User talk:FunkMonk

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.

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)

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)

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

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)

• 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)

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

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

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)

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

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)

• 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)
• 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)

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

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

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

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)

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)

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)

• 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)

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)

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)

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

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)

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

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)

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

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)

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)

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

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

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

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)

"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)

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)

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)

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)

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)

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

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)

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

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)

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

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

Disambiguation link notification for July 4

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Mauritius Blue Pigeon, you added links pointing to the disambiguation pages Providence and Farquhar (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) 10:41, 4 July 2013 (UTC)

Request for Arbitration case declined

This is a courtesy notice to inform you that a request for arbitration, which named you as a party, has been declined. Please see the Arbitrators' opinions for potential suggestions on moving forward.

For the Arbitration Committee, — ΛΧΣ²¹ 16:20, 4 July 2013 (UTC)

Jesus FAC

Hey, thanks for your second opinion at the Jesus good article review. I've now nominated the article for FAC. If you have time, can you take a look at the article and leave some comments? --FutureTrillionaire (talk) 00:27, 6 July 2013 (UTC)

I'll take a look. FunkMonk (talk) 20:49, 6 July 2013 (UTC)

Flightless Dodo article

You removed my request for a citation on the statement that "It is presumed that the Dodo became flightless because of the ready availability of abundant food sources and a relative absence of predators on Mauritius." You said that "It is in the article". I couldn't find the part of the article that said who presumed this nor indeed anything supporting the reason for it becoming flightless. Perhaps you can point me to the appropriate part of the article. Rjm at sleepers (talk) 05:34, 7 July 2013 (UTC)

I'll make it clearer in the article. FunkMonk (talk) 19:29, 7 July 2013 (UTC)

Thanks for the citation. I'll continue the discussion on the article's talk page to make it easier for others to join in if they want to. Rjm at sleepers (talk) 06:04, 8 July 2013 (UTC)

Vulcanodon

Hi FunkMonk, you added a Vulcanodon image from in Poznan Plaza. Is that in Poland? See Poznań. Reid,iain james (talk) 04:02, 8 July 2013 (UTC)

Yeah, you can usually find more information about an image if you click on it. FunkMonk (talk) 04:05, 8 July 2013 (UTC)

Do you know if it's the City of the County? Reid,iain james (talk) 14:38, 8 July 2013 (UTC)

Great northern tilefish to GA

I have done all but one of which you have asked (the other will be done shortly), here, could you check it out once you are free ;) Thanks Prabash.Akmeemana 17:26, 8 July 2013 (UTC)

Yep, I might get time in a couple of days. FunkMonk (talk) 04:21, 11 July 2013 (UTC)

Mammoth

Hi FunkMonk, I know you know the mammoth articles far better than I, so I thought I'd best just point you at this article, then I realised there are a big bunch of articles in this google search all related to the same thread. Presumably the blood sample stuff is new (but maybe that's just the hype?) and ought to find a place somewhere in the article. EdwardLane (talk) 04:30, 11 July 2013 (UTC)

Hi, the specimen already is mentioned last under the frozen specimens section. The blood thing is a bit overhyped, and needs actual scientific study before anything can be concluded. FunkMonk (talk) 05:41, 11 July 2013 (UTC)

Ok cool, I figured you would know or at least easily find, whether the specimen was the same as one in the article, where I would have spent a good hour before I could be 'fairly sure'. I'll forget this for now then. Cheers EdwardLane (talk) 09:57, 11 July 2013 (UTC)

1RR arbitration for Syrian civil war articles

A request for Arbcom regarding creation of specific Syrian civil war 1RR arbitration tool is issued and if accepted will affect this page and other related pages on Syrian civil war. The issue was previously discussed here and recommended for Arbcom solution on the issue. As an editor involved in previous discussion, your opinion is requested, thank you.Greyshark09 (talk) 17:22, 11 July 2013 (UTC)

Previously you posted your opinion on my sandbox page as following:

Will cool the many hot-heads down, and force them to use the talk-page, which is a good thing. ~~~~

Please repost it at the official discussion.Greyshark09 (talk) 17:22, 11 July 2013 (UTC)