text-align:center; font-size:14pt; color:black;" | '''[[Image:Torchlight help.png|30px]]''' | style="font-size:8pt; padding:4pt; line-height:1.25em; color:black;" | This user is not too proud to call/ask for HELP! |}</div>

The above text will help you change the user box if you so wish, and even the image that I used if you so desire. I also encourage you that if you want to, you can move the page where this user box is located to somewhere in your name space, like User:Wloveral/User Boxes/Not too proud for example.

If you do want to do some tweaking to the colour, that is controlled by the six sets of numbers and or letters preceeded by the hash in the above code, like #000000 is black for example, and you can change the colour by just changing the numbers and letters, and a fairly comprehensive hex colour chart can be found here.

That's just about it, drop me a line if the user box does anything funny to your user page, or if you need any more help with anything. Enjoy.--22:00, 4 May 2008 (UTC)

It was no problem really, and I might just create that user box. best wishes to you too.--Kerotan^{Leave Me a Message} Have a nice day :) 00:39, 5 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for adding Brazil to Talk:Henry Walter Bates; please see my adjustment to the Bates banners box, which enables banner heads to be visible, and is a better format for later additions. Or so I think! While we're at it, would you feel like checking through my geographical and other Brazilian (& entomo)info on the Fritz Müller article? Thanks! Macdonald-ross (talk) 10:58, 13 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Hi. I have left the user a message with a few explanations and suggestions. I do believe he was editing in good faith, and in at least some of the instances he was, indeed, correct (Rivelino, for instance, has several instances of weasel words). The user has been with the project for just 10 days (account was created May 3) and, even if he had been editing anonymously before that (which might explain the IP doing similar edits), he is, for all intents and purposes, a newbie. So hopefully, this was no more than a misunderstanding. Cheers, Redux (talk) 12:49, 13 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Wloveral - I'm not sure exactly what there is I can teach you about stub sorting... the best thing is to just jump in. I did write a "how to" guide as part of a virtual classroom that was being run here last year - it's at User:Grutness/Stubbing how-to. That and WP:STUB will tell you a lot of what stub-sorting is all about. There are thousands of different stub type to sort things into, but even if you just learn a basic few at first (e.g., {{bio-stub}} for articles about individual people, {{geo-stub}} for places, {{music-stub}}, {{hist-stub}} for history and {{struct-stub}} for buildings and structures) and work from there. The full list is daunting, but there are patterns in it (there are lots of CountryName-geo-stub, CountryName-bio-stub, CountryName-hist-stub, etc, templates for articles related to places, people, and history in individual countries, for instance, e.g., France-geo-stub, Italy-bio-stub, Canada-hist-stub). Other than that, have a look at the various pages of Wikipedia:WikiProject Stub sorting, and hopefully you'll soon get into the swing of the way it works. Good luck, and welcome aboard :) Grutness...wha? 04:29, 16 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

It does sound like a lot of different stub types and a lot of info to carry around in your head, but as I said, even a few simple stub types helps, especially with sorting newly-created pages or helping empty out the main stub category (Category:Stubs), and most of the "how to" information is fairly common sense, so it's difficult to go too far wrong if you're using existing templates and categories. What generally happens is that some stub sorters work on a particular area they feel comfortable with (in your case, for instance, you might like to have a look at Category:Brazil geography stubs and see whether any of the articles in there would be better with more specific state stubs like Sergipe-geo-stub, or whether anything simply marked with Brazil-stub needs something more precise like Brazil-bio-stub). If you're only working at the general level of Category:Stubs or dealing with one specific area you'd only need to know a small section of the stub system. Grutness...wha? 10:25, 16 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Olá Wloveral! Há uma discussão ocorrendo em Talk:Potential superpowers#Removal of Brazil e gostaríamos da sua opinião. Obrigado pela atenção! Felipe C.S ^{( talk )} 22:01, 16 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Sim, você está absolutamente certo. Más o problema é que estão discutindo apenas a remoção do Brasil, e não a eliminação do artigo. O Brasil tem as mesmas potencialidades dos outros países listados no artigo. Talvez você pudesse fazer uma revisão no texto da seção "Brazil", eu não falo inglês e não posso fazer isso. Abraços; Felipe C.S ^{( talk )} 22:37, 16 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Você também ajudaria muito, se abrisse uma nova discussão questinando as "credible sources" das outras seções como a Russia. Não encontrei nenhuma... Obrigado pela atenção! Felipe C.S ^{( talk )} 22:46, 16 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Pode pelo menos dar seu voto? Abraços; Felipe C.S ^{( talk )} 23:08, 16 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Hi, just a heads up since you have worked on this page. I have deleted it as a G4; Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Adilson Melo refers. TerriersFan (talk) 23:24, 16 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Many thanks Bill.I am going to upload some high res pics of Neotropicals soon.Been busy with my Nikon, hence the haste. Warm regards Robert akaNotafly (talk) 08:32, 17 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Bill,

I understand your concern about creating pages that list animals that share only half of their species' name. It is interesting that you would bring this specific topic up for conversation as it is the one contribution for which I have received a barnstar. The rationale behind creating such pages is that a person will often only know part of the name of the species for which they are looking. By typing "miserabilis" into the search bar, they are provided with either a short list to choose from or a long well-structured list by which they will easily find the specific species they desire. These pages are not supposed to indicate that there is some connection between the species listed. Instead, they serve as disambiguation pages that distinguish between unrelated but similarly-titled articles. Such pages have been deemed helpful for the development of the project.

In reference to your analogy of human names, that is actually my speciality. One of the main objectives of WikiProject Anthroponymy is to create a list of people for every given name and every surname, and another is to create an article for each given name and surname. Extremely common given names are not given full listings but rather a computer-generated list of all articles beginning with that name, but most names (ranging from the rare to the relatively uncommon) are given actual "hand-made" lists. For your specific example, John, see John (first name) for the article and click "All pages beginning with John" in the infobox to find the list. I hope I have sufficiently explained my case. Feel free to contact me if you have any further concerns.

Neelix (talk) 15:17, 17 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Please continue further discussion of this at Talk:Miserabilis. Thank you. Bob the Wikipedian (talk) 20:22, 22 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Hi, Just FYI, i shall finish the tagging next week when i get my replacement ram back. I got down to the J section - Special:Contributions/Reedy Bot, but had to finish for the day. —Reedy 15:49, 17 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I might point out that this is the precise rule I was following in these edits. I agree that "redundant" seems poor diction, which occurred to me minutes after I made those changes. However, "unnecessary" is appropriate, as these intermediate taxons are not important for the immediate understanding.

You referenced the following quote: "Taxoboxes should include all major ranks above the taxon described in the article, plus minor ranks that are important to understanding the classification of the taxon described in the article, or which are discussed in the article. Other minor ranks should be omitted."

Here's my understanding of how this is interpreted, and the basic rules I picked up when I learned from my mistakes that were corrected by others:

superclass: kingdom, phylum, subphylum, superclass

class: kingdom, phylum, subphylum, infraphylum, superclass, class

subclass: kingdom, phylum, class, subclass

infraclass: kingdom, phylum, class, subclass, infraclass

superorder: kingdom, phylum, class, subclass, infraclass, superorder

order: kingdom, phylum, class, subclass, infraclass, superorder, order

suborder: kingdom, phylum, class, order, suborder

infraorder: kingdom, phylum, class, order, suborder, infraorder

superfamily: kingdom, phylum, class, order, suborder, infraorder, superfamily

family: kingdom, phylum, class, order, suborder, infraorder, superfamily, family

subfamily: kingdom, phylum, class, order, family, subfamily

infrafamily: kingdom, phylum, class, order, family, subfamily, infrafamily

tribe: kingdom, phylum, class, order, family, subfamily, infrafamily, tribe

subtribe: kingdom, phylum, class, order, family, tribe, subtribe

infratribe: kingdom, phylum, class, order, family, tribe, subtribe, infratribe

genus: kingdom, phylum, class, order, family, tribe, subtribe, infratribe, genus

subgenus: kingdom, phylum, class, order, family, tribe, genus, subgenus

species: kingdom, phylum, class, order, family, tribe, genus, subgenus, species

subspecies: kingdom, phylum, class, order, family, tribe, genus, subgenus, species, subspecies

infraspecies: kingdom, phylum, class, order, family, tribe, genus, subgenus, species, subspecies, infraspecies

If you disagree, perhaps we should get someone else's input at WP:ANIMAL. Bob the Wikipedian (talk) 15:54, 20 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Glad to know we're on the same page. Ha, I'm not a botanist, just a zoologist. When I mess with botany taxoboxes, it's only to add links to already-existing taxons or add an image-- speaking of which, I happen to be making sufficient progress in traversing the list of plant articles without images at this very moment. I wish I knew how to actually do an automated update on those lists-- that way I wouldn't be missing any articles as I add images and remove old requests. Bob the Wikipedian (talk) 16:15, 20 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Mine would look like this:

|regnum=Animalia

|phylum=Chordata

|classis=Mammalia

|subclassis=Theria

|infraclassis=Eutheria

|superordo=Laurasiatheria

|ordo=Cetacea

It looks like I missed the Cetartiodactyla and Whippomorpha, although these aren't as widely recognized. Bob the Wikipedian (talk) 16:43, 20 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

The only intermediate taxons to be included are those directly above the immediate taxon, which, in this case, include all intermediate taxons between the class and the order. The subphylum is above the class, so it is left out. Bob the Wikipedian (talk) 16:53, 20 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Additional thought...it seems that the spinal chord is more important than the backbone...I've always thought otherwise. Vertebrata ought to be a phylum, in my opinion, and Chordata should just be something higher, maybe not so major. Bob the Wikipedian (talk) 16:57, 20 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

All those are now done! Noticed a couple of bad tags which i've now reverted. —Reedy 13:49, 22 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

See my talk for my response! =) —Reedy 17:14, 22 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

{{Infobox Settlement}} - On my talk page aswell... —Reedy 18:03, 22 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

People stubs done. Looking at the rest of the people, cats, a few images, etc, nearly 3000 in the work list, not all will be edited. Will give you a shout when thats done —Reedy 22:59, 22 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

All the people are now tagged with WPBIO and WPBrazil. —Reedy 20:47, 23 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Woah! Slow down, and remember I'm human. I can only work so fast, and also have a real life.

However, thanks for giving me ideas for things to work on (plant articles without images is one of the hardest, most monotonous, and cumbersome projects I've worked on, and it requires lots of breaks, so these will help me relax some).

If you are this good at finding articles that need serious help, perhaps you might consider a user subpage with a list of articles you intend to work on/are requesting help with. You might also find it helpful to hire some volunteer WikiOtters. I gotta say, you're tempting me to become a WikiOtter! ;)

If you had a subpage for articles needing work, then WikiOtters could sign their name next to them when they are working on them.

Ha, do I belong on Bob?

I'm not done yet with the first link you gave me...only the bee. The spider and butterfly I haven't even looked at yet. Bob the Wikipedian (talk) 22:22, 22 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

lol, I was joking about belonging on Bob. I'm living and unnoteworthy, so I don't qualify for my own entry, even if it is my username (and real name, I might add).

I'm finished now with the Miserabilis stuff. I didn't change a whole lot, since filing these redirects under afd would be pretty pointless. As a general rule, I don't like links that take you to the same page you were just on...however, what if you actually typed that name in? I would hope to come to some page. However, redirects shouldn't be created simply because someone is too lazy to write an article. In my opinion, these three redirects should never have been created, but filing them for deletion will be just as unproductive. These three titles would be good candidates for their own articles, since they are each unique species within multispecies genera. Bob the Wikipedian (talk) 22:49, 22 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Serjão redirected to Serge (first name). I don't see any problems with the Immo disambiguation-- it looks okay to me. In fact, it is probably one of the best-made disambiguations I've ever seen. Bob the Wikipedian (talk) 22:57, 22 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I am surprised at how well-done Bob appears to be. I'm not sure what sort of work you were wanting on this page, but it looks like it's already there and functioning properly with a list of articles. If needed, people will add to it themselves. Bob the Wikipedian (talk) 23:07, 22 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

On Andrena, note the following sentence: "Andrena is the largest genus in the family Andrenidae, and is nearly worldwide in distribution, with the notable exceptions of Oceania and South America." The sentence says they're everywhere except South America and Oceania. I wish I would catch those little words that change the meanings of sentences while taking tests in school!  :)

Yeah, those name articles all look good to me. However, I stick to zoology articles for the most part, as that's the area I know most about, although I am willing to make the occassional edit on something else. Peace out, Bob the Wikipedian (talk) 23:25, 22 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

See the option "Email this user" on the left? Try that. Bob the Wikipedian (talk) 17:35, 23 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Wow, I never realized there was so much confusion in the world of zoology. In high school, I aced the taxonomy portion of my biology class with 100%, saying, oh, there's nothing to it; all of it is strictly logical and there's no ambiguity. This article definitely proves me wrong!  :)

I don't quite understand all of it, but I picked up a few interesting things. (I had to look up colugo and tree shrew. They must not have been in the illustrated portion of the World Atlas of Animals my mom gave me when I was four.) That's pretty neat that their hands and feet are webbed as well as their limbs and tail. The "primitive brain" part made me think of a really stupid animal that knows day/night, move/sit still, and maybe distinguish what foods are safe to eat or what other animals will hunt it. This made me laugh, even though I am pretty sure they're not that primitive!

I'm surprised to learn they're not related to bats! I would expect the colugo and bat to be closer-related, since they both have webbed hands and limbs.

Even though quite a bit of this was over my head, I enjoyed what I learned. Thanks for sharing! As I read these abstracts, I'm quickly learning there's a lot more to taxonomy than what I realized!

Now if only I could find the species paper for the Maluku frogfish!

Peace,

Bob the Wikipedian (talk) 23:39, 23 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Sorry to bother you again, but could you have a look at Canus?--Wloveral (talk) 18:49, 25 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Wikipedia_talk:WikiProject_Disambiguation#Species_epithet_disambiguation_pages Bob the Wikipedian (talk) 12:47, 27 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Hey... When you add the stubs as the category, but not using the stub templates it really complicated things. Is there a reason that you add the stub as a category? Jabencarsey (talk) 01:33, 23 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Hey - No problem... Stub sorting needs lots of help. Basically you want to check out Wikipedia:WikiProject_Stub_sorting. The stubs should get added directly (with curly braces { not the swuare ones [ which are for categories) that will automatically add the category. Jabencarsey (talk) 01:46, 23 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I have created the stub template for {{Riodinidae-stub}} at Template:Riodinidae-stub. Shyamal (talk) 16:14, 1 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I made the Ctenomorphodes tessulatus page for my wikiproject:Phasmatodea, and what do you mean when you mean clean up? i don't think you are a admin for all i know, and are you really dead? BJ (talk) 20:38, 25 May 2008 (UTC) Wikipedia:WikiProject Phasmatodea —Preceding unsigned comment added by Bjaco18 (talk • contribs) 20:38, 25 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

RE: Have a look:

• • False garden mantis
  • onchestus sp.
  • spur legged phasmid
  • A. monstrosa
  • childrens stick insect
  • Titan stick insect
  • Large brown mantis
  • Burying mantis *New*
  • Goliath stick insect *New*
  • Orthodera ministralis **Brand new** 7:58 7/8/8
  • Pink-winged phasma **Brand new** 11:15pm 10/5/08
    • • • BRAND NEW--Largest page-Brisbane insects 5:50pm 23/may/08 ******
          • • • Wiki project-Ctenomorphodes tessulatus********

BJ (talk) 20:41, 25 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Hi, I am trying to get article Mystriosuchus ready for Good Article status, but I think there are multiple issues with the article. If you are interested in extinction-related articles, I'd appreciate it if you could lend a hand. I am asking all the users I can find who are prominently involved in the extinction-related wikiprojects. Thanks! The ''Gorgeous Girl''!!! (talk) 04:41, 26 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Hello. You tagged Canus with an AfD notice, however you did not finish the remaining two steps of the AfD, which includes creating the actual AfD discussion page, and including that page in the list of the day's discussions. As such, the AfD template has been removed. If you wish to renominate the page, please feel free to do so by following the instructions at: How to list pages for deletion, making sure to complete all 3 listed steps. -- Collectonian (talk · contribs) 16:07, 26 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Nice to see your contributions. Do consider adding your user name to Wikipedia:LEPID and Wikipedia:WikiProject Arthropods to indicate your membership and resource availability. Cheers. Shyamal (talk) 06:15, 27 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Oops, Great! I see you are already listed ! Shyamal (talk) 06:21, 27 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Wloveral. I notice you recently added a reference to the number of mollusc species on the mollusca talkpage. I've not got access to the text that you cited, but if you have, could you perhaps answer or comment on the question that I posed lower down the talkpage? Best regards, --Plumbago (talk) 08:16, 27 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Ha, thanks for catching my really dumb mistake on that taxobox. Normally I put more effort into taxoboxes than that, but with the Memorial Day weekend, I had a lot of catching up to do. It took me about 12 hours to catch up! (Although, as you can see, I took the liberty of mentioning the top ten species of 2008, which required making a few stubs. That reminds me...I need to put stub templates on those. Well, I need to hit the road at the moment. If you're not doing anything and don't mind stubbing them for me, go ahead. Otherwise, I'll get to them tomorrow sometime. Bob the Wikipedian (talk) 23:14, 27 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

That's pretty cool! And what a double coincidence! Apparently the three of us must all have very similar interests. I'm online now, so I'll go stub those stubs. By the way, before you tag any more of those epithets for deletion, have you had a look at this topic yet? You might change your mind...I have, and I hope you see why. Bob the Wikipedian (talk) 01:22, 28 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I agree...there are much better things to worry about. Besides, I don't think it's really hurting anything. It may mean Wikipedia requires additional servers, but hey, Wikipedia has plenty of donations to buy whatever they need to. After all, we can remove all we want, but in the end, it's the contributions, not the deletions, that matter the most. I say when in doubt, leave it.

On a somewhat lighter note, I've added over 1,000 (maybe over 1,300, haven't checked recently) pages to my watchlist. I patrol my watchlist daily, and WOW, it definitely took me all of 12 hours to catch up after the three-day weekend...and I have no idea what happened Friday night through Sunday morning...my watchlist wouldn't show that much! I'm thinking it might be time for me to start removing pages from my watchlist. I'm also requesting various page protections, such as one on Popcorn. But hey, I'm staying busy, and that's what matters, right?  :)

So how has your day been?

Bob the Wikipedian (talk) 01:41, 28 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I see. I'm sorry your day didn't go too well. 1,200, you say? Wow...I thought I was a busy Wikipedian! I'd say go for it. Uploading photos takes a little while, since you have to tag everything...I would do that part another day/week, but whatever floats your boat. Have fun with that!

I'm feeling a particular high right now since I just merged all my Wikipedia accounts and can now use this name on the languages that ban the word "Wikipedian" from usernames. Ha, looks like I found a loophole! Bob the Wikipedian (talk) 02:57, 28 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I'm not sure how much you know about pterosaurs, but I found this paper pretty interesting and thought you might, too:

Terrestrial stalking azhdarchids, the paper

Bob the Wikipedian (talk) 19:57, 28 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

p.s. The more technical version by the same author is here: A Reappraisal of Azhdarchid Pterosaur Functional Morphology and Paleoecology Bob the Wikipedian (talk) 20:04, 28 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Hi. You added some notices to the Florida Healing Outpouring page but nothing on its talk page. Perhaps you could explain a little further about how it can be improved. — SimonEast (talk) 10:32, 29 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Hi William,

Please stop nominating the disambiguation pages I create for speedy deletion. Based on the discussion that has been generated on the "Miserabilis" and "Canus" deletion nominations, it looks like the community mostly agrees that the species epithets alone are not sufficient disambiguation page material, and so I have stopped creating them. Also based on these discussions, however, it looks like the community mostly agrees that "G. species" disambiguation pages are acceptable and quite helpful. This is the type of disambiguation page I have been creating. If you disagree with this assessment, let's try to work things out in one centralized discussion and not on all the different articles that represent this idea. I'll hold off in creating more "G. species" disambiguation pages until some kind of consensus has been reached.

Please understand that I only contribute what I believe to be helpful to the betterment of the project.

Neelix (talk) 03:25, 30 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Now this I definitely support. While the epithets are debatable, I can honestly say that this is a good idea. For example, I know several people who don't know the T. in the dinosaur T. rex, commonly referred by its binomial abbreviation, stands for Tyrannosaurus (much less know how to spell that). I have to commend Neelix for going so boldly where no Wikipedian has gone before. In fact, I will. Have a wonderful day! Bob the Wikipedian (talk) 12:24, 30 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Dear Bob and Neelix, The problem with the "G. species" formula is that the generic abbreviation is dependent on the context in which it is placed for its meaning, and, as such, this form only appears in a sentence, paragraph, chapter, or paper in which the full generic name is previously given and where no confusion is possible. The mosquito people are particularly addicted to this short-hand formula and, when discussion both Aedes and Anopheles in the same paper, will abbreviate the genera as Ae. and A., respectively. Sometimes, when the subgenus is the nominate one, its abbreviation will be used within parentheses, but this, too, is just found within scientific publications. These generic abbreviations are not for use outside of scientific papers. A context-dependent abbreviation can not be used as thought it were a standard one in the title of a WP article. ("F.C." now seems to be standard for football club, although I think a space is called for.) Disambiguation can be used to good end in the hundreds of cases in which the same generic name is employed for both plant and animal groups. The recently created page Eisenbeckia does just that. T. rex, notwithstanding its fame and trecherous spelling, must use the search feature to find its full generic name (or just google "sue" and "Field Museum"). BTW, in taxonomy the masculine and feminine grammatical forms of the same name are considered synonyms. For example, the butterfly genus Heliconius and the plant genus Heliconia persist only because they are in different kingdoms. (I have both in my backyard.) Have a good weekend and best wishes. Cheers, Bill

Hi Bill,

Based on the deletion discussion of Miserabilis, I am under the impression that species epithets are not sufficient for disambiguation pages in and of themselves because the are inseparable from their genuses. Having said this, I agree with Good Olfactory's comments; that is, "G. species" disambiguation pages, more aptly called set index articles, are justified as "G. species" titles are quoted in literature by themselves without the full genus named. A parallel can be drawn between "G. species" set index articles and ship set index articles. The question is not one of confusion, but one of proper naming. "G. species" is a proper naming format, and when an example of this format is typed into the search bar, a user should be presented with what he/she is looking for.

On my talk page, you suggested that Bob join in the discussion. Unfortunately, he is on a hiatus until June 17th.

If you still feel that "G. species" set index articles are unjustified, we should move this discussion somewhere more central, as I suggested in the initial post. The reason that a consensus was reached on Miserabilis was because it was in an appropriate location to attract discussion. A user talk page would probably not be as condusive.

Happy editing,

Neelix (talk) 13:08, 1 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Dear Neelix, When Linnaeus finally settled on (disambiguous) binomial nomenclature (in 1758, for animals, in the 10th edition of his Systema Naturae), he did not have computers, and he could hardly realize how necessary computers would be for sorting out the more than 1.5 million species of plants and animals that his intellectual descendants would name by the end of the twentieth century. Let us see how far you get with the G. species_epithet model you propose. If all species had correctly filled taxoboxes, a bot might be able to help you. There are authoritative systematic catalogs on the internet that could help you, such as Don Wilson's catalog of the mammals of the world on the Smithsonian Institution's website. This database includes about 5500 currently valid or "accessable" binomials and about as many binomials in synonymy and homonymy. (Yes, these out-of-use "ghost" names also are remembered in taxonomy, sort of like previous edits of a wikipedia article.) I, myself, have a database of about 5000 species names for neotropical butterflies, but it is not yet a finished product that I can use to bot-generate wikipedia butterfly species pages. It was suggested humorously some years ago that Linnaeus himself must be considered the type specimen of Homo sapiens and should be dug up to assume his rightful place in a natural history museum. He has had his way for the past 260 years. Good luck to you. --Wloveral (talk) 18:05, 1 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Bill,

Thank you for your inspiring words and helpful advice. I will keep both in mind as I edit Wikipedia in the future. I hope we will cross paths again.

Neelix (talk) 18:31, 3 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Lovely man. I met him a few times.However Eugène was a rogue.I put a couple of pics on his page and some unadorned comment.More pics to follow in Commons (tomorrow perhaps).Some of the butterflies are very interesting in themselves. Thanks for the Erebia edits. Another well worked genus.Tourist trade and grant aided endemics.All the best. Slainte Robert Notafly (talk) 21:07, 30 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Many thanks.My E-mail address is on my User Page but in any event I will reply by e-mail Monday.Warm regards from the Emerald Isle Notafly (talk) 20:49, 31 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Wloveral, You tagged the page Semmelweis' ideas rejected as unscientific with {cleanup-title} on 02:22, 1 June 2008. Why? The tag is not self-explanatory. Please be specific. I dont understand your reasoning. I have created a discussion page where you may reply Talk:Semmelweis' ideas rejected as unscientific. Power.corrupts (talk) 09:47, 1 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Wloveral, I checked your edit history for the date you tagged the article. You have been extremely productive with page edits every few minutes, I counted 43 edits in just one hour 02:00-03:00. Assuming that you sometimes read articles without actually editing them this implies that you only glanced at my article before suggesting a rename. This also explains why you left no note on the discussion page. Why this enormous haste? I would never suggest renames (or merges for that matter) unless I read the whole thing thoroughly, gave it consideration, and then crafted a discussion entry presenting my points. Your did the same thing with Gerechtigkeitsgasse, a Swiss street name which I think is fully WP:title policy-compliant Please be sensitive, that your tags and comments tax real people's real time out there. I leave this note on your discussion page because it may be of interest to other wiki contributors.Power.corrupts (talk) 14:11, 3 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Hi. I've noticed you have tagged several articles with non-English titles for cleanup. Actually, if there is no generally used English name for a subject, then using the original-language term is the right thing to do. I've expanded on this a bit at Talk:Gerechtigkeitsgasse. Best,  Sandstein  20:51, 1 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

g'day i'm ben i sent you some messages in the past but am sending you this one for a good reason: WikiProject Mantodea for you to join thanks and cheers ;) B jacob (talk) 01:57, 2 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

g'day me again nice to hear from you, did you know that my cousin in law plays jazz music! Me my self breed and study these amazing crearures, although if you would like to see some of my work click Here, this breed of praying mantid which i have mastered to raise and breed, although this breed is Parthenogenic so breeding is really easy. I have made trusworthy friends at a museum in Brisbane Australia where i live, and these friends have let me take part in work experience in taking inquires for the public about stick insects, my working with insects started when i was about 4 and have moved away and then came back to my age know, 12, when growing up i experienced younger children killing stick insects and have divised a group called Bugs ed, an insect friendly and insect wise group educating young children about not killing but keeping these pecurliar creatures. I am currently breeding Extatosoma tiaratum and Tropidoderus childrenii for study and much more. Thanks for your time Cheers :)

B jacob (talk) 20:34, 2 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

{{User:Bjaco18/UBX/wikipedia:wikiproject mantodea}}

hopefully this one is fixed

B jacob (talk) 21:13, 2 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Hi have a look at this picture of mine at the bottum of the page Here and if you would like to place a nomination or a comment please do so. B jacob (talk) 02:21, 3 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Olá Wloveral! Estou organizando uma força tarefa para levar o artigo "Brazil" ao status de Featured. Antes que eu apresentasse os problemas do artigo, queria saber se você está interessado e disponível. Atenciosamente; Felipe C.S ^{( talk )} 21:32, 3 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Ótimo! Há alguns dias eu nomeei o artigo para o status de Featured, para serem apresentados seus problemas. [3] Como você pode ver, são basicamente alguns problemas de escrita e principalmente as fontes. Já que você disse se interessar por algo relacionado a Floresta Amazônica, você poderia cuidar da seção "Geography" do artigo? Se precisar de ajuda com alguma referência pode me contatar. Se eu falasse inglês a um bom nível, eu mesmo o faria, mas... Bom, espero que aceite. Abraços; Felipe C.S ^{( talk )} 20:56, 4 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Fiz a melhoria da introdução, da infobox e do primeiro texto da seção Economy. [4] Você ainda não deu uma resposta, portanto vou perguntar novamente: Você poderia cuidar da seção Geography? (Visto que se interessa por assuntos relacionados à Amazônia). Essa seção precisa de uma revisão e boas referências (sempre usando Wikipedia:Citation templates). Com um trabalho em conjunto levaremos o artigo ao status de Featured. Atenciosamente; Felipe C.S ^{( talk )} 20:05, 6 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

As far as I remember, the template is ready for use; however I don't remember there being a consensus that it would be an improvement, and/or necessary. It may also need amending to reflect re-ordering of sections since it was written. I'm afraid I'm unlikely to have much time to dedicate to it in the coming weeks! Smith609 Talk 20:32, 4 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Bill This looks as if it is the right man Francisco Hernández de Toledo but his dates don't fit the timeline.Must "fly" Robert Notafly (talk) 19:14, 5 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Eu vou ampliar o artigo que comecei, sobre o Dr. Júlio Afrânio Peixoto.Quando terminar, eu lhe peço para fazer a revisão dele.Por sinal, este eugenista disse uma frase que terminou se aplicando a ele mesmo:Todo homem morre duas vezes.A segunda morte é quando ele é esquecido.Agre22 (talk) 20:25, 13 June 2008 (UTC)agre22[reply]

Foi você quem ampliou aquele meu artigo sobre o Dr. Júlio Afrânio Peixoto?Se sim, a ampliação ficou razoável, mas: 1-Ao contrário do que aconteceu com a obra literária de Machado de Assis,Lima Barreto, a obra literária do Dr. Júlio Afrânio Peixoto, envelheceu.Para citar, o biógrafo dele, Afrânio Peixoto foi um "perdulário da pena", tendo publicado mais de 90 livros.No entanto não é por problemas de direitos autorais, que tal obra não está sendo atualmente editada.É por falta de qualidade mesmo. 2-No tópico Medicine não se fala de que o Prêmio Nobel em Medicina e Fisiologia de 1921, que só tinha como competidor Carlos Chagas, não foi concedido a ninguém.Também não se diz, que foi na Argentina, não no Brasil, que as descobertas de Carlos Chagas foram confirmadas de vez.Apenas no caso de negar que a doença de Chagas tivesse ligação com inflamação da tireóide(bócio) é que o Dr. Afrânio Peixoto estava certo.Em todo o resto, ele estava errado. 3-O artigo devia citar as duas melhores frases ditas por este eugenista: Eu trocaria todos os títulos que tenho, pelo direito de ter uma descendência. Uma frase dita por ele, ao perder o único filho que teve, que era um débil físico e mental.Outra frase dita por ele: Todo homem morre duas vezes.A segunda morte de um homem vem quando é esquecido. 4-O artigo devia dizer, que apesar de tanto ser muito respeitado, como muito odiado,no Brasil, este eugenista hoje não é nem uma coisa , nem outra.Ele é simplesmente, um esquecido. Agre22 (talk) 16:51, 15 June 2008 (UTC)agre22[reply]

Eu tenho um livro, com um capítulo sobre o Dr. Júlio Afrânio Peixoto.Se desejas(gratuitamente) a xerox do capítulo sobre el, eu posso lhe enviar de graça.Meu e-mail é: daltonagre@uol.com.br .Eu escrevi algumas poucas coisas, naquele artigo sobre o Dr. Júlio Afrânio Peixoto. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Agre22 (talk • contribs) 14:51, 16 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Eu também nunca seria um amigo do Dr. Júlio Afrânio Peixoto.Só que o fato dele ter sido um eugenista, um neurótico, um desastrado,etc. não é desculpa para se ignorar a vida dele.A maioria esmagadora dos personagens mais importantes da história foram vilões;no geral até piores, que o desastrado Dr. Júlio Afrânio Peixoto. Agre22 (talk) 12:28, 17 June 2008 (UTC)agre22[reply]

Dear William, Many thanks for removing the "stub" template from this page. Perhaps you could also advise on re-grading on the Talk page...? Thanks again—GRM (talk) 15:09, 24 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for the feedback, Bill—GRM (talk) 20:27, 24 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Wloveral - no problem. I just added a proposal at Wikipedia:WikiProject_Stub_sorting/Proposals/2008/June (which is all you need to do to propose a new stub type). Unless there's any strong opposition (which is unlikely), you can go ahead and make the template in a few days time. If you can find 60 articles that can take the template, then it can get its own category, too (if not, it should just be made to feed into Category:Butterfly stubs for now). Grutness...wha? 00:28, 25 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Hi William- I noticed you added several myrmecologists to the list of notable myrmecologists. Since most of these people don't have their own wikipedia page, could you please include a line or 2 on what makes then notable? For an example please see the notable apiologists section on the Apiology page. Cheers, AJseagull1 (talk) 21:27, 7 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Bill Do you have anything on Justin Goudot Best regards Robert PS. Brazil I'd love to but the museum finances aren't that great atm.

Thanks for uploading Image:Nessaea obrina Jari.JPG. The image has been identified as not specifying the copyright status of the image, which is required by Wikipedia's policy on images. If you don't indicate the copyright status of the image on the image's description page, using an appropriate copyright tag, it may be deleted some time in the next seven days. If you have uploaded other images, please verify that you have provided copyright information for them as well.

For more information on using images, see the following pages:

• Wikipedia:Image use policy
• Wikipedia:Image copyright tags

This is an automated notice by STBotI. For assistance on the image use policy, see Wikipedia:Media copyright questions. NOTE: once you correct this, please remove the tag from the image's page. STBotI (talk) 00:50, 1 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Bill, I saw your message on Robert Nash's page. You need to either obtain an email from the original author indicating that the image has been released into public domain or show a website which indicates the status. On commons.wikimedia.org, you send that email to the OTRS email id, I guess you can paste the email contents (with the email headers, message ID etc) on the image page and also tag with {{pd}}. Hope this helps. Shyamal (talk) 06:55, 1 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Dr Overal, I was just browsing and rummaging through some old books from my dead father's room and I found these writings by some José Cândido de Melo Carvalho. It was great to see all the information about him here on wikipedia. Having seen the history of the page, I noticed that many contributions on Museu Emilio Goeldi's history and the advances in Brazilian zoology and ecology have come from your user sir. I would also like to apologise for some bad comments I made on the Jose Marcio Correa Ayres discussion page, I was a bit stupefied with some inaccurate pieces of information but at the same time not realizingg that it had been done with good intentions, and that wikipedia is all about progressive improvement. Best,

Espantalho --Espantalho (talk) 04:12, 30 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I see you provided the ref to Ponder & Lindberg (2008) for various species counts in Mollusc. The article is now being reviewed for GA, and the Ponder & Lindberg refs have defects: do not identify author & title of the contribution (Ponder & Lindberg are editors); no page numbers; not formatted using citation templates. As you recommended Ponder & Lindberg, I'm hoping you can fix these. Otherwise I'll have to remove refs to Ponder & Lindberg and all the specific content items they support. -- Philcha (talk) 10:29, 22 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I wanted to know if you (or any friends of yours) are interested in dermatology, and would be willing to help me with the WikiProject Medicine/Dermatology task force? Particularly with infectious causes of skin disease? kilbad (talk) 18:43, 23 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Greeting from Ireland.I've started adding to Medical Entomology.Would you take a look?.Back to photography next week.Anything special you want.Not Doritis - we have one but I can't find it.However I have a freind in Cologne who is just about to start photographing specimens in the Alexander Koenig Museum and may find it there.E-mail any South America wants lists and I will do my best. Warmest regards.Wish I could take up your suggestion and get to Brazil. Maybe 2010 Robert Notafly (talk) 15:54, 14 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

It's here at long last! The January 2009 issue of the WikiProject History of Science newsletter is ready, with exciting news about Darwin Day 2009. Please feel free to make corrections or add news about any project-related content you've been working on. You're receiving this because you are a participant in the History of Science WikiProject. You may read the newsletter or unsubscribe from this notification by following the link. Yours in discourse --ragesoss (talk) 02:53, 11 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Bom dia! Please check out this discussion here: Template_talk:Infobox_Scientist#Religion_field. Bletchley (talk) 11:16, 11 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Check out this deletion discussion here: [5] Bletchley (talk) 11:48, 11 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Happy New Year Bill. Can you e-mail what you have so far? Robert aka Notafly (talk) 09:23, 23 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Hello Wloveral,

WikiProject Piracy is currently undergoing some updates and changes, and we are trying to find out who is still active in the project. You are currently listed as a participant on the list of participants, and we would like for you to update your status. Please move your name to the section that best describes your activity in the project:

• Active - still active and interested within the scope of the WikiProject.
• Semi-Active - still active on Wikipedia, but not as active in regards to the WikiProject.
• Former Members - a catch-all classification for those editors who are not active on Wikipedia, those that are still on Wikipedia, but no longer part of this WikiProject, or those that have otherwise not moved their names to another classification yet.

Thank you,
Adolphus79 (talk) 16:50, 8 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

User:Jimfbleak seeks the id of this butterfly from southwestern Brazil. File:ButterflyBrazil_148.jpg. Thanks. Shyamal (talk) 15:24, 27 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for uploading File:Dr. Novães 4.jpg. I noticed that the file's description page currently doesn't specify who created the content, so the copyright status is unclear. If you did not create this file yourself, you will need to specify the owner of the copyright. If you obtained it from a website, then a link to the website from which it was taken, together with a restatement of that website's terms of use of its content, is usually sufficient information. However, if the copyright holder is different from the website's publisher, their copyright should also be acknowledged.

If you have uploaded other files, consider checking that you have specified their source and tagged them, too. You can find a list of files you have uploaded by following this link. Unsourced and untagged images may be deleted one week after they have been tagged, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If the image is copyrighted under a non-free license (per Wikipedia:Fair use) then the image will be deleted 48 hours after 02:21, 11 July 2009 (UTC). If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you. NW (Talk) 02:21, 11 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Bill Did you see this Adalbert Seitz (BDH link bottom of the page)atb Robert akaNotafly (talk) 10:22, 28 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Are you still and Active participant of WikiProject Animals WP:ANIMALS ? Please let me know. ZooPro 05:50, 2 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]

You have been invited to join WikiProject Insects!! Join today and work with me and other members (project just made 22:44, 19 November 2009 (UTC)) in a collaboration on improving insect orders and creating pages of insect families. Things like insect-related awards, userboxes, topicons, ect. are also coming soon.

I was also interested in joining WP:Phasmatodea and WP:Manotdea into WP:Insects. If we do that, we can all collaborate, as it says the project has become inactive, any thoughts? Well you can give me an answer on my talk page or WikiProject insects' talk page when you're ready!! Bugboy52.4 | =-= 23:26, 19 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, Wloveral, thanks for your recent interest in the article. This is just a note to say that I've removed the internal link you recently added because the newly created nature faker redirects to the main article, which WP:OVERLINK expressly states not to do. FYI. :) María (habla conmigo) 19:40, 5 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Hello Wloveral! Thank you for your contributions. I am a bot alerting you that 1 of the articles that you created is tagged as an Unreferenced Biography of a Living Person. The biographies of living persons policy requires that all personal or potentially controversial information be sourced. In addition, to ensure verifiability, all biographies should be based on reliable sources. If you were to bring this article up to standards, it would greatly help us with the current 7 article backlog. Once the article is adequately referenced, please remove the {{unreferencedBLP}} tag. Here is the article:

1. Anne E. Magurran - Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL

Thanks!--DASHBot (talk) 21:33, 16 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Me bloqueram. E eu não sei como apelar, contra o bloqueio, que é/seria eterno.O que eu faço?187.79.106.19 (talk) 19:15, 20 March 2010 (UTC)agre22[reply]

Hello. Your account has been granted the "reviewer" userright, allowing you to review other users' edits on certain flagged pages. Pending changes, also known as flagged protection, is currently undergoing a two-month trial scheduled to end 15 August 2010.

Reviewers can review edits made by users who are not autoconfirmed to articles placed under pending changes. Pending changes is applied to only a small number of articles, similarly to how semi-protection is applied but in a more controlled way for the trial. The list of articles with pending changes awaiting review is located at Special:OldReviewedPages.

When reviewing, edits should be accepted if they are not obvious vandalism or BLP violations, and not clearly problematic in light of the reason given for protection (see Wikipedia:Reviewing process). More detailed documentation and guidelines can be found here.

If you do not want this userright, you may ask any administrator to remove it for you at any time. Courcelles (talk) 18:56, 17 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Hi! It seems you recently created an unreferenced biography of a living person: Herbert Walter Levi. The community has decided that all new biographies of living persons must contain a reliable source that supports at least one statement made about the person in the article as per our verifiability policy. Please add references as soon as possible. Thanks! --LaraBot (talk) 00:10, 19 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Hello there. This is an automated message to tell you about the gradual phasing out of the preference entitled "Mark all edits minor by default", which you currently have (or very recently had) enabled.

On 13 March 2011, this preference was hidden from the user preferences screen as part of efforts to prevent its accidental misuse (consensus discussion, guidelines for use at WP:MINOR). This had the effect of locking users in to their existing preference, which, in your case, was true. To complete the process, your preference will automatically be changed to false in the next few days. This does not require any intervention on your part and all users will still be able to manually mark their edits as being minor in the usual way.

For well-established users such as yourself there is a workaround available involving custom JavaScript. If you have any problems, feel free to drop me a note.

Thank you for your understanding and happy editing :) Editing on behalf of User:Jarry1250, LivingBot (talk) 21:04, 15 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

The article Herbert Walter Levi has been proposed for deletion because under Wikipedia policy, all biographies of living persons created after March 18, 2010, must have at least one source that directly supports material in the article.

If you created the article, please don't take offense. Instead, consider improving the article. For help on inserting references, see Wikipedia:Referencing for beginners or ask at Wikipedia:Help desk. Once you have provided at least one reliable source, you may remove the {{prod blp}} tag. Please do not remove the tag unless the article is sourced. If you cannot provide such a source within ten days, the article may be deleted, but you can request that it be undeleted when you are ready to add one. Regards, SunCreator ^(talk) 22:49, 24 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Very good article. Congrats for the updated and useful info on the subject. Keep up the good work.......:) ! Krenakarore (talk) 14:53, 16 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Hey, I am a good friend of some nieces of Darrell A. Posey who wanted to know if you could place his pic on his wiki page. It is a good article about him, by the way. 96.29.127.234 (talk) 05:50, 4 November 2011 (UTC)[reply]

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! Sarah (talk) 19:02, 16 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Delivered on behalf of The Wikipedia Library by MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 06:18, 11 June 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) 16:37, 23 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]

A file that you uploaded or altered, File:Nessaea obrina Jari.JPG, has been listed at Wikipedia:Files for discussion. Please see the discussion to see why it has been listed (you may have to search for the title of the image to find its entry). Feel free to add your opinion on the matter below the nomination. Thank you. XXN, 14:07, 17 August 2017 (UTC)[reply]