This 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.
Image copyright problem with Image:R(conversion).svg
Thanks for uploading Image:R(conversion).svg. The image has been identified as not specifying the copyright status of the image, which is required by Wikipedia's policy on images. If you don't indicate the copyright status of the image on the image's description page, using an appropriate copyright tag, it may be deleted some time in the next seven days. If you have uploaded other images, please verify that you have provided copyright information for them as well.
For more information on using images, see the following pages:
Image copyright problem with Image:Syntomeida epilais.jpg
Thanks for uploading Image:Syntomeida epilais.jpg. The image has been identified as not specifying the copyright status of the image, which is required by Wikipedia's policy on images. If you don't indicate the copyright status of the image on the image's description page, using an appropriate copyright tag, it may be deleted some time in the next seven days. If you have uploaded other images, please verify that you have provided copyright information for them as well.
For more information on using images, see the following pages:
Hello. Concerning your contribution, File:Pink-katydid.jpg, please note that Wikipedia cannot accept copyrighted text or images obtained from other web sites or printed material, without the permission of the author(s). As a copyright violation, File:Pink-katydid.jpg appears to qualify for deletion under the speedy deletion criteria. File:Pink-katydid.jpg has been tagged for deletion, and may have been deleted by the time you see this message.
If you believe that the article or image is not a copyright violation, or if you have permission from the copyright holder to release the content freely under the GNU Free Documentation License (GFDL) then you should do one of the following:
If you have permission from the author, leave a message explaining the details at [[Talk:File:Pink-katydid.jpg]] and send an email with the message to "permissions-en (at) wikimedia (dot) org". See Wikipedia:Requesting copyright permission for instructions.
If a note on the original website states that re-use is permitted under the GFDL or released into the public domain leave a note at [[Talk:File:Pink-katydid.jpg]] with a link to where we can find that note.
If you hold the copyright to the material: send an e-mail from an address associated with the original publication to permissions-en(at)wikimedia(dot)org or a postal message to the Wikimedia Foundation permitting re-use under the GFDL, and note that you have done so on [[Talk:File:Pink-katydid.jpg]].
However, for textual content, you may simply consider rewriting the content in your own words. Thank you. (ESkog)(Talk) 00:15, 23 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Image copyright problem with Image:Range of the Oleander Moth.png
Image Copyright problem
Thank you for uploading Image:Range of the Oleander Moth.png. However, it currently is missing information on its copyright status. Wikipedia takes copyright very seriously. It may be deleted soon, unless we can determine the license and the source of the image. If you know this information, then you can add a copyright tag to the image description page.
If you have uploaded other files, consider checking that you have specified their license and tagged them, too. You can find a list of files you have uploaded by following this link.
If you have any questions, please feel free to ask them at the media copyright questions page. Thanks again for your cooperation. (ESkog)(Talk) 00:17, 23 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Image tagging for File:Pink-katydid.jpg
Thanks for uploading File:Pink-katydid.jpg. You don't seem to have said where the image came from or who created it. We require this information to verify that the image is legally usable on Wikipedia, and because most image licenses require giving credit to the image's creator.
To add this information, click on this link, then click "Edit this page" and add the information to the image's description. If you need help, post your question on Wikipedia:Media copyright questions.
For more information on using images, see the following pages:
Image permission problem with Image:Pink-katydid.jpg
Image Copyright problem
Thanks for uploading Image:Pink-katydid.jpg. I noticed that while you provided a valid copyright licensing tag, there is no proof that the creator of the image (or other media file) agreed to license it under the given license.
If you created this media entirely yourself but have previously published it elsewhere (especially online), please either
make a note permitting reuse under the GFDL or another acceptable free license (see this list) at the site of the original publication; or
Send an email from an address associated with the original publication to permissions-en@wikimedia.org, stating your ownership of the material and your intention to publish it under a free license. You can find a sample permission letter here.
If you did not create it entirely yourself, please ask the person who created the image to take one of the two steps listed above, or if the owner of the image has already given their permission to you via email, please forward that email to permissions-en@wikimedia.org.
If you have uploaded other files, consider checking that you have provided evidence that their copyright owners have agreed to license their works under the tags you supplied, too. You can find a list of files you have uploaded by following this link. Images lacking evidence of permission may be deleted one week after they have been tagged, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you. (ESkog)(Talk) 22:23, 23 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Please stop
Please stop uploading images from Google Images or other web sources and claiming they fall under the GFDL. Unless the creator of the image has given his/her permission for a release under a compatible license, he/she still retains the copyright to the image, and thus we cannot host the image on Wikipedia. Several of your recent uploads have had the same issue. In the future, please make sure to upload work that is either 100% your own creation, or work which you have permission to post. Thank you. (ESkog)(Talk) 06:50, 24 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Image copyright problem with File:Pink-katydid.jpg
Thanks for uploading File:Pink-katydid.jpg. The image has been identified as not specifying the copyright status of the image, which is required by Wikipedia's policy on images. If you don't indicate the copyright status of the image on the image's description page, using an appropriate copyright tag, it may be deleted some time in the next seven days. If you have uploaded other images, please verify that you have provided copyright information for them as well.
For more information on using images, see the following pages:
Image copyright problem with File:Katydid-distribution.gif
Thanks for uploading File:Katydid-distribution.gif. The image has been identified as not specifying the copyright status of the image, which is required by Wikipedia's policy on images. If you don't indicate the copyright status of the image on the image's description page, using an appropriate copyright tag, it may be deleted some time in the next seven days. If you have uploaded other images, please verify that you have provided copyright information for them as well.
For more information on using images, see the following pages:
License tagging for File:Spinosaurus skeleton 1.svg
Thanks for uploading File:Spinosaurus skeleton 1.svg. You don't seem to have indicated the license status of the image. Wikipedia uses a set of image copyright tags to indicate this information; to add a tag to the image, select the appropriate tag from this list, click on this link, then click "Edit this page" and add the tag to the image's description. If there doesn't seem to be a suitable tag, the image is probably not appropriate for use on Wikipedia.
I used the <!-- --> elements to hide the Spinosaurus reconstruction for the time being. There are some issues with it, such as the thin upper arm bones, the size of the ilium and the shape of the pubis, how the lower jaw articulates with the skull, the vertebral spines not matching the outline of the body, and so on. Compare with this illustration of the known material of several spinosaurids. While I personally don't think that there is enough known of Spinosaurus to warrant making a skeletal reconstruction that is not mostly based on scaled-up Baryonyx and Suchomimus, I suggest that you take this image to Wikipedia:WikiProject Dinosaurs/Image review for a second opinion. Thank you for your time! J. Spencer (talk) 18:52, 19 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
your name in IPA
Hey,
One hint about the IPA. The stress marks work like they do in Webster's dictionary, before the syllable, not afterwards like in American Heritage. So Bugboy would be [ˈbʌɡbɔɪ]. (Also, using the correct mark for stress, like here, rather than an apostrophe may strike people as better esthetically.) kwami (talk) 21:00, 19 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks
Orphaned non-free media (File:Our Kingdom Ministry of Febuary '09.jpg)
Thanks for uploading File:Our Kingdom Ministry of Febuary '09.jpg. The media description page currently specifies that it is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, it is currently orphaned, meaning that it is not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the media was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that media for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).
If you have uploaded other unlicensed media, please check whether they're used in any articles or not. You can find a list of 'image' pages you have edited by clicking on the "my contributions" link (it is located at the very top of any Wikipedia page when you are logged in), and then selecting "Image" from the dropdown box. Note that all non-free media not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. BJBot (talk) 05:08, 20 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Orphaned non-free media (File:Our Kingdom Ministry of January '09.jpg)
Thanks for uploading File:Our Kingdom Ministry of January '09.jpg. The media description page currently specifies that it is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, it is currently orphaned, meaning that it is not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the media was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that media for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).
If you have uploaded other unlicensed media, please check whether they're used in any articles or not. You can find a list of 'image' pages you have edited by clicking on the "my contributions" link (it is located at the very top of any Wikipedia page when you are logged in), and then selecting "Image" from the dropdown box. Note that all non-free media not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. BJBot (talk) 05:09, 20 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Orphaned non-free media (File:The Watchtower of Febuary 1, 2009.jpg)
Thanks for uploading File:The Watchtower of Febuary 1, 2009.jpg. The media description page currently specifies that it is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, it is currently orphaned, meaning that it is not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the media was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that media for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).
If you have uploaded other unlicensed media, please check whether they're used in any articles or not. You can find a list of 'image' pages you have edited by clicking on the "my contributions" link (it is located at the very top of any Wikipedia page when you are logged in), and then selecting "Image" from the dropdown box. Note that all non-free media not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. BJBot (talk) 05:27, 24 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
I don't have access to my photos from Mozambique right now, but will in a few weeks and will see if I have any more photos, particularly of the web, that could assist with identification. I will that add a Category: based on your suggestion, thanks!Bdell555 (talk) 15:20, 9 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Help needed for ref for move
Hi Mr 52.40
I recently started two insect pages here and here, but used their binomial names instead of their common names, which it appears is the consensus for naming ento articles. When I move the pages, I want to cite some [[WP:Policy]] for this. I've searched all over the place, but can't find anything. Could you possibly help me with this? Thank you!--Shirt58 (talk) 12:24, 16 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]
ps: Please call me just Shirt. May I address you as Bugboy in future?
Hi Bugboy,
Just precisely what I needed to know - thanks indeed! Feel free to grab yourself one of these critters for your awards page.
ps: When I was a young larva, all I wanted to be was an etymologist. Ooops, I mean entomologist. Sometime during my pupation, I realised that you actually have to be able to do basic math to be a life scientist... numerous exoskeleton moults later, and despite being completely bored by ichthyology, I've somehow ended up a land-based sp of superorder Selachimorpha, but that's another story. A heads up: there's an as-yet only very partially tapped mine of Public Domain bug pix at http://www.ento.csiro.au/aicn/.
Harvest mite
Wondering if you would be interested in helping out with the Harvest mite article. It currently references several different species and needs some work to take it up to encyclopedia standard!--Gak (talk) 13:03, 17 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]
I don't think the main problem is a lack of references. I think the main problem is that it mixes up lots of different species into the same article. I am an infectious diseases specialist, and I arrived at the article from work I am doing on the Scrub typhus article, but arthropods is outside my area of expertise. Thanks in advance! Gak (talk) 15:14, 17 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks for all your work so far! I think the main error is the assertion that mites of the genus Trombicula are vectors of scrub typhus (Orientia tsutsugamushi): It is only mites of the genus Leptotrombidium that transmit scrub typhus. I think that looking at the direction of the current article, it is really talking about Trombicula only, and Leptotrombidium really needs its own article. What do you think? --Gak (talk) 10:17, 18 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]
A few references for Leptotrombidium:
Roberts LW, Robinson DM (1977). "Efficiency of transovarial transmission of Rickettsia tsutsugamushi in Leptotrombidium arenicola (Acari: Trombiculidae)". J Med Entomol. 13 (4–5): 493–6. PMID403286.
Urakami H; et al. (2000). "Detection, isolation and characterization of Orientia tsutsugamushi in Leptotrombidium intermedium". Med Entomol Zool. 51 (3): 169–177. {{cite journal}}: Explicit use of et al. in: |author= (help)
Lerdthusneef K, Khlaimaneef N, Monkannaf T; et al. (2002). "Efficiency of Leptotrombidium chiggers (Acari: Trombiculidae) at transmitting Orientia tsutsugamushi to laboratory mice". 39 (3): 521–525. {{cite journal}}: Cite journal requires |journal= (help); Explicit use of et al. in: |author= (help); Text "J Med Entomol" ignored (help)CS1 maint: multiple names: authors list (link)
Takahashi M, Misumi H, Urakami H; et al. (2004). "Mite vectors (Acari: Trombiculidae) of scrub typhus in a new endemic area in northern Kyoto, Japan". J Med Entomol. 41 (1): 107–14. PMID14989353. {{cite journal}}: Explicit use of et al. in: |author= (help)CS1 maint: multiple names: authors list (link)
I don't think you'll find a reference stating that scrub typhus is NOT transmitted by mites of genus Trombicula. I'm not being flippant: it's like you won't find an article stating that malaria is NOT transmitted by Culex mosquitoes. Negative information just doesn't get published. All I can tell you is that you won't find an article on Trombicula + Orientia tsutsugamushi' (old name Rickettsia tsutsugamushi). Gak (talk) 16:36, 18 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Hello
Hello Bugboy,
I too am one of Jehovah's Witnesses and would like to extend my greetings to you. Tell me, how many other Witnesses frequent Wikipedia (that you know of)? It seems to me like a whole lot. ZackTuren (talk) 04:24, 18 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Signed your autograph book. Not sure if that's what you're supposed to do on those pages, however. I'm a complete WikiN00b. Speaking of which, I was wondering if (considering your amazing UserPage) if you could help me set one up. ZackTuren (talk) 16:36, 18 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Yes I've been on Wikipedia longer, however I never took the time to really go in-depth and dive into it. Haha, most of the editing stuff used on Wiki has gone completely over my head. But anyways, I mainly just want a simple setup on my page, much like TenPoundHammer's page. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:TenPoundHammer
You sir, are a god. Thanks! I'll fiddle around with it a bit (not right now, it's a bit late here xD), but thank you very much. I need to get Wikipedia for Dummies. Also, I seem to be having a problem getting my userboxes on the right side of the screen, as opposed to just being... jumbled.
Mighty mites
This is the first time someone's consulted me on this topic. I have to say I'm very pleased to be able to render assistance! Anyway, while I don't have the full article, IngentaConnect has an article titled The Life Cycle of the Scrub Typhus Chigger Mite, Trombicula akamushi, which would seem to dispute that genus Trombicula doesn't carry scrub typhus. But the title alone isn't very illuminating. This page also seems to indicate T. akamushi is a vector for scrub typhus, but I can't attest to the page's reliability necessarily. T. deliense does as well, but apparently was renamed into genus Leptotrombidium, as this Center for Disease Control page indicates. However, the page does explicitly state that Orientia tsutsugamushi, the cause of scrub typhus, is carried by trombiculid mites. This abstract on Tsutsugamushi Disease (Scrub or Mite-Borne Typhus) in the Philippine Islands also names deliensis (referring to it as a Trombicula) and T. akamushi as being found on rats bearing Rickettsia orientalis. This would seem to indicate, unless there is newer data than what I've found that contradicts it, that members of genus Trombicula can indeed carry O. tsutsugamushi and thus transmit scrub typhus. You might submit this to the folks you were conversing with and see if perhaps their data is newer or explicitly contradicts this. Please get back to me with any further questions! - Vianello (talk) 22:44, 21 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]
If you think that this redirect is wrong, please do not blank it, but request its deletion at WP:RFD. Blanking may be misconstrued as vandalism. Carlossuarez46 (talk) 03:53, 3 March 2009 (UTC)
Ditto Leptotrombidium. Carlossuarez46 (talk) 03:53, 3 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]
reply
Nomination
Hello, again, I want to nominate the article I created, Trombiculidae but I do not know how, or if it completely meets the criteria for GA status(it is currently of B status).
Buɡboy52.4 (talk) 16:49, 3 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]
P.S. Reply on my talk page so I know when you reply, thanks in advance, again.
The "how" part is easy; there are full instructions at WP:GAN and WP:GNGA. The article will, however, need a degree of improvement before it's ready, I feel. I don't think the criteria have changed much since the last time I steered something through the GA process. The important point is to re-read through everything carefully, from the point of view of a new reader (which is always hard, if you've written the article yourself). There are a number of points I can see which will need redressing:
The taxobox seems to indicate that the article is about a genus, rather than the family.
The article effectively has two lead sections, one at the beginning, and a second one at the start of "Chiggers".
The list of genera is too prominent, especially given the number of red links. It should be moved to the taxobox or split into columns or at the very least moved further down the article. Taxonomy and nomenclature are not usually the prime concern of the readers of an encyclopaedia.
Many statements, including many important facts, are not obviously referenced. You will need to make sure that every major point has an in-line citation, which can include citing the same source(s) several times, but each fact should ideally have an indication of where it comes from.
Finally, it's as well to make sure that the formatting matches the Manual of Style. If it deviates from that at all, you can guarantee that someone will pick up on it sooner or later. In a similar vein, check that all genera and species are in italics, and that no higher ranks are.
This may seem like a big list, and I expect other unexpected problems will crop up, but don't be disheartened. It's quite satisfying seeing your work recognised as being of high quality, and the whole encyclopaedia benefits from having well-formed and informative articles. If you ever want me to give the article the once over, just let me know. --Stemonitis (talk) 22:55, 3 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Hello, I recently noticed that you've been creating articles for the individual species of the genus Trombiculidae. While this is (very) good, none of the articles seem to be referenced. Could you please reference them? ErikTheBikeMan (talk) 02:04, 4 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]
I'll be sure to take a look and add what I can manage! Thanks for inviting me to help out on this. - Vianello (talk) 22:57, 7 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Re: Gothic
There's some good links in the External links section of the Gothic language article, including this one which has a bunch of lessons, and the University of Texas has some rather intimidating linguistic summaries of the language here. Other than that, it's just like any other language, pick up a book on it or get lessons, not much more to do (the Internet doesn't work and you know it :) ). I personally have no knowledge of it, bar a very rudimentary understanding of the writing system. If you could help over at the Gothic Wikipedia, that'd be great, they need all the help they can get. So, ganbare! (Wrong language, I know. But you get the picture.) +Hexagon1(t) 04:54, 10 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Well, I can't just pull that kind of information out of my arse, so I'd personally suggest you ask around at the Gothic Wikipedia, if there isn't a consensus on how to implement scientific naming already, I am confident they would appreciate the discussion. You have to realise that kind of information may be hard to find on the Internet, and you may have to follow the lead of the Latin Wikipedia in coining some neologisms as a community. +Hexagon1(t) 02:19, 11 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]
I'm not sure you should be making any neologisms up yourself, or maybe, if you do, make sure to note that on the talk or something. One of the admins – got:User:Jacques Pirat – appears to have some substantial edits, as do got:User:Yadönapya and got:User:Manie. You could try asking them. +Hexagon1(t) 06:33, 11 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Sorry it took me a little bit!
I added an information-rich reference to your sandbox page's article in progress, and did what I could to incorporate the relevant info and do some general copyeditting (though not much was needed). I'll see what else I can find! - Vianello (talk) 01:30, 15 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Not a problem! I know it's scant in some regards. The adulthood section is a bit meager (maybe it should be merged into an existing one?), for instance. But I hope that helps put it on its way. - Vianello (talk) 02:21, 15 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Hello
I have taken the liberty of adding the the Wikiproject animals banner to the talk pages of all the pages you just created. If you want me to do this for any future articles you create, just send me a list of them. LetsdrinkTea 23:00, 22 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Also, I have a script for the automated creation of pages if you want it, thats what I used for the talk pages LetsdrinkTea 23:42, 22 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]
The script I use is actually an HTML page with Javascript automated form submission. Basically, I fill in a list of pages to create, the content to add to the pages, hit submit and watch it go LetsdrinkTea 00:45, 23 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Sure, I can easily modify it to replace *** with the page name LetsdrinkTea 00:59, 23 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]
I just created the pages in Rhombodera, you can see the examples; I will email the script to you LetsdrinkTea 01:23, 23 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Open up notepad, copy the contents into it, then click save as, and then enter pagename.html as the file name LetsdrinkTea 01:39, 23 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Ok, do you know how to find your edit token? Follow the instructions in your email LetsdrinkTea 01:49, 23 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Press Ctrl + F and search for edittoken You should find something like
Copy the value in the edittoken field (in this case it would be 3cf93e27e31d2bffa2afce0be386fcba+\ ) This changes each time you log in so remember to update it LetsdrinkTea 02:19, 23 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Yes indeed, you do. Remember to re-enter it each time you login as it will change and you cannot edit without it LetsdrinkTea 02:23, 23 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Change the text box that says Template into the page content, the same way you would if you were editing a page on Wikipedia. Then, change the text box that says List of pages to edit to a list of pages to edit, each of which should be seperated by a new line in the box. Then, enter your edit summary, then click the button that says Go!. You may have to disable your popup blocker if it doesn't work. LetsdrinkTea 02:33, 23 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Im sorry, I meant to say enter the page content into the text box under where it says "Template" LetsdrinkTea 02:56, 23 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]
You need to disable your popup blocker or anything that might be preventing it from running, because a new window or tab should open, displaying the page you just created/edited. LetsdrinkTea 20:08, 23 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]
You need to right-click the yellow bar and click allow blocked content. However, it would be much better if you used Firefox instead since I did not test it on IE LetsdrinkTea 21:38, 23 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]
In firefox, go to tools > options > content > and uncheck block popup windows LetsdrinkTea 22:17, 23 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]
What did the page say after it opened? Are you sure you typed in your edit token correctly? LetsdrinkTea 22:35, 23 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]
You left a blank line at the end of the list. Don't leave any blank lines because it will take you to the main page. Also, did you enter your edit token correctly? LetsdrinkTea 22:39, 23 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Im trying to figure out why it doesn't edit the page, since it works for me, I'll get back to you soon LetsdrinkTea 22:54, 23 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]
I think I know whats wrong, you need to go into Firefox and Log in, make sure to check "Remember Me", then enter your edit token again. LetsdrinkTea 23:00, 23 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Did you try again after logging in on Firefox? LetsdrinkTea 23:12, 23 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Try using it to make an edit to the sandbox and tell me what happens LetsdrinkTea 23:22, 23 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]
I honestly don't know why it isn't working for you. If you would like you could send me a list of pages and I could create them for you LetsdrinkTea 23:47, 23 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Try this: Find the line that says <textarea name="wpTextbox1" rows="10" cols="100" id="textbox" disabled> And take out the disabled part so that it says <textarea name="wpTextbox1" rows="10" cols="100" id="textbox"> LetsdrinkTea 00:11, 24 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Nice, sorry it took so long! LetsdrinkTea 00:33, 24 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Also, if you want to make it edit pages faster, find the line that says if (x<targets.length) { setTimeout("hit()", 5000); }
and edit the number to the number of milliseconds to wait before each successive edit. To make it edit once every 1 second, you would say if (x<targets.length) { setTimeout("hit()", 1000); } However, you might trigger an abuse filter if you go too fast LetsdrinkTea 01:35, 24 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Hello Bugboy, just to let you know, the Sigara species you created all state that they belong to the "Mantodea" order, which is not correct it seems, because the taxobox states something else. Furthermore, there is a "see also" section which refers to a list with mantis species, which seems to not belong on these pages. Just thought I would let you know. Cheers Ruigeroeland (talk) 09:22, 9 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Latin pron.
Hey Bugboy,
I don't know from your question (which I answered on my page) whether you just had a problem with Trombiculidae, because the dictionaries contradicted each other, or if it was a more general question of Latin pronunciation. If the latter, you'll find everything you want to know (and then some) at Traditional English pronunciation of Latin. A lot of biologists will disagree with that description, however, since different schools have their own conventions for pronouncing Latin. But if you supply the reader with the original Latin, including macrons on long vowels, then people who don't like the traditional English literary conventions can go from there, since the essential point is where to place the stress, and that depends on Latin vowel length. Or you can figure out where the stress goes yourself, and just say, stressed as Trombicúlidae or some such. kwami (talk) 00:58, 10 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]
I see from your user page that you have a basic level of Latin, so hopefully you have access to a halfway decent dictionary. kwami (talk) 01:01, 10 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Hello, Bugboy52.40. You have new messages at ZooFari's talk page. You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.
Its excellent actually having another content builder on board. Maybe soon you'll oust me into third position with number of edits? I've created around 50,000 articles, at your rate you should pass this if you keep it up! Ther eis a huge amount missing, just look at all the nature articles and content missing from other wikis!Dr. BlofeldWhite cat 17:02, 12 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]
OMG you just broke the record for number of pages created in a minute. You create an astounding 55 pages in one minute. Dr. BlofeldWhite cat 17:04, 12 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]
I've never seen so many pages created so quickly. It would be of great benefit if you could help get articles on species and genera onto here en masse. Thats the best way to get things up and running provided there is a reference. Problem is though oftne if you create more than 10 articles a minute you may need permission and approval.Dr. BlofeldWhite cat 17:08, 12 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Wow really? There are thousands of articles missing from various species databases. Best way to get them onto here is my automated tools using a script as you are. Scout around various articles on plants and insects, theres usually many red links.Dr. BlofeldWhite cat 17:10, 12 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Ask User:Proteins who I believe is interested in running a species bot whether he can point you to some missing article lists or nature databases. Your script would be very useful for starting them.Dr. BlofeldWhite cat 17:15, 12 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Yeah that would be great. You can also ask any of the active project members of the various biology projects if they have banks of missing lists and a source. For instance Wikipedia:WikiProject Lepidoptera etc. There are many databases like this from which missing lists can also be obtained.Dr. BlofeldWhite cat 17:25, 12 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Hi there. You have recently created an impressive number of new species pages, such as Macroglossum vidua, presumably using a script. They all look mostly fine to me, but I noticed that the taxobox formatting seems a bit off compared to the usual practice, as documented at WP:TX. For taxoboxes summarizing individual species, the "species = " parameter normally only contains the abbreviated genus and specific epithet (M. vidua), while the full binomial name (Macroglossum vidua) goes in the "binomial = " parameter. Additionally, though the visual appearance is the same, you probably should use ''' to put text in bold, rather than a wikilink to the article itself. It would be great of you could tweak the script before creating the next batch of articles, or possibly even redo some of those you did earlier and that haven't been edited in the meantime. Thanks, Hqb (talk) 17:47, 12 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Really? It shouldn't be that big a change, and it seems like a shame to create large numbers of knowingly misformatted pages. Hqb (talk) 18:03, 12 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]
I did say "misformatted", not "misinforming". Sure, it's not directly wrong, but we do have a Manual of Style and various project-specific style guidelines, precisely so that articles are not only factually correct, but also appear as uniform and consistent as reasonably possible. Note that, in any case, you should probably not be doing any large-scale automated page creation without obtaining explicit prior approval, per WP:Bot policy. Hqb (talk) 18:20, 12 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Bot edits
Hi -- the speed of your edits indicates that you're making them using a bot, but there's no indication that you've requested or received permission to work that way. Are you aware of Wikipedia:Bot_policy? I don't see anything harmful about the edits, but experience says that great care must be taken with these things. Regards, Looie496 (talk) 18:21, 12 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks for responding. I'm not an expert on this stuff, but I do know that if you use software agents to edit articles you absolutely must read and follow the instructions I pointed at (WP:Bot policy). There have been countless cases of people with excellent intentions causing disasters by using malfunctioning bots. And by the way, you may wish to chip in at WP:ANI#Flooding edits, which brought this to my attention. (I'm not an admin, just to be completely clear.) Regards, Looie496 (talk) 18:34, 12 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]
The main problem is that the articles have to be patrolled by editors. If you were listed on the white list of editors then the JV Bot would automatically mark them as patrolled. You shouldn't have any problems but as you can see people get alarmed when you create articles at a fast rate.Dr. BlofeldWhite cat 18:36, 12 April 2009 (UTC)
Personally the faster the better in my own view but you will need permission to do so and get your articles marked as auto patrolled.Dr. BlofeldWhite cat 18:41, 12 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Ask User:Jayvdb and tell him what you are doing and intend to do and ask if you can go on the white list of auto-patrolled editors. He is also a member of the missing articles project and you also might want to ask him about missing lists of species you can work through too.Dr. BlofeldWhite cat 18:45, 12 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Your script looks like it would be very useful. If you have a faster/bot-rate script that you'd like to run, I would suggest applying for approval through Wikipedia:Bots/Requests_for_approval. In the mean time, there's one more fix needed to the pages you created: the species name should be in abbreviated form (H. sapiens) as per WP:TX. I'll start at the most recent and work backward. If you want to help, maybe start at the oldest and work forward. Thanks for the new articles. Sancho 18:48, 12 April 2009 (UTC)
Yeah contact both of them, eventually you should get approval for both. If you have prior approval from BAG and your articles are flagged as patrolled then you should be able to create a high rate of articles per minute.Dr. BlofeldWhite cat 18:50, 12 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Wow, wow, wow, I am being told to do a lot of things, but before I could do them, i go to go to my meeting, and I'll be back like in 2 hours, KK? Buɡboy52.4 (talk) 18:56, 12 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Yes, you will need to register a new about, something like BugBot would probably work well. The fill out parts I - IV of Wikipedia:BRFA and someone will review your bot and decide whether or not to approve. It looks like you've already run the task, so it should be easy to approve it as well functioning. MBisanztalk 23:02, 12 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Oh, it looks like that account is already registered, maybe something like User:BugBot52.40? MBisanztalk 23:21, 12 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]
If you are clicking to confirm each edit, it is manual, if it auto-clicks each edit, it is automated. MBisanztalk 23:32, 12 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Yes, that would be automated. MBisanztalk 23:36, 12 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]
It is a flag that designates an edit as being made by an automated function so that people who review edits can skip reviewing it. MBisanztalk 23:40, 12 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Someone will review your request at WP:BRFA and decide whether or not to grant it. MBisanztalk 23:43, 12 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]
You need to follow the instructions on WP:BRFA, it should not be listed on my talk page. MBisanztalk 00:04, 13 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Hi Nicholas! How can I help you? JavaScript is a very light procedural and object oriented programming language with a very simple syntax similar to C++ mixed with Java or vice versa. As you know, it is the default scripting language for the Internet, because its engine can be embedded in web browsers (Client-side), in a web server (Server-side), and, practically, elsewhere. You don't need to be a programmer to use JavaScript. Check out the following doc at the mozzilla developer center:
Actually, I have not enabled email from other users, but I think that it is not a problem. I remain at your disposal, anytime. –pjoef (talk • contribs) 14:16, 14 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Hello, I am the person who gave it to you. My account was blocked because someone in my dorm who was using the same Wi-Fi network as me as socking/trolling. I would be glad to explain it to you if you want. 96.255.93.122 (talk) 23:55, 14 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Well, everything I asked is on pjoef's page. And I am sorry that happend, I guess the system is faulted. User:Bugboy52.4 (talk) 00:01, 15 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Here is a helpful guide to Javascript. It would be helpful if you know some HTML. Read some of it and see if you can understand what all the code does. http://w3schools.com/js/default.asp96.255.93.122 (talk) 00:05, 15 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]
well actually, if you read what I wrote, I was looking for some new programing.
For example, If you compare Bactromantis virga & Bactromantis mexicana, they have the same content except for three places the page title is, were I put the ***. If you look down to the references, they both have the same reference, and now compare them to Bantia chopardi & Bantia fusca, they have the same references, except for the name of the previous genus replaced by the new genus. And as you can see, the genus is stated as the first part of the binomial name, as Bantia fusca's genus is Bantia, is it possible to program it to remove the last part of the binomial name, from Bantia fusca to just Bantia; possible indicating this action with only two, **. Another problem is the taxobox, were the species is indicated, the binomial name should be abbreviated to B. fusca, can this be programed too, maybe with only one, *. Tell me your E-mail, or some other way to give you the script. Buɡboy52.4 (talk) 19:32, 14 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Yes, that would be easy to do. However, I am going to implement it as replacing $$$ with the genus name to avoid confusion. 96.255.93.122 (talk) 00:14, 15 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]
That's fine with me, you can just send the new script to my E-mail again, and if I ever need any help again, is it OK to use your E-mail? Bugboy52.4(talk) 00:16, 15 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]
@@@ will be used for the first letter of the page name plus a period, plus the second word of the page. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 96.255.93.122 (talk) 00:38, 15 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]
your just going to have to send it to me.
You sir are a GOD!! thank you!
Glad to see somebody has helped you. Let the fun and games commence my friend. I want to see an article on every family every genera and every species on the planet LOL! One thing though can you fix the referencing so it is like Bactromantis mexicana thanks.Dr. BlofeldWhite cat 10:43, 15 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]
I'm glad to hear that your problem is solved. –pjoef (talk • contribs) 13:23, 15 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]
You've spelt family wrong. Can you correct the errors?Dr. BlofeldWhite cat 20:17, 15 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Actually two errors, you added an unnecessary [ in the referencing. Please see the diff and correct the ones you started. Thanks.Dr. BlofeldWhite cat 20:18, 15 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Bot overwriting pages
Just a note: please be more careful with your robot (if it be such). Some of the pages it has created are not new and overwrote existing content, not necessarily on the same subject, such as with Heliodorus. Thanks. • Anakin(talk) 00:12, 16 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]
It is almost done, I cut it off at neoto so I can give a rest, sorry! Bugboy52.4 (talk) 02:04, 16 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]
It won't stop! but I am on thw white list. Bugboy52.4 (talk) 02:05, 16 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]
I use a Java script, and it isn't a bot, I tried to regester it for approval, thats what they said, so I had to get approval by getting sighned on the white list. Bugboy52.4 (talk) 02:06, 16 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Hello, you can stop the script whenever you want by typing javascript:x=9999999; void(0); into the address bar. When you start up again, be sure to delete the pages that have been already created from the list 96.255.93.122 (talk) 02:13, 16 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]
They aren't incorrect, they just are going at a fast rate, and my pages are automatically checked by the JVbot. Bugboy52.4 (talk) 02:15, 16 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]
And it is almost done, it is too late to stop it now. Bugboy52.4 (talk) 02:16, 16 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Yeah, thanks, I'll be here all night with the 2, 375 genera, and who knows how many species! Oh is it possible to make it skip over pages that were already made, so it doesn't over-wrtie them?
If you fill out that list I'll add the species to the genus articles. But a bit every day. Good?Dr. BlofeldWhite cat 21:02, 16 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Dr. Blofeld directed me to you
I tend to create a lot of fairly simple articles on various genera of prehistoric organism. Dr. Blofeld said you and he collaborated on a similar project and he suggested I approach you. Would you be interested in working together for something like this? Abyssal (talk) 12:31, 17 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]
I have no idea what you meant. Could you clarify a bit? Abyssal (talk) 14:46, 17 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Sena
Sena is a disambiguation page. It seems to me that you are running a bot to create auto-generated taxonomy articles, and therefore overwriting the Sena article. Please create it at a separate place, and also fix your bot (and get a flag as well). --Ragib (talk) 22:15, 17 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Unfortunately, you overwrote the dab page again. If it's a pywikipediabot , then it is easy to check whether the page exists. --Ragib (talk) 22:28, 17 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Just to let you know, I've reverted an article overwrite and a disambiguation page overwrite at Melaleuca and Eremaea respectively. Melburnian (talk) 23:04, 17 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]
I made a new version that prevents overwriting an existing page if you want it 173.66.142.101 (talk) 23:09, 17 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]
I would love it just send it to me with the new version stuff (like the $$$ & @@@@) Bugboy52.4 (talk) 01:45, 18 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]
I sent it to you. Feel free to send it to your friend Abyssal 173.66.142.101 (talk) 02:56, 18 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]
it is definitely different, but it still over-writes pages. Bugboy52.4 (talk) 03:15, 18 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Overwriting
You have several reports of overwriting existing pages. Regardless of what method you are using to edit, this is unacceptable. Please change whatever editing tool you are using to prevent this in the future. MBisanztalk 22:12, 18 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Also, please use descriptive edit summaries. Here and in many other cases, you used the same edit summary 3 times, despite it only being correct the first time (English is also preferred). Mr.Z-man 22:27, 18 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Hey Letsdrinktea (or Blah24984, leaf shaped ant, or whatever you go by these days) I got your message, are you really leaf shaped ant? and how can your E-mail be blocked? And it works! Bugboy52.4 (talk) 21:42, 19 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]
OK, I used Leaf shaped ant to test my script and to make sure you were not giving it out and to make sure you were not violating any rules. But that got blocked too. 96.255.93.227 (talk) 01:45, 20 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]
I am getting error code
<?xml version="1.0"?>
<api>
<error code="invalidtitle" info="Bad title ``Lasioderma turkestanicum
''">
Not sure why, just make it manually if it happens —Preceding unsigned comment added by 96.255.93.227 (talk) 22:30, 20 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]
ID
Thanks for insect ID, I'll recat them later jimfbleak (talk) 05:31, 21 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Entomology Degree
Please contact me by e-mail (on my Institution Website See my User page) Only too pleased to help but which country are you inand do you mean systematic entomology? All the best from Ireland Robert aka Notafly (talk) 20:14, 21 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Yes But change magni to nmni New address. I'll try and answer tomorrrow
Your series of articles
Hi Bugboy - I'm afraid that your "prototype" in your series of articles has a typo: "fuit flies" vs. "fruit flies". Jamie☆S93 01:51, 24 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]
No problem, I hope you get it sorted out. :) Jamie☆S93 01:56, 24 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Looks alright (it's just editing your own articles, and the changes look to be valid), although the script created quite a few pages in the process, too, such as this: with the edit summary "typo". Jamie☆S93 02:02, 24 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Hmm, okay. If you could figure out its pattern maybe, that'd be good. I can always lend a hand if you end up just doing some of the work manually. :) Best, Jamie☆S93 02:07, 24 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Beetles?
Hi Bugboy,
Are fruit flies really beetles? Aren't those Coleoptera, not Diptera? (that's the stub tag all your new articles are picking up). Cheers, Antandrus (talk) 02:05, 24 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]
No problem -- I figured you might have a quick way to fix them all in one pass. Thanks, Antandrus (talk) 02:08, 24 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]
BarnStar
The Fauna Barnstar
For all the Bug Pages you made! Yourname (talk) 02:12, 24 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Several of your April 24 new pages
Hi Bugboy52.40. A friendly note to let you know that several of your new pages include an unlabeled external reference that's not directly relevant. Have a look at [1] in Cephalophysa, for example. This resolves to http://www.itis.gov/servlet/SingleRpt/SingleRpt, which is a search page. (I wonder whether you intend for this link to resolve to the result of a search for the term that's the article's title.) Anyway, I just wanted to bring this to your attention. This problem applies to all of the pages I checked, which makes me think it's pervasive among your new pages today.
A secondary comment, if you don't mind: these external references would be a little more useful if, in addition to the link, you included in the single-brackets the nature of the reference. Having a reference list entry reading [1] (arrow) with no text requires that I mouse-over the link, look at the URL, and guess to what it's intended to refer. Anyway, thought you'd like to know. Regards, Jim Ward(talk·stalk) 20:01, 24 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]
The reason for the page (wiktionary:User:Pengo/Latin) is that I get frustrated with not knowing what any of the scientific names of species mean. So I got all the names of all the species (or at least the ones that IUCN red list lists), and ranked the species part of names in order of how common they were. The idea was that others could then see what words they could create dictionary entries for first to make the most impact. Unfortunately it never really took off, and even common ones like "rufescens" still have no translation. —Pengo 02:19, 25 April 2009 (UTC) [And I still don't know what rufescens means.][reply]
Sorry I haven't the foggiest clue about the etymology of Trombiculidae. —Pengo 01:31, 26 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Userpages
I removed that comment from your userpage because, well, it seemed to me that it reflected a fundamental philosophical misconception. And I was being bold.
Incidentally, this is what you wanted to see, yes? DS (talk) 02:56, 25 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Easier question first: there's no connection between (my editing your userpage) and (my adding you to the whitelist), but I saw that you were interested in being on the whitelist and I thought you'd be pleased to know about it. Secondly... I'm not totally sure I remember, honestly; I think it's because it seemed reminiscent of vitalism. Life and nonlife both obey the laws of physics, there's no 'defying gravity' or anything like that. We make a tidy little living in the backwaters of universal-scale entropic decay, but Keynes is still right: in the long run, we're all dead. DS (talk) 14:26, 25 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Well. I've looked again, and... well, your original statement about "proactive" was sort of abstruse. My best guess as to what you meant was something about how is it that life can move, can do things rather than just be... but the thing is, we KNOW how these things are possible. It's because we get energy from one external source or another, almost all of which are ultimately derived from the Sun; the question of how precisely this works is a deep one, yes, but it's essentially "the difference between life and nonlife" all over again - and less clearly phrased. The Sun's energy is produced from what is, ultimately, entropic decay; there's always energy lost. Our lives, our civilization, species, our entire biosphere... all powered by the scraps of energy that escape the sun as it entropically fuses. In the long run, the sun will go out and the radioactive deposits that heat the earth's core will decay into inertness... but then, as John Maynard Keynes said about whether anything is sustainable in the long run: "in the long run, we are all dead". D'you have a better idea now? DS (talk) 14:57, 25 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]
More awards
I know you like awards so check this page out WP:SVC you might find it interesting! Yourname (talk) 00:46, 26 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]
They are awards that you award your self with. So pick the ones your a eligible for and award yourself Yourname (talk) 00:55, 26 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]
It's for both time spent on wikipedia or the number of edits you must meet the post number to award yourself! Yourname (talk) 01:56, 26 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Barnstar
Thank you for the Barnstar :) WhisperToMe (talk) 02:33, 26 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Seconded. Goes to show just how much time I have on my hands. *grin* All the best. Bobo. 02:59, 26 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks as well, but I'll have to decline it. Giving me a barnstar for reaching a number of edits is to me the same as giving me one for having brown hair; I didn't do anything special to earn it. Besides, your barnstar teaches people that the number of edits is more important that the substance of those edits, and I disagree with that. --Kbdank71 03:16, 26 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks, although there will be many who will claim number of edits highly unimportant rather its the "quality" of edits that counts.Dr. BlofeldWhite cat 09:29, 26 April 2009 (UTC)
Hi. We appreciate the gesture but edit count is not seen as important by many on here. One editor for instance could make 100,000 edits with just minor fixes and reverts using AWB and not really add any content while another with 30,000 edits could be one of our best FA producers for example.Dr. BlofeldWhite cat 12:21, 26 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Re: barnstar
Thank you! I shall move that to my user page next time I archive my talk. Grutness...wha? 07:30, 26 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]
I'm not really sure what you mean; I just removed the spacing between them. Are you asking if some of them are excessive or violate WP:EL? If so, I'd be happy to clear the bad ones out. Cheers, Reywas92Talk 22:23, 27 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]
I'd be more than happy to give it a GA review. I'll probably be able to get to it on Wednesday or Thursday. Reywas92Talk 01:38, 28 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]
No, you are not allowed to assign your article GA yourself, per WP:GAN. Although thorough references are the primary focus, there may be many other things that you have missed. I have some homework to do, but I promise I'll review the article soon. Cheers, Reywas92Talk 01:27, 1 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]
....
"replay"?
What? Don't follow. DS (talk) 22:37, 27 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]
I'll do a copy-edit when I find the time. DS (talk) 23:48, 27 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]
File copyright problem with File:Runty,_my_little_Muscovy_Duckling.JPG
File Copyright problem
Thank you for uploading File:Runty,_my_little_Muscovy_Duckling.JPG. However, it currently is missing information on its copyright status. Wikipedia takes copyright very seriously. It may be deleted soon, unless we can determine the license and the source of the file. If you know this information, then you can add a copyright tag to the image description page.
If you have uploaded other files, consider checking that you have specified their license and tagged them, too. You can find a list of files you have uploaded by following this link.
If you have any questions, please feel free to ask them at the media copyright questions page. Thanks again for your cooperation. Chris 09:32, 28 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Thank you...
very much for the 100,000 edit barnstar. With any luck, I might be able to get whatever the next level up from there eventually too. Let's hope so. John Carter (talk) 20:51, 28 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Re: Signature
Well, when watching your guest book, there´s a link that says: "I want new messages", and it leads to this page: User:Bugboy52.40/Autograph Book (already with the edition mode), and there is just the signature of another dude (who probably was in the same situation as me), and nobody else, I sign there anyway, but my signature didn´t appear with the others, so I then used the other link next to the "i want messages" one that says: "sign below", but it just leads to a page that says: "No such section" [1]. In there there is some kind of redirection to an autograph page, but it´s the first one I reached before, the one with just one guy and me (only two signatures that doesn´t appear anywhere). So that´s why it took me like 3 minutes....By the way, what is "guady"? - ☩Damërung☩.-- {{subst:CURRENTTIME}}, {{subst:CURRENTDAY}} {{subst:CURRENTMONTHNAME}} {{subst:CURRENTYEAR}} (UTC)
Bugboy52.40, Damërung has smiled at you! Smiles promote WikiLove and hopefully this one has made your day better. Spread the WikiLove by smiling at someone else, whether it be someone you have had disagreements with in the past or a good friend. Go on, smile! Cheers, and happy editing! Smile at others by adding {{subst:Smile}} to their talk page with a friendly message.
I think the original reviewer is off their mark concerning cite web being necessary for GA. I just rechecked the wikipedia GA standards, and that's FA criteria, not GA. Either way, all your references need to be cited in a similar manner, and right now you've cited inline references in at least 3 different ways. Bare references (only hyperlinks with no explanation as to who the article, publisher, etcetera are) are supposed to be avoided. I added a couple lines from the prevailing winds article, also currently under GA review, which related to insects/arthropods. At the very least, I'd suggest using that style of referencing, which is similar in style to that which already exists in some of the insect article's references. Thegreatdr (talk) 21:37, 2 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]
If you're intending on taking this article to FA soon anyway, then cite web would make sense. For a format that is supposed to be more user-friendly with its inputs, it takes up a lot of code so I completely avoid cite web, except when submitting an article for FA, which I've only done twice so far. Thegreatdr (talk) 00:27, 3 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]
I still have to escape the Prevailing winds GAR before I can help you out more with insects. Will let you know when it finally passes. Thegreatdr (talk) 12:57, 3 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]
I started to help, but then found a serious error with reference 56. Check all your references and make sure no more wikipedia articles, or mirrored wikipedia articles on other websites, are used as references within this article. This is a significant violation of MoS, and if this problem proliferates the article, it could be failed again. Thegreatdr (talk) 14:58, 18 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Categories
Good to see that you are creating species articles. Can you make sure that categories are added to articles? Cheers. -- Alan Liefting (talk) - 23:22, 2 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Vigil surdus audivit sonitum
On your user page, you translate this as, "A death policeman heard the noise". For surdus, you mean "deaf", not "death". Looks like a typo. Viriditas (talk) 04:03, 3 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]
I fixed it and made some changes. Revert if you like! :) Viriditas (talk) 03:06, 4 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]
I think we have a misunderstanding. I'm adding the references I'm going to use in the article to the further reading section as a placeholder. As I expand the article, I move the reference inline. I do this with every article I write, and there is nothing wrong with doing it this way. From what I can tell, you figured this out and used the references inline. So, that's a good thing. Viriditas (talk) 03:02, 5 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Do you have the PDF files? If you want, I can e-mail them to you. Viriditas (talk) 03:12, 5 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]
It looks like most of the current text was copied from [2]. I will try to rewrite what I can, but we need to write it in our own words and cite the sources correctly. Copying text wholesale is discouraged. The further reading section allows you to quickly find the sources, and if you have access to them, use them. If you need me to send you any, let me know. I have access to many of them in PDF format, but not all. Viriditas (talk) 09:38, 5 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Your data reversion
Thanks for fixing my cite ref on that last edit. Just to clear the other issue up: I changed the data from 70 g to 71 g based on the link it referenced. [3]. a littleinsignificant 19:51, 6 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Don't worry, I'm in. I'm no professional, though, so I'm not as quick at the refs as you are. (I just finished downloading this 3.6 megabyte PDF for ref #34 and it turned out to be in German! [4]) a littleinsignificant 20:02, 6 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Problem with the <ref name= Gullan and Cranston> you sent me: when I replace the refs I get "Cite error: Closing </ref> missing for <ref> tag." on the preview, and I can't seem to fiddle around enough to correct it. And ref #16 looks the same... I think we might have messed up somewhere. a littleinsignificant 22:05, 6 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Success!! It works! Thank you, Bugboy, you have just made my day! a littleinsignificant 22:28, 6 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]
EDIT: Oops... my fault, I forgot an extra bracket. But the point is, it's fixed now (I mean it this time). Thank you so much for the incredible work you've put into this whole article! a littleinsignificant 22:34, 6 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Deal. I'll take 9-64, sorry for looking minimalist. Can't edit anymore tonight, I'll finish them tomorrow. a littleinsignificant 00:35, 7 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Finished the last of the refs (one we missed). Sorry about my downtime, you're the one really pulling the weight here :) a littleinsignificant 17:26, 13 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Aww, thank you! (Yaaay, my first barnstar! I'll treasure it always as if it were my very own adopted foreign baby!) a littleinsignificant 19:30, 13 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks. Gracias por la identificación--Lmbugato speak 18:01, 9 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]
DYK for Xylocopa sonorina
On May 12, 2009, Did you know? was updated with a fact from the article Xylocopa sonorina, which you created or substantially expanded. If you know of another interesting fact from a recently created article, then please suggest it on the Did you know? talk page.
Thanks for the invitation to review this article. However I think I ought to look at the older entries in the GA review queue first - the backlog seems to be rising again. Good luck.
BTW I suggest you make your "Archives" box fixed rather than floating - it gets in the way of "edit" links. --Philcha (talk) 05:35, 14 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Identification
Hi Bugboy,
Thanks for identifying the scientific names of my spider and insect photos! Any further help you could provide would be much appreciated.
Errr I wouldn't recommend this kind of experimenting. It can easily lead to an accidental block :/...simply posting a little test edit by your IP wouldn't hurt? Rather than replacing the page with "poop."¤~Persian Poet Gal(talk) 23:21, 17 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]
GAN
I wasn't saying that the article needed to be fixed overnight, if you can do it in a few days, that's fine. It's just that I think to reformat most of the refs, replace the many that are not to reliable sources, and find refs for the bits that don't have a ref (eg first two paras of "larva") may take more time than is reasonable. If it can't be done within a few days, then the article was too far from GA on the refs alone. Good luck jimfbleak (talk)
Messing with your mind?
C'mon, it's not that hard to ignore, is it? :/ It's not like too many people go to my page you know :).
The "I have a userbox that asks for a barnstar and it worked" Barnstar
its for the reasons given in the title. Im going to steal a few of your userboxes, I didnt know they existed Spongefrog (talk) 20:48ish, 19 May 2009 (UTC)
1. All the refs for the article Insect have been finished and formatted correctly.
2. User:Thegreatdr discovered that ref #56 in the article Insect was a mirror of Wikipedia and therefore unacceptable.
I removed the offending ref. If it turns out another reference is a mirror of Wikipedia, the article could be failed the nomination.
We need to make sure that none of the other cited websites are mirrors like ref 56. The way to do this is to take each ref, decide what subject it primarily deals with (for example: insect flight) and compare the ref with that subject's article on Wikipedia. If the two are similar, we delete the ref. a littleinsignificant 01:54, 20 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]
I've slowly scoured refs 1-58, slowly developing a cramp in my left side along with a sudden urge to punch something. They all look clean. a littleinsignificant 16:05, 20 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]
WOW!
I just saw your userbox saying you're desperate for a Barnstar. Two words - WOW!.
That is brilliant. I will have to steal the idea (hopefully you understand), but in return...
Did you know Bonellia Robineau-Desvoidy, 1830 is now Linnaemya Robineau-Desvoidy, 1830 (subgenus Linnaemya, to be precise), as it is a junior homonym of Bonellia Rolando, [1822] (e.g. Bonellia viridis).
To see whether a genus name is preoccupied, Nomenclator Zoologicus. In this case, I would cite it as:
* {{aut|uBio}} (2005): ''Digital Nomenclator Zoologicus'', version 0.86 '''1''': 450. [http://www.ubio.org/NZ/PDF/Vol1/pg0450.pdf PDF fulltext]
You will get the volume and : page numbers as well as the links to the PDF on the results page, after you search for a genus name. Nomenclator is almost completely reliable up to 2005 (less than one name in 100 has wrong information, as far as I have used it).
I also advise you very strongly against using ITIS as taxonomic mainstay. Much of it is an unreviewed heap of decade-old data, and the parts that are up to date are hardly ever complete (much is North American taxa only). Systematics is also unreliable, typically half a century old.
nomen.at is also not reliable, and Encyclopedia of Life is still too bad for en:Wikipedia (they simply kludged together ITIS and some other unreliable sources). There are a few good databases around, but mainly for vertebrates; I know none for Diptera. :(((
But there is hope; what you want is something like this, specifically this (be patient, their connection seems bad). ToLweb I found also a quite reliable source, there is little content on Tachinidae but the literature referenced may be accessible to you.
I usually use ITIS as a source of last resort, and remove it entirely as soon as I have something better (which is basically anything). ITIS shoud NEVER EVER be inserted en masse by a bot. I am serious about that. People who know nothing of the article's topic will use it as point of reference, and as it looks so "authoritative" they'll believe it's the real deal. It is not; it is the Weekly World News of taxonomy.
But don't let this drag you down - it took me much years to learn what database is good and what's crap. Thanks for your work anyway! Having taxon articles instead of redlinks is always good ;-)
Have you seen this? Very useful is this, but you probably already know it.
I know, I wish I could have passed it, but it's not quite there. I encourage you to continue working on the article and surely it will soon be GA. Reywas92Talk 19:28, 22 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]
monobook.js
Hey. The monobook.js file is a Javascript page that is attached to your user account (yours would be at User:Bugboy52.40/monobook.js). Javascript code that you put here will be executed whenever you view a page. Javascript is a client-side scripting language that lets web pages do interactive things.
If you don't know how to use Javascript, that's fine - most people don't. Instead, you can add other people's scripts and tools to your page, and gain whatever functionality the tool offers. You can find more information about user scripts at Wikipedia:User scripts. Hope that helps! If you have any questions, let me know on my talk page. Thanks, Ale_Jrbtalk 19:36, 22 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Hi. Don't worry about copying it - it's one of the best ways to learn! You would have probably found, though, that you didn't see much difference - a number of my scripts are for administrators only and have no effect for non-sysops. Be careful when you;re editing your monobook page, as if you add dangerous code, it's possible for almost anything to happen. If you need any help, let me know. Cheers, Ale_Jrbtalk 20:02, 22 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Tachinidae
It might be possible to create such pages in your sandbox first, perhaps in batches, and delete those that are not good (or flag those that are good), and then mv them to the article space.
It is probably better compile a reliable list, then run the bot over this. Dysmorodrepanis (talk) 22:11, 22 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Oh, I do, but I am not an expert on Diptera, only edit them perhaps two or three times a year. But WT:ARTH might know of a source you can use. User:Dyanega is not specialized in arthropods, but he is a well-known entomologist and taxonomist and probably one of the #1 insect experts here on Wikipedia. He either knows a source, or knows someone who knows a source ;-) Dysmorodrepanis (talk) 03:14, 23 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Did you check the Raw signature box? --Abce2|AccessDenied 00:02, 25 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Seems like you got it. Oh, and about the talk page, I don't know, it just happens. --Abce2|AccessDenied 00:05, 25 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Oh, the control click thing. I honesty have no idea how that happens. It's been driving me nuts!--Abce2|AccessDenied 8:10 pm, Today (UTC−4)
How did you do that? I'm doing this on my IP so I won't put the control click on your page again. Can you please reply to my IP too? --74.197.64.226 (talk) 00:18, 25 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Get rid of the control clicks! Everything I tried failed! --74.197.64.226 (talk) 00:20, 25 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]
By getting rid of, I meant deleting them off a page. And I'm still a little confused. And No, I don't have a bot. --74.197.64.226 (talk) 00:24, 25 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]
I'm getting back on my Abce2 account to find out if I have a monobook. (I don't remeber if I made one or not. --74.197.64.226 (talk) 00:25, 25 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Tried that, but it did not work. In fact, it just put another Control Click. Here, I'm going to get off (so I don't go insane) and sleep on it a little. I will still be on my IP most of the time until the sulotion is found. --74.197.64.226 (talk) 00:31, 25 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Everytime I edit it, it puts a control click. --74.197.64.226 (talk) 00:49, 25 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]
It worked!!!! Finally! Thanks a lot.
The Barnstar of Diligence
Thanks for helping me with the...problem. If you know what I mean. --Abce2|AccessDenied 15:28, 25 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]
I signed your autograph book. Could you sign mine then? (You'd be the first person) --Abce2|AccessDenied 19:44, 25 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Weird. The word "century" looks wrong to me all of a sudden. Anyway, it looks really cool! The "GOOOOOOOOOGLE" scroll thing is a bit off, but we can't do anything about tha unless someone uploads an image of-
Oh my god. I just caught myself talking about this like it was an article. Too much wiki, gonna hang up. Really cool! just a littleinsignificant 02:36, 25 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Re:New photo, ID help please
Hi Bugboy, thanks for the ID! Now I need to reupload the image under the correct name... Tom-b (talk) 15:39, 25 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Test
Test.... ----Bugz were here!--t--c--⇾ 16:05, 25 May 2009 (UTC)
[reply]
Oops, I forgot.
Sorry, I forgot to thankyou for that barnstar. Thanks. I can't think of anything else to say now, so bye. Spongefrog (talk) 19:58, 26 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]
My Userpage
Thanks for the input, but I think it looks better with a white color. It matches the rest of the page. Before editting someones userpage ask them and them edit it, cheers World (talk • contributions) 20:42, 26 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Template loop
You had an obvious template loop in User:Bugboy52.40/sandbox1/project. In Wikipedia a template may not call uon itself. The solution is easy, to put "overzicht" in another page. Wish you success, Debresser (talk) 11:11, 27 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Shoutbox
If you want, I can install a standard shoutbox here for you. (in a space that doesn´t disrupts, like my page) In this case that I´m online, if you have a shutbox too, i can make my rapid-replies there (this tool could be useful for real-time-progress edits on a specified article, you know, for cooperative working). - Damërung...ÏìíÏ..._ΞΞΞ_. -- 20:27, 27 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]
I have installed a new shoutbox for you, remember that my intentions with this chat-facilitating-tool are to help in wikipedia´s improvement and enhancement (ease of synergy, avoid overflooding, etc...), not to be confused with a WP:NOT violation. If you have any comments about misplacing or malfunctioning or whatever, let me know at my talk page. - Damërung...ÏìíÏ..._ΞΞΞ_. -- 22:48, 29 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Tachinidae
Hi. I don't think there is any hope of a website that simply gives a list of tachinids; that's not the sort of thing people could do casually in their spare time, and with the existence of the BDWD, it would be redundant. The problem with using the BDWD to generate a list is that it has ALL tachinid genera names in history (including fossils), not just those that are presently recognized and living taxa. The Nomenclator there, as of today, seems to be down - but if there is a filter for searching that allows you to eliminate outdated names and fossils, then you might be able to generate a list once the Nomenclator is up and running again. Hope this helps, Dyanega (talk) 15:42, 28 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]
The BDWD Nomenclator is the database of all existing fly names, at [5]. There are 21,241 entries for Tachinidae. I seriously doubt you have time to look at all 21,241 names to check which ones are outdated, but that is on fact your only option should you wish to pursue the project: there is no short cut to obtaining a list of tachinid names using this master list of fly names, since there is no filter to remove outdated ones, and those should NOT be given in any list you might compile for Wikipedia. ITIS, as far as I'm aware, lists only North American tachinids. The "nomen.at" site displays only 200 genera between the letters G and M in the alphabet; in order to see other names, you have to know them already and type them into the search. There are some projects that are just too big for one person to tackle - if it could have been done, it would have been done already by someone else. Dyanega ([
RE: Username
It's 'The Elite' in Leet (or, 'The One the Vandals Phear').
I happened to find that the life cycle illustration you made in Trombiculidae is extremely similar to the one on http://animals.howstuffworks.com/arachnids/chigger1.htm . While "information" cannot be copyrighted, the presentation and layout are protected. Your illustration in SVG is perhaps generated using the trace feature of Inkscape. If so it might be a good idea to redraw the image, change the layout, fonts etc if the copyright is not to be infringed. Shyamal (talk) 05:50, 30 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]
A file that you uploaded or altered, File:Chigger bite.png, has been listed at Wikipedia:Possibly unfree files because its copyright status is unclear or disputed. If the file's copyright status cannot be verified, it may be deleted. You may find more information on the file description page. You are welcome to add comments to its entry at the discussion if you are interested in it not being deleted. Thank you. --Shyamal (talk) 05:54, 30 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]
A tag has been placed on File:Chigger bite.png requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section I9 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because the image appears to be a blatant copyright infringement. For legal reasons, we cannot accept copyrighted images or text borrowed from other web sites or printed material, and as a consequence, your addition will most likely be deleted.
If you think that this notice was placed here in error, you may contest the deletion by adding {{hangon}} to the top of the page that has been nominated for deletion (just below the existing speedy deletion or "db" tag), coupled with adding a note on the talk page explaining your position, but be aware that once tagged for speedy deletion, if the page meets the criterion it may be deleted without delay. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag yourself, but don't hesitate to add information to the page that would render it more in conformance with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. Bugboy52.4 | =-= 01:19, 31 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Caloplaca
Thanks so much for doing that! Unfortunately I'd say there's still a lot of research to be done on it to see which taxa are obsolete, junior synonyms, etc. 50 Xylophone Playerstalk 19:53, 1 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]
2 nuevas arañas sin identificar
Te agradezco que mires estas fotos por si puedes identificar las arañas:
fixed your image, the mistake was in the color you chosed, SVG works best with RGB colors, specially in degradations, please check your document settings to see if you are working with CMYK or RGB colors. wich program did you used to do the image? -LadyofHats (talk) 14:31, 1 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]
This 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.
Thanks for uploading File:Our Kingdom Ministry of Febuary '09.jpg. The media description page currently specifies that it is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, it is currently orphaned, meaning that it is not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the media was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that media for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).
_Alt.png)
Araña en Ordes
Araña en Ordes
Araña en Ordes
Araña en Ordes
Araña en Vilarromarís, Oroso
Araña en Vilarromarís, Oroso
.svg&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
