User talk:Hhbruun

Fungi and funga

While 'fungus/fungi' is equivalent of 'plant(s)' and 'animal(s)', FUNGA is the mycological equivalent of flora and fauna (general term: biota). In the good old Linnean days, one could talk about the 'plant kingdom' and the 'animal kingdom' (plus the 'mineral kingdom'). In this system, fungi belonged with the plants. We now know that the fungi constitutes a kingdom of its own, and are in fact more closely related to animals than to plants. Of course, one may discuss how many kingdoms there are and if we should have biota terms for all. However, fungi are organisms forming communities, and macroscopic fungi are treated in 'floras' covring certain regions. Hence, mycologist have felt the need for a term equivalent of flora and fauna. The word 'funga' has been in wide circulation for at least ten years (although I haven't tried to elucidate the origins of the word). Hhbruun 10:16, 11 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

DYK

On July 3, 2007, Did you know? was updated with a fact from the article Christen C. Raunkiær , which you created or substantially expanded. If you know of another interesting fact from a recently created article, then please suggest it on the Did you know? talk page.

Well done Hhbruun for making such a great start to Wikipedia. This article was kindly nominated by Circeus. Do feel free to self-nom in future and happy editing. Blnguyen (bananabucket) 07:05, 3 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

On February 26, 2008, Did you know? was updated with a fact from the article Douglas Barton Osborne Savile, which you created or substantially expanded. If you know of another interesting fact from a recently created article, then please suggest it on the Did you know? talk page.

Thanks again. Circeus was again the kindly nominator. Do feel free to self-nom in future. Thanks, Blnguyen (photo straw poll) 02:11, 26 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Botanisk Tidsskrift

Hi I am currently working on List of botany journals and tabulating them. I was wondering if you could tell me how many issues per year Botanisk Tidsskrift was published in as this is one of the coloumns in my table (See User:Million Moments/Sandbox2 and feel free to add any other general botany journals to this work in progress!). Thanks Million_Moments (talk) 17:22, 13 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

WOW! That list of journals will keep me busy for awhile! Thank you for your help! Million_Moments (talk) 10:49, 14 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

July 21 DYK

On 21 July, 2008, Did you know? was updated with a fact from the article Flora Danica, which you created or substantially expanded. If you know of another interesting fact from a recently created article, then please suggest it on the Did you know? talk page.

--Bedford ^Pray 21:42, 21 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

bios

Thanks very much for your excellent botany articles. If you write any more new biographical pages, it would be great if you could add categories for birth and death years (i.e. appropriate subcategories of Category:Births by year & Category:Deaths by year. (I'm just adding them to bios you've already written!) Dsp13 (talk) 16:08, 12 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Autoreviewer

Hi, after reading one of your articles at newpage patrol, I was surprised to see that an editor who has contributed as well as you have for such a long time hadn't already been approved as an wp:Autoreviewer. So I've taken the liberty of rectifying that. Ϣere SpielChequers 13:07, 14 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

David W. Goodall

Hi! It seems you recently created an unreferenced biography of a living person: David W. Goodall. Our verifiability policy requires that all content be cited to a reliable source. Please add references as soon as possible. Thanks! --LaraBot (talk) 00:20, 21 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Unreferenced BLPs

Hello Hhbruun! Thank you for your contributions. I am a bot alerting you that 2 of the articles that you created are tagged as Unreferenced Biographies of Living Persons. The biographies of living persons policy requires that all personal or potentially controversial information be sourced. In addition, to insure verifiability, all biographies should be based on reliable sources. if you were to bring these articles up to standards, it would greatly help us with the current 81 article backlog. Once the articles are adequately referenced, please remove the {{unreferencedBLP}} tag. Here is the list:

Hans Henrik Reventlow Bruun - Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL
Nils Malmer - Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL

Thanks!--DASHBot (talk) 22:21, 8 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

IPA for Danish

I've moved the article you recently created, IPA for Danish to Wikipedia:IPA for Danish. This kind of article about the administration of Wikipedia should live in the Wikipedia namespace, not the main article one. (You might also want to consider adding a link to the article to the {{IPAkeys}} template.) — æk ^Talk 16:35, 10 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you for that! I couldn't quite figure out how to do it. Hhbruun (talk) 19:14, 10 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Scandinavian mycologists

I've just finished writing up Gertrude Simmons Burlingham, and have been wondering whether the links I put in for Lars Romell and Seth Lundell are warranted. Romell has a brief obit in Mycologia, but Lundell doesn't, though I could find info about his involvement in a major exsiccata series (Fungi Exsiccati Suecici; [1], [2]). I figure if more detailed sources exist, they are probably in Scandinavian languages. Are these two notable or should I just unlink them? Circéus (talk) 10:32, 25 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I would leave the names as redlinks. Both are authors of names still in wide use (se Index Fungorum). I guess they are sufficiently notable.Hhbruun (talk) 11:56, 25 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Kathleen Mary Drew-Baker

Genuine mistake, I copied the citeweb reference from another article, I changed all the other features but failed to change the web itself. FruitMonkey (talk) 19:53, 30 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

File copyright problem with File:Doris_Askell_Love.jpg

Thank you for uploading File:Doris_Askell_Love.jpg. However, it currently is missing information on its copyright status. Wikipedia takes copyright very seriously. It may be deleted soon, unless we can determine the license and the source of the file. If you know this information, then you can add a copyright tag to the image description page.

If you have uploaded other files, consider checking that you have specified their license and tagged them, too. You can find a list of files you have created in your upload log.

If you have any questions, please feel free to ask them at the media copyright questions page. Thanks again for your cooperation. Melesse (talk) 03:00, 14 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]

You are now a Reviewer

Hello. Your account has been granted the "reviewer" userright, allowing you to review other users' edits on certain flagged pages. Pending changes, also known as flagged protection, will be commencing a two-month trial at approximately 23:00, 2010 June 15 (UTC).

Reviewers can review edits made by users who are not autoconfirmed to articles placed under flagged protection. Flagged protection is applied to only a small number of articles, similarly to how semi-protection is applied but in a more controlled way for the trial.

When reviewing, edits should be accepted if they are not obvious vandalism or BLP violations, and not clearly problematic in light of the reason given for protection (see Wikipedia:Reviewing process). More detailed documentation and guidelines can be found here.

If you do not want this userright, you may ask any administrator to remove it for you at any time. Courcelles (talk) 04:55, 16 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Kurt Westergaard

Hallo, here http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Kurt_Westergaard&diff=next&oldid=339447313 you inserted a link that should bring to an interview to Westergaard. The link bring actually just to the search page of the Nordjyske. I searched all the articles from the date you gave (3 January) but I couldn't find any mention of Regan or God. Could you please either fix the link or remove the sentence you added? Thanks. --Dia^ 06:03, 16 June 2010 (UTC) —Preceding unsigned comment added by Dia^ (talk • contribs)

License tagging for File:Watt, A S.jpg

Thanks for uploading File:Watt, A S.jpg. You don't seem to have indicated the license status of the image. Wikipedia uses a set of image copyright tags to indicate this information; to add a tag to the image, select the appropriate tag from this list, click on this link, then click "Edit this page" and add the tag to the image's description. If there doesn't seem to be a suitable tag, the image is probably not appropriate for use on Wikipedia.

For help in choosing the correct tag, or for any other questions, leave a message on Wikipedia:Media copyright questions. Thank you for your cooperation. --ImageTaggingBot (talk) 14:06, 14 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Proposed deletion of Bodo Johansen

The article Bodo Johansen has been proposed for deletion because of the following concern:

A search for references failed to find significant coverage in reliable sources to comply with notability requirements. This included web searches for news coverage, books, and journals, which can be seen from the following links:
Bodo Johansen – news, books, scholar
Consequently, this article is about a subject that appears to lack sufficient notability.

While all contributions to Wikipedia are appreciated, content or articles may be deleted for any of several reasons.

You may prevent the proposed deletion by removing the {{dated prod}} notice, but please explain why in your edit summary or on the article's talk page.

Please consider improving the article to address the issues raised. Removing {{dated prod}} will stop the proposed deletion process, but other deletion processes exist. The speedy deletion process can result in deletion without discussion, and articles for deletion allows discussion to reach consensus for deletion. Abductive (reasoning) 20:46, 14 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Proposed deletion of Funga

Repost of Funga

A tag has been placed on Funga requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia, because it appears to be a repost of material that was previously deleted following a deletion process. If you can indicate how it is different from the previously posted material, place the template {{hang on}} underneath the other template on the article and put a note on the page's discussion page saying why this article should stay. Administrators will look at your reasoning before deciding what to do with the page. If you believe the original discussion was unjustified, please contact the administrator who deleted the page or use deletion review instead of continuing to recreate the page. Thank you. Sasata (talk) 02:01, 16 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Categories for discussion nomination of Category:Carlsberg Laboratory staff

Category:Carlsberg Laboratory staff, which you created, has been nominated for discussion. If you would like to participate in the discussion, you are invited to add your comments at the category's entry on the Categories for discussion page. Thank you. -- Alan Liefting (talk) - 05:47, 4 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]

List of ecologists

Hi, Hhbruun... thanks for creating so many ecologist pages. I hope you are still interested, as I'd like to see even more. I've been working on a few lately, and would appreciate any assistance. I hope you will also give your opinion on whether to keep the page List of ecologists and please add links to any of your pages that are not already there. I think it is useful, but clearly it does need work, as does the Category:Ecologists page (which should, I'm told, function more like the Category:Scientists page). All need more from your part of the world.

You may also be interested in using the new Template:User ecologist on your user page.

p.s. I like the idea of "funga"... I hadn't heard it before, and it is clearly needed!

Cheers, and, again, tusind tak! --Araucana (talk) 00:47, 11 November 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Orphaned non-free media (File:Whittaker-Robert-H-1920-1980.jpg)

Thanks for uploading File:Whittaker-Robert-H-1920-1980.jpg. The media description page currently specifies that it is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, it is currently orphaned, meaning that it is not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the media was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that media for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).

If you have uploaded other unlicensed media, please check whether they're used in any articles or not. You can find a list of 'file' pages you have edited by clicking on the "my contributions" link (it is located at the very top of any Wikipedia page when you are logged in), and then selecting "File" from the dropdown box. Note that all non-free media not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. Hazard-Bot (talk) 04:04, 10 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]

AFD notification

Nomination of Mosekilde for deletion

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Mosekilde 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/Mosekilde 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 template from the top of the article. — CactusWriter ^(talk) 17:19, 5 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

ArbCom elections are now open!

Hi,
You appear to be eligible to vote in the current Arbitration Committee election. The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to enact binding solutions for disputes between editors, primarily related to serious behavioural issues that the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the ability to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail. If you wish to participate, you are welcome to review the candidates' statements and submit your choices on the voting page. For the Election committee, MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 17:32, 23 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]

ArbCom Elections 2016: Voting now open!

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

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

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

ArbCom 2017 election voter message

Hello, Hhbruun. Voting in the 2017 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23.59 on Sunday, 10 December. All users who registered an account before Saturday, 28 October 2017, made at least 150 mainspace edits before Wednesday, 1 November 2017 and are not currently blocked are eligible to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once.

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

If you wish to participate in the 2017 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 18:42, 3 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]

ArbCom 2018 election voter message

Hello, Hhbruun. Voting in the 2018 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23.59 on Sunday, 3 December. All users who registered an account before Sunday, 28 October 2018, made at least 150 mainspace edits before Thursday, 1 November 2018 and are not currently blocked are eligible to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once.

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

If you wish to participate in the 2018 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 18:42, 19 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Petrus de Dacia (not monk, friar)

Looks like you created this article about Swedish Dominican Petrus de Dacia https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Petrus_de_Dacia_(Swedish_monk), and also changed title of the article from Petrus de Dacia to Petrus de Dacia (Swedish monk). Could you please change it back, if this is simpler, or change it to e.g. Petrus de Dacia (Swedish friar) or Petrus de Dacia (Swedish Dominican)? See also Talk page of the article. Thank you. BirgittaMTh (talk) 06:47, 21 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Nomination of Marsh Ecology Award for deletion

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Marsh Ecology Award 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/Marsh Ecology Award until a consensus is reached, and anyone, including you, 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 until the discussion has finished.

UtherSRG (talk) 15:02, 18 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Nomination of Marsh Ecology Award for deletion

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Marsh Ecology Award 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/Marsh Ecology Award (2nd nomination) until a consensus is reached, and anyone, including you, 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 until the discussion has finished.

UtherSRG (talk) 13:11, 17 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]