User talk:Maky

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

Today's Featured Article: Notification[edit]

This is to inform you that Slow loris, which you nominated at WP:FAC, will appear on the Wikipedia Main Page as Today's Featured Article on 10 December 2014. The proposed main page blurb is here; you may amend if necessary. Please check for dead links and other possible faults before the appearance date. Brianboulton (talk) 22:24, 28 November 2014 (UTC)

Good to see it there, - coming with a hidden message to slow down ;) - I love to see four names in a nomination, precious again --Gerda Arendt (talk) 06:46, 10 December 2014 (UTC)


Hi Maky. I see you've reverted my addition of a link here. Not a problem, since technically it does violate WP:OVERLINK. But when I read a long article it is annoying to have to search back through the article just to find a link, when it could also appear later in the article. WP:OVERLINK does sound a bit like a guideline, and not a rule, where it says "Generally, a link should appear only once in an article...". I just found a discussion here about this situation. Apparently it has been discussed before, I'll have to search the archives. As this is about to become a FA, I realize caution should be used when editing. Thanks for your work on Slow loris, and thanks for the 'thanks' earlier! CuriousEric 18:46, 9 December 2014 (UTC)

In all honesty, I completely agree with you. However, I have fought tooth and nail on this point on several FAC candidates (including this one, I think), and I've just been happy to walk away with multiple FAs that included links duplicated in three places (one time each): lead, body, image caption. The only reason I reverted was to maintain the "standards" set at FAC. If you want to be bold and apply your interpretation of that guideline, I won't revert again. Personally, I don't care for arguing for or against "guidelines", since it usually comes down to who's carrying the bigger stick or has the most friends. But anyway, thanks again for your work! I'm looking forward to seeing this as a TFA. – Maky « talk » 21:31, 9 December 2014 (UTC)
Thanks Maky. I've reverted with (hopefully) a sufficient edit summary, we'll see where the chips fall. CuriousEric 22:52, 9 December 2014 (UTC)
...And it didn't last very long. Nor did some of my other "excessive" links. – Maky « talk » 08:12, 10 December 2014 (UTC)
Sigh. Perhaps you could add your two cents here to show support. I haven't had time to search the archives yet, but perhaps the discussion should be revived. It appears to be one of those heated ones like "the Beatles" vs. "The Beatles" mid-sentence. CuriousEric 16:06, 10 December 2014 (UTC)
Truthfully, I'd rather stay out of it. Though you guys make good points, discussions over guidelines are almost never fruitful and more akin to walking through a minefield. – Maky « talk » 19:55, 10 December 2014 (UTC)

Sportive lemur[edit]

Hi Alex,

have you been able to determine the origin of the designation sportive lemur? --Florian Blaschke (talk) 01:49, 10 December 2014 (UTC)

Yes, I helped author an article that covered a lot of lemur etymologies, and I've been meaning to add all of them to the various lemur articles. I'll try to add them tomorrow, including the etymology of "sportive lemur". – Maky « talk » 07:38, 10 December 2014 (UTC)
@Florian Blaschke: The etymology has been added for the article Sportive lemur. I will keep adding more lemur etymologies over the coming days. – Maky « talk » 21:14, 10 December 2014 (UTC)
Thank you for your efforts! --Florian Blaschke (talk) 14:09, 11 December 2014 (UTC)

Your GA nomination of Fork-marked lemur[edit]

Hi there, I'm pleased to inform you that I've begun reviewing the article Fork-marked lemur 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 FunkMonk -- FunkMonk (talk) 21:41, 16 December 2014 (UTC)

@FunkMonk: Thanks! Before you get too far with the review, if you would, please allow me to add material from one more source. I dug it out of my private library last night, not realizing how much new information it might provide. Though the article won't change radically, it might be best to hold off on the review for ~24 hours. Sorry for the trouble. – Maky « talk » 21:48, 16 December 2014 (UTC)
No problem, reviewers come by so slowly these days that I also sometimes nominate articles before having added all the info I want... FunkMonk (talk) 21:51, 16 December 2014 (UTC)
Lol! I was beginning to feel guilty. /grin – Maky « talk » 21:52, 16 December 2014 (UTC)
@FunkMonk: Sorry for the delays. I've been a little busy with work the last few days. Also, I've been a bit distracted, and procrastination has sunk in because I realize how much work will be involved to incorporate that major source. Anyway, I'm free Sunday, so I plan to add the material then, as well as add a bit about the evolutionary history as speculated based off a few studies in molecular genetics. – Maky « talk » 19:55, 19 December 2014 (UTC)
No problem, just ping me when you feel ready. FunkMonk (talk) 20:36, 19 December 2014 (UTC)
@FunkMonk: I'm ready for you to resume your review. Sorry for the delay. – Maky « talk » 01:53, 22 December 2014 (UTC)

Your GA nomination of Fork-marked lemur[edit]

The article Fork-marked lemur you nominated as a good article has passed Symbol support vote.svg; see Talk:Fork-marked lemur 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 FunkMonk -- FunkMonk (talk) 02:22, 25 December 2014 (UTC)