User talk:FunkMonk: Difference between revisions

Content deleted Content added

Inline

Revision as of 00:15, 22 July 2013

This talk page is automatically archived by MiszaBot. Any sections older than 7 days are automatically archived to Archive 8. Sections without timestamps are not archived.

Archives

Archive 1	Archive 2	Archive 3
Archive 4	Archive 5	Archive 6
Archive 7	Archive 8	Archive 9
Archive 10	Archive 11	Archive 12
Archive 13	Archive 14	Archive 15
Archive 16	Archive 17	Archive 18
Archive 19	Archive 20	Archive 21
Archive 22	Archive 23	Archive 24
Archive 25	Archive 26	Archive 27
Archive 28	Archive 29

This page has archives. Sections older than 7 days may be automatically archived by .

Talkback

Hello, FunkMonk. You have new messages at Talk:Pornography (album)/GA1.
You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.

Quagga again

How is the taxonomy coming? Don't forget that the one paper explains how the quagga lost its stripes. Also should we keep the culture section with its few cites? LittleJerry (talk) 22:36, 16 June 2013 (UTC)[reply]

My plan is to summarise the stripe paper, and if present, taxonomy issues in that South Africa mammal book. As for the culture section, I think it could be made into a "relationship with humans" section, and all the useless pop culture cameos can be removed. FunkMonk (talk) 14:09, 17 June 2013 (UTC)[reply]

We're gonna need some cites for the cultural references. LittleJerry (talk) 19:22, 18 June 2013 (UTC)[reply]

For the books, I assume they would suffice as sources themselves. The Jurassic Park novel references to the quagga are somewhat notable as far as I remember, since they relate to the recreation of extinct animals, with the quagga being used as an example of such. I'll see if I can find it in my old copies. I've removed the games and stuff like that. The film appearance seems somewhat notable, I guess there must be a source mentioning it somewhere. FunkMonk (talk) 19:35, 18 June 2013 (UTC)[reply]

And by the way, there is some info on appearance and sympatry with other zebras in the 2005 genetics paper that could be used outside the evolution section. FunkMonk (talk) 19:35, 18 June 2013 (UTC)[reply]

I've already put that in the "Biology and ecology" section. LittleJerry (talk) 20:08, 18 June 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for your help. I'm now going to nominate it for GA. LittleJerry (talk) 20:05, 19 June 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Alright, I think a little more could be added form the sources we have, but I guess it is long enough for GA. FunkMonk (talk) 20:53, 19 June 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Well, feel free to add some. LittleJerry (talk) 21:27, 19 June 2013 (UTC)[reply]

I'm currently fleshing out with stuff I can find, but Skinner 2005 mentions "Skinner & Smithers 1990" as a place to find more information about the quagqa. Walkers animals mentions "Smithers 1983". Do you know what that publication is? FunkMonk (talk) 15:45, 20 June 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Another thing, I think it would be nice to note how many stuffed specimens/skins/skeletons still exist today, if this information can be found. I know it is mentioned in some old papers, but not which. FunkMonk (talk) 17:20, 20 June 2013 (UTC)[reply]
I think it is ready for GA now, but I have requested some papers[1] that may help us expand the article further. FunkMonk (talk) 19:32, 20 June 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Okay, thanks. The article looks even better. I'm afraid I can't locate those papers. LittleJerry (talk) 19:50, 20 June 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Some papers have been provided there, you may want to download them. FunkMonk (talk) 21:20, 20 June 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Done. LittleJerry (talk) 21:27, 20 June 2013 (UTC)[reply]

And sorry for being so late in the game, by the way, but never did a collaboration before, and was a bit unsure how to start (and I'm also a bit busy in real life at the moment). But it seems to be going well now, and I think we have plenty of time to work before anyone reviews the article. At this rate, I think we could get it to FA, what do you think? FunkMonk (talk) 22:05, 20 June 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Sounds intriguing. Do you think we'll have to add back in the info on culture to be comprehensive for FA? LittleJerry (talk) 23:06, 20 June 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Unless we find something really notable, a few random and scattered mentions in books doesn't really make a difference for FA. But that doesn't mean we should leave out if we find something profound, what we had just wasn't up to snuff. FunkMonk (talk) 23:09, 20 June 2013 (UTC)[reply]

This book seems to be a specialised source: [2] Darren Naish mentions it here[3], and discusses the quagga. FunkMonk (talk) 23:27, 20 June 2013 (UTC)[reply]

I think we should paraphrase some of the information given by Colonal Harris instead of quoting a whole passage. LittleJerry (talk) 22:53, 22 June 2013 (UTC)[reply]

I didn't add the quote myself[4], and was about to remove it, but after reading it, and upon learning it is one of the only definite descriptions from life, I kind of like it. The thing is, by paraphrasing it, we have to interpret it, and that is good enough for second hand accounts (like the books we've cited), but this is a first hand account, and almost all the animal is known from in life. Therefore, meddling with it can tamper with the meaning. And besides, I've brought many articles to FA status that contained extensive contemporary descriptions of recently extinct animals (often they are only known from very few accounts), so shouldn't be a problem for FAC, if that's what you had in mind. FunkMonk (talk) 22:56, 22 June 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Okay then. LittleJerry (talk) 23:04, 22 June 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Now that it's a GA, the next step would be fixing the stuff mentioned in the review. Then it shouldn't be too far from FA. I would personally love a section about the existing museum specimens, but I have no comprehensive source about it. Seems to be in that 1996 book. FunkMonk (talk) 01:08, 23 June 2013 (UTC)[reply]

I won't be able to order that book. Money's tight on my part. LittleJerry (talk) 02:10, 23 June 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Shouldn't be necessary for FA anyway. Do you think there is enough info to make a range map? Since we now know the exact date the last specimen died, August 12, we could perhaps submit it as today's featured article for that date if we get it to FA before? FunkMonk (talk) 01:56, 24 June 2013 (UTC)[reply]

I'm not sure. I have no experience in making maps. LittleJerry (talk) 03:04, 24 June 2013 (UTC)[reply]

The articles states that "...it is unclear why the quagga lost the stripes on its hind parts" but also "Its distinct coat pattern likely evolved rapidly due to geographical isolation and/or adaptation to a drier environment". The latter is cited to a more recent source. LittleJerry (talk) 03:09, 24 June 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Well, even the latter leaves it unclear, "likely" doesn't indicate much certainty. And there doesn't seem to be any consensus of why zebras even have stripes, not to mention the lack of them. FunkMonk (talk) 03:44, 24 June 2013 (UTC)[reply]

So is it almost ready. LittleJerry (talk) 20:49, 24 June 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Yeah, I think we should send it to the copyeditors first, though... FunkMonk (talk) 20:53, 24 June 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Done. LittleJerry (talk) 21:00, 24 June 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Nice! Until then, each of us could read trough it, and fix overlooked errors in the process. I always find mistakes on re-read. FunkMonk (talk) 21:05, 24 June 2013 (UTC)[reply]

"Historically, quagga taxonomy was further complicated by he fact that the extinct southernmost population of Burchell's zebra was thought to be a distinct subspecies until recently, Equus quagga burchellii (then regarded a full species, E. burchellii)." I think the reviewers are going to object to the use of "recently". LittleJerry (talk) 21:19, 24 June 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Yeah, I'm not sure, but I think the 2004 paper we cite was the first to propose this? FunkMonk (talk) 21:22, 24 June 2013 (UTC)[reply]

This 1978 paper may be where it was first proposed: http://www.biodiversitylibrary.org/page/40680486/#page/5/mode/1up FunkMonk (talk) 21:53, 24 June 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Reading that, it seems to have been in a 1974 paper by the same author[5], which is also a list of specimens. Trying to find it... FunkMonk (talk) 21:57, 24 June 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Andnope... The 70s papers do claim Burchell's zebra never went extinct, but not that the surviving population was the same as any other subspecies, so it may have been the 2004 paper after all. Pretty complicated. FunkMonk (talk) 05:22, 25 June 2013 (UTC)[reply]

How long do you want to wait for the copyedit? LittleJerry (talk) 01:09, 30 June 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Takes longer than I had expected. If you feel it is ready for FAC already, I'm fine wit that. FunkMonk (talk) 01:15, 30 June 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Lets wait another week. LittleJerry (talk) 22:38, 2 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]

I'll be on Iceland until July 17, so may not be able to respond on a FAC until then. FunkMonk (talk) 16:57, 3 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Okay. LittleJerry (talk) 17:46, 4 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]

I have Internet access here anyway, so no problem. FunkMonk (talk) 03:02, 5 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Well then, we can start now if you want. You can create the page and I'll add my name on after. LittleJerry (talk) 01:00, 12 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Ok, will do when I am home on tuesday (I don't have the sources with me). FunkMonk (talk) 04:03, 15 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Motion proposed regarding the Syrian civil war clarification and amendment request

This is a courtesy notice to inform you that an Arbitrator has proposed a motion regarding a clarification and amendment request in which you were named as a party. For the Arbitration Committee, Callanecc (talk • contribs • logs) 01:28, 14 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Moneran Panty Run

What's your suggestion about this?--Mr Fink (talk) 21:18, 19 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Talkback

Hello, FunkMonk. You have new messages at User talk:Great northern tilefish/GA1.
Message added 21:47, 19 July 2013 (UTC). You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.

ChrisGualtieri (talk) 21:47, 19 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Oops, Talk:Great northern tilefish/GA1. I've done some more work as well. ChrisGualtieri (talk) 14:21, 20 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Arbitration motion regarding Syrian civil war articles

This is a courtesy notice to inform you that the Arbitration Committee has passed a motion with respect to a request for clarification and amendment, in which you were named as a party, regarding articles related to the Syrian civil war. Please see the link above for the full text of the motion. For the Arbitration Committee, Callanecc (talk • contribs • logs) 08:54, 21 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]

* Southern limit of the distribution of the green anaconda

Good evening:

Please allow me to share an article with you. Maybe you will find it interesting:

http://www.naturapop.com/home/southern-limit-of-the-distribution-of-the-green-anaconda