Jump to content

User talk:Invertzoo: Difference between revisions

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Browse history interactively
← Previous editNext edit →
Content deleted Content added
VisualWikitext
No edit summary
Line 240: Line 240:


[[User:DerekSmith|DerekSmith]] ([[User talk:DerekSmith|talk]]) 12:31, 15 June 2012 (UTC)
[[User:DerekSmith|DerekSmith]] ([[User talk:DerekSmith|talk]]) 12:31, 15 June 2012 (UTC)

Hi Invertzoo, beating you a little bit on the clock (65)and am from Lincolnshire.

Like you, Darwin heavily influenced me (but then he did change the world, but having read McCarthy, I cannot believe that I blythly ignored the challenges to Neo-Darwinism that remained unanswered - [[Saltation_(biology)]] and massive species stability over vast periods of time right up to extinction.

McCarthy's conclusions answer both of these problems and also answers the mounting problem with classification, where species do not fit 'cleanly' into an evolutionary niche.

Having read McCarthy, I have gone back and read much of Darwin's work and I am amazed at how close the great man came time and again to reaching exactly the same conclusion as McCarthy. So near, yet so far.

Your own field will, I feel, leap at hte McCarthy conclusion with example after example.

Darwin changed the world, McCarthy has changed my life - you will understand what I mean when you read him.

Enjoy

Derek

[[User:DerekSmith|DerekSmith]] ([[User talk:DerekSmith|talk]]) 14:08, 15 June 2012 (UTC)

Revision as of 14:08, 15 June 2012

Template:Archive box collapsible

Hello, and welcome to the talk page of my user page; how can I help you? Please put your new post at the bottom of the page, and if you are a new editor, please remember to sign it with 4 of these "~". If you are talking about an article, please blue link the title of it. Thanks.

I have been contributing since the summer of 2007, but there are still many aspects of WP I know nothing or almost nothing about, so I am always interested in helpful suggestions. Thanks!


To leave me a message click here


The current Wikipedia time is:
03:12, Tuesday, 17 September 2024 (UTC)
To update time purge the cache!
This user lives in, or hails from,
New York City.
Wikiproject GastropodsThis user is a member of WikiProject Gastropods.
This user is a participant in
WikiProject Gastropods.
Wikiproject Bivalves
This user is a member of WikiProject Bivalves.
This user is a participant in WikiProject Tree of Life.
 		This user is a member of WikiProject Caribbean.

............................................................................................................................................

.............................................................................................................................................

Fabulous work

I am sitting in your presentation at the Wiki NYC Conference. Fabulous work on gastropods. Thank you. :)--Jimbo Wales (talk) 21:01, 25 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]


..............................................................................................................................................

Extract from Ganesh note about old gastropod stubs


The Signpost: 07 May 2012

Bivalvia

Thank you for your help on improving Bivalvia. I thought there might be some way to go yet on polishing it up but Keilana has expressed him/herself satisfied. I thought the GA review was very thorough and asked Keilana about whether the article was a FA possibility to which the reply was: "I definitely think it's comprehensive enough for GA, but I also think FA is definitely an attainable goal. Sorry for being such a hardass reviewer."

So I plan to work towards FAC and add sections on use as food and on shellfish toxicity. Can you think of any other missing information? Cwmhiraeth (talk) 05:16, 12 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]

I think that's really a great idea to work towards getting Bivalvia up to FA status. I will be happy to assist if I can help in any way, for example with smoothing the prose and fine-tuning it. One small thing I thought of that you could add is to say whose taxonomy system Huber is using in his new book. I do not have that book yet so I can't look and see who he borrowed the system from or if it is his own synthesis. I am not sure what other sections (other than food and toxicity) need adding to the article, I will have to think carefully to see if I can come up with anything. As for smaller improvements, I guess you will need alt text for all of the images. I suppose someone might ask what all the labelled organs are in the oyster drawing and in the Margaritifera anatomy drawing. By the way, the small freshwater pea clams, Sphaeriidae, climb around on water plants using their foot, you might want to mention that in the behavior section. At the beginning of the 2010 taxonomy you may want to say that taxa with a dagger are extinct fossil groups. All best wishes to you, Invertzoo (talk) 16:19, 12 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]
You make some good points there. I'm currently working on a Toxicity section but have got distracted into writing a new article on Anadara subcrenata, the consumption of which caused 47 deaths in China in 1988. The trouble with this article is that the species name is widely used but is not included in WoRMS or ITIS and I have not yet established the presently accepted name. I added its name to the genus page so that it would not be an orphan. Cwmhiraeth (talk) 08:56, 13 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]
I wonder if that Anadara species is in the new Huber book, the Compendium of Bivalves? And I have another idea about expanding the Bivalve article: I suppose in a general section about human relevance, as well as talking about food and toxicity, you could also include a mention of pearls, mother of pearl, and the influence of the scallop shell on art history and design. Invertzoo (talk) 17:38, 13 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]

The Signpost: 14 May 2012

Please fill out our brief Teahouse survey

Teahouse logo
Teahouse logo

Hello fellow Wikipedian, the hardworking hosts and staff at WP:Teahouse would like your feedback!

We have created a brief survey intended to help us understand the experiences and impressions of veteran editors who have participated on the Teahouse. You are being selected to participate in our survey because you edited the Teahouse Questions or Guests pages some time during the last few months.

Click here to be taken to the survey site.

The survey should take less than 15 minutes to complete. We really appreciate your feedback, and we look forward to your next vist to the Teahouse!

Happy editing,

J-Mo, Teahouse host

This message was sent via Global message delivery on 01:13, 22 May 2012 (UTC)

The Signpost: 21 May 2012

The Signpost: 28 May 2012

Wikipedia:Featured picture candidates/delist/File:Melo aethiopica 001.jpg

Hi there- you've been mentioned, and your input would be appreciated, in the above discussion. J Milburn (talk) 10:59, 31 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Melo aethiopica

Hallo Invertzoo! There is a delisting-discussion caused by your removing of a picture of Melo aethiopica, see [1]. I please you to explain the reasons, why you removed it, especially the characters, your decision is based on. As far as I know, the only character is the protonch (and according to this it is a aethiopica; see also the link to M. broderipii on the description page of the picture of M. aethiopica), all others (shell form, colour and so on are variable and/or depending of age) are not suited for exact determination. If it is neither aethiopica nor broderipii, what do you think it is? By the way, we had a similar discussion on Commons about the same subject, and you can see the result: It is still listed as aethiopica. Please anwer on the page (see above), where the delisting is discussed. Greetings --Llez (talk) 11:16, 31 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]

MVO

Hello, Invertzoo. When you changed MVO into a disambiguation page, you may have overlooked WP:FIXDABLINKS, which says:

A code of honor for creating disambiguation pages is to fix all resulting mis-directed links.
Before moving an article to a qualified name (in order to create a disambiguation page at the base name, to move an existing disambiguation page to that name, or to redirect that name to a disambiguation page), click on What links here to find all of the incoming links. Repair all of those incoming links to use the new article name.

It would be a great help if you would check the other Wikipedia articles that contain links to "MVO" and fix them to take readers to the correct article. Thanks. R'n'B (call me Russ) 11:20, 3 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]

OK, will do Russ, thanks for the heads up. Invertzoo (talk) 12:23, 3 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]
I went through the whole list. Hopefully I have corrected every example. Invertzoo (talk) 13:35, 3 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]

The Signpost: 04 June 2012

Re: About new bivalve article listing

Hello Susan, I have updated the Bivalve new article listing ruleset and removed the word "pearl" from it. Let me know if you need help with anything else. — Ganeshk (talk) 13:08, 9 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]

A possible source

See this source for info about (for example) the golden orb. Sorry, I am not a native speaker, if I was I would've tried to expand the article myself. I figured the source may be helpful for an expert like yourself. Arcandam (talk) 05:04, 12 June 2012 (UTC) p.s. Is this edit correct?[reply]

Thanks, what you did seems fine to me! The heading "References" was spelled incorrectly, but as far as I can tell everything else seems totally fine, thanks for your work! Invertzoo (talk) 23:29, 12 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks! I am using AWB to fix that typo because a lot of people made the same mistake. Keep up the good work! Arcandam (talk) 00:03, 13 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]
That's great that you are fixing that typo everywhere Arcandam! There's a lot of things like that that need fixing throughout Wikipedia. Good for you that you would go ahead and do much needed routine clean-up like that! By the way, if you want me to look over any other new mollusk articles (or any others) feel free to ask me. Usually the new bivalve and gastropod articles show up in the NewArtBot listings after a few days, and I look at them anyway, but occasionally it happens that I get busy IRL and miss a few things. Invertzoo (talk) 02:24, 13 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks for the invitation for the Wikiproject. I am sorry, I think I am unable to help that project in a way that is significant enough to call myself a member because this is not my native language and I know next to nothing about bivalves. The reason I came across the golden orb was that I was deleting :Indented line. While doing that I noticed a fact template dated July 2008 so I Googled around a bit. I like doing cleanup stuff like this or that or fixing typos when I am not reverting vandals. Arcandam (talk) 04:02, 13 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]
That's terrific that you fix typos like that; it is one of the most useful things you could possibly be doing on Wikipedia, really! That makes me happy and I wish there were more people doing that. I must also say that your English seems very good to me. If you ever get to the point where you want a break from doing the things you usually do, feel free to come over here and write (or improve) bivalve articles. Stubs are fine. In the bivalve and gastropod projects we have a number of people for whom English is not their first language, and we also have a couple of people who started out knowing nothing about bivalves or gastropods but who have done very well. In any case, all best wishes to you and it was nice to "meet" you. Invertzoo (talk) 12:20, 13 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]

The Signpost: 11 June 2012

Bivalvia

Hi Susan, not sure you had noticed. Bivalvia is currently a FA candidate. — Ganeshk (talk) 23:52, 12 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Hey thanks Ganesh! You are right; I had not noticed. I will try to help out if I can. Invertzoo (talk) 01:47, 13 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]

The Tea Leaf - Issue Four

Hi! Welcome to the fourth issue of The Tea Leaf, the official newsletter for the Teahouse!

  • Teahouse pilot wraps up after 13 weeks After being piloted on English Wikipedia starting in February, the Teahouse wrapped up its pilot period on May 27, 2012. We expect this is just the beginning for the Teahouse and hope the project will continue to grow in the months to come!

Thank you and congratulations to all of the community members who participated - and continue to participate!

  • What you've all been waiting for: Teahouse Pilot Report is released! We look forward to your feedback on the methodology and outcomes of this pilot project.
  • ....and if a pilot report wasn't enough, the Teahouse Pilot Metrics Report is out too! Dive into the numbers and survey results to learn about the impact the Teahouse has made on English Wikipedia.
  • Teahouse shows positive impact on new editor retention and engagement
  • 409 new editors participated during the entire pilot period, with about 40 new editors participating in the Teahouse per week.
  • Two weeks after participating, 33% of Teahouse guests are still active on Wikipedia, as opposed to 11% of a similar control group.
  • New editors who participated in the Teahouse edit 10x the number of articles, make 7x more global edits, and 2x as much of their content survives on Wikipedia compared to the control group.
  • Women participate in the Teahouse 28% of Teahouse participants were women, up from 9% of editors on Wikipedia in general, good news for this project which aimed to have impact on the gender gap too - but still lots to be done here!
  • New opportunities await for the Teahouse in phase two as the Teahouse team and Wikipedia community examine ways to improve, scale, and sustain the project. Opportunities for future work include:
  • Automating or semi-automating systems such as invites, metrics and archiving
  • Experimenting with more ways for new editors to discover the Teahouse
  • Building out the social and peer-to-peer aspects further, including exploring ways to make answering questions easier, creating more ways for new editors to help each other and for all participants to acknowledge each other's efforts
  • Growing volunteer capacity, continuing to transfer Teahouse administration tasks to volunteers whenever possible, and looking for new ways to make maintenance and participation easier for everyone.
  • Want to know how you can lend a hand at the Teahouse? Become a host! Learn more about what makes the Teahouse different than other help spaces on Wikipedia and see how you can help new editors by visiting here.
  • Say hello to the new guests at the Teahouse. Take the time to welcome and get to know the latest guests at the Teahouse. Drop off some wikilove to these editors today, as being welcomed by experienced editors is really encouraging to new Wikipedians.

You are receiving The Tea Leaf after expressing interest or participating in the Teahouse! To remove yourself from receiving future newsletters, please remove your username here. Sarah (talk) 16:43, 13 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Charles Darwin was Nearly Right

Hi,

You have made such a significant contribution to the 'Darwin' page, I thought you might be interested in a recent paper by Eugene McCarthy http://www.macroevolution.net/support-files/forms_of_life.pdf


Darwin was spot on with natural selection, and so very close on many occasions to the real source of genetic variation. This approach by McCarthy unlocks the last riddle - Saltation - which plagued Darwin's theory.

Your thoughts would be appreciated.

Thanks - Derek

DerekSmith (talk) 12:31, 15 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Invertzoo, beating you a little bit on the clock (65)and am from Lincolnshire.

Like you, Darwin heavily influenced me (but then he did change the world, but having read McCarthy, I cannot believe that I blythly ignored the challenges to Neo-Darwinism that remained unanswered - Saltation_(biology) and massive species stability over vast periods of time right up to extinction.

McCarthy's conclusions answer both of these problems and also answers the mounting problem with classification, where species do not fit 'cleanly' into an evolutionary niche.

Having read McCarthy, I have gone back and read much of Darwin's work and I am amazed at how close the great man came time and again to reaching exactly the same conclusion as McCarthy. So near, yet so far.

Your own field will, I feel, leap at hte McCarthy conclusion with example after example.

Darwin changed the world, McCarthy has changed my life - you will understand what I mean when you read him.

Enjoy

Derek

DerekSmith (talk) 14:08, 15 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk:Invertzoo&oldid=497717547"