Ornithodiez

Welcome!

Hello, Ornithodiez, 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 and How to develop articles
• How to create your first article (using the Article Wizard if you wish)
• Manual of Style

I hope you enjoy editing here and being a Wikipedian! Please sign your messages on talk 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 on this page and then place {{help me}} before the question. Again, welcome! mgiganteus1 (talk) 03:03, 29 February 2012 (UTC)Reply

Please do not move pages by copy/pasting. It "fragments" the page's history. Please see Wikipedia:Moving_a_page#Before_moving_a_page Thank you Jim1138 (talk) 23:29, 12 March 2012 (UTC)Reply

I have removed all your requests. Please do not add {{delete}} to a page without a valid reason; the acceptable reasons are listed at WP:Criteria for Speedy Deletion. Requesting deletion without cause has the appearance of being disruptive. If you have any questions you can ask me on my talk page. -RunningOnBrains^(talk) 21:55, 5 May 2012 (UTC)Reply

Also, please use an edit summary when making significant edits such as this (it is recommended that you always use an edit summary). It is very inconvenient for other editors when you do not summarize your changes. Thank you. -RunningOnBrains^(talk) 21:59, 5 May 2012 (UTC)Reply

Hi. Is it ok now? --Termininja 11:42, 13 May 2012 (UTC)Reply

I'm not sure I understand the problem. Why not have a summary of the major groups on the Dromaeosauridae page as well as expanded sub-pages? For example, dinosaur is a featured article, and it has individual pages for its various sub-groups which do not impact its FA status. MMartyniuk (talk) 18:19, 16 May 2012 (UTC)Reply

This is a pretty major edit to make with no edit summary. Such edits are often reverted on sight. Please use edit summaries. They are very helpful, and save us all a lot of time. Best wishes and happy editing. Anna Frodesiak (talk) 01:57, 14 June 2012 (UTC)Reply

It would be very helpful if you would give an explanation of your edit in the Edit Summary box before you save an update. It will help those of us who monitor for vandalism to worry a bit less when we see an edit that removes 5,000 characters. Your help here will be greatly appreciated. Thank you. Vertium (talk to me) 01:58, 14 June 2012 (UTC)Reply

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Seriema, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Rhea (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver). Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 11:12, 12 December 2012 (UTC)   Hello. You have a new message at PhnomPencil's talk page.Reply

In some of your recent edits, such as to Gansus, you have been replacing in-line references with footnotes. What is the rationale behind this? In my opinion and many other editors', this adds an extra step (read note, look up complete ref manually) that is unnecessary in an online medium. The purpose of footnotes in print works is to save space on the page while providing a tidy reference at the bottom, rather than clutter the text with notes that still have to be looked up in the references section. On Wikipedia, is it not more convenient to simply footnote the entire reference, especially given the new feature that pops the reference up on hover? MMartyniuk (talk) 12:55, 17 January 2013 (UTC)Reply

When you use {{delete}} you must always give a deletion reason, eg. {{db-user}}. — RHaworth (talk · contribs) 10:30, 19 January 2013 (UTC)Reply

Can you please stop removing the images, I don't understand your reason for removing them. They are there to show the sutle differences and commonality where the birds are in the world to how they look. There is nothing wrong with the images, Govvy (talk) 11:46, 25 January 2013 (UTC)Reply

Please, I cannot implore you enough for the need to explain what you are doing when you are making major edits. I notice that this is a recurring theme. It is very easy to jot down a few words when you make an edit, especially a major edit. Other editors will, understandably so, just revert those changes as nonconstructive edits. Please don't take me the wrong way, you look like are trying to bring a lot to the table, and constructive edits are always welcome. speednat (talk) 19:16, 8 April 2013 (UTC)Reply

I don't mean to raise a stink, but take a look at Wikipedia:Talk page guidelines, you will notice that removing someone else post even from your own talk page is considered improper unless there are valid reasons. But not agreeing with what that person has stated is not really a valid reason. I was not trying to offend you only educate you as I also was educated when I make mistakes( which I still do on a regular basis). I made the original post due to a large amount of information that you deleted off of tinamou that was valid, correct, and proper, without any explanation. If, you disagree with certain amounts or types of information, you are more than welcome to make changes but it is accepted practice to explain, especially on 4000 character deletions to explain why. Again please don't take me the wrong way as I am not trying to offend, but merely educated. speednat (talk) 20:11, 8 April 2013 (UTC)Reply

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited List of European birds, you added links pointing to the disambiguation pages Crane, Blue-headed Wagtail and Rock Pipit (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver). Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 11:37, 10 April 2013 (UTC)Reply

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Willi Hennig, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Taxonomy (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver). Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 11:34, 2 May 2013 (UTC)Reply

Ornithodiez: You may know what you are doing, but you made major changes to Ostrich, including switching and removing images, changing captions, and moving sections around, and all without a single edit summary to justify your changes. I see from your talk page here that you have been asked repeatedly to use edit summaries, and from your contributions that you are still not doing so. When you don't use an edit summary, fellow editors have to guess why you made a change. Please start giving your reasons in a summary. Otherwise you may get reverted unnecessarily. I am frankly unsure what you were trying to achieve at Ostrich. Yngvadottir (talk) 04:18, 17 May 2013 (UTC)Reply

Dear Ornithodiez, I saw that you updated the Penguin article with a new reference to the 'The Basal Fossils' section, deleting the article I inserted earlier on. While I agree your reference seems more relevant, Wikipedia guidelines state you cannot insert a URL reference which requires any type of payment or login to access the full content. Please see here: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Citing_sources#Links_to_sources Would you have any other reference with this content? Thank you very much for your contribution! Cheers, Zalunardo8 (talk) 09:22, 22 May 2013 (UTC)Reply

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Eurasian Wren, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Troglodytes (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver). Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 11:30, 22 October 2013 (UTC)Reply

I noticed that you re-did the reference section on this article. Without, trying to come across the wrong way, I want to point out a couple of things. First, you removed all of the <no wiki>{{cite book}</no wiki> etc. templates. The templates make it easier to work on, reference and read,. Second, you changed styles from a dedicated reference section// small inline citation style to a detailed inline citation style. whereas some may prefer the latter it is customary, unless there are extenuating circumstances, to stick with the style that was originally placed on the article. See Which style to use. I used to like the way you changed to, but over time I have realized that the short inline is better for the main reason that it avoids unneccesary clutter when citing a page number see Short Citation. Again please do not take me the wrong way. The main reason I noticed was that in the past I have standardized all of the ratite pages (although some since have needed work again), to the same style across the article. Take a look at that entire wiki page on referencing as it helped me and it may help you. Thanks speednat (talk) 00:52, 8 November 2013 (UTC)Reply

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Cheer Pheasant, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Burmah (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver). Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 09:17, 19 November 2013 (UTC)Reply

  Hello, I'm BracketBot. I have automatically detected that your edit to Paraves 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:

• have paedomorphic dinosaur skulls]. ''Natur'', 487(7406):223-226. doi: 10.1038/nature11146.]</ref> A study in 2007 suggested that extreme miniaturization was ancestral for the clade, whose

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, BracketBot (talk) 14:48, 25 March 2014 (UTC)Reply

Hi Ornithodiez: I see you've recently updated the cladogram in the bird article with the information from a recent series of papers; these obviously really changed our understanding of many of the various orders and the relationships between them. However, you've not updated the information that follows your new cladogram, leading to a complete disconnect between two parts of the same article! Would you please update the remaining information so that we again have a cohesive, comprehensive article? Thanks! MeegsC (talk) 15:38, 13 December 2014 (UTC)Reply

Hello Ornithodiez, how are you? I appreciate the addition of the cladograms and the phylogeny of the various bird taxa and help editing my articles on the newly named bird taxa.

If you don't mind I might need some help. There is this user, User:Besieged seems to be confused about raptors. He suggested merging Accipitrimorphae with the genus Accipiter and saying all vultures are not raptors, based on old out of date info and the literal meaning of the word "raptor". I took down the merger as I find it unneed, but is upset and does not understand. Here is the link for more details https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Talk:Accipitrimorphae

PS I apologize for the earlier message as I send it through the mobile app.--4444hhhh (talk) 07:26, 8 January 2015 (UTC)Reply

Why do you insist on decapitalizing American and Chilean in the lede of American flamingo? They are capitalized throughout the article and should be. Have a look at American robin or American red fox. I will let you revert your own mistake. Dger (talk) 16:10, 15 January 2015 (UTC)Reply

Please don't do this again. It is not acceptable in English. Wikipedia's style is expressed at MOS:LIFE. SchreiberBike talk 19:36, 10 February 2015 (UTC)Reply

  Hello, I'm BracketBot. I have automatically detected that your edit to Mousebird 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:

• of [[bird]]s, that are related to the [[clade]] [[Eucavitaves]], that includes the cuckoo roller ([[Leptosomatiformes]], [[trogon]]s (Trogoniformes), [[Bucerotiformes]], [[Coraciformes]] and [[

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, BracketBot (talk) 16:52, 24 January 2015 (UTC)Reply

Seeing the section was named Classification of modern bird orders I thought more light could be shed on the Aequornithes in the cladogram, as it contains such a wide diversity of species in the petrels and albatrosses as well as the unique forms of storks and pelicans etc. Collapsing all these into a single clade simplifies the cladogram somewhat but requires the reader to visit another article to relate these orders. Sorry if I made a mess of your revisions of Jan 9th, I will not make any further changes. I also note there is a discrepancy between the numbers of the orders under heading Superorder Neognathae (27 orders) and most other authorities (35+ orders). I will attempt to correct this section eventually unless asked not to, thanks Nickwilso (talk) 10:50, 27 January 2015 (UTC)Reply

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Modern birds, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Mesites. Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 09:01, 28 January 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) 16:52, 24 November 2015 (UTC)Reply

Hi, I'm Mabalu. Ornithodiez, thanks for creating Strisores!

I've just tagged the page, using our page curation tools, as having some issues to fix. Lovely redirect expansion, please do add extra cites but looking good so far!

The tags can be removed by you or another editor once the issues they mention are addressed. If you have questions, you can leave a comment on my talk page. Or, for more editing help, talk to the volunteers at the Teahouse.

Mabalu (talk) 14:59, 7 March 2017 (UTC)Reply

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Charadriiformes, you added links pointing to the disambiguation pages Arenaria and Numenius. Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 10:22, 27 March 2017 (UTC)Reply

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. An automated process has detected that when you recently edited Accipitridae, you added links pointing to the disambiguation pages Aquila and Asturina. 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) 06:07, 24 November 2020 (UTC)Reply

Hi, I noticed that you added a cladogram to the Corvoidea article. Your source, Jønsson et al 2011 is relatively old and I thought it would easy to replace the cladogram with a more up-to-date version but it seems that the relationships remain uncertain. I've commented on the talk page here. Happy editing. - Aa77zz (talk) 15:21, 2 December 2020 (UTC)Reply

Thank you, I didn't notice that Corvoidea was in Kuhl et al. (2020), I only saw non-passerine neoavians. --Ornithodiez (talk) 16:11, 2 December 2020 (UTC)Reply

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

(Opt-out instructions.) --DPL bot (talk) 06:11, 10 December 2020 (UTC)Reply

If you want to delete a page you've created in the future, add {{db-g7}} to the top, which will mark it for speedy deletion. Elli (talk | contribs) 15:23, 21 June 2021 (UTC)Reply

An automated process has detected that when you recently edited Timeline of ornithology, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Frank Gill.

(Opt-out instructions.) --DPL bot (talk) 20:56, 30 July 2024 (UTC)Reply