User talk:Casliber

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Jump to: navigation, search
Archive
Archives

Contents

Nomenclature of fungi[edit]

Hey there. I recently stumbled across an issue of Nova Hedwigia Beheift titled "the genera of fungi" (or was it agaricaceae?). It's filled to the brink with mind-numbing nomenclatural discussions of all the genera ever described (I think, anyway). Would it be any use if I looked up the specific ref or any specific genera? Circeus 00:20, 14 June 2007 (UTC)

That would be friggin' trés bién. The first one that would be absolutely great to get a clarification on is Agaricus which was called Psalliota in many texts fro many years and I've been mystified as to why. Other articles I intend cleaning up are Amanita muscaria, which is the one I intended taking to FA first but it just didn't come together well, Gyromitra esculenta as a future FA, Agaricus bisporus as a future FA, and cleaning up the destroying angels - Amanita virosa, Amanita bisporiga and Amanita verna. Boletus edulis would be a good one to check too. let me know if anything interesting pops up. I'll see ifd I can think of any other taxonomic quagmires later today. Work just got real busy :( cheers, Cas Liber | talk | contribs 02:01, 14 June 2007 (UTC)
Generally, that's pretty arcane and only relevant to genus articles, or species that were tightly involving in defining them (for example, there seems to be an odd debate over the multiple type species for Amanita). I'll look up Agaricus, Amanita (since A. muscaria's the current type) and Psalliota. I'll also dig up the ref so you can look it up yourself, with any chance. Circeus 04:52, 14 June 2007 (UTC)
Cool, keen to see what pops up. cheers, Cas Liber | talk | contribs 05:17, 14 June 2007 (UTC)
I only quickly thumbed through it and noted the full ref (Donk, M.A. (1962). "The generic names proposed for Agaricaceae". Beiheifte zur Nova Hedwigia 5: 1–320. ISSN 0078-2238. ) because I forgot about it until the last minute. Psalliota looks like a classic synonym case. It shares the same type with Agaricus, and might be older. Circeus 01:02, 16 June 2007 (UTC)
Weird! I thought Linnaeus was calling all sorts of things Agaricus so I wonder how it could predate that really....anyway I am curious.cheers, Casliber (talk · contribs) 02:46, 16 June 2007 (UTC)


Okay, First thing I have to say is... Damn, 18th-19th century taxonomy and nomenclature of fungi is a right mess. Whose bright idea was it to give fungi 3 starting dates in the ICBN???

LOTS of "per" in citation here. See [1]

On Agaricus
Etym.: Possibly "from Agarica of Sarmatica, a district of Russia" (!). Note also Greek ἀγαρικ[1]όν "a sort of tree fungus" (There's been an Agaricon Adans. genus, treated by Donk in Persoonia 1:180)
Donk says Linnaeus' name is devalidated (so that the proper author citation apparently is "L. per Fr., 1821") because Agaricus was not linked to Tournefort's name (Linnaeus places both Agaricus Dill. and Amanita Dill. in synonymy), but truely a replacement for Amanita Dill., which would require that A. quercinus, not A. campestris be the type. This question compounded by the fact that Fries himself used Agaricus roughly in Linnaeus' sense (which leads to issues with Amanita), and that A. campestris was eventually excluded from Agaricus by Karsten and was apparently in Lepiota at the time Donk wrote this, commenting that a type conservation might become necessary.
All proposals to conserve Agaricus against Psalliota or vice versa have so far been considered superfluous.
References
  1. ^ Letter is script and looks like a Russian и.
On Lepiota
Etym. Probably greek λεπις, "scale"
Basionym is Agaricus sect. Lepiota Pers. 1797, devalidated by later starting date, so the citation is (Pers.) per S.F.Gray. It was only described, without species, and covered an earlier mentioned, but unnamed group of ringed, non-volvate species, regardless of spore color. Fries restricted the genus to white-spored species, and made into a tribe, which was, like Amanita repeatedly raised to genus rank.
The type is unclear. L. procera is considered the type (by Earle, 1909). Agaricus columbrinus (L. clypeolarus) was also suggested (by Singer, 1946) to avoid the many combination involved otherwise in splitting Macrolepiota, which include L. procera. Since both species had been placed into different genera prior to their selection (in Leucocoprinus and Mastocephalus respectively), Donk observes that a conservation will probably be needed, expressing support for Singer's emendation.
On Psalliota
Etym.: ψάλιον, "ring"
Psalliota was first published by Fries (1821) as trib. Psalliota. The type is Agaricus campestris (widely accepted, except by Earle, who proposed A. cretaceus). Kummer (not Quélet, who merely excluded Stropharia) was the first to elevate the tribe to a genus. Basically, Psalliota was the tribe containing the type of Agaricus, so when separated, it should have caused the rest of the genus to be renamed, not what happened. It seems to be currently not considered valid, or a junior homotypic synonym, anyway the explanation is that it was raised by (in retrospect) erroneously maintaining the tribe name.
On Amanita
Etym.: Possibly from Amanon,a mountain in Cilicia.

A first incarnation from Tentamen dispositionis methodicae Fungorum 65. 1797 is cited as devalidated: "Introduced to cover three groups already previously distinguished by Persoon (in [...] Tent. 18. 1797) under Agaricus L., but at that time not named. It is worth stressing that [The species now known as Amanita caesarea] was not mentioned."

With Agaricus L. in use, Amanita was a nomen nudum per modern standard, so Persoon gave it a new life unrelated to its previous incarnations, and that is finally published after a starting date by Hooker (the citation is Pers. per Hook., 1821). He reuses Withering's 1801 definition (A botanical arrangement of British plants, 4th ed.). "The name Amnita has been considered validly published on different occasions, depending on various considerations." Proposed types include (given as Amanita. Sometimes they were selected as Agarici):
  • A. livida Pers. (By Earle, in 1909). Had been excluded in Vaginata or Amanitopsis and could not be chosen.
  • A. muscaria Pers. (By Clemens & Shear, 1931) for the genus (1801) from Synopsis fungorum, was generally transferred to the one from Hooker's Flora of Scotland, which is currently considered the valid publication of Amanita (or was in the 50s).
  • A. phalloides (by Singer, 1936) for the 1801 genus.
  • A.bulbosa (by Singer & Smith, 1946) for Gray's republication. This is incorrect as Gray's A. bulbosa is a synonym of A. citrina. Some authors consider Gray to be the first valid republisher.
  • A. caeserea (by Gilbert, 1940). Troublesome because not known personally to Persoon or Fries.

Donk concludes the earliest valid type is A. muscaria, the species in Hooker, adding that he'd personally favor A. citrina.

The name has been republished three times in 1821: in Hooker, Roques and Gray (in that order). Roques maintained Persoon's circumscription, including Amanitopsis and Volvaria. Gray excluded Amanitopsis and Volvariella into Vaginata. Right after, Fries reset the name by reducing the genus to a tribe of Agaricus, minus pink-spored Volvariella. This tribe became a subgenus, than genus via various authors, Quélet, altough not the first, often being attributed the change. Sometimes it was used in a Persoonian sense (whether that is a correct use according to ICBN is not clear to me).
Homonyms of Amanita Pers. are Amanita adans. (1763, devalidated) and Amanita (Dill) Rafin. (1830)
On Boletus
Not including (Not in Agaricaceae, sorry).

Phew! Circeus 18:52, 18 June 2007 (UTC)

I hope you intend to clean that prose ASAP? It's definitely not article-worthy as is. Circeus 01:05, 20 June 2007 (UTC)
I'm working on it. Got distracted this morning...cheers, Casliber (talk · contribs) 01:08, 20 June 2007 (UTC)

Pork[edit]

LOL, I love your sense of humour. Maimonedes is a good reference. The reality is that Islam takes food restrictions from Judaism; and Christianity doesn't have any restriction (courtesy of three references in the New Testament). The reason why pork should be restricted (along with many other things) is not given explicitly in the Hebrew Bible, hence Bible commentators have been offering guesses since ancient times. My own favourite, however, is Mary Douglas, wife of Louis Leakey, daughter of a Lutheran pastor. Her theory is excellent, based on her cultural anthropological observations, with a decent feel for how Biblical text works. It's rather an abstract theory though. Anyway, I'll see if I can manage a literature review of dietry restrictions in the ANE, especially if there's anything explicit about pork. Don't think I'll find a reference for "why" the pork taboo is in place, though, if it's documented, I'd have read about that in commentaries. Perhaps a clay tablet with the answer has been destroyed in only the last few years during the "troubles" in Iraq. :( Alastair Haines (talk) 21:27, 7 April 2008 (UTC)

This is the great thing about uncertainty. Lacking an answer, the reports of Maimonides, Mary Douglas and the other guy mentioned are fascinating.Cheers, Casliber (talk · contribs) 22:15, 7 April 2008 (UTC)
Scotish pork taboo is a remarkable article! Thanks for that, lol. Alastair Haines (talk) 21:59, 8 April 2008 (UTC)

Spotted this. I'll look for a ref to the Maimonides comment. The normal teaching is that pork is no more or less offensive to Jews than any other forbidden meat (dog, horse etc) or forbidden part of kosher animal (blood, Gid Hanasheh etc). The pig (NB pig, not pork - an important distinction which is relevant for the Maimonides comment too, I note) is "singled out" because it alone of the animals that have one of the two "signs" (it has split hooves but doesn't chew the cud) lies down with its legs sticking out. Most quarapeds have their legs folded under them. There's a midrashic lesson to be learned there, apparently, that the pig is immodestly and falsely proclaiming its religious cleanliness, when it is not. Anyway, that said, I'll look into the M comment - he was quite ahead of his time in terms of medical knowledge (check his biog). And NB my OR/POV antennae buzzed when I read that little section. --Dweller (talk) 22:52, 7 April 2008 (UTC)

Someone has tagged the Religious restrictions on the consumption of pork for OR, though the talk page seems to indicate it is for a different reason....Cheers, Casliber (talk · contribs) 23:03, 7 April 2008 (UTC)
Hmm... makes me more dubious, but I'll check. btw... I'm not Alastair! --Dweller (talk) 23:10, 7 April 2008 (UTC)

Have found good stuff, including online version of Maimonides text. I'll dump it here for you to use as you wish.

I maintain that the food which is forbidden by the Law is unwholesome. There is nothing among the forbidden kinds of food whose injurious character is doubted, except pork (Lev. xi. 7), and fat (ibid. vii. 23). But also in these cases the doubt is not justified. For pork contains more moisture than necessary [for human food], and too much of superfluous matter. The principal reason why the Law forbids swine's flesh is to be found in the circumstance that its habits and its food are very dirty and loathsome. It has already been pointed out how emphatically the Law enjoins the removal of the sight of loathsome objects, even in the field and in the camp; how much more objectionable is such a sight in towns. But if it were allowed to eat swine's flesh, the streets and houses would be more dirty than any cesspool, as may be seen at present in the country of the Franks.[1]

So, Maimonides argues "pork contains more moisture than necessary [for human food], and too much of superfluous matter", whatever that means! More importantly, the "principal reason" is that if you keep pigs, you end up with a dirty and unhealthy environment. Important note: Maimonides was writing from Islamic Egypt at the time, which is why he mentions "as may be seen at present in the country of the Franks." (ie France)

The comments about the pig's habit of lying with its legs outstretched come from Midrash Vayikra Rabba (ch 13) where it is mentioned as part of an elaborate metaphor, but not in connection with any reason for particularly abhorring the creature.

Hope that helps. --Dweller (talk) 09:48, 8 April 2008 (UTC)

References
  1. ^ Maimonides, Guide for the perplexed, Book III ch.48. Can be viewed online at http://www.sacred-texts.com/jud/gfp/gfp184.htm

Alpha Centauri[edit]

I have unfortunately had to revert much of the changes you have made to the Alpha Centauri page - mainly to the structure revisions that you have done. While I agree it is best to standardise between bright star pages (i.e. Sirius), there is significant problems doing so to the Alpha Centauri page. The problem in previous edits is the confusion with Alpha Centauri the star and Alpha Centauri as a system. There was much about alpha centauri, especially its brightness compared to Arcturus as well as the relationship with Proxima Centauri. (See the Discussion with the associated page to this article.) It was thought best to avoid complexity by giving the basic information, and add complexity in sections so information could be understood at various levels of knowledge. Also as there is much interest in Alpha Centauri from children to amateur astronomers, it was best to give the introduction as brief as possible and explain the complexities as we go. As to modifications of articles as drastically as you have done to complex article, it might be better to do so with some discussion in the discussion section before doing so. Although I note that you have much experience in doing wiki edits, much better than me, it is better to make small changes in complex articles paragraph by paragraph than carte blanche changes. (I am very happy to discuss any issues on the article with you in the alpha centauri discussion to improve the article.)

As to the introduction, much of the additions you have made are actually speculative, and are not necessary on fact. I.e. "This makes it a logical choice as "first port of call" in speculative fiction about interstellar travel, which assumes eventual human exploration, and even the discovery and colonization of imagined planetary systems. These themes are common to many video games and works of science fiction." has little to do with the basic facts on alpha centauri. I.e. Nearest star, third brightest star, binary star, etc. As for "Kinematics" as a title, this is irrelevant (Sirius article also has it wrong). (Also see Discussion page for Alpha Centauri with SpacePotato) Note: I have contributed much to this page - 713 edits according to the statistics. (27th April 2008 to today) Arianewiki1 18:04, 6 August 2009 (UTC)

O-kay...taken it to the talk page.Casliber (talk · contribs) 20:29, 6 August 2009 (UTC)

Bract pattern[edit]

Banksia menziesii cone.jpg

You know what I don't get? On page 245 of George (1981), and again on page 40 of Collins (2007), George gives a diagram showing the arrangement of unit inflorescences on a Banksia flower spike. Both diagrams clearly show a hexagonal layout; i.e. every common bract is surrounded by six equidistant common bracts, thus forming little hexagons. In support of this, George (1981) states "The unit inflorescences are so arranged on the axis that there are three pattern lines—vertical, and both dextral and sinistral spiral."

I haven't dissected an inflorescence, but in some species the pattern persists right through flowering and can be seen on the infructescence. You won't get a better example than this B. menziesii cone. Look at that pattern. There's no way you could call it hexagonal. It is a rectangular (or rather diamond, since the lines are diagonal) grid. Depending on how you define a neighbourhood, you could argue that each common bract has 4 or 8 neighbours, but there's no way you could argue for 6. Similarly, you could argue for two pattern lines (dextral and sinistral spiral) or four (dextral, sinistral, vertical and horizontal), but there is no way you could argue for 3, because there is no reason to include vertical whilst excluding horizontal). On top of that there is a beautiful symmetry in the way each common bract is surrounded by its own floral bracts and those of its neighbours. But George's diagrams destroy that symmetry.

I thought maybe B. menziesii was an exception to a general rule, but you can see the same diamond grid, though not as clearly, in File:Banksia serrata4.jpg, and I reckon (but am not certain) I can see it in my B. attenuata cone. And in File:Banksia prionotes mature cone.jpg too. What the heck is going on?

(I'm not just being a pretentious wanker here. I thought the diagram was interesting and informative enough for me to whip up an SVG version for Wikipedia. But since copying George's diagram isn't really on, and it is much better to go straight from nature if possible, I was basing my version on this B. menziesii cone. But it isn't going to work if the diagram shows a rectangular grid and the text has to say it is hexagonal.)

Hesperian 13:28, 29 August 2009 (UTC)

Thanks for reminding me on this one - I think it was Alex (or Kevin??) who told me that every bract pattern was unique to a species and hence diagnostic, but as far as I know not much if anything has been published on this area. The similarity between archaeocarpa and attenuata was noted (the bract pattern remaining in the fossils). I seem to recall feeling bamboozled as well by the description when I read it some time ago. I will have to refresh myself with some bedtime reading....Casliber (talk · contribs) 13:50, 29 August 2009 (UTC)
Update: I had a look at the pages in question in the banksia book(s), there is a little bit more in the 1981 monograph but not much. I meant to ring Alex George about this and should do so in the next few days...I guess the photos look sort of like hexagons stretched vertically :P Casliber (talk · contribs) 06:46, 2 September 2009 (UTC)
Dipsacus fullonum Just passing through. I am not an expert with flora but I do take photos now and again. Does this image from my personal collection help or hinder your discussion? I see diamonds --Senra (talk) 12:58, 22 July 2010 (UTC)
Haha yeah. Not a bad comparison at all. a diamond pattern it is there as well. You sorta let your eyes go a little out of focus and see two diagonal lines....Casliber (talk · contribs) 14:12, 22 July 2010 (UTC)

Question[edit]

If this is what developing flower pairs look like...
then what are these brown and white furry things?

I note that the last six images to be posted on your talk page were posted by me. I'm not sure whether to apologise....

What is going on in the lower image? Clearly this is an inflorescence in very early bud, but those furry white things are apparently not developing flower pairs. Are they some kind of protective bract or something?

Hesperian 01:24, 1 September 2009 (UTC)

You certainly see those thingies on the developing buds of alot of banksias. I'd be intrigued what the Nikulinsky book, which is essentially a series of plates of a developing menziesii inflorescence, says (not sure, I don't recall whether it had commentary...). Another thing to look up. Was about to look up the patterns just now. Casliber (talk · contribs) 02:35, 1 September 2009 (UTC)
Now I have looked at the books and bract architecture, question is are they common bracts or are they something which falls off (don't think so but..). Something else to ask Alex. Casliber (talk · contribs) 06:49, 2 September 2009 (UTC)
Having found nothing in George, I've been reading Douglas's stuff on ontogeny of Proteaceae flowers, and found nothing there either.

If you snap a spike axis in half, they are just that brown colour, and essentially made of closely packed fuzz. I wonder if there is initially no gap in the axis for the flower to grow, so the developing flower literally has to shove some of the axis out in front of it as it extends. This would explain everything except for the white tip. Hesperian 10:23, 2 September 2009 (UTC)


I have today taken a long lunch and gone bushwalking with Gnangarra. While he took happy-snaps, I did some OR on this question. My diagnosis is: these are peduncles that have developed common bracts, but have not yet developed floral bracts or flowers.

In very young spikes like the one pictured here, they are not yet very densely packed together, so they can be perceived as individual peduncles. Given time, they will continue to grow, and as they do so they will become more and more densely packed together, until eventually they are jammed together so tightly that their dense coverings of hairs form the fibrous brown material that comprises a typical flower spike, and the common bracts at their apex will form the bract pattern on the surface of the spike. At that point, they will no longer be distinguishable as individual peduncles, but will simply be part of the spike.

When the flowers start to develop, they get squeezed together even more. At this point, sometimes, a peduncle may break off the axis and be squeezed right out of the spike as the flowers around it develop. Thus you may see one or two of these furry things sitting at random positions on the surface of a developed flower spike.

As evidence for this hypothesis I offer the following observations:

  1. Wherever one of those "furry things" is found loose on the surface of a spike, you will also find a gap in the bract pattern beneath it, where the common bract is absent;
  2. "Furry things" may occasionally be found partly out of the spike, but partly in, in which cases the white tip is quite obviously the common bract. In such cases removal of the "furry thing" leaves behind a visible hole in the spike where a common bract ought to be.

Hesperian 05:58, 15 September 2009 (UTC)

Interesting - Gah! Forgot to ring Alex - evening is a crazy time with little availability for me, but will see what I can do. Casliber (talk · contribs) 20:57, 15 September 2009 (UTC)

Not OR any more. Look at the picture of "Banksia flower bud seen in profile" here: clear evidence of the common and floral bracts forming one of those little furry upside-down pyramids, with the flower arising from it. Hesperian 03:38, 19 September 2009 (UTC)

On a tangential point, the first image would most likely pass FPC if it ever finds a home that is appropriate. Noodle snacks (talk) 06:55, 17 October 2010 (UTC)
Hmmm, okay, hopefully Hesperian will see this thread. :) Casliber (talk · contribs) 11:31, 17 October 2010 (UTC)
Gosh, would it really?! I was quite proud of it but a bit unsure whether it had enough depth of field. But if I'll take anyone's word that it would probably pass, I'll take Noodle snacks. :-) Hesperian 23:27, 17 October 2010 (UTC)

Parrot stuff[edit]

doi:10.1016/j.ympev.2009.08.021

is not finalized, but the preprint is ready and formatted. It may well be one of the most comprehensive and beautiful papers on the topic of Psittaciformes evolution. Only gripe: it still does not consider the fossil record fully. Is doi:10.1080/08912960600641224

really so hard to get? 2 cites in 3 years for what is essentially the baseline review is far too little... even Mayr does not cite it - granted, most is not Paleogene, but still...).

But that does not affect the new paper much, since they remain refreshingly noncommitted on the things they cannot reliably assess from their data. And data they have a lot. Also always nice to see geography mapped on phylogenetic trees. Dysmorodrepanis (talk) 01:19, 2 December 2009 (UTC)

PDFs sent... let me know if need anything else. Sasata (talk) 08:17, 7 December 2009 (UTC)
Thx :) Casliber (talk · contribs) 11:39, 7 December 2009 (UTC)

Banksia menziesii with persistent florets[edit]

Banksia menziesii inflorescence with persistent florets.jpg
Banksia menziesii with persistent florets.jpg

While I was out a-walking in the bush one day last week, I spied a banksia with an unfamiliar jizz. Even on closer inspection I was bamboozled for half a minute until the pieces fell together and I realised I was looking at a B. menziesii with persistent florets. Not just a bit late to fall: there were old cones from previous seasons with the florets still bolted on. In fact, there wasn't a single bald cone on the whole tree. I've never seen anything like it. Have you? Hesperian 04:42, 2 February 2010 (UTC)

Hmm..interesting. I have not ever noticed a menziesii like this, but not to say it can't happen. Might it be a menziesii/prionotes hybrid - how far is the tree from you? I'd compare the newgrowth/leaf dimensions/trunk all for comparison. Did it have any new flowers? Some of these old cones have an aura of prionotes about them...Casliber (talk · contribs) 05:11, 2 February 2010 (UTC)
prionotes crossed my mind at first, but the bark is that of menziesii, and nothing like the distinctive prionotes bark. And the flower spikes lack the woolliness of old prionotes florets.

It's quite near my place; about ten minutes drive. Even closer to where Alex lives (assuming he still lives at the address he has been publishing under lately): only five minutes drive from there I would guess. If it's prionotes (which it isn't), then we've extended the known range of that species 10km south. Likewise, a hybrid means there's a prionotes population nearby, so it amounts to the same thing. Hesperian 05:30, 2 February 2010 (UTC)

Banksiamyces again[edit]

I finally made it to the library and got a hold of the article you had asked about a couple of weeks ago. There's enough info there to make DYK-worthy stubs on the genus, and three of the species (macrocarpus, katerinae, toomanis), or, alternatively, maybe enough for a GA on the genus. What are the chances of images? Apparently these fungi make small but visible apothecia on the seed capsules. Berkeley and Broome first wrote about the fungus in 1887, so maybe there's a sketch from the protologue that's useable. Anyway, I'll start adding text in a day or two and maybe we can have the first Banksia/Fungi wikiproject collaboration? Sasata (talk) 14:25, 18 February 2010 (UTC)

Berkeley & Broome (1887) is online at http://www.biodiversitylibrary.org/item/13683 — see page 217. There is a picture at Plate 29 figure 18. Hesperian 02:09, 19 February 2010 (UTC)
That's a nice image on plate 29 there. They call it Tympanis toomanis on page 224 decription of plate. How do we capture that image and replicate it on commons? Casliber (talk · contribs) 03:06, 19 February 2010 (UTC)
Like this. Hesperian 03:37, 19 February 2010 (UTC)
On page 222, they talk about finding it on a banksia cone near the Tooma River in southern NSW, which leaves me thinking it is a cone of Banksia marginata although they do not state this (OR alert ++++). Funny looking marginata cone but marginata is a hugely variable species....Casliber (talk · contribs) 03:11, 19 February 2010 (UTC)
Check your email; I've sent you a copy of Beaton (1982), where they do state that the cone is B. marginata. (You guys should have asked me first; I could have saved Sasata a walk to the library.) Hesperian 03:26, 19 February 2010 (UTC)
@Sasata - I'll leave it up to you whether a solid GA and one DYK for the whole shebang, or 4 species articles - you've got the material and I am happy either way. cheers, Casliber (talk · contribs) 03:11, 19 February 2010 (UTC)
Am working on the article behind-the-scenes now... that picture you uploaded is excellent, and thanks Hesp for finding the protologue. Too bad the scan resolution is so crappy; I can upload a screen capture/crop to Commons, but will first investigate to see if there's a copy of the original around here so I might rescan at higher resolution. Four DYKs and 1 GA doesn't sound unreasonable for the lot, but I'll see what I can come up with. Sasata (talk) 03:32, 19 February 2010 (UTC)
The resolution is good. I guess you were looking at it at 25%. Try zooming in. Hesperian 03:40, 19 February 2010 (UTC)
Yeah, it'll do the trick. I gave the article a good push towards GA. Hesp, do you have easy access to Beaton 1984, or maybe Fuhrer, B,; May, T. (1993). "Host specificity of disc-fungi in the genus Banksiamyces on Banksia." Victorian Naturalist (South Yarra) 110 (2):73-75? I think once those two are located and added, that'll be it from journals (but you may find stuff to add from your Banksia books?). I could start stubs for the species, but it would be a shame to have to leave out B. maccannii. Sasata (talk) 07:09, 19 February 2010 (UTC)
I can probably get Vic Naturalist at UNSW Library next tuesday or friday (slim chance on weekend). Casliber (talk · contribs) 07:25, 19 February 2010 (UTC)
When you get to Victorian Naturalist, you'll also want to grab Sommerville, K.; May, T. (2006). "Some taxonomic and ecological observations on Banksiamyces". The Victorian Naturalist 123: 366–375.  Hesperian 08:43, 19 February 2010 (UTC)
Thanks for finding that, wonder why it didn't show up in my database search. Cas, if it's too mush hassle for you to get these, let me know and I can order them, would take 1-2 weeks to get here.
I'll have easy access to Beaton (1984) on Monday. No access to Victorian Naturalist. Hesperian 08:38, 19 February 2010 (UTC)
Sorry, forgot again. I've just scanned it now. Cas: I'll forward shortly; if you have Sasata's email address, can you forward it on please? Otherwise, Sasata: send me an email so I know where to send this scan. Hesperian 04:16, 25 February 2010 (UTC)
I don't see any email link on your user page... I can wait until Cas forward a copy. Thanks kindly Sasata (talk) 15:25, 25 February 2010 (UTC)
I guess you've never noticed the "Email this user" link in the sidebar toolbox.... Hesperian 23:22, 25 February 2010 (UTC)
! Wouldya look at that... That's embarrassing! Now excuse me while I go give eyewitness testimony in a murder trial. Sasata (talk) 23:46, 25 February 2010 (UTC)
Hang on a sec, will send. Also, will be near the library again for Vic Naturalist. Casliber (talk · contribs) 20:03, 25 February 2010 (UTC)
Hahaha. Fantastic. I just realised I never uplaoded a funny photo I took in WA a few years ago. I need to double check.
This old cone of Banksia violacea had these dark objects on it which might be a fungus as they certainly weren't on any other cones I saw about the place.
Casliber (talk · contribs) 20:25, 18 February 2010 (UTC)

As OZtrylia has a notoriously under described rang of and field of mycology study - any signs of further fungi or algae work is to be encouraged at all points SatuSuro 01:51, 19 February 2010 (UTC)


Taking pity on poor Cas, whose Banksia books are still packed up in boxes:

From Collins, Collins and George (2008), page 47, first paragraph of a section entitled "Fungi and lichens":

"Many kinds of fungi are associated with Banksias. There is even a genus of fungi named for their association with these plants—Banksiamyces. The first species of these was recognised in the 1880s and placed in the genus Tympanis, then in the 1950s transferred to the genus Encoelia. Further collections and research led to the description of the genus Banksiamyces by Beaton and Weste in 1982, with two further species. Six taxa are now recognised, so far known from 13 species of Banksia (Sommerville & May, 2006). Commonly known as banksia discs, they have all been found on eastern Australian Banksias and one is also known in Western Australia. They are discomycete fungi, growing on the fruit and appearing as small, shallow dark cups on the follicles (Fuhrer, 2005). When dry they fold inwards and look like narrow slits. Their effect is unk[n]own but it seems unlikely that they are responsible for degradation of the seeds."

At the bottom of the page there is a photo of Banksiamyces on B. lemanniana. They look like little light grey maggots on the follicles. Based on the photo and textual description, I would suggest that the B. violacea photo doesn't show this genus. Hesperian 11:17, 19 February 2010 (UTC)

Hmmm, that's what I initially thought when I read the description and sketches in Beaton 1982, but after seeing B&B's 1872 sketches, I was pretty sure Cas's pic was a Banksiamyces. I guess I should reserve judgment until I get more info. Sasata (talk) 17:09, 19 February 2010 (UTC)
From the abstract of Somerville and May 2006: "Apothecia of these crops are of different macroscopic appearance, with lighter apothecia being mostly immature, and darker apothecia producing spores." ... so who knows? Sasata (talk) 17:11, 19 February 2010 (UTC)

Anything else to add to this article? Shall we put it up for GAN? Sasata (talk) 17:39, 18 May 2010 (UTC)

Yeah put it up, there might be some bits and pieces. I'll take a look. Casliber (talk · contribs) 20:32, 18 May 2010 (UTC)
Any Banksia experts you're chums with that might be able to give a confirmation on your putative Banksiamyces photo? Sasata (talk) 05:45, 21 May 2010 (UTC)
damn, I meant to contact Tom May about it (who has been helpful before). Will dig up his email and see what he says. Casliber (talk · contribs) 07:09, 21 May 2010 (UTC)

More bedtime reading[edit]

[2]—the most recent phylogeny and dating of Proteaceae. Easy to miss with such an obscure title. Hesperian 12:08, 28 February 2010 (UTC)

Abraham Halpern[edit]

You may want to have a look there as well. Appears to have been improved by a Szasz fan. I've read diagonally this article, but even that doesn't seem to support the light in which the Halpern-Szasz issue is presented in Wikipedia. Tijfo098 (talk) 13:19, 3 November 2010 (UTC)

Just go back from a weekend break with no innernet..now where was I.....Casliber (talk · contribs) 10:21, 7 November 2010 (UTC)

Figs[edit]

Okay, I'm giving my impression on F. maxima, since I'm not clear what you are actually asking. The description, I must say, is a particularly lacking part of the article under any evaluation criterion. Even as one who appreciates the topic, I'm finding the taxonomy section very confusing. As in Entoloma sinuatum, I'll gladly have a look into rewriting it if you want me to. The huge list of synonym suggest there is significant variation in the plant, possibly infraspecific taxa? I agree the Reproduction section is possibly too detailed. It can probably be reduced to a 2-paragraph primer and merged into "Ecology", though I have a hard time identifying what is species (or could be!) species-specific and what is not, as I have no familiarity with the plants in question (not to mention I am not an actual plant scientist even compared to you).

One of the greater-scale problem I see, which you might want to work on if you're going to take aim at several of these articles, is that information on the peculiar reproduction suystem in figs as a whole is spread across multiple articles (the genus article, Common fig and other species, syconium) and poorly focused, leaving no good article to aim {{main}} links at. I suspect using syconium as he main article and linking to it from others (including Ficus) might be, in the long run, the best course of action. Circéus (talk) 02:56, 18 March 2011 (UTC)

Sounds good. Don't worry about rewriting anything yet. I was looking at overall meta-article structure WRT reproduction, which you've given me a good idea to work with. Cheers, Casliber (talk · contribs) 03:21, 18 March 2011 (UTC)

You'll probably find this worth watching[edit]

[3] He's a pretty good speaker. I created a stub about the book, which is probably worth getting to DYK, although I'm not sure I have the time to expand it enough this weekend. Cheers, Tijfo098 (talk) 04:48, 7 May 2011 (UTC)

Interesting will look later when I can have the sound up. Casliber (talk · contribs) 05:02, 7 May 2011 (UTC)

FYI[edit]

All of the following species are worth 2x points; let me know if you'd be interested in collaborating in one or more for bonus points in a later round. Sasata (talk) 06:54, 6 February 2012 (UTC)

Hahaha - thank heavens for European mushrooms :))) - yeah, I'd like to buff Clitocybe nuda (which was one of the yummiest mushrooms I've eaten), and we really should be improving the other mass-eaten edibles. Also I buffed the sickener for DYK so would be good to finish the job....Casliber (talk · contribs) 12:02, 6 February 2012 (UTC)

Ok, I'll move Clitocybe nuda and Russula emetica closer to the top of "the list". I agree the popular edibles would be good to do as well, but they're hard ... we'll see how free time & motivation plays out over the next few months. Sasata (talk) 19:05, 6 February 2012 (UTC)


Constellation task force assessment[edit]

Certainly Assessment boxes like the one for the cardiology task force are made by User:WP 1.0 bot. Just post to talk there and it can make your box easily. —Justin (koavf)TCM 18:37, 12 August 2012 (UTC)

Thanks for that! I've not used bots in my time here. Casliber (talk · contribs) 01:07, 13 August 2012 (UTC)

Do you have this book?[edit]

Shepherd CJ, Totterdell CJ. 1988. Mushrooms and Toadstools of Australia. Melbourne: Inkata Press. Would appreciate you checking something for me if you do. Thanks, Sasata (talk) 19:45, 27 August 2012 (UTC)

I know the book but don't have it. This was written by Queensland authors so different view which is good. I can get it from library either today or thursday (next door to work on these days). Casliber (talk · contribs) 20:43, 27 August 2012 (UTC)
I was hoping you'd be able to tell me what it says about Mycena chlorophanos for an article about a similar (bioluminescent) species M. chlorophos. Don't go out of your way to get it, there's no rush, and many other articles to work on in the meantime ... thanks! Sasata (talk) 01:34, 28 August 2012 (UTC)
Ah ok. Today was tricky for a number of reasons so was unable to get there. Thursday will be doable. Casliber (talk · contribs) 07:20, 28 August 2012 (UTC)

Problem[edit]

GreatOrangePumpkin (talk · contribs) - User destroys the new infoboxes for the pharaoh, see as example at Khufu. There was a clear agreement within the Egypt´s project to use the new boxes. Regards;--Nephiliskos (talk) 13:47, 3 September 2012 (UTC)

Sigh - that discussion is a wall of text, but I see the supportive tone. Need to revisit this. Casliber (talk · contribs) 14:12, 3 September 2012 (UTC)
Thank you. At least some help. I reported the edit-warrior (who had already received blockings for his behavior), but I received only could shoulders by admnistrators. As if I could know where to beg for help and report such behavior elsewhere! The problem is that GOP knows about the project´s discussion but continues his actions... Regards;--Nephiliskos (talk) 14:21, 3 September 2012 (UTC)


Aboriginal Astronomy[edit]

Hi Casliber - thanks for your note. Yes there's quite a bit more out there which Duane Hamacher and I are slowly trying to get written up. You can find some more stuff on www.emudreaming.com and you may find some papers you havent come across on http://www.atnf.csiro.au/people/rnorris/papers/papers.htm

Have fun! RayNorris (talk) 03:34, 8 October 2012 (UTC)

Great! I'll have a look and if I find anything specific to nag you on...I will :) cheers, Casliber (talk · contribs) 03:49, 8 October 2012 (UTC)

Talk:Applied behavior analysis[edit]

Hi Casliber,
I wanted to know if you could reply to my comment on the talk page to merge the Behavior modification article into the Applied behavior analysis article, as ABA is the new term for Behavior mod.
See here: Talk:Applied behavior analysis#Merging_the_articles_Applied_behavior_analysis_and_Behavior_modification.
Thanks!
ATC . Talk 14:20, 16 November 2012 (UTC)

I replied to your comment and have two sources (that I showed you) which verify what I am saying. Thanks. ATC . Talk 22:37, 17 November 2012 (UTC)
Resolved the issue. I found a journal explaining the controversy over the terms. See here: http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC2223172/. It states as follows: "A New Science? [section] Perhaps there is a tendency to draw pejorative contrasts between PBS and ABA in order to bolster claims about the status of PBS as a new and distinct science or discipline (e.g., Bambara et al., 1994; E. Carr, 1997; E. Carr et al., 2002; Knoster et al., 2003; Sisson, 1992). There may be disagreement among PBS leaders on this point. On the one hand, for example, Horner (2000) stated that 'Positive behavior support is not a new approach. … [It is] the application of behavior analysis to the social problems created by such behaviors as self-injury' (p. 97). He further stated, 'There is no difference in theory or science between positive behavior support and behavior modification. These are the same approach with different names. If any difference exists, it is in the acceptance [by PBS] of much larger outcomes and the need to deliver the global technology that will deliver these outcomes' (p. 99). Other writers have referred to PBS as an 'extension' of applied behavior analysis (e.g., Turnbull et al., 2002, p. 377). ATC . Talk 22:00, 7 December 2012 (UTC)
Hi did you ask? I still haven't got any feedback on on WP:MED, WP:Psychology, or WP:Education yet about merging the articles. Thanks. ATC . Talk 04:07, 17 December 2012 (UTC)
I asked one psychologist who thought ABA was a form of BM - will ask some others to get a more global view. Casliber (talk · contribs) 04:55, 17 December 2012 (UTC)
Some books say that. I do not why. Ask about the Positive Behavior Support (PBS) thing as well. ATC . Talk 23:37, 24 December 2012 (UTC)
Hi, Have you asked others yet? ATC . Talk 19:17, 27 December 2012 (UTC)
Xmas/summer holidays mean there are tumbleweeds blowing through work at the moment (i.e. very quiet...) Casliber (talk · contribs) 20:03, 27 December 2012 (UTC)
I see...Actually I spoke to someone I know who has a Ph.D. in Behavior Analysis and Clinical Psychology. He is also an author and works with autistic children as well as people with sexual disorders and to help some people organize themselves in business (See here: Organizational behavior management (OBM)), and has spoken at various press conferences. He said anyone who still uses the term "behavior modification" is using "outdated termonoligy" and that no one has called ABA "behavior modification" in years if they kept up with the literature. In addition, he said Cognitive Behavior Therapy commonly used ABA in the old days which is why they use to call it "Cognitive-Behavior Modification". He said some forms of CBT still incorporate ABA which is known as Functional analytic psychotherapy and Acceptance and Commitment Therapy. But it is primarily two different forms of Behavior therapy. ATC . Talk 08:00, 29 December 2012 (UTC)
ATC I don't doubt you and am appreciative of the steps you've taken to investigate. Thanks for the update. Still waiting for folks to get back to work....cheers, Casliber (talk · contribs) 09:49, 29 December 2012 (UTC)
Thanks for the reply and enjoy the holidays! ATC . Talk 22:39, 29 December 2012 (UTC)
Hey don't mean to be a nudge but am wondering if you've gotten any updates. Take care. ATC . Talk 04:46, 9 January 2013 (UTC)
The senior psychologist on our ward thought it was only to do with specific therapy for autism, but she conceded she wasn't hugely familiar with the area. Casliber (talk · contribs) 08:17, 9 January 2013 (UTC)
Okay. I spoke to a psychology college professor about it and his wife is a behaviorist. He said, ABA, Behavior Mod., and PBS are all the same thing. And some people still use the word "behavior mod.", as I saw in some scientific journals (from about a year ago). Most of the time PBS, a form of ABA, is used in schools (SchoolWide Positive Behavior Intervention Support or SWPBIS) or for autism treatment (Early intensive behavioral intervention). Although they are all the same thing, ABA/PBS usually refer to education; although, technically speaking they are all the same thing. The Behavior Analyst Certification Board website only uses the terms "ABA" (including PBS) and "Experimental Analysis of Behavior" (for research studies), the two are subtypes of Behavior Analysis. If you search the website, they don't even use the word "behavior modification". The only other popular ABA sub terms - excluding education - are "Organizational Behavior Management" (OBM, to stay organized at a work site) and Clinical behavior analysis (CBA). *(Note this is just an update of what I learned, heard about, and discovered. I don't think most people understand it. In everyday conversation though, people using the term "ABA" are referring to the early intervention used for autism including "Discrete Trial Teaching" (DTT)) ATC . Talk 21:54, 17 February 2013 (UTC)

WP:MEDGA2013[edit]

I started WP:MEDGA2013 and I included what you said about delirium. I've clarified my intent at that page and I wondered if you intended to try to get the article up to GA status or not. Best! Biosthmors (talk) 20:34, 18 January 2013 (UTC)

Yes I do. Casliber (talk · contribs) 05:41, 19 January 2013 (UTC)


Gene migration research, India --> Australia[edit]

This http://www.economist.com/news/science-and-technology/21569688-genetic-evidence-suggests-four-millennia-ago-group-adventurous-indians points to a gene study you may be interested in.... Likely people from the Indian sub-continent mixed with Australian aboriginies 4xxxx years ago. An maybe brought dingos. Regards, Ariconte (talk) 09:24, 22 January 2013 (UTC)

Will read anon. Casliber (talk · contribs) 10:59, 22 January 2013 (UTC)

Glasser's choice theory[edit]

Could use some work if you're interested. Someone not using his real name (talk) 09:36, 28 January 2014 (UTC)

ok - will take a look soonish....Cas Liber (talk · contribs) 14:14, 28 January 2014 (UTC)

Orange-bellied Parrot[edit]

Neophema99 (talk) 07:58, 19 February 2014 (UTC) Hi. I would like to open for discussion the format of the entry for 'Orange-bellied Parrot'. As news occurs in the recovery program for this species, the limitations of the current format of the Wikipedia entry become more obvious. The heading, 'Conservation Status' should, I believe, be reserved for the actual conservation status in Australia, and in the three states, SA, Tasmania and Victoria. What follows after that, but still under that heading, at present, is a running commentary of events since about 2010. This is not acceptable. I propose another heading be inserted, 'Recovery Program' or similar. In it, a short history of the OBP recovery program could be given - since 1980 or so - and then, new events could be smoothly inserted as they happen. What do others think? The Wikipedia entry is an important first port of call for many people interested in this bird. We owe it to them, and to history, to provide a better entry.

Neophema99 (talk) 07:58, 19 February 2014 (UTC)

Agreed. Will take a look. sounds good - helps with seamless updating and no doubt there is a lot of info that could be added. Cas Liber (talk · contribs) 08:52, 19 February 2014 (UTC)

Obsolete Constellations[edit]

I just found an amazing source for articles on them: John Hill's Urania Adam Cuerden (talk) 22:55, 7 March 2014 (UTC)

Cool! I was judt giving some feedback to core contest and will look at stub. Cas Liber (talk · contribs) 23:00, 7 March 2014 (UTC)
Urania's Mirror has gotten a wee bit less stubby. Adam Cuerden (talk)

Titanoceratops review[edit]

Sorry about your review on Titanoceratops. I had actually forgotten that it was not completed, and was away for just over the entire May Long Weekend, so I could not reply to your comments. I am not asking you to re-open the review, but yes please, could you send me the articles and give me feedback on my progress. The "Distinguishing Characteristics" section I find tough to modify, as there are extremely specific features that distinguish an animal, and sometimes those features cannot be described a different way from what the author has written. Any help with that section would be greatly appreciated.

On Zanabazar, I have pasted the article in my sandbox with a new modified version of the discovery section, and with the "Distinguishing Characteristics" section removed. How closely paraphrased is it now, and if it is better could you comment on the DYK page where the discussion was, at least, being held (There have been no comments for about a week or more last I checked). Thanks for your help - IJReid (talk) 14:00, 20 May 2014 (UTC)

Move review notification[edit]

Because you participated in the most recent discussion regarding the proposed move of Hillary Rodham Clinton, you are hereby notified per Wikipedia:Canvassing#Appropriate notification that the administrative determination of consensus from that discussion is being challenged at Wikipedia:Move review/Log/2014 May. Please feel free to comment there. Cheers! bd2412 T 19:20, 20 May 2014 (UTC)

Main Page appearance: Thopha saccata[edit]

This is a note to let the main editors of Thopha saccata know that the article will be appearing as today's featured article on June 9, 2014. If this article needs any attention or maintenance, it would be preferable if that could be done before its appearance on the Main Page. If you prefer that the article appear as TFA on a different date, or not at present, please ask Bencherlite (talk · contribs). You can view the TFA blurb at Wikipedia:Today's featured article/June 9, 2014. If it needs tweaking, or if it needs rewording to match improvements to the article between now and its main page appearance, please edit it, following the instructions at Wikipedia:Today's featured article/requests/instructions. The blurb as it stands now is below:

Thopha saccata

Thopha saccata, commonly known as the double drummer, is the largest Australian species of cicada and reputedly the loudest insect in the world. Documented by the Danish zoologist Johan Christian Fabricius in 1803, it was the first described and named cicada native to Australia. Its common name comes from the large dark red-brown sac-like pockets that the adult male has on each side of its abdomen—the "double drums"—that are used to amplify the sound it produces. The adult double drummer is the largest Australian species of cicada. Broad-headed compared with other cicadas, the double drummer is mostly brown with a black pattern across the back of its thorax, and has red-brown and black underparts. The sexes are similar in appearance, though the female lacks the male's tymbals and sac-like covers. Found in sclerophyll forest in Queensland and New South Wales, adult double drummers generally perch high in the branches of large eucalypts. They emerge from the ground where they have spent several years as nymphs from November until March, and live for another four to five weeks. They appear in great numbers in some years, yet are absent in others. (Full article...)

You (and your talk-page stalkers) may also be interested to hear that there have been some changes at the TFA requests page recently. Nominators no longer need to calculate how many "points" an article has, the instructions have been simplified, and there's a new nomination system using templates based on those used for DYK suggestions. Please consider nominating another article, or commenting on an existing nomination, and leaving some feedback on your experience. Thank you. UcuchaBot (talk) 23:01, 20 May 2014 (UTC)

Kentrosaurus[edit]

Would you be able to review Kentrosaurus? Thank you. LittleJerry (talk) 15:05, 21 May 2014 (UTC)

@LittleJerry: I think I've made one or two edits several years ago - I think that is allowable so yes will try and get to it. Cas Liber (talk · contribs) 02:14, 22 May 2014 (UTC)

DYK nomination of T Ursae Minoris[edit]

Symbol question.svg Hello! Your submission of T Ursae Minoris at the Did You Know nominations page has been reviewed, and some issues with it may need to be clarified. Please review the comment(s) underneath your nomination's entry and respond there as soon as possible. Thank you for contributing to Did You Know! Yoninah (talk) 00:35, 22 May 2014 (UTC)

DYK for Canis Major[edit]

Materialscientist (talk) 00:47, 22 May 2014 (UTC)

DYK for Urodacus yaschenkoi[edit]

 — Crisco 1492 (talk) 12:36, 22 May 2014 (UTC)

100-up![edit]

Congratulations on becoming Wikipedia's second FA centurion, a truly magnificent achievement. I will work up the material you've given me with a view to next week's Signpost. Great work! Brianboulton (talk) 22:17, 23 May 2014 (UTC)

Congrats! :) - NeutralhomerTalk • 22:19, 23 May 2014 (UTC)
thx both! yeah Brian I added a bit more - can't think of anything else I'd add right now....Cas Liber (talk · contribs) 22:36, 23 May 2014 (UTC)

DYK for Banksieaeformis[edit]

Cas Liber (talk · contribs) 01:58, 24 May 2014 (UTC)

This week's article for improvement (week 22, 2014)[edit]

Roger Ebert cropped.jpg

Roger Ebert, well known for his contributions to film criticism.

Hello, Casliber.

The following is WikiProject Today's articles for improvement's weekly selection:

Film criticism


Previous selections: French Revolutionary Wars • Forests of Australia


Get involved with the TAFI project! You can...
Posted by: MediaWiki message delivery (talk) on behalf of EuroCarGT (talk) 00:04, 26 May 2014 (UTC) • Opt-out instructions

DYK for T Ursae Minoris[edit]

HJ Mitchell | Penny for your thoughts? 14:22, 25 May 2014 (UTC) 00:58, 26 May 2014 (UTC)

Help with a Peer Review?[edit]

Hi Casliber, I noticed that your name came up on the list of volunteers for peer review of biological topics. I was wondering if you would be willing to review the Gynecomastia article. I can see that you're a very accomplished and experienced editor and I think the article would benefit from a set of new (but veteran) eyes. I'm working on getting it to GA (and eventually FA down the road). Please let me know. Thanks! TylerDurden8823 (talk) 04:45, 27 May 2014 (UTC)

So, any interest in this Casliber? TylerDurden8823 (talk) 07:34, 30 May 2014 (UTC)
Sorry, got distracted. Cas Liber (talk · contribs) 08:30, 30 May 2014 (UTC)
That's okay, it happens to me too Thank you for helping! TylerDurden8823 (talk) 08:46, 30 May 2014 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for May 27[edit]

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Macrozamia spiralis, you added links pointing to the disambiguation pages Blue Mountains and Coralloid (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) 08:48, 27 May 2014 (UTC)

Request for comment[edit]

Hello there, a proposal regarding pre-adminship review has been raised at Village pump by Anna Frodesiak. Your comments here is very much appreciated. Many thanks. Jim Carter through MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 06:46, 28 May 2014 (UTC)

100 Featured articles[edit]

Tireless Contributor Barnstar Hires.gif The Tireless Contributor Barnstar
Outstanding. Thank you! --Pine 07:04, 29 May 2014 (UTC)
Well done Cas!--Melburnian (talk) 12:40, 29 May 2014 (UTC)
@Melburnian: - any other plant articles you've reasonably buffed you want to punt over to GA/FA (and get on the mainpage?)? Some reasonably complete ones might be fairly straightforward.....Epacris impressa.....ideas? Cas Liber (talk · contribs) 03:44, 30 May 2014 (UTC)
Another collaborative effort with you in the style of Telopea speciosissima and Lambertia formosa would be nice. Epacris impressa seems a logical candidate for this - it's a floral emblem, found in Sydney and Melbourne and flowering right now.--Melburnian (talk) 04:40, 30 May 2014 (UTC)
Ok - will pull out some books and articles soonish....be good to get all the floral emblems Featured.Cas Liber (talk · contribs) 05:49, 30 May 2014 (UTC)

'Chrome[edit]

Cas, I'm pinging you and all your responsible talk page stalkers about a race horse article, California Chrome, which is GA- class now, to ask that anyone who does vandal patrol please watchlist it for the next two weeks. I have been the lead editor on the article, but I need all the eyes I can get to help. The horse is to run for the Triple Crown at the 2014 Belmont Stakes on June 7. The article is getting very high traffic for a horse article (over 250K hits this month) and we had some real PITA vandalism on both Derby day (where some troll posted - obviously inaccurately - that the horse died) and Preakness day (where someone who should know better went in and erased half the article in random places) plus the usual kiddie nonsense; due to the nature of horse racing, the vandalism hits fast and because several people are also trying to legitimately update the article at the same time, reversions can become tricky. I was turned down for a request to give it temporary semi through Belmont day, but the problem is that the vandalism problem will hit in about a 3-hour period, so after the fact protection will be rather useless. I'm going to try again to get semi for at least 24 hours on either side of the race, but in the meantime, I need human eyes. Also, if anyone wants to do an informal peer review along the way, I'm probably going to take it to FAC after the Belmont. Many thanks in advance. Montanabw(talk) 18:11, 29 May 2014 (UTC)

James Rutka protection[edit]

The BLP policy is intended to protect people from defimation or negative misrepresentation. It is not intended to "protect" an article from being filled with true but promotionally-toned or other positive but unencyclopedic material.

This page needs heavy watchlisting (I've asked WikiProject Medicine participants to watchlist the page) but I don't think it needs semi-protection, particularly indefinite semi-protecting.

If you think it needs protecting, I would ask you to consider shortening the time to a few weeks and I would ask you to consider replacing the protection with PC1 protection so non-logged in editors and new editors can edit the article, even if their changes aren't immediately visible. davidwr/(talk)/(contribs) 22:02, 30 May 2014 (UTC)

ok hang on. If you're going to watch it I'll PC it. Cas Liber (talk · contribs) 22:15, 30 May 2014 (UTC)

DYK for Macrozamia spiralis[edit]

 — Crisco 1492 (talk) 04:50, 31 May 2014 (UTC)

Congrats[edit]

For the amazing milestone of 100 FAs. Doc James (talk · contribs · email) (if I write on your page reply on mine) 14:05, 1 June 2014 (UTC)

Thx - will try and sprinkle a few more medical ones in the next 100...sometimes it's a bit too much like...work really....Cas Liber (talk · contribs) 14:10, 1 June 2014 (UTC)
I know the feeling, it is why I almost never write on law. Congratulations.--Wehwalt (talk) 16:27, 1 June 2014 (UTC)
Thx - I'll race you to 200 now ;) Cas Liber (talk · contribs) 21:06, 1 June 2014 (UTC)
@Casliber: I think Wehwalt could beat ya. :) He is kinda prolific in his FAs. :) - NeutralhomerTalk • 21:21, 1 June 2014 (UTC)
Yeah probably...... Cas Liber (talk · contribs) 00:47, 2 June 2014 (UTC)

FA congratulations (again)[edit]

Well, I could leave you the usual {{FA congrats}} template for Grus (constellation) and point you politely in the direction of TFAR, but in your case it would be both inadequate and superfluous! A hearty congratulations for reaching this milestone and many thanks for your nominations at TFAR. Very best wishes, BencherliteTalk 18:23, 1 June 2014 (UTC)

Barnstar[edit]

Cscr-featured.svg Cscr-featured.svg Cscr-featured.svg Cscr-featured.svg Cscr-featured.svg Cscr-featured.svg Cscr-featured.svg Cscr-featured.svg Cscr-featured.svg Cscr-featured.svg
Cscr-featured.svg Cscr-featured.svg Cscr-featured.svg Cscr-featured.svg Cscr-featured.svg Cscr-featured.svg Cscr-featured.svg Cscr-featured.svg Cscr-featured.svg Cscr-featured.svg
Cscr-featured.svg Cscr-featured.svg Cscr-featured.svg Cscr-featured.svg Cscr-featured.svg Cscr-featured.svg Cscr-featured.svg Cscr-featured.svg Cscr-featured.svg Cscr-featured.svg
Cscr-featured.svg Cscr-featured.svg Cscr-featured.svg Cscr-featured.svg Cscr-featured.svg Cscr-featured.svg Cscr-featured.svg Cscr-featured.svg Cscr-featured.svg Cscr-featured.svg
Cscr-featured.svg Cscr-featured.svg Cscr-featured.svg Cscr-featured.svg Cscr-featured.svg Cscr-featured.svg Cscr-featured.svg Cscr-featured.svg Cscr-featured.svg Cscr-featured.svg
Cscr-featured.svg Cscr-featured.svg Cscr-featured.svg Cscr-featured.svg Cscr-featured.svg Cscr-featured.svg Cscr-featured.svg Cscr-featured.svg Cscr-featured.svg Cscr-featured.svg
Cscr-featured.svg Cscr-featured.svg Cscr-featured.svg Cscr-featured.svg Cscr-featured.svg Cscr-featured.svg Cscr-featured.svg Cscr-featured.svg Cscr-featured.svg Cscr-featured.svg
Cscr-featured.svg Cscr-featured.svg Cscr-featured.svg Cscr-featured.svg Cscr-featured.svg Cscr-featured.svg Cscr-featured.svg Cscr-featured.svg Cscr-featured.svg Cscr-featured.svg
Cscr-featured.svg Cscr-featured.svg Cscr-featured.svg Cscr-featured.svg Cscr-featured.svg Cscr-featured.svg Cscr-featured.svg Cscr-featured.svg Cscr-featured.svg Cscr-featured.svg
Cscr-featured.svg Cscr-featured.svg Cscr-featured.svg Cscr-featured.svg Cscr-featured.svg Cscr-featured.svg Cscr-featured.svg Cscr-featured.svg Cscr-featured.svg Cscr-featured.svg
The Dense Nebula of One Hundred Barnstars
Awarded for reaching one hundred featured articles. Nebulae, as you no doubt know, are areas of high star formation. Adam Cuerden (talk) 21:40, 1 June 2014 (UTC)

Heh, cute. Cas Liber (talk · contribs) 06:28, 2 June 2014 (UTC)

This week's article for improvement (week 23, 2014)[edit]

Amazonriverbasin basemap.png

The Amazon Basin, pictured in yellow, holds the largest rainforest in the world.

Hello, Casliber.

The following is WikiProject Today's articles for improvement's weekly selection:

Amazon Basin


Previous selections: Film criticism • French Revolutionary Wars


Get involved with the TAFI project! You can...
Posted by: MediaWiki message delivery (talk) on behalf of EuroCarGT (talk) 00:02, 2 June 2014 (UTC) • Opt-out instructions

Main Page appearance: Boletus luridus[edit]

This is a note to let the main editors of Boletus luridus know that the article will be appearing as today's featured article on June 20, 2014. If this article needs any attention or maintenance, it would be preferable if that could be done before its appearance on the Main Page. If you prefer that the article appear as TFA on a different date, or not at present, please ask Bencherlite (talk · contribs). You can view the TFA blurb at Wikipedia:Today's featured article/June 20, 2014. If it needs tweaking, or if it needs rewording to match improvements to the article between now and its main page appearance, please edit it, following the instructions at Wikipedia:Today's featured article/requests/instructions. The blurb as it stands now is below:

Boletus luridus mushroom

Boletus luridus, commonly known as the lurid bolete, is a fungus of the bolete family, found in deciduous woodlands on chalky soils in Asia, Europe, and eastern North America. Fruit bodies arise in summer and autumn and may be abundant. It is a solid bolete with an olive-brown cap up to 20 cm (8 in) in diameter, with small reddish pores on the underside. The stout ochre stem reaches dimensions of 8–14 cm (3–6 in) tall and 1–3 cm (0.4–1.2 in) wide, and is patterned with a reddish meshwork. Like several other red-pored boletes, it stains blue when bruised or cut. Though edible when cooked, it can cause gastric upset when eaten raw and can be confused with the poisonous Boletus satanas. Hence some guidebooks recommend avoiding consumption altogether. Boletus luridus has been implicated in causing adverse reactions when eaten with alcohol similar to those caused by the compound coprine, though laboratory testing has not revealed any evidence of coprine in the mushroom. Boletus luridus is mycorrhizal, forming a symbiotic association with deciduous trees such as oak, birch and beech, and has been found to have a growth-enhancing effect with conifers in experiments. (Full article...)

You (and your talk-page stalkers) may also be interested to hear that there have been some changes at the TFA requests page recently. Nominators no longer need to calculate how many "points" an article has, the instructions have been simplified, and there's a new nomination system using templates based on those used for DYK suggestions. Please consider nominating another article, or commenting on an existing nomination, and leaving some feedback on your experience. Thank you. UcuchaBot (talk) 23:02, 2 June 2014 (UTC)

DYK for Nirmala (novel)[edit]

Cas Liber (talk · contribs) 23:08, 4 June 2014 (UTC)

The Pulse (WP:MED newsletter) June 2014[edit]

The first edition of The Pulse has been released. The Pulse will be a regular newsletter documenting the goings-on at WPMED, including ongoing collaborations, discussions, articles, and each edition will have a special focus. That newsletter is here.

The newsletter has been sent to the talk pages of WP:MED members bearing the {{User WPMed}} template. To opt-out, please leave a message here or simply remove your name from the mailing list. Because this is the first issue, we are still finding out feet. Things like the layout and content may change in subsequent editions. Please let us know what you think, and if you have any ideas for the future, by leaving a message here.

Posted by MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 03:23, 5 June 2014 (UTC) on behalf of WikiProject Medicine.

Congratulations![edit]

The Natural History Shield for Service to Wikipedia.jpg The Natural History Shield
Please accept this modest token of everyone's admiration, in lieu of an unwieldy 100 Natural History Barnstars! I held off from giving you the award before as I felt you were too senior for that, but 100 FAs can't be ignored. Chiswick Chap (talk) 05:52, 5 June 2014 (UTC)
Heh, thanks. Cas Liber (talk · contribs) 06:13, 5 June 2014 (UTC)

You may be interested...[edit]

Talk:American Paint Horse#Requested moves - where we're now moving on from species to breeds. Ealdgyth - Talk 12:25, 5 June 2014 (UTC)

Groan.....Cas Liber (talk · contribs) 13:14, 5 June 2014 (UTC)

Adminship?[edit]

Thanks for the compliment. I'd prefer to remain one of the foot soldiers for now. Best, Yoninah (talk) 19:16, 5 June 2014 (UTC)

No worries. Just thought I'd ask....Cas Liber (talk · contribs) 20:11, 5 June 2014 (UTC)

Your page protection of Sigmund Freud[edit]

To: Casliber; In reference to your page protection of Sigmund Freud, there appears to be a claim made by a previous editor that Freud was a regular professor in Europe, which does not match with the biography of Freud written by Prof Peter Gay. I have tried to explain this on the Talk page there, but another editor appears to disagree, and is apparently moving in the direction of "adapting" Prof Peter Gay to state matters never stated in his book. Misquotation of a living author creates other issues as well. Could you glance at this? FelixRosch (talk) 20:29, 5 June 2014 (UTC)

Just trying to read now. Cas Liber (talk · contribs) 20:41, 5 June 2014 (UTC)
Many thanks for looking at this. User:Allmancer has decided to decline your generous offer to discuss this on Talk prior to re-posting his/her own version of the text, and has gone ahead and re-posted it without heeding anything you generously offered on the Talk page as an option. I have put this on Talk there and on his/her own Talk page. Should the Page possibly be flagged as BLP to try to get User:Allmancer to wait for consensus prior to his/her multiple re-posts of this issue. Your comment from yesterday seems to put the discussion on a good path and perhaps you could amplify it in some way. FelixRosch (talk) 15:15, 6 June 2014 (UTC)
Previous user is again reverting text to his/her own preference in spite of your generous offer to provide useful material for the Talk page. User:Allmancer is now showing a disregard against two editors (your comments and my comments) trying to engage with him on the Talk page. BLP issue is a real one and Prof Peter Gay is a living author who is being misquoted for the personal reasons of User:Allmancer. I would Support you if you could place the German title into the Lede in order to protect what Prof Peter Gay at Yale University states in his book, or to delete the BLP reference until the Talk page discussion reaches consensus. Either way, the misquote of a living author Prof Peter Gay should be protected until the BLP issue reaches consensus on the Talk page. It would be preferable to see your version of the edit posted, and to avoid reporting User:Allmancer for multiple reverts. Your amplification from yesterday to User:Allmancer was ignored by him/her again. Possibly you could add your message to mine on his/her Talk page since that editor is ignoring both comments for yourself and myself who are seeking to resolve the matter on the Talk page. FelixRosch (talk) 15:44, 7 June 2014 (UTC)
Hang on....Cas Liber (talk · contribs) 15:46, 7 June 2014 (UTC)
Thanks for your comment from Saturday. Over the week-end i was able to request further comments on the blp noticeboard with results that I have reposted on the Talk page for Freud. At present it looks like 3 editors supporting the inclusion of the German title for a.o. in German in order to avoid all ambiguity problems. User:Allmancer has declined your offer to start an RFC over the last 3 days for his/her view, and after 7 (seven) days has not been able to provide the quotation directly from Prof Peter Gay's book to support his/her position. Given that Prof Peter Gay is a living author with blp concerns, possibly it would be helpful if you could close out the issue with whatever your decision is for it, and return the Freud Page to its previous protection status which would be beneficial to all users in general. The current status appears to be 3 Supports for using the German title (including yours), 1 Oppose, and 1 n.b. comment. With appreciation for your looking after the Freud page in the past and during this last week. FelixRosch (talk) 17:32, 9 June 2014 (UTC)

Fellow Quiz Show contestant[edit]

Heya

Read you are a regular quiz show contestant. I've been on a few in my time (Sale of the Century, Flashbacks(?)- ABC Quiz Show c. 2000, and Temptation) so we might have come across each other, knowing what such a small world the professional quiz show contestant circuit is. And a big "well done" for all your work here. --Roisterer (talk) 22:45, 5 June 2014 (UTC)

I was on Jeopardy (3 nights) in 1993, Temptation and "Sale in early 2000s, 6 nights on Wheel of Fortune in 2001 and 3 times on Einstein Factor (04,06,08). Agree is a small circuit - I ran into a few people more than once :) Cas Liber (talk · contribs) 03:11, 6 June 2014 (UTC)

DYK for House From Hell[edit]

 — Crisco 1492 (talk) 00:02, 7 June 2014 (UTC)

Thank you...[edit]

...for taking care of the ref desk tonight. That one troll has been persistent, so it may turn out that two weeks is not enough. But we'll see. ←Baseball Bugs What's up, Doc? carrots→ 02:48, 7 June 2014 (UTC)

(shrugs) no dramas, if it continues, we'll continue the semi'ing for a while. Cas Liber (talk · contribs) 05:08, 7 June 2014 (UTC)
Dudes! What the heck are you guys even saying? I came to Wikipedia's reference ref once in a while to ask for help. I'm not a freaking troll. I have better things to do in life than to waste my precious time trolling on Wikipedia. I hate trolling. Last question I asked on the ref is probably a few months ago. I have never trolled in Wikipedia, so I have no idea how can you even try to say that I'm trolling? I asked for help, if only someone just translated it in the beginning without insulting me then nothing would have happened. All I wanted is to get the letter translated and this is what I got? First, I was insulted then being framed as a troll without any solid evidence. Making grammatical mistake is not even close to be the same as trolling. By your definition, almost everyone on the internet would be trolling. The internet space is not the same as an English class. Nobody gives a damn about grammar; there is just no time for that. People only care about getting their points across; that's all it matters. Seriously. I used to respect Wikipedia as a helpful source, but after this incident, I'm not sure if I can trust Wikipedia if the people like you guys are running this place. You guys are turning away readers and help-seeker like me. Good job on that! (sarcasm). And bye, I'm out of here now. Someone was kindly enough to help me translate it. My purpose here is done. I have no reason to be anymore. However, you guys pissed me off so much by framing me as a troll, so I just have to speak up before I go. That's how I roll through life. Ok bye and peace!75.168.122.245 (talk) 05:28, 8 June 2014 (UTC)
Ok then - can you link to the questions you asked and I can look for myself? Cas Liber (talk · contribs) 05:48, 8 June 2014 (UTC)

Sleeping Dogs (video game)[edit]

Hey man! Would you mind doing a peer review for "Sleeping Dogs (video game)"? I just finished polishing it and would really appreciate any feedback you could give, specially on the front section, develoment and dlc tabs. URDNEXT (talk) 18:23, 7 June 2014 (UTC)

Ok, I'll take a look. Cas Liber (talk · contribs) 22:13, 7 June 2014 (UTC)
Thanks man! What do you think about the article now? URDNEXT (talk) 22:35, 7 June 2014 (UTC)

DYK for Darlingia ferruginea[edit]

 — Crisco 1492 (talk) 00:02, 8 June 2014 (UTC)

Reculver FAC[edit]

Sorry to be a pest, but could I trouble you for a revisit of your initial comments at the Reculver FAC? Things have moved on quite a bit, I think. Apologies if you're still watching and waiting! Cheers. Nortonius (talk) 13:39, 8 June 2014 (UTC)

Great, thank you! :o) Nortonius (talk) 14:45, 8 June 2014 (UTC)

User:Tarbuckle[edit]

Hello, Casliber. You forgot to properly template this user when you blocked him. - Hoops gza (talk) 22:58, 8 June 2014 (UTC)

I chose to write rather than use a template. Feel free to substitute one if you feel strongly about it. Cas Liber (talk · contribs) 02:30, 9 June 2014 (UTC)

Oh, I just thought that every blocked user is supposed to have a template because they should be able to see that they have the right to request to be unblocked, that's all. - Hoops gza (talk) 15:45, 9 June 2014 (UTC)

What’s going on here please, regarding the Palmeria plant genus article?[edit]

What’s going on here please, regarding the Palmeria plant genus article, and what was in this article beforehand?

Handy APNI Palmeria genus listing reference. —--Macropneuma 23:59, 8 June 2014 (UTC)

Right, it was just a redirect to the diambiguation page...but since it came from there it was unneeded and better deleted. THanks for the link - genus page coming up....Cas Liber (talk · contribs) 02:34, 9 June 2014 (UTC)
Great, rapid, work! --Macropneuma 03:20, 9 June 2014 (UTC)

This week's article for improvement (week 24, 2014)[edit]

230px

The Tickle Me Elmo toy was based on the Sesame Street character Elmo

Hello, Casliber.

The following is WikiProject Today's articles for improvement's weekly selection:

Tickle Me Elmo


Previous selections: Amazon Basin • Film criticism


Get involved with the TAFI project! You can...
Posted by: MediaWiki message delivery (talk) on behalf of EuroCarGT (talk) 00:09, 9 June 2014 (UTC) • Opt-out instructions

Winnipeg, introduction still in need of improvement?[edit]

Hi, I made a lot of changes to the Winnipeg introduction, and am wondering if I did more harm than good, or is it okay/better (as of 9:44pm Winnipeg time)? Is the Winnipeg article still looking like a featured article?

Thanks --Jd.101 (talk) 02:45, 9 June 2014 (UTC)

@Jd.101: Right (1) - the cree bit is good, but MUST be in the body of the text as well, and the inline reference is better in body but NOT lead. (2) capitalising "West" is good I think (3) but trimming last paragraph not a good idea - I'd revert that subtraction if I were you. Cas Liber (talk · contribs) 02:49, 9 June 2014 (UTC)
Thanks for the quick reply, I'll try your suggestions. --Jd.101 (talk) 02:59, 9 June 2014 (UTC)
I re-added the last paragraph part listing the festivals and sports teams, thats what you suggested right? Also, (sorry Im just not sure): when you say the cree bit must be in the body, does that mean in the history section? --Jd.101 (talk) 03:19, 9 June 2014 (UTC)
Or was it the economy section I should have put back?--Jd.101 (talk) 03:33, 9 June 2014 (UTC)
Sorry, my bad - cree bit was in body already.....Cas Liber (talk · contribs) 04:47, 9 June 2014 (UTC)
So how is the introduction looking now? I really appreciate your opinion. Thanks.--Jd.101 (talk) 19:25, 9 June 2014 (UTC)

Collaborations[edit]

It would appear that me and User:Cwmhiraeth might wish to collaborate with writing on the Wiki. Prior to this, there are a few things that may need a facilitator (informal) in a discussion about this on my talk page, and I wondered if you could assist, even in a small way. Snowman (talk) 09:59, 9 June 2014 (UTC)
Sure. I just posted there as the orange message bar came up. Cas Liber (talk · contribs) 10:12, 9 June 2014 (UTC)
I have thought about it a bit more, and I think that collaboration over long time period with User:Cwmhiraeth will depend on how she responds to my comments to her recent allegation made on my talk page that I harassed her during her editor review, see her edit. Her editor review was an invitations for comments and it was primarily about aspects of her mistakes. If she could understand my role in protecting the Wiki from her mistakes as a kindness to readers, then she might see my role in a more benign light. I wonder why did she made this allegation on my talk page yesterday, so long after her editor review? I trust that her work is now better. Snowman (talk) 13:18, 9 June 2014 (UTC)
Of course, with your offers of collaboration on science topics, I will start to think about anything relevant. I am not in a hurry, but I would like to set up a suitable environment for me to do some editing when the weather turns cold here in the UK next Autumn. There are lots of pages to choose from for collaborations and I will not be offended if you thought any of my suggestions were not suitable. What do you think about the medical topic "imperforate hymen"? It is a page in the scope of both WP Anatomy and WP Medicine. I am not in a hurry, my planning time scale is months over the English summer. Snowman (talk) 13:18, 9 June 2014 (UTC)
Hmmm, I find it hard to get enthusiastic about that article. I keep a sort of dashboard at User:Casliber/To-Do of articles I am interested in. I will have a think. Something narrow enough so the scope can be defined easily yet maybe interesting and broad enough so it isn't very esoteric. Cas Liber (talk · contribs) 13:25, 9 June 2014 (UTC)
I sort of see what you mean about it being esoteric. I thought of it as one of the less complex potential GAs, because it is an easily defined topic, and probably interesting to many. There are many more to choose from. Snowman (talk) 13:27, 9 June 2014 (UTC)
Maybe human skull is a better starting point than skull. I want to do delirium at some point but that is pretty medical and has little to do with anatomy. Cas Liber (talk · contribs) 13:40, 9 June 2014 (UTC)
Delirium is a psychiatry and general medical topic. Delirium is a broad topic and improving the article looks difficult and I probably would only be interested in a few parts of it. I am interested in human pathology, anything medical, and general science. There is no need to focus entirely on anatomy articles, but I would like to see test the ground and improve some anatomy articles preferable with some clinical content. Paradoxically, my experience has been that displaying expertise on the Wiki is problematic and results in being cross-questioned for being correct or criticized for fixing things. I would have thought that if someone comes along and fixes a number of problems including misunderstandings and ambiguities then editors would be grateful, but it does not work like that here and instead someone is more likely to say that I have been editing too much without discussion (or something like that) or even being reverted with the edit summary "see talk page". Of course, I make some accidental mistakes as well and editing here can be humbling. I was generally delighted when the erudite User:Rabo3 helped to edit parrot articles that I had expanded a bit in my role as an armature ornithologist. I am saddened that he has left the Wiki now, but I hope he returns sometime. I might be wrong, but I vaguely recall that he got into erudite discussions about bird classification with other ornithologists (that went over my head) and the last straw was when he had some work reverted. On the Wiki, I think that I am happiest illustrating and editing parrot and other bird articles as a hobbyist. I have to go off line now and do some tasks. Snowman (talk) 15:35, 9 June 2014 (UTC)
  • Snowman wrote above "Her editor review was an invitations for comments and it was primarily about aspects of her mistakes. If she could understand my role in protecting the Wiki from her mistakes as a kindness to readers, then she might see my role in a more benign light. I wonder why did she made this allegation on my talk page yesterday, so long after her editor review?"

My editor review should not have been about identifying my mistakes, although that is what it turned out to be. It should have been a proper assessment of what I do, the good points and the bad. I have no objection to you correcting any errors I make but there was no need to make a great song and dance about it. In the articles Salt and Sugar, it was not so much that I had got the medical aspects wrong, but that the studies I found and referred to had been superseded by others, and I had no idea how touchy WikiProject Medicine was about such things. I'm not even sure what terrible faults I committed in Anatomy because I was pretty fed up with your part of the review by then and just switched off. Nor did I agree with all the comments made by Af...... in her blog, some of which were just bunkum. When I joined the Wikipediocracy forum and started pointing out her errors there, she closed the thread down pretty quickly. As for why I mentioned the editor review on your talk page yesterday, that was because you were annoying another editor. I hoped that by collaborating with me now on a GAN, you could move away from the course of conduct that led LT910001 to complain at An/I. So, what about working together on a parrot or some other bird article, in between your bouts of enjoying the summer sunshine. I guess Casliber is lucky, I see the winter temperature in Sydney yesterday was 19°C, much the same as it is in the UK as we approach the longest day. Cwmhiraeth (talk) 18:40, 9 June 2014 (UTC)

Yeah, but my daughter is supposed to be going to a ski camp in 4 weeks and we've had a very warm autumn which bodes ill for it.....Cas Liber (talk · contribs) 21:03, 9 June 2014 (UTC)
@Cwmhiraeth - problem is, if stuff needs fixing, then the fact that it is asked about in a manner which annoys the writer does not take away from the fact that it needs reviewing. I just had a look at cervix and it is looking rather good now (I don't know what it was missing as I didn't have time to look in detail before the lengthy discussions), but there's still a couple of things missing. Anyway.....Cas Liber (talk · contribs) 21:07, 9 June 2014 (UTC)
I think that User Cwm's comment above says more about her than it says about me. Snowman (talk) 23:32, 9 June 2014 (UTC)
Casliber you have completely missed the point of the AN/I if you think it was written because of a "manner which annoys the writer". I would point out that, like SMR, the "fixing" you have done is, for the most part, stylistic. As I hope you realise, writing style is almost completely subjective and yours, mine, or any other users opinion of style is an opinion, not something that "needs fixing". --LT910001 (talk) 22:01, 16 June 2014 (UTC)

unprotect request (WP:RD/S)[edit]

Please strongly consider removing the semiprotection on the Wikipedia:Reference Desks. Perhaps something changed when I wasn't looking, but in my experience, we've never protected any of the desks for that long. (Typical protections, it seems to me, have been measured in hours.) Very many of the questioners at the desks are unregistered or brand-new, not-yet-autoconfirmed users. Yes, there's some trolling, but we have got be able to deal with that some other way; semiprotecting a desk for days or weeks leads to way too much collateral damage. Thank you. --Steve Summit (talk) 22:30, 9 June 2014 (UTC)

P.S. I should have said, see also this thread on the talk page.
Agreed. I can't use the desks at all right now and it's really unfair. Please unprotect them. TweenWoof (talk) 22:39, 9 June 2014 (UTC)
You are the reason they're protected. ←Baseball Bugs What's up, Doc? carrots→ 23:50, 9 June 2014 (UTC)

BMJ offering 25 free accounts to Wikipedia medical editors[edit]

Neat news: BMJ is offering 25 free, full-access accounts to their prestigious medical journal through The Wikipedia Library and Wiki Project Med Foundation (like we did with Cochrane). Please sign up this week: Wikipedia:BMJ --Cheers, Ocaasi via MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 01:14, 10 June 2014 (UTC)

A barnstar for you![edit]

Tireless Contributor Barnstar Hires.gif The Tireless Contributor Barnstar
It's hard work, finding the answers to other editors' questions, isn't it?! Thanks for all the work you do. hamiltonstone (talk) 01:52, 10 June 2014 (UTC)
Indeed.....Cas Liber (talk · contribs) 01:59, 10 June 2014 (UTC)

A barnstar for you![edit]

Kindness Barnstar Hires.png The Random Acts of Kindness Barnstar
I'm very happy with your many achievements. Keep up the good work! (=D) }IMr*|(60nna)I{ 04:47, 10 June 2014 (UTC)
Cool, thanks! Cas Liber (talk · contribs) 05:58, 10 June 2014 (UTC)
You're welcome! }IMr*|(60nna)I{ 06:25, 10 June 2014 (UTC)

Skull[edit]

I had a look at your suggestion, the "Human skull" article, and some literature. My book has 57 pages of intense osteology alone, and it is not going to be easy to summarize that in one article. On the other hand, finger is quite a popular article, but it would need a lot of animal stuff. What about Henry Gray, Gray's Anatomy, or a new article "List of editions of Gray's Anatomy", see the list of the talk page for Gray's Anatomy. CGJung is a very popular article, but I would not find expanding that easy. A student has expanded an article on Cranial nerves, which at first glance looks very good and is awaiting GA review. Snowman (talk) 21:02, 11 June 2014 (UTC)

Hmm, I changed my mind and decided to attack cervix, partly to get a grasp on hte recent dustup but also because it looks like it might not be far off a shot at FAC with some tidying and sorting out of anatomy. Jung I must admit I am not overly interested in expanding. Cranial nerves might be worth looking at. Will have a scan of all suggestions - today has turned out busier than I ahd hoped though. Cas Liber (talk · contribs) 02:43, 12 June 2014 (UTC)

The Core Contest (4) report[edit]

Hi Casliber, (cc. @Binksternet:, @Secret:, @Sven Manguard:, @Coren:), when you have a moment please provide a report for the Core Contest (4) as you did previously for Core Contest (3). The template report format is available here. Thanks -- Katie Chan (WMUK) (talk) 14:42, 12 June 2014 (UTC)

@Katie Chan (WMUK): ummm, come to think of it....did I write one of these for the Stub contest? I wrote a postscript on the contest page but can reformat that if you want. I think I'd like to run that again next....Cas Liber (talk · contribs) 15:12, 12 June 2014 (UTC)
I'm okay with the postscript that's there. We can use the template next time. Thanks for the report, but please create a new page based on the template next time, rather than editing the template itself directly. ;-) Katie Chan (WMUK) (talk) 15:46, 12 June 2014 (UTC)

Talk:Hestercombe House/GA1[edit]

Hi, I was wondering if you had any further thoughts on what needs to be done at Talk:Hestercombe House/GA1?— Rod talk 16:08, 12 June 2014 (UTC)

Damn - sorry, hang on....Cas Liber (talk · contribs) 03:06, 14 June 2014 (UTC)


Articles you might like to edit, from SuggestBot[edit]

SuggestBot predicts that you will enjoy editing some of these articles. Have fun!

Add sources
Kappa Serpentis
HD 3346
Eukaryote
Common Era
Absurdistan
Theta Ursae Minoris
Cleanup
Cepheus (constellation)
Poptropica
Epsilon Eridani
Expand
Telemundo
Galactic quadrant
Johnny Test
Unencyclopaedic
Midnight Sons
Banksieaeidites
Internet encyclopedia
Wikify
Ben Mumphrey
Justin Trudeau
Traian Băsescu
Orphan
Edith Banfield Jackson
Acacia cremiflora
Banksia rufa subsp. magna
Merge
Human digestive system
Miley Cyrus discography
Anna O.
Stub
Baurusuchus
Musca Borealis
A Mixture of Frailties
Gamma Pictoris
Dalpiazia
Axis of Evil Comedy Tour

SuggestBot picks articles in a number of ways based on other articles you've edited, including straight text similarity, following wikilinks, and matching your editing patterns against those of other Wikipedians. It tries to recommend only articles that other Wikipedians have marked as needing work. Your contributions make Wikipedia better — thanks for helping.

If you have feedback on how to make SuggestBot better, please tell me on SuggestBot's talk page. Thanks from Nettrom (talk), SuggestBot's caretaker. -- SuggestBot (talk) 04:49, 15 June 2014 (UTC)

Request for Adminship nomination[edit]

Hi, I'm A.Minkowiski. I'm fighting against vandalism and my main focus is to revert vandal edits and reporting them. I would be very happy if I become an admin to fight against vandals directly. First I was an long term IP editor and now, few months before I created my account and started fighting against vandalism. I have requested same message to others if some one look at my work. I hope to hear from you soon. Plus, I'm familiar with blocking policy and other policies too. Thank you. A.Minkowiski _Lets t@lk 12:14, 15 June 2014 (UTC)

I have taken a look - can you tell me your most severe conflict here on WP? I think you need to be around for a a few more months yet and try and write some content. I can help with that. I think an attempt now is very unlikely to succeed. Sorry. Cas Liber (talk · contribs) 13:15, 15 June 2014 (UTC)
I do agree with you 100%. My main focus is fighting against vandalism, monitoring WP:AIV and review block request and blocking users etc. As I started my editing in fighting against vandalism. I wanted to be an admin so that I can perform my job directly against vandalism, and I am well aware about policies regarding blocking users, unblocking users, SPI etc. I want to perform such job. I would be thankful to you if you put my nomination for adminship. A.Minkowiski _Lets t@lk 15:52, 15 June 2014 (UTC)
I don't want to put anyone through it if they can't pass. Right now I don't think you'd pass. I think it needs to be a few months more. If you run now and are unsuccessful, it will make it harder in a few months' time. Sorry. Cas Liber (talk · contribs) 20:30, 15 June 2014 (UTC)

This week's article for improvement (week 25, 2014)[edit]

National Library Beijing China.jpg

The old buildings of the National Library of China house historical and ancient books, documents and manuscripts

Hello, Casliber.

The following is WikiProject Today's articles for improvement's weekly selection:

National Library of China


Previous selections: Tickle Me Elmo • Amazon Basin


Get involved with the TAFI project! You can...
Posted by: MediaWiki message delivery (talk) on behalf of EuroCarGT (talk) 00:22, 16 June 2014 (UTC) • Opt-out instructions

Future edits to Parathyroid gland and Cranial nerves[edit]

Hello Casliber. I have decided to withdraw my nomination of esophagus. I am feeling like an underclass of citizen, one who is allowed to spend hours researching and editing articles to bring them up to GA standards, as independently verified by other editors, yet who is too "amateurish" to determine the final prose, layout, or style of an article. This is not an issue of WP:OWN. This is an issue of WP:ETIQUETTE. There is one user (me) who has done the majority of researching and information-building for these articles, and another set of users who decide to rewrite these articles, preserving the research which I have done, but removing any trace of my involvement.

It is extremely demoralising to be treated this way. I'd ask you to strongly reconsider your planned edits of Parathyroid gland, which is already a GA, and instead pick one of the 5,065 other anatomical articles to improve -- they sure as heck need it, and a lot more than articles that are already at GA. --LT910001 (talk) 22:18, 16 June 2014 (UTC)

LT910001 I am sorry you feel like this - unfortunately for the GA process to have standards and credibility it needs to have some rigorous review. Facts are facts and we're writing an encyclopedia. medical articles have been under a high degree of scrutiny. Look I am really happy that someone is keen on improving these articles and the work you've done on cervix has been integral to getting it to where it is now. However, the article still lacked some rather important material (layers for instance, structure in other mammals, adequate coverage of screening) and had some factual errors. You can complain all you like about writing style but it doesn't change the fact that there were factual errors that needed fixing, which other editors have reviewed and tweaked. I am concerned there will be other errors in articles that have passed GA that we need to fix. If you make factual errors then WP:ETIQUETTE is trumped by this. Don't take it personally. I have been hammered in reviews before. Cas Liber (talk · contribs) 01:46, 17 June 2014 (UTC)
This is not about factual accuracy and I am very happy to collaborate. But let me explain why I am feeling pretty upset. I have put a lot of effort into revitalising WPANATOMY. I put many hours into drafting these articles, such as Esophagus for GAN. A user begins to follow me from article to article, rewriting large sections and making a variety of comments, day on day, for 15 days straight, including comments that the articles shouldn't even be at the GAN. At the same time the user concurrently makes a huge amount of edits to the articles, usually on unrelated matters. This user comes along and makes a staggering number of edits to prose. I ask the user to discuss this and am accused of WP:OWN and told by you that this purely is a matter of factual accuracy and not editorial style. A reviewer (you) takes up the review and asks me to re-correct issues of prose that have arisen as a result of the user who is following me. To top it all off, the same reviewer (you) and the same user completely rewrite an article that has already made it to GA after promotion, and expresses an interest in doing the same to all the other GA or GAN that I have currently nominated. I would be not be upset if these were targetted at specific areas of the articles. But they are not targeted, they are wholesale, they do or will involve every article I have nominated for GA, and then when asked about the rationale or for some degree of care I am told well, one ought to be staunch, and this is purely a matter of factual integrity. The hundreds of edits, mostly stylistic, that you and this user have made say otherwise.
To summarise, I feel like I have put a lot of effort into these articles to get them above a 'threshold', and above that threshold you and another user decide they would like to WP:OWN the article by making huge edits in a short time, and rewriting large portions, and by insulting me, calling me "amateurish", unable to withstand criticism, and writing articles that need to be "fixed". I am concurrently expected to be responsive to any concerns you raise as reviewer, yet simultaneously expect the article to have a large rewrite by the same reviewer (you) in the future. Well, I think that's enough for me, I see no reason to be voluntarily subjected to this, and I wish you and Wikipedia well. Goodbye, --LT910001 (talk) 03:01, 17 June 2014 (UTC)
LT910001 When I copyedit an article or correct or rearrange the prose, I often have no idea who has written what, so I wasn't deliberately focussing on your material at the Peer Review. If you are getting that impression then I am sorry that that has happened. I appreciate this can be a steep learning curve and am appreciative of your enthusiasm
Often rearranging prose on complex material can be like kneading dough - the first draught might have some problems, so it is more closely aligned with the source, which then makes the prose a bit cumbersome, so is then kneaded some more to make it both accurate and pleasurable to read. There are plenty of times material has been rejigged back and forth to get it right. peer reviews are helpful here as there is no time limit or obligation to overcome any particular hurdle.
I was not the reviewer at the GAN, but merely offering some advice after the fact. Take it as a compliment that after looking at cervix that I felt it was not actually far off a shot at WP:FAC, where it can be co-nominated by multiple editors.
Look, at the end of the day I do feel you're a net positive. I apologise that my interactions have made you feel like you're being put on the spot. I hope you can take that on board, take heart and keep working on material, but if you can't then you can't, in which case take care, good luck and god bless. Cas Liber (talk · contribs) 04:17, 17 June 2014 (UTC)
No, "god bless" my foot! Wikipedia, and these two projects in particular, really needs contributors of the calibre of LT910001! (Please excuse the uninvited but friendly intrusion here.) 86.128.169.211 (talk) 07:49, 17 June 2014 (UTC)
No it's a fair call. I am sad it ended up like this. Cas Liber (talk · contribs) 12:04, 17 June 2014 (UTC)
  • It is not possible to quantify the loss of a human relationship, but if I were to guess at the cost of hiring paid staff to replace the time that LT910001 gave to us, I might guess at 20,000 USD per year assuming a low rate considering his expertise and considering that I expect he lives in an expensive country. Since I collaborated with this user I miss this person more, and with him being a medical professional that makes him even more valuable, and with him having built community relationships that are now broken is another loss and demoralizing to everyone at WikiProject Med. There is also the potential investment which the community had in him, as when someone has been happy here for over a year, we might have expected for them to be a supporter long term.
I do not blame you personally Casliber but there is no fair call which results in the loss of a community member. We at WP:MED are suffering a real loss as a result of this, and while I do not want you to feel personal fault for this, something went wrong and something needs to change. I regret regularly losing my wiki friends because it hurts. I know you and I worry less about what you do than masses of other people not having your experience doing whatever it is that makes other people leave. I expect that you will never again be in a situation in which someone says they are leaving because of you, just because I think now you are sensitive to the risk and consequences, and again, you did nothing wrong and ought not feel bad. I blame the community structure and the lack of options for settling disputes. I worked with LT910001 and I needed that person around. Again, this is not about you, but I do not want my friends to feel unsafe here. I made a proposal at meta:Grants:IdeaLab/Victim support services. I am not sure what to do, but I do not want people to feel victimized, without an option for recourse, and happier to leave than stay. Whenever there is a problem I want resolution, not to lose my colleagues. Blue Rasberry (talk) 19:11, 17 June 2014 (UTC)
Bluerasberry maybe email LT910001 after a day or two and just check on how their feeling in the first instance and just listen...and just see where it goes from there. Cas Liber (talk · contribs) 20:48, 18 June 2014 (UTC)
Hi, Blue Rasberry. It can be a sad thing, but friends come and go. What sort of pages do you like to edit? I usually edit wildlife pages, where as an amateur I am often bewildered by changes in taxonomy, so my edits tend to ovoid complex issues. My favorite role is as an amateur illustrator for wildlife page. I might edit technical articles from time to time; nevertheless, I am reluctant to participate in User Casliber's plans to improve the skull article, partly because there are 57 large pages of intense osteology alone in one of my books. Snowman (talk) 13:22, 20 June 2014 (UTC)

A cup of coffee for you![edit]

A small cup of coffee.JPG I truly appreciate all the times when I have seen you mediate conflict and make Wikipedia a better place. I appreciate your commitment to training so many people on Wikipedia and being so friendly to so many people. Blue Rasberry (talk) 19:12, 17 June 2014 (UTC)
My sentiments entirely. And I hope you don't feel I'm targeting you in some way. I'm certainly not. Many years and various heated discussions over the exact wording of peer-review submissions has taught something me how delicate writerly and editorial feelings can be, and the need for mutual understanding. Unfortunately, over the internet it's harder to get together for a really good coffee. Best wishes, 86.128.169.211 (talk) 22:23, 17 June 2014 (UTC)
No no, discussion is needed on episodes like this - unfortunately I have ended up contributing to reasons why LT910001 left, which is sad and I regret. Cas Liber (talk · contribs) 20:46, 18 June 2014 (UTC)
It would be nice to talk over a cup of coffee about how a trickcyclist knows about cervical cytology, CIN (I, II and III), carcinoma in situ, invasive cancer, and cancer at a cellular level. Is "invasive cancer" really a tautology? Snowman (talk) 13:32, 20 June 2014 (UTC)

Your GA nomination of Epacris impressa[edit]

Hi there, I'm pleased to inform you that I've begun reviewing the article Epacris impressa you nominated for GA-status according to the criteria. Time2wait.svg This process may take up to 7 days. Feel free to contact me with any questions or comments you might have during this period. Message delivered by Legobot, on behalf of Wilhelmina Will -- Wilhelmina Will (talk) 02:40, 20 June 2014 (UTC)

Timeline[edit]

Hi Cas, I am not in any hurry with the editing of the Cervix article or I do not mind moving on to consider and enhance other articles. In fact, the weather forecast is good here this week, so I am planning doing some out-door work, and I might only be near my computer in the mornings, midday, or evenings. There is quite a lot of editing to be done on the "cervix" article, as I assume you must be aware, but it is shaping up and I can almost visualize the final layout now, except for the "other animals" stuff. Could you give me some idea of the timeline of your plans with the cervix article, if any. Incidentally, I hope that I can call you Cas (rather than the more formal term User Casliber), after all these years of collaborating on various projects on the wiki, and I include nominators and reviewers as collaborators. Call me Snow or Snowman, if you prefer this to the more formal version. Snowman (talk) 12:18, 20 June 2014 (UTC)

Calling me cas is fine as that is my name and everyone calls me that in real life. I agree it looks in good shape except for the animals section and some cultural references - some of the links LT91001 look promising. I find a pause is often helpful to take stock before proceeding. I was musing on other anatomical articles and I did think of spleen as something sort of notable and definitive enough but hopefully modest enough to not be a too ambitious choice. I also plan on Sydney funnel-web spider after learning lessons from redback. Cas Liber (talk · contribs) 12:28, 20 June 2014 (UTC)
There is screening with DNA tests for HPV DNA, which is used a lot were cytology is unreliable, as far as I am aware. It is also used as a combined test with cytology. Cytology reporting needs an extensive network of personnel including quality control systems. I would like to include something about the reporting nomenclatures for cervical cytology. Acetic acid test. Repeat smears. Colposcopy. More about the treatments of early ca cx. Not entirely sure of the scope of the article. I am not sure why there is not an article "human cx". Has anyone sang any songs about the fennel web? Snowman (talk) 13:48, 20 June 2014 (UTC)
I think we have to draw the line somewhere - we have screening and cancer daughter articles remember. Will think about it...Cas Liber (talk · contribs) 03:01, 21 June 2014 (UTC)

Article length question[edit]

Hi. Keeping in the mind that there are long FAs (Ian Smith, Ronald Reagan, Benjamin Disraeli), would you recommend splitting this article or keeping it intact? I would rather not split it. Mohamed CJ (talk) 18:41, 21 June 2014 (UTC)

Oooh that's quite big. Listen, I have to run off and do real life chores but will take a look properly later. Cas Liber (talk · contribs) 23:13, 21 June 2014 (UTC)
Okay :) Mohamed CJ (talk) 10:00, 22 June 2014 (UTC)

Mohamed CJ - Can the Treaties_with_Britain be moved to the parent article and then a trimmed version be here? Does it need all the detail here to focus on the 20th century reforms? Cas Liber (talk · contribs) 12:46, 22 June 2014 (UTC)

Sure. Mohamed CJ (talk) 17:30, 22 June 2014 (UTC)

I'd review all the background material actually and make sure that the more detailed information was in History of Bahrain (1783–1971) and less detailed here. Cas Liber (talk · contribs) 12:49, 22 June 2014 (UTC)

I think History of Bahrain (1783–1971) is concerned with a much longer historical period and therefore would naturaly contain less info than this one. For instance I wouldn't expect there to anything like a demographics section in it. Mohamed CJ (talk) 17:30, 22 June 2014 (UTC)

Cervix[edit]

I do not see the reason why you closed the discussion on the introduction of the cervix article, because I had added a comment on 2O June 2014 at 11:48 am and no one had replied prior to your putting a closing box around the discussion on 21 June 2014. I presented references of definitions that cancer and invasive cancer are different. I feel that by closing off this discussion, you have stifled discussion on this topic, without asking all of the participants of the discussion and without allowing the discussion to run its course. Have you seen the definition of carcinoma in situ in the Oxford Concise Medical Dictionary? This sort of reference is the sort of thing, which would advance the discussion on that topic? There is a very famous carcinoma in situ at the cervix, so the term "invasive cancer" had particular clarity here. Snowman (talk) 21:58, 22 June 2014 (UTC)

Snowman, I closed this as both places were becoming hard to follow becuase of their size and there was some acrimony and frustration expressed - furthermore the arguments of using "invasive" in the lead are tenuous and counterintuitive. In each case, there is nothing to be done by adding the word or excluding CIN from what we mean by cancer - if we are going to split hairs then CINI is precursor of CINII or CINIII - hence precursors of all neoplasia is what screening can find. Hence we either consider CIN under the cancer umbrella, but even if we don't it can be covered broadly - there is no need to exclude it from discussion be talking of invasive cancer in any of the three mentions of cervical cancer in the lead. You are not going to be able to convince either me or James (I hate to say, "trust me I'm a doctor" at this point but I do feel like saying it!) and it will lead to more problems. There are many other areas of the article that need attention. Let's work together on them. Cas Liber (talk · contribs) 01:21, 23 June 2014 (UTC)

This week's article for improvement (week 26, 2014)[edit]

Anubis standing.svg

Anubis, the jackal headed god of ancient Egypt

Hello, Casliber.

The following is WikiProject Today's articles for improvement's weekly selection:

Anubis


Previous selections: National Library of China • Tickle Me Elmo


Get involved with the TAFI project! You can...
Posted by: MediaWiki message delivery (talk) on behalf of EuroCarGT (talk) 00:04, 23 June 2014 (UTC) • Opt-out instructions

Redback readership spike a week ago[edit]

Do you know what caused this? --99of9 (talk) 06:01, 23 June 2014 (UTC)

Interesting - I think this news sotry caused this spike but that was much less than this spike just gone. Hmmm, I haven't seen anything on the news. Cas Liber (talk · contribs) 06:31, 23 June 2014 (UTC)

Main Page appearance: Banksia dentata[edit]

This is a note to let the main editors of Banksia dentata know that the article will be appearing as today's featured article on July 9, 2014. If this article needs any attention or maintenance, it would be preferable if that could be done before its appearance on the Main Page. If you prefer that the article appear as TFA on a different date, or not at present, please ask Bencherlite (talk · contribs). You can view the TFA blurb at Wikipedia:Today's featured article/July 9, 2014. If it needs tweaking, or if it needs rewording to match improvements to the article between now and its main page appearance, please edit it, following the instructions at Wikipedia:Today's featured article/requests/instructions. The blurb as it stands now is below:

Banksia dentata, drawn in 1773

Banksia dentata, commonly known as the tropical banksia, is a species of tree in the genus Banksia. It occurs across northern Australia, southern New Guinea and the Aru Islands. Growing as a gnarled tree to 7 m (23 ft) high, it has large green leaves up to 22 cm (8.7 in) long with toothed margins. The cylindrical yellow flower spikes, up to 13 cm (5 in) high, appear over the cooler months, attracting honeyeaters, sunbirds, the sugar glider and a variety of insects. Flowers fall off the ageing spikes, which swell and develop follicles containing up to two viable seeds each. Banksia dentata is one of the four original Banksia species collected by Sir Joseph Banks in 1770 (1773 depiction shown), and one of four species published in 1782 as part of Carolus Linnaeus the Younger's original description of Banksia. Within the genus, it is classified in the series Salicinae, a group of species from Australia's eastern states. Genetic studies show it is an early offshoot within the group. Banksia dentata is found in tropical grassland known as savanna, associated with Pandanus and Melaleuca. It regenerates from bushfire by regrowing from its woody base, known as a lignotuber. (Full article...)

You (and your talk-page stalkers) may also be interested to hear that there have been some changes at the TFA requests page recently. Nominators no longer need to calculate how many "points" an article has, the instructions have been simplified, and there's a new nomination system using templates based on those used for DYK suggestions. Please consider nominating another article, or commenting on an existing nomination, and leaving some feedback on your experience. Thank you. UcuchaBot (talk) 00:02, 24 June 2014 (UTC)

DYK for Butyriboletus[edit]

Gatoclass (talk) 16:17, 24 June 2014 (UTC)

What do you think my chances would be of passing RfA?[edit]

Recently, I've come across a few problems where I have needed admin tools to fix an issue regarding our articles. For example, I recently had to make a post to AN so that somebody else could fix a cut-and-paste move I noticed. There are also times when I've had to do uncontroversial moves over redirects with history and have been unable to, and, in passing at RPP, PROD, and AfD, have seen backlogs over 24 hours. In addition, for the work I am currently doing on wiki, being able to view deleted history would be a great help.

As a result, I have been thinking of running for RfA, but I don't know whether or not I'd stand a chance at passing. Do you think that I would have a chance at the moment? I admit that I may not be the most frequent user of the tools, but I believe that I would be a net positive with them, and would not abuse them. A recall process would definitely be set up, since I believe in accountability.

StringTheory11 (t • c) 02:44, 25 June 2014 (UTC)

You gotta think of reasons why folks might oppose - you've been around 4 years (a good thing), produced quality content (a good thing), have identified areas you'd work in (a good thing), and alot of your interest is opining and tidying up material of marginal notability (a good thing, even if your view is different to mine). Have a look at the three questions people get asked and double check community consensus view before answering optional ones. What are the worst disputes you've been in? You have a clean block log (good thing)...yeah if you want I can nominate you. Cas Liber (talk · contribs) 04:54, 25 June 2014 (UTC)
Hmm, I think the worst conflict so far was probably around August 2013 when I felt that there was a certain user who was basically attempting to get any articles that I had prodded undeleted, even when I think that even you would find them to be non-notable (see, for example, the now-deleted history of SAO 49991). Fortunately, it seems to have been resolved amicably, with me conceding that a few articles be restored, while the other party conceded that most of the articles were not, in fact, notable. I thank you for the offer of nomination, and will probably take you up on it, but do you mind giving me a day or so to mull it over? StringTheory11 (t • c) 16:54, 25 June 2014 (UTC)
Yeah sure, no hurry/take your time. Cas Liber (talk · contribs) 19:42, 25 June 2014 (UTC)
I'm ready to go, I think, having read stuff over! StringTheory11 (t • c) 00:15, 27 June 2014 (UTC)
Ok hang on a sec. Cas Liber (talk · contribs) 00:17, 27 June 2014 (UTC)

A DYK from Al-Risalah al-Dhahabiah[edit]

I've nominated Al-Risalah al-Dhahabiah for DYK and I've derived a hook from this article. But, it is not reviewed yet! Please consider reviewing it for possible presentation in the main page. Thanks Mhhossein (talk) 12:37, 25 June 2014 (UTC)

This sometimes takes some time. I have a couple of chores I need to do first. Cas Liber (talk · contribs) 12:49, 25 June 2014 (UTC)
Thanks for reviewing the article. How much time have I got for fixing it?Mhhossein (talk) 06:25, 26 June 2014 (UTC)

A barnstar for you![edit]

Copyeditor Barnstar Hires.png The Copyeditor's Barnstar
For your work in Nirmala... The herald 12:02, 26 June 2014 (UTC)
thanks! Cas Liber (talk · contribs) 12:06, 26 June 2014 (UTC)

Main Page appearance: Leo Minor[edit]

This is a note to let the main editors of Leo Minor know that the article will be appearing as today's featured article on July 21, 2014. If this article needs any attention or maintenance, it would be preferable if that could be done before its appearance on the Main Page. If you prefer that the article appear as TFA on a different date, or not at present, please ask Bencherlite (talk · contribs). You can view the TFA blurb at Wikipedia:Today's featured article/July 21, 2014. If it needs tweaking, or if it needs rewording to match improvements to the article between now and its main page appearance, please edit it, following the instructions at Wikipedia:Today's featured article/requests/instructions. The blurb as it stands now is below:

Leo Major and Leo Minor

Leo Minor is a small and faint constellation in the northern celestial hemisphere. Its name is Latin for "the smaller lion", in contrast to Leo, the larger lion (19th-century illustration of both pictured). It lies between the larger and more recognizable Ursa Major to the north and Leo to the south. Leo Minor was not regarded as a separate constellation by classical astronomers; it was designated by Johannes Hevelius in 1687. There are 37 stars brighter than apparent magnitude 6.5 in the constellation; three are brighter than magnitude 4.5. 46 Leonis Minoris, an orange giant of magnitude 3.8, is located some 95 light years from Earth. At magnitude 4.4, Beta Leonis Minoris is the second brightest star and the only one in the constellation with a Bayer designation. It is a binary star, the brighter component of which is an orange giant and the fainter a yellow-white main sequence star. The third brightest star is 21 Leonis Minoris, a rapidly rotating white main sequence star of average magnitude 4.5. The constellation also includes two stars with planetary systems, two pairs of interacting galaxies, and the unique deep-sky object Hanny's Voorwerp. (Full article...)

You (and your talk-page stalkers) may also be interested to hear that there have been some changes at the TFA requests page recently. Nominators no longer need to calculate how many "points" an article has, the instructions have been simplified, and there's a new nomination system using templates based on those used for DYK suggestions. Please consider nominating another article, or commenting on an existing nomination, and leaving some feedback on your experience. Thank you. UcuchaBot (talk) 23:02, 26 June 2014 (UTC)

Preps[edit]

I filled most of those two preps, so would you like to promote them to the Queue? Gatoclass (talk) 05:38, 27 June 2014 (UTC)

sure, hang on. Cas Liber (talk · contribs) 05:49, 27 June 2014 (UTC)
The prep 1 didn't had credit templates for the last hook. Now it has been moved to queue. Please add the credit templates.--Skr15081997 (talk) 06:09, 27 June 2014 (UTC)
Credits added now. Cas Liber (talk · contribs) 06:18, 27 June 2014 (UTC)
Thanks Cas :) Gatoclass (talk) 06:21, 27 June 2014 (UTC)

A request[edit]

I had recently expanded a filmography and nominated it for FL. 9 days have passed since it was nominated but no one has commented yet. This is my first FL candidate. I would be glad if you leave a comment on the nomination page. If you don't want to comment, then no problem.--Skr15081997 (talk) 06:50, 27 June 2014 (UTC)

DYK for Momba Station[edit]

Cas Liber (talk · contribs) 08:04, 27 June 2014 (UTC)

to q5?[edit]

Here [4] you said "to Q5" but I don't think it got there.

While you're at it, "ace the" doesn't make sense in

that British airman Tom Rees was killed in the first official victory credited to German flying ace the Red Baron?

-- howzabout either

that British airman Tom Rees was killed in the first official victory credited to the Red Baron?

or

that British airman Tom Rees was killed in the first official victory credited to the "Red Baron"—​German World War I flying ace Manfred von Richthofen?

-- the latter being what it was before Gatoclass tinkered with it. [5] EEng (talk) 18:26, 27 June 2014 (UTC)

Looking at the history it came and went. I must admit when I say it I wouldn't concede that the "ace the" is necessarily wrong....is a strange one though Cas Liber (talk · contribs) 20:59, 27 June 2014 (UTC)

DYK for BH Crucis[edit]

 — Crisco 1492 (talk) 00:34, 28 June 2014 (UTC)

FA[edit]

Hey man, I'm working on the Super Mario Bros. 3's page and I was wondering what you think of it, considering I'm planning on taking it to FA. Cheers! URDNEXT (talk) 16:03, 28 June 2014 (UTC)

This week's article for improvement (week 27, 2014)[edit]

Java Man.jpg

Reconstruction of the head of Java Man

Hello, Casliber.

The following is WikiProject Today's articles for improvement's weekly selection:

Java Man


Previous selections: Anubis • National Library of China


Get involved with the TAFI project! You can...
Posted by: MediaWiki message delivery (talk) on behalf of EuroCarGT (talk) 01:45, 30 June 2014 (UTC) • Opt-out instructions

WikiCup 2014 June newsletter[edit]

After an extremely close race, Round 3 is over. 244 points secured a place in Round 4, which is comparable to previous years- 321 was required in 2013, while 243 points were needed in 2012. Pool C's Smithsonian Institution Godot13 (submissions) was the round's highest scorer, mostly due to a 32 featured pictures, including both scans and photographs. Also from Pool C, Scotland Casliber (submissions) finished second overall, claiming three featured articles, including the high-importance Grus (constellation). Third place was Pool B's , whose contributions included featured articles Russian battleship Poltava (1894) and Russian battleship Peresvet. Pool C saw the highest number of participants advance, with six out of eight making it to the next round.

The round saw this year's first featured portal, with Republic of Rose Island Sven Manguard (submissions) taking Portal:Literature to featured status. The round also saw the first good topic points, thanks to Florida 12george1 (submissions) and the 2013 Atlantic hurricane season. This means that all content types have been claimed this year. Other contributions of note this round include a featured topic on Maya Angelou's autobiographies from Idaho Figureskatingfan (submissions), a good article on the noted Czech footballer Tomáš Rosický from Bartošovice v Orlických horách Cloudz679 (submissions) and a now-featured video game screenshot, freely released due to the efforts of Republic of Rose Island Sven Manguard (submissions).

The judges would like to remind participants to update submission pages promptly. This means that content can be checked, and allows those following the competition (including those participating) to keep track of scores effectively. This round has seen discussion about various aspects of the WikiCup's rules and procedures. Those interested in the competition can be assured that formal discussions about how next year's competition will work will be opened shortly, and all are welcome to voice their views then. If you are concerned that your nomination—whether it is at good article candidates, a featured process, or anywhere else—will not receive the necessary reviews, please list it on Wikipedia:WikiCup/Reviews. If you want to help out with the WikiCup, please do your bit to help keep down the review backlogs! Questions are welcome on Wikipedia talk:WikiCup, and the judges are reachable on their talk pages or by email. Good luck! If you wish to start or stop receiving this newsletter, please feel free to add or remove yourself from Wikipedia:WikiCup/Newsletter/Send. J Milburn (talk · contribs) The ed17 (talk · contribs) and Miyagawa (talk · contribs) 18:48, 30 June 2014 (UTC)

23![edit]

23!!! Ye gods, laddie! How many species are there in that genus? Adam Cuerden (talk) 22:37, 30 June 2014 (UTC)

about 170.....Cas Liber (talk · contribs) 23:07, 30 June 2014 (UTC)

July 2014[edit]

Hello, I'm BracketBot. I have automatically detected that your edit to 53 Persei variable 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:
  • ], [[HD 13745]] and [[HD 19374]] had been found to exhibit both Beta Cephei and SPB variability.]].<ref name=decat07>{{cite journal | title = Observational Asteroseismology of slowly pulsating B

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, BracketBot (talk) 04:00, 2 July 2014 (UTC)

See User:EEng#Computer_porn. EEng (talk) 05:22, 2 July 2014 (UTC)
EEng ...ummm I don't get it. Cas Liber (talk · contribs) 22:12, 3 July 2014 (UTC)
I leave that for anyone who gets a message from Bracketbot or Citationbot. EEng (talk) 22:24, 3 July 2014 (UTC)


Hello, I'm BracketBot. I have automatically detected that your edit to Acacia parramattensis 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:
  • ').<ref name=Benson1996/> The foliage serves as food for the caterpillars of the moonlight jewel (''[[Hypochrysops delicia]]'', imperial hairstreak (''[[Jalmenus evagoras]]''), amethyst

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, BracketBot (talk) 02:32, 19 July 2014 (UTC)


Hello, I'm BracketBot. I have automatically detected that your edit to Acacia decurrens 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:
  • the caterpillars of the double-spotted line blue (''[[Nacaduba biocellata]]''), moonlight jewel (''[[Hypochrysops delicia]]'', imperial hairstreak (''[[Jalmenus evagoras]]''), ictinus blue (''[[

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, BracketBot (talk) 02:38, 19 July 2014 (UTC)

DYK for PZ Telescopii[edit]

 — Crisco 1492 (talk) 11:32, 3 July 2014 (UTC)

Peer Review Request -- Hamish Peacock Comment[edit]

Hi, I am requesting a peer review for Hamish Peacock. Peacock is an Australian javelin thrower who has competed at: Senior, Junior and Youth World Championships and is competing in the Glasgow Commonwealth Games in the coming weeks. I would greatly appreciate if you could review this article.

Review Page: Wikipedia:WikiProject Biography/Peer review/Hamish Peacock NickGibson3900 (Talk - Cont.) 19:10, 5 July 2014 (UTC)

DYK for Slowly pulsating B star[edit]

Gatoclass (talk) 11:32, 6 July 2014 (UTC)

A barnstar for you![edit]

Special Barnstar Hires.png The Special Barnstar
Here is a Special to say thank you for your prompt DYK review of Steven Novella. Kyle(talk) 22:33, 6 July 2014 (UTC)

This week's article for improvement (week 28, 2014)[edit]

Wok Cooking.jpg

Stir frying in a wok

Hello, Casliber.

The following is WikiProject Today's articles for improvement's weekly selection:

Stir frying


Previous selections: Java Man • Anubis


Get involved with the TAFI project! You can...
Posted by: MediaWiki message delivery (talk) on behalf of EuroCarGT (talk) 00:05, 7 July 2014 (UTC) • Opt-out instructions

Disambiguation link notification for July 7[edit]

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited XX Tauri, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Taurus. 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) 08:53, 7 July 2014 (UTC)

Nala (Ramayana): Template:Did you know/Queue/3[edit]

Can you please move to next queue, when India is awake?--Redtigerxyz Talk 15:29, 7 July 2014 (UTC)

Invisible bird[edit]

Thanks for another great TFA, precious again! - Did you know that I got the Drummer Rail to the German Main page? --Gerda Arendt (talk) 05:51, 9 July 2014 (UTC)

Das is sehr gut! Aber mein Deutch is schrecklich.....Cas Liber (talk · contribs) 07:40, 9 July 2014 (UTC)
13k hits ;) - similar to when it was DYK here in 2010, remember? Planned for April Fool 2015 TFA, as you probably know, but it would not work with the German name, that just mentions drumming, not invisible, --Gerda Arendt (talk) 22:05, 10 July 2014 (UTC)

Thank you for the minor leo! - Nich zu glauben. - I remember a simple sign on the coast of Australia: "Steep cliffs. You have been warned" --Gerda Arendt (talk) 05:58, 21 July 2014 (UTC)

DYK nomination of W Serpentis[edit]

Symbol question.svg Hello! Your submission of W Serpentis at the Did You Know nominations page has been reviewed, and some issues with it may need to be clarified. Please review the comment(s) underneath your nomination's entry and respond there as soon as possible. Thank you for contributing to Did You Know! Yoninah (talk) 22:20, 9 July 2014 (UTC)

Changing the hook[edit]

Hi! my hook is in Queue 4 and will be in the main page in 2 hours. But I hadn't proposed this hook. in fact my hook was changed before moving to prep area. The current hook is not suitable and attractive. Can it be changed? Mhhossein (talk) 18:48, 10 July 2014 (UTC)

I just woke up. Will take a look. Cas Liber (talk · contribs) 22:00, 10 July 2014 (UTC)

Your GA nomination of Epacris impressa[edit]

The article Epacris impressa you nominated as a good article has passed Symbol support vote.svg; see Talk:Epacris impressa for comments about the article. Well done! If the article has not already been on the main page as an "In the news" or "Did you know" item, you can nominate it to appear in Did you know. Message delivered by Legobot, on behalf of Wilhelmina Will -- Wilhelmina Will (talk) 00:42, 11 July 2014 (UTC)

DYK for W Serpentis[edit]

 — Crisco 1492 (talk) 08:48, 11 July 2014 (UTC)

Prep 1[edit]

The image doesn't look appropriately licensed to me. Gatoclass (talk) 09:33, 11 July 2014 (UTC)

I suppose re-reading the licencing it is possibly a little to fuzzy...ok, leave it to me and I'll rejig. Cas Liber (talk · contribs) 09:59, 11 July 2014 (UTC)

DYK for Epacris impressa[edit]

 — Crisco 1492 (talk) 04:38, 12 July 2014 (UTC)

DYK for HD 41248[edit]

Gatoclass (talk) 11:24, 13 July 2014 (UTC)

This week's article for improvement (week 29, 2014)[edit]

Eod2.jpg

Inserting blasting caps into blocks of C-4

Hello, Casliber.

The following is WikiProject Today's articles for improvement's weekly selection:

C-4 (explosive)


Previous selections: Stir frying • Java Man


Get involved with the TAFI project! You can...
Posted by: MediaWiki message delivery (talk) on behalf of EuroCarGT (talk) 00:24, 14 July 2014 (UTC) • Opt-out instructions

Titanoceratops[edit]

Hi Cas Liber. I would like to have access to the full articles of those papers you have to improve Titanoceratops your help would be greatly appreciated, as it should be fairly easy for someone else to review it. I have modified the Distinguishing anatomical features section, and once the articles are added it should be ready for another Ga review. Thanks for your help, IJReid (talk) 02:46, 14 July 2014 (UTC)

Ok - send me an email via 'email user' function at left - I can't attach files if I email you via this method but can if I reply to your email. Happy to help - cheers, Cas Liber (talk · contribs) 03:35, 14 July 2014 (UTC)
Mail-message-new.svg
Hello, Casliber. Please check your email – you've got mail!
It may take a few minutes from the time the email is sent for it to show up in your inbox. You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{You've got mail}} or {{YGM}} template.
Thanks again, IJReid (talk) 03:42, 14 July 2014 (UTC)
Ok - coming soon....Cas Liber (talk · contribs) 04:18, 14 July 2014 (UTC)
Sorry to bother you again Casliber, but I am not certain that I emailed you, or that your have replied yet. Please correct me if I'm wrong but based on my inbox I did not send an email to you, and have not yet received one either. I am not sure if wikipedia mail appears on the sender's inbox, or if you have replied to my message, but I am not certain that my email is working correctly. If you would like, I can resend the email to you so I can get the papers. If I am being hasty I apologize, just I am concerned about my mail functioning. IJReid (talk) 00:20, 15 July 2014 (UTC)
Sorry, been busy - did get email and will send material Cas Liber (talk · contribs) 06:17, 15 July 2014 (UTC)
Reid,iain james email sent - let me know if it gets through. Cas Liber (talk · contribs) 06:35, 15 July 2014 (UTC)
Ah, it finally appeared :) Thanks again. BTW, do you want to help with the expansion or are you busy at the moment? IJReid (talk) 14:31, 15 July 2014 (UTC)
Just go for it...am not motivated to do much editing on dinosaurs..maybe one day soon though...Cas Liber (talk · contribs) 14:34, 15 July 2014 (UTC)
I am not sure what content from Maiorino (2013) I can add to Titanoceratops, all the info on the genus from the other articles has been added (I think), but Titanoceratops is not mentioned in Maiorino. PS: Is there anything else for me to change before I renominate, the Distinguishing characteristics section can potentially be removed? IJReid (talk) 04:33, 16 July 2014 (UTC)
Cursory glance suggests it looks ok - just make sure you're happy that no bits are too closely paraphrased and all the material is faithful to the sources. Bit busy for a while. Cas Liber (talk · contribs) 05:55, 16 July 2014 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for July 14[edit]

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Shell star, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Pavo. 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) 08:50, 14 July 2014 (UTC)

Happy 1000th article![edit]

Hi, that almost feel as good as a world championship, no? Best regards Hekerui (talk) 13:39, 14 July 2014 (UTC)

Sort of...yeah......(chuckle) Cas Liber (talk · contribs) 19:21, 14 July 2014 (UTC)

Medical Translation Newsletter[edit]


Medical translation.svg

Wikiproject Medicine; Translation Taskforce

Stetho book.jpg

Medical Translation Newsletter
Issue 1, June/July 2014
by CFCF, Doc James

sign up for monthly delivery


Wiki Project Med Foundation logo.svg
TWB.svg

This is the first of a series of newsletters for Wikiproject Medicine's Translation Task Force. Our goal is to make all the medical knowledge on Wikipedia available to the world, in the language of your choice.

note: you will not receive future editions of this newsletter unless you *sign up*; you received this version because you identify as a member of WikiProject Medicine

Spotlight - Simplified article translation


Wikiproject Medicine started translating simplified articles in February 2014. We now have 45 simplified articles ready for translation, of which the first on African trypanosomiasis or sleeping sickness has been translated into 46 out of ~100 languages. This list does not include the 33 additional articles that are available in both full and simple versions.

Our goal is to eventually translate 1,000 simplified articles. This includes:

We are looking for subject area leads to both create articles and recruit further editors. We need people with basic medical knowledge who are willing to help out. This includes to write, translate and especially integrate medical articles.

What's happening?


IEG grant
CFCF - "IEG beneficiary" and editor of this newsletter.

I've (CFCF) taken on the role of community organizer for this project, and will be working with this until December. The goals and timeline can be found here, and are focused on getting the project on a firm footing and to enable me to work near full-time over the summer, and part-time during the rest of the year. This means I will be available for questions and ideas, and you can best reach me by mail or on my talk page.

Wikimania 2014

For those going to London in a month's time (or those already nearby) there will be at least one event for all medical editors, on Thursday August 7th. See the event page, which also summarizes medicine-related presentations in the main conference. Please pass the word on to your local medical editors.

Integration progress

There has previously been some resistance against translation into certain languages with strong Wikipedia presence, such as Dutch, Polish, and Swedish.
What was found is that thre is hardly any negative opinion about the the project itself; and any such critique has focused on the ways that articles have being integrated. For an article to be usefully translated into a target-Wiki it needs to be properly Wiki-linked, carry proper citations and use the formatting of the chosen target language as well as being properly proof-read. Certain large Wikis such as the Polish and Dutch Wikis have strong traditions of medical content, with their own editorial system, own templates and different ideas about what constitutes a good medical article. For example, there are not MEDRS (Polish,German,Romanian,Persian) guidelines present on other Wikis, and some Wikis have a stronger background of country-specific content.

  • Swedish
    Translation into Swedish has been difficult in part because of the amount of free, high quality sources out there already: patient info, for professionals. The same can be said for English, but has really given us all the more reason to try and create an unbiased and free encyclopedia of medical content. We want Wikipedia to act as an alternative to commercial sources, and preferably a really good one at that.
    Through extensive collaborative work and by respecting links and Sweden specific content the last unintegrated Swedish translation went live in May.
  • Dutch
    Dutch translation carries with it special difficulties, in part due to the premises in which the Dutch Wikipedia is built upon. There is great respect for what previous editors have created, and deleting or replacing old content can be frowned upon. In spite of this there are success stories: Anafylaxie.
  • Polish
    Translation and integration into Polish also comes with its own unique set of challenges. The Polish Wikipedia has long been independent and works very hard to create high quality contentfor Polish audience. Previous translation trouble has lead to use of unique templates with unique formatting, not least among citations. Add to this that the Polish Wikipedia does not allow template redirects and a large body of work is required for each article.
    (This is somewhat alleviated by a commissioned Template bot - to be released). - List of articles for integration
  • Arabic
    The Arabic Wikipedia community has been informed of the efforts to integrate content through both the general talk-page as well as through one of the major Arabic Wikipedia facebook-groups: مجتمع ويكيبيديا العربي, something that has been heralded with great enthusiasm.
Integration guides

Integration is the next step after any translation. Despite this it is by no means trivial, and it comes with its own hardships and challenges. Previously each new integrator has needed to dive into the fray with little help from previous integrations. Therefore we are creating guides for specific Wikis that make integration simple and straightforward, with guides for specific languages, and for integrating on small Wikis.

Instructions on how to integrate an article may be found here [8]

News in short


To come
  • Medical editor census - Medical editors on different Wikis have been without proper means of communication. A preliminary list of projects is available here.
  • Proofreading drives

Further reading



Thanks for reading! To receive a monthly talk page update about new issues of the Medical Translation Newsletter, please add your name to the subscriber's list. To suggest items for the next issue, please contact the editor, CFCF (talk · contribs) at Wikipedia:Wikiproject Medicine/Translation Taskforce/Newsletter/Suggestions.
Want to help out manage the newsletter? Get in touch with me CFCF (talk · contribs)
For the newsletter from Wikiproject Medicine, see The Pulse

If you are receiving this newsletter without having signed up, it is because you have signed up as a member of the Translation Taskforce, or Wiki Project Med on meta. 22:32, 16 July 2014 (UTC)

Comment[edit]

While I genuinely welcome the discussion you have started here, it would also have been nice, given that we have worked together the odd time, if you could have joined the existing discussion at my talk page about the same matter. You are still very welcome to do so. --John (talk) 22:53, 16 July 2014 (UTC)

Was busy and on a slow computer. Still busy. Thought it was just a question about etiquette there. Will join discussion over there. Cas Liber (talk · contribs) 02:58, 17 July 2014 (UTC)

DYK for BL Telescopii[edit]

Gatoclass (talk) 15:44, 17 July 2014 (UTC)

S Antliae/BL Telescopii[edit]

It appears all my sarcasm today (most of it anyway) was pointed in your direction. It's always meant light-heartedly so I hope I didn't upset you by poking fun at your stars (I do go thermonuclear occasionally, you'll know it when you see it and then be thankful that it's virtual here). Belle (talk) 23:49, 17 July 2014 (UTC)

Heh, I saw all the sarcasm/dry wit and was heartily amused. No worries... Cas Liber (talk · contribs) 23:52, 17 July 2014 (UTC)

DYK for S Antliae[edit]

Gatoclass (talk) 04:10, 18 July 2014 (UTC)

Wikicup semifinalists interview request[edit]

As you may know, I write for the Signpost, basically Wikipedia's newsletter. I'd like to do a feature on the semifinalists, would you be willing to provide, say, 250 to 500 words saying: (1.) Why did you join the Wikicup? (2.) What you you hope to get out of it? and (3.) Which of your contributions to the Wikicup are your favourites?

Not quite sure how I'll order them - I'll probably make the ed17 decide, as, you know, Conflict of Interest: I am a semifinalist. I'd imagine point order or alphabetical or the like.

Can you please reply at Wikipedia:Wikipedia Signpost/2014-07-30/Wikicup#Casliber? Thanks! Adam Cuerden (talk) 00:26, 19 July 2014 (UTC)

This week's article for improvement (week 30, 2014)[edit]

Jazz Band in Queens Park - geograph.org.uk - 729107.jpg

A Jazz band plays in a park festival

Hello, Casliber.

The following is WikiProject Today's articles for improvement's weekly selection:

Jazz band


Previous selections: C-4 (explosive) • Stir frying


Get involved with the TAFI project! You can...
Posted by: MediaWiki message delivery (talk) on behalf of EuroCarGT (talk) 03:02, 21 July 2014 (UTC) • Opt-out instructions

DYK for Acacia parramattensis[edit]

 — Crisco 1492 (talk) 19:43, 21 July 2014 (UTC)

User:StringTheory11/AfD[edit]

You are very much welcomed to observe, participate or opine on my methods there. It is based on my own similar situation User talk:Dennis Brown/CSD. Since he and I share this same distinction, I'm hoping my experience will help him over the hump. His attitude about it has been good and I'm confident the mentoring will help. I've also invited DGG, who has indicated he will at least observe as well. Personally, I think this is a good thing as we need good admin, and it is better to promote someone that is highly skilled and deal with a singular weakness via mentoring, crash course style. Putting them off for a year usually means forever, so while unorthodox, this is a better solution. Dennis Brown |  | WER 21:56, 21 July 2014 (UTC)

Agree. Cas Liber (talk · contribs) 19:58, 22 July 2014 (UTC)

Sigmund Freud[edit]

Do you think Sigmund Freud can be unprotected yet? Jackmcbarn (talk) 19:30, 22 July 2014 (UTC)

Dunno...maybe...let's take a look....Cas Liber (talk · contribs) 19:55, 22 July 2014 (UTC)

DYK queue 3[edit]

I left a note at DYK but they mainly get ignored because they're too difficult to quickly fix or there's a general perception that facts don't matter. But in the queue you've just "promoted", the hook says "that the Toungoo Dynasty's decisive victory over Ava and its allies in the Toungoo–Ava War (1538–45) cemented the upstart kingdom's emergence..." but it's completely unclear what or who is the "upstart kingdom". Hopefully you can fix this or remove the dubious hook before it hits main page. The Rambling Man (talk) 20:18, 22 July 2014 (UTC)

oh fuck...(facepalm)....hang on......................Cas Liber (talk · contribs) 20:21, 22 July 2014 (UTC)
No stress. The Rambling Man (talk) 20:22, 22 July 2014 (UTC)
Hmmm...actually it's pretty clear to me it means this mob, both from the article lead and the intonation of the hook. Writing it another way makes it sound concrete and repetitive. Cas Liber (talk · contribs) 20:25, 22 July 2014 (UTC)
While you're at it, Cas Liber, the image in this set needs protecting before the bot can promote the queue to the main page... BlueMoonset (talk) 20:27, 22 July 2014 (UTC)
The problem is you have "Dynasty" and "Ava" and then "the upstart kingdom", which of the Dynasty and Ava is the upstart kingdom? It is picky but I wonder if there's a better way to do it.... The Rambling Man (talk) 20:28, 22 July 2014 (UTC)
Errr...obviously the winners..? Cas Liber (talk · contribs) 20:44, 22 July 2014 (UTC)
(edit conflict) The Rambling Man, I'm not quite sure why the editor allowed you to delete my text when adding your own, but I'm reinserting it where it was before your post. Cas Liber, the image still presumably needs protecting; Materialscientist usually deletes the bot error text once the image has been protected, but I don't know whether that's strictly necessary. Thanks. (PS: I thought it was obviously the winners, too.) BlueMoonset (talk) 20:46, 22 July 2014 (UTC)
OK, I just looked at the time and I have to hop off right now. That is pretty straightforward but I gotta run.....Cas Liber (talk · contribs) 20:49, 22 July 2014 (UTC)

No worries, I just found it confusing, hopefully my tweaks will help prevent ERRORS. Sorry to bother you Cas. The Rambling Man (talk) 21:16, 22 July 2014 (UTC)

The Rambling Man No worries....listen, I know yer innerested in mainpage stuff...see Wikipedia_talk:Today's_featured_article#Who_looks_at_what...Leo_Minor Cas Liber (talk · contribs) 23:57, 22 July 2014 (UTC)

DYK[edit]

Slight error in one of the DYK's on the main page: do think you could correct ...that a rough cut of "Deep Breath", the first episode of the eighth series of Doctor Who, was leaked online six weeks before the episode was due to air? to ...that a rough cut of "Deep Breath", the first episode of the eighth series of Doctor Who, was leaked online six weeks before the episode is due to air? Emphasis added to show what needs fixing. The episode is yet to air, so the current wording isn't quite correct. Thanks. G S Palmer (talkcontribs) 15:32, 23 July 2014 (UTC)

Damn, that is tricky. Yes it is in the future -but the tenses then flow weirdly....and it's not six weeks now. Hmmmm. I only just woke up. Need coffee and to think about this.....Cas Liber (talk · contribs) 20:50, 23 July 2014 (UTC)
How about ...that a rough cut of "Deep Breath", the first episode of the eighth series of Doctor Who, was leaked online six weeks before the episode's intended release date? instead? Avoids the issue. LeadSongDog come howl! 21:38, 23 July 2014 (UTC)