User talk:Kevmin

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Jump to: navigation, search
Please note that if you post something for me here, put this page on your watch list -- I'll respond to it here.

If I posted on your talk page, you can reply on your talk page and I'll be watching your page. This makes it easier for both of us to keep everything in context. Thanks.


Recognized content[edit]

Just a reminder, this is still very awesome :) jonkerztalk 20:41, 30 August 2015 (UTC)

@Jonkerz:That is a pretty impressive list indeed! And a lot of DYK work, with three more in the process as we speak.--Kevmin § 02:34, 1 September 2015 (UTC)
Pachycondyla eocenica SMFMEI10889.jpg The Fossilized Ant DYK Barnstar x 50
For writing 50* DYKs on fossil ants, uploading tons of images and for getting stuff done! jonkerztalk 03:47, 4 September 2015 (UTC)

*actually 56 official DYKs

I initially counted your official DYKs to 57, plus the three not-yet-official ones, making it an even 60, but then I realized that it was 56+3.. so yeah it's more like 60 actually, but let's keep it at even numbers :) jonkerztalk 03:47, 4 September 2015 (UTC)

Wow, I didnt realize Id passed 50 on just ants! Still have more in the works as I go lol. @Jonkerz:--Kevmin § 14:48, 5 September 2015 (UTC)
and +1 with Pachycondyla lutzi live and nominated.--Kevmin § 04:15, 7 September 2015 (UTC)
@Jonkerz: Pachycondyla parvula live now also and nominated--Kevmin § 20:24, 14 September 2015 (UTC)
I have a feeling Pachycondyla petiolosa and Pachycondyla petrosa are up next :) By the way, do you have any plans to nominate Yantaromyrmex for GA? At 9k characters of readable prose it is on par with our current GAs on fossil ants. The lead would have to be expanded to summarize the article, but other than that it is a good candidate. jonkerztalk 17:52, 16 September 2015 (UTC)
@Jonkerz:They are indeed, in the next two weeks or so in fact hopefully. I havent done a GA before to be honest, but go for it if you think it could be.--Kevmin § 20:16, 16 September 2015 (UTC)
I was hoping you would go for it, because I'm not much of a GA writer myself.. ;) jonkerztalk 14:01, 18 September 2015 (UTC)
@Jonkerz: I'll ping the resident GA1 ant writer then, :D @Burklemore1:--Kevmin § 16:21, 18 September 2015 (UTC)
Very suitable candidate, I'll focus on the article once I have finished with one of my side projects (beefing up the Termite article). I doubt there is any info in regards to its ecology, so I won't be very vigorous when it comes to finding new content (since the article looks complete anyway). Btw Kevmin, A new extinct Dolichoderinae genus was described this year, Ktunaxia. Not sure if you have started writing on it, but it's a suggestion if you want to create a new ant article. Burklemore1 (talk) 16:37, 18 September 2015 (UTC)
@Jonkerz:@Burklemore1: Cool! Let me know if you have any questions on Yantaromyrmex at any point. Ive been watching the shifts with termite, glad to see its happening. The taxonomy has changed a bunch since the last major update. LOL So many dead ants so little time, I'll look into it when I finish Dlussky & Wedmann 2012. Take a look at 2015 in arthropod paleontology for an idea of how behind I am in all reality, I keep plugging away though. o.o --Kevmin § 01:19, 19 September 2015 (UTC)
I'm curious as to why there is no available author(s) given in the taxobox, I believe it was Dlussky & Dubovikoff who described the genus in 2013. I have been working on the termite article in one of my sandboxes, so this will justify my assumed lack of editing on the actual article itself. It's a lot easier editing there since it will be the last spot you'll see vandals and potential edit conflicts. As for all those dead bugs, I wish you good luck, it looks like a tiring task. At least they're in fossils and not in your house. ;) Burklemore1 (talk) 05:39, 19 September 2015 (UTC)


──────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────── I fixed the authority for the article, the parameter just needed a tweak in the taxobox. Yah, I have been concentrating on Pacific Northwest Eocene taxa and ants just too keep a steady flow at this point on the articles. I wouldn't mind all those fossils in my house, haha, it would be so much easier to get images for the articles.--Kevmin § 15:14, 19 September 2015 (UTC)

That would explain it, haha. I'm in Australia so sadly I cannot make any contribution to images of the extinct ants up in your area. I really want to take a picture of Brownimecia, I have only seen it through copyrighted restorations and low quality non-free images. I think that one is in the north-east though. Burklemore1 (talk) 06:19, 20 September 2015 (UTC)
Done and dusted with Termite, and I have now requested a copyedit so I can GA nominate. With that done, I can now focus on Yantaromyrmex. Burklemore1 (talk) 14:56, 20 September 2015 (UTC)
@Burklemore1: Photos of the Brownimecia clavata holotype are available on AntWeb under cc-by-4.0! They may have been recently uploaded, or perhaps I didn't find them back in 2013. I emailed Brian L. Fisher of AntWeb regarding a second batch upload of AntWeb photos just minutes ago (that would make everything sooo much easier), but feel free to manually upload any photos in the meantime. jonkerztalk 16:43, 20 September 2015 (UTC)
Great to know! I've been occasionally checking the fossil taxa on there to see which ones I can upload I'll get to them as soon as I get home in a few minutes-Kevmin § 17:02, 20 September 2015 (UTC)
@Jonkerz: Feel free to incorporate the photos into my sandbox, I really need to get that list done and dusted. Burklemore1 (talk) 17:09, 20 September 2015 (UTC)
@Jonkerz:@Burklemore1: Ive uploaded the Brownimecia clavata images and I'm adding them to the appropriate articles. Im going to expand the Brownimecia article now that I have Pachycondyla petiolosa and I can pause. :D --Kevmin § 18:16, 20 September 2015 (UTC)
Here is the link to the original source that describes the ant. I see it as a potential GA nominee if there is enough information! Burklemore1 (talk) 18:21, 20 September 2015 (UTC)
@Burklemore1: I have the article downloaded and saved from working on some of the Sphecomyrminae articles, which I will probably finish out now, since I have the article up again. Thanks though!--Kevmin § 18:26, 20 September 2015 (UTC)
No worries, I look forward to the expansion! Meanwhile I'll focus my attention on Yantaromyrmex and scoop up anymore available information. Burklemore1 (talk) 18:31, 20 September 2015 (UTC)
I did a few minor edits + expansion to the lead to Yantaromyrmex. Other than that, the article seems complete, and so I have nominated it for GA. Burklemore1 (talk) 08:39, 21 September 2015 (UTC)
@Burklemore1:@Jonkerz: Awesome, looks good! The Brownimecia expansion is down to the physical description section, and then I will move it to live.--Kevmin § 22:03, 21 September 2015 (UTC)
Updating that to the expansion is now moved to live article space and nominated for dyk.--Kevmin § 00:21, 22 September 2015 (UTC)
Article looks good! I found a book somewhere that says the Brownimecia and another genus may have had "high level of feeding specalisation" owing to the morphology of the mandibles. If I'm correct, this is the opposite of a generalist feeder and so the ant may have had a limited diet. It also goes on to say that Late Cretaceous ants probably faced a low predation rate, due to the absence of highly social species and diverse families. This could be useful for a new section if you see find it necessary. Burklemore1 (talk) 03:18, 22 September 2015 (UTC)
Very awesome work by the both of you! Being the only member of its subfamily, Brownimecia certainly deserved better than the stub we used to have. jonkerztalk 11:51, 22 September 2015 (UTC)


@Burklemore1:Whats the name of the book and I'll see about adding it. Its a long enough article now it may be proddable into a GA?--Kevmin § 12:46, 22 September 2015 (UTC)
@Jonkerz: At least we can now see the article is a fine source of information for anyone who would like to learn more. The link to the page is here, featured in the book History of Insects. I definitely view it as a GA, so once you either add that in, I'll expand the lead and nominate it for GA. If Macabeemyrma managed to achieve GA status, Brownimecia will have no problem too (infact Brownimecia has roughly 1,000 words while Macabeemyrma has 700-750). Burklemore1 (talk) 13:12, 22 September 2015 (UTC)
Great, Ill take a look at it when I get home and add in the information that Grimaldi and Engel give there.--Kevmin § 13:20, 22 September 2015 (UTC)
Sounds good, I'll expand the lead when you have finished editing. Also, can articles nominated for dyk be allowed to be nominated for GA at the same time? I have always wondered if you can in case the two nominations may interrupt. Burklemore1 (talk) 13:26, 22 September 2015 (UTC)
They may indeed, as GA's are totally nominatable for dyk now, and the 5x expansion of the article is within the dyk rules time-frame.--Kevmin § 13:30, 22 September 2015 (UTC)
Ah, I see. I think Brownimecia is a good starting point for GA nomination among the ant subfamilies; perhaps I could propose on forming a good topic with the subfamilies (that is what I'm doing with Myrmeciinae and its articles, which can form as a subtopic). Burklemore1 (talk) 13:43, 22 September 2015 (UTC)
Ant subfamily GA projecting could be a good project for sure. I think Brownimeciinae, Sphecomyrminae and Armaniidae (still seems to be placed outside Formicidae) are all GA close at this point.--Kevmin § 16:56, 22 September 2015 (UTC)
All of the subfamilies seem to be studied well, especially their history and such. I'll focus on the extinct ones first; I think we would need to add Armaniidae to the GA list either way. Burklemore1 (talk) 04:03, 23 September 2015 (UTC)


@Burklemore1:@Jonkerz: Myanmyrma is now live and nominated! --Kevmin § 23:22, 1 October 2015 (UTC)

The article looks good, I like it! I can also confirm Banded sugar ant has been promoted to FA. :) Burklemore1 (talk) 03:47, 2 October 2015 (UTC)
Awesome, we're making a lot of strides with Formicidae articles all around :D --Kevmin § 16:38, 2 October 2015 (UTC)
Definitely, from 1 GA in 2014 to 7 so far in 2015, and the Banded sugar ant was promoted seven years after Ant first became an FA. Not only that, we almost have a dozen waiting to be GA reviewed and many more are soon to be nominated. 2015 has been a good year. Burklemore1 (talk) 13:56, 3 October 2015 (UTC)
@Burklemore1:@Jonkerz: 2014 seems to have been my best year for ant DYKs, lol I'll have to work hard to beat it. I did just add this section Wikipedia:WikiProject Insects/ant task force/Recognized content#Main page images to the Rec. content page. Feel free to add any others that you know of--Kevmin § 18:34, 4 October 2015 (UTC)
Looks good, I like it. Speaking of images, we should also add a "Featured images" section. I recall around five ant images that are featured. Burklemore1 (talk) 03:29, 5 October 2015 (UTC)
I agree that featured images should be added to the page, and maybe images be selected to be put in for PotD candidacy--Kevmin § 01:01, 6 October 2015 (UTC)?
Definitely, that sounds pretty good. Btw, when did you want Brownimecia to be nominated? I have my hands tight with some nominees right now, but I'll nominate when you are happy with it. Burklemore1 (talk) 16:34, 6 October 2015 (UTC)
I think Brownimecia is in a good spot, and when you have the time is perfect, no rush for me.--Kevmin § 23:28, 6 October 2015 (UTC)
Excellent, I have four GA nominees being reviewed right now so I'll nominate it when the four have been concluded. Burklemore1 (talk) 03:03, 7 October 2015 (UTC)
I have chimed in on the Avitomyrmex GA nomination and just let me know if you have anything you need from me on the noms.--Kevmin § 15:02, 7 October 2015 (UTC)
No worries, I thought it would be necessary to tag you in so you can explain it better than myself. Will do, I'll be nominating Brownimecia very soon! Also, what does orthotaxonomy and parataxonomy even mean? Burklemore1 (talk) 04:41, 8 October 2015 (UTC)

──────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────── I'm now going to be nominating Brownimecia for GA, but I'll add the content I found on its ecology first. I'll let you know if I need any assistance. Burklemore1 (talk) 04:08, 9 October 2015 (UTC)

DYK for Pachycondyla eocenica[edit]

-- Gatoclass (talk) 06:54, 28 September 2015 (UTC)

DYK for Pachycondyla lutzi[edit]

--Chris Woodrich (talk) 06:39, 4 October 2015 (UTC)

DYK for Pachycondyla? messeliana[edit]

--Chris Woodrich (talk) 18:55, 4 October 2015 (UTC)

DYK for Elephantomyia bozenae[edit]

--Gatoclass (talk) 07:16, 8 October 2015 (UTC)

DYK for Pachycondyla parvula[edit]

--Thanks for helping with the DYK project Victuallers (talk) 07:46, 9 October 2015 (UTC)

DYK for Brownimecia[edit]

--Cas Liber (talk · contribs) 20:02, 9 October 2015 (UTC)

DYK for Myanmyrma[edit]

--Gatoclass (talk) 03:01, 12 October 2015 (UTC)

Pachycondyla petrosa[edit]

This is an automated message from CorenSearchBot. I have performed a web search with the contents of Pachycondyla petrosa, and it appears to include material copied directly from

It is possible that the bot is confused and found similarity where none actually exists. If that is the case, you can remove the tag from the article. The article will be reviewed to determine if there are any copyright issues.

If substantial content is duplicated and it is not public domain or available under a compatible license, it will be deleted. For legal reasons, we cannot accept copyrighted text or images borrowed from other web sites or printed material. You may use such publications as a source of information, but not as a source of sentences. See our copyright policy for further details. (If you own the copyright to the previously published content and wish to donate it, see Wikipedia:Donating copyrighted materials for the procedure.) CorenSearchBot (talk) 22:02, 12 October 2015 (UTC)

Another false positive, ugh.--Kevmin § 22:04, 12 October 2015 (UTC)