User talk:Invertzoo/Archive 6
 | This page is an archive of past discussions. Do not edit the contents of this page. If you wish to start a new discussion or revive an old one, please do so on the current talk page. |
ARCHIVE PAGE 6: March 2008
re:New articles on tide pool animals
You are the the power that keeps me going on Wikipedia. Thank you!--Mbz1 (talk) 01:13, 5 March 2008 (UTC)
Hello, I just received your message. Sorry about the hasty revert on your edits, I don't do very much editing on Wikipedia. I didn't realize you had done other things to the article besides split them in half. The main reason I switched it back was because it seemed like there wasn't much reasoning for breaking up the article on National Lampoon into two articles, each of which include information on the films in addition to the magazine. It seemed a bit confusing, and seemed like the lines were arbitrarily drawn between "National Lampoon" the magazine, "National Lampoon" the production company, and "National Lampoon" as a brand name. Also, I was a little concerned with statements like "Other than that, there is no actual connection in terms or staff or personnel with the historical National Lampoon magazine" that was in your National Lampoon Inc. article, since that is simply inaccurate-- for instance, Matty Simmons, one of the founding members of National Lampoon magazine, the Executive Producer of "Disco Beaver from Outer Space" "Animal House" and the "Vacation" films, functioned and continues to function as a creative director, consultant and producer for The National Lampoon throughout its entire history, well into present day with "National Lampoon's Pucked" (2006). Similarly, I can't find any evidence that the company was suddenly renamed "National Lampoon Inc." (or became a separate company or entity than what it was throughout the '90s) in 2002, which further muddles the reasoning of separation. The emphasis that the printed magazine ceased publication in 1998 seems to ignore the fact that it was resuscitated under Scott Rubin (current Editor-in-Chief of National Lampoon) as an article-centered web publication on National Lampoon.com.
The fact that National Lampoon is now more recognized as a comedy franchise similar to "Mad" than only a magazine leads me to believe that it might be better to have a detailed and appropriately elaborate section dedicated to its inception and history as a magazine, followed by a section dedicated to its transition to films with "Animal House" and "Vacation" (which were based on the magazine), and finally its transition to a brand name/franchise and production company.
I agree there is a marked difference in the quality of work from what National Lampoon once was and what it is currently, but I just can't see how splitting them apart in this situation in the manner that you have is the best solution.
Sorry again for the misunderstanding, and I hope this helps you understand my reasoning for the reversion. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 76.175.162.123 (talk) 06:39, 6 March 2008 (UTC)
Hello again 76.175.162.123., First, a reminder: please remember to sign your posts by putting four "~" at the end. Thank you for getting back to me and explaining (in retrospect) what you felt the questions were that caused you to make that revert on March 4th. (I should also explain that I am dividing my reply to you into several separate posts, so that I may compose them at my leisure. They will appear gradually during the next two days.) As a new user with only five edits, if you have now (perhaps?) had a chance to read through the WP links I gave you, you can understand why a revert is almost always problematic, and should basically only be used in cases of vandalism. Thank you for your apology; I will re-instate the previous version. As a new user, it is really a good idea to avoid making any large changes until you get the hang of Wikipedia and how it works, which can take quite a time. Another very important consideration I feel obliged to raise up front, is the COI or conflict of interest issue, which is a major concern on Wikipedia, and one that you may possibly be completely unaware of. [1]Anyone who works for, is associated with, or is otherwise involved in, National Lampoon Inc, or any of its competitors, cannot edit articles about those topics. Does this apply to you? If so, then you are more than welcome to browse around and consider editing any of the other two million WP articles, but not the ones on these particular topics. Best wishes to you, Invertzoo (talk) 15:38, 6 March 2008 (UTC)
Not Anisodoris nobilis but Geitodoris heathi
Hi Mila, today I talked to an old nudibranch friend of mine (Steve Long) about your image File:Anisodoris nobilis in tide pools.JPG,and he said he thought that flattened down creature was Discodoris heathi also known as Geitodoris heathi. I was very pleased to hear that from him, because that is also what I had thought it probably was, so I am going to go ahead with that ID, and write an article about that species. By the way, I put another image of yours on the Phidiana hiltoni page. I am also thinking about doing an article for the sea star and the big green anemone using the great picture of yours that is at the starfish article. You have so many great images! I suppose there is nowhere I can go look where all these tidepool images of yours are displayed all together??? Best wishes, Invertzoo (talk) 18:53, 7 March 2008 (UTC)
- Thank you very, much,Invertzoo. Here are the place, where I have some of my tide pools images together. Tide Pools--Mbz1 (talk) 19:32, 7 March 2008 (UTC)
- Oh thank you very much Mila. I will see if I can write some more articles. I can't imagine why you think you are not a really good photographer. it seems to me that a lot of your work is fully professional in standard. Many of your images are really stunning, which is why you are nominated for picture of the day and featured image so often. By the way, you may want to change the title of the Geitodoris picture, because it says it is an Anisodoris. best to you, Invertzoo (talk) 20:51, 7 March 2008 (UTC)
Please help to ID
Hi, Invertzoo. Thank you for the warm words about my photography skills. The thing is that I sometimes get lucky to take an interesting or unusual image, but I've never cared so much about image quality. Anyway here are three images of the same shell I took at Hawaii. The quality is not good, but I hope you might be able To ID it:1
2
3
Here are few shells (also from Hawaii)They were cemented together as it shown at the image 4
If you are interested in these images, please let me know and I upload them to Wikipedia. You also might be interested in looking at this set of images.
Thank you for your time and please respond here. I'll check on your response.--Mbz1 (talk) 14:58, 8 March 2008 (UTC)
Hi Mila. OK I had to research this because I am not very familiar with Indo-Pacific shells: I have neither lived there not visited that area at all. And let me just explain that in general I need two views of a shell, one of the "topside" and one of the underside showing the aperture. However I believe this is the money cowrie, Cypraea moneta. Also great! Thanks for the page of images!! Talk to you soon Mila, I have to go talk to a neighbor of mine right now. Invertzoo (talk) 16:10, 8 March 2008 (UTC)
What you see in your three sequential pictures of the money cowry is the mantle (the striped part) expanding outwards as the soft parts of the animal start to emerge from the shell. In live cowries, when they are active, the mantle (a thin layer of skin that secretes shell), usually completely covers the shell, and that is what makes the cowry shell so very shiny. Invertzoo (talk) 17:15, 8 March 2008 (UTC)
Oh, I just added two of your images in to the article Hermissenda crassicornis including putting one into the taxobox -- it is much better than the previous taxobox image. As for your other picture with the ?three gastropods "cemented together", it's a bit hard to tell what is going on, but it certainly could be that the cone snail has attacked a mating pair of Cymatium species in order to try to eat one or both of them. Pretty interesting picture. Invertzoo (talk) 23:16, 8 March 2008 (UTC)
Yes, I think it would be worth having them here on Wikipedia, if it is not too much trouble. Invertzoo (talk) 13:02, 9 March 2008 (UTC)
You could call the 3 images in that series: Cypraea moneta mantle expansion 1, then 2, and 3. As for the other one, I would maybe call it: " Conus pennaeus attacks pair of Cymatium sp. Were you diving when you took that shot? Can you remember how deep the water was? And were the shells about 2 or 3 inches long? Did you pick them up? Were they very firmly stuck together? Invertzoo (talk) 23:38, 9 March 2008 (UTC)
- I uploaded the three images
. You could find two other in the other-version tab at the description of the first image.
About other image:Conus pennaeus was about two inches long. The shells were in 7-8 feet deep water. I've never touched them. Have you noticed that there were three of Cymatium sp. and not two? I know nudibrances could mate in groups of three or more. I wonder, if Cymatium sp. could also mate in groups? Thank you. --Mbz1 (talk) 16:48, 10 March 2008 (UTC)
- I uploaded the three images
Fairly common fairly white snails
In response to your post at commons:User_talk:Vmenkov. Yes, there is a close-up, Image:Kadina-snails-climb-fence-0717.jpg. I have more pictures on my computer, and if you want, can post them as well. You're welcome to use your malacological knowledge to correct the captions and category (and perhaps maybe also create at least stub Wikipedia articles on both species, as they are both white and common). Vmenkov 23:36, 11 April 2008 (UTC)
- And here's more pictures: commons:User:Vmenkov/Snails, for your enjoyment and identification. Incidentally, are you aware of the causes of this "fence-climbing" behavior? Do snails simply mistake a fence post for a tree, and climb it hoping to reach tasty leaves and fruit? It would be interesting to add that to the article(s) on the appropriate species (or "snail" in general, if this is common to many species). Vmenkov (talk) 07:51, 14 April 2008 (UTC)
- Thanks for your response on my talk page. You wrote: "As for the climbing thing, I have only seen that in a few species, ones which are very tolerant of dry conditions, and I don't know what causes that behavior. As far as I know it is not discussed anywhere in the literature, at least not that I am familiar with." Well, you seem to be an expert on mollusks - maybe here's a topic for a paper for you to write! Until it is written, I will presume that the snails just try to be closer to the sky. :-) As my photos show, I have seen it in two places, near St.Remy (Provence) and in Kadina (South Australia). Vmenkov (talk) 01:08, 5 May 2008 (UTC)
- I have just today done a stub article on Theba pisana. I will very shortly do one on Cochlicella acuta a group of which is quite well shown in the center of this one of your images as I have shown here. Invertzoo (talk) 22:10, 24 June 2008 (UTC) Invertzoo (talk) 00:04, 25 June 2008 (UTC)
- Cochlicella acuta done now. Invertzoo (talk) 23:14, 24 June 2008 (UTC)
- Thanks for the articles. My "snail gallery", with whatever snail pictures I have, as I've mentioned already, is here: commons:User:Vmenkov/Snails. Fell free to use any pictures for illustrating appropriate articles. Vmenkov (talk) 00:28, 25 June 2008 (UTC)
Thanks for revealing the secrets of aestivating snails, striving to reach the heights! Vmenkov (talk) 06:43, 27 June 2008 (UTC)
Maybe you would like to make an article?
Hi, Invertzoo, I added the image of Pocillopora meandrina 
, which I took at Hawaii. Maybe you'd like to make an article about this coral. The fish was always there (sometimes the two of them). Thank you.--Mbz1 (talk) 04:09, 20 April 2008 (UTC)
Guggenheim Museum
At first blush, I tend to disagree with your recent edit of Solomon R. Guggenheim Museum, but when I tried to articulate my reasons, I was somewhat dissatisfied with my own words. The best I can do is to share what remains, for now, naught but a tentative impression. --Tenmei (talk) 15:01, 11 May 2008 (UTC)
Hi Tenmai. Perhaps you can go ahead and fix it if you felt that what I did was not really the best choice? You may already know that trivia sections are against Wikipedia policy, see [2]. This trivia section in particular struck me as being pretty irrelevant to the article anyway; the listed items were not tied in in any way to anything significant about the museum. If you can take them all and integrate them in a productive way, or do something else creative or relevant with them, please feel free. Best to you, Invertzoo (talk) 15:21, 11 May 2008 (UTC)
NYC Meetup: June 1, 2008
|
New York City Meetup
|
In the afternoon, we will hold a session dedicated to meta:Wikimedia New York City activities, elect a board of directors, and hold salon-style group discussions on Wikipedia and the other Wikimedia projects (see the last meeting's minutes).
We'll also review our recent Wikipedia Takes Manhattan event, and make preparations for our exciting successor Wiki Week bonanza, being planned with Columbia University students for September or October.
In the evening, we'll share dinner and chat at a local restaurant, and (weather permitting) hold a late-night astronomy event at Columbia's telescopes.
You can add or remove your name from the New York City Meetups invite list at Wikipedia:Meetup/NYC/Invite list.
Also, check out our regional US Wikimedia chapters blog Wiki Northeast (and we're open to guest posts).
This has been an automated delivery by BrownBot (talk) 23:53, 19 May 2008 (UTC)
Thank you!
Hi, Invertzoo, Thank you for doing the articles! Today I uploaded an image of something. I took the image at Hawaii and I do not know what it is.
Thank you for your time.--Mbz1 (talk) 02:10, 30 May 2008 (UTC)
- Hi, Invertzoo, If you're talking about that image "Bryozoa" I put, where it was taken not only in the description, but also in the name of the image. Of course in general it is a very good suggestion to give the name of the place the image was taken. If you're talking about Leptasterias aequalis
, I'm very sure my ID is correct. It is a sea star. I see them often in tide pools, where I live and you were absolutely right I did not specified the place I took the image. Sorry about that.Thank you.--Mbz1 (talk) 13:53, 30 May 2008 (UTC)
- Hi, Invertzoo, If you're talking about that image "Bryozoa" I put, where it was taken not only in the description, but also in the name of the image. Of course in general it is a very good suggestion to give the name of the place the image was taken. If you're talking about Leptasterias aequalis
Six-armed starfish
hi, Invertzoo. I've just uploaded this image: 
. Maybe you'd be interested to make a small article on this image too. Thank you.--Mbz1 (talk) 02:56, 30 May 2008 (UTC)
Hi again Mila, I Hope you have not really retired as it says on your talk page now...? In any case I made a stub about your starfish at: Leptasterias aequalis. Hope you like it. If you happen to use a good printed guide to the intertidal animals of your part of the coast, please let me know what it is. Many thanks, Invertzoo (talk) 22:25, 30 May 2008 (UTC)