User talk:Casliber: Difference between revisions

Browse history interactively

← Previous edit Next edit →

Content deleted Content added

VisualWikitext

Inline

Revision as of 08:03, 11 September 2013

Nomenclature of fungi

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

That would be friggin' trés bién. The first one that would be absolutely great to get a clarification on is Agaricus which was called Psalliota in many texts fro many years and I've been mystified as to why. Other articles I intend cleaning up are Amanita muscaria, which is the one I intended taking to FA first but it just didn't come together well, Gyromitra esculenta as a future FA, Agaricus bisporus as a future FA, and cleaning up the destroying angels - Amanita virosa, Amanita bisporiga and Amanita verna. Boletus edulis would be a good one to check too. let me know if anything interesting pops up. I'll see ifd I can think of any other taxonomic quagmires later today. Work just got real busy :( cheers, Cas Liber | talk | contribs 02:01, 14 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Generally, that's pretty arcane and only relevant to genus articles, or species that were tightly involving in defining them (for example, there seems to be an odd debate over the multiple type species for Amanita). I'll look up Agaricus, Amanita (since A. muscaria's the current type) and Psalliota. I'll also dig up the ref so you can look it up yourself, with any chance. Circeus 04:52, 14 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Cool, keen to see what pops up. cheers, Cas Liber | talk | contribs 05:17, 14 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I only quickly thumbed through it and noted the full ref (Donk, M.A. (1962). "The generic names proposed for Agaricaceae". Beiheifte zur Nova Hedwigia. 5: 1–320. ISSN 0078-2238.) because I forgot about it until the last minute. Psalliota looks like a classic synonym case. It shares the same type with Agaricus, and might be older. Circeus 01:02, 16 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Weird! I thought Linnaeus was calling all sorts of things Agaricus so I wonder how it could predate that really....anyway I am curious.cheers, Casliber (talk · contribs) 02:46, 16 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

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

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

On Agaricus: Etym.: Possibly "from Agarica of Sarmatica, a district of Russia" (!). Note also Greek ἀγαρικ^[1]όν "a sort of tree fungus" (There's been an Agaricon Adans. genus, treated by Donk in Persoonia 1:180)

Donk says Linnaeus' name is devalidated (so that the proper author citation apparently is "L. per Fr., 1821") because Agaricus was not linked to Tournefort's name (Linnaeus places both Agaricus Dill. and Amanita Dill. in synonymy), but truely a replacement for Amanita Dill., which would require that A. quercinus, not A. campestris be the type. This question compounded by the fact that Fries himself used Agaricus roughly in Linnaeus' sense (which leads to issues with Amanita), and that A. campestris was eventually excluded from Agaricus by Karsten and was apparently in Lepiota at the time Donk wrote this, commenting that a type conservation might become necessary.

All proposals to conserve Agaricus against Psalliota or vice versa have so far been considered superfluous.

References

^ Letter is script and looks like a Russian и.

On Lepiota: Etym. Probably greek λεπις, "scale"; Basionym is Agaricus sect. Lepiota Pers. 1797, devalidated by later starting date, so the citation is (Pers.) per S.F.Gray. It was only described, without species, and covered an earlier mentioned, but unnamed group of ringed, non-volvate species, regardless of spore color. Fries restricted the genus to white-spored species, and made into a tribe, which was, like Amanita repeatedly raised to genus rank.

The type is unclear. L. procera is considered the type (by Earle, 1909). Agaricus columbrinus (L. clypeolarus) was also suggested (by Singer, 1946) to avoid the many combination involved otherwise in splitting Macrolepiota, which include L. procera. Since both species had been placed into different genera prior to their selection (in Leucocoprinus and Mastocephalus respectively), Donk observes that a conservation will probably be needed, expressing support for Singer's emendation.

On Psalliota: Etym.: ψάλιον, "ring"; Psalliota was first published by Fries (1821) as trib. Psalliota. The type is Agaricus campestris (widely accepted, except by Earle, who proposed A. cretaceus). Kummer (not Quélet, who merely excluded Stropharia) was the first to elevate the tribe to a genus. Basically, Psalliota was the tribe containing the type of Agaricus, so when separated, it should have caused the rest of the genus to be renamed, not what happened. It seems to be currently not considered valid, or a junior homotypic synonym, anyway the explanation is that it was raised by (in retrospect) erroneously maintaining the tribe name.

On Amanita: Etym.: Possibly from Amanon,a mountain in Cilicia.

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

With Agaricus L. in use, Amanita was a nomen nudum per modern standard, so Persoon gave it a new life unrelated to its previous incarnations, and that is finally published after a starting date by Hooker (the citation is Pers. per Hook., 1821). He reuses Withering's 1801 definition (A botanical arrangement of British plants, 4th ed.). "The name Amnita has been considered validly published on different occasions, depending on various considerations." Proposed types include (given as Amanita. Sometimes they were selected as Agarici):

A. livida Pers. (By Earle, in 1909). Had been excluded in Vaginata or Amanitopsis and could not be chosen.
A. muscaria Pers. (By Clemens & Shear, 1931) for the genus (1801) from Synopsis fungorum, was generally transferred to the one from Hooker's Flora of Scotland, which is currently considered the valid publication of Amanita (or was in the 50s).
A. phalloides (by Singer, 1936) for the 1801 genus.
A.bulbosa (by Singer & Smith, 1946) for Gray's republication. This is incorrect as Gray's A. bulbosa is a synonym of A. citrina. Some authors consider Gray to be the first valid republisher.
A. caeserea (by Gilbert, 1940). Troublesome because not known personally to Persoon or Fries.

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

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

Homonyms of Amanita Pers. are Amanita adans. (1763, devalidated) and Amanita (Dill) Rafin. (1830)

On Boletus: Not including (Not in Agaricaceae, sorry).

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

I hope you intend to clean that prose ASAP? It's definitely not article-worthy as is. Circeus 01:05, 20 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I'm working on it. Got distracted this morning...cheers, Casliber (talk · contribs) 01:08, 20 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Pork

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

This is the great thing about uncertainty. Lacking an answer, the reports of Maimonides, Mary Douglas and the other guy mentioned are fascinating.Cheers, Casliber (talk · contribs) 22:15, 7 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Scotish pork taboo is a remarkable article! Thanks for that, lol. Alastair Haines (talk) 21:59, 8 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

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

Someone has tagged the Religious restrictions on the consumption of pork for OR, though the talk page seems to indicate it is for a different reason....Cheers, Casliber (talk · contribs) 23:03, 7 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Hmm... makes me more dubious, but I'll check. btw... I'm not Alastair! --Dweller (talk) 23:10, 7 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

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

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

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

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

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

References

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

Alpha Centauri

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

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

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

Bract pattern

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

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

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

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

Hesperian 13:28, 29 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for reminding me on this one - I think it was Alex (or Kevin??) who told me that every bract pattern was unique to a species and hence diagnostic, but as far as I know not much if anything has been published on this area. The similarity between archaeocarpa and attenuata was noted (the bract pattern remaining in the fossils). I seem to recall feeling bamboozled as well by the description when I read it some time ago. I will have to refresh myself with some bedtime reading....Casliber (talk · contribs) 13:50, 29 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Update: I had a look at the pages in question in the banksia book(s), there is a little bit more in the 1981 monograph but not much. I meant to ring Alex George about this and should do so in the next few days...I guess the photos look sort of like hexagons stretched vertically :P Casliber (talk · contribs) 06:46, 2 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Dipsacus fullonum Just passing through. I am not an expert with flora but I do take photos now and again. Does this image from my personal collection help or hinder your discussion? I see diamonds --Senra (talk) 12:58, 22 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Haha yeah. Not a bad comparison at all. a diamond pattern it is there as well. You sorta let your eyes go a little out of focus and see two diagonal lines....Casliber (talk · contribs) 14:12, 22 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Question

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

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

Hesperian 01:24, 1 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

You certainly see those thingies on the developing buds of alot of banksias. I'd be intrigued what the Nikulinsky book, which is essentially a series of plates of a developing menziesii inflorescence, says (not sure, I don't recall whether it had commentary...). Another thing to look up. Was about to look up the patterns just now. Casliber (talk · contribs) 02:35, 1 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Now I have looked at the books and bract architecture, question is are they common bracts or are they something which falls off (don't think so but..). Something else to ask Alex. Casliber (talk · contribs) 06:49, 2 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Having found nothing in George, I've been reading Douglas's stuff on ontogeny of Proteaceae flowers, and found nothing there either.

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

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

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

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

As evidence for this hypothesis I offer the following observations:

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

Hesperian 05:58, 15 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

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

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

On a tangential point, the first image would most likely pass FPC if it ever finds a home that is appropriate. Noodle snacks (talk) 06:55, 17 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Hmmm, okay, hopefully Hesperian will see this thread. :) Casliber (talk · contribs) 11:31, 17 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Gosh, would it really?! I was quite proud of it but a bit unsure whether it had enough depth of field. But if I'll take anyone's word that it would probably pass, I'll take Noodle snacks. :-) Hesperian 23:27, 17 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Parrot stuff

doi:10.1016/j.ympev.2009.08.021

is not finalized, but the preprint is ready and formatted. It may well be one of the most comprehensive and beautiful papers on the topic of Psittaciformes evolution. Only gripe: it still does not consider the fossil record fully. Is doi:10.1080/08912960600641224

really so hard to get? 2 cites in 3 years for what is essentially the baseline review is far too little... even Mayr does not cite it - granted, most is not Paleogene, but still...).

But that does not affect the new paper much, since they remain refreshingly noncommitted on the things they cannot reliably assess from their data. And data they have a lot. Also always nice to see geography mapped on phylogenetic trees. Dysmorodrepanis (talk) 01:19, 2 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

PDFs sent... let me know if need anything else. Sasata (talk) 08:17, 7 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Thx :) Casliber (talk · contribs) 11:39, 7 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Banksia menziesii with persistent florets

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

Hmm..interesting. I have not ever noticed a menziesii like this, but not to say it can't happen. Might it be a menziesii/prionotes hybrid - how far is the tree from you? I'd compare the newgrowth/leaf dimensions/trunk all for comparison. Did it have any new flowers? Some of these old cones have an aura of prionotes about them...Casliber (talk · contribs) 05:11, 2 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

prionotes crossed my mind at first, but the bark is that of menziesii, and nothing like the distinctive prionotes bark. And the flower spikes lack the woolliness of old prionotes florets.

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

Banksiamyces again

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

Berkeley & Broome (1887) is online at http://www.biodiversitylibrary.org/item/13683 — see page 217. There is a picture at Plate 29 figure 18. Hesperian 02:09, 19 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

That's a nice image on plate 29 there. They call it Tympanis toomanis on page 224 decription of plate. How do we capture that image and replicate it on commons? Casliber (talk · contribs) 03:06, 19 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Like this. Hesperian 03:37, 19 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

On page 222, they talk about finding it on a banksia cone near the Tooma River in southern NSW, which leaves me thinking it is a cone of Banksia marginata although they do not state this (OR alert ++++). Funny looking marginata cone but marginata is a hugely variable species....Casliber (talk · contribs) 03:11, 19 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Check your email; I've sent you a copy of Beaton (1982), where they do state that the cone is B. marginata. (You guys should have asked me first; I could have saved Sasata a walk to the library.) Hesperian 03:26, 19 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

@Sasata - I'll leave it up to you whether a solid GA and one DYK for the whole shebang, or 4 species articles - you've got the material and I am happy either way. cheers, Casliber (talk · contribs) 03:11, 19 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Am working on the article behind-the-scenes now... that picture you uploaded is excellent, and thanks Hesp for finding the protologue. Too bad the scan resolution is so crappy; I can upload a screen capture/crop to Commons, but will first investigate to see if there's a copy of the original around here so I might rescan at higher resolution. Four DYKs and 1 GA doesn't sound unreasonable for the lot, but I'll see what I can come up with. Sasata (talk) 03:32, 19 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

The resolution is good. I guess you were looking at it at 25%. Try zooming in. Hesperian 03:40, 19 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Yeah, it'll do the trick. I gave the article a good push towards GA. Hesp, do you have easy access to Beaton 1984, or maybe Fuhrer, B,; May, T. (1993). "Host specificity of disc-fungi in the genus Banksiamyces on Banksia." Victorian Naturalist (South Yarra) 110 (2):73-75? I think once those two are located and added, that'll be it from journals (but you may find stuff to add from your Banksia books?). I could start stubs for the species, but it would be a shame to have to leave out B. maccannii. Sasata (talk) 07:09, 19 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I can probably get Vic Naturalist at UNSW Library next tuesday or friday (slim chance on weekend). Casliber (talk · contribs) 07:25, 19 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

When you get to Victorian Naturalist, you'll also want to grab Sommerville, K.; May, T. (2006). "Some taxonomic and ecological observations on Banksiamyces". The Victorian Naturalist. 123: 366–375.{{cite journal}}: CS1 maint: multiple names: authors list (link) Hesperian 08:43, 19 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for finding that, wonder why it didn't show up in my database search. Cas, if it's too mush hassle for you to get these, let me know and I can order them, would take 1-2 weeks to get here.

I'll have easy access to Beaton (1984) on Monday. No access to Victorian Naturalist. Hesperian 08:38, 19 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Sorry, forgot again. I've just scanned it now. Cas: I'll forward shortly; if you have Sasata's email address, can you forward it on please? Otherwise, Sasata: send me an email so I know where to send this scan. Hesperian 04:16, 25 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I don't see any email link on your user page... I can wait until Cas forward a copy. Thanks kindly Sasata (talk) 15:25, 25 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I guess you've never noticed the "Email this user" link in the sidebar toolbox.... Hesperian 23:22, 25 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

! Wouldya look at that... That's embarrassing! Now excuse me while I go give eyewitness testimony in a murder trial. Sasata (talk) 23:46, 25 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Hang on a sec, will send. Also, will be near the library again for Vic Naturalist. Casliber (talk · contribs) 20:03, 25 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Hahaha. Fantastic. I just realised I never uplaoded a funny photo I took in WA a few years ago. I need to double check.

Casliber (talk · contribs) 20:25, 18 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

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

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

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

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

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

Hmmm, that's what I initially thought when I read the description and sketches in Beaton 1982, but after seeing B&B's 1872 sketches, I was pretty sure Cas's pic was a Banksiamyces. I guess I should reserve judgment until I get more info. Sasata (talk) 17:09, 19 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

From the abstract of Somerville and May 2006: "Apothecia of these crops are of different macroscopic appearance, with lighter apothecia being mostly immature, and darker apothecia producing spores." ... so who knows? Sasata (talk) 17:11, 19 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

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

Yeah put it up, there might be some bits and pieces. I'll take a look. Casliber (talk · contribs) 20:32, 18 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Any Banksia experts you're chums with that might be able to give a confirmation on your putative Banksiamyces photo? Sasata (talk) 05:45, 21 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

damn, I meant to contact Tom May about it (who has been helpful before). Will dig up his email and see what he says. Casliber (talk · contribs) 07:09, 21 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Abraham Halpern

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

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

Figs

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

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

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

You'll probably find this worth watching

[3] He's a pretty good speaker. I created a stub about the book, which is probably worth getting to DYK, although I'm not sure I have the time to expand it enough this weekend. Cheers, Tijfo098 (talk) 04:48, 7 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Interesting will look later when I can have the sound up. Casliber (talk · contribs) 05:02, 7 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]

FYI

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

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

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

Constellation task force assessment

Certainly Assessment boxes like the one for the cardiology task force are made by User:WP 1.0 bot. Just post to talk there and it can make your box easily. —Justin (koavf)❤T☮C☺M☯ 18:37, 12 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]

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

Do you have this book?

Shepherd CJ, Totterdell CJ. 1988. Mushrooms and Toadstools of Australia. Melbourne: Inkata Press. Would appreciate you checking something for me if you do. Thanks, Sasata (talk) 19:45, 27 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]

I know the book but don't have it. This was written by Queensland authors so different view which is good. I can get it from library either today or thursday (next door to work on these days). Casliber (talk · contribs) 20:43, 27 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]

I was hoping you'd be able to tell me what it says about Mycena chlorophanos for an article about a similar (bioluminescent) species M. chlorophos. Don't go out of your way to get it, there's no rush, and many other articles to work on in the meantime ... thanks! Sasata (talk) 01:34, 28 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Ah ok. Today was tricky for a number of reasons so was unable to get there. Thursday will be doable. Casliber (talk · contribs) 07:20, 28 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Problem

GreatOrangePumpkin (talk · contribs) - User destroys the new infoboxes for the pharaoh, see as example at Khufu. There was a clear agreement within the Egypt´s project to use the new boxes. Regards;--Nephiliskos (talk) 13:47, 3 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Sigh - that discussion is a wall of text, but I see the supportive tone. Need to revisit this. Casliber (talk · contribs) 14:12, 3 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you. At least some help. I reported the edit-warrior (who had already received blockings for his behavior), but I received only could shoulders by admnistrators. As if I could know where to beg for help and report such behavior elsewhere! The problem is that GOP knows about the project´s discussion but continues his actions... Regards;--Nephiliskos (talk) 14:21, 3 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Aboriginal Astronomy

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

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

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

Talk:Applied behavior analysis

Hi Casliber,
I wanted to know if you could reply to my comment on the talk page to merge the Behavior modification article into the Applied behavior analysis article, as ABA is the new term for Behavior mod.
See here: Talk:Applied behavior analysis#Merging_the_articles_Applied_behavior_analysis_and_Behavior_modification.
Thanks!
ATC^{. Talk} 14:20, 16 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]

I replied to your comment and have two sources (that I showed you) which verify what I am saying. Thanks. ATC^{. Talk} 22:37, 17 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Resolved the issue. I found a journal explaining the controversy over the terms. See here: http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC2223172/. It states as follows: "A New Science? [section] Perhaps there is a tendency to draw pejorative contrasts between PBS and ABA in order to bolster claims about the status of PBS as a new and distinct science or discipline (e.g., Bambara et al., 1994; E. Carr, 1997; E. Carr et al., 2002; Knoster et al., 2003; Sisson, 1992). There may be disagreement among PBS leaders on this point. On the one hand, for example, Horner (2000) stated that 'Positive behavior support is not a new approach. … [It is] the application of behavior analysis to the social problems created by such behaviors as self-injury' (p. 97). He further stated, 'There is no difference in theory or science between positive behavior support and behavior modification. These are the same approach with different names. If any difference exists, it is in the acceptance [by PBS] of much larger outcomes and the need to deliver the global technology that will deliver these outcomes' (p. 99). Other writers have referred to PBS as an 'extension' of applied behavior analysis (e.g., Turnbull et al., 2002, p. 377). ATC^{. Talk} 22:00, 7 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Hi did you ask? I still haven't got any feedback on on WP:MED, WP:Psychology, or WP:Education yet about merging the articles. Thanks. ATC^{. Talk} 04:07, 17 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]

I asked one psychologist who thought ABA was a form of BM - will ask some others to get a more global view. Casliber (talk · contribs) 04:55, 17 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Some books say that. I do not why. Ask about the Positive Behavior Support (PBS) thing as well. ATC^{. Talk} 23:37, 24 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Hi, Have you asked others yet? ATC^{. Talk} 19:17, 27 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Xmas/summer holidays mean there are tumbleweeds blowing through work at the moment (i.e. very quiet...) Casliber (talk · contribs) 20:03, 27 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]

I see...Actually I spoke to someone I know who has a Ph.D. in Behavior Analysis and Clinical Psychology. He is also an author and works with autistic children as well as people with sexual disorders and to help some people organize themselves in business (See here: Organizational behavior management (OBM)), and has spoken at various press conferences. He said anyone who still uses the term "behavior modification" is using "outdated termonoligy" and that no one has called ABA "behavior modification" in years if they kept up with the literature. In addition, he said Cognitive Behavior Therapy commonly used ABA in the old days which is why they use to call it "Cognitive-Behavior Modification". He said some forms of CBT still incorporate ABA which is known as Functional analytic psychotherapy and Acceptance and Commitment Therapy. But it is primarily two different forms of Behavior therapy. ATC^{. Talk} 08:00, 29 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]

ATC I don't doubt you and am appreciative of the steps you've taken to investigate. Thanks for the update. Still waiting for folks to get back to work....cheers, Casliber (talk · contribs) 09:49, 29 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for the reply and enjoy the holidays! ATC^{. Talk} 22:39, 29 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Hey don't mean to be a nudge but am wondering if you've gotten any updates. Take care. ATC^{. Talk} 04:46, 9 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

The senior psychologist on our ward thought it was only to do with specific therapy for autism, but she conceded she wasn't hugely familiar with the area. Casliber (talk · contribs) 08:17, 9 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Okay. I spoke to a psychology college professor about it and his wife is a behaviorist. He said, ABA, Behavior Mod., and PBS are all the same thing. And some people still use the word "behavior mod.", as I saw in some scientific journals (from about a year ago). Most of the time PBS, a form of ABA, is used in schools (SchoolWide Positive Behavior Intervention Support or SWPBIS) or for autism treatment (Early intensive behavioral intervention). Although they are all the same thing, ABA/PBS usually refer to education; although, technically speaking they are all the same thing. The Behavior Analyst Certification Board website only uses the terms "ABA" (including PBS) and "Experimental Analysis of Behavior" (for research studies), the two are subtypes of Behavior Analysis. If you search the website, they don't even use the word "behavior modification". The only other popular ABA sub terms - excluding education - are "Organizational Behavior Management" (OBM, to stay organized at a work site) and Clinical behavior analysis (CBA). *(Note this is just an update of what I learned, heard about, and discovered. I don't think most people understand it. In everyday conversation though, people using the term "ABA" are referring to the early intervention used for autism including "Discrete Trial Teaching" (DTT)) ATC^{. Talk} 21:54, 17 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

WP:MEDGA2013

I started WP:MEDGA2013 and I included what you said about delirium. I've clarified my intent at that page and I wondered if you intended to try to get the article up to GA status or not. Best! Biosthmors (talk) 20:34, 18 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Yes I do. Casliber (talk · contribs) 05:41, 19 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Gene migration research, India --> Australia

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

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

Core contest microgrant

Hi Casliber, hope you're well.

I note that the Core Contest micro-grant has been approved - congrats; looking forward to seeing what comes of it! I am currently putting together the April newsletter (it will go out on the 26th) and would like to put something in the section on micro-grants about the core contest last time, using it as both an opportunity to plug the micro-grants scheme generally and flag up the contest and getting involved. Would you be happy to put together a couple of paragraphs (200 words or so) to this effect? You can see past newsletters here - http://uk.wikimedia.org/wiki/Membership/Newsletter - and see what other volunteers have written for this section :)

Drop me a line on my talk page on the uk wiki and let me know either way? Thank you! Katherine Bavage (WMUK) (talk) 16:15, 15 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Hi, I have taken over the newsletter from Katherine. Would you be able to write something on this for this month's newsletter? I will be looking for something by 24th. If you are pressed for time, you can write a bullet list of points and we can put it into paragraphs. Let me know soon. Thanks -- Katie Chan (WMUK) (talk) 15:32, 11 June 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for reminding me...Cas Liber (talk · contribs) 20:43, 11 June 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Hi, do you think you can get me something on this soon? The newsletter will be going out later this week. Thanks -- Katie Chan (WMUK) (talk) 09:54, 25 June 2013 (UTC)[reply]

I am waiting on a judge to pass judgement....Cas Liber (talk · contribs) 10:24, 25 June 2013 (UTC)[reply]

I'm sorry, I'm a bit confused here. Do you mean you are waiting for a decision on the approval or otherwise of the microgrant? If so, I was of the understanding that it was approved by Mike Peel back in March. -- Katie Chan (WMUK) (talk) 10:49, 25 June 2013 (UTC)[reply]

I am waiting for the 3rd judge to give me his rankings for the articles in the competition we ran, then I can write a summary. Cas Liber (talk · contribs) 10:57, 25 June 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Hi, in terms of what we're looking for, it wouldn't actually be necessary to wait for the results of the latest contest. Rather than "this is the result", we were hoping for a short piece that can certainly look back at the results of the previous contest, but also personally how you've found the microgrant process, whether application for it are simple enough etc. If you look at Katherine original request above, that should clarify somewhat. If you are busy, I am always happy to do a quick IRC chat where I can ask you some questions and then write up a piece based on your responses. -- Katie Chan (WMUK) (talk) 11:36, 25 June 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Floury Baker request

The taxobox image from this article will hit the front page next week - if you've got time, I'd appreciate any further contributions to the article. In particular could you see if you can figure out if this is the same species, or a different one with the same common name. I'm stumped. --99of9 (talk) 12:43, 5 June 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Okay - we can have a look for some journal stuff....Cas Liber (talk · contribs) 12:51, 5 June 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Nevermind, it looks like Altria perulata = Arunta perulata = White Drummer. Nice of the Town and Country author to give us a binomial!--99of9 (talk) 12:56, 5 June 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Looks like its changed its name - will update the page. Cas Liber (talk · contribs) 12:58, 5 June 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Important find - thanks. Having so many names confuses me so! --99of9 (talk) 13:15, 5 June 2013 (UTC)[reply]

I think we can get this to GA nominee. Cas Liber (talk · contribs) 13:16, 5 June 2013 (UTC)[reply]

I'm up for having a go, but will be mostly offline from Friday for a week and a bit. --99of9 (talk) 13:36, 5 June 2013 (UTC)[reply]

If you can find data on time underground, that would be good. The "over a year" was from a generic Australian cicada's article. I have a 1930's children's poem that says it's 3 years... but I'm hesitant to rely on that :). --99of9 (talk) 13:36, 5 June 2013 (UTC)[reply]
I doubt we can get it to 5x expanded, but here's a possible hook: "Did you know that... floury bakers with very distinctive male genitalia and anti-reflective camouflage are brought into class to startle Australian schoolchildren with their “strident shrieking”" .--99of9 (talk) 13:38, 6 June 2013 (UTC)[reply]

I already 5x expanded it in 2009 to get the DYK then....Cas Liber (talk · contribs) 20:07, 6 June 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Ahah, a 25x bar feels pretty high to jump! --99of9 (talk) 20:58, 6 June 2013 (UTC)[reply]

By my count it's up there, so I've put a nom up Template:Did you know nominations/Aleeta curvicosta. --99of9 (talk) 23:26, 7 June 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Carina Nebula

Thanks for commenting here. To be clear, I have no great investment in the current title, other than that it is the current title, and that any change should be via the proper process. I also think bullying and blustering shouldn't be rewarded. As to what is correct, there is evidence that both names are in common use (Google searches come out fairly even, and results are mixed), though I’d favour the present title for the practical reasons outlined last time. Anyway, I will await developments...Moonraker12 (talk) 13:05, 13 June 2013 (UTC)[reply]

A barnstar for you!

	The Special Barnstar
	For contributing 84 featured articles on wikipedia. Quite brilliant!!! ♦ Dr. ☠ Blofeld 12:23, 14 June 2013 (UTC)[reply]

DYK for Eucalyptus albens

On 16 June 2013, Did you know? was updated with a fact from the article Eucalyptus albens, which you created or substantially expanded. The fact was ... that white box are used for railway sleepers and fences in Australia? The nomination discussion and review may be seen at Template:Did you know nominations/Eucalyptus albens. You are welcome to check how many hits the article got while on the front page (here's how, quick check) and it will be added to DYKSTATS if it got over 5,000. If you know of another interesting fact from a recently created article, then please suggest it on the Did you know? talk page.

The DYK project (nominate) 16:33, 16 June 2013 (UTC)

The Wikipedia Library now offering accounts from Cochrane Collaboration (sign up!)

The Wikipedia Library (talk | edit)

Get free access to research!

...Support Open Access...

The Wikipedia Library gets Wikipedia editors free access to reliable sources that are behind paywalls. Because you are signed on as a medical editor, I thought you'd want to know about our most recent donation from Cochrane Collaboration.

Cochrane Collaboration is an independent medical nonprofit organization that conducts systematic reviews of randomized controlled trials of health-care interventions, which it then publishes in the Cochrane Library.
Cochrane has generously agreed to give free, full-access accounts to 100 medical editors. Individual access would otherwise cost between $300 and $800 per account.
If you are still active as a medical editor, come and sign up :)

Cheers, Ocaasi^{t | c} 20:19, 16 June 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Nomination of Sue Snell for deletion

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Sue Snell is suitable for inclusion in Wikipedia according to Wikipedia's policies and guidelines or whether it should be deleted.

The article will be discussed at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Sue Snell (2nd nomination) until a consensus is reached, and anyone is welcome to contribute to the discussion. The nomination will explain the policies and guidelines which are of concern. The discussion focuses on high-quality evidence and our policies and guidelines.

Users may edit the article during the discussion, including to improve the article to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the article-for-deletion notice from the top of the article.

Drowning Girl at WP:FAC

Given your involvement in Wikipedia:Featured article candidates/Look Mickey/archive1, I thought you might want to get involved in Wikipedia:Featured article candidates/Drowning Girl/archive1‎, which could use some feedback.--TonyTheTiger (T/C/BIO/WP:CHICAGO/WP:FOUR) 04:47, 18 June 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Wikipedia:Most wanted stubs

Hi Beland - is it possible to run a bot and see what turns up at Wikipedia:Most wanted stubs as the most wanted stubs to expand? Interested in what it might turn up for potential DYK expansions...Cas Liber (talk · contribs) 03:36, 13 June 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Hmm, definitely looks like it's time for an update there. Unfortunately the code I have to do that is old and creaky and I'm not sure it's compatible with the current database dumps. I'll try and take a look at it in the next few weeks. -- Beland (talk) 16:12, 18 June 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks - thought it might be interesting. cheers, Cas Liber (talk · contribs) 20:10, 18 June 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Hyderabad

Hi. Thanks for all the work you're doing. I've fixed about half a dozen places where editing caused file invocations to be munged. I'm guessing it was Visual Editor, but haven't been able to figure out what upsets it, except that all the ones it munged have wikilinks in them. They were too badly messed up to deduce what they should have been, so I've restored from an earlier version of the page (just before your edits with Visual Editor). If you had edited any of the captions, those edits will have been lost; apologies if so, but I couldn't see how to avoid it. I haven't edited anything outside the file calls. --Stfg (talk) 12:53, 20 June 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Yeah, that was really weird. I didn't do much after that anyway. I've disabled visual editor as well. Cas Liber (talk · contribs) 20:26, 20 June 2013 (UTC)[reply]

June 2013

Hello, I'm BracketBot. I have automatically detected that your edit to Grevillea mucronulata may have broken the syntax by modifying 2 "[]"s. If you have, don't worry, just edit the page again to fix it. If I misunderstood what happened, or if you have any questions, you can leave a message on my operator's talk page.

List of unpaired brackets remaining on the page:

the family [[Proteaceae]] that is endemic to [[New South Wales]] in [[Australia]]. Described by [[Robert Brown (botanist)| [[Robert Brown]] in 1810, it is found in open [[sclerophyll]] forest or

Thanks, BracketBot (talk) 01:36, 22 June 2013 (UTC)[reply]

DYK nomination of Grevillea mucronulata

Hello! Your submission of Grevillea mucronulata at the Did You Know nominations page has been reviewed, and some issues with it may need to be clarified. Please review the comment(s) underneath your nomination's entry and respond there as soon as possible. Thank you for contributing to Did You Know! Arctic Kangaroo (✉ • ✎) 05:46, 22 June 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Disambiguation link notification for June 25

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Catholic Press, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Tabloid (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver). Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 10:54, 25 June 2013 (UTC)[reply]

DYK for Catholic Press

On 28 June 2013, Did you know? was updated with a fact from the article Catholic Press, which you created or substantially expanded. The fact was ... that the Catholic Press and the Australian Workers' Union periodical the Worker were the only two Australian newspapers opposing conscription in 1916–17? The nomination discussion and review may be seen at Template:Did you know nominations/Catholic Press. You are welcome to check how many hits the article got while on the front page (here's how, quick check) and it will be added to DYKSTATS if it got over 5,000. If you know of another interesting fact from a recently created article, then please suggest it on the Did you know? talk page.

Orlady (talk) 03:54, 28 June 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Request for peer review

Hi Casliber,

I saw your name listed as a volunteer for peer review - particularly for articles related to sports. We are working on expanding the article on Swedish footballer Emilia Appelqvist to ensure it is not deleted and also to improve the article to a higher assessment class. Would you be willing to take a look at the article and provide feedback? Thank you. Hmlarson (talk) 16:54, 28 June 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Gotta get past AFD first. I suspect the sources are in swedish, which I don't speak. I'd trawl newspapers. Cas Liber (talk · contribs) 21:14, 28 June 2013 (UTC)[reply]

TemplateData is here

Hey Casliber

I'm sending you this because you've made quite a few edits to the template namespace in the past couple of months. If I've got this wrong, or if I haven't but you're not interested in my request, don't worry; this is the only notice I'm sending out on the subject :).

So, as you know (or should know - we sent out a centralnotice and several watchlist notices) we're planning to deploy the VisualEditor on Monday, 1 July, as the default editor. For those of us who prefer markup editing, fear not; we'll still be able to use the markup editor, which isn't going anywhere.

What's important here, though, is that the VisualEditor features an interactive template inspector; you click an icon on a template and it shows you the parameters, the contents of those fields, and human-readable parameter names, along with descriptions of what each parameter does. Personally, I find this pretty awesome, and from Monday it's going to be heavily used, since, as said, the VisualEditor will become the default.

The thing that generates the human-readable names and descriptions is a small JSON data structure, loaded through an extension called TemplateData. I'm reaching out to you in the hopes that you'd be willing and able to put some time into adding TemplateData to high-profile templates. It's pretty easy to understand (heck, if I can write it, anyone can) and you can find a guide here, along with a list of prominent templates, although I suspect we can all hazard a guess as to high-profile templates that would benefit from this. Hopefully you're willing to give it a try; the more TemplateData sections get added, the better the interface can be. If you run into any problems, drop a note on the Feedback page.

Thanks, Okeyes (WMF) (talk) 21:57, 28 June 2013 (UTC)[reply]

WikiCup 2013 June newsletter

We are down to our final 16: the 2013 semi-finals are upon us. A score of 321 was required to survive round 3, further cementing this as the most competitive WikiCup yet; round 3 was survived in 2012 with 243 points, in 2011 with 76 points and in 2010 with 250 points. The change may in part be to do with the fact that more articles are now awarded bonus points, in addition to more competitive play. Reaching the final has, in the past, required 573 points (2012, a 135% increase on the score needed to reach round 4), 150 points (2011, a 97% increase) and 417 points (2010, a 72% increase). This round has seen over a third of participants claiming points for featured articles (with seven users claiming for multiple featured articles) and most users have also gained bonus points. However, the majority of points continue to come from good articles, followed by did you know articles. In this round, every content type was utilised by at least one user, proving that the WikiCup brings together content contributors from all corners of the project.

Round 3 saw a number of contributions of note. Figureskatingfan (submissions) claimed the first featured topic points in this year's competition for her excellent work on topics related to Maya Angelou, the noted American author and poet. We have also continued to see high-importance articles improved as part of the competition: Ealdgyth (submissions) was awarded a thoroughly well-earned 560 points for her featured article Middle Ages and 102 points for her good article Battle of Hastings. Good articles James Chadwick and Stanislaw Ulam netted Hawkeye7 (submissions) 102 and 72 points respectively, while 72 points were awarded to Piotrus (submissions) for each of Władysław Sikorski and Emilia Plater, both recently promoted to good article status. Collaborative efforts between WikiCup participants have continued, with, for example, Casliber (submissions) and Sasata (submissions) being awarded 180 points each for their featured article on Boletus luridus.

A rules reminder: content promoted between rounds can be claimed in the round after the break, but not the round before. The case in point is content promoted on the 29/30 June, which may be claimed in this round. If you are concerned that your nomination—whether it is at good article candidates, a featured process, or anywhere else—will not receive the necessary reviews, please list it on Wikipedia:WikiCup/Reviews. We are currently seeing concern about the amount of time people have to wait for reviews, especially at GAC- if you want to help out with the WikiCup, please do your bit to reduce the review backlogs! Questions are welcome on Wikipedia talk:WikiCup, and the judges are reachable on their talk pages or by email. Good luck! If you wish to start or stop receiving this newsletter, please feel free to add or remove yourself from Wikipedia:WikiCup/Newsletter/Send. J Milburn (talk • email) and The ed17 (talk • email) 10:03, 1 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Franz Kafka all time top TFA!!!

[4] 768,586 hits

Wikipedia:Today's featured article/Most viewed

WP:TOP25

YEE HAW PumpkinSky talk 01:56, 4 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]

- Cas, as this was 2nd place in core last year, I thought you'd like to know. PumpkinSky talk 02:30, 4 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]
  - Wow, colour me impressed. Cas Liber (talk · contribs) 02:49, 4 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]
    - Your local paint shop just blew up on you ;-) PumpkinSky talk 02:52, 4 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Scottish society in the Middle Ages

Many thanks for the thoughtful GA review, which genuinely helped improve the article. Much appreciated.--SabreBD (talk) 08:01, 4 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]

No worries - a pleasure to read. Cas Liber (talk · contribs) 10:51, 4 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Habitability of red dwarf systems

You are invited to work on User:Wer900/Habitability of red dwarf systems, as I improve it significantly until it can be brought to GA class. Your aid is most appreciated. Thanks, Wer900 • talk 23:31, 4 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]

I am also intermittently buffing Phoenix (constellation) and Triangulum ...and some input might spur me to resume interest in pushing them to GA. Not hugely enthused to work on them but they are pretty small and I like GA as a stable way-point. Cas Liber (talk · contribs) 00:18, 21 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]

When God Writes Your Love Story

Hi Casliber,

Thank you for contributing to the FAC for the Carabane article back in 2009; it was my first featured article and I was glad to see it go up on the main page. I have submitted another article for featured status: When God Writes Your Love Story. If you would be willing to contribute to the corresponding FAC, I would appreciate your input.

Neelix (talk) 13:47, 5 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]

DYK for Grevillea mucronulata

On 5 July 2013, Did you know? was updated with a fact from the article Grevillea mucronulata, which you created or substantially expanded. The fact was ... that the green spider flower was the first grevillea known to science? The nomination discussion and review may be seen at Template:Did you know nominations/Grevillea mucronulata. You are welcome to check how many hits the article got while on the front page (here's how, quick check) and it will be added to DYKSTATS if it got over 5,000. If you know of another interesting fact from a recently created article, then please suggest it on the Did you know? talk page.

Gatoclass (talk) 16:02, 5 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Volvopluteus gloiocephalus

Was hoping you could source the Greek etymology for me? Sasata (talk) 05:40, 6 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]

WP:FOUR for Tylopilus felleus

		Four Award
		Congratulations! You have been awarded the Four Award for your work from beginning to end on Tylopilus felleus. TonyTheTiger (T/C/BIO/WP:CHICAGO/WP:FOUR) 11:49, 6 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]

--TonyTheTiger (T/C/BIO/WP:CHICAGO/WP:FOUR) 11:49, 6 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Question

For you after your oppose at Wikipedia_talk:Featured_article_candidates#Alternate_RFC_on_governance_of_the_FA_forums PumpkinSky talk 22:55, 7 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Nettlecombe Court

Thank you for your review which has definitely helped to improve the article.— Rod ^talk 07:31, 12 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]

No worries - a pleasure to read as always. Cas Liber (talk · contribs) 07:48, 13 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Responding here

I've pulled out of there due to some recent tasteless comments. Regarding, "Anthony, have you scrolled up through Eric's talk page and looked through the history? Before the last kerfuffle there are loads of constructive article-related discussion, help with writing and copyediting articles all over the place. Does this look like a net negative? Really?"

I know. It's because of his helpful collaboration and excellent hard content work that I've resolutely supported him until now. And even now it's not an easy call. But at this stage, yes. I think it's time he stopped that. Especially given the situation and target of some of those insults. --Anthonyhcole (talk · contribs · email) 16:02, 12 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Yeah, well in an ideal world I'd wish Eric weren't so colourful in replies as it gives folks ammunition. But we're all human. Anyway, I have too much on my plate to devote much energy to it or anything else that I don't find enjoyable at present. Sigh. Cas Liber (talk · contribs) 07:47, 13 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]

In an ideal world Eric would realise how offensive and hurtful his insults are, and you would recognise that that matters on a simple human level - that the feelings of the people he gratuitously, petulantly, capriciously insults matter. Characterising the problem simply as giving folks ammunition misses entirely the human impact of his behaviour.

If you want to consider secondary consequences of his oafishness, then on top of the "ammunition" he delivers up to others please also consider the amount of time it consumes and division it causes here. --Anthonyhcole (talk · contribs · email) 08:04, 13 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]

No point pinging Eric as he can't respond at present. More often than not, there is a slippery slope happening and fraying tempers. I do feel sorry for targets but not bystanders who take it upon themselves to be indignant, especially some who seem to spend more time arguing at various discussion boards than contributing content. If I were feeling less jaded at present, I'd point out that our first pillar is that we're an encyclopedia which is at least as important as our civility pillar. I am interested in the end product. I would say that the numbers of encyclopedia-building editors who have benefitted from his copyediting and had a pleasant time vastly outnumber encyclopedia-building editors who have personally been discouraged by his outbursts. Note some of the former were once in the latter category.

Also - none of us are angels - I'd rather people who lose it with someone, get annoyed but get over it quickly rather than folks who are outwardly polite but bear secret ill-will or antipathy. The latter phenomenon I would say directly is a factor to some degree in the failure to achieve consensus of every large community decision from main page appearance to pending changes to whatever. Anyway, we both have our views and neither is going to convince the other, but I do acknowledge your point of view as having vailidity. Cas Liber (talk · contribs) 08:22, 13 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]

The ping was just a matter of politeness. I've got his talk page watchlisted if he wants to respond. Yes to all the above. This is not easy. --Anthonyhcole (talk · contribs · email) 08:32, 13 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]

And just to make things more fun - wikipedia is at a crossroads - no editor is an island and it takes a concerted and collaborative effort to keep producing the top material that we've started to produce. If wikipedia wants to be taken seriously it needs all hands (of expeirenced content editors) on deck Cas Liber (talk · contribs) 09:15, 13 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Personally, I try as hard as possible to ignore the dramah boards and the folks who inhabit them. While I don't always buy into the "evil admins vs. the virtuous content creators", like all memes, there is a grain of truth to them. Those content creators are the folks actually building the website. When folks prattle about how important it is that we be inclusive and accepting of others, it always amazes me that what they really mean is that we should be inclusive and accepting of people who act like we want them to, not people who occasionally get fed up with things and lose their temper. It's a lot easier to not lose your temper or get cranky when you don't have hours of hard work to defend. Ealdgyth - Talk 12:29, 13 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]

WP:GOCE invitation

Hi, Casliber. I know you're incredibly busy pretty much all the time, but I wanted to drop you a note to see if you'd be interested in joining the Guild of Copy Editors July 2013 backlog elimination drive. Since we started running drives three years ago, we've cut the backlog down by about two thirds, but we have stalled out a bit now. We need more help to keep pushing down the number of articles that still need copy editing. The current drive is already halfway over! Please consider joining it and chipping in a few articles if you have the time. I hope to see you there. Cheers. —Torchiest ^talk_edits 13:07, 15 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Yeah, maybe...Cas Liber (talk · contribs) 20:29, 15 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Disambiguation link notification for July 16

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Ficus subpisocarpa, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Fig (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver). Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 10:55, 16 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Core contest prizes?

Hi Casliber! I was wondering if there's any status update on awarding prizes for the Core Contest held this spring? It's been two months since the contest closed, so I am hoping the results will be announced soon. Best, -- Diannaa (talk) 00:17, 17 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Long story but all sorted now - will post something within 24 hours. Sorry for delay. Cas Liber (talk · contribs) 01:53, 17 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you ~! -- Diannaa (talk) 02:55, 17 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Deletion of article Noel Chiappa

Hi, I noticed that a couple of years back, User:Seldonquin created an article on me, which you (properly) deleted because it had been created by a blocked user. I was wondering if you'd mind un-deleting it (or object if I un-deleted it) - it's basically an OK article - one or two minor errors. It would fill a red link (admittedly only one, but it's not one I put in :-).

I dunno if I'd be considered notable, but I offer as data that i) I'm one of about 30 people listed on the "Birth of the Internet" plaque at Stanford, and also ii) one of the people listed in RFC-1251, "Who's Who in the Internet: Biographies of IAB, IESG and IRSG Members" - one of only about half-a-dozen people who are in both lists.

Your call... :-) Noel (talk) 14:03, 19 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Okay....(damn, I forgot all about the creator...oh well) if you're happy to improve it have at it. Cas Liber (talk · contribs) 14:20, 19 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks! Will do. Noel (talk) 15:02, 20 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Talkback

Hello, Casliber. You have new messages at Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Astronomy.
Message added 04:42, 21 July 2013 (UTC). You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.

StringTheory11 (t • c) 04:42, 21 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Costa Rica

Hi Casliber! I'm contacting you as you're the protecting admin of Costa Rica. The article has been semi-protected for over a year now, though the editing volume seems to be low, with 56 edits to the article so far this year. I think the semi-protection can be safely removed now. Cheers, eh bien mon prince (talk) 04:11, 23 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Sure, why not. Let's see how it goes. Cas Liber (talk · contribs) 04:57, 23 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]

This week's articles for improvement - 22 July 2013 to 28 July 2013

posted by Northamerica1000^(talk) 13:57, 23 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]

I've added an opt-in section for those interested in receiving TAFI notifications on the project's main page, located here. Those that don't opt-in won't receive this message again. Also, a revised notification template has been created, located at Template:TAFI weekly selections notice. Northamerica1000^(talk) 05:11, 24 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Boletus calopus

With a fatter lead and a final c/e, I think this is about ready for GAN. I'll eventually have some more details to add from Alessio 1985 and perhaps other bits from elsewhere, but that can wait for FAC... Sasata (talk) 08:54, 24 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Cool - will take a look and tweak. Cas Liber (talk · contribs) 12:01, 24 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]

I buffed the lead a little (using Boletus luridus as a comparator but am mindful that this article is less that half the word count of that one, so left the lead proportionally smaller Cas Liber (talk · contribs) 20:22, 24 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Your GA nomination of Boletus calopus

Hello, I just wanted to introduce myself and let you know I am glad to be reviewing the article Boletus calopus you nominated for GA-status according to the criteria. This process may take up to 7 days. Feel free to contact me with any questions or comments you might have during this period. Message delivered by GA bot, on behalf of J Milburn -- J Milburn (talk) 22:37, 24 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]

DYK for Old Windsor Road

On 25 July 2013, Did you know? was updated with a fact from the article Old Windsor Road, which you created or substantially expanded. The fact was ... that in 1794, Old Windsor Road was the second major road in Sydney? The nomination discussion and review may be seen at Template:Did you know nominations/Old Windsor Road. You are welcome to check how many hits the article got while on the front page (here's how, quick check) and it will be added to DYKSTATS if it got over 5,000. If you know of another interesting fact from a recently created article, then please suggest it on the Did you know? talk page.

Cas Liber (talk · contribs) 05:03, 25 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]

DYK for Ficus subpisocarpa

On 25 July 2013, Did you know? was updated with a fact from the article Ficus subpisocarpa, which you created or substantially expanded. The fact was ... that cavities in the stems of the fig species Ficus subpisocarpa can host ant colonies? The nomination discussion and review may be seen at Template:Did you know nominations/Ficus subpisocarpa. You are welcome to check how many hits the article got while on the front page (here's how, quick check) and it will be added to DYKSTATS if it got over 5,000. If you know of another interesting fact from a recently created article, then please suggest it on the Did you know? talk page.

Orlady (talk) 21:33, 25 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Your GA nomination of Boletus calopus

The article Boletus calopus you nominated as a good article has passed ; see Talk:Boletus calopus for comments about the article. Well done! Message delivered by GA bot, on behalf of J Milburn -- J Milburn (talk) 22:48, 25 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Your expertise is awaited

At Wikipedia_talk:Four_Award#Scribbled_Thoughts, I have been awaiting your expertise regarding WP:WBFAN.--TonyTheTiger (T/C/BIO/WP:CHICAGO/WP:FOUR) 18:07, 26 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Impressive editing

Hi! Impressed by your editing list. Keep it up! — Preceding unsigned comment added by S72013 (talk • contribs) 13:39, 28 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Cool, thanks for the note! cheers, Cas Liber (talk · contribs) 14:33, 28 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]

DYK-Good Article Request for Comment

Did you know ... that since you expressed an opinion on the GA/DYK proposal last year, we invite you to contribute to a formal Request for Comment on the matter? Please see the proposal on its subpage here, or on the main DYK talk page. To add the discussion to your watchlist, click this link. Regards, Gilderien Chat|What I've done22:51, 28 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Hi, would you like to elaborate on your !vote? :) --Gilderien Chat|Contributions 00:50, 29 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Bird taxonomy

Hi Cas – I note that you have just stated on the Birds Project talk page that we have agreed to use IOC taxonomy in bird articles. Now, I am happy with this, but also note that the taxonomy and resources guide of the project gives HBW as the de facto standard. HBW follows (or is about to follow) BirdLife International taxonomy (which appears to be more conservative – or maybe just lags behind IOC). Any problem if I update the guide to replace HBW with IOC on this? Maias (talk) 01:54, 31 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Sounds good to me. Cas Liber (talk · contribs) 01:57, 31 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]

WikiCup 2013 July newsletter

We're halfway through this year's penultimate round, and the competition is moving along well. Pool A's Sasata (submissions) currently leads overall, while Pool B's Sturmvogel_66 (submissions) is second. Both leaders are WikiCup veterans, and both have already scored over 600 points this month. If the round were to end today, Miyagawa (submissions), with 274 points, would be the lowest-scoring participant to make it through. This indicates that participants will need a score comparable to last year's (573, the highest ever) to qualify for the final. The high scores this year are a testament both to the quality of participants and to the increased focus on significant content (eligible for bonus points) in this year's competition. So far this round, both Sasata and Cwmhiraeth (submissions) have made up over half of their score through bonus points, with, for example, high importance FA koala earning Sasata a total of 440 points (from a multiplier of 4.4) and high-importance GA sea earning Cwmhiraeth a total of 216 points (from a multiplier of 7.2). Other articles on important topics submitted this round include a featured article on the Norman conquest of England by Ealdgyth (submissions), and good articles on Nobel laureate in literature Henryk Sienkiewicz, Nobel laureate in physics Hans Bethe, and the noted Japanese aircraft carrier Hiryū. These articles are by Piotrus (submissions), Hawkeye7 (submissions) and Sturmvogel_66 respectively.

Other than that, there is not much to report! If you are concerned that your nomination—whether it is at good article candidates, a featured process, or anywhere else—will not receive the necessary reviews, please list it on Wikipedia:WikiCup/Reviews. If you want to help out with the WikiCup, please do your bit to reduce the review backlogs! Questions are welcome on Wikipedia talk:WikiCup, and the judges are reachable on their talk pages or by email. Good luck! If you wish to start or stop receiving this newsletter, please feel free to add or remove yourself from Wikipedia:WikiCup/Newsletter/Send. J Milburn (talk • email) and The ed17 (talk • email) 23:28, 31 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]

DYK RfC

As a listed DYK participant, you are invited to contribute to a formal Request for Comment on the question of whether Good Articles should appear in the Did You Know? slot in future. Please see the proposal on its subpage here, or on the main DYK talk page. To add the discussion to your watchlist, click this link. Thank you in advance. Gilderien Chat|Contributions00:21, 1 August 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Welcome to The Wikipedia Adventure!

Hi! We're so happy you wanted to play to learn, as a friendly and fun way to get into our community and mission. I think these links might be helpful to you as you get started.

If you have any questions, you can ask me personally. I'm Ocaasi. I'm glad you're with us :) -- Ocaasi^{leave me a message}

Mission 1	Mission 2	Mission 3	Mission 4	Mission 5	Mission 6	Mission 7
Say Hello to the World	An Invitation to Earth	Small Changes, Big Impact	The Neutral Point of View	The Veil of Verifiability	The Civility Code	Looking Good Together

Get Help

About The Wikipedia Adventure | Hang out in the Interstellar Lounge

WP:FOUR for Boletus badius

		Four Award
		Congratulations! You have been awarded the Four Award for your work from beginning to end on Boletus badius. TonyTheTiger (T/C/WP:FOUR/WP:CHICAGO/WP:WAWARD) 12:09, 3 August 2013 (UTC)[reply]

--TonyTheTiger (T/C/WP:FOUR/WP:CHICAGO/WP:WAWARD) 12:09, 3 August 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Delphine Parrott

Please take another look at Template:Did you know nominations/Delphine Parrott which is now being disputed. Andrew Davidson (talk) 08:49, 5 August 2013 (UTC)[reply]

DYK for Xerocomellus

On 5 August 2013, Did you know? was updated with a fact from the article Xerocomellus, which you created or substantially expanded. The fact was ... that mushrooms of the genus Xerocomellus (X. armeniacus pictured) are often brightly coloured? The nomination discussion and review may be seen at Template:Did you know nominations/Xerocomellus. You are welcome to check how many hits the article got while on the front page (here's how, quick check) and it will be added to DYKSTATS if it got over 5,000. If you know of another interesting fact from a recently created article, then please suggest it on the Did you know? talk page.

The DYK project (nominate) 16:02, 5 August 2013 (UTC)

DYK for Xerocomellus armeniacus

On 5 August 2013, Did you know? was updated with a fact from the article Xerocomellus armeniacus, which you created or substantially expanded. The fact was ... that mushrooms of the genus Xerocomellus (X. armeniacus pictured) are often brightly coloured? You are welcome to check how many hits the article got while on the front page (here's how, quick check) and it will be added to DYKSTATS if it got over 5,000. If you know of another interesting fact from a recently created article, then please suggest it on the Did you know? talk page.

The DYK project (nominate) 16:03, 5 August 2013 (UTC)

GOCE July 2013 barnstar

		The Minor Barnstar
		This barnstar is awarded for participation in the WP:GOCE July 2013 copy edit drive. Thank you for taking part! Diannaa (talk) 23:35, 5 August 2013 (UTC)[reply]

A cupcake for you!

Thanks for reviewing Tonkin Highway, and helping it become a GA - Evad37 (talk) 03:46, 7 August 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Cool, thanks/no problem - a pleasure to read - we need to do a fair bit of buffing to catch up with the Americans....Cas Liber (talk · contribs) 04:19, 7 August 2013 (UTC)[reply]

FAC: Parity of zero

Hi Cas. I was wondering whether, if i promise to do a review on your next FA nom, you'd take a look at parity of zero? It isn't my nom, I was just a reviewer, but it's almost at the bottom of the list, only two people have looked at it, and being entirely selfish it disappoints me when i do a review and then the nom gets archived for lack of eyes rather than actual problems. Great effort on Australia's banksias as always. How many have you taken to FA now?! Cheers, hamiltonstone (talk) 00:03, 8 August 2013 (UTC)[reply]

I'll take a look now. Don't feel obliged to review mine as I've generally been pretty lucky with getting timely reviews. Yes it is > 20 banksias.....Cas Liber (talk · contribs) 03:09, 8 August 2013 (UTC)[reply]

DYK for Bazinga rieki

On 9 August 2013, Did you know? was updated with a fact from the article Bazinga rieki, which you created or substantially expanded. The fact was ... that the jellyfish Bazinga rieki was named in part for the catchphrase uttered by Sheldon Cooper in The Big Bang Theory? The nomination discussion and review may be seen at Template:Did you know nominations/Bazinga rieki. You are welcome to check how many hits the article got while on the front page (here's how, quick check) and it will be added to DYKSTATS if it got over 5,000. If you know of another interesting fact from a recently created article, then please suggest it on the Did you know? talk page.

Alex Shih ^Talk 03:04, 9 August 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Razor grinder

I see you've caught the cicada bug :-). At some point I'd love to write about the Razor grinder (Henicopsaltria Eydouxii) because it has a cool name and I have some great pics: commons:Category:Henicopsaltria_Eydouxii. Let me know if you want to collaborate again. --99of9 (talk) 05:24, 9 August 2013 (UTC)[reply]

GO for it - choose the taxobox image and expand away....I borrowed the cicadas of Australia book too.Cas Liber (talk · contribs) 05:29, 9 August 2013 (UTC)[reply]

DYK for Bushshrike

On 9 August 2013, Did you know? was updated with a fact from the article Bushshrike, which you created or substantially expanded. The fact was ... that the mating song of the male Slate-colored Boubou (pictured), a member of the Bushshrike family, depends more on his mate's hormone levels than his own? The nomination discussion and review may be seen at Template:Did you know nominations/Bushshrike. You are welcome to check how many hits the article got while on the front page (here's how, quick check) and it will be added to DYKSTATS if it got over 5,000. If you know of another interesting fact from a recently created article, then please suggest it on the Did you know? talk page.

— Crisco 1492 (talk) 14:47, 9 August 2013 (UTC)[reply]

DYK for Slate-colored Boubou

On 9 August 2013, Did you know? was updated with a fact from the article Slate-colored Boubou, which you created or substantially expanded. The fact was ... that the mating song of the male Slate-colored Boubou (pictured), a member of the Bushshrike family, depends more on his mate's hormone levels than his own? You are welcome to check how many hits the article got while on the front page (here's how, quick check) and it will be added to DYKSTATS if it got over 5,000. If you know of another interesting fact from a recently created article, then please suggest it on the Did you know? talk page.

— Crisco 1492 (talk) 14:48, 9 August 2013 (UTC)[reply]

DYK for Malaconotoidea

On 10 August 2013, Did you know? was updated with a fact from the article Malaconotoidea, which you created or substantially expanded. The fact was ... that the bushshrikes, helmetshrikes, Ioras, vangas and woodswallows all belong to a group of shrike-like songbirds known as the Malaconotoidea? The nomination discussion and review may be seen at Template:Did you know nominations/Malaconotoidea. You are welcome to check how many hits the article got while on the front page (here's how, quick check) and it will be added to DYKSTATS if it got over 5,000. If you know of another interesting fact from a recently created article, then please suggest it on the Did you know? talk page.

The DYK project (nominate) 02:33, 10 August 2013 (UTC)

A barnstar for you!

	The Editor's Barnstar
	Perfect transformation of the page Ficus subpisocarpa. Geat use of the references. Daegil (talk) 04:04, 10 August 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks - I am sure there are plenty more around. Had experience with ficus articles....Cas Liber (talk · contribs) 04:18, 10 August 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Disambiguation link notification for August 10

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Thopha sessiliba, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Ghost gum (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver). Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 10:39, 10 August 2013 (UTC)[reply]

ArbCom clarification request

See [5]. Someone not using his real name (talk) 21:30, 10 August 2013 (UTC)[reply]

DYK for Adenanthos ellipticus

On 11 August 2013, Did you know? was updated with a fact from the article Adenanthos ellipticus, which you created or substantially expanded. The fact was ... that the oval-leaf adenanthos is known from only three populations covering less than 0.31 km² (77 acres) in Fitzgerald River National Park? The nomination discussion and review may be seen at Template:Did you know nominations/Adenanthos ellipticus. You are welcome to check how many hits the article got while on the front page (here's how, quick check) and it will be added to DYKSTATS if it got over 5,000. If you know of another interesting fact from a recently created article, then please suggest it on the Did you know? talk page.

Alex Shih ^Talk 02:04, 11 August 2013 (UTC)[reply]

DYK for New Zealand Coot

On 11 August 2013, Did you know? was updated with a fact from the article New Zealand Coot, which you recently nominated. The fact was ... that the New Zealand and the Chatham Coot were likely hunted to extinction by the Māori people? The nomination discussion and review may be seen at Template:Did you know nominations/New Zealand Coot. You are welcome to check how many hits the article got while on the front page (here's how, quick check) and it will be added to DYKSTATS if it got over 5,000. If you know of an interesting fact from another recently created article, then please suggest it on the Did you know? talk page.

Alex Shih ^Talk 13:51, 11 August 2013 (UTC)[reply]

DYK for Chatham Coot

On 11 August 2013, Did you know? was updated with a fact from the article Chatham Coot, which you recently nominated. The fact was ... that the New Zealand and the Chatham Coot were likely hunted to extinction by the Māori people? You are welcome to check how many hits the article got while on the front page (here's how, quick check) and it will be added to DYKSTATS if it got over 5,000. If you know of an interesting fact from another recently created article, then please suggest it on the Did you know? talk page.

Alex Shih ^Talk 13:51, 11 August 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Template:Did you know nominations/Tower Belle

Hi, Good suggestion for hook, which I have reworked. When you have a moment, could you take another look? Jezhotwells (talk) 18:41, 11 August 2013 (UTC)[reply]

DYK for Thopha saccata

On 12 August 2013, Did you know? was updated with a fact from the article Thopha saccata, which you created or substantially expanded. The fact was ... that the noise made by large numbers of double drummers has been described as "almost unbearable"? The nomination discussion and review may be seen at Template:Did you know nominations/Thopha saccata. You are welcome to check how many hits the article got while on the front page (here's how, quick check) and it will be added to DYKSTATS if it got over 5,000. If you know of another interesting fact from a recently created article, then please suggest it on the Did you know? talk page.

Alex Shih ^Talk 01:33, 12 August 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Carification request archived

This note is to inform you that the Science Apologist topic ban clarification request has been archived, with no action taken on the matter.

For the Arbitration Committe, — ΛΧΣ²¹ 19:21, 12 August 2013 (UTC)[reply]

DYK for Arunta perulata

On 13 August 2013, Did you know? was updated with a fact from the article Arunta perulata, which you created or substantially expanded. The fact was ... that the call of the white drummer is amplified by its sac-like tympal covers? The nomination discussion and review may be seen at Template:Did you know nominations/Arunta perulata. You are welcome to check how many hits the article got while on the front page (here's how, quick check) and it will be added to DYKSTATS if it got over 5,000. If you know of another interesting fact from a recently created article, then please suggest it on the Did you know? talk page.

Alex Shih ^Talk 12:47, 13 August 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Your GA nomination of Phoenix (constellation)

Hello, I just wanted to introduce myself and let you know I am glad to be reviewing the article Phoenix (constellation) you nominated for GA-status according to the criteria. This process may take up to 7 days. Feel free to contact me with any questions or comments you might have during this period. Message delivered by GA bot, on behalf of Hamiltonstone -- Hamiltonstone (talk) 12:25, 15 August 2013 (UTC)[reply]

WP:FOUR

Hi, this is a note to inform you that a page in which you have previously shown interest, WP:FOUR, has been nominated for deletion. Your comments would be appreciated. Thank you! — Crisco 1492 (talk) 16:27, 15 August 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Main Page appearance: Banksia violacea

This is a note to let the main editors of Banksia violacea know that the article will be appearing as today's featured article on August 21, 2013. If this article needs any attention or maintenance, it would be preferable if that could be done before its appearance on the Main Page. If you prefer that the article appear as TFA on a different date, or not at all, please ask featured article director Raul654 (talk · contribs) or one of his delegates (Dabomb87 (talk · contribs), Gimmetoo (talk · contribs), and Bencherlite (talk · contribs)), or start a discussion at Wikipedia talk:Today's featured article/requests. You can view the TFA blurb at Wikipedia:Today's featured article/August 21, 2013. If it needs tweaking, or if it needs rewording to match improvements to the article between now and its main page appearance, please edit it, following the instructions at Wikipedia:Today's featured article/requests/instructions. The blurb as it stands now is below:

Banksia violacea is a species of shrub or tree in the plant genus Banksia (family Proteaceae). It generally grows as a small shrub to 1.5 m (5 ft) high with fine narrow leaves, and is best known for its unusually coloured dark purple-violet inflorescences. The colour of the inflorescences, short leaves, and flattened follicles which are sticky when young, help identify this species from others in the field. It is found in low shrubland in southern regions of Western Australia from Esperance in the east to Narrogin in the west, growing exclusively in sandy soils. First described in 1927 by West Australian botanist Charles Gardner, the species was at one stage considered a variety of B. sphaerocarpa. Although there are no recognised subspecies or varieties, both lignotuberous and nonlignotuberous forms exist for Banksia violacea. Wasps, ants and flies have been recorded visiting flower spikes. Banksia violacea is classified as Not Threatened under the Wildlife Conservation Act of Western Australia. Regarded as of little value to floriculture, it is rarely cultivated. (Full article...)

UcuchaBot (talk) 23:01, 15 August 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Chandralekha

The article is listed in the WP:TAFI list and while every other article has received a support/oppose tag, Chandralekha (1948 film) alone has not. Do you support it in being improved? Kailash29792 (talk) 06:22, 17 August 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Parity of zero

Hi Cas, no one else wants to pay this much attention, and Ian is about to close. I am fine if it dies for lack of quality, but you might see what you think... hamiltonstone (talk) 10:08, 17 August 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Commented there now. Cas Liber (talk · contribs) 14:48, 17 August 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Your GA nomination of Phoenix (constellation)

The article Phoenix (constellation) you nominated as a good article has passed ; see Talk:Phoenix (constellation) for comments about the article. Well done! Message delivered by GA bot, on behalf of Hamiltonstone -- Hamiltonstone (talk) 10:17, 17 August 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Notifications

Following up on your comment on Ironholds talk page. I'm still trying to get my head around the etiquette involved in using that notifications system. I suppose pinging everyone who copy-edited an article isn't quite what it was intended for, but it was nice to see you stop by and bump that article assessment up to start. It is one of those where I was aware of the sources (it was a redlink at Stuart Ballantine Medal) but not quite sure about starting an article (I have less reservations about starting articles on people where more sources exist, such as Leroy Chang, but to take another example, there is very little out there about Abeles' co-worker George D. Cody). Anyway, when I noticed someone else create the Abeles article, I then weighed in with what I had. I'm not sure the article can go any further than that unless more sources become available, so I'm largely moving on from that one now. But it is surprising what other people find sometimes (there were very helpful additions to the Chang article by another editor for example). Carcharoth (talk) 12:08, 17 August 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Pinging people is always good - the more collaborative the editing the better. I am always happy to be pinged as I am often busy and juggling lots and forget stuff.....Cas Liber (talk · contribs) 23:17, 17 August 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Species identification

Hi Casliber. I don't know if this is quite up your alley, but I was wondering if you could identify an insect (I think it might be a moth)? I found this freely lisenced image on flickr, and my curiosity was piqued by how white and fuzzy it looks. Chris857 (talk) 22:47, 17 August 2013 (UTC)[reply]

It does look like a moth, do we know where it was taken? Once we have that, asking a local entomologist might be good and we can figure that out...Cas Liber (talk · contribs) 23:16, 17 August 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Well, if the person's tags are to be believed, it is Sisseton, South Dakota, US. Chris857 (talk) 23:25, 17 August 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Ok - gotta run now but will think who to contact later. Cas Liber (talk · contribs) 23:32, 17 August 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Your GA nomination of Boletus torosus

Hello, I just wanted to introduce myself and let you know I am glad to be reviewing the article Boletus torosus you nominated for GA-status according to the criteria. This process may take up to 7 days. Feel free to contact me with any questions or comments you might have during this period. Message delivered by GA bot, on behalf of Rcej -- Rcej (talk) 11:57, 18 August 2013 (UTC)[reply]

DYK for Henicopsaltria eydouxii

On 18 August 2013, Did you know? was updated with a fact from the article Henicopsaltria eydouxii, which you created or substantially expanded. The fact was ... that the razor grinder (pictured) of eastern Australia is so named because its call is reminiscent of a metal grinder? The nomination discussion and review may be seen at Template:Did you know nominations/Henicopsaltria eydouxii. You are welcome to check how many hits the article got while on the front page (here's how, quick check) and it will be added to DYKSTATS if it got over 5,000. If you know of another interesting fact from a recently created article, then please suggest it on the Did you know? talk page.

Alex Shih ^Talk 12:02, 18 August 2013 (UTC)[reply]

WP:FOUR for Aleeta curvicosta

		Four Award
		Congratulations! You have been awarded the Four Award for your work from beginning to end on Aleeta curvicosta. TonyTheTiger (T/C/WP:FOUR/WP:CHICAGO/WP:WAWARD) 16:06, 18 August 2013 (UTC)[reply]

--TonyTheTiger (T/C/WP:FOUR/WP:CHICAGO/WP:WAWARD) 16:06, 18 August 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Thalaivaa

Thank you so much!

-- L o g X 20:29, 19 August 2013 (UTC)[reply]

No problem :) Cas Liber (talk · contribs) 20:42, 19 August 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Can you increase the protection period for this article? -- L o g X 20:47, 19 August 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Just gimme a ping when it's over. I'll be happy to re-protect if needed then. Cas Liber (talk · contribs) 20:49, 19 August 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Alright! :-) Have a great day! -- L o g X 20:50, 19 August 2013 (UTC)[reply]

big violation from a user

just wanted to let you know that there's a user who is constantly abusing his rollback privileges as seen here and here (and has edit warred for several edits on that article). He also has been removing talk page threads by other users as seen here (despite the fact they're made to improve the article). Could you may please stop this user at once? He's being highly disruptive. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 69.232.152.217 (talk) 22:33, 19 August 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Your GA nomination of Boletus torosus

The article Boletus torosus you nominated as a good article has passed ; see Talk:Boletus torosus for comments about the article. Well done! Message delivered by GA bot, on behalf of Rcej -- Rcej (talk) 04:47, 20 August 2013 (UTC)[reply]

WP:FOUR RFC

There are two WP:RFCs at WP:FOUR. The first is to conflate issues so as to keep people from expressing meaningful opinions. The second, by me, is claimed to be less than neutral by proponents of the first. Please look at the second one, which I think is much better.--TonyTheTiger (T / C / WP:FOUR / WP:CHICAGO / WP:WAWARD) 06:19, 20 August 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Triple crown?

Is anyone maintaining Wikipedia:Triple Crown/Nominations? I put in for an upgrade a while back, someone else just did recently, and there's a pileup of several people pending... anyone home over there? Montanabw^(talk) 19:16, 20 August 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Folks just take it in turns. Anyone is welcome to do other folks' - will take a look. Cas Liber (talk · contribs) 20:17, 20 August 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Zurich or Zürich?

Hi Casliber, this discussion might be of interest to you. Best Regards -- Marek.69^talk 21:17, 21 August 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Please remove the Pricasso link on the main page

This is likely the most controversial article on Wikipedia right now. User:Russavia is in the process of being de-bureaucrated for trolling Jimbo with this article. There is no way this would get through the DYK process if it had been brought to the attention of large numbers of Wikipedians. In short this is a pretty "good" example of what's wrong with Wikipedia/Commons governance. Please remove asap. Smallbones_(smalltalk) 00:35, 23 August 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Sorry, been very busy today with precious little free time. I suspect this has nearly run its course anyway. Cas Liber (talk · contribs) 10:48, 23 August 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Disambiguation link notification for August 23

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Pavo (constellation), you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Grus (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver). Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 11:00, 23 August 2013 (UTC)[reply]

There's a |} at the bottom of your userpage

I was going to delete it but then I though: Myself, wait a minute. He's an admin and you don't want to be taken as a vandal. So I am went right straight to you talk page -this one- and I am letting you know. Thanks for reading me :) Miss Bono^[zootalk] 12:31, 23 August 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Well spotted and thankyou! ......I'm a what? Not seen that abbreviation before....Cas Liber (talk · contribs) 13:39, 23 August 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Hehe I meant to say you are an admin, it seems like I ate the letters. And you're welcome :) Miss Bono^[zootalk] 13:49, 23 August 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Aaah, yes - admin tools are very useful for content-writers like me :) Cas Liber (talk · contribs) 13:53, 23 August 2013 (UTC)[reply]

:D Yup! Have a beautiful day! Miss Bono^[zootalk] 14:08, 23 August 2013 (UTC)[reply]

DYK for NGC 6752

On 27 August 2013, Did you know? was updated with a fact from the article NGC 6752, which you created or substantially expanded. The fact was ... that NGC 6752, containing 100,000 stars, is the third brightest globular cluster in the sky? The nomination discussion and review may be seen at Template:Did you know nominations/NGC 6752. You are welcome to check how many hits the article got while on the front page (here's how, quick check) and it will be added to DYKSTATS if it got over 5,000. If you know of another interesting fact from a recently created article, then please suggest it on the Did you know? talk page.

Alex Shih ^Talk 12:03, 27 August 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Your GA nomination of Pavo (constellation)

Hi there, I'm pleased to inform you that I've begun reviewing the article Pavo (constellation) you nominated for GA-status according to the criteria. This process may take up to 7 days. Feel free to contact me with any questions or comments you might have during this period. Message delivered by GA bot, on behalf of Adam Cuerden -- Adam Cuerden (talk) 18:26, 27 August 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Talk:Pavo (constellation)/GA1

I've reviewed this; it's mostly good, but a few points need dealt with. Adam Cuerden ^(talk) 18:29, 27 August 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Pavo (constellation)

Hey there! With last night's changes, I'm happy to promote this to GA. Congrats! Review follows. Adam Cuerden ^(talk) 13:04, 28 August 2013 (UTC)[reply]

GA Review

This review is transcluded from Talk:Pavo (constellation)/GA1. The edit link for this section can be used to add comments to the review.

Reviewer: Adam Cuerden (talk · contribs) 18:25, 27 August 2013 (UTC)[reply]

The article looks pretty good. It's short, but the Southern constellations have less history behind them than the northern, so not horribly surprising.

"The name of the brightest star Alpha Pavonis—Peacock—was assigned by Her Majesty's Nautical Almanac Office in the late 1930s; the RAF insisted that all of the stars must have names, the star hitherto having lacked a proper name." - does this mean the other stars in the constellationhave names from this time, or are there missing words that should clarify it's stars above a certain magnitude?

Source just says "bright" - generally this means 1st and/or 2nd magnitude...added Cas Liber (talk · contribs) 12:45, 28 August 2013 (UTC)[reply]

"The Peacock's mythology dates to Graeco-Roman times and the story of Jason and the Argonauts. [...] . She honored him further by locating his constellation close to Argo Navis, the constellation representing the Argo." - how is this consistent with the constellation being created in the 16th century? Likewise, is the Argus myth actually relevant? Adam Cuerden ^(talk) 18:25, 27 August 2013 (UTC)[reply]

It's interesting as the article reflects how Pavo is written about in books on constellations, for instance, see here. I agree it is rather tangential really. given the retrospective link as it were. I can switch it to make it more relevant as the name Junonia Avis was used in one source and hence mention that and then the story. Cas Liber (talk · contribs) 20:10, 27 August 2013 (UTC)[reply]

That would work. It'd help if you dated the alternate name as well. That said, I can't help but feel the claimed honouring by putting a constellation near Argo Navis - written, as it is, to imply it appears in the original myth - is spurious and should be dropped. I also suspect that two different Arguses are getting combined in the first myth told - Argus Panoptes being turned into a peacock makes sense. Peacocks have eyes on their tails. Argus the ship builder who made the Argo? I don't think so. It's cited, I know, but I'd question the reliability of the cite. Adam Cuerden ^(talk) 20:42, 27 August 2013 (UTC)[reply]

It's one of those interesting situations where (I guess) well meaning but mistaken writers have perpetuated some possibly spurious connections, and we do better by dropping it...but does that fall into OR territory or we conisder it just obvious. I will double check some more sources to see how we can alter it and likely scrub some tangential material. Bit busy today but will see what I can do later 02:18, 28 August 2013 (UTC)

Two comments on the same issue. First, I had a problem with the Staal reference in the recently closed FAC on Perseus, where it didn't square with other sources on the subject of chinese constellations. Given that the library catalogue i checked classified Staal as "juvenile nonficiton", i'd treat it with care. Second, i don't think the current para on the greek myth is a model of clarity. It needs to be slightly longer, because at the moment a lot of characters are involved without much explanation: in three sentences we have Argus, Io, Mercury, Jupiter, and Juno. Juno set the story in motion, judging by the content of the third sentence, yet is not introduced in the first sentence. And that first sentence is inexplicably weird really: for an unknown reason, someone is guarding a pregnant person who has been turned into a heifer?? It should be included, it just needs to make more sense...hamiltonstone (talk) 09:53, 28 August 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Finally, a citation is needed for the ship being named after it. Adam Cuerden ^(talk) 18:28, 27 August 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Yes indeed. I had altercations with the editor inserting this ship material in all manner of star, figures from mythology and constellation etc articles, without success. Good luck finding that ref, Cas. hamiltonstone (talk) 09:53, 28 August 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Bugger it - no sources are coming up - not integral to article really anyway, hence removed. Cas Liber (talk · contribs) 12:43, 28 August 2013 (UTC)[reply]

I think, with the changes, this is a GA. ✓ Pass. Adam Cuerden ^(talk) 12:58, 28 August 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Your GA nomination of Pavo (constellation)

The article Pavo (constellation) you nominated as a good article has passed ; see Talk:Pavo (constellation) for comments about the article. Well done! Message delivered by GA bot, on behalf of Adam Cuerden -- Adam Cuerden (talk) 13:07, 28 August 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Million Award

		The Million Award
		For your contributions to bring Lion (estimated annual readership: 2,612,000) to Featured Article status, I hereby present you the Million Award. Congratulations on this rare accomplishment, and thanks for all you do for Wikipedia's readers. -- Khazar2 (talk) 14:47, 28 August 2013 (UTC)[reply]

The Million Award is a new initiative to recognize the editors of Wikipedia's most-read content; you can read more about the award and its possible tiers (Quarter Million Award, Half Million Award, and Million Award) at Wikipedia:Million Award. You're also welcome to display this userbox:

This editor won the Million Award for bringing Lion to Featured Article status.

If I've made any error in this listing, please don't hesitate to correct it; if for any reason you don't feel you deserve it, please don't hesitate to remove it; if you know of any other editor who merits one of these awards, please don't hesitate to give it; if you yourself deserve another award from any of the three tiers, please don't hesitate to take it! Cheers, -- Khazar2 (talk) 14:47, 28 August 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks! Cas Liber (talk · contribs) 20:26, 28 August 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Looks like we owe you for this, too:

		The Million Award
		For your contributions to bring Major depressive disorder (estimated annual readership: 1,372,000) to Featured Article status, I hereby present you the Million Award. Congratulations on this rare accomplishment, and thanks for all you do for Wikipedia's readers. -- Khazar2 (talk) 13:07, 29 August 2013 (UTC)[reply]

This editor won the Million Award for bringing Major depressive disorder to Featured Article status.

Sorry these are coming piecemeal; we're still assembling the database. But thanks for your impressive body of work! -- Khazar2 (talk) 13:07, 29 August 2013 (UTC)[reply]

WikiCup 2013 August newsletter

This year's final is upon us. Our final eight, in order of last round's score, are:

Hawkeye7 (submissions), a WikiCup newcomer who has contributed on topics of military history and physics, including a number of high-importance topics. Good articles have made up the bulk of his points, but he has also scored a great deal of bonus points. He has the second highest score overall so far, with more than 3000 points accumulated.
Casliber (submissions), another WikiCup veteran who reached the finals in 2012, 2011 and 2010. He writes on a variety of topics including botany, mycology and astronomy, and has claimed the highest or joint highest number of featured articles every round so far this year. He has the third highest score overall, with just under 3000 points accumulated.
Cwmhiraeth (submissions), 2012 WikiCup champion, who writes mostly on marine biology. She has also contributed to high-importance topics, seeing huge numbers of bonus points for high-importance featured and good articles. Previous rounds have seen her scoring the most bonus points, with scoring spread across did you knows, good articles and featured articles.
Sasata (submissions), a WikiCup veteran who finished in second place in 2012, and competed as early as 2009. He writes articles on biology, especially mycology, and has scored highly for a number of collaborations at featured article candidates.
Sturmvogel_66 (submissions), the winner of the 2010 competition. His contributions mostly concern Naval history, and he has scored a very large number of points for good articles and good article reviews in every round. He is the highest scorer overall this year, with over 3500 points in total.
Ealdgyth (submissions), who is competing in the WikiCup for the second time, though this will be her first time in the final. A regular at FAC, she is mostly interested in British medieval history, and has scored very highly for some top-importance featured articles on the topic.
Miyagawa (submissions), a finalist in 2012 and 2011. He writes on a broad variety of topics, with many of this year's points coming from good articles about Star Trek. Good articles make up the bulk of his points, and he had the most good articles back in round 2; he was also the highest scorer for DYK in rounds 1 and 2.
Adam Cuerden (submissions) has previously been involved with the WikiCup, but hasn't participated for a number of years. He scores mostly from restoration work leading to featured picture credits, but has also done some article writing and reviewing.

We say goodbye to eight great participants who did not qualify for the final: Piotrus (submissions), Figureskatingfan (submissions), ThaddeusB (submissions), Dana boomer (submissions), Status (submissions), Ed! (submissions), 12george1 (submissions), Calvin999 (submissions). Having made it to this stage is still an excellent achievement, and you can leave with your heads held high. We hope to see you all again next year. Signups are now open for the 2014 WikiCup, which will begin on 1 January. All Wikipedians, whatever their interest or level of experience, are warmly invited to participate in next year's competition.

This last month has seen some incredible contributions; for instance, Cwmhiraeth's Starfish and Ealdgyth's Battle of Hastings—two highly important, highly viewed pages—made it to featured article status. It would be all too easy to focus solely on these stunning achievements at the expense of those participants working in lower-scoring areas, when in fact all WikiCup participants are doing excellent work. A mention of everything done is impossible, but here are a few: Last round saw the completion of several good topics (on the 1958, 1959 and 1962 Atlantic hurricane seasons) to which 12george1 had contributed. Calvin999 saw "S&M" (song), on which he has been working for several years, through to featured article status on its tenth try. Figureskatingfan continued towards her goal of a broad featured/good topic on Maya Angelou, with two featured and four good articles. ThaddeusB contributed significantly to over 20 articles which appeared on the main page's "in the news" section. Adam Cuerden continued to restore a large number of historical images, resulting in over a dozen FP credits this round alone. The WikiCup is not just about top-importance featured articles, and the work of all of these users is worthy of commendation.

Finally, the usual notices: If you are concerned that your nomination—whether it is at good article candidates, a featured process, or anywhere else—will not receive the necessary reviews, please list it on Wikipedia:WikiCup/Reviews. If you want to help out with the WikiCup, please do your bit to reduce the review backlogs! Questions are welcome on Wikipedia talk:WikiCup, and the judges are reachable on their talk pages or by email. Good luck! If you wish to start or stop receiving this newsletter, please feel free to add or remove yourself from Wikipedia:WikiCup/Newsletter/Send. J Milburn (talk • email) and The ed17 (talk • email) 05:38, 29 August 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Redback spider

Any interest in this? The article uses one of my pics, we have them in our garden, and it gets an awful lot of page hits (~1000/day), so I'd probably pitch in. Plenty of good sources available make it easier than the cicadas I think. User:M.O.X might want to join in, since he has first "hand" experience of their bite :-) Whaddya think MOX? --99of9 (talk) 12:30, 30 August 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Hmmm, not thought of that one before - Katipo is already a GA so provides a good model I guess...I just noticed Hadronyche formidabilis is pretty stubby so that looks a good target for a 5x expand....Cas Liber (talk · contribs) 14:16, 30 August 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Ah, I hadn't seen Katipo - that's even better. --99of9 (talk) 23:00, 30 August 2013 (UTC)[reply]

I'd happily help out! Interesting fact: Only 10% of redback spiders have venomous bites. I was "lucky" enough to have been bitten by one of them :P James ^{(T • C)} • 9:02pm • 10:02, 31 August 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Great User:M.O.X! I've started improving it, put it on your watchlist and feel free to pitch in. At the moment there are a few {{cn}} tags and a fair bit of unreferenced info, but I think it's got quite a good breadth of coverage. Hey User:LT910001, I appreciated your "thanks", do you want to join an effort to get it up to GA? It would be great to have WP_Medicine eyes on it. --99of9 (talk) 23:41, 1 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Hey! I'd love to help out. I'll need about a week to get on top of the topic before I start making some contributions. I'll check out the article and talk page, too. Anywhere else I should have a look at? LT90001 (talk) 02:28, 2 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]

A barnstar for you!

	The Random Acts of Kindness Barnstar
	For helping a random IP who asked questions about dinosaurs on the Dinosaur Portal talk page back in November, 2010. You made Wikipedia look good! Abyssal (talk) 17:08, 30 August 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks! Can't think of anything stunningly witty to say.....Cas Liber (talk · contribs) 02:49, 31 August 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Willamette River

Would you mind dealing with my urgent edit request here? Thanks. Jsayre64 (talk) 17:25, 1 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Never mind, sorry. It's been taken care of. Jsayre64 (talk) 17:38, 1 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Ivan Drago merge discussion

Talk:Rocky_IV#Merge_for_Ivan_Drago_into_Rocky_IV An AFD you participated in that just got closed today, is now at a merge discussion. Dream Focus 19:29, 1 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]

DYK for Pavo (constellation)

On 2 September 2013, Did you know? was updated with a fact from the article Pavo (constellation), which you created or substantially expanded. The fact was ... that the constellation of Pavo was named for a Green rather than a Blue Peacock? The nomination discussion and review may be seen at Template:Did you know nominations/Pavo (constellation). You are welcome to check how many hits the article got while on the front page (here's how, quick check) and it will be added to DYKSTATS if it got over 5,000. If you know of another interesting fact from a recently created article, then please suggest it on the Did you know? talk page.

The DYK project (nominate) 00:03, 2 September 2013 (UTC)

Labiaplasty

Hi Cas, just to let you know that two accounts belonging to the person causing the problem at Labiaplasty have been blocked indefinitely, so it should be okay now to reduce or remove the protection. Semi-protection might still be a good idea, if you're willing, because he was editing with IPs too. SlimVirgin ^(talk) 03:32, 3 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]

ok - hang on, will take a look. Cas Liber (talk · contribs) 03:37, 3 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks! SlimVirgin ^(talk) 04:08, 3 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]

GA review

Hello, would you be able to review Pinniped for GA? Thanks. LittleJerry (talk) 01:52, 5 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]

will try - free time unpredictable. Cas Liber (talk · contribs) 02:29, 5 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for reviewing. Do you know anyone that can make a range map? LittleJerry (talk) 01:10, 7 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Yeah I could - do you have a source/reference map? Cas Liber (talk · contribs) 03:08, 7 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]

I'll link you some maps to look at later on. The ranges of several species overlap. LittleJerry (talk) 04:11, 7 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Okay, lets divide it into regions LittleJerry (talk) 20:36, 7 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]

For the North Atlantic/Artic focus on ringed seal, grey seal, harbor seal and the hooded seal.
Foe the North Pacific: northern fur seal, California sea lion/Guadalupe fur seal, Steller sea lion and spotted seal
For the Southern Ocean: southern elephant seal, Weddell seal (should probably fill in all of the Weddell and Ross sea), South American sea lion,/fur seal, Subantarctic fur seal, brown fur seal, New Zealand fur seal and Australian sea lion
For the Galápagos: Galápagos sea lion
Isolated ranges: Hawaiian monk seal, Mediterranean monk seal, Juan Fernández fur seal, Caspian seal, Baikal seal.

I must admit I am surprised there isn't an amalgam map somewhere - am a bit worried someone would see constructing a map such as this as synthesis. Might be worth discussing first.....21:29, 7 September 2013 (UTC)

There an amalgam in MacDonald's book Encyclopedia of Mammals. LittleJerry (talk) 21:59, 7 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Aah good. Cas Liber (talk · contribs) 22:06, 7 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]

September 2013

Hello, I'm BracketBot. I have automatically detected that your edit to Hadronyche versuta may have broken the syntax by modifying 1 "{}"s. If you have, don't worry, just edit the page again to fix it. If I misunderstood what happened, or if you have any questions, you can leave a message on my operator's talk page.

List of unpaired brackets remaining on the page:

Museum |volume=10|pages= 187–270 [253-55] |url=http://biodiversitylibrary.org/page/9090567}}</ref>

Thanks, BracketBot (talk) 13:54, 6 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, I'm BracketBot. I have automatically detected that your edit to Redback spider may have broken the syntax by modifying 1 "()"s. If you have, don't worry, just edit the page again to fix it. If I misunderstood what happened, or if you have any questions, you can leave a message on my operator's talk page.

List of unpaired brackets remaining on the page:

newspaper=[[Queensland Times |Queensland Times (Ipswich) (Qld. : 1909 – 1954)]] |location=Ipswich) (Qld. |date=26 February 1940 |accessdate=5 September 2013 |page=6 Edition: DAILY. |publisher=

Thanks, BracketBot (talk) 00:36, 9 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Future collaboration

Are there any insect or invertebrate species you plan on working on somewhere down the road? LittleJerry (talk) 20:11, 6 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Yes - I am really enjoying these big furry spiders (look at my contributions) - I've never seen one but they alll live around where I live, so am also doing it in case I see one or get bitten. 99of9 (talk · contribs) is buffing redback spider and I am helping, but not as much as I should be really. I am buffing quite a few for DYK, just to get a bit of a "feel" for them - think the one might be Atrax robustus but not sure yet. Let me think about it. Collaborations are good - the articles come so much better prepared for GA/FA. Cas Liber (talk · contribs) 20:34, 6 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Great, I think we could use more invertebrates at FA. LittleJerry (talk) 20:50, 6 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Yeah, the literature can be very tricky to find sometimes. Cas Liber (talk · contribs) 20:51, 6 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Actually, a good thing to do would be to keep an eye on redback spider and review it when it is nominated at GA, and be as tough/nitpicky as possible, to help get more of a "feel" for some of these spider articles. Cas Liber (talk · contribs) 20:56, 6 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]

I don't think I could review it as critically as most but I'll be rooting. Do your guys intend to bring it to FA? LittleJerry (talk) 21:03, 6 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]

I generally intend FA to be a finishing point of anything I work on, though sometimes I might leave it for a while, either to take stock of it, or because something is missing - e.g. Banksia oligantha I can't get a picture of, so have left it until such time as I can get one, or Boletus torosus, which is a little on the small side, though I think we might make a tilt anyway. Will ask Sasata on that one. Cas Liber (talk · contribs) 21:28, 6 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Is there any literature on trapdoor spiders? LittleJerry (talk) 23:01, 6 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]

I am sure there is heaps Cas Liber (talk · contribs) 23:29, 6 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Actually this could be a major headache! - What Americans call trapdoor spiders is the family Ctenizidae, which is not what we Australians have...hmm, ours are Idiopidae - so the common name should link to Ctenizoidea I guess. Must look into this - the malaysian trapdoor spiders are Liphistiidae and completely different. Barychelidae are another group also using the term "trapdoor spider" but with a qualifier....Cas Liber (talk · contribs) 03:13, 7 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]

What about Arachnid? Or is that to big an undertaking. LittleJerry (talk) 04:09, 7 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Or Scorpion? LittleJerry (talk) 19:11, 7 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]

I like mygalomorph - all the big hairy spider group, a really cool and interesting bunch of critters. Yeah, happy to work on that one Cas Liber (talk · contribs) 01:41, 8 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Hmm, that sounds interesting. But I'll need some resources to start with; a book on spiders that detail the different infraorders. Any suggestions? LittleJerry (talk) 01:51, 8 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]

No idea, I have not looked in detail into it yet. Need to do some ferreting out of resources. Cas Liber (talk · contribs) 02:08, 8 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Are you always this influential? --99of9 (talk) 08:51, 8 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]

I suspect it's because 1 in 5 people clicked on it after looking at DYK for Hadronyche infensa Cas Liber (talk · contribs) 09:57, 8 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Ah, that makes sense. That's a pretty solid flowthrough. --99of9 (talk) 11:09, 8 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]

What will be interesting is if subsequent DYKs also have the same linking spike, which would show that different people read DYKs and not the same ones. I have 5x expanded some others. Cas Liber (talk · contribs) 11:55, 8 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Let me know when you've looked into mygalomorph. LittleJerry (talk) 15:11, 8 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Could I add it to your to-do list?

Sure. Cas Liber (talk · contribs) 21:22, 9 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]

DYK for Hadronyche infensa

On 7 September 2013, Did you know? was updated with a fact from the article Hadronyche infensa, which you created or substantially expanded. The fact was ... that the venom of the Darling Downs funnel-web spider becomes more toxic in the early summer when male spiders are roaming looking for a mate? The nomination discussion and review may be seen at Template:Did you know nominations/Hadronyche infensa. You are welcome to check how many hits the article got while on the front page (here's how, quick check) and it will be added to DYKSTATS if it got over 5,000. If you know of another interesting fact from a recently created article, then please suggest it on the Did you know? talk page.

The DYK project (nominate) 08:03, 7 September 2013 (UTC)

Request

Your feedback here would be greatly appreciated. — Crisco 1492 (talk) 01:34, 8 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Sorry - missed that - will take a look. Cas Liber (talk · contribs) 01:37, 8 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]

No worries. Hope you can shed some light on this — Crisco 1492 (talk) 01:43, 8 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Whaam! v. H. C. McNeile

Given your interest in contributing to the main page scheduling discussions, I feel it is appropriate to inform you that you have supported a 2-point article for September 28th and now a 5-point article has been nominated for the same date at WP:TFAR.--TonyTheTiger (T / C / WP:FOUR / WP:CHICAGO / WP:WAWARD) 07:53, 9 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]

? Cas Liber (talk · contribs) 09:08, 9 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Help with the Never Let Me Down FA review?

Hi, I've submitted the album Never Let Me Down for FA review (it's a GA article now). Sadly I've only had one editor provide input, and while I think I've responded to all the feedback, they don't have time to continue reviewing. I'm looking to get a few more people involved so we can make a decision on the article, and I saw you've been active on other FA reviews so I thought I'd see if you could help too. If not, no worries. Here's a link to the FA review. Thank you! 87Fan (talk) 19:51, 10 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Ok. will take a look. Cas Liber (talk · contribs) 04:17, 11 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]

DYK for Hadronyche versuta

On 11 September 2013, Did you know? was updated with a fact from the article Hadronyche versuta, which you created or substantially expanded. The fact was ... that the female Blue Mountains funnel-web spider is possibly more poisonous because it injects more venom? The nomination discussion and review may be seen at Template:Did you know nominations/Hadronyche versuta. You are welcome to check how many hits the article got while on the front page (here's how, quick check) and it will be added to DYKSTATS if it got over 5,000. If you know of another interesting fact from a recently created article, then please suggest it on the Did you know? talk page.

The DYK project (nominate) 08:03, 11 September 2013 (UTC)

[1] Letter is script and looks like a Russian и.

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

[1]

[1]

@@ Line 1,252: / Line 1,252: @@
 Hi, I've submitted the album ''Never Let Me Down'' for FA review (it's a GA article now). Sadly I've only had one editor provide input, and while I think I've responded to all the feedback, they don't have time to continue reviewing. I'm looking to get a few more people involved so we can make a decision on the article, and I saw you've been active on other FA reviews so I thought I'd see if you could help too. If not, no worries. Here's [[Wikipedia:Featured article candidates/Never Let Me Down/archive1|a link to the FA review]]. Thank you! [[User:87Fan|87Fan]] ([[User talk:87Fan|talk]]) 19:51, 10 September 2013 (UTC)
 :Ok. will take a look. [[User:Casliber|Cas Liber]] ([[User talk:Casliber|talk]] '''·''' [[Special:Contributions/Casliber|contribs]]) 04:17, 11 September 2013 (UTC)
+==DYK for Hadronyche versuta==
+{{tmbox
+|style = notice
+|small =
+|image = [[Image:Updated DYK query.svg|15px|Updated DYK query]]
+|text = On [[Wikipedia:Recent_additions#11 September 2013|11 September 2013]], '''[[:Template:Did you know|Did you know?]]''' was updated with a fact from the article '''''[[Hadronyche versuta]]''''', which you created or substantially expanded. The fact was ''... that the female '''[[Hadronyche versuta|Blue Mountains funnel-web spider]]''' is possibly more poisonous because it injects more venom?'' The nomination discussion and review may be seen at [[Template:Did you know nominations/Hadronyche versuta]]. You are welcome to check how many hits the article got while on the front page <small>([[User:Rjanag/Pageview stats|here's how]], [http://stats.grok.se/en/201309/Hadronyche_versuta quick check])</small> and it will be added to [[WP:DYKSTATS|DYKSTATS]] if it got over 5,000. If you know of another interesting fact from a recently created article, then please suggest it on the [[:Template talk:Did you know|Did you know? talk page]].
+}}<!-- Template:UpdatedDYK -->  [[WP:Did you know|The DYK project]] ([[T:TDYK|nominate]]) 08:03, 11 September 2013 (UTC)

Revision as of 08:03, 11 September 2013

Nomenclature of fungi

Bract pattern

Question

Parrot stuff

Banksia menziesii with persistent florets

Banksiamyces again

More bedtime reading

Figs

You'll probably find this worth watching

FYI

Constellation task force assessment

Do you have this book?

Problem

Aboriginal Astronomy

WP:MEDGA2013

Gene migration research, India --> Australia

Core contest microgrant

Floury Baker request

Carina Nebula

A barnstar for you!

DYK for Eucalyptus albens

The Wikipedia Library now offering accounts from Cochrane Collaboration (sign up!)

Nomination of Sue Snell for deletion

Drowning Girl at WP:FAC

Hyderabad

June 2013

DYK nomination of Grevillea mucronulata

Disambiguation link notification for June 25

DYK for Catholic Press

Request for peer review

TemplateData is here

WikiCup 2013 June newsletter

Franz Kafka all time top TFA!!!

Scottish society in the Middle Ages

Habitability of red dwarf systems

When God Writes Your Love Story

DYK for Grevillea mucronulata

WP:FOUR for Tylopilus felleus

Question

Nettlecombe Court

Responding here

WP:GOCE invitation

Disambiguation link notification for July 16

Core contest prizes?

Deletion of article Noel Chiappa

Talkback

Costa Rica

This week's articles for improvement - 22 July 2013 to 28 July 2013

Your GA nomination of Boletus calopus

DYK for Old Windsor Road

DYK for Ficus subpisocarpa

Your GA nomination of Boletus calopus

Your expertise is awaited

Impressive editing

DYK-Good Article Request for Comment

Bird taxonomy

WikiCup 2013 July newsletter

DYK RfC

Welcome to The Wikipedia Adventure!

WP:FOUR for Boletus badius

Delphine Parrott

DYK for Xerocomellus

DYK for Xerocomellus armeniacus

GOCE July 2013 barnstar

A cupcake for you!

FAC: Parity of zero

DYK for Bazinga rieki

Razor grinder

DYK for Bushshrike

DYK for Slate-colored Boubou

DYK for Malaconotoidea

A barnstar for you!

Disambiguation link notification for August 10

ArbCom clarification request

DYK for Adenanthos ellipticus

DYK for New Zealand Coot

DYK for Chatham Coot

DYK for Thopha saccata

Carification request archived