This user is a WikiGnome

User talk:Casliber

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

Contents


The lion constellation image[edit]

I emailed a Dr. of the Astronomy Department at Berkeley University California to review the Lion constellation image that I linked to. And he emailed me regarding the image: "[...] [This] lion looks much more interesting than the versions of Leo that are usually drawn." All stars below the visual magnitude of 6 have been deleted. This is a Dr. of Astronomy who confirmed that the image is interesting. He calls it "more interesting then the versions of Leo that are usually drawn". So as a Dr. of Astronomy he must know the H.A. Rey Lion which is as much as the image I linked to a possible connection of the stars in the Leo Constellation. A doctor of Astronomy calls my connection of the stars in Leo "more interesting then the other visualisations". And H.A. Rey with a less interesting connection of the stars in Leo is on Wikipedia. So why not the visualisation I link to. A Dr. of Astronomy at Berkely University Astronomy Department. What else can one bring to have you accept that it is a work of scientific worth. I think one can really trust the knowledge and overview over astromical topics of the Dr.'s of Berkeley University Astronomy Department. Please don't be so stubborn and withhold this knowledge from Wikipedia and Humanity. Please see that if a Dr. of Astronomy from a University with renown calls it the most interesting visualisatiion of the subject that he has seen then it is ok to give it out to the public. Since you protected the page please put my link back in. I want people to be able to see this. and I don't want you to withhold it for what I think are dubious reasons (Maybe that the topic of the website is on is spirituality. Spirituality has always been a science in my eyes. As finding ways of how to come to higher insights is one of the eldest theorie building in human culture). This is all I can put in to this discussion. A Dr. from Berkely University Astronomy Department calls it the most interesting visualization of the Lion Constellation he has ever seen. I think this is by far enough to appear on Wikipedia as long as visualisations are presented on this page. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2003:CA:4BCD:1854:B852:1E36:8D07:B51E (talk) 16:08, 15 August 2016 (UTC)

Nomenclature of fungi[edit]

Hey there. I recently stumbled across an issue of Nova Hedwigia Beheift titled "the genera of fungi" (or was it agaricaceae?). It's filled to the brink with mind-numbing nomenclatural discussions of all the genera ever described (I think, anyway). Would it be any use if I looked up the specific ref or any specific genera? Circeus 00:20, 14 June 2007 (UTC)

That would be friggin' trés bién. The first one that would be absolutely great to get a clarification on is Agaricus which was called Psalliota in many texts fro many years and I've been mystified as to why. Other articles I intend cleaning up are Amanita muscaria, which is the one I intended taking to FA first but it just didn't come together well, Gyromitra esculenta as a future FA, Agaricus bisporus as a future FA, and cleaning up the destroying angels – Amanita virosa, Amanita bisporiga and Amanita verna. Boletus edulis would be a good one to check too. let me know if anything interesting pops up. I'll see ifd I can think of any other taxonomic quagmires later today. Work just got real busy :( cheers, Cas Liber | talk | contribs 02:01, 14 June 2007 (UTC)
Generally, that's pretty arcane and only relevant to genus articles, or species that were tightly involving in defining them (for example, there seems to be an odd debate over the multiple type species for Amanita). I'll look up Agaricus, Amanita (since A. muscaria's the current type) and Psalliota. I'll also dig up the ref so you can look it up yourself, with any chance. Circeus 04:52, 14 June 2007 (UTC)
Cool, keen to see what pops up. cheers, Cas Liber | talk | contribs 05:17, 14 June 2007 (UTC)
I only quickly thumbed through it and noted the full ref (Donk, M.A. (1962). "The generic names proposed for Agaricaceae". Beiheifte zur Nova Hedwigia. 5: 1–320. ISSN 0078-2238. ) because I forgot about it until the last minute. Psalliota looks like a classic synonym case. It shares the same type with Agaricus, and might be older. Circeus 01:02, 16 June 2007 (UTC)
Weird! I thought Linnaeus was calling all sorts of things Agaricus so I wonder how it could predate that really....anyway I am curious.cheers, Casliber (talk · contribs) 02:46, 16 June 2007 (UTC)


Okay, First thing I have to say is... Damn, 18th–19th century taxonomy and nomenclature of fungi is a right mess. Whose bright idea was it to give fungi 3 starting dates in the ICBN???

LOTS of "per" in citation here. See [1]

On Agaricus
Etym.: Possibly "from Agarica of Sarmatica, a district of Russia" (!). Note also Greek ἀγαρικ[1]όν "a sort of tree fungus" (There's been an Agaricon Adans. genus, treated by Donk in Persoonia 1:180)
Donk says Linnaeus' name is devalidated (so that the proper author citation apparently is "L. per Fr., 1821") because Agaricus was not linked to Tournefort's name (Linnaeus places both Agaricus Dill. and Amanita Dill. in synonymy), but truely a replacement for Amanita Dill., which would require that A. quercinus, not A. campestris be the type. This question compounded by the fact that Fries himself used Agaricus roughly in Linnaeus' sense (which leads to issues with Amanita), and that A. campestris was eventually excluded from Agaricus by Karsten and was apparently in Lepiota at the time Donk wrote this, commenting that a type conservation might become necessary.
All proposals to conserve Agaricus against Psalliota or vice versa have so far been considered superfluous.

References

  1. ^ Letter is script and looks like a Russian и.
On Lepiota
Etym. Probably greek λεπις, "scale"
Basionym is Agaricus sect. Lepiota Pers. 1797, devalidated by later starting date, so the citation is (Pers.) per S.F.Gray. It was only described, without species, and covered an earlier mentioned, but unnamed group of ringed, non-volvate species, regardless of spore color. Fries restricted the genus to white-spored species, and made into a tribe, which was, like Amanita repeatedly raised to genus rank.
The type is unclear. L. procera is considered the type (by Earle, 1909). Agaricus columbrinus (L. clypeolarus) was also suggested (by Singer, 1946) to avoid the many combination involved otherwise in splitting Macrolepiota, which include L. procera. Since both species had been placed into different genera prior to their selection (in Leucocoprinus and Mastocephalus respectively), Donk observes that a conservation will probably be needed, expressing support for Singer's emendation.
On Psalliota
Etym.: ψάλιον, "ring"
Psalliota was first published by Fries (1821) as trib. Psalliota. The type is Agaricus campestris (widely accepted, except by Earle, who proposed A. cretaceus). Kummer (not Quélet, who merely excluded Stropharia) was the first to elevate the tribe to a genus. Basically, Psalliota was the tribe containing the type of Agaricus, so when separated, it should have caused the rest of the genus to be renamed, not what happened. It seems to be currently not considered valid, or a junior homotypic synonym, anyway the explanation is that it was raised by (in retrospect) erroneously maintaining the tribe name.
On Amanita
Etym.: Possibly from Amanon,a mountain in Cilicia.

A first incarnation from Tentamen dispositionis methodicae Fungorum 65. 1797 is cited as devalidated: "Introduced to cover three groups already previously distinguished by Persoon (in [...] Tent. 18. 1797) under Agaricus L., but at that time not named. It is worth stressing that [The species now known as Amanita caesarea] was not mentioned."

With Agaricus L. in use, Amanita was a nomen nudum per modern standard, so Persoon gave it a new life unrelated to its previous incarnations, and that is finally published after a starting date by Hooker (the citation is Pers. per Hook., 1821). He reuses Withering's 1801 definition (A botanical arrangement of British plants, 4th ed.). "The name Amnita has been considered validly published on different occasions, depending on various considerations." Proposed types include (given as Amanita. Sometimes they were selected as Agarici):
  • A. livida Pers. (By Earle, in 1909). Had been excluded in Vaginata or Amanitopsis and could not be chosen.
  • A. muscaria Pers. (By Clemens & Shear, 1931) for the genus (1801) from Synopsis fungorum, was generally transferred to the one from Hooker's Flora of Scotland, which is currently considered the valid publication of Amanita (or was in the 50s).
  • A. phalloides (by Singer, 1936) for the 1801 genus.
  • A.bulbosa (by Singer & Smith, 1946) for Gray's republication. This is incorrect as Gray's A. bulbosa is a synonym of A. citrina. Some authors consider Gray to be the first valid republisher.
  • A. caeserea (by Gilbert, 1940). Troublesome because not known personally to Persoon or Fries.

Donk concludes the earliest valid type is A. muscaria, the species in Hooker, adding that he'd personally favor A. citrina.

The name has been republished three times in 1821: in Hooker, Roques and Gray (in that order). Roques maintained Persoon's circumscription, including Amanitopsis and Volvaria. Gray excluded Amanitopsis and Volvariella into Vaginata. Right after, Fries reset the name by reducing the genus to a tribe of Agaricus, minus pink-spored Volvariella. This tribe became a subgenus, than genus via various authors, Quélet, altough not the first, often being attributed the change. Sometimes it was used in a Persoonian sense (whether that is a correct use according to ICBN is not clear to me).
Homonyms of Amanita Pers. are Amanita adans. (1763, devalidated) and Amanita (Dill) Rafin. (1830)
On Boletus
Not including (Not in Agaricaceae, sorry).

Phew! Circeus 18:52, 18 June 2007 (UTC)

I hope you intend to clean that prose ASAP? It's definitely not article-worthy as is. Circeus 01:05, 20 June 2007 (UTC)
I'm working on it. Got distracted this morning...cheers, Casliber (talk · contribs) 01:08, 20 June 2007 (UTC)

Pork[edit]

LOL, I love your sense of humour. Maimonedes is a good reference. The reality is that Islam takes food restrictions from Judaism; and Christianity doesn't have any restriction (courtesy of three references in the New Testament). The reason why pork should be restricted (along with many other things) is not given explicitly in the Hebrew Bible, hence Bible commentators have been offering guesses since ancient times. My own favourite, however, is Mary Douglas, wife of Louis Leakey, daughter of a Lutheran pastor. Her theory is excellent, based on her cultural anthropological observations, with a decent feel for how Biblical text works. It's rather an abstract theory though. Anyway, I'll see if I can manage a literature review of dietry restrictions in the ANE, especially if there's anything explicit about pork. Don't think I'll find a reference for "why" the pork taboo is in place, though, if it's documented, I'd have read about that in commentaries. Perhaps a clay tablet with the answer has been destroyed in only the last few years during the "troubles" in Iraq. :( Alastair Haines (talk) 21:27, 7 April 2008 (UTC)

This is the great thing about uncertainty. Lacking an answer, the reports of Maimonides, Mary Douglas and the other guy mentioned are fascinating.Cheers, Casliber (talk · contribs) 22:15, 7 April 2008 (UTC)
Scotish pork taboo is a remarkable article! Thanks for that, lol. Alastair Haines (talk) 21:59, 8 April 2008 (UTC)

Spotted this. I'll look for a ref to the Maimonides comment. The normal teaching is that pork is no more or less offensive to Jews than any other forbidden meat (dog, horse etc) or forbidden part of kosher animal (blood, Gid Hanasheh etc). The pig (NB pig, not pork – an important distinction which is relevant for the Maimonides comment too, I note) is "singled out" because it alone of the animals that have one of the two "signs" (it has split hooves but doesn't chew the cud) lies down with its legs sticking out. Most quarapeds have their legs folded under them. There's a midrashic lesson to be learned there, apparently, that the pig is immodestly and falsely proclaiming its religious cleanliness, when it is not. Anyway, that said, I'll look into the M comment – he was quite ahead of his time in terms of medical knowledge (check his biog). And NB my OR/POV antennae buzzed when I read that little section. --Dweller (talk) 22:52, 7 April 2008 (UTC)

Someone has tagged the Religious restrictions on the consumption of pork for OR, though the talk page seems to indicate it is for a different reason....Cheers, Casliber (talk · contribs) 23:03, 7 April 2008 (UTC)
Hmm... makes me more dubious, but I'll check. btw... I'm not Alastair! --Dweller (talk) 23:10, 7 April 2008 (UTC)

Have found good stuff, including online version of Maimonides text. I'll dump it here for you to use as you wish.

I maintain that the food which is forbidden by the Law is unwholesome. There is nothing among the forbidden kinds of food whose injurious character is doubted, except pork (Lev. xi. 7), and fat (ibid. vii. 23). But also in these cases the doubt is not justified. For pork contains more moisture than necessary [for human food], and too much of superfluous matter. The principal reason why the Law forbids swine's flesh is to be found in the circumstance that its habits and its food are very dirty and loathsome. It has already been pointed out how emphatically the Law enjoins the removal of the sight of loathsome objects, even in the field and in the camp; how much more objectionable is such a sight in towns. But if it were allowed to eat swine's flesh, the streets and houses would be more dirty than any cesspool, as may be seen at present in the country of the Franks.[1]

So, Maimonides argues "pork contains more moisture than necessary [for human food], and too much of superfluous matter", whatever that means! More importantly, the "principal reason" is that if you keep pigs, you end up with a dirty and unhealthy environment. Important note: Maimonides was writing from Islamic Egypt at the time, which is why he mentions "as may be seen at present in the country of the Franks." (ie France)

The comments about the pig's habit of lying with its legs outstretched come from Midrash Vayikra Rabba (ch 13) where it is mentioned as part of an elaborate metaphor, but not in connection with any reason for particularly abhorring the creature.

Hope that helps. --Dweller (talk) 09:48, 8 April 2008 (UTC)

References

  1. ^ Maimonides, Guide for the perplexed, Book III ch.48. Can be viewed online at http://www.sacred-texts.com/jud/gfp/gfp184.htm

Alpha Centauri[edit]

I have unfortunately had to revert much of the changes you have made to the Alpha Centauri page – mainly to the structure revisions that you have done. While I agree it is best to standardise between bright star pages (i.e. Sirius), there is significant problems doing so to the Alpha Centauri page. The problem in previous edits is the confusion with Alpha Centauri the star and Alpha Centauri as a system. There was much about alpha centauri, especially its brightness compared to Arcturus as well as the relationship with Proxima Centauri. (See the Discussion with the associated page to this article.) It was thought best to avoid complexity by giving the basic information, and add complexity in sections so information could be understood at various levels of knowledge. Also as there is much interest in Alpha Centauri from children to amateur astronomers, it was best to give the introduction as brief as possible and explain the complexities as we go. As to modifications of articles as drastically as you have done to complex article, it might be better to do so with some discussion in the discussion section before doing so. Although I note that you have much experience in doing wiki edits, much better than me, it is better to make small changes in complex articles paragraph by paragraph than carte blanche changes. (I am very happy to discuss any issues on the article with you in the alpha centauri discussion to improve the article.)

As to the introduction, much of the additions you have made are actually speculative, and are not necessary on fact. I.e. "This makes it a logical choice as "first port of call" in speculative fiction about interstellar travel, which assumes eventual human exploration, and even the discovery and colonization of imagined planetary systems. These themes are common to many video games and works of science fiction." has little to do with the basic facts on alpha centauri. I.e. Nearest star, third brightest star, binary star, etc. As for "Kinematics" as a title, this is irrelevant (Sirius article also has it wrong). (Also see Discussion page for Alpha Centauri with SpacePotato) Note: I have contributed much to this page – 713 edits according to the statistics. (27th April 2008 to today) Arianewiki1 18:04, 6 August 2009 (UTC)

O-kay...taken it to the talk page.Casliber (talk · contribs) 20:29, 6 August 2009 (UTC)

Bract pattern[edit]

Banksia menziesii cone.jpg

You know what I don't get? On page 245 of George (1981), and again on page 40 of Collins (2007), George gives a diagram showing the arrangement of unit inflorescences on a Banksia flower spike. Both diagrams clearly show a hexagonal layout; i.e. every common bract is surrounded by six equidistant common bracts, thus forming little hexagons. In support of this, George (1981) states "The unit inflorescences are so arranged on the axis that there are three pattern lines—vertical, and both dextral and sinistral spiral."

I haven't dissected an inflorescence, but in some species the pattern persists right through flowering and can be seen on the infructescence. You won't get a better example than this B. menziesii cone. Look at that pattern. There's no way you could call it hexagonal. It is a rectangular (or rather diamond, since the lines are diagonal) grid. Depending on how you define a neighbourhood, you could argue that each common bract has 4 or 8 neighbours, but there's no way you could argue for 6. Similarly, you could argue for two pattern lines (dextral and sinistral spiral) or four (dextral, sinistral, vertical and horizontal), but there is no way you could argue for 3, because there is no reason to include vertical whilst excluding horizontal). On top of that there is a beautiful symmetry in the way each common bract is surrounded by its own floral bracts and those of its neighbours. But George's diagrams destroy that symmetry.

I thought maybe B. menziesii was an exception to a general rule, but you can see the same diamond grid, though not as clearly, in File:Banksia serrata4.jpg, and I reckon (but am not certain) I can see it in my B. attenuata cone. And in File:Banksia prionotes mature cone.jpg too. What the heck is going on?

(I'm not just being a pretentious wanker here. I thought the diagram was interesting and informative enough for me to whip up an SVG version for Wikipedia. But since copying George's diagram isn't really on, and it is much better to go straight from nature if possible, I was basing my version on this B. menziesii cone. But it isn't going to work if the diagram shows a rectangular grid and the text has to say it is hexagonal.)

Hesperian 13:28, 29 August 2009 (UTC)

Thanks for reminding me on this one – I think it was Alex (or Kevin??) who told me that every bract pattern was unique to a species and hence diagnostic, but as far as I know not much if anything has been published on this area. The similarity between archaeocarpa and attenuata was noted (the bract pattern remaining in the fossils). I seem to recall feeling bamboozled as well by the description when I read it some time ago. I will have to refresh myself with some bedtime reading....Casliber (talk · contribs) 13:50, 29 August 2009 (UTC)
Update: I had a look at the pages in question in the banksia book(s), there is a little bit more in the 1981 monograph but not much. I meant to ring Alex George about this and should do so in the next few days...I guess the photos look sort of like hexagons stretched vertically :P Casliber (talk · contribs) 06:46, 2 September 2009 (UTC)
Dipsacus fullonum Just passing through. I am not an expert with flora but I do take photos now and again. Does this image from my personal collection help or hinder your discussion? I see diamonds --Senra (talk) 12:58, 22 July 2010 (UTC)
Haha yeah. Not a bad comparison at all. a diamond pattern it is there as well. You sorta let your eyes go a little out of focus and see two diagonal lines....Casliber (talk · contribs) 14:12, 22 July 2010 (UTC)

Question[edit]

If this is what developing flower pairs look like...
then what are these brown and white furry things?

I note that the last six images to be posted on your talk page were posted by me. I'm not sure whether to apologise....

What is going on in the lower image? Clearly this is an inflorescence in very early bud, but those furry white things are apparently not developing flower pairs. Are they some kind of protective bract or something?

Hesperian 01:24, 1 September 2009 (UTC)

You certainly see those thingies on the developing buds of alot of banksias. I'd be intrigued what the Nikulinsky book, which is essentially a series of plates of a developing menziesii inflorescence, says (not sure, I don't recall whether it had commentary...). Another thing to look up. Was about to look up the patterns just now. Casliber (talk · contribs) 02:35, 1 September 2009 (UTC)
Now I have looked at the books and bract architecture, question is are they common bracts or are they something which falls off (don't think so but..). Something else to ask Alex. Casliber (talk · contribs) 06:49, 2 September 2009 (UTC)
Having found nothing in George, I've been reading Douglas's stuff on ontogeny of Proteaceae flowers, and found nothing there either.

If you snap a spike axis in half, they are just that brown colour, and essentially made of closely packed fuzz. I wonder if there is initially no gap in the axis for the flower to grow, so the developing flower literally has to shove some of the axis out in front of it as it extends. This would explain everything except for the white tip. Hesperian 10:23, 2 September 2009 (UTC)


I have today taken a long lunch and gone bushwalking with Gnangarra. While he took happy-snaps, I did some OR on this question. My diagnosis is: these are peduncles that have developed common bracts, but have not yet developed floral bracts or flowers.

In very young spikes like the one pictured here, they are not yet very densely packed together, so they can be perceived as individual peduncles. Given time, they will continue to grow, and as they do so they will become more and more densely packed together, until eventually they are jammed together so tightly that their dense coverings of hairs form the fibrous brown material that comprises a typical flower spike, and the common bracts at their apex will form the bract pattern on the surface of the spike. At that point, they will no longer be distinguishable as individual peduncles, but will simply be part of the spike.

When the flowers start to develop, they get squeezed together even more. At this point, sometimes, a peduncle may break off the axis and be squeezed right out of the spike as the flowers around it develop. Thus you may see one or two of these furry things sitting at random positions on the surface of a developed flower spike.

As evidence for this hypothesis I offer the following observations:

  1. Wherever one of those "furry things" is found loose on the surface of a spike, you will also find a gap in the bract pattern beneath it, where the common bract is absent;
  2. "Furry things" may occasionally be found partly out of the spike, but partly in, in which cases the white tip is quite obviously the common bract. In such cases removal of the "furry thing" leaves behind a visible hole in the spike where a common bract ought to be.

Hesperian 05:58, 15 September 2009 (UTC)

Interesting – Gah! Forgot to ring Alex – evening is a crazy time with little availability for me, but will see what I can do. Casliber (talk · contribs) 20:57, 15 September 2009 (UTC)

Not OR any more. Look at the picture of "Banksia flower bud seen in profile" here: clear evidence of the common and floral bracts forming one of those little furry upside-down pyramids, with the flower arising from it. Hesperian 03:38, 19 September 2009 (UTC)

On a tangential point, the first image would most likely pass FPC if it ever finds a home that is appropriate. Noodle snacks (talk) 06:55, 17 October 2010 (UTC)
Hmmm, okay, hopefully Hesperian will see this thread. :) Casliber (talk · contribs) 11:31, 17 October 2010 (UTC)
Gosh, would it really?! I was quite proud of it but a bit unsure whether it had enough depth of field. But if I'll take anyone's word that it would probably pass, I'll take Noodle snacks. :-) Hesperian 23:27, 17 October 2010 (UTC)

Banksia menziesii with persistent florets[edit]

Banksia menziesii inflorescence with persistent florets.jpg
Banksia menziesii with persistent florets.jpg

While I was out a-walking in the bush one day last week, I spied a banksia with an unfamiliar jizz. Even on closer inspection I was bamboozled for half a minute until the pieces fell together and I realised I was looking at a B. menziesii with persistent florets. Not just a bit late to fall: there were old cones from previous seasons with the florets still bolted on. In fact, there wasn't a single bald cone on the whole tree. I've never seen anything like it. Have you? Hesperian 04:42, 2 February 2010 (UTC)

Hmm..interesting. I have not ever noticed a menziesii like this, but not to say it can't happen. Might it be a menziesii/prionotes hybrid – how far is the tree from you? I'd compare the newgrowth/leaf dimensions/trunk all for comparison. Did it have any new flowers? Some of these old cones have an aura of prionotes about them...Casliber (talk · contribs) 05:11, 2 February 2010 (UTC)
prionotes crossed my mind at first, but the bark is that of menziesii, and nothing like the distinctive prionotes bark. And the flower spikes lack the woolliness of old prionotes florets.

It's quite near my place; about ten minutes drive. Even closer to where Alex lives (assuming he still lives at the address he has been publishing under lately): only five minutes drive from there I would guess. If it's prionotes (which it isn't), then we've extended the known range of that species 10km south. Likewise, a hybrid means there's a prionotes population nearby, so it amounts to the same thing. Hesperian 05:30, 2 February 2010 (UTC)

Banksiamyces again[edit]

I finally made it to the library and got a hold of the article you had asked about a couple of weeks ago. There's enough info there to make DYK-worthy stubs on the genus, and three of the species (macrocarpus, katerinae, toomanis), or, alternatively, maybe enough for a GA on the genus. What are the chances of images? Apparently these fungi make small but visible apothecia on the seed capsules. Berkeley and Broome first wrote about the fungus in 1887, so maybe there's a sketch from the protologue that's useable. Anyway, I'll start adding text in a day or two and maybe we can have the first Banksia/Fungi wikiproject collaboration? Sasata (talk) 14:25, 18 February 2010 (UTC)

Berkeley & Broome (1887) is online at http://www.biodiversitylibrary.org/item/13683 — see page 217. There is a picture at Plate 29 figure 18. Hesperian 02:09, 19 February 2010 (UTC)
That's a nice image on plate 29 there. They call it Tympanis toomanis on page 224 decription of plate. How do we capture that image and replicate it on commons? Casliber (talk · contribs) 03:06, 19 February 2010 (UTC)
Like this. Hesperian 03:37, 19 February 2010 (UTC)
On page 222, they talk about finding it on a banksia cone near the Tooma River in southern NSW, which leaves me thinking it is a cone of Banksia marginata although they do not state this (OR alert ++++). Funny looking marginata cone but marginata is a hugely variable species....Casliber (talk · contribs) 03:11, 19 February 2010 (UTC)
Check your email; I've sent you a copy of Beaton (1982), where they do state that the cone is B. marginata. (You guys should have asked me first; I could have saved Sasata a walk to the library.) Hesperian 03:26, 19 February 2010 (UTC)
@Sasata – I'll leave it up to you whether a solid GA and one DYK for the whole shebang, or 4 species articles – you've got the material and I am happy either way. cheers, Casliber (talk · contribs) 03:11, 19 February 2010 (UTC)
Am working on the article behind-the-scenes now... that picture you uploaded is excellent, and thanks Hesp for finding the protologue. Too bad the scan resolution is so crappy; I can upload a screen capture/crop to Commons, but will first investigate to see if there's a copy of the original around here so I might rescan at higher resolution. Four DYKs and 1 GA doesn't sound unreasonable for the lot, but I'll see what I can come up with. Sasata (talk) 03:32, 19 February 2010 (UTC)
The resolution is good. I guess you were looking at it at 25%. Try zooming in. Hesperian 03:40, 19 February 2010 (UTC)
Yeah, it'll do the trick. I gave the article a good push towards GA. Hesp, do you have easy access to Beaton 1984, or maybe Fuhrer, B,; May, T. (1993). "Host specificity of disc-fungi in the genus Banksiamyces on Banksia." Victorian Naturalist (South Yarra) 110 (2):73–75? I think once those two are located and added, that'll be it from journals (but you may find stuff to add from your Banksia books?). I could start stubs for the species, but it would be a shame to have to leave out B. maccannii. Sasata (talk) 07:09, 19 February 2010 (UTC)
I can probably get Vic Naturalist at UNSW Library next tuesday or friday (slim chance on weekend). Casliber (talk · contribs) 07:25, 19 February 2010 (UTC)
When you get to Victorian Naturalist, you'll also want to grab Sommerville, K.; May, T. (2006). "Some taxonomic and ecological observations on Banksiamyces". The Victorian Naturalist. 123: 366–375.  Hesperian 08:43, 19 February 2010 (UTC)
Thanks for finding that, wonder why it didn't show up in my database search. Cas, if it's too mush hassle for you to get these, let me know and I can order them, would take 1–2 weeks to get here.
I'll have easy access to Beaton (1984) on Monday. No access to Victorian Naturalist. Hesperian 08:38, 19 February 2010 (UTC)
Sorry, forgot again. I've just scanned it now. Cas: I'll forward shortly; if you have Sasata's email address, can you forward it on please? Otherwise, Sasata: send me an email so I know where to send this scan. Hesperian 04:16, 25 February 2010 (UTC)
I don't see any email link on your user page... I can wait until Cas forward a copy. Thanks kindly Sasata (talk) 15:25, 25 February 2010 (UTC)
I guess you've never noticed the "Email this user" link in the sidebar toolbox.... Hesperian 23:22, 25 February 2010 (UTC)
! Wouldya look at that... That's embarrassing! Now excuse me while I go give eyewitness testimony in a murder trial. Sasata (talk) 23:46, 25 February 2010 (UTC)
Hang on a sec, will send. Also, will be near the library again for Vic Naturalist. Casliber (talk · contribs) 20:03, 25 February 2010 (UTC)
Hahaha. Fantastic. I just realised I never uplaoded a funny photo I took in WA a few years ago. I need to double check.
This old cone of Banksia violacea had these dark objects on it which might be a fungus as they certainly weren't on any other cones I saw about the place.
Casliber (talk · contribs) 20:25, 18 February 2010 (UTC)

As OZtrylia has a notoriously under described rang of and field of mycology study – any signs of further fungi or algae work is to be encouraged at all points SatuSuro 01:51, 19 February 2010 (UTC)


Taking pity on poor Cas, whose Banksia books are still packed up in boxes:

From Collins, Collins and George (2008), page 47, first paragraph of a section entitled "Fungi and lichens":

"Many kinds of fungi are associated with Banksias. There is even a genus of fungi named for their association with these plants—Banksiamyces. The first species of these was recognised in the 1880s and placed in the genus Tympanis, then in the 1950s transferred to the genus Encoelia. Further collections and research led to the description of the genus Banksiamyces by Beaton and Weste in 1982, with two further species. Six taxa are now recognised, so far known from 13 species of Banksia (Sommerville & May, 2006). Commonly known as banksia discs, they have all been found on eastern Australian Banksias and one is also known in Western Australia. They are discomycete fungi, growing on the fruit and appearing as small, shallow dark cups on the follicles (Fuhrer, 2005). When dry they fold inwards and look like narrow slits. Their effect is unk[n]own but it seems unlikely that they are responsible for degradation of the seeds."

At the bottom of the page there is a photo of Banksiamyces on B. lemanniana. They look like little light grey maggots on the follicles. Based on the photo and textual description, I would suggest that the B. violacea photo doesn't show this genus. Hesperian 11:17, 19 February 2010 (UTC)

Hmmm, that's what I initially thought when I read the description and sketches in Beaton 1982, but after seeing B&B's 1872 sketches, I was pretty sure Cas's pic was a Banksiamyces. I guess I should reserve judgment until I get more info. Sasata (talk) 17:09, 19 February 2010 (UTC)
From the abstract of Somerville and May 2006: "Apothecia of these crops are of different macroscopic appearance, with lighter apothecia being mostly immature, and darker apothecia producing spores." ... so who knows? Sasata (talk) 17:11, 19 February 2010 (UTC)

Anything else to add to this article? Shall we put it up for GAN? Sasata (talk) 17:39, 18 May 2010 (UTC)

Yeah put it up, there might be some bits and pieces. I'll take a look. Casliber (talk · contribs) 20:32, 18 May 2010 (UTC)
Any Banksia experts you're chums with that might be able to give a confirmation on your putative Banksiamyces photo? Sasata (talk) 05:45, 21 May 2010 (UTC)
damn, I meant to contact Tom May about it (who has been helpful before). Will dig up his email and see what he says. Casliber (talk · contribs) 07:09, 21 May 2010 (UTC)

More bedtime reading[edit]

[2]—the most recent phylogeny and dating of Proteaceae. Easy to miss with such an obscure title. Hesperian 12:08, 28 February 2010 (UTC)

Abraham Halpern[edit]

You may want to have a look there as well. Appears to have been improved by a Szasz fan. I've read diagonally this article, but even that doesn't seem to support the light in which the Halpern-Szasz issue is presented in Wikipedia. Tijfo098 (talk) 13:19, 3 November 2010 (UTC)

Just go back from a weekend break with no innernet..now where was I.....Casliber (talk · contribs) 10:21, 7 November 2010 (UTC)

Figs[edit]

Okay, I'm giving my impression on F. maxima, since I'm not clear what you are actually asking. The description, I must say, is a particularly lacking part of the article under any evaluation criterion. Even as one who appreciates the topic, I'm finding the taxonomy section very confusing. As in Entoloma sinuatum, I'll gladly have a look into rewriting it if you want me to. The huge list of synonym suggest there is significant variation in the plant, possibly infraspecific taxa? I agree the Reproduction section is possibly too detailed. It can probably be reduced to a 2-paragraph primer and merged into "Ecology", though I have a hard time identifying what is species (or could be!) species-specific and what is not, as I have no familiarity with the plants in question (not to mention I am not an actual plant scientist even compared to you).

One of the greater-scale problem I see, which you might want to work on if you're going to take aim at several of these articles, is that information on the peculiar reproduction suystem in figs as a whole is spread across multiple articles (the genus article, Common fig and other species, syconium) and poorly focused, leaving no good article to aim {{main}} links at. I suspect using syconium as he main article and linking to it from others (including Ficus) might be, in the long run, the best course of action. Circéus (talk) 02:56, 18 March 2011 (UTC)

Sounds good. Don't worry about rewriting anything yet. I was looking at overall meta-article structure WRT reproduction, which you've given me a good idea to work with. Cheers, Casliber (talk · contribs) 03:21, 18 March 2011 (UTC)

FYI[edit]

All of the following species are worth 2x points; let me know if you'd be interested in collaborating in one or more for bonus points in a later round. Sasata (talk) 06:54, 6 February 2012 (UTC)

Hahaha – thank heavens for European mushrooms :))) – yeah, I'd like to buff Clitocybe nuda (which was one of the yummiest mushrooms I've eaten), and we really should be improving the other mass-eaten edibles. Also I buffed the sickener for DYK so would be good to finish the job....Casliber (talk · contribs) 12:02, 6 February 2012 (UTC)

Ok, I'll move Clitocybe nuda and Russula emetica closer to the top of "the list". I agree the popular edibles would be good to do as well, but they're hard ... we'll see how free time & motivation plays out over the next few months. Sasata (talk) 19:05, 6 February 2012 (UTC)


Constellation task force assessment[edit]

Certainly Assessment boxes like the one for the cardiology task force are made by User:WP 1.0 bot. Just post to talk there and it can make your box easily. —Justin (koavf)TCM 18:37, 12 August 2012 (UTC)

Thanks for that! I've not used bots in my time here. Casliber (talk · contribs) 01:07, 13 August 2012 (UTC)

Aboriginal Astronomy[edit]

Hi Casliber – thanks for your note. Yes there's quite a bit more out there which Duane Hamacher and I are slowly trying to get written up. You can find some more stuff on www.emudreaming.com and you may find some papers you havent come across on http://www.atnf.csiro.au/people/rnorris/papers/papers.htm

Have fun! RayNorris (talk) 03:34, 8 October 2012 (UTC)

Great! I'll have a look and if I find anything specific to nag you on...I will :) cheers, Casliber (talk · contribs) 03:49, 8 October 2012 (UTC)

Gene migration research, India --> Australia[edit]

This http://www.economist.com/news/science-and-technology/21569688-genetic-evidence-suggests-four-millennia-ago-group-adventurous-indians points to a gene study you may be interested in.... Likely people from the Indian sub-continent mixed with Australian aboriginies 4xxxx years ago. An maybe brought dingos. Regards, Ariconte (talk) 09:24, 22 January 2013 (UTC)

Will read anon. Casliber (talk · contribs) 10:59, 22 January 2013 (UTC)

Glasser's choice theory[edit]

Could use some work if you're interested. Someone not using his real name (talk) 09:36, 28 January 2014 (UTC)

ok – will take a look soonish....Cas Liber (talk · contribs) 14:14, 28 January 2014 (UTC)

Orange-bellied Parrot[edit]

Neophema99 (talk) 07:58, 19 February 2014 (UTC) Hi. I would like to open for discussion the format of the entry for 'Orange-bellied Parrot'. As news occurs in the recovery program for this species, the limitations of the current format of the Wikipedia entry become more obvious. The heading, 'Conservation Status' should, I believe, be reserved for the actual conservation status in Australia, and in the three states, SA, Tasmania and Victoria. What follows after that, but still under that heading, at present, is a running commentary of events since about 2010. This is not acceptable. I propose another heading be inserted, 'Recovery Program' or similar. In it, a short history of the OBP recovery program could be given – since 1980 or so – and then, new events could be smoothly inserted as they happen. What do others think? The Wikipedia entry is an important first port of call for many people interested in this bird. We owe it to them, and to history, to provide a better entry.

Neophema99 (talk) 07:58, 19 February 2014 (UTC)

Agreed. Will take a look. sounds good – helps with seamless updating and no doubt there is a lot of info that could be added. Cas Liber (talk · contribs) 08:52, 19 February 2014 (UTC)

Obsolete Constellations[edit]

I just found an amazing source for articles on them: John Hill's Urania Adam Cuerden (talk) 22:55, 7 March 2014 (UTC)

Cool! I was judt giving some feedback to core contest and will look at stub. Cas Liber (talk · contribs) 23:00, 7 March 2014 (UTC)
Urania's Mirror has gotten a wee bit less stubby. Adam Cuerden (talk)


got any advice for writing a constellation FA?[edit]

Thinking of diversifying and trying Corona B. Double sharp (talk) 16:17, 7 September 2014 (UTC)

It's easier than stars as there is less hardcore physics involved, but trickier as you have to make the material not "listy", which it sort of is by very nature. Smaller constellations are easier as there is less material to list generally. Star guide books, alot of which are on google, are good for general overview, how to find things, what's next to what etc. but alot of their factual info (distance/luminosity) is outdated. I have even suspected this in newer reprints/editions where new material is coming out. SIMBAD is a godsend and makes finding other material easy. I was using it as a ref itself but probably better to use the refs it cites. Overall I find astronomy articles more challenging than biology ones – trickeir to make engaging. We can collaborate on CrB if you like as I did plan on taking it All the Way at some point and then having it as a double mainpage with CrA. Collaborating is good as it makes for less work in some ways – each of us can copyeidt the other etc. 20:43, 7 September 2014 (UTC)
Just popping in during some of the rare free time I have at the moment to say that the hardest part of the constellation articles is figuring out exactly what objects to write about, since there is generally quite a bit of discretion in whether or not something should be in the article. I generally try to write about all stars brighter than magnitude 5.0, and the most-studied astronomical objects within the constellation, as well as a few other things such as extremes (e.g. R136a1) and unusual objects. One tip to find notable stars, I've found, is this SIMBAD query, which lists all Bayer, Flamsteed, and variable stars in each constellation by number of refs. Of course further research is necessary for other stars without said designations, but it's a good start. I would help, but I don't anticipate having much free time at all until at least December. StringTheory11 (t • c) 21:18, 7 September 2014 (UTC)
StringTheory11 Wow! Great idea/find! That really helps. Agree with what you've said. I think it is good to get these in order as it also highlights what other articles are underdone or incorrect etc. Cas Liber (talk · contribs) 01:51, 8 September 2014 (UTC)
Yup the small size was part of the reason I chose CrB (it's not the only reason though :-P). I'm cool with a collaboration. ST11's suggestions, as always, make a lot of sense. Going to read through some constellation FAs to get an idea of what to write – not least CrA... Double sharp (talk) 02:38, 8 September 2014 (UTC)
Double sharp, I have started buffing with this one. Just arting with the brighter stars – SIMBAD is best place to start and then chasing refs. Not sure how much you know about them (figuring distance from parallax etc...) so just ask away..or start on deep sky objects and I'll continue with stars (??) Cas Liber (talk · contribs) 01:05, 12 November 2014 (UTC)

Carcinoma in situ[edit]

The carcinoma in situ page has been updated and it explains the different views that sometimes carcinoma in situ is seen as a cancer and sometimes it is not. You will probably remember earlier this year that you supported changing my use of the term "invasive cancer" to "cancer". The expression "invasive cancer" is used frequently in books particularly when talking about cancer of the cervix and in my opinion using the term "invasive cancer" can improve clarity. What do you think of the explanations in the carcinoma in situ article? Snowman (talk) 13:13, 4 November 2014 (UTC)

As it reads right now, which ones are you thinking should have invasive added to them? Cas Liber (talk · contribs) 19:35, 4 November 2014 (UTC)
Whoops, I have phrased it badly above, but you seem to have understood me. I should have said that you did not support my use of "invasive cancer" and you preferred the use of "cancer" instead. Actually, to me, it is not as simple as just inserting the word "invasive". Back then, I saw a better phrase in a reference and I thought about using it, because I thought that it would be accurate, readable, and I hoped keep everyone happy; however, the situation become unnecessarily tense and I felt like I was walking on eggs (and you know what that means). I did not get around to developing the article any further nor mentioning the "magical" phrase. I will see if I can find the phrase again. I recall that the solution was to use a short phrase in the place of cancer or invasive cancer in the introduction. I am talking in riddles at the present time, because I want to make sure that I can find that phrase again, and that will mean thinking about the introduction again. Snowman (talk) 20:32, 4 November 2014 (UTC)
Okay, let me know what you are thinking of once you get it clear. It is an intriguing question. Cas Liber (talk · contribs) 11:56, 5 November 2014 (UTC)
I would recommend the amendment belew, because the demarcation between non-cancer and cancer varies according to the literature, as we have seen, and this is made more difficult by a simplified language and vocabulary used to communicate the complex situation to patients. A definition of cancer that includes in-situ cancer is well established, but perhaps the world of the cytologist or histopathologist is a small world, where to say "invasive cancer" is not unusual. This is the current line in the introduction; "Cervical cytology tests can often detect precursors of cervical cancer and enable early successful treatment.". I think that it would be more accurate if it said something like; "The main aim of cervical cytology screening is to detect precursors of cancer and early cervical cancer to enable early successful treatment.". In this new line a full spectrum from viral changes to dysplasia to carcinoma-in-situ to early invasive cancer is included, so the controversy over where to put the non-cancer/cancer line disappears, and the meaning is clear no matter where the reader puts the line in his or her own mind-map. Snowman (talk) 13:05, 6 November 2014 (UTC)
I reworded it like this to make it flow better yet be inclusive and cover all interpretations. Cas Liber (talk · contribs) 13:24, 6 November 2014 (UTC)
After some deep thought, I think that your edit is good enough. Snowman (talk) 14:09, 6 November 2014 (UTC)
  • What do you think about making a joint nomination with me to take the cervix article to FA review sometime? I would not be planning to edit much of the "History" and "Other animals" sections, because I do not know much about those topics. I am not usually on the nominator's side of the fence, but I would be willing to step into that role here, partly to test the water. Snowman (talk) 13:29, 6 November 2014 (UTC)
I think it is a good idea – the prerequisites for being a nominator are being reasonably familar with the article and having the ability to address issues raised at FAC. Do you see anything else that needs fixing before listing it at FAC? 02:15, 7 November 2014 (UTC)
Oh good. I would like to have a long look at the article before FA nomination, and I expect that I will not feel happy with the article as a potential FA nomination for several weeks. There is some content and page organization in the article (as it is now) that I would like to reflect on. The peer review is also worth re-visiting to see what was not achieved there. I will probably attempt to start a few discussions on the article talk page where relevant. Do you have any time frame in mind or any particular schedule of your own to work around? Of course, I would ask you to constructively criticize my work whenever you think that anything can be improved, and I will try to focus on the issue and answer honestly and objectively trying not to be fractious nor stubborn, with a view to learning from my errors. It think that it will work better like that, than keeping quite or not speaking up when you do not agree with your co-nominator. I am saying that because I guessed that you have not felt easy about not supporting your co-nominator in FA reviews previously. Also, as before, please be alert to my writing style, which can sometimes need re-phrasing owing to clumsy grammar, although the content is often unambiguous (to me at least). Apart from that, it could be challenging writing for general readers and even more challenging writing for specialist readers that are unfamiliar with the small world of histopathology. Snowman (talk) 12:08, 7 November 2014 (UTC)
Snowmanradio I have no time scale on this so it sorta takes as long as it takes. The refs need fixing for page numbers. The material is pretty good – only thing from PR left is double checking lymphatic drainage really I thought. Anyway. Posting things step by step on talk page is good. Cas Liber (talk · contribs) 20:39, 7 November 2014 (UTC)
  • I would have though that the "Function" heading would be about normal function. Surly, putting a barrier in front of the cx is not a normal function of the cervix. Also, oc pills are more about pharmacology and modified functioning of the cervix. Should the "Contraception" heading have its own level-2 heading? This has been discussed before, but it is worth starting another discussion on the talk page about this? Snowman (talk) 21:42, 7 November 2014 (UTC)
I think that the human altering of function is fine there. I think it is fine as a level 3 heading underneath function Cas Liber (talk · contribs) 23:10, 7 November 2014 (UTC)
When medicines affect function, it is called pharmacology. Snowman (talk) 22:49, 12 November 2014 (UTC)
  • In the introduction; "... the cervix is usually between 2 and 3 cm long and roughly round in shape". Change to: ?
1. "... the cervix is cylindrically shaped usually between 2 and 3 cm long and roughly round in cross section".
2. "... the cervix is usually between 2 and 3 cm long and roughly round in in cross section" Snowman (talk) 17:30, 8 November 2014 (UTC)

I think the first one or something like it – will take a look now. I wonder if the fact it is roughly cylindrical makes saying it's round in cross-section redundant. Cas Liber (talk · contribs) 22:22, 8 November 2014 (UTC)

Your amendment looks find to me. Snowman (talk) 11:32, 10 November 2014 (UTC)
  • Should there be more consistency in using {{main| under more of the headings where there is an obvious main article else where? Snowman (talk) 11:49, 12 November 2014 (UTC)
Snowmanradio Yes that sounds like a good idea. Cas Liber (talk · contribs) 18:54, 12 November 2014 (UTC)
OK, I expect that I will add some when I do some editing there. Snowman (talk) 20:47, 12 November 2014 (UTC)
  • Re Vaginal portion of cervix. Have you got any ideas on what to do with this article on the portio (or ectocervix)? I do not know why WP Anatomy has so many articles on sub-parts. If relevant, I expect that a formal discussion would be needed to consider a merge. Snowman (talk) 20:47, 12 November 2014 (UTC)
I think it should be merged. Will post something. Cas Liber (talk · contribs) 21:42, 12 November 2014 (UTC)
I plan to watch for a while and express an opinion, if needed. Snowman (talk) 22:49, 12 November 2014 (UTC)
It is off to a good start over there. I think that there is nothing on the unreferenced portio page that can be copied over to the cervix page. We could start planing how to present the portio (and its various names) on the cervix page. Snowman (talk) 12:04, 13 November 2014 (UTC)
  • In have found what to me looks like a 2003 copyrighted version of File:Cervix dilation sequence.svg, so I have started a deletion discussion on Commons. Commons administrators will now have a look at it. Initially, I left an message with the uploader on Commons to ask a technical question about the image, and I noticed that he is currently blocked for three months, so I did a search for other copies of the cervix dilation image. The image should show the babies head moving down the birth canal as the cervix dilates, but the head looks stuck. The image is on about a dozen or more Wikis, so they might all be removed by a bot in due course. I am not sure if the image needs removing from the Cervix page at this juncture or not, so I wonder what you think about removal from the en Wiki. Snowman (talk) 09:01, 13 November 2014 (UTC)
Oh dear – I suspect it will have to be removed, though maybe hold for a moment and see if an explanation is forthcoming. Cas Liber (talk · contribs) 09:23, 13 November 2014 (UTC)
I recently found a photograph of a rare parrot with the wrong copyright and it was deleted from Commons one week after I started the deletion discussion. Snowman (talk) 14:23, 13 November 2014 (UTC)
That sounds in keeping with deletion discussions elsehwere – around 1 week. Cas Liber (talk · contribs) 19:17, 13 November 2014 (UTC)
Update: Image was deleted this yesterday. Snowman (talk) 13:10, 21 November 2014 (UTC)
  • The Cervical cancer article has had a lot of work on it since about June, and it is well worth looking at. I expect that we could shorten (or otherwise amend) the section on cervical cancer in the "cervix" article, because the "cervical cancer" article offers a good readable account. Snowman (talk) 12:40, 14 November 2014 (UTC)
@Snowmanradio: I will take a look. Cas Liber (talk · contribs) 10:05, 15 November 2014 (UTC)
  • Re HPV vaccines. Sometimes, I like to tidy up the linked pages. This article was moved from the singular to the pleural in March 2014. I am aware that there is more than one HPV vaccine, but I would expect this to be on the singular name, unless there something controversial about it that I have missed. Snowman (talk) 12:59, 14 November 2014 (UTC)
@Snowmanradio: yes that is unusual and I think I prefer it at singular. I think it is worth discussing on the talk page. Cas Liber (talk · contribs) 10:05, 15 November 2014 (UTC)
  • The "Anatomical abnormalities" section looks like a mixture of acquired and congenital diseases. Could this be organized differently? I nearly did a reorganization, but a little re-organization does not change much, and I suspect that it would be easier to do a bit of a re-write. Also, it may be possible to expand the section with a little about the developmental abnormalities of the female genital tract seen in Cryptophthalmos syndrome, Johanson-Blizzard syndrome, Rokitansky Anomalod, and as less commonly seen in Roberts syndrome and Trisomy 18 syndrome. These diseases are not at the front of my mind, however these are in the index of my rather old second-hand book on human malformation. This is not a small change, so I welcome your opinion. Snowman (talk) 13:34, 14 November 2014 (UTC)
@Snowmanradio: let me take a look. I don't recall it right now and I thought I was happy with it before but will look. Cas Liber (talk · contribs) 10:05, 15 November 2014 (UTC)
I have become unexpectedly busy in real life, so I have not had much time for editing the Wiki. I hope that I will be able to contribute with more editing and work on the cervix article again after about two or three months . Snowman (talk) 10:03, 15 December 2014 (UTC)
@Snowmanradio: no worries. I found that I have lost interest in it. My free time (of which I have little) has to be enjoyable and thus something I have real enthusiasm for. I found I did get a bit enthusiastic about this one but comes and goes. More interested in frigatebird and brachychiton rupestris now. Cas Liber (talk · contribs) 10:11, 15 December 2014 (UTC)
Also orange-bellied parrot – very interesting story. I find writing about extinct species makes me sad (I leave them to FunkMonk) but rare ones are ok. Cas Liber (talk · contribs) 10:12, 15 December 2014 (UTC)
Apart from manual editing, I was hoping to write a few scripts for fun to do scanning and mass editing tasks on the Wiki this Autumn and Winter, but can not participate in a meaningful way at the present time. I plan to return when I can and I will look to see what you and User FunkMonk are doing then. Incidentally, have you any thoughts on why discussions about anatomy topics tend to be rather brittle? I might ask that question on the WP Anatomy talk page. Snowman (talk) 10:49, 15 December 2014 (UTC)
What do you mean by 'brittle'? Cas Liber (talk · contribs) 12:30, 15 December 2014 (UTC)
I will ask open-ended questions instead. Do you have any observations about discussions on anatomy topics? Snowman (talk) 12:48, 15 December 2014 (UTC)


Thanks for doing the starboxes[edit]

They really look spiffy now! :D Benkenobi18 (talk) 16:36, 7 September 2016 (UTC)

They can be a bit fiddly....Cas Liber (talk · contribs) 21:54, 7 September 2016 (UTC)

The elusive Sydney meetup[edit]

I am keen to attend and you suggested you would pick a time and date........ on that basis I changed the time to RSN. Should we just say next Thursday at 6PM and I will at least buy you a drink? Regards, Ariconte (talk) 07:07, 8 September 2016 (UTC)

OK, it is on for you and me at least :-) . Do you know how to spam the invite list??? I don't immediately know how but could research. Ariconte (talk) 23:18, 8 September 2016 (UTC)
I see ... you can do it! WP:MMS. Thanks, Ariconte (talk) 01:09, 9 September 2016 (UTC)
I have requested at Wikipedia_talk:Mass_message_senders#Request_for_mass_message_delivery:_September_10.2C_2016. Regards, Ariconte (talk) 06:16, 10 September 2016 (UTC)
I gave up.... the bureaucracy got me down. Ariconte (talk) 09:49, 10 September 2016 (UTC)
I'll do some pinging. Cas Liber (talk · contribs) 11:12, 10 September 2016 (UTC

Thanks for being the organizer! I have plugged for 17 October repeat which will hopefully fit Tony and others... see the meetup page. Regards, Ariconte (talk) 00:32, 16 September 2016 (UTC)

Wikipedia:Featured article candidates/Eega/archive2[edit]

I have opened this FAC on September 1. I don't expect a major turnout in the near future. If interested, can you please do a source review? Pavanjandhyala (talk) 05:04, 10 September 2016 (UTC)

GA Cup Barnstar[edit]

Minor Barnstar.png The Minor Barnstar
On behalf of all the GA Cup judges, thank you for participating in the 2016 GA Cup! Although you didn't end up making the top 16, you decided to sign up therefore contributing and we thank you for that. MrWooHoo (TC) 20:36, 10 September 2016 (UTC)

Sydney Meetup next Thursday evening[edit]

You are invited to the Sydney Meetup!

  • Thursday 15 September at 6PM at Petersham Bowling Club.
    (a) accessible by train - Petersham station
    (b) has some nice draught beers
    (c) has some nice food
    (d) has some quiet areas outside and inside...so people can chat without getting a hoarse voice by shouting over 100 decibels of muzak etc.
    (e) accessible by car with straightforward parking nearby
This message was delivered to the invitation list - to opt out of future invitations please remove your name from the list. 04:04, 11 September 2016 (UTC)

This week's article for improvement (week 37, 2016)[edit]

Adarsha School Narayanganj.JPG

Adarsha School Narayanganj in Dhaka, Bangladesh

Hello, Casliber.

The following is WikiProject Today's articles for improvement's weekly selection:

Education in Bangladesh

Please be bold and help to improve this article!


Previous selections: Wedding ring • Holy Spirit


Get involved with the TAFI project. You can: Nominate an article • Review nominations


Posted by: MusikBot talk 02:17, 12 September 2016 (UTC) using MediaWiki message delivery (talk) on behalf of WikiProject TAFI • Opt-out instructions

DYK note[edit]

Hi, Casliber. I noticed that you recently moved from Prep to Queue 1 a DYK hook with which I was involved. Please note that the nominator has listed me at Template:Did you know nominations/Madison Street Bridge (Portland, Oregon) as co-creator, as I carried out a major expansion when the article was brand-new. Thanks. SJ Morg (talk) 11:12, 14 September 2016 (UTC)

Ok, credit added now Cas Liber (talk · contribs) 11:21, 14 September 2016 (UTC)
Thanks. SJ Morg (talk) 11:31, 14 September 2016 (UTC)

Hello![edit]

Hey Cas! I've noticed you've made several large contributions to anything featured-related on Wikipedia, and was wondering if you could help me out. I recently nominated Gwen Stefani's "Make Me Like You" as a featured article candidate, and it seems to be going quite well so far. One reviewer in particular stated that the article has "prose" issues", and I spent a couple of days going through the article and re-reading it, to which I believe it cleared up nicely. If you could check it out for me and perhaps leave some comments and your opinion, it would be very much appreciated. However, only do so if you have the time, I don't want to inconvenience you! Regards, Carbrera (talk) 18:36, 18 September 2016 (UTC).

Am a bit busy today, but will try to take a look - in the meantime, I strongly suggest looking at User:Tony1/How_to_improve_your_writing and see what you think. Cas Liber (talk · contribs) 20:15, 18 September 2016 (UTC)

Contests and improvement drives[edit]

Hello. I noticed you running things like the Wikipedia:Stub Contest and the Wikipedia:The Core Contest, and I was wondering how much work it is to organize and run those and where the prizes come from. I have an idea for clearing out some of the maintenance backlogs. See this diff where I mention it. ~ ONUnicorn(Talk|Contribs)problem solving 14:24, 19 September 2016 (UTC)

Aah @ONUnicorn: you mean something like another thing I was planning - see User:Casliber/Golden Gnome - though more than happy if someone else does something like this. What happens is that WMUK has microgrants (see here). I put up proposals at here, here and here. Happy to help you create a contest, it's pretty easy and fun. Cas Liber (talk · contribs) 11:31, 20 September 2016 (UTC)

The Voice season 11[edit]

Hi I would like a request to protect the page The Voice (U.S. season 11) from unauthorized users to avoid disruptive editing thank u! ;) Chanels4ever (talk) 23:36, 21 September 2016 (UTC)

Done. Cas Liber (talk · contribs) 02:32, 22 September 2016 (UTC)

Extended confirmed protection[edit]

Padlock-blue.svg Hello, Casliber. This message is intended to notify administrators of important changes to the protection policy.

Extended confirmed protection (also known as "30/500 protection") is a new level of page protection that only allows edits from accounts at least 30 days old and with 500 edits. The automatically assigned "extended confirmed" user right was created for this purpose. The protection level was created following this community discussion with the primary intention of enforcing various arbitration remedies that prohibited editors under the "30 days/500 edits" threshold to edit certain topic areas.

In July and August 2016, a request for comment established consensus for community use of the new protection level. Administrators are authorized to apply extended confirmed protection to combat any form of disruption (e.g. vandalism, sock puppetry, edit warring, etc.) on any topic, subject to the following conditions:

  • Extended confirmed protection may only be used in cases where semi-protection has proven ineffective. It should not be used as a first resort.
  • A bot will post a notification at Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard of each use. MusikBot currently does this by updating a report, which is transcluded onto the noticeboard.
Please review the protection policy carefully before using this new level of protection on pages. Thank you.
This message was sent to the administrators' mass message list. To opt-out of future messages, please remove yourself from the list. 17:48, 23 September 2016 (UTC)

This week's article for improvement (week 39, 2016)[edit]

Durer selfporitrait.jpg

Albrecht Dürer, famous German painter of the German Renaissance.

Hello, Casliber.

The following is WikiProject Today's articles for improvement's weekly selection:

List of German painters

Please be bold and help to improve this article!


Previous selections: Brain damage • Education in Bangladesh


Get involved with the TAFI project. You can: Nominate an article • Review nominations


Posted by: MusikBot talk 00:07, 26 September 2016 (UTC) using MediaWiki message delivery (talk) on behalf of WikiProject TAFI • Opt-out instructions

GA Cup Announcement[edit]

WikiProject Good Articles's 2016-2017 GA Cup
Symbol support vote.svg

Greetings, all!

We would like to announce the start of the 4th GA Cup, a competition that seeks to encourage the reviewing of Good article nominations! Thus far, there have been three GA Cups, which were successful in reaching our goals of significantly reducing the traditionally long queue at GAN, so we're doing it again. Currently, there are over 400 nominations listed. We hope that we can again make an impact this time.

The 4th GA Cup will begin on November 1, 2016. Four rounds are currently scheduled (which will bring the competition to a close on February 28, 2017), but this may change based on participant numbers. We may take a break in December for the holidays, depending on the results of a poll of our participants taken shortly after the competition begins. The sign-up and submissions process will remain the same, as will the scoring.

Sign-ups for the upcoming competition are currently open and will close on October 31, 2016. Everyone is welcome to join; new and old editors, so sign-up now!

If you have any questions, take a look at the FAQ page and/or contact one of the judges.

Cheers from 3family6, Figureskatingfan, Jaguar, MrWooHoo, and Zwerg Nase.

To subscribe or unsubscribe to future GA Cup newsletters, please add or remove your name to our mailing list. If you are a participant, you will be on the mailing list no matter what as this is the easiest way to communicate between all participants.

--MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 22:38, 28 September 2016 (UTC)

DYK for Spotted pardalote[edit]

Updated DYK query.svg On 29 September 2016, Did you know was updated with a fact from the article Spotted pardalote, which you recently created, substantially expanded, or brought to good article status. The fact was ... that the spotted pardalote has been called the headache bird on account of its repetitive call? The nomination discussion and review may be seen at Template:Did you know nominations/Spotted pardalote. You are welcome to check how many page hits the article got while on the front page (here's how, Spotted pardalote), and it may be added to the statistics page if the total is over 5,000. Finally, if you know of an interesting fact from another recently created article, then please feel free to suggest it on the Did you know talk page.
Gatoclass (talk) 00:02, 29 September 2016 (UTC)

The Rambling Man arbitration proposed decision posted[edit]

A proposed decision has been posted in the open The Rambling Man arbitration page. Please review this decision and draw the arbitrators' attention to any relevant material or statements. Comments may be brought to the attention of the committee on the proposed decision talk page. For a guide to the arbitration process, see Wikipedia:Arbitration/Guide to arbitration. If you are not a party, you may opt out of further notifications regarding this case at Wikipedia:Arbitration/Requests/Case/The Rambling Man/Mass Message List. For the Arbitration Committee, Kevin (aka L235 · t · c) via MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 01:36, 2 October 2016 (UTC)

This week's article for improvement (week 40, 2016)[edit]

Hello, Casliber.

The following is WikiProject Today's articles for improvement's weekly selection:

Math rock

Please be bold and help to improve this article!


Previous selections: List of German painters • Brain damage


Get involved with the TAFI project. You can: Nominate an article • Review nominations


Posted by: MusikBot talk 00:07, 3 October 2016 (UTC) using MediaWiki message delivery (talk) on behalf of WikiProject TAFI • Opt-out instructions

Tetragnatha montana[edit]

Start? really? After you classed it as such I checked out some other C Class spider articles. I think this is a C Class but I don't assess my own articles. Thanks for your edits by the way.Quetzal1964 20:08, 3 October 2016 (UTC)‎

On auto. You are right. will rerate. Cas Liber (talk · contribs) 20:23, 3 October 2016 (UTC)

Thanks Quetzal1964 07:43, 4 October 2016 (UTC)

FAC reviewing barnstar[edit]

Reviewer Barnstar Hires.png The Reviewer Barnstar
FAC can't function without people like you contributing reviews. Thank you for the six FAC reviews and four image/source reviews you did during September. Mike Christie (talk - contribs - library) 23:53, 4 October 2016 (UTC)

Belgium national football team FAC2[edit]

Hi, the article Belgium national football team is under review as FAC again. At the first FA review you raised a couple of general issues and provided a "Support" after I coped with them. I thank you and the other FA reviewers for this critical input as it helped to get the article forward. You are warmly invited to have a second look now. Regards, Kareldorado (talk) 15:59, 5 October 2016 (UTC)

Wikipedia:WikiProject Africa/The Africa Destubathon[edit]

Hi, Anthere has requested a central notice here. Is it possible you could see to it yourself that something is put up announcing this? Anthere has also requested some experienced editors to help with the current Nigerian Wiki Loves Women contest, I don't know if you'd be interested in offering some advice or guidance on that. It's a very good cause and I've contributed myself at least a dozen articles but I'm not sure exactly what they're looking for in judging it!♦ Dr. Blofeld 11:23, 6 October 2016 (UTC)

@Dr. Blofeld: I got the ping, went to your page...and got sidetracked by the AfD..."Mary from DoDS!! no way!!" Will take a look now...Cas Liber (talk · contribs) 13:59, 6 October 2016 (UTC)
Hi Casliber. Indeed, as pointed out by @Dr. Blofeld:, your help would be welcome on the Wikipedia:WikiProject Wiki Loves Women /Team Nigeria/Contests. Shola is looking for some support to set up the jury (and perhaps help in setting criteria ?). As far as I understood, User:Rosiestep will also help (since she volunteered to coach the Nigeria team) (but I suspect she might be completely under water with the m:WikiConference North America. Thanks Anthere (talk)
@Anthere: ok I will take a look. Cas Liber (talk · contribs) 14:42, 7 October 2016 (UTC)
@Anthere: - You're right. It's WikiConference North America Day1 and it has my full attention. I don't recall volunteering to coach the Nigeria team as I recognized I was maxed out with conference planning, followed by a geographic move at the end of the month. I apologize for my current unavailability, but when my calendar stabilizes, it would be my pleasure to mentor the team. --Rosiestep (talk) 17:10, 7 October 2016 (UTC)
@Rosiestep:, oh. Shola mentioned your name in an email to me as being a help on this, but we might have misunderstood one another. In any cases, I remember you said last summer that the conference would be your autumn energy drainer :) Anthere (talk)

This week's article for improvement (week 41, 2016)[edit]

Spelling-Bee photo from Jhenidah Cadet College.jpg

A spelling bee at Jhenidah Cadet College in Bangladesh

Hello, Casliber.

The following is WikiProject Today's articles for improvement's weekly selection:

Spelling bee

Please be bold and help to improve this article!


Previous selections: Math rock • List of German painters


Get involved with the TAFI project. You can: Nominate an article • Review nominations


Posted by: MusikBot talk 04:02, 10 October 2016 (UTC) using MediaWiki message delivery (talk) on behalf of WikiProject TAFI • Opt-out instructions

DYK for Cape Wickham Links[edit]

Updated DYK query.svg On 15 October 2016, Did you know was updated with a fact from the article Cape Wickham Links, which you recently created, substantially expanded, or brought to good article status. The fact was ... that golfers share the 18-hole Cape Wickham Links on King Island with short-tailed shearwaters? The nomination discussion and review may be seen at Template:Did you know nominations/Cape Wickham Links. You are welcome to check how many page hits the article got while on the front page (here's how, Cape Wickham Links), and it may be added to the statistics page if the total is over 5,000. Finally, if you know of an interesting fact from another recently created article, then please feel free to suggest it on the Did you know talk page.
Gatoclass (talk) 00:01, 15 October 2016 (UTC)

May I interest you[edit]

...in this? - FrB.TG (talk) 10:41, 16 October 2016 (UTC)

I'll take a look soon. Cas Liber (talk · contribs) 12:59, 16 October 2016 (UTC)

This week's article for improvement (week 42, 2016)[edit]

Noise Research Program on Hangar Apron - GPN-2000-001457.jpg

NASA researchers at Glenn Research Center conducting tests on aircraft engine noise in 1967

Hello, Casliber.

The following is WikiProject Today's articles for improvement's weekly selection:

Noise

Please be bold and help to improve this article!


Previous selections: Spelling bee • Math rock


Get involved with the TAFI project. You can: Nominate an article • Review nominations


Posted by: MusikBot talk 00:07, 17 October 2016 (UTC) using MediaWiki message delivery (talk) on behalf of WikiProject TAFI • Opt-out instructions

Wiki Loves Women- Monthly Contest[edit]

Hi Calisber, trust you are fine.We appreciate great work that you are doing on Wikipedia. We therefore seek your expertise as a jury in our monthly writing contest to Promote Nigerian women. Please add your name here Cc:@Anthere:. Olaniyan Olushola (talk) 06:36, 19 October 2016 (UTC)

@Olaniyan Olushola: I am not clear on whether this is a standalone contest or part of one of the broader contests....? Cas Liber (talk · contribs) 08:57, 19 October 2016 (UTC)
Hi, it depends on you and your availability. Olaniyan Olushola (talk) 09:15, 19 October 2016 (UTC)
The link doesn't work - I can help judge but I think that a contest that only concentrates on such a narrow category is doomed to failure. All other contests are broad in outlook. I don't understand how my participation influences how broad or narrow it is...? Cas Liber (talk · contribs) 09:30, 19 October 2016 (UTC)
Thank you for accepting to be one of the judge in our contest.As per case of depth of the contest. Kindly note that it is a monthly contest and each month will be tagged with unique title. The month of October, will be tagged Women in Politics. Please let me know how you feel.Olaniyan Olushola (talk) 20:49, 19 October 2016 (UTC)
Hi, Calisber kindly meet User:Gereon K. one of the Jury in the contest.Olaniyan Olushola (talk) 21:27, 19 October 2016 (UTC)


Just sending this because you've done the majority of edits on her page...

The link [2] on https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lisa-Ann_Gershwin is dead now. Not sure if there is any other evidence or publication related to the claim.

beroe (talk) 20:33, 19 October 2016 (UTC)

Redirect help[edit]

Hello Cas, could you help me with a redirect for a bird Family page? It is not a straight-forward one and I don't want to mess it up and lose the edit history of the pages.

1. The Pachycephalidae page should be renamed/moved to "Whistler (bird)". This would be in order to change to the common name from the scientific name. But to do this, we would need to address: 2. The "Whistler (bird)" page already exists however, serving as the redirect page to the subfamily Pachycephalinae. 3. The Pachycephalidae page could then be a redirect page to "Whistler (bird)". 4. Also, the Whistlers redirect page would have to change to a disambiguation page to allow the reader to choose between "Whistler (bird)" and "Whistler (radio)"

Thanks, Loopy30 (talk) 03:32, 22 October 2016 (UTC)

@Loopy30: We've had this dilemma before with other families and genera - if you look on IOC, the family Pachycephalidae is called "whistlers and allies". "Whistler (bird)" is most equivalent to the genus Pachycephala (which is where the term should redirect to). Even the subfamily contains birds not known as whistlers. Cas Liber (talk · contribs) 05:52, 22 October 2016 (UTC)
@Casliber: Hmmm, I'm not sure a page title of "Whistlers and allies" would be any better than "Pachycephalidae". I think I shall leave it like it is for the time being. I see that other family pages also are not always named iaw IOC. "Monarchidae" points to "Monarch flycatcher", instead of "Monarch (bird)" even though not all species have monarch in their common name. Thanks for the quick reply! Loopy30 (talk) 13:05, 22 October 2016 (UTC)

wanna review an element everyone's heard of?[edit]

Iodine is up at GAN. Double sharp (talk) 16:42, 22 October 2016 (UTC)

@Double sharp:, BTW Apus is at GAN - if you wanna still write a constellation then looking at or even reviewing another might be prudent. Cas Liber (talk · contribs) 10:58, 23 October 2016 (UTC)
I'm not really so keen on writing one now, but I might take on the review in a few days once I've looked at a few others. Double sharp (talk) 11:47, 23 October 2016 (UTC)

DYK for Clematis glycinoides[edit]

Updated DYK query.svg On 23 October 2016, Did you know was updated with a fact from the article Clematis glycinoides, which you recently created, substantially expanded, or brought to good article status. The fact was ... that the intense fumes emitted by the crushed leaves of the so-called headache vine (pictured) cause one to feel like his head is "exploding" ... making him forget all about his headache? The nomination discussion and review may be seen at Template:Did you know nominations/Clematis glycinoides. You are welcome to check how many page hits the article got while on the front page (here's how, Clematis glycinoides), and it may be added to the statistics page if the total is over 5,000. Finally, if you know of an interesting fact from another recently created article, then please feel free to suggest it on the Did you know talk page.
Cas Liber (talk · contribs) 00:51, 23 October 2016 (UTC)

Queue 3[edit]

Hi, I just made a few corrections to Prep 3 a few minutes before you promoted it, but the corrections don't appear in Queue 3...? Yoninah (talk) 09:56, 23 October 2016 (UTC)

Oh, there they are when I cleared my browser. Thanks, Yoninah (talk) 09:57, 23 October 2016 (UTC)
I saw - and added. those pesky purges....Cas Liber (talk · contribs) 09:58, 23 October 2016 (UTC)

This week's article for improvement (week 43, 2016)[edit]

Alte Fabrik Siebnen Dachstock.JPG

The attic at a factory

Hello, Casliber.

The following is WikiProject Today's articles for improvement's weekly selection:

Attic

Please be bold and help to improve this article!


Previous selections: Noise • Spelling bee


Get involved with the TAFI project. You can: Nominate an article • Review nominations


Posted by: MusikBot talk 00:07, 24 October 2016 (UTC) using MediaWiki message delivery (talk) on behalf of WikiProject TAFI • Opt-out instructions

The Voice season 11[edit]

Greetings! please protect The Voice (U.S. season 11) for authorized users again to avoid vandalism. Thank you! :) Chanels4ever (talk) 01:33, 24 October 2016 (UTC)

@Chanels4ever: wow that's alot of IP editing since semiprotection was lifted - how much is vandalism and how much is legit editing? Cas Liber (talk · contribs) 02:19, 24 October 2016 (UTC)

WLW writing contest Nigeria September 2016[edit]

Hi Casliber, fellow judge of the contest, I made a list of all eligible articles written for the contest. You can find it at User:Gereon K./WLW Nigeria September 2016. I suggest to discuss the process of judging by e-mail. Best regards, --Gereon K. (talk) 09:27, 24 October 2016 (UTC)

Agreed. Sorry have been a bit under the weather the last few days. Cas Liber (talk · contribs) 12:11, 24 October 2016 (UTC)
I hope that you get well soon. Please answer my e-mail. Without your e-mail-adress I cannot adress both you and Sydney at the same time. :) --Gereon K. (talk) 13:46, 24 October 2016 (UTC)
Done Cas Liber (talk · contribs) 14:14, 24 October 2016 (UTC)

DYK for Bratton Downs[edit]

Updated DYK query.svg On 26 October 2016, Did you know was updated with a fact from the article Bratton Downs, which you recently created, substantially expanded, or brought to good article status. The fact was ... that a Duke of Burgundy has been spotted on Bratton Downs? The nomination discussion and review may be seen at Template:Did you know nominations/Bratton Downs. You are welcome to check how many page hits the article got while on the front page (here's how, Bratton Downs), and it may be added to the statistics page if the total is over 5,000. Finally, if you know of an interesting fact from another recently created article, then please feel free to suggest it on the Did you know talk page.
Cas Liber (talk · contribs) 00:08, 26 October 2016 (UTC)

DYK for Tetragnatha montana[edit]

— Maile (talk) 01:11, 27 October 2016 (UTC)

Incomplete DYK nomination[edit]

Symbol question.svg Hello! Your submission of Template:Did you know nominations/Olearia tomentosa at the Did You Know nominations page is not complete; see step 3 of the nomination procedure. If you do not want to continue with the nomination, tag the nomination page with {{db-g7}}, or ask a DYK admin. Thank you. DYKHousekeepingBot (talk) 14:14, 27 October 2016 (UTC)

Edits needed to Queue 2[edit]

Casliber, I wasn't sure whether you'd seen the WT:DYK#Pull needed from Queue 2 post. Even aside from the issue of whether one hook needs to be pulled (Nikkimaria is usually spot on when articles duplicate text), there are a large number of DYKmake templates that don't have a subpage parameter but definitely need one. I've explained there how to figure out which ones do need the parameter (it's for at least two multi-article hooks), and if no one has done it by the time you see this, it would be great if you did, since you were the one who did the prep to queue promotion. Many thanks. BlueMoonset (talk) 19:02, 28 October 2016 (UTC)

I would like to add to this that each of the actor's articles has now been tagged for lacking inline citations for one or (many) more unreferenced appearances. Also, the Wonut article now has a couple of tags for unreferenced claims of names. The latter is not such a big deal as I guess you could remove those claimed names, but the Ariel nomination needs to be kicked to the kerb/curb. Cheers. The Rambling Man (talk) 20:15, 28 October 2016 (UTC)
Ok, just having coffee. Umm....right, let's look. Cas Liber (talk · contribs) 21:36, 28 October 2016 (UTC)

Wikiquote[edit]

Hi, I would like to invite you to contribute to our sister project Wikiquote. Some articles there that may use more informative quotes include:

Do let me know if you are interested in this. If you are uninterested can you consider pinging some folks in the reply message who can be potential contributors to Wikiquote. Solomon7968 13:38, 29 October 2016 (UTC)

Bit busy at the moment. Will take a look later Cas Liber (talk · contribs) 22:18, 29 October 2016 (UTC)

how to make DYK hooks actually interesting[edit]

The saving-people-at-Auschwitz thing for cerium was quite impressive and I've nominated that for DYK, but for the life of me I cannot think of something cool in the iodine article that I would like to say on the main page. The closest I can think of are "iodine was discovered during the Napoleonic Wars" and "contrary to popular belief, there is no such thing as an iodine allergy"...but that's not about the element itself. Or am I thinking too hard? Double sharp (talk) 15:11, 29 October 2016 (UTC)

P.S. bromine is now at GAN. Maybe I can try to polish off the halogens and rare earths before the year is out?!? Only seven (Cl; Pr, Nd, Gd, Tb, Ho, Er) more to go!!! Double sharp (talk) 15:14, 29 October 2016 (UTC)
Interesting. Let me digest...Cas Liber (talk · contribs) 22:18, 29 October 2016 (UTC)

SR[edit]

Can you do source reviews for the noms requested here? 2A02:8108:1BF:AB8C:B4F8:189E:2510:3E98 (talk) 15:16, 29 October 2016 (UTC)

DYK nomination of Fairy gerygone[edit]

Symbol question.svg Hello! Your submission of Fairy gerygone at the Did You Know nominations page has been reviewed, and some issues with it may need to be clarified. Please review the comment(s) underneath your nomination's entry and respond there as soon as possible. Thank you for contributing to Did You Know! Yoninah (talk) 20:37, 29 October 2016 (UTC)

Mary Kitson Clark DYK[edit]

Hi Casliber! I am confused. I have received a DYK on my talk page a few moments ago and yet the DYK its self is worded very differently to the ones that were given the okay during the reviewing process. Am I right in thinking that you were the one who changed the wording? There's a big between "a key text" and "a basic guide". Is there anyway this could be changed? Or is it now stuck in its watered down wording because it is on the main page? Thanks, Gaia Octavia Agrippa Talk 00:18, 30 October 2016 (UTC)

Scrap that. You are not to blame but I have found the post-promoted discussion about this hook else where. I shall take my complaint there. Gaia Octavia Agrippa Talk 00:23, 30 October 2016 (UTC)
Ok thanks. Just sitting down for a sec between setting up for a Halloween party...Cas Liber (talk · contribs) 00:48, 30 October 2016 (UTC)
Sorry for the confusion. Enjoy your party! Gaia Octavia Agrippa Talk 01:06, 30 October 2016 (UTC)

This week's article for improvement (week 44, 2016)[edit]

Street food vendors at a roadside market just outside Hua Hin, Thailand.jpg

Street food vendors at a roadside market just outside of Hua Hin District, Thailand

Hello, Casliber.

The following is WikiProject Today's articles for improvement's weekly selection:

Street food

Please be bold and help to improve this article!


Previous selections: Attic • Noise


Get involved with the TAFI project. You can: Nominate an article • Review nominations


Posted by: MusikBot talk 00:08, 31 October 2016 (UTC) using MediaWiki message delivery (talk) on behalf of WikiProject TAFI • Opt-out instructions

Fornax[edit]

You do excellent job expanding the constellation articles, promoting many of them to good article and few even to featured article statuses. There are still constellation articles you didn't expand, including Fornax the furnace especially since I just got a new furnace in my home. PlanetStar 04:22, 1 November 2016 (UTC)

I know. I had an idea to go alphabetical....but maybe not. Cas Liber (talk · contribs) 04:40, 1 November 2016 (UTC)

Wikipedia:Today's featured article/November 27, 2016[edit]

Hi Cas, I should get this one done today or tomorrow. - Dank (push to talk) 21:55, 1 November 2016 (UTC)

ok cool. Cas Liber (talk · contribs) 01:47, 2 November 2016 (UTC)
What's your favorite synonym for "occurring"? I'm not a fan of the word. - Dank (push to talk) 18:25, 7 November 2016 (UTC)

WikiCup 2016 November newsletter: Final results[edit]

The final round of the 2016 WikiCup is over. Congratulations to the 2016 WikiCup top three finalists:

In addition to recognizing the achievements of the top finishers and everyone who worked hard to make it to the final round, we also want to recognize those participants who were most productive in each of the WikiCup scoring categories:

  • Featured Article – Cas Liber (actually a three-way tie with themselves for two FAs in each of R2, R3, and R5).
  • Good Article – MPJ-DK had 14 GAs promoted in R3.
  • Featured List – England Calvin999 (submissions) produced 2 FLs in R2
  • Featured Pictures – Adam Cuerden restored 18 images to FP status in R4.
  • Featured Portal – Yakutsk SSTflyer (submissions) produced the only FPO of the Cup in R2.
  • Featured Topic – Connecticut Cyclonebiskit (submissions) and Calvin were each responsible for one FT in R3 and R2, respectively.
  • Good Topic – MPJ-DK created a GT with 9 GAs in R5.
  • Did You Know – MPJ-DK put 53 DYKs on the main page in R4.
  • In The News – India Dharmadhyaksha (submissions) and New York City Muboshgu (submissions), each with 5 ITN, both in R4.
  • Good Article Review – MPJ-DK completed 61 GARs in R2.

Over the course of the 2016 WikiCup the following content was added to Wikipedia (only reporting on fixed value categories): 17 Featured Articles, 183 Good Articles, 8 Featured Lists, 87 Featured Pictures, 40 In The News, and 321 Good Article Reviews. Thank you to all the competitors for your hard work and what you have done to improve Wikipedia.--MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 01:52, 2 November 2016 (UTC)

We will open up a discussion for comments on process and scoring in a few days. The 2017 WikiCup is just around the corner! Many thanks from all the judges. If you wish to start or stop receiving this newsletter, please feel free to add or remove yourself from Wikipedia:WikiCup/Newsletter/Send. Sturmvogel 66 (talk · contribs · email), Figureskatingfan (talk · contribs · email), and Godot13 (talk · contribs · email)

Congratulations on your 2016 WikiCup victory![edit]

Hi Casliber- I wanted to congratulate you on winning this year's WikiCup. You will get a trophy, but I am working with a graphics design friend to update and personalize the design, so (if all goes well) please give me until early December.--Godot13 (talk) 02:07, 2 November 2016 (UTC)

Ok cool! thanks for running the competition! cheers, Cas Liber (talk · contribs) 03:33, 2 November 2016 (UTC)
Woohoo congrats, my friend. This is an impressive achievement. Vanamonde (talk) 05:34, 5 November 2016 (UTC)

WikiProject Good Articles's 2016-2017 GA Cup[edit]

WikiProject Good Articles's 2016-2017 GA Cup
Symbol support vote.svg

Greetings, all!

We would like to announce the start of the 4th GA Cup, a competition that seeks to encourage the reviewing of Good article nominations! Thus far, there have been three GA Cups, which were successful in reaching our goals of significantly reducing the traditionally long queue at GAN, so we're doing it again. Currently, there are over 400 nominations listed. We hope that we can again make an impact this time.

The 4th GA Cup will begin on November 1, 2016. Four rounds are currently scheduled (which will bring the competition to a close on February 28, 2017), but this may change based on participant numbers. We may take a break in December for the holidays, depending on the results of a poll of our participants taken shortly after the competition begins. The sign-up and submissions process will remain the same, as will the scoring.

Sign-ups for the upcoming competition are currently open and will close on November 14, 2016. Everyone is welcome to join; new and old editors, so sign-up now!

If you have any questions, take a look at the FAQ page and/or contact one of the judges.

Cheers from 3family6, Figureskatingfan, Jaguar, MrWooHoo, and Zwerg Nase. We apologize for the delay in sending out this message until after the competition has started. Thank you to Krishna Chaitanya Velaga for aiding in getting this message out.

To subscribe or unsubscribe to future GA Cup newsletters, please add or remove your name to our mailing list. If you are a participant, you will be on the mailing list no matter what as this is the easiest way to communicate between all participants.

--MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 01:38, 3 November 2016 (UTC)

WikiProject Good Articles's 2016-2017 GA Cup[edit]

WikiProject Good Articles's 2016-2017 GA Cup
Symbol support vote.svg

Greetings, all!

We would like to announce the start of the 4th GA Cup, a competition that seeks to encourage the reviewing of Good article nominations! Thus far, there have been three GA Cups, which were successful in reaching our goals of significantly reducing the traditionally long queue at GAN, so we're doing it again. Currently, there are over 400 nominations listed. We hope that we can again make an impact this time.

The 4th GA Cup will begin on November 1, 2016. Four rounds are currently scheduled (which will bring the competition to a close on February 28, 2017), but this may change based on participant numbers. We may take a break in December for the holidays, depending on the results of a poll of our participants taken shortly after the competition begins. The sign-up and submissions process will remain the same, as will the scoring.

Sign-ups for the upcoming competition are currently open and will close on November 14, 2016. Everyone is welcome to join; new and old editors, so sign-up now!

If you have any questions, take a look at the FAQ page and/or contact one of the judges.

Cheers from 3family6, Figureskatingfan, Jaguar, MrWooHoo, and Zwerg Nase. We apologize for the delay in sending out this message until after the competition has started. Thank you to Krishna Chaitanya Velaga for aiding in getting this message out.

To subscribe or unsubscribe to future GA Cup newsletters, please add or remove your name to our mailing list. If you are a participant, you will be on the mailing list no matter what as this is the easiest way to communicate between all participants.

--MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 01:40, 3 November 2016 (UTC)

Wikipedia:Wikipedia Signpost/Newsroom/Wikicup[edit]

By my count, you had eight FAs this competition. Does that agree with your count? Adam Cuerden (talk) 02:42, 3 November 2016 (UTC)

I didn't keep count. Sounds about right I guess...Cas Liber (talk · contribs) 09:50, 3 November 2016 (UTC)

This week's article for improvement (week 45, 2016)[edit]

Amy and Malea doing the sword dance (4779191092).jpg

A sword dance performance

Hello, Casliber.

The following is WikiProject Today's articles for improvement's weekly selection:

Sword dance

Please be bold and help to improve this article!


Previous selections: Street food • Attic


Get involved with the TAFI project. You can: Nominate an article • Review nominations


Posted by: MusikBot talk 00:07, 7 November 2016 (UTC) using MediaWiki message delivery (talk) on behalf of WikiProject TAFI • Opt-out instructions

Wikipedia:Featured list candidates/Tamannaah filmography/archive1[edit]

Interested in doing a image and source review? Let me know. :) Regards, Pavanjandhyala (talk) 05:02, 7 November 2016 (UTC)

Ping me once you get 3 supports and I'll take a look. Cas Liber (talk · contribs) 09:08, 7 November 2016 (UTC)
Today, i've got the third support. Are you interested to take up? Pavanjandhyala (talk) 11:02, 16 November 2016 (UTC)

DYK for Black grasswren[edit]

Updated DYK query.svg On 8 November 2016, Did you know was updated with a fact from the article Black grasswren, which you recently created, substantially expanded, or brought to good article status. The fact was ... that although the black grasswren was discovered in 1901, its nesting habits remained unknown for nearly one hundred years? The nomination discussion and review may be seen at Template:Did you know nominations/Black grasswren. You are welcome to check how many page hits the article got while on the front page (here's how, Black grasswren), and it may be added to the statistics page if the total is over 5,000. Finally, if you know of an interesting fact from another recently created article, then please feel free to suggest it on the Did you know talk page.
— Maile (talk) 00:01, 8 November 2016 (UTC)

Template:Did you know nominations/Oriam[edit]

Casliber, I'm confused about your November 1 approval of this one, because it's placed up among the original hooks and ALTs, not in the body of the article, where a new ALT4 had been placed just the day before. Where it's placed, it's actually superseded by earlier hooks; the DYKHousekeepingBot won't include this in the # Verified column of its table because of that. (It also looks like you're approving ALT3, though that isn't clear.)

If you meant to approve ALT4, can you please move your approval down below its proposal and comment, and also please strike all the hooks that haven't been approved? And if you meant to approve ALT3, can you still please move your approval down the bottom so it's in chronological order, and make clear which hook it's far and strike the ones you don't approve? (If it is ALT3 you've approved, can you please also check ALT4, since it has been proposed, and give it a thumbs up or down?) Many thanks. BlueMoonset (talk) 17:56, 11 November 2016 (UTC)

Tick down at bottom - see page. Cas Liber (talk · contribs) 19:35, 11 November 2016 (UTC)

White-winged fairy wren for TFA[edit]

Two-Factor Authentication now available for admins[edit]

Hello,

Please note that TOTP based two-factor authentication is now available for all administrators. In light of the recent compromised accounts, you are encouraged to add this additional layer of security to your account. It may be enabled on your preferences page in the "User profile" tab under the "Basic information" section. For basic instructions on how to enable two-factor authentication, please see the developing help page for additional information. Important: Be sure to record the two-factor authentication key and the single use keys. If you lose your two factor authentication and do not have the keys, it's possible that your account will not be recoverable. Furthermore, you are encouraged to utilize a unique password and two-factor authentication for the email account associated with your Wikimedia account. This measure will assist in safeguarding your account from malicious password resets. Comments, questions, and concerns may be directed to the thread on the administrators' noticeboard. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 20:32, 12 November 2016 (UTC)

DYK for Fairy gerygone[edit]

Updated DYK query.svg On 14 November 2016, Did you know was updated with a fact from the article Fairy gerygone, which you recently created, substantially expanded, or brought to good article status. The fact was ... that the fairy gerygone nests near wasp nests, possibly to keep itself safe from predators? The nomination discussion and review may be seen at Template:Did you know nominations/Fairy gerygone. You are welcome to check how many page hits the article got while on the front page (here's how, Fairy gerygone), and it may be added to the statistics page if the total is over 5,000. Finally, if you know of an interesting fact from another recently created article, then please feel free to suggest it on the Did you know talk page.
— Maile (talk) 00:01, 14 November 2016 (UTC)

This week's article for improvement (week 46, 2016)[edit]

ADR4396.jpg

A woman wearing a dress

Hello, Casliber.

The following is WikiProject Today's articles for improvement's weekly selection:

Dress

Please be bold and help to improve this article!


Previous selections: Sword dance • Street food


Get involved with the TAFI project. You can: Nominate an article • Review nominations


Posted by: MusikBot talk 00:07, 14 November 2016 (UTC) using MediaWiki message delivery (talk) on behalf of WikiProject TAFI • Opt-out instructions

A new user right for New Page Patrollers[edit]

Hi Casliber.

A new user group, New Page Reviewer, has been created in a move to greatly improve the standard of new page patrolling. The user right can be granted by any admin at PERM. It is highly recommended that admins look beyond the simple numerical threshold and satisfy themselves that the candidates have the required skills of communication and an advanced knowledge of notability and deletion. Admins are automatically included in this user right.

It is anticipated that this user right will significantly reduce the work load of admins who patrol the performance of the patrollers. However,due to the complexity of the rollout, some rights may have been accorded that may later need to be withdrawn, so some help will still be needed to some extent when discovering wrongly applied deletion tags or inappropriate pages that escape the attention of less experienced reviewers, and above all, hasty and bitey tagging for maintenance. User warnings are available here but very often a friendly custom message works best.

If you have any questions about this user right, don't hesitate to join us at WT:NPR. (Sent to all admins).MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 13:47, 15 November 2016 (UTC)

DYK nomination of Brown-necked parrot[edit]

Symbol question.svg Hello! Your submission of Brown-necked parrot at the Did You Know nominations page has been reviewed, and some issues with it may need to be clarified. Please review the comment(s) underneath your nomination's entry and respond there as soon as possible. Thank you for contributing to Did You Know! Regards, Krishna Chaitanya Velaga (talk • mail) 12:55, 16 November 2016 (UTC)

more element GANs[edit]

We now have strontium added to the list (the other ones are bromine, seaborgium, and bohrium – the last two are several months old by now). I was going to do chlorine next, which is on hold. The logical next step would be Ca and Mg. Double sharp (talk) 14:40, 16 November 2016 (UTC)

I addressed your comments on the GAN page for Sr. Double sharp (talk) 06:28, 17 November 2016 (UTC)
And now chlorine is at GAN! Double sharp (talk) 12:54, 19 November 2016 (UTC)

Amanita ocreata for TFA[edit]

This week's article for improvement (week 47, 2016)[edit]

Éponge type 1 (1).jpg

A cleaning sponge

Hello, Casliber.

The following is WikiProject Today's articles for improvement's weekly selection:

Sponge (material)

Please be bold and help to improve this article!


Previous selections: Dress • Sword dance


Get involved with the TAFI project. You can: Nominate an article • Review nominations


Posted by: MusikBot talk 00:07, 21 November 2016 (UTC) using MediaWiki message delivery (talk) on behalf of WikiProject TAFI • Opt-out instructions

Trouted[edit]

Rainbow trout transparent.png Whack!

You've been whacked with a wet trout.

Don't take this too seriously. Someone just wants to let you know you did something silly.

You have been trouted for: no reason.

ArbCom Elections 2016: Voting now open![edit]

Scale of justice 2.svg Hello, Casliber. Voting in the 2016 Arbitration Committee elections is open from Monday, 00:00, 21 November through Sunday, 23:59, 4 December to all unblocked users who have registered an account before Wednesday, 00:00, 28 October 2016 and have made at least 150 mainspace edits before Sunday, 00:00, 1 November 2016.

The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail.

If you wish to participate in the 2016 election, please review the candidates' statements and submit your choices on the voting page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 22:08, 21 November 2016 (UTC)

DYK for Olearia tomentosa[edit]

Updated DYK query.svg On 22 November 2016, Did you know was updated with a fact from the article Olearia tomentosa, which you recently created, substantially expanded, or brought to good article status. The fact was ... that daisy bushes can be downy, viscid, twiggy, or clammy? The nomination discussion and review may be seen at Template:Did you know nominations/Olearia tomentosa. You are welcome to check how many page hits the article got while on the front page (here's how, Olearia tomentosa), and it may be added to the statistics page if the total is over 5,000. Finally, if you know of an interesting fact from another recently created article, then please feel free to suggest it on the Did you know talk page.
— Maile (talk) 00:02, 22 November 2016 (UTC)

DYK for Olearia ramulosa[edit]

Updated DYK query.svg On 22 November 2016, Did you know was updated with a fact from the article Olearia ramulosa, which you recently created, substantially expanded, or brought to good article status. The fact was ... that daisy bushes can be downy, viscid, twiggy, or clammy? You are welcome to check how many page hits the article got while on the front page (here's how, Olearia ramulosa), and it may be added to the statistics page if the total is over 5,000. Finally, if you know of an interesting fact from another recently created article, then please feel free to suggest it on the Did you know talk page.
— Maile (talk) 00:02, 22 November 2016 (UTC)

DYK for Olearia viscidula[edit]

Updated DYK query.svg On 22 November 2016, Did you know was updated with a fact from the article Olearia viscidula, which you recently created, substantially expanded, or brought to good article status. The fact was ... that daisy bushes can be downy, viscid, twiggy, or clammy? You are welcome to check how many page hits the article got while on the front page (here's how, Olearia viscidula), and it may be added to the statistics page if the total is over 5,000. Finally, if you know of an interesting fact from another recently created article, then please feel free to suggest it on the Did you know talk page.
— Maile (talk) 00:02, 22 November 2016 (UTC)

DYK for Olearia decurrens[edit]

Updated DYK query.svg On 22 November 2016, Did you know was updated with a fact from the article Olearia decurrens, which you recently created, substantially expanded, or brought to good article status. The fact was ... that daisy bushes can be downy, viscid, twiggy, or clammy? You are welcome to check how many page hits the article got while on the front page (here's how, Olearia decurrens), and it may be added to the statistics page if the total is over 5,000. Finally, if you know of an interesting fact from another recently created article, then please feel free to suggest it on the Did you know talk page.
— Maile (talk) 00:02, 22 November 2016 (UTC)

Hydrus for TFA[edit]

Cool Cas Liber (talk · contribs) 09:42, 22 November 2016 (UTC)
* Thank you for another banksia, and the comment "this one I see as complete to the best of my ability..and the others aren't" ;)
* A date-releated article was nominated for that day, yes, too late, and I don't want to interfer ;) --Gerda Arendt (talk) 08:41, 27 November 2016 (UTC)

WP:AE[edit]

Hey, you need to fix your question on AE. That's not a good ping. Bishonen | talk 13:46, 26 November 2016 (UTC).

aah yes. fixed now. Cas Liber (talk · contribs) 13:51, 26 November 2016 (UTC)
It looks ok on the page now, but the ping actually still won't work. You need to start a new line and sign again, see WP:PING, for it to do that. But I expect Doc will probably see it anyway. Bishonen | talk 15:14, 26 November 2016 (UTC).
(wakes up/rubs eyes) aaah. ok, I need a coffee....Cas Liber (talk · contribs) 19:47, 26 November 2016 (UTC)

Under the Bridge for TFA[edit]

This week's article for improvement (week 48, 2016)[edit]

Hello, Casliber.

The following is WikiProject Today's articles for improvement's weekly selection:

Homework

Please be bold and help to improve this article!


Previous selections: Sponge (material) • Dress


Get involved with the TAFI project. You can: Nominate an article • Review nominations


Posted by: MusikBot talk 00:08, 28 November 2016 (UTC) using MediaWiki message delivery (talk) on behalf of WikiProject TAFI • Opt-out instructions

DYK for Rosy-throated longclaw[edit]

Updated DYK query.svg On 29 November 2016, Did you know was updated with a fact from the article Rosy-throated longclaw, which you recently created, substantially expanded, or brought to good article status. The fact was ... that it is not known whether the Marquis Leone de Tarragon named the rosy-throated longclaw (Macronyx ameliae) for his wife or his mother? The nomination discussion and review may be seen at Template:Did you know nominations/Rosy-throated longclaw. You are welcome to check how many page hits the article got while on the front page (here's how, Rosy-throated longclaw), and it may be added to the statistics page if the total is over 5,000. Finally, if you know of an interesting fact from another recently created article, then please feel free to suggest it on the Did you know talk page.
Vanamonde (talk) 00:01, 29 November 2016 (UTC)

DYK for Brachychiton megaphyllus[edit]

Updated DYK query.svg On 2 December 2016, Did you know was updated with a fact from the article Brachychiton megaphyllus, which you recently created, substantially expanded, or brought to good article status. The fact was ... that to the speakers of the Ngan’gityemerri language, the flowering of the red-flowering kurrajong marks the time that freshwater crocodiles are laying eggs? The nomination discussion and review may be seen at Template:Did you know nominations/Brachychiton megaphyllus. You are welcome to check how many page hits the article got while on the front page (here's how, Brachychiton megaphyllus), and it may be added to the statistics page if the total is over 5,000. Finally, if you know of an interesting fact from another recently created article, then please feel free to suggest it on the Did you know talk page.
— Maile (talk) 00:03, 2 December 2016 (UTC)

Hydrus again[edit]

Does this work for you? I eyeballed this from star charts ... if it's not right, then 13° would probably work. - Dank (push to talk) 14:38, 2 December 2016 (UTC)

Looks fine Cas Liber (talk · contribs) 23:13, 2 December 2016 (UTC)