|This user is busy in real life and may not respond swiftly to queries.|
Please leave a message after the beep.
- 1 Invitation to vote on an article
- 2 Thanks
- 3 Unassessed orchid genera
- 4 Title/style confusion help
- 5 GLAM Cafe invitation
- 6 Pitfour estate
- 7 High Sheriff of Lincolnshire
- 8 Thanks for the copy edit
- 9 Main Page appearance: Adiantum viridimontanum
- 10 WikiProject Plants assessment and a request
- 11 Using dates with authority
- 12 DYK for Asplenium × boydstoniae
- 13 Precious
- 14 Thomas Pearce (British Army officer)
- 15 To the attention of Your Royal Wikiness
- 16 Seasonal greetings
- 17 Nomination of Charles McLaren, 4th Baron Aberconway for deletion
- 18 Thanks, and could you make a couple moves for me?
- 19 Disambiguation link notification for April 29
- 20 Bellomont/Bellamont
- 21 Zoransky and Compagnons
- 22 Threston-Hoax
- 23 Non succeeding heirs
- 24 Hot blast and coke
- 25 Oxford Vice-Admiral?
- 26 Pick your brain.
- 27 Humphry Morice
Invitation to vote on an article
hello. since you are an editor of the article Ammar ibn Yasir, would you be interested in voting for it to make it a featured article or not? thank you for your time Grandia01 (talk) 13:03, 3 June 2014 (UTC)
Unassessed orchid genera
I know you've been doing a lot of work over several monthstackling the unassessed article backlog for WikiProject Plants, and was glad to see you started up again the other day. A lot of the remaining unassessed genus articles are on orchids, and most of these are listed as having no accepted species in The Plant List/WCSP. Some of these genera may have accepted species that are currently treated by WCSP as unresolved, or the genus may be best treated as a synonym. I've been holding off on assessing these since I'm not sure what the status of them is, and figuring it out would involve some time spent in reasearch. Maybe it's best to worry about the taxonomic status of the genus later and simply go ahead with assessment; it's certainly appropriate to rate these articles as Low importance Stubs. Anyway, carry on with the assessment, but I though I should explain why I'd skipped assessing these. You may also come across a few unassessed articles on species that aren't that aren't treated as accepted by The Plant List/WCSP. Plantdrew (talk) 16:46, 16 September 2013 (UTC)
Title/style confusion help
GLAM Cafe invitation
|Wikipedians are invited to the GLAM Café at the Chemical Heritage Foundation to meet, talk, and edit. We provide the space, the coffee, and the snacks: you provide ideas and enthusiasm! On the second Tuesday of each month, starting November 12, 2013.|
Hi, I noticed you edited Pitfour estate a short while ago, altering the sentence about the son of Robert II. I have just checked the source, the Blenheim of Buchan book, and it states it was Alexander, Lord of Badenoch and earl of Buchan and Ross. Do you have a different source? Any help or clarification would be much appreciated as the information about that time frame of the estate I have is a bit sketchy. Thanks. SagaciousPhil - Chat 20:06, 26 October 2013 (UTC)
- Thanks for your message - I replied on my talk page but as I'm not sure if you're watching it, I'm just leaving a note here too! SagaciousPhil - Chat 21:49, 26 October 2013 (UTC)
High Sheriff of Lincolnshire
Hi. I noticed that you added dates to High Sheriff of Lincolnshire (28 October 2013), as dmy form. Do you think it would be better to add them something at least like 1668 (6 November):, so keeping the look of the common list style throughout the article, and consistent for the reader ? Acabashi (talk) 20:38, 28 October 2013 (UTC)
Thanks for the copy edit
Hi, thanks for the copy editing you've done to a couple of the Melbourne tram depot articles. It's always nice to have a second set of eyes read over what in reality is a draft; I find it takes a couple of days after writing to pick up all your own little mistakes. I've changed a few things just because the Vicsig source is a little too brief about the privatisation process, which is unnecessarily complicated. I'll try to rewrite the rest of the depot articles in the next few weeks and would appreciate it if you gave them a look over too. Thanks again, Liamdavies (talk) 03:04, 2 November 2013 (UTC)
Main Page appearance: Adiantum viridimontanum
This is a note to let the main editors of Adiantum viridimontanum know that the article will be appearing as today's featured article on November 27, 2013. 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 all, please ask Bencherlite (talk · contribs). You can view the TFA blurb at Wikipedia:Today's featured article/November 27, 2013. 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:
Adiantum viridimontanum, commonly known as Green Mountain maidenhair fern, is a rare fern found only in outcrops of serpentine rock in New England and Canada. It is named after the site of its discovery in the Green Mountains in Vermont; it has since been located in Quebec and in one site on serpentine in coastal Maine. Until 1991, it was grouped with the western maidenhair fern A. aleuticum, which itself was classified as a variety of the northern maidenhair fern A. pedatum. It was then established that A. viridimontanum was a hybrid species and that the other two ferns were distinct species, although it is difficult to distinguish between the three species in the field. Due to the limited distribution of A. viridimontanum and its similarity to other species, little is known of its ecology. It thrives on sunny, disturbed areas where ultramafic rock is covered with thin soil, such as road cuts, talus slopes, and asbestos mines. Individual plants seem long-lived, and new individuals only infrequently reach maturity. It is one of four species endemic to serpentine in eastern North America and is considered globally threatened due to its habitat restrictions. (Full article...)
WikiProject Plants assessment and a request
Looks like we've both been busy recently and have moved on from assessing for class/importance for WikiProject Plants tagged articles. I came across several articles today via Catscan that you'd put the WikiProject Plants banner on minutes before I tried to. I'd like see the Start/Unassessed Importance and Unassessed Class/Unassessed Importance articles finished off, but I'm progressing slowly on assessment as the remainder have some issues I'd like to address first. In several cases, the major issue I see is that I can't make a move to a more appropriate title (e..g. a common name titled article that should be a DAB/SIA for multiple species). Would you be willing to consider making some moves I suggest? List of plant species known as snakeroot was recently importance assessed, but I'd been leaving it unassessed deliberately, pending a potential move to Snakeroot (Ageratina doesn't seem like a slam dunk redirect target for the term "snakeroot"). Could you make this move? Plantdrew (talk) 06:27, 18 November 2013 (UTC)
- Thanks for making the snakeroot move. I'm about to go to bed, but will suggest some other moves in the morning. One more for now, would you consider moving Water hyacinth to Eichhornia, and redirecting "water hyacinth" to Eichhornia crassipes? E. crassipes is a globally significant invasive species and by far the most common referent of the term "water hyacinth". I'll propose water hyacinth for a formal Requested Move if you're not comfortable making the move unilaterally, but will be suggesting further moves in the morning that need a mop and bucket unless you tell me not to bother you. Plantdrew (talk) 07:29, 18 November 2013 (UTC)
- I'm watching your talk page, so we can keep the conversation here if you'd like. Could you move Golden cereus to Bergerocactus? Wikipedia's article title seems to be the major force behind use of "Golden cereus"; yet it still has fewer Google results than the scientific name. USDA Plants calls it "golden snakecactus", Calflora calls it "golden spined cereus". It's not a significant plant outside of botany and succulent enthusiasts (who aren't going to be scared off by a scientific name).
I recalled an edit you made to Cymopterus basalticus a few months ago in which you stated not to use the date with the authority. I was wondering if you could point me to any guidelines in the MOS or any projects that relate to this. Thanks Fredlyfish4 (talk) 03:53, 19 November 2013 (UTC)
- Thanks for your response. I mostly edit animal articles, which may explain the differences why I never noticed articles without dates. Fredlyfish4 (talk) 04:36, 19 November 2013 (UTC)
DYK for Asplenium × boydstoniae
|On 19 November 2013, Did you know? was updated with a fact from the article Asplenium × boydstoniae, which you created or substantially expanded. The fact was ... that Boydston's spleenwort, a hybrid fern, was created in culture in 1954 but not discovered in the wild until 1971? The nomination discussion and review may be seen at Template:Did you know nominations/Asplenium × boydstoniae. You are welcome to check how many hits the article got while on the front page (here's how, quick check) and it will be added to DYKSTATS if it got over 5,000. If you know of another interesting fact from a recently created article, then please suggest it on the Did you know? talk page.|
Hi, it would help me to know exactly what it was you did not like which brought about your edit with the comment "clean up succession box". Please would you let me know. Thanks, Eddaido (talk) 00:13, 30 November 2013 (UTC)
To the attention of Your Royal Wikiness
Since you were one of the main participants in previous RfC's on the subject, perhaps you would be interested to know that I started here a thread whose aim is to throw ideas around about potential improvements on how we denote people with pretensions to royal and feudal titles. (Apologies for the title of this message! I can't help introducing a bit of levity to "serious" subjects.) -The Gnome (talk) 08:32, 6 December 2013 (UTC)
Merry Christmas and best wishes for a happy, healthy and productive 2014!
|Ruhrfisch ><>°° 01:53, 25 December 2013 (UTC)|
Nomination of Charles McLaren, 4th Baron Aberconway for deletion
A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Charles McLaren, 4th Baron Aberconway is suitable for inclusion in Wikipedia according to Wikipedia's policies and guidelines or whether it should be deleted.
The article will be discussed at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Charles McLaren, 4th Baron Aberconway until a consensus is reached, and anyone is welcome to contribute to the discussion. The nomination will explain the policies and guidelines which are of concern. The discussion focuses on high-quality evidence and our policies and guidelines.
Users may edit the article during the discussion, including to improve the article to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the article-for-deletion notice from the top of the article. Flaming Ferrari (talk) 15:25, 7 March 2014 (UTC)
Thanks, and could you make a couple moves for me?
Thank you for the barnstar. Thank you also for tagging the last few days of new plant articles. I'd been falling behind. Can you do a few moves for me? The first three are ones I'd been avoiding assessing (and the last showed up as a reverted move in the assessment log recently) . It was easy to keep track of them as being mistitled in the now relatively short list of unassessed articles, but you did the Kleinia a couple days ago and I did Cream nut several weeks ago.
- Senecio kleinia->Kleinia neriifolia. The Plant List has it as Kleinia. The article has it as Kleinia in the taxobox and text (contrary to the title). I don't see any reason to keep it as Senecio.
- Cream nut->Lecythis pisonis. Not a plant that is well known to English speakers by any common name. I suspect most English speakers who've heard a common name for it know a Portuguese name, not "cream nut". I get more Google hits for "cream nut"+Bertholletia than "cream nut"+Lecythis. If you make the move to L. pisonis, I'll turn Cream nut into a set index for multiple plants known by that common name.
- London Pride (plant)->Saxifraga × urbium 1 of 4 plants listed at London Pride. Common name is ambiguous. I'm not a fan of using a hybrid scientific name when a common name is available (too many possible variant forms with spacing and the characters x/×/X), but there's really no way to make the common name work here.
- Microbiota->Microbiota decussata, Microbiota (disambiguation)->Microbiota. Ambiguous term. ~75% of the incoming links to the article on the genus Microbiota intend Microbiota (microbiology). Although monotypic genera are usually at the genus name title, WP:FLORA suggests using the binomial as the title when the genus name is ambiguous.
I'm excited about getting close to getting all the plant articles assessed (well, except for the massive number of stubs tagged as unassessed importance and the continual stream of new articles). I think we've pretty much caught all the existing articles on plant species and higher taxa. There are probably a couple thousand articles on plant cultivars, plant pathogens, or botanists that haven't been tagged for WikiProject Plants. I'm not sure I'm going to work much on tagging those. I've tagged a few categories recently, but there are at least 1600 untagged Categories relevant to Plants Project. The benefit of tagging Categories seems pretty low.
What do you think should be done with Damascus rose water? Should it redirect to Rosa × damascena (as it does now) or rose water? Should it be tagged for WP Plants? Should it be tagged instead for the projects that have tagged Talk:Rose water? Plantdrew (talk) 04:45, 22 March 2014 (UTC)
Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Robert Shirley, 13th Earl Ferrers, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Malaya (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.
Zoransky and Compagnons
THX a lot for your effort to dig out this snakepit or sockpuppets, made up back-up publications and whatnot. It is really incredible how this thing turned out to be. I first believed it to be some American who might have wanted to create some hoax nobility backround for his own family, first publishing an article on the Zoranskys in English, backed up by hoax German literature and then either using a Sockpuppet or waiting for someone else to translate it into German and get the German article started. Those fake back-up books were of such a bad linguistic quality, filled with mistakes, that there was no chance they were written by a German native or even someone who knew a thing or two about tha language. Right now our admins ad Wikipedia Germany are also checking one of the users who brought the Martin V. Zoransky article to our wiki whether he was a willing collaborator or the mastermind behind this. I honestly don't believe he was behind this, since there were just too many faults in those fake German publications. Additional to that: its also an issue for Google books AND Amazon, since some of those fake back-up publications like this and that too are a hoax and never existed. So basically Amazon is offering books at a high price that never existed and can never be sold. This thing is big! THX again for your help! LagondaDK (talk) 09:37, 30 July 2014 (UTC)
I thought you might like to know about my latest update on the Threston-case: Its really incredible ... I mean ... honestly ... I just can't get my head around it ... "T.R. Threston" is a HOAX! All right already, she does have an elaborate facebook-page, Twitter account, mentioning in annual report of whatever club of travel writers, all uploaded from somewhere, non-valid ISBN and very dodgy, but now finally there is proof that "T.R. Threston" is completely made up! Not even her photoes ar real! That photo from her facebook-"fan" page? Fake! The one from her wordpress page? Fake! Her Twitter? All are fake! You are asking for proof? Well ... lets take the pic from her facebook-fan page for a minute and compare it to this photo of Jessica Alba at Toronto Film Festival 2007. Please note the people in the background ... LagondaDK (talk) 21:17, 1 August 2014 (UTC)
Non succeeding heirs
I take your point - though I suggest there are a very small minority of articles where such heirs are in the list. Personally I think the list is for holders - the article body for biography - but if you want to bring it up on the project to seek views I have no objection. Garlicplanting (talk) 13:05, 3 August 2014 (UTC)
Hot blast and coke
Could you give me a ref on this? I'm unable to find anything at all. I see that the original ref was HCA 25/1, pt. 1 f. 79, which I take to be some kind of manuscript reference, which would be OR unless it's published. Tom Reedy (talk) 03:20, 5 September 2014 (UTC)
Pick your brain.
As I rarely get involved in page renaming I could do with a hand or advice. For obvious reasons the article at John_Jacob_Astor_VIII should be at its original location and was moved without consensus this present location. Using undo on the edit earlier this year will doubtless create a mess. Garlicplanting (talk) 11:58, 8 September 2014 (UTC)
I noticed that you reverted my move of Humphry Morice (the elder) to Humphry Morice, with the edit summary "distinguish from his son, also an MP". I find the current situation problematic for several reasons. Firstly, there is no Wikipedia article about Morice's son, and, per our guidelines on disambiguation, we only disambiguate between existing articles, not potential ones. Secondly, as far as I can tell, the Humphry Morice we already have an article about is more notable than the one we don't have an article about, largely because of the former's station as Governor of the Bank of England. As such, the article we already have would be considered the primary target even if we did have an article about his son. Furthermore, since there was no redirect left behind in the move, people who type "Hymphry Morice" into the search bar and press enter will not be brought to the only article we have about someone by that name. For these reasons, would you be willing to let me move the article back to Humphry Morice?
- Hi Choess,
- I have created the disambiguation page, as you suggested, as well as the article about the other Morice, in order to satisfy the guideline. I have also given the articles disambiguators that indicate how these individuals were best known rather than how they were related to each other. I hope these changes meet with your satisfaction.