User talk:Afranklady
Welcome!
[edit]{{helpme}} on your talk page and ask your question there. Please remember to sign your name on talk pages by clicking 
or by typing four tildes "~~~~"; this will automatically produce your name and the date. If you are already excited about Wikipedia, you might want to consider being "adopted" by a more experienced editor or joining a WikiProject to collaborate with others in creating and improving articles of your interest. Click here for a directory of all the WikiProjects. Finally, please do your best to always fill in the edit summary field when making edits to pages.|
Getting Started
Getting Help
Policies and Guidelines
|
The Community
Things to do
Miscellaneous
|
Happy editing! Peaceray (talk) 23:27, 8 November 2024 (UTC)
The page List of pholidoted has been speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This was done under section R3 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because it was a recently created redirect from an implausible typo or misnomer, or other unlikely search term.
Please do not recreate the material without addressing these concerns, but do not hesitate to add information in line with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. If you think this page should not have been deleted for this reason, you may contact the deleting administrator, or if you have already done so, you may open a discussion at Wikipedia:Deletion review. UtherSRG (talk) 01:19, 17 November 2024 (UTC)
MoS ... sandbox?!
[edit]Hi, by all means follow the MoS (with care, it's only human), but there's no reason to follow its Sandbox, which is purely people thinking aloud. All the best, Chiswick Chap (talk) 19:33, 29 November 2024 (UTC)
- Thanks for the tip. Afranklady (talk) 19:34, 29 November 2024 (UTC)
The post-anal tail ... is a term of art, so we are obliged to use it
[edit]Hi, many thanks for your efforts to improve Wikipedia. However, I've noticed that at both Vertebrate and Chordate, you have invented the phrase "post-cloacal tail", to supplement or perhaps supplant the widely-used term of art in zoology, "post-anal tail". To be clear, the anatomical situation of having a tail like this is always called post-anal in the zoology literature. Editors must not go about inventing terminology, however wrong they may feel the terminology in the scientific literature is. The role of the encyclopedia is to describe, not to invent, and we are obliged to use terms of art just as they are. Any further attempts to insert the invented phrase, or anything like it, in articles would certainly be disruptive editing. I do hope this is clear. There are many genuine errors and deficiencies in the project's articles, such as lack of citations and poor expression, so there is no shortage of work to be done at all levels, from fixing typos to rewriting poorly-constructed articles. All the best, Chiswick Chap (talk) 18:45, 30 November 2024 (UTC)
- I deeply apologise. I won’t do that again. Afranklady (talk) 18:59, 30 November 2024 (UTC)
- Many thanks. Chiswick Chap (talk) 19:45, 30 November 2024 (UTC)
December 2024
[edit]
Hello. In a recent edit to the page Vertebral column, you changed one or more words or styles from one national variety of English to another. Because Wikipedia has readers from all over the world, our policy is to respect national varieties of English in Wikipedia articles.
For a subject exclusively related to the United Kingdom (for example, a famous British person), use British English. For something related to the United States in the same way, use American English. For something related to another English-speaking country, such as Canada, Australia, New Zealand, Ireland, India, or Pakistan, use the variety of English used there. For an international topic, use the form of English that the first author of the article used.
In view of that, please don't change articles from one version of English to another, even if you don't normally use the version in which the article is written. Respect other people's versions of English. They, in turn, should respect yours. Other general guidelines on how Wikipedia articles are written can be found in the Manual of Style. If you have any questions about this, you can ask me on my talk page or visit the help desk. Thank you. CodeTalker (talk) 19:48, 1 December 2024 (UTC)
- Thanks for reminding me. I have been correcting English variants of articles all day when the articles state what type of English they want me to use. I apologise for any mess ups. Afranklady (talk) 19:52, 1 December 2024 (UTC)
Hello. I have noticed that you often edit without using an edit summary. Please do your best to always fill in the summary field. This helps your fellow editors use their time more productively, rather than spending it unnecessarily scrutinizing and verifying your work. Even a short summary is better than no summary, and summaries are particularly important for large, complex, or potentially controversial edits. To help yourself remember, you may wish to check the "prompt me when entering a blank edit summary" box in your preferences. Thanks! UtherSRG (talk) 23:07, 4 December 2024 (UTC)
Edit summaries
[edit]Hi there, a request: could you please start using edit summaries? It helps those of us who have the zoological articles on our watchlists to see whether frequent small edits (as yours tend to be) are copy edits/grammatical changes, or something altering content, which may suggest a second look. Generally, edit summaries also help establishing your credibility and are plain good practice, so I suggest getting used to employing them as a matter of course :) Cheers --Elmidae (talk · contribs) 17:32, 4 December 2024 (UTC)
- Oh right. I forgot about that. Sorry. Afranklady (talk) 17:33, 4 December 2024 (UTC)