Talk:List of U.S. state reptiles/Archive 1

This is an archive of past discussions. Do not edit the contents of this page. If you wish to start a new discussion or revive an old one, please do so on the current talk page.

Archive 1

I find a resolution from 1994, showing painted turtle as the Vermont reptilian. Not displayed on state webpage though. TCO (talk) 03:39, 5 December 2010 (UTC)

I think you can go ahead and ad it TCO, page looks a bit inactive. You can use the reference I generated to cite it.--NYMFan69-86 (talk) 03:50, 15 December 2010 (UTC)

Wilco.

1. Needs individual RS for each state.

2. Need to check those where we show none as well as those on list. At least for VT, just going to the state website was not good enough. Had to do a search to find it.

3. For some, like painted turtle, probably should make sure we display a picture that is "within range" (i.e. typical of the animal in that state, right now is technically correct, but not ideal). This may apply on other animals as well. So there are 3 states that should show a midland species.

4. If someone does this work, then might as well take it to FL. But I have no idea what an FL entails. I am more an article guy than a list guy.

5. Doesn't look like this list has gotten much recent attention, but I don't know if there is some "state symbol" project or guru or some needs from that direction, rather than from the Herp project. Just maybe useful to get both perspectives.

TCO (talk) 07:58, 15 December 2010 (UTC)

And I can upgrade the PT info a little (we are the best we have 4 states, ha!), but just want to think about do we brush the whole thing up. I will look back and see who put most of this together and drop a note on his/her page.TCO (talk) 08:04, 15 December 2010 (UTC)

The list has good formatting right now, but it needs help in various ways. First, the lead needs to be expanded and more encompassing, see FLs to see what it should look like (perhaps List of Nobel laureates). Second, we need to find out how many and which states actually have a state reptile. Beyond that we need, as you mentioned, a relieable source for each one and to make sure the picture is of a subspecies that lives in the state.--NYMFan69-86 (talk) 17:43, 15 December 2010 (UTC)

Your interest level? How hard would it be to get the "star" and how worthy of doing?

I did some reading after writing that comment and looked at some other state or animal featured lists. See what they are looing for. Think it would not be that tricky. Thoughts?

No, it really shouldn't, I don't see what could hold us back (images maybe but they already seem to be largely there...potential changes in reptiles, but we'll have to look at what the sources say). I'm game for trying.--NYMFan69-86 (talk) 18:28, 15 December 2010

Cool! Will keep PT attention first. But this seems like a neat and easy one. And more interesting than list of toothbrushes in my drawer or some such. Plus the pictures will jazz the reviewers!TCO (talk) 21:10, 15 December 2010 (UTC)

Alright great, there's so much nice work being done nowadays i can hardly keep up!--NYMFan69-86 (talk) 00:08, 16 December 2010 (UTC)

Tell me what you think of this source: http://www.statesymbolsusa.org/Lists/reptiles_amphibians.html I think it should be helpful for this article.--NYMFan69-86 (talk) 05:26, 18 December 2010 (UTC)

Clicking on each name also yields a separate page with info on when it became the state reptile.--NYMFan69-86 (talk) 05:27, 18 December 2010 (UTC)

I've seen that one and think it is pretty decent. Just nagging concern that it is a link farm. But good page really in terms of the content. I've seen it cited on wikipedia.TCO (talk) 05:30, 18 December 2010 (UTC)

Oh yes, I know. However, we can cite each page separately so the reader doesn't have to go digging through the links (i.e. for Alabama state reptile, we cite this page, not the main page).--NYMFan69-86 (talk) 05:32, 18 December 2010 (UTC)

Agreed.TCO (talk) 05:38, 18 December 2010 (UTC)

Cool, work will commence after Painted turtle eh?--NYMFan69-86 (talk) 05:41, 18 December 2010 (UTC)

And some sleep and Xmas. Maybe even work work.  ;)TCO (talk) 05:45, 18 December 2010 (UTC)

Oooh, I don't see painted turtle being done before Christmas anyway. ;-) NYMFan69-86 (talk) 05:47, 18 December 2010 (UTC)

Here's one we can follow closely: List of Testudines families. Recently upheld as FL this past summer.--NYMFan69-86 (talk) 05:51, 18 December 2010 (UTC)

Don't let me slow you down, but I should concentrate on picta for now. Lot in my head. If you want to go after this, feel free to advance it. I think state symbols is OK, but would feel better if for every state reptile, we had an actual state source (like the way we did for C.p.) You can also get started on some text. I think discussing a little bit about the concept of state symbols would be good. Imagine someone from Europe who wonders if there is an econmic dimension, what does it mean? Also, some compare and contrast work (most common reptile, etc. I really do think C.p. is the "cardinal" of reptiles.) Also, maybe could think about grouping by type of reptile (turtle versys lizard versus crocadillian, versus snake). how many of each? Just take off after it, and I can come and improve later.TCO (talk) 05:52, 18 December 2010 (UTC)

Yeah, that is a good page. Also check out the FL on state mammals. We can blow these guys out of the water, no doubt...TCO (talk) 05:52, 18 December 2010 (UTC)

I like the fire in your voice! Yes, all that material will get proper coverage. The source for Alabama is an individual, state source. It would be ideal to get a new one for each state, I'll see. But yes, for now, picta.--NYMFan69-86 (talk) 05:58, 18 December 2010 (UTC)

There was a news story of someone trying to start a proposal to make Rod Blagoyavich the IL state reptile: "Move over painted turtle". TCO (talk) 14:28, 18 December 2010 (UTC)

Damn. Well, our little guys a fighter, and he's cute. I'm sure they'll reconsider. ;-)--NYMFan69-86 (talk) 19:33, 18 December 2010 (UTC)

• Official State Reptiles--NYMFan69-86 (talk) 05:43, 19 December 2010 (UTC)
• <ref> {{cite web | url = http://www.statesymbolsusa.org/Lists/reptiles_amphibians.html | title = State Reptiles-Amphibians | accessdate = 2010-12-19 | publisher = State Symbols USA}}</ref>--NYMFan69-86 (talk) 05:44, 19 December 2010 (UTC)

http://www.msa.md.gov/msa/mdmanual/01glance/symbols/html/reptile.html

Let me get this generated, it'll only take a minute.--NYMFan69-86 (talk) 03:35, 21 January 2011 (UTC)

When you have a chance, include: <ref name='Maryland 2010'> {{cite web | url = http://www.msa.md.gov/msa/mdmanual/01glance/symbols/html/reptile.html | title = Maryland State Reptile - Diamondback Terrapin | accessdate = 2011-01-21 | date = 2010-03-08 | work = Maryland Manual On-Line: A Guide to Maryland Government | publisher = Maryland State Archives}}</ref>

for Maryland? Don't want to override you (again).--NYMFan69-86 (talk) 03:44, 21 January 2011 (UTC)

Oops, template's down. I threw it in. Lead looks pretty.  :-) NYMFan69-86 (talk) 03:46, 21 January 2011 (UTC)

Thanks man. I musta been tired last night as I missed a state's box tortoise and then the whole gopher and desert tortoise thing.TCO (talk) 03:48, 21 January 2011 (UTC)

It's impeccable. The only thing I can offer is that the very last sentence seems more like it belongs in the second to last paragraph (where all the genera stuff is talked about).--NYMFan69-86 (talk) 04:54, 21 January 2011 (UTC)

Move it. I'm typing up some image thoughts

Alright brother. NYMFan69-86 (talk) 04:17, 22 January 2011 (UTC)

Kind of a tough process. Am really not that much of a jock on images (yet). Putting thoughts down to clarify thinking.

1. I can't identify the species herpetologically but I looked at file names and such to make sure we have right species. Only one, the Ohio one is off. will doublecheck that OH requires that subspecies and then look for better pic. Although the Southern and Northern species look the same in resolution of our photos. well...oh...well.

2. AL pic needs crop.

3. I need to go back and look for the images that are listed as Federal. First couple I could not find on listed sites. that is probably a way people get sleezy claiming Federal.

4. A bunch of different licenses listed. GFDL, PD, CCbySA. New Mex one had "copyright" listed, need to understand that. Another said bot loaded. Also at least one was WP, not Commons.

5. With 3 and 4 above and just in general need to get FN advice. Maybe even just hvae him screen these for us now.

6. There are a few where we could probably find more compelling shots, but nothing really galling. Not going to sweat that.

7. TN image will change to match NC (for ease of viewer, see exact same image, know exact same animal).

8. KS ornate box turtle needs crop. Also question on the license.

9. Three-toed box turtle (MO) has a bit of a Portal pic look to it.

Agree, desert tortoise also.--NYMFan69-86 (talk) 05:10, 22 January 2011 (UTC)

TCO (talk) 05:56, 21 January 2011 (UTC)

http://codes.ohio.gov/orc/gp5

TCO (talk) 06:22, 21 January 2011 (UTC)

Got it, cool cite.--NYMFan69-86 (talk) 05:21, 22 January 2011 (UTC)

http://www.library.ca.gov/history/symbols.html

TCO (talk) 06:24, 21 January 2011 (UTC)

Cali was covered by Shearer, but if you want me to generate this ref I can just to back the book up.--NYMFan69-86 (talk) 05:23, 22 January 2011 (UTC)

I'm probably being anal, but since we used that name from that source, was the disagrement.TCO (talk) 05:43, 22 January 2011 (UTC)

It also says the scientific name verbatim beside it, I think we're okay.--NYMFan69-86 (talk) 06:01, 22 January 2011 (UTC)

Shearer doesn't discuss this, maybe that citation should be moved to before that sentence?--NYMFan69-86 (talk) 05:24, 22 January 2011 (UTC)

Sure, move it. Other article covers us. Kinda have to read down, but I take it as it does. Put Sherer where you want. If it really gets tricky we can do an nb and explain it. Can you call out the bird stuff with individiual refs?TCO (talk) 05:41, 22 January 2011 (UTC)

Got them both (two birds one stone...so to speak).--NYMFan69-86 (talk) 05:50, 22 January 2011 (UTC)

http://www.tsl.state.tx.us/ref/abouttx/symbols.html

--NYMFan69-86 (talk) 05:30, 22 January 2011 (UTC)

[1] If this source is correct, we may have a broader list on our hands. For instance, each member is officially designated as something slightly different: "State reptile," "Official reptile," "Official State reptile," "Official Georgia state reptile".... One even has a "salt water reptile," Florida's loggerhead sea turtle. Maybe we just need to include another column that says "designation." If we are to go by what this source is telling us.--NYMFan69-86 (talk) 06:14, 22 January 2011 (UTC)

I would probably lean against. And if we do, you get to do the work! But seriously, I think the designations are pretty trivial (not really different in any sense of how the creature is used in different states). And I bet when we dig into will find individual states are not even self consistent (using slightly different wording on state websites versus legislation).

The salt water reptile is more interesting. I know with mammals some states have more than one type. Or just don't even bother with subdivisions, but say we will have jmore than one bird or whatever and they are all just state bird. Let's look into this issue.TCO (talk) 06:32, 22 January 2011 (UTC)

Goog catch on the FL thing. We should add it, similar to how the state birds are handled with a parenthetical. See AL where they list a state bird, and then a state game bird. You figure out how to bifurcate the table and I will make changes in the lead. Here is the ref. http://myfwc.com/newsroom/08/statewide/News_08_X_SeaTurtleSymbol.htm

Cool. It's about two thirty right now (morning). I'll make the split tomorrow and generate the ref tomorrow. Beyond that only west virginia needs a rl.--NYMFan69-86 (talk) 07:22, 22 January 2011 (UTC)

K Our only image of the Alabama red-bellied turtle. It has a pretty ugly black border. With all your image experience, would this be an easy fix for you? To crop it? If not, no sweat. It's pretty unnoticeable.--NYMFan69-86 (talk) 04:48, 21 January 2011 (UTC)

It's easy. Even you could do it.  ;-) You just take it into Paint and there is a little crop tool and you crop it and save it. Then upload as derivative like with the mirror image.TCO (talk) 05:25, 21 January 2011 (UTC)

I'm on it. NYMFan69-86 (talk) 04:19, 22 January 2011 (UTC)

Says it cannot be done: the license is unknown. Oh well. Does that bode badly for this image? Will it have to be removed?--NYMFan69-86 (talk) 22:02, 22 January 2011 (UTC)

I'm questionable on that image for other reasons. Went to the listed site and could not find it (even searching around). But I did find it on a different copyrighted site (well the overall page was copyrighted, they did not specify the image source). There is actually a better image from state of AL anyhow. But I gotta get moving with the whole request thing. Or searching for some third image. It is a rare turtle and there are few images. Same concern exists for Arizona and may for some other pics. I dropped FN another note saying to at least coach us. I think there are sort of suspicious things to look for even if the image has a written justification on the project, that are sorta trouble signs. But I don't understand it all. I guess technically, someone could get a government image off a website (legit) and then the website might change. Unless they have some archival method to prove it was on there once. Sorry for your time spent.TCO (talk) 22:15, 22 January 2011 (UTC)

State Dog Breeds has a similar look to us, with the table and all. I don't know how fussy they are with the headings and we have a good rationale for our order. But I asked for some opinions on FL in general and we should get FB. We could also do a map if we wanted to states w/wout SR.

Birds of Georgia was one of those lists where there was a little paragraph for each species.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Featured_list_candidates

TCO (talk) 09:29, 22 January 2011 (UTC)

Hi there,

I'll go through a few points that might help speed you through FL (State Dogs is only my third, so I'm no expert by any means!). One thing that surprised me was that they wanted the "List of" dropped from the title of the article, with the dogs page becoming

. Now I don't think you'll need to make it U.S. state reptile species, but I'd suggest a rename to U.S. state reptile. Second, third and fourth paragraphs need to be referenced.

Regarding the table - they tend to like a separate column for references, so just add an extra one called Ref(s) and move the citations from each line to there. You'll need to remove the sorting function on the image column and the refs column (open up the dogs list and look at the table - in fact feel free just to copy the code to make it easier).

References all look fine, but they'll want the dates all in the same format, and in American format so Month Day Year in whatever style you choose.

Other than that, I think it all looks good. They're likely to ask questions about the prose section at the top - but you won't know what they'll ask until you nominate it. :) Hope it all goes well. 10:06, 22 January 2011 (UTC)

Hey, I went through and did a few changes to the article, looks pretty good! Like the other user said above, pick a date type for your references (i.e. 2011-01-20 or January 20 2010), and also refs 30 and 31 need to be converted to full references, not just a link. As said above, I guess the form now is to drop the "List of" from the title if there's no other article to separate from, so the list should be moved to

U.S. state reptiles. You're pretty much good to go, though! --PresN

17:23, 22 January 2011 (UTC)

Thanks, I will transfer this comment to talk page (hope OK). Yeah, we will get all the all refs squared away like an FA. We know how to do that. Are some old ones left over, from when we started. But we will both check their veracity and make them format perfect. I like the idea of changing the article title. Usually when I link to stuff, I'm already using the shorter words in text. And maybe it encourages a bit more wholistic work product. I'm kinda worried on the images. I tried going through them but there are a variety of licences (and almost all were put there before us, different than Painted turtle where we were the uploaders. Some of the ones that say Federal government, I can't find currently on govt websites. I just need an expert to advise (and to learn how to do that myself in the future). Asked FN to take a look at it (figure if we go with the toughest critic to help us brush up, then we are "clean" when go to review. He has not responded, so will ping him again. 17:36, 22 January 2011 (UTC)

Just as a note, I disagree strongly with the suggestion to drop the "List of..." from the title; I've honestly never heard of this before, and AFAIK "List of..." is still the preferred naming format for...er...lists. Nobody's suggested that so far at the FLC for List of birds of Georgia (U.S. state), anyway. - 17:52, 22 January 2011 (UTC)

Interesting. I guess there is more to it. How about the rest of it. Any help? Images worry me the most...TCO (talk) 18:14, 22 January 2011 (UTC)

I don't know any of the rules or general trends with this, but I would prefer to leave it with the "Lise of...". Just one man's opinion.--NYMFan69-86 (talk) 22:14, 22 January 2011 (UTC)

I'm Mr. Easy on this one. Y'all settle it. (which means we will leave it, since NYM is co-author).TCO (talk) 22:16, 22 January 2011 (UTC)

Since we now have the columns stretched to fill the page (which looks WAAY better btw), is there a way to center the images withing their column?--NYMFan69-86 (talk) 23:36, 22 January 2011 (UTC)

Let me fix it. Regards,

talk

) 23:33, 22 January 2011 (UTC)

I didn't manage to center this but make the column small enough it has to fit the image, is that okay? IF not I will investigate further. There is

talk

) 00:56, 23 January 2011 (UTC)

It looks much better. Centering, since it's difficult, isn't necessary. Thank you SunCreator, big help.--NYMFan69-86 (talk) 01:00, 23 January 2011 (UTC)

Perfect. Exactly what I wanted.TCO (talk) 01:29, 23 January 2011 (UTC)

The only current turtle FL. I remember reading somewhere on the FLC review page that a "key" was necessary for lists (I can't seem to find it now to quote the comment exactly). Notice how it has a section above the table where it talks about what is in each column. Should we do something similar here?--NYMFan69-86 (talk) 23:50, 22 January 2011 (UTC)

Interesting find. I think our table is nicer than theirs. Hate how the images are so tiny and completely on extreme left. That's a pretty old FL. No talk page comments, but I will read their FLC review. Bottom line is I think that key adds little info. I mean if I'm designing it myself, I would not think the headers need much explanation and so it's just spinach. If they make us do it, fine. But I don't see state dogs being required for it. So we should do what makes sense, not thing we hve to do something that we don't think makes article better, when we don't know a requirement. I will change one header title. I hate that whole binomen thing (can't even say binomial name since 53. I'm going to call it scientific name, but wlink to binomial nomenclature. That's most common sense.TCO (talk) 01:29, 23 January 2011 (UTC)

And our lead already has a lot of discussion of states, years, references, science names. Just don't see the value.TCO (talk) 01:31, 23 January 2011 (UTC)

Okay, I tend to agree, was just wondering why they were asked to have it. And change on my friend, nobody uses the term "binomen."--NYMFan69-86 (talk) 01:33, 23 January 2011 (UTC)

An FL from 2006. I wouldn't take that list as useful for passing an FL today. Regards,

talk

) 01:38, 23 January 2011 (UTC)

According to the title of the image used for Kansas, these are two different turtles.--NYMFan69-86 (talk) 23:56, 22 January 2011 (UTC)

It's in the task list above to crop it. License is a little interesting as well...TCO (talk) 01:17, 23 January 2011 (UTC)

Ah, didn't catch that. Okay. If no other can be found on commons (which I believe is the case), perhaps there's a flickr image.--NYMFan69-86 (talk) 01:18, 23 January 2011 (UTC)

Right, I noticed that earlier. The 'Ornate box turtle' - it's ambiguous as both 'Terrapene ornata' and 'Terrapene ornata ornata' are called that. You have an image with a desert box turtle (on right) with an ornate. How about using

talk

) 01:32, 23 January 2011 (UTC)

Cool, done. This article feature's some of your images SunCreator.  :-) NYMFan69-86 (talk) 01:39, 23 January 2011 (UTC)

Better picture, can see resemblence to other box turtle, better license. nice.TCO (talk) 01:59, 23 January 2011 (UTC)

1. Headings (top of table) should have first word capitalized, sentence case, per MOS.

2. Those parentheticals (sr and ssr) should not. They are common nouns, not proper ones and are not starting a sentence, are parenthetical to the species name, following from it. If you look at state birds for instance, they do not. Like I would not capitalize w in "(whole genus)" either.

3. I need to look into whether first letter of an entry should be capitalized. MOS does not immediately answer and usage off-wiki (i.e. real standards) is not clear either. Probably fine to leave as is, since that is how most current wiki tables are set up. And if you had a sentence fragment or a whole sentence, obviously you would. And at least for Florida, it's actually more of sentence frags that you have.TCO (talk) 01:53, 23 January 2011 (UTC)

I see now. We're getting there!--NYMFan69-86 (talk) 02:05, 23 January 2011 (UTC)

The link for Colorado(http://www.colorado.gov/cs/Satellite/GovRitter/GOVR/1230899240124) has gone dead today/yesterday because of having a new governor. Any alternatives? It's used on picta article also. Sometimes archiving url's is a fine idea but I didn't get around to doing that one with webcitation.org. Regards,

) 20:03, 23 January 2011 (UTC)

Some Wikipedia bot might have archived it by the way. Not sure what it's called. Archivebot? Regards,

talk

) 20:08, 23 January 2011 (UTC)

Thanks for catching this SunCreator. I'll just find a new source for it, now big deal.--NYMFan69-86 (talk) 20:20, 23 January 2011 (UTC)

New URL [2] about to generate the reference.--NYMFan69-86 (talk) 20:21, 23 January 2011 (UTC)

Can you replace one in picta as well. Regards,

talk

) 20:57, 23 January 2011 (UTC)

Sorry, yes, done. Thanks again.--NYMFan69-86 (talk) 21:01, 23 January 2011 (UTC)

On picta the ref doesn't show for me, but if it showed the caps on the title are not consistent with other title caps in other refs. Regards,

talk

) 21:07, 23 January 2011 (UTC)

My fault, how about now?--NYMFan69-86 (talk) 21:13, 23 January 2011 (UTC)

Yep, that's great. Regards,

talk

) 21:31, 23 January 2011 (UTC)

The first picture here....is it fair game? It's a government website. I just really like it, so majestic.--NYMFan69-86 (talk) 20:40, 23 January 2011 (UTC)

US Fed GOVT only. And even there, it's better to find some policy page that says the content is free (like what I did with he webbed foot pic). But you're pretty safe with US FED unless of course, they say it's owned by someone else. With NH pics in our article, I had to write and get permission. Some of the states are pretty strict about their content (like Missouri has big warnings that their stuff is copyrighted). They might still do the CC-by-SA licensing. But you have to ask.TCO (talk) 22:01, 23 January 2011 (UTC)

There are actually a lot of great images out there on state sites. Check out the dorsalis on Alabama's site. I was up late last night and sent notes in to a couple states asking for some permissions. (I sorta had this idea in my mind of doing top and bottom pics (in gallery) for all four subspecies. eastern and southern have distinctive top views, but you really need to see the bottom to resolve western from midland. I was thinking that I would want to actually take my own photos and control the size and all that, but failing that, we might be able to cobble something together with enough donated images. I guess I should think about what we really need, but instead was just asking for what looks good. If this pig doesn't pass FA somehow, I will just keep doing things that blow people away with above and beyond.)TCO (talk) 22:01, 23 January 2011 (UTC)

Also a lot of state sites use someone else's pic. Like with NH, I only got permissions for the ones their employee's took. Of course, you can keep going back and try with the individual photog, but it's more work and probably less likely to say "yes" than a state govt.TCO (talk) 22:03, 23 January 2011 (UTC)

Ah, I thought it was easier then that. Never mind, I'm totally happy with the images we have, the only exception being the western painted turtle for description; you can't really see the little guy (it doesn't really have to be changed though). A gallery like the one your talking about doing would put the article over the top.  :-) -NYMFan69-86 (talk) 22:08, 23 January 2011 (UTC)

Yeah, I definitely wouldn't hold the article from the front page over it. Just was things I was thinking of to make the thing unquestionably stellar. Kinda started seeing more and more beautiful pics and realized we could get most of what I wanted by donations, rather than actually having a qualified biologist get "stereotpyical" subspecies specimens and then doing controlled picture taking on a light table and all. It's totally doable, really. just a hassle of sending out all the donation requests.

The other thing that would be sort of above and beyond (and don't let anyone think we "need this", but it would be a tenth cherry on top of the 20 scoop ice cream sundae) would be a full size map, like you mentioned once. the only thing is I would want it BETTER than that sea turtle one. I would want to show every blue speckle in the SW properly (I love the Audobon Society Field Guide, it actually shows the individial river traces in NM for instance), would want to show Oregon and BC and Washington properly at the PAcific Ocean), really kind of nail the Gulf Coast thing in Alabama, souther extent of the Eastern all at that). Would mean looking at ALL the sources, emphasis on the most recent and trustworthy ones (I am very high on SOME of the state departments) and then drawing the picture from that. It's not just a graphical exercise, though. But you could show Tennessee river, Mississippi, all that. Maybe even call out the political names (although if we could do abbreviations, that would really help, worried about viewability). Is just another thing in my mind. I really think it's already stunning in detail and accuracy. And both Lovich and Gervais emphasized that.

P.s. I had a couple other things, like asking for a donated video (instead of the link) or maybe a good one that I saw on Youtube (getting the donation). But they're more gimmicky. Still, every bit helps. I was already blown away by your images when I first came to help out. And people love the images (Gervais even said so).TCO (talk) 00:12, 24 January 2011 (UTC)

We should make sure all the animals or maybe states have inbound links coming here.TCO (talk) 08:56, 24 January 2011 (UTC)

I have had a superficial look over this article and for the most part it is fine. I have concerns about

) 14:53, 23 January 2011 (UTC)

If you are having trouble tracking images back to their source I would recommend tineye Fasach Nua (talk) 01:49, 24 January 2011 (UTC)

TCO translation

1. I think we need to deep six the collage. do a map instead like with state dogs. Asked that person to do one for us. Just too many problems with that collage. Very pretty, but not really state reptiles anyhow.

Map in, collage cut. TCO (talk) 15:36, 24 January 2011 (UTC)

That map is awesome! --NYMFan69-86 (talk) 18:26, 24 January 2011 (UTC)

2. Not sure what he means about the collared lizzard email (I don't see an email). Will ask at Commons or go back to him.

I just went and changed it out anyhow. TCO (talk) 08:55, 24 January 2011 (UTC)

3. That's a relief on the NM lizards. But now that I look at the pic, it has three different lizards. All are called whiptails, but only middle one is the listed species. Need to check on what the required reptile is and if we can get a pic of only it (if it is not all three).

4. I'm really not such a strong facing inward. And especially for seomthing like this, where it's a list and not pages littered around on the page on different sides withing text. And I wouldn't want to use worse images (in quality of view) to face in. that said, would be a good motivator to look in Commons and if we find something better might as well change out.

Maybe we could just "flip" them all. But actually, I'm thinking we might as well use this as an opportunity to look for better images.

5. I don't see how we can do same aspect ratio if alligators are long and skinny and turltes are round. I wouldn't want a bunch of blank space. Or to cut off the lizard's tails. But we should look into it and find out what goes on at FLC.

6. I'm still concrned about AL and the other government ones. Want to do the trace back thing.

One suggestion: the map can be further improved by indicating the order of reptile by colour coding. i.e Turtles/Croc/Squamata(snakes&lizards). Maybe a column for the order in the table also. Regards,

) 18:58, 24 January 2011 (UTC)

One other comment, and this is borderline personal because I lived there for 11 years, why isn't Long Island colored!?--NYMFan69-86 (talk) 19:00, 24 January 2011 (UTC)

We need to get the guy to color it. He might not even be from US. My preference would be to leave as is for color, but I'm fine if you want to do work to make it more differentiated. Could also do by decade of accepnatnce which kinda shows the "spread of reptile symbolism". Also, I know the snakes and lizards are together but I worry it confuses people. Like legs and no legs.  :( But if you want to do work to get the map to be that way, I won't object.

I think the decade thing is a great idea, from the sixties on up to the 200's. Five colors, not too confusing I don't think (but it may prove to be, I don't know, we'll have to see how it looks).--NYMFan69-86 (talk) 20:40, 24 January 2011 (UTC)

I added another ref. I can't say most or always since we didn't check every state. But often seems more accurate than sometimes. But we have the WV article where it assumes schoolkids do the proposing. And every single state we've looked at was schoolkid initiated.TCO (talk) 03:07, 25 January 2011 (UTC)

Okay, I didn't know so many were. I guess that's what I get for looking at a book that just lists them, doesn't give background information. Sorry!--NYMFan69-86 (talk) 03:08, 25 January 2011 (UTC)

Pretty new image!--NYMFan69-86 (talk) 02:55, 26 January 2011 (UTC)

I was waiting for the attaboy. It's in picta too. knew how you hated the old one.TCO (talk) 03:03, 26 January 2011 (UTC)

Hate's a strong word, haha. It was okay for like movement or habitat or something, but not for description because you couldn't really see it. This new one is great though, nice work.  :-) NYMFan69-86 (talk) 03:10, 26 January 2011 (UTC)

got me thinking. Do you think the midland in picta might be a better image over here?TCO (talk) 03:12, 26 January 2011 (UTC)

Hmmmm. Call me crazy but I almost like this image better over there. It's really a toss up though, I'm fine either way. If you wanna make your change you can do it, they're both nice.--NYMFan69-86 (talk) 03:23, 26 January 2011 (UTC)

I have no strong feeling on this one for this page. Leave it if you like it. Heck, guess I did something right! Over there, I'm moving to top and bottom image galleries so a head on image is inappropriate for the gallery. TCO (talk) 03:27, 26 January 2011 (UTC)

The note on box turtle is not referenced. It also seems unnecessary because it's used on Terrapene(box turtle) so it's not ambiguous. Also the topic is about US states, so it seems clearly not about the box turtles of Asia. Regards,

) 13:41, 26 January 2011 (UTC)

Let's cut it. Agreed.TCO (talk) 14:31, 26 January 2011 (UTC)

Is the state reptile of Georgia 'Gopher tortoise' or 'Gopherus polyphemus'? Regards,

) 13:56, 26 January 2011 (UTC)

Try state of Georgia website.TCO (talk) 14:30, 26 January 2011 (UTC)

Found a link but it's not the original text. Regards,

talk

) 14:54, 26 January 2011 (UTC)

Thanks man. Didn't mean to be curt, but had a separate Wikifight to fight. Google news search for 1989 (do they go that far back)? Usually good news stories then. Otherwise we need the statute or resolution or whateve, but I am not a jock. Actually what is the difference on the two species? I thought both the common name for the genera and for the species was the same. So are you saying that if Georgia designated on the common name, it is ambigous? Hmmm...donno. And then we have another where it says whole genus. Wonder what book says? Or off-site sources (still need a ref, but wonder what they beleive).TCO (talk) 15:29, 26 January 2011 (UTC)

Seems it was 'Gopher tortoise' see news item and none found as scientific name. Yes, the term is a little ambiguous and thought this might clear it up, but I guess not. Regards,

talk

) 16:25, 26 January 2011 (UTC)

I think if they say "the gopher tortoise" as opposed to "the gopher tortoises", that they mean the species. Also the others are not found in Georgia. Every secondary site I could find had the species (but lacked a footnote). I guess we could call them. If we need a source, then Shearer. Of course he has not batted 100% yet either. TCO (talk) 17:20, 26 January 2011 (UTC)

Agreed. Regards,

talk

) 17:30, 26 January 2011 (UTC)

State Facts. Regards,

) 01:27, 28 January 2011 (UTC)

It's in there. They call it "official reptile". We already discussed that we are not differentiating official reptile and state reptile and even state official reptile. We can put a sentence in the lead though if you want. Cool?TCO (talk) 01:36, 28 January 2011 (UTC)

My mistake. Was looking at wrong state on map :( Regards,

talk

) 01:42, 28 January 2011 (UTC)

Do we have to verify that certain states don't have a state reptile?--NYMFan69-86 (talk) 03:03, 28 January 2011 (UTC)

I don't think so. I was just checking. Now confident in them all having found all the state symbol pages for the ones not listed. Regards,

talk

) 03:09, 28 January 2011 (UTC)

Oh, well, you had me going there!  ;-P It's good to have that safety net. Truly nice work SunCreator. NYMFan69-86 (talk) 03:13, 28 January 2011 (UTC)

I'm glad we did it. Otherwise we are implicitly relying on the statenet websites. Was the right thing to do. Can't rely on the book since it is old.TCO (talk) 04:28, 28 January 2011 (UTC)

The content is clearly here. I do think we should take it very seriously as it will just be so much better if we have checked and fixed every single thing we can, before getting it on others hands. Won't say that we get a no changes pass. But just the way to be and will more likely get us an eventual pass.

Two main "global things", I think we need to consider as we get this thing ready. First, we inherited a lot of content within the article. We need to feel the whole thing is ours, know it from front to back, not get "surprises" from things that were put in before we started. Second, we need to do the same level of effort that we did with picta (or fixes that we learned in review) on this article. Obviously it's a lot less content than an FA. And kinda easier to research. But we should still be completely buttoned up and respect the "star", not treat it as a lower standard because of the list thing.

I suspect that the two main areas to work on are the images and the refs. I could take the former and you take the latter. Images may be more to do than refs (I don't know what condition they are in), so if you finish up, I'm sure I can use the help. You could work from the bottom on images, I can work from the top. (EDIT: just do everything except images. hope that is a fair split.) Once we finish, everything on the list, let's each do a final review of the whole article. I find this easier than monitoring each others changes as it happens (but of course don't hold back if you notice me "genusesing"!) and it makes sure every aspect had two eyes. Then after fixing any little things that come up from that last internal look, let's put it in the "star" queue!

I'm with you friend. You get images and I'll get the refs. We can have PresN and Fifelfoo help us out respectively as well. About a week or two of fine tuning and this baby should be ready for candidacy (the only image thing I ask that I do is the alt text. I'll Do it in one fell swoop over the weekend, have been really busy lately. Dont worry about having to replace images after the alt text is added, minimal work is needed for me to go in and add it to a different image.). And yes, here's to another point! NYMFan69-86 (talk)

List of things to fix (add and cross off and edit at will!)

OLD STUFF

• content: For any species that we did not provide the reference on (iow we relied on the previous editor), we should double-check and make sure that the info is correct.
• old refs: same as above, we should look at any old refs, make sure they are really RSes and support the info. More importantly we should go over them very strictly on formatting, to make sure consistent with how we roll.

REFS

• Complete format check. Let's go over all the things we know about sentence case and date format and dash and the like.

OTHER

• Links: Let's Dab/EL check ourselves. Either use PresN's tool, or just ask him to do it. Also, we should mechanically check all the links and make sure they go where we want. We have a lot in both the tables and the lead. SunC found one bad one on gopher tortoise, so let's check the bunch.

• I actually have two questions about this. Should something like painted turtle be linked each time it's in the list? Also, since over at picta we didn't link states, should we take those wlinks out of our table? NYMFan69-86 (talk) 05:32, 28 January 2011 (UTC)

I would leave them. It's OK in a table. Disn't hit you like in text with all the speed bumps. In fact, if you have too much blue and a listy para, consider coverting to a table. plus it's what they expect. but I think it's also good for the reader.TCO (talk) 05:42, 28 January 2011 (UTC)

I tend to agree, just wanted to make sure it didn't qualify as

overlinking. NYMFan69-86 (talk

) 05:53, 28 January 2011 (UTC)

• Ext sites: Let's double-check our list versus the big websites we link to (for content). Obviously they are not RSes, but this is just to see if there is any errors.
• Territories: Let's get a list of the U.S. territories and check each one via an individual google search to see if it has a reptile. We can figure out how to handle it if one does.
• Category: I don't understand the piping with the state symbols cat (look in edit mode). Added reptiles as a cat
• NM: need to understand if all whip tails are called out or just one subspecies (picture has all three). either fix picture by crop or change species designatoin.

This is an image of three different species, from the uploader: "Shows three species of the lizard genus Cnemidophorus, commonly known as whiptails: C. inornatus, C. neomexicanus, C. tigris." I suggest a crop, I can't locate another image of this little guy (maybe an image offsite if a crop can't be done).--NYMFan69-86 (talk) 03:31, 28 January 2011 (UTC)

hold on trigger. The common name of all three of those species is the whiptail and our listed common name is whiptail. So let's make sure that the species restrictivity is correct. We need to check the NM ref. Maybe they have 3 damned species as their state reptile!TCO (talk) 04:16, 28 January 2011 (UTC)

http://www.sos.state.nm.us/KidsCorner/StateSymbols.html#reptile Regards,

talk

) 04:24, 28 January 2011 (UTC)

That answers that. We can't really crop that image though, aspect ratio will make it too long after the crop. Let's get someone to photoshop the background over the top of the left and right lizards.TCO (talk) 04:40, 28 January 2011 (UTC)

IMAGES

• Best picture: (don't get mad at me). Let's go and check the Commons and at least do a skim (using the category or a search) and make sure we have the best picture for the animal. This is part of making the article "ours". Can be a quick skim, but it's fair for the reader that we grabbed best avail content.
• Check the image provenance. (where they really came from.) I am most worried about AL and AZ, but there may be some further down. Need to learn how to use the FN tin star tool. If some (like AL) are enough an issue may want to get a different image, may need to go off site to get one. It just worries me when I see the huge number of images with a million different justifications and that we did not generate (and some quite old, and I have personally put a bad image up before, so I know the crime).
• AL pic needs crop.

I tried to about a week ago and I wasn't allowed to because it's license was "unknown"...that may be a bigger problem.--NYMFan69-86 (talk) 03:26, 28 January 2011 (UTC)

It came from fws.gov, can't that be worked out? Regards,

talk

) 03:48, 28 January 2011 (UTC)

Let's figure out the license. I have a sneaking suspicion it was never a government image. It's not on the site listed and then it is on a commercial site. If we can confurm that it was a govt licence we can update the file card. Otherwise, we should probably get a new image. Maybe just ask the commercial guy. There's that tin star tool of FN's. We need to use it and see if we can find it somewhere on a fed govt website, which would make all easy. Definitely fix the license before the crop anyway.TCO (talk) 04:19, 28 January 2011 (UTC)

Really difficult to find this species. The only one I can find that isn't a copy of the Wikipedia one is http://www.archives.state.al.us/emblems/st_rept.html, this is a state archive. So I don't think it's covered my the federal licensing. Regards,

talk

) 02:12, 29 January 2011 (UTC)

I'll put in a request for it and will also try out the tin star thing since I was beating the horn over this image. I'll try to target my effort as am feeling sick again. Appreciate others pushing this thing along.  :-( TCO (talk) 02:51, 29 January 2011 (UTC)

Take a break and take it easy. Turtles don't race ;) Regards,

talk

) 03:17, 29 January 2011 (UTC)

• flip any images needed (I don't completely agree with this, but it doesn't matter, let's do it).

I've been asked to look at this list by User:TCO. My comments are as follows.

It's a nice neat list. I have not done a full peer review. These are some random thoughts after a quick look.

• As a Brit my first question is "what is the particular reason for the state choose the reptile it does?". In the first sentence you say they "exemplify their state's character" and give a ref. But the ref is to an offline source, so that does not help me. Is there any way of explaining that more fully? I guess it's something to do with whether they contain desert, or are by the sea, or something like that, but it would be good to have some sort of explanation. Is it more to do with geography than "character"?

We were trying to hit this but I guess should do a bit more. Wiki seems of no help since the "state symbols" articles is just a glorified Dab. Gotta be some good article that explains the "phenomenon" of kitchy state animals and symbols more. Actually moving the WV ref up to this sentence as well since it talks about the practice of all the state animals, and is online. But we just need to find one good article that explains why we crazy colonists roll the way we do. No need for a huge essay but maybe a more solid sentence or two, plus wquality ref. Google web not working, but maybe we can find some Alistaire Cooke type description of what we find normal.TCO (talk) 17:13, 28 January 2011 (UTC)

• Make sure you have the text copyedited. The first criterion for a FL is that the prose has to be of professional standard.

I'll see if I can cajole Wehwalt into going through it. Is just four paras. Am too brain-fried to mess with it more myself and better to just get another pair of eyes. I'm fine with any rearrangements or even cutting the para on genuses that SunC tagged.TCO (talk) 16:53, 28 January 2011 (UTC)

• In the last sentence you mention "state reptile spots". Not sure what they are; is it a technical term; or is it a USA/Brit thing?

We should reword. I was trying to be succint and I just mean "slot", "place", etc. in the context of the list.TCO (talk) 17:21, 28 January 2011 (UTC)

• Your Harvard link doesn't work, partly because there are two Shearers, and you need to use the "citation" template in the Bibliography. So change all the Harvard refs to {{Harvnb|Shearer|Shearer|1994|p=309}} (changing the page number appropriately), and in the Bibliography change "cite book" to "citation". Then when you click on the reference, it highlights the book in the bibliography. Maybe not much use in this list where there is only one book, but when there are multiple books, it can be helpful.
• But (leading on from the last point) you are supposed to use the same family of citation templates throughout (either "citation" or "cite *"). I use "citation" throughout, and it seems OK for everything.

Let's see if we can get an elaboration. Not sure if this is from me using the toolbar and you Magnus or something more. And not sure if we are OK to use toolbars or have to cut and past the template itself. On the Harvard and the bibliography, I kinda remain perplexed why we even do it. I'm just used to inline citations with no bibiography. I'm not against it per se. I just haven't researched it and thought about it. And it's not how you write science papers.TCO (talk) 16:54, 28 January 2011 (UTC)

I'm a little confused about the comment as well. Well, first, let me say thank you for the review! My name is NYMFan69-86, it's nice to meet you.  :-) We have our citations that link down to our sole member in bibliography (like with many articles I've worked on). What exactly is wrong with the format...is it strange to have just one book? Should the book become highlighted when one clicks on a given Shearer citation? The only real reason I used this format is because there was a broad range of pages in the book that we used.--NYMFan69-86 (talk) 19:59, 28 January 2011 (UTC)

• There's something goes wrong with sorting — the columns jump about. Not sure what's causing that but I guess some of the pipes must be wrong.
• There seem to be some new recent rules about accessibility. I've just had a list promoted, and had to add a line at the top of the template to give more explanation. Something like "+List of state reptiles with scientific names and photographs". And then each line has to start with "! scope="col" style=" and each item in the list has to start with "! scope="row"|". Difficult to explain. Suggest you have a look at List of churches preserved by the Churches Conservation Trust in Northern England and copy the sort of thing I had to do.
• I just wonder if there is too much "white space". Maybe the photos could be reduced in size. That's no problem for the reader because they can always click on the photo for a larger image.

Good luck with the progress of the list. A lot of this stuff can seem complicating and confusing, but it makes the outcome more satisfying. --Peter I. Vardy (talk) 11:59, 28 January 2011 (UTC)

Thank you for your review/thoughts. That gives us plenty of specifics to clear up. Regards,

talk

) 17:00, 28 January 2011 (UTC)

Sorting fails if you use rowspans. I've duplicated 'Florida' (as it belongs on two rows) and the sorting works now. I've added scope to both the column headers and row headers to meet our guidance on accessibility, and added the class "plainrowheaders" on the assumption that you won't want bold, centred state names. Let me know if I can help with anything else. Cheers (another Brit) --RexxS (talk) 02:05, 29 January 2011 (UTC)

I want you to help us as much as you can! Have a slice of the star too! Rule Britannia. Err...wait. Seriously, love it and BRING IT!TCO (talk) 02:45, 29 January 2011 (UTC)

See Wehwalt's talk page. He will come over and give us some help. As we look at these issues of the vague genera para (we should just cut that whole para, it's too confusing and geeky) and the lack of description of waht a state symbol is, I start to think our issue is more content than copyedit. Will not be trivial to build up, can't just summarize Sheerer, but surely the info is out there. Need to think about what we want in this thing, what key content to give to the reader and then develop it. Then polish it. TCO (talk) 19:21, 28 January 2011 (UTC)

On the issue on content I agree. It seems if you go to the state website they have a small section that could be commented about. Such as: Colorado, georgia, maryland, missouri, north carolina "The turtle watches undisturbed as countless generations of faster "hares" run by to quick oblivion, and is thus a model of patience for mankind, and a symbol of our State’s unrelenting pursuit of great and lofty goals." ohio - the "farmers friend" that eats disease-carrying rodents. Regards,

talk

) 19:58, 28 January 2011 (UTC)

That's great stuff. I think if we did a para with three punchy stories or quotes, that would be some cool content and illustratively explain the point. Plus be fun to read. Kudos, man. Good replacement for genus para. I'm hating that thing more and more. I wrote it and it still seems too nitanoid even to me.TCO (talk) 20:23, 28 January 2011 (UTC)

Okay, I agree with the changes. I'll look for a tried and true definition of a "state reptile" and perhaps even a "state symbol." This content is essential.--NYMFan69-86 (talk) 20:30, 28 January 2011 (UTC)

I cut the genera para. Let's plop in a pretty para about turtles playing around and epitomizing their state's character or whatever (the SunC three examples) and then we are golden. This will be easier to research and will actually be a better way to show the concept (by examples) than searching for some opining on the concept so much.TCO (talk) 20:33, 28 January 2011 (UTC)

Cool. I'd like to use North Carolina and Maryland if you don't mind. Also, I feel like maybe a couple others of different orders is best, we should probably have a snake or two, maybe the American alligator...I'll chew on it and try to find sources.--NYMFan69-86 (talk) 21:11, 28 January 2011 (UTC)

Those are definitely cool animals. We should kinda go by the sites that have best quote to show the whole folderol. Some sites don't say anything, so they don't help illustrate the concept. Others have something pretty cute and effective and fun and all. With 50 to choose from, we should be able to get a few killer examples. Make sure they are not all one kind of animal or all one region, like you said. TCO (talk) 21:36, 28 January 2011 (UTC)

The terrapin is obviously pretty emblematic and can even note the state football team. With carolinus there is the name commonality. Just don't know if you will find the punchy quotes there. But there are others like Texas or Arizona or New Mexico that have one with the state in the name. TCO (talk) 22:01, 28 January 2011 (UTC)

OK, I think we have enough with the comments above and some specific things from Wehwalt, to improve content. I will start putting the basic points down and get it in there. We may want to play with which fact goes in which para, but I will get a first draft down for us to play with. Also, I've kind of been running with an unconscious assumption in my head that we had to stick to four paras (which was tricky for instance on painted turtle), but maybe since this not really a "lede", we can go to five. Not pushing that and for now 3-4 should be fine. Just saying this may be a restriction that we don't have, if the useful content dictates 5 paras.TCO (talk) 17:14, 29 January 2011 (UTC)

Template:Did you know/Queue...or if that is to late, you know where to look...  ;-) TCO (talk) 04:15, 29 January 2011 (UTC)

Queue 2,on in about 1224 hours time. Congratulations. Super picture when in thumb because the Tiger looks alive! Regards,

talk

) 04:25, 29 January 2011 (UTC)

THANKS! One of the reviewers of the picture (who wouldn't support) seemed to think it was alive even in large size. He might have been joking, not sure though. He said that was why Tanner has lived to be 100! I left a (hopefully taken in jest) "neener, neener" comment at the FP directors talk page. By hook or crook...TCO (talk) 04:32, 29 January 2011 (UTC)

Oh...and I actually meant to post this on a user talk page. But given how I like to threadjack article talk pages, not surprised if people think I did it on purpose.  ;) TCO (talk) 04:34, 29 January 2011 (UTC)

NOW I understand why they had that longwinded parenthetical about the tiger! HA! They should have just not said anything and deliberately decieved the viewer. Picture is so ballsy if you think Tigger is alive!TCO (talk) 04:36, 29 January 2011 (UTC)

Just saw this, congrats man. And if nobody said anything I would have thought it was alive!--NYMFan69-86 (talk) 04:51, 29 January 2011 (UTC)

I sent an email to the donor (Daines, museum director) and the ccs from the email. Just so that if any check email before it goes up, they know when its coming. Will also send a note afterwards, talking about the hits it got. Just trying to give people a little happiness when they help us. P.s. They have a lot of herp samples in that museum...;-) TCO (talk) 19:17, 29 January 2011 (UTC)

There are two things in the lead that I think could either be cut or made into notes. The paragraph concerning states that have reptiles named after them and this bit: "Conversely, in the north part of the central and western states, only one state (Wyoming) named a state reptile. In the Great Lakes region, there was a cluster of three states (Illinois, Michigan and Ohio) that named a reptile. In the Northeast, there was another cluster of three participating states (Vermont, New York and Massachusetts)." Just my opinion, if we still are looking to cut down the lead at all.--NYMFan69-86 (talk) 07:33, 30 January 2011 (UTC)

I'm not trying to cut the lead down. I sort of had an aha which is that this can be longer than a normal lead. It's not like we are trying to summarize another article. But if it reads too long, clip it. Why not get some advice from the super listers or look at some and see if we can have a longer lead. I just thought why restrict ourselves. But I'm not sure. They were things from Wehwalt. We could also probably just tighten up. Like instead of describing all the different locations of northern states, say something like 20 of 24 states in the south and 6 of 15 states in the north. I donno...TCO (talk) 08:41, 30 January 2011 (UTC)

• Pennsylvania

House bill 621. Regards,

) 01:14, 28 January 2011 (UTC)

Did that end up getting passed? --Guerillero | My Talk 01:26, 28 January 2011 (UTC)

I did a google search and there were three stories on the progress to gettting passed but never a victory story. Needs to get passed and then executive has to sign. None of the secondary sites show it either.TCO (talk) 01:32, 28 January 2011 (UTC)

Check,checking, checking....no it didn't. www.legis.state.pa.us/WU01/LI/CSM/2011/0/6680.pdf Regards,

talk

) 01:39, 28 January 2011 (UTC)

Confirmation not a state reptile yet. http://pa.gov/portal/server.pt/gateway/PTARGS_0_2_24667_2966_368351_43/http%3B/pubcontent.state.pa.us/publishedcontent/publish/cop_general_government_operations/pagov/branding/pagov_tabbed_portlet/about_pennsylvania.html. Regards,

talk

) 02:09, 28 January 2011 (UTC)

http://sites.state.pa.us/kids/quiz.htm

• New Hampsire

None here http://www.nh.gov/nhinfo/animal.html Regards,

) 01:33, 28 January 2011 (UTC)

OK. You are checking all to make sure they are in or out. Cool. Umm...we don't have this one listed, so is fine, right?TCO (talk) 01:42, 28 January 2011 (UTC)

Yeah, keeping a record to save going back over them. Regards,

talk

) 01:50, 28 January 2011 (UTC)

Another for nh http://www.bow.k12.nh.us/sbennert/NH%20Map.htm Regards,

talk

) 02:56, 28 January 2011 (UTC)

• New Jersey

None here http://www.nj.gov/njfacts/animal.htm Regards,

) 01:44, 28 January 2011 (UTC)

• Wisconsin

http://www.state.wi.us/state/core/wisconsin_state_symbols.html Regards,

) 01:50, 28 January 2011 (UTC)

• Oregon

http://www.oregon.gov/OBDD/KIDS/kidrpt_facts3.shtml Regards,

) 02:06, 28 January 2011 (UTC)

• Washington

http://www.leg.wa.gov/Symbols/Pages/default.aspx Regards,

) 02:18, 28 January 2011 (UTC)

• Idaho

history.idaho.gov/ES1_statesymbols.pdf Regards,

)

• Montana

http://mhs.mt.gov/education/studentguide/Symbols.asp Regards,

) 02:23, 28 January 2011 (UTC)

• Utah

http://www.utah.gov/about/symbols.html Regards,

) 02:24, 28 January 2011 (UTC)

• North Dakota

http://www.nd.gov/category.htm?id=75 Regards,

) 02:28, 28 January 2011 (UTC)

• South Dakota

http://legis.state.sd.us/statutes/DisplayStatute.aspx?Type=Statute&Statute=1-6 Regards,

) 02:32, 28 January 2011 (UTC)

• Nebraska

http://www.sos.ne.gov/ne_symbols.html Regards,

) 02:39, 28 January 2011 (UTC)

• Minnesota

http://www.sos.state.mn.us/student/symbols.html Regards,

) 02:39, 28 January 2011 (UTC)

Blanding’s turtle was proposed 1998/1999. http://www.leg.state.mn.us/leg/unsym.aspx Regards,

talk

) 19:32, 28 January 2011 (UTC)

• Iowa

http://www.legis.state.ia.us/Pubinfo/StateSymbols/ Regards,

) 02:39, 28 January 2011 (UTC)

• Arkansas

http://web.sssd.k12.ar.us/southside/staff/vogtf/arkansas_facts/arkansasimages_index.html http://www.soskids.arkansas.gov/5-8-history-state-symbols.html http://www.e-referencedesk.com/resources/state-symbols/arkansas/ http://www.soskids.arkansas.gov/5-8-history-state-symbols.html Regards,

) 02:43, 28 January 2011 (UTC)

• Indiana

http://www.state.in.us/gov/2546.htm For kids, not really sure there are not more. Regards,

comment added 02:46, 28 January 2011 (UTC).

• Kentucky

http://www.kdla.ky.gov/resources/KYSymbols.htm Regards,

) 02:49, 28 January 2011 (UTC)

• Virginia

http://legis.state.va.us/1_cap_class/6-8/6_8_emb_symb.html Regards,

) 02:50, 28 January 2011 (UTC)

• Rhode Island

http://www.rilin.state.ri.us/statutes/title42/42-4/index.htm Regards,

) 03:01, 28 January 2011 (UTC)

• Maine
• http://www.maine.gov/sos/kids/about/symbols/symbols.htm
• http://www.maine.gov/portal/facts_history/facts.html Regards,
  talk
  ) 03:02, 28 January 2011 (UTC)

• Alaska

http://www.commerce.state.ak.us/ded/dev/student_info/student.htm Regards,

) 03:04, 28 January 2011 (UTC)

• Hawaii
• http://hawaii.gov/dbedt/info/economic/library/facts/symbols/ Regards,
  talk
  ) 03:07, 28 January 2011 (UTC)

• Delaware
• http://portal.delaware.gov/delfacts/ Regards,
  talk
  ) 14:08, 31 January 2011 (UTC)

• District of Columbia
• http://about.dc.gov/symbols.asp Regards,
  talk
  ) 14:09, 31 January 2011 (UTC)

Addressed the Wehwalt comments and added geography, time discussion, as well as the stuff we were talking about wrt "examples" to show how the state reptile is a symbolic thing. Turning it over to y'all.

1. Fix refs (got lazy and url plopped)

2. Fix notes (I think you have to convert to "named, grouped" refs, this is possible. see

. If you want to do it with tagged refs, then I don't know how. got lazy

3. Fix redlinks, got lazy.

4. Run an individual search on each territory's website and see if any state reptiles. I'm thinking we could do a bundled nb comment that then has 7 refs for the sites (may be a little tricky if they don't even address symbols). Anyhow, check at a minimum and probably we can do some refs to demonstrate the negative comment.

5. Feel free to pick punchier examples for the how states justify their reptiles para. I just went with what we had in talk.

6. Feel free to make any other upgrades, fix mistakes. Etc. think we have some juicy content now, though!TCO (talk) 22:40, 29 January 2011 (UTC)

Let me get these for ya. You did fabulous work, I feel lazy. NYMFan69-86 (talk) 01:15, 30 January 2011 (UTC)

Your baby! Feel free to squeeze the Vermont thing down if you want. Was kind of torn and have a hard time cutting my babies. Love how it illustrates some of the stuff we have in article (legislative process, flowerly langauge, symbolicness, schoolchildren, etc.) Helpful for the Brits and such to see wth the state reptile is. But if you think better to cut a few of the flowery phrases feel free. just would leave the schoolchildren and the legislature (as that is "proving" something we said.)TCO (talk) 01:49, 30 January 2011 (UTC)

I keep messing with it. Maybe if you crop the football players almost in half (that upper half is wasted) then it helps fit things on page. Of course if you don't like the Terps or VT, feel free to clip anything.TCO (talk) 05:25, 30 January 2011 (UTC)

I changed it to a different image. Is it okay for us to use File:MarylandTerrapins.png, or, since it's so strictly copyrighted, is it off limits?--NYMFan69-86 (talk) 07:26, 30 January 2011 (UTC)

I love that image, especially as it has the turtle, but it will not fly for this article. Either stick the logo back in that just says word Terps. Or crop the players. Or think of something else.  ;) TCO (talk) 08:36, 30 January 2011 (UTC)

The single player looks good. TCO (talk) 08:44, 30 January 2011 (UTC)

Gator looks good too. But I don't know about sections and such, this really shouldn't resemble an article so much... NYMFan69-86 (talk) 06:12, 31 January 2011 (UTC)

(no action, just noting), there are a couple other pretty prominent reptiles uses here by Uni sports teams. UF Gators. Texas horned toads (same as lizard). You could almost do anothe para on it.  ;-) It seems like all predate the usage as state reptile too.TCO (talk) 09:08, 30 January 2011 (UTC)

I did it.TCO (talk) 01:09, 31 January 2011 (UTC)

1. Article: I think this is becoming a little more "article-like". But I think that is fine actually. It's the Article People who are down on lists in their articles. Not the List People being down on articles in their lists. They actually sort of want some of that. And really since the Article People are so anti-list, if you have something sort of half-way in between you're better off making it a list.

2. Think we can add some section breaks to all that content.

2.5. And a lead to the lead. Need to feel the spirit move me as the whole thing sorta flows now.

2.75. And rename it as we discussed earlier (cutting "List of")

3. We can see if there is a better picture with UF and with TCU, to consider. The Terps logo (just words, no turtle) is also PD.

4. We could cut VT down a lot or even make them a block quote in article (not boxed).

(It'll get there...you've seen me rip stuff apart...and it ended up being good [I hope] in the end. Thanks for putting up!)

TCO (talk) 01:26, 31 January 2011 (UTC)

Here are your choices. I think better than just a football player:

Going Gators for now...simplest (main school has same name as state and is public vice private).

TCO (talk) 03:48, 31 January 2011 (UTC)

Great idea. Gators is best picture. Regards,

talk

) 05:40, 31 January 2011 (UTC)

• List of U.S. state reptiles. Is this title accurate? It's a list of US states that have a state reptile. If it was a list of state reptiles the primary key would be the reptile and the state(s) it occured in would be a secondary key. Regards,
  talk
  ) 17:07, 28 January 2011 (UTC)

We could say "U.S. state official reptiles"? In title only; "state bird", "state fish", is the normal usage in text, and I think clear in context that you are talking about just one. We could cut "List of" just to keep the title from reading too long. I'm easy though. If someone has a good fix...TCO (talk) 17:19, 28 January 2011 (UTC)

I'm not sure how adding the words 'offical' changes anything.

To me a list of US state reptiles is the following:

• Alabama red-bellied turtle
• American alligator
• Arizona ridge-nosed rattlesnake
• Black racer
• Collared lizard
• Common snapping turtle
• Desert tortoise
• Diamondback terrapin
• Eastern box turtle
• Garter snake
• Gopher tortoise
• Horned lizard
• Loggerhead sea turtle
• New Mexico whiptail lizard
• Ornate box turtle
• Painted turtle
• Texas horned lizard
• Three-toed box turtle
• Timber rattlesnake
• Western painted turtle

Regards,

talk

) 18:19, 28 January 2011 (UTC)

1. See the other state lists and how they are named for a guide.

2. Name it a better name to express what you want and clarify the confusion. TCO (talk) 18:42, 28 January 2011 (UTC)

I'll await NYMFan's input and ideas. I don't have an idea of what to call it at this stage, just that the current title isn't really doing it. Regards,

talk

) 19:24, 28 January 2011 (UTC)

Understood. I think everyone on our side of the pond "gets it". So we need help from you, what makes it clear to the foreigner. That's why I proposed adding "official". (we would not need it.) You could try "List of U.S. state symbols (reptiles)". Or "List of U.S. state reptiles (symbols)". Little long, but explicit. And yeah...maybe a very clear title that explains these are almost "emblems" will help get the context over to the non USians, so a clear title would actually help with our struggle in lead. Of course maybe it's that anachronistic "brute" that is bothering you. Feel free to change it!  :-) TCO (talk) 19:35, 28 January 2011 (UTC)

One thing I wouldn't do is put the word "official" in the title. This (although perhaps not the most reliable source) has it that not every reptile is "official," some are, but others are just the "state reptile." I think the current title is sort of okay (if you're worried about the repeats). I mean look at List of Silver Slugger Award winners at shortstop (only one Met on that list!?), it has repeats. It doesn't just list all the players who were once a silver slugger at shortstop. I really don't have any other ides for a title, just throwing out some of my opinions (I wouldn't really mind a change to something else though, so not totally defending the one we have).--NYMFan69-86 (talk) 20:15, 28 January 2011 (UTC)

Good thinking. Keep the official out of there...that's a road we don't want to go down. The bolded one is the best I could come up with. Does it scratch the itch? TCO (talk) 20:26, 28 January 2011 (UTC)

It scratches part of it.  :-P I almost like the one before it better. The only thing is that all the symbol lists would probably have to follow suit (see, I learned how to spell "suit." ha): birds, dogs, shells...etc. We can think about it but so far, if a change is made, "List of U.S. state symbols (reptiles)" has my vote.--NYMFan69-86 (talk) 20:33, 28 January 2011 (UTC)

Can you check and see if there is one style or varied for all the state animals, birds, etc.? I think we need to follow the pattern if there is one and just deal with the Euro confusion by a good lead (like the examples below). We can't drive a different title style right now.TCO (talk) 20:35, 28 January 2011 (UTC)

If you type "List of U.S. state..." into the wikipedia search field you'll see that we match up with all of them:

U.S. state dog breeds, so that brings the whole practice of titling these lists into question.--NYMFan69-86 (talk

) 20:48, 28 January 2011 (UTC)

I favour the removal of the "List of" part. Having "list of state reptiles" sets the idea you are going to see a list of reptiles, but you are greeted with a list of states. While if it's simply "U.S. state reptiles", then the same expectation is not set. Regards,

talk

) 22:56, 28 January 2011 (UTC)

I could role with that. We would almost have to start a movement though, almost all of the other lists like this start with "list of." NYMFan69-86 (talk) 23:04, 28 January 2011 (UTC)

I'm fine with change (don't need it, but doesn't bug me either). I think we are better off just making the change and then seeing how it plays out. If they hate it we change it back and the Brits just have to deal with the huh factor. If they don't notice, then fine we have the preferred title for our article. I have pretty low energy for convincing a bunch of people to change the titles of those articles. And actually if you really care to get them changed, in the end, you are better off by going stealth mode and just changing them as you take them over and write them to FL. More fait accomplis tactics. Sorry, longwinded, but I'm just saying name it whatever you want and fight whatever battles you want, but I'm passive! TCO (talk) 23:09, 28 January 2011 (UTC)

At this point, I am strongly in the SunC camp, for a bunch of additional reasons. Will request a name change to the one he proposed. I'm not touching with a ten foot pole some plan to make all the state symbol list article names be retitled. But it makes sense for us and is being used by

U.S. state dog breeds in the FL queue, now.TCO (talk

) 01:09, 2 February 2011 (UTC)

Moved it to "U.S. state reptiles" as that seems to be what your getting at. Let me know if that was not the right name as I don't recall proposing any name. Regards,

talk

) 01:23, 2 February 2011 (UTC)

Perfect!TCO (talk) 01:35, 2 February 2011 (UTC)

1. Sections: I'm totally fine with taking this back to less content if you all want. honest. Just do it. I value your morale about 10 bazillion times more than something I was trying out to see if it worked!

2. Collage: I'd like to take a shot at this (well especially if we go with more content and sections and all). Was thinking use images from OUR list. Alligator, lizard (Texas best), snake (I like Ohio cause of size), turtle (NC cause of size). We could totally do it. Then it goes in the spot up on top where you want something good looking. And then I can put the map down in geography (or maybe history). It should be pretty easy to take four images, dump them in paint and then save. the other one was done like that!

3. Oh...and I didn't mean to hog the toy. Just got bored and no one was playing with it right then!  ;-)TCO (talk) 06:53, 31 January 2011 (UTC)

We could move the map to the top if you want. Could either ditch the collage or stick it down in biology...hmmm. Let me try it.TCO (talk) 00:40, 1 February 2011 (UTC)

The FL people are fine with us having this amount of text. I sorta asked in a way hoping to get the answer I got (you know how biased I am), but seriously they are cool. Top guy said so. [3] TCO (talk) 00:40, 1 February 2011 (UTC)

I still kinda lean to changing the name as it makes SunC happy, (I think) helps position the peice as not purely a list but having some more article content, as well as "List of" seems excess verbiage (we don't say "Article of" and this is a case where there are not separate article and list). But I'm easy. there are differing opinions on this whole List of, so if we go that road, would just change our thing and not getting into convincing people wrt all the articles. TCO (talk) 00:40, 1 February 2011 (UTC)

The content is kinda fine now. It's the pictures that I'm not sure what to do with. The

talk

) 03:33, 2 February 2011 (UTC)

Those are the two bothering me as well. The NM one has our little guy in it (the middle I believe) and is apparently the only one on commons that does. Maybe we could attach a note saying that the lizard in the middle is the New Mexico whiptail? As for the Alabama red-bellied, maybe we should just search for a different (free) image...what do you think?--NYMFan69-86 (talk) 03:35, 2 February 2011 (UTC)

I've searched extensively for another free image of the Alabama red-bellied, there is none. There is only a few website with a photo also, the state websites being the best. Regards,

talk

) 03:46, 2 February 2011 (UTC)

I'll take care of AL. Right NOW!

For NM, the answer is simple. We photoshop the "sand" over the top of the left and right lizards. It's a legit reason. Try doing it yourself if you know how or just track someone down to do it for us. (just post a comment at Village Pump for Commons or En-wiki, or if you know an image stud ask them. I know a bunch for the FP experience. Or I'm sure there is some queue or process for image work. I just feel more comfortable "going direct", but whatevah. I can do it to, just looking not to steal all the "fun".  ;-) TCO (talk) 03:56, 2 February 2011 (UTC)

I like the collage but it's not correctly attributed as a derivative of the other works. Regards,

) 01:00, 1 February 2011 (UTC)

Thanks man. Let's put it in the "list of things to fix". I tried following the rules, but the darned upload instructions (the normal ones, maybe I should have tried the offline tool) let me do all the work, enter the first file name and then said there was no option in IE to name multiple files! I just gave up at that point.

Actually I wasn't a complete criminal. I had TCO collage "uno" and actually put file descriptions and a tag on it, to try to get an admin to fix it manually. We'll get it designated officially either by me figuring out software or manually or whatever. I think all 4 images are "clean" to start with, so should be good. I will stick a description and tag on "dos" as well. they both need renaming too. no-no to use user name. I was really hacking. no biggie, I know how to do that.

Had a different question before I slog that through! Please let me know any changes you want (or make them yourselves). I kinda threw that in there as a quick draft. At a minimum it needs some black cropped. Wasn't sure if you all would want other animals or a different "look" on the collage-ing (like try for perfect Cartesian arrangement) or what. So can I just get the image fixed and then I will upload it?

I'm really leaning towards NOT blue-linking all the animal names. It's hard enough with the Latin, common, parantheses, complicated logic and all. Putting in blue speed bumps makes it harder. Plus we got a freaking LIST OF LINKS 2 inches lower! Could keep the "in article" links for things like state bird, or genus, or state legislature. Higher order concepts. But leave the listed stuff down below. But not all the cruft. That's kind of the purpose of a table of links anyway, to get some of the blue out of text. Just think it might help us.TCO (talk) 03:01, 1 February 2011 (UTC)

Even if we do leave them, then we should do a sweep and make sure we don't link them repeatedly and link at first mention. there was a bunch that I fixed, but page has been changing a lot with moves of text and all.TCO (talk) 04:46, 2 February 2011 (UTC)

Wow, this is a new list! All for the better: I love the lead, the way all the images are formatted now, and the information/prose. There are, however, two easily changable things that I would...change. The first is make the map bigger. I don't think it's totally necessary to have different colors and stuff (then we would need a legend, which gets distracting/messy), but just a bigger "px" would be nice for the reader. The other is moving "History and geography" so that it's the first heading. I think the information there would be served best if it was followed by the justifications and the biology behind it. Just some ideas, let me know what you think. Great work here, sorry I've been so sparse...--NYMFan69-86 (talk) 03:07, 2 February 2011 (UTC)

I'm always up for a bigger picture. I mean...well...I really prefer it small...but just to make you happy, let's do it. Kidding. I think it was small, when I had the collage cause it had a differnt aspect ratio, but with the map you can go bigger.

On the move, sure, try it out. The reason I stuck the justifications higher, was I felt it helped with our readers who are Commonwealth readers, who have the whole "what is it" concern. So hitting them with the "pretty words" stuff, pretty soon, kinda shows that it's symbolic. And the history and geography stuff is a lot more "in weeds" in terms of detail. But I'm fine. Give it a shot.TCO (talk) 03:22, 2 February 2011 (UTC)

Made the moves, hope I didn't offend ya. I made the image only a tad larger, it was just a little hard to see before (I mean, if you want the Brits to have a hard time understanding the list, making the U.S. map small is a good place to start!!). --NYMFan69-86 (talk) 03:31, 2 February 2011 (UTC)

I like it. It's also nice having some of that state by state stuff closer to the map visually. Also nice that we have more of alternation of image type dry (map), active (mascot), dry (VT test), active (collage). Went ahead and moved the collage to alternate sides also.TCO (talk) 03:40, 2 February 2011 (UTC)

Yup, icing on the cake as far as formatting goes. Just made it a little smaller, sorta want to emphasize the map, have it biggest of all (top right corner, closest to the "stars" if you know what I'm saying ;-) ). In any case, it all looks good to me, now only thing really left is the images and sorting out what to do about blue links.--NYMFan69-86 (talk) 03:46, 2 February 2011 (UTC)

I got lazy and was plopping bare URLs in for new refs. There's some cleanup to be done after the big content creation orgy. I think if we brush it up, should be golden. The FL people are pretty nice and encouraged us to get it in there soon.TCO (talk) 03:49, 2 February 2011 (UTC)

Ah, yes, no worries. Let me hit those (refs and alt text).--NYMFan69-86 (talk) 03:59, 2 February 2011 (UTC)

Good change on the 2000s and 2010s!TCO (talk) 04:43, 2 February 2011 (UTC)

Thanks!  :-) NYMFan69-86 (talk) 04:50, 2 February 2011 (UTC)

I'm adding the refs to the bio section. Please don't mess with the list refs or bio refs until I'm done. making an offline list of named refs.TCO (talk) 07:14, 2 February 2011 (UTC)

OK. I've done the trickiest ones. I'll get the rest later tonight. Or feel free if you want.TCO (talk) 10:35, 2 February 2011 (UTC)

SunC and I have been discussing this. There is some decent info. I've written a short para on state reptiles of the territories at the end of the Geography section (just seemed to make sense to put the real states first, but worth covering the topic for completeness). Working on getting all the refs in. I think we can ref it all, but we need to do a little work. For instance, would be good to get some PR spanish language refs that are stronger RSes than what I have in English. We can nail this though. There's enough there.TCO (talk) 23:25, 2 February 2011 (UTC)

OK, I put a source versus every factoid on the territory para. Take a look and please either find better refs, or if you think sufficient, clear the cn tag. I would feel a little stronger with a better source (PR newspaper or more offical site or something, that NYM finds in Spanish, vice the travel site that I used for SOME of the reffing). All the stuff needs formatting too. TCO (talk) 01:03, 3 February 2011 (UTC)

Northern Marianas and US VI are busting my ass to find a legit site that lists their symbols. I know how to play it though. We'll just say in text (or put a note) that says "as of 2003". And then we'll use the third edition of Sheerer as the reference. He covers the territories as you can see from some of the territory symbol articles.TCO (talk) 02:07, 3 February 2011 (UTC)

Need to take care of some RW things (all good). There's plenty to be done, so have fun and push the puppy along. I won't be stealing the fun and hogging the toy for a few days. P.s. I hope Spotted is not high pri, NYM. TCO (talk) 08:32, 3 February 2011 (UTC)

I hope. I asked for help at Commons and they said do it yourself, but I wasn't sure which fields. Anyhow, the description lists the other files and says derivative now.TCO (talk) 09:40, 3 February 2011 (UTC)

I need to avoid the video game addiction of editing Wiki, but putting down a thought in the parking lot:

1. Like to duplicate (and somehow expand) first para content in lead, down to justifications. Will conform more with a practice of not having anything in lead that's not in article. Also, will dress that section up a little to have a bit more discussion to go with all the quotes. I know we came up dry on Sheerer saying that much about the "practice". And web searches hard too, as you get all the lists. But there must be some magazine articles or even Alastair Cooke like "observatioins of the funny Americans" that just comment on the practice itself. EVen if it's in the context of some larger article. I could practically write the article myself (maybe I should), but of course no OR, bla bla. Anyhow, the right discussion might be on state birds or perhaps state symbols. It's the concept itself that I want to have a bit more on. Maybe even we find a state specific discussion that still makes some general observations. Basically long-winded way of saying I want more RS to be able to say stuff I know is true.

1.5. Like to get all the refs out of the lead (look ugly). this means they need to be sitting on content that says same points further down in article.

1.75. Second para of lead is fine. It is normal summary style of selected major points further down in article.

2. Similar to above, would like some ref or two on the whole "not special wildlife protection". Either on the concept itself or prehaps we can get discussion of some individual states.

3. I feel OK with the schoolchildren generalization. It's a valid reflection in lead of the stuff we have on individual states. Although perhaps a para with examples of a few, would make it stronger. Still we have two refs there (and can supply more) as well as the comments in the WV article. Still (I think as I type, apologies), a para deeper in article would really nail it and then support a summary style comment in lead.

4. Actually, as I think about it, we may could use a section called "Process". Can be built up from all the clippings we have on animals getting passed. if not, then just stick that same content within justifications. And come up with some sort of word that "covers" both aspects. I donno. "Legislative process" or "State actions". Something. Struggling, but...thinking...

That's interesting. I'm just thinking if a section like that gets started it may become unencyclopedic. We would almost have to cite the original pieces of legislation. I think we are probably fine without a section like this, just think it's FL without all the detail. But I dunno.--NYMFan69-86 (talk) 20:26, 4 February 2011 (UTC)

TCO (talk) 18:47, 3 February 2011 (UTC)

Agreed. Let's keep that, for if we ever write an article on state animals or state symbols themselves. Too much of a tangent here.TCO (talk) 21:15, 4 February 2011 (UTC)

[4] Just need a page number please.--NYMFan69-86 (talk) 20:22, 4 February 2011 (UTC)

Scratch that, you were nice enough to include it.--NYMFan69-86 (talk) 20:32, 4 February 2011 (UTC)

Was bothering me to have text sandwiched. But if you want frog lower, feel free to revert.TCO (talk) 21:21, 4 February 2011 (UTC)

Maybe you should change back. Or improve somehow. No biggie!TCO (talk) 21:25, 4 February 2011 (UTC)

Just fix it, man. I keep making it worse.  :(TCO (talk) 22:53, 4 February 2011 (UTC)

Tried some different stuff, nothing major. I think it's pretty nice now, we have the two large and in charge images (map and collage) balancing each other, top right and bottom left. It's nice man.--NYMFan69-86 (talk) 05:33, 5 February 2011 (UTC)

You solved the jigsw puzzle in Geography! That template is little lacking. Or I need to learn how to use it better. Not sure how to put it on left and it seems like it messes up wordwrap a little different from normal block.TCO (talk) 05:57, 5 February 2011 (UTC)

Area you all up for that, for this? Has easily been the 1500 words of prose expansion that they want (list expansion is not counted). Think it's a pretty cool article. We explain this concept better than Sheerer or anyone on the net.TCO (talk) 03:53, 1 February 2011 (UTC)

DYK nom is here: [5]. TCO (talk) 05:06, 1 February 2011 (UTC)

I'm not familiar with DYK rules. How does it qualify? A fivefold expansion in five days? Regards,

talk

) 05:15, 1 February 2011 (UTC)

1. It only goes off the prose. (It doesn't matter that a lot of the table was here to start with, and wouldn't help if we had built it way longer.) So our contribution is right what they want.

2. On the five days: It's under the newbie Swahili rules (I kid you not, there is something really called that). Basically they won't be too harsh on us if it's not that far over. Especially if a newbie. (I'm a newbie. Don't bite me. Ha!) I put us in at the 21st which is when the article was nothing. so they know it came in at 10 days old (nothing sneaky, it's all evident.)

3. We might have even made the strict 5 day limit and 5 fold, as there has been a lot of stuff getting built. but I wasn't sure and didn't want to mess up if we had only done 3 fold in the last 5 days or something. We're cool though. It's almost like we're helping them out if it's good content and they go through a lot of hooks every day, need them coming in. With a decent article, a pic, and no big boners like plagiarsim or the like, we're a "good candidate". (I will go get that description page for the other [not map] image updated though at Commons...not sure if it would get noted really...they mostly fasten on the hook...but still might as well not have the issue.)TCO (talk) 05:29, 1 February 2011 (UTC)

We got the "OK". So we are good to go as far as DYK. They do a look before as it goes into the queue and all, any if something came up could pull, but basically we passed and just have to wait until it gets slotted into a time.TCO (talk) 09:42, 2 February 2011 (UTC)

Are you serious!? That's awesome!  :-) NYMFan69-86 (talk) 15:50, 2 February 2011 (UTC)

We are in the queue now, slated to run at 1800 GMT on the 5th (today).TCO (talk) 06:15, 5 February 2011 (UTC)

We are on the page, second hook. Can't beleive they went with that crappy image. It's a great hook about penis fencing, but the image is miserable. Ours would have been a nice change of pace. Oh well...TCO (talk) 18:35, 5 February 2011 (UTC)

Puerto Rico is not a state, and frogs are not reptiles. So, I removed those paragraphs. Ghmyrtle (talk) 21:03, 5 February 2011 (UTC)

Agreed frogs are not reptiles and material should be removed for that reason. The PR stuff we clearly differentiated it as a territory and those are covered in that context (after the actual states). See for instance USDA National Arboretum list of state flowers and Shearer state symbols, where they list symbols of territories and D.C. But definitely needs to go as frogs are amphibians. Total brainfart on that! Thanks! TCO (talk) 21:15, 5 February 2011 (UTC)

It happens. Sorry, it just jumped out at me from the main page (not literally...)  :) Ghmyrtle (talk) 21:22, 5 February 2011 (UTC)

No sweat. I feel good about the page really. Have been dealing with Brits and Canadians who say they have no concept what a state reptile is (in individual species articles). REally went at it, including the Vermont quote and all to show a little bit of the silliness and fun of the whole thing. 21:26, 5 February 2011 (UTC)

I think this (article) list works to convey the message of "state reptile" to everyone fairly well. No real gaps in reasoning I don't think. And thank you Ghmyrtle, that stuff had to go.--NYMFan69-86 (talk) 05:23, 6 February 2011 (UTC)

FYI: [6] TCO (talk) 01:36, 6 February 2011 (UTC)

Very cool, hope they can help us out!--NYMFan69-86 (talk) 05:21, 6 February 2011 (UTC)

Done. The person that did it is a great map-maker too. Based on his talk pageTCO (talk) 22:31, 6 February 2011 (UTC)

It's perfect! Get that man's number!--NYMFan69-86 (talk) 05:44, 7 February 2011 (UTC)

“

Maybe our state quotes should go in a template like this?

”

--NYMFan69-86 (talk) 05:20, 6 February 2011 (UTC)

Try them. Block quotes did a lot for me, but fat ones might be even better. Just see how it looks.TCO (talk) 07:33, 6 February 2011 (UTC)

Put them in, please revert if you like it better your way (I sorta like these).--NYMFan69-86 (talk) 21:42, 6 February 2011 (UTC)

I will let sit for a while and see if they grow on me. I grew to like the geography change and map at the top and all that. I really like the fat quotes in general for an article, but don't like how they look here with the stuff on the right and then three in a row. Just feel a little that they are too much.TCO (talk) 22:30, 6 February 2011 (UTC)

Maybe we can change the layout so that we're both 100% happy. No sense in going through FLC with the two head contributers in disagreement. We can move the map to geography and the collage up to the lead, put to quotes back, and make some images larger. I dunno, either way and I'm chipper.  :-) --NYMFan69-86 (talk) 22:37, 6 February 2011 (UTC)

Nah. I like the map on top. It's so much immediate info. Really look at that and almost don't need the article, even the list. Is just a very high value image. Then Geo near it makes sense. Image size is fine as you tweaked it also. Just think the fat quote are too much when you have three so close as well as a box. Think they are better when you have a lot of dense text and really set aside one quote. But I'm fine.TCO (talk) 22:47, 6 February 2011 (UTC)

Map is great at top right, it's what the subject is about. Quotes look good but four is to many. I made the Vermont painted turtle as a main quote and put the others into sentence form. Regards,

talk

) 23:26, 6 February 2011 (UTC)

Like those changes SunCreator. Nice compromise, visually pleasing.--NYMFan69-86 (talk) 04:33, 7 February 2011 (UTC)

Looks good. Nice work on the quote as well. Like it without the ellipses and such. TCO (talk) 05:53, 7 February 2011 (UTC)

I think I (finally) hit them all [7]. Sorry everyone, that took forever. It also appears like our biggest image problems have been solved: Alabama slider cropped and New Mexico Lizard edited. Are all images and alt text good?--NYMFan69-86 (talk) 19:04, 10 February 2011 (UTC)

Good stuff, man. You may think this is TCO overkill, but I thought we would do the following:

• Check the provenance of the AL image via FN tin star program. (If it's still ambigious would leave, but if we find out for sure, it is Federal would rest easier, or visa versa.) There is a fall-back to use the drawing from the pdf (which is federal).
• Check AZ and any other FED images via tin star. Nothing particular, but I just had a few concerns and we did inherit this content from others from a long time ago.
• check Commons for each species to make sure best picture. (Nothing extensive, just a quick "everything" search under the name. Same rationale, some images are old, and we did not put this together. Would not go offsite, but Commons is reasonable.)

waiting on snapping turtle evaluation...TCO (talk) 06:08, 11 February 2011 (UTC)

• Flip any imagesthat look right.

There aren't many facing right right now, only ones that would need the change are the loggerheads and the box turtles (Florida, North Carolina, Kansas, and South Carolina, Tennessee), a total of 2 different images. I'm cool if we wanna change them, so long as it's easy.  :-) NYMFan69-86 (talk) 01:42, 11 February 2011 (UTC)

TCO (talk) 20:10, 10 February 2011 (UTC)

Tennessee doesn't require flipped. He is looking at you. ;) Regards,

talk

) 01:59, 11 February 2011 (UTC)

...and smiling!--NYMFan69-86 (talk) 02:07, 11 February 2011 (UTC)

You're a good man, Charlie Brown, I mean NYM. Let me know if you like eaither of these two pics more than our current alligator. (note, trivial for me to flip, crop, even collagisize). Just let me know your artistic view.

P.s. Mottenen could use a little Myrrha help/encouragement. Go buck him up if you have a minute.

TCO (talk) 01:59, 11 February 2011 (UTC)

Top left would be cool if dad's head wasn't in the corner. I would still have to go with the one we use, darker color so it's easier to see. And I'll see what I can do for him.--NYMFan69-86 (talk) 02:08, 11 February 2011 (UTC)

Will stick with what we have.TCO (talk) 02:35, 11 February 2011 (UTC)

Cool, but I won't be broken if it gets switched (to either of the other two). To me, all images appear to be really nice except for: Alabama of course (higher resolution image would be nice) and maybe Kansas, turtle's a little hard to see (but we can leave it, works to highlight the camouflage). Wow, that would make a cool album name, dibs!--NYMFan69-86 (talk) 02:55, 11 February 2011 (UTC)

Do me a favor. Take a look through the snapping turtles on Commons and make sure we have the best choice.TCO (talk) 03:10, 11 February 2011 (UTC)

Cough, cough. Squeek, squeek (wheel).TCO (talk) 06:07, 11 February 2011 (UTC)

State law, I looked at designates it at the species level, not subpecies. [8] Comments?TCO (talk) 03:27, 11 February 2011 (UTC)

Mm...even that link says "Ornate box turtle," the subspecies. And I remember seeing it in Shearer. NYMFan69-86 (talk) 04:51, 11 February 2011 (UTC)

Yeah, but if you read the Wiki article on the species, it is sometimes referred to as ornate box turtle as well at the species level. And if the state calls out the Latin... (I would still stick with a pic of the subspecies ornata as luetiolo or whatever is only in desert SW.) Just saying, KS law...TCO (talk) 05:16, 11 February 2011 (UTC)

Bah, I don't know then. I suppose it make more sense if it's the whole species. Wish I hadn't returned that book... NYMFan69-86 (talk) 05:36, 11 February 2011 (UTC)

Shearer (Google viewed it) says species also. Not subspecies. [9] TCO (talk) 05:43, 11 February 2011 (UTC)

I can't view it but I believe ya, make the switch. Nice catch! NYMFan69-86 (talk) 05:46, 11 February 2011 (UTC)

"Ornate box turtle" can mean the species(Terrapene ornata) or subspecies(Terrapene ornata ornata), for that reason the

talk

) 12:43, 11 February 2011 (UTC)

File:Garter snake close up northern ontario canada.jpg

Please look at this as well. Note Mass designates the whole genus, so any version that would normally be in Mass is fine. I would prefer not to do some wierd desert version or something if it looks distinctive and is a subspecies people will find (when looking at file name) is not present in Mass. but other than that, sky's the limit. And there is a very broad category with all kinds of categories. But please weed through and select best image. Here's some possibilities.

TCO (talk) 03:36, 11 February 2011 (UTC)

I really like the first one, clean, focused. NYMFan69-86 (talk) 04:42, 11 February 2011 (UTC)

I'll swap it in. You could have voted to stay with the original. Or looked at the 500 images on Commons.  ;) I think the issue with a lot of this list is the pics are so small, you really need closeups.TCO (talk) 05:06, 11 February 2011 (UTC)

Cool, thanks. I don't know, your the one with refined taste for images. I usually think they're all good! NYMFan69-86 (talk) 05:14, 11 February 2011 (UTC)

Not as nice in terms of animal pose, but this image allows seeing the iconic "diamond back" of the shells.

TCO (talk) 03:46, 11 February 2011 (UTC)

I did see this one before (may have even been in the list before we showed up). I don't know, I really like the one we have but you're right, it's sort of a strange angle, doesn't do the turtles signature feature justice. I'm split, your choice. NYMFan69-86 (talk) 04:47, 11 February 2011 (UTC)

I got bold.  :)TCO (talk) 05:04, 11 February 2011 (UTC)

It's nice.  :-) NYMFan69-86 (talk) 05:06, 11 February 2011 (UTC)

This ref backs up the sentence that talks about other animals as state symbols, but the ref is just a link-field. Verifying what is said could take a person 15+ minutes. Just saying this because today I'm looking to finish up the references, want to make sure we have the best ones possible. NYMFan69-86 (talk) 15:53, 12 February 2011 (UTC)

I'll work on it. We have to reference those sorts of sites for this one piece of content. And I have avoided doing so every other place. I can write an nb note and call out the different specific links. You are right there. And maybe the other competitor. That will at least give the direct links and I use two sources.

P.s. squeek! TCO (talk) 16:06, 12 February 2011 (UTC)

Cool, and I know that cite backs up what we say, but I could see someone asking us to be more specific with the references we use. Thanks for having a look at it. NYMFan69-86 (talk) 17:37, 12 February 2011 (UTC)

It'll be a little while. working on Galapagos now. I'll brush it up though. Don't sweat formatting that one. It will end up an nb with like 5 or ten refs, but I can do them all by cut and paste and some tweaking. I'll just use the template for all.TCO (talk) 20:01, 12 February 2011 (UTC)

I can do that if you want...I'm about to begin serious wikiwork (it's about 7 right now, won't log off 'til midnight at least).--NYMFan69-86 (talk) 00:18, 13 February 2011 (UTC)

thanks. I still have a bunch of other reviews and such to do! TCO (talk) 00:25, 13 February 2011 (UTC)

I think the last three paragraphs of "history" need a small reformat. We have the lead in sentence "Three states chose reptiles that were already prominently associated with a major university in the state" attached to the information about only one of the Universities. Can this sentence be made into a clause followed by a colon with the three paragraphs following?--NYMFan69-86 (talk) 02:40, 13 February 2011 (UTC)

Sure. Or just make it a one sentence paragraph without a colon.TCO (talk) 02:42, 13 February 2011 (UTC)

That works, thanks.  :-) NYMFan69-86 (talk) 02:45, 13 February 2011 (UTC)

Finito. I made all the Netstate ones separate, easier on the reader. What do you say we take care of that "verification needed" tag. What can we dig up?--NYMFan69-86 (talk) 03:03, 13 February 2011 (UTC)

Good improvement. I think we just use 2003 Sheerer as the authority. We just Google book it (usually shows those pages). Then just do an nb note and say "as of 2003" and give a references with the page range that covers those 4 territories. Easy peasy!TCO (talk) 03:39, 13 February 2011 (UTC)

(ec) Thank you! And you make it all sound so "easy peasy." Can you give it a shot (not exactly sure what you mean, plus don't know if I can view the source). Just punch in the google book URL here and it spits out a reference. We can fiddle with the page numbers. Thanks TCO!--NYMFan69-86 (talk) 03:43, 13 February 2011 (UTC)

I also did some pretty good Google searches, and nothing turned up. Obviously we can't cite a negative Google search. Just letting you know there is no evidence to worry about to contradict our as of 2003 reference.TCO (talk) 03:41, 13 February 2011 (UTC)

I'm on it...like a turtle killing birds.TCO (talk)

It's pages 245-246. I Amazon viewed it and had to do a little finagling to get the view, but there's ways....like sometimes it will show when you search but not when you scroll. It was in Amazon view, but not Google. I'll just enter it.TCO (talk) 04:03, 13 February 2011 (UTC)

We should use the direct source for WV. One of these:

http://www.budget.wv.gov/executivebudget/Documents/WVProfile2011.pdf

http://www.legis.state.wv.us/Bill_Status/Resolution_History.cfm?year=2008&sessiontype=RS&input4=28&billtype=cr&houseorig=s&btype=res

Here is the resolution text. [10]

Designating the timber rattlesnake as West Virginia's state reptile and designating Megalonyx Jeffersonii as West Virginia's state fossil.

Whereas, The timber rattlesnake is an integral part of the history, culture and ecology of West Virginia and the United States; and Whereas, The timber rattlesnake is present throughout West Virginia and its color and pattern is reminiscent of West Virginia's fauna and flora; and Whereas, The timber rattlesnake is important to preserve as a predator and prey in West Virginia's ecology; and Whereas, The timber rattlesnake kills mice and rats at no cost while cleaning up after itself; and Whereas, The timber rattlesnake is a popular icon that does attract attention and, thereby, may enhance tourism; and Whereas, Since no other state has adopted the timber rattlesnake as a state reptile, West Virginia can be the first and it would be a proud contribution by the eighth grade class at Romney Middle School, from West Virginia's oldest county, in West Virginia's oldest town, to have been instrumental in making the timber rattlesnake the state reptile of West Virginia; and Whereas, No fossil has been designated as the official state fossil for the State of West Virginia; and Whereas, Interest in fossils and paleontology has become increasingly widespread throughout the citizenry of this state, there currently being fossil, rock and gem clubs already organized in the counties of Cabell, Harrison, Kanawha and Wood; and Whereas, In 1797, President Thomas Jefferson obtained and described fossil bones from a limestone cave in what is now Monroe County; and Whereas, These bones were again described by Casper Wistar in 1799 as the bones of a giant extinct ground sloth; and Whereas, Wistar named the bones as a new species, Megalonyx Jeffersonnii, in honor of President Jefferson; and Whereas, The bones are from the Ice Age or Pleistocene Epoch which lasted from 10,000 to 1.8 million years ago; and Whereas, The designation of a state fossil would aid in the promotion of interest in geology, paleontology and history; and Whereas, The bones afford an opportunity for special studies in American, state and natural history for the students of the state; and Whereas, Thirty-nine of the 50 states have an official state fossil; therefore, be it Resolved by the Legislature of West Virginia: That the Legislature hereby designates the timber rattlesnake as West Virginia's state reptile and designates the fossil Megalonyx Jeffersonnii as West Virginia's state fossil; and, be it Further Resolved, That the Clerk of the Senate is hereby directed to forward copies of this resolution to the citizens and schools in the state.

TCO (talk) 04:42, 13 February 2011 (UTC)

Okay, I'll look at it tomorrow and generate the source. Nice work with the above reference! How are our images? Any liscense issues left? NYMFan69-86 (talk) 04:39, 13 February 2011 (UTC)

We should fire up FN's tin star program and look at AR and AZ and any of the others that were listed as US GOVT and site was unfindable. I have not made it a priority. TCO (talk) 04:42, 13 February 2011 (UTC)

found another thing I missed in the lead (TX and WY both use same genus)

done now I take it Regards,

talk

) 12:51, 19 February 2011 (UTC)

FP worthy? Free at least! [11]

This link is dead (temporary?). Regards,

talk

) 12:49, 19 February 2011 (UTC)

Here is a different url, but same drawing: http://www.fws.gov/southeast/pubs/esmobile.pdf TCO (talk) 16:08, 19 February 2011 (UTC)

Article seems to be ready for featured list nomination now. Regards,

)

I just gave it a fresh CE. Should be pretty clean now on that front. Would still like to nail references and images as discussed.TCO (talk) 01:12, 19 February 2011 (UTC)

I'm still here! Sorry everyone! I think refs and images can be fixed during the review, this list seems ready to me. I also think it's best to submit earlier rather than later, even though we're not completely finished yet, because it gives us more breathing room between now and our deadline April 1st deadline. TCO, if you want to wait [and I know you're waiting on me :-( ], we can do that, I don't much mind. This is your baby!!! NYMFan69-86 (talk) 04:33, 20 February 2011 (UTC)

It's OK. Take care of school and life. I will have time to work on this, this week. The refs is just grunt work. Prefer to do it before submission. I will make an attempt to resolve some of the image issues as well. We'll get it in regardless by Friday. I do not support submitting with known, easy, issues to fix.TCO (talk) 04:54, 20 February 2011 (UTC)

I hate midterms. Busted a 98.67 on my chemistry exam though. I've been studying in the library more than I've been sleeping. Friday is perfect. And I haven't forgotten about the reference things we've talked about TCO. Tomorrow. Thanks for understanding.  :-) NYMFan69-86 (talk) 05:55, 20 February 2011 (UTC)

Concentrate on physics and calc. I've got this stuff in hand. Will ask if anything special needed. Minglex has been a little scarce, so not like you can even help him with Pritchard. Congrats on the chem test!TCO (talk) 06:55, 20 February 2011 (UTC)

Haha, thanks, you're a life saver! I'll be around more in the following few days to a week. 101 on my psych exam!!  :-) NYMFan69-86 (talk) 17:17, 20 February 2011 (UTC)

Went through the whole list again.

AL: put in an FFD. Don't think that image is legit. Only free image is the line drawing of a turtle (not really detailed). Sending some notes out to try to get a donation of a non-free image.

AZ: Now ok, changed image.

TX: Discovered a problem (state image listed as federal by uploader). Put in a FFD and uploaded new image (best free I could find). May be cropped a bit tight, so feel free to do your own crop if you want.TCO (talk) 06:35, 22 February 2011 (UTC)

Thanks for fixing Arizona and Texas (crop on this one is fine), they both look good. For Alabama we'll have to do some searching I suppose. Is there any image on a gov't website of this little guy?--NYMFan69-86 (talk) 18:47, 22 February 2011 (UTC)

The only federal images are of a line drawing (very low detail) or of a roadkill, with a big placard in front of it and exploded shell. I sent an email to US FWS Alabama supervisor to see if he has an image (I doubt it, since they don't have on on lots of docs where they normally would). Three other sources are DH Nelson (professor), Jim Goodwin (wedding photog) and possibly AL state (although they seem to use other people's images and the one that might be theirs is a hatchling). Need to get 3 more emails out. I'm actually thinking to go ahead and flip it in the queue and just let them know about the image issue. Will do once the emails are out. Also, still need to fix WV reference. Then we can conom.TCO (talk) 19:21, 22 February 2011 (UTC)

Don't work too hard (I know you're basically working for two now though, sorry). Keep trucking and I'll help as I can.--NYMFan69-86 (talk) 21:30, 22 February 2011 (UTC)

I'll get it in late tonight. Few minor fixes still needed. Nothing radical. Busy til then.TCO (talk) 22:17, 22 February 2011 (UTC)

Fark, maybe not. Realized the collage now has the bad Texas lizard in it. HAve to do that all over again (can't just cover).TCO (talk) 04:12, 23 February 2011 (UTC)

Little bit more content coming in, then will relook at org and build the lead to reflect. Sorry, all, not crazy what we had before, or after. Just scrunching my head and doing my best. Once I get it all in, am fine with changes (to include changing back to old org, slimming, etc.) Just felt off and trying to fix it!TCO (talk) 00:36, 26 February 2011 (UTC)

I thought we were doing article, book, and web page titles in sentence case. What we were taught with last FA?TCO (talk) 09:17, 6 March 2011 (UTC)

No one answered, so I am sentence casing. Like what we did with Tony and with painted turtle. I am amenable to arguments to the contrary, going with the flow and all that happy horseshit. But since no one chipped in (and since the changes going in are not wholesale changes, but making article inconsistent), I will just use my rule from sex (satisfy yourself first). TCO (talk) 00:35, 7 March 2011 (UTC)

I switched a few sources' cases without really looking at what I was doing. You know this better than me, make the changes necessary.  :-) Sorry for screwing with it.--NYMFan69-86 (talk) 00:41, 7 March 2011 (UTC)

I am coming across stuff for a FL state tortoise. It's not on all their sites (nor is the loggerhead). And there was a bill that failed. But it seems like there was a bill that passed later (as an amendment).

See: [12] and [13].

TCO (talk) 10:32, 6 March 2011 (UTC)

 DoneTCO (talk) 03:40, 7 March 2011 (UTC)

Anchored. The page range I used was 97-248; I believe those were the two extremes (if not, please change). For the citations that link to it, could you put in the correct page numbers? I just used "1" for now, I know thats not right but it makes it easy for you to identify and change.--NYMFan69-86 (talk) 00:51, 7 March 2011 (UTC)

Thank you TCO, nice fixes.--NYMFan69-86 (talk) 01:44, 8 March 2011 (UTC)

Question: why are the two different ISBNs used? Each book normally has two right? One that starts with a 9 and one that starts with a 0? Should these be consistent?--NYMFan69-86 (talk) 02:48, 9 March 2011 (UTC)

Older books are

talk

) 02:56, 9 March 2011 (UTC)

Thanks, so long as it's kosher. I just didn't know.  :-)--NYMFan69-86 (talk) 02:58, 9 March 2011 (UTC)

Well, they probably have different ISBNs since they are different content. Wiki advocates using the longer ISBN and including the hyphens, when possible. Other than that, permission granted to go check them and verify them.  :-) [I'm going to work on the webciting stuff.]TCO (talk) 02:59, 9 March 2011 (UTC)

I see this as the last "need to fix" item. Rest are either fixed or are debatable if we need to do anything. Was hoping SunC would do for us, but I may break down and learn how.TCO (talk) 02:12, 8 March 2011 (UTC)

I personally have no idea how to do this. SunCreator's been a little busy lately, maybe we can ask the reviewers?--NYMFan69-86 (talk) 05:34, 8 March 2011 (UTC)

Naw. Let's take care of mechanical things like this ourselves. Let's bug them with things where we really neeed input or where we have to thrash out a disgreement. I can copy what he did with Florida, using webcite (I read up on it).TCO (talk) 05:58, 8 March 2011 (UTC)

Goto http://www.webcitation.org/archive.php, copy paste the URL you wish to archive, put in any email address such as [email protected], then hit submit, on the next screen you'll get a link that is the archive URL (i.e http://www.webcitation.org/5x1yO3A7M) use this in the

talk

) 12:53, 8 March 2011 (UTC)

 Done (I am a badass webciter now.) TCO (talk) 05:07, 9 March 2011 (UTC)

• Notes 1 and 3 are pretty much the same thing, how about combining them.

Yes, please.

I have done this before, with normal named refs for classes of refs. Not sure what the whole ref tagging thing is anyhow. I think NYM was trying to make it link, but had to duplicate when we do the #tag thingie. Someone else figure this out, please? I am getting tired.TCO (talk) 18:16, 8 March 2011 (UTC)

I looked at this earlier but had the same problem. I think I'm gonna ask at the help desk. Regards,

talk

) 01:32, 9 March 2011 (UTC)

• It would look better if the first letter in the State reptile column of the table was in capitals. You start a sentence with a capital letter, no? So not sure why it's been made lower case.

OK. I just looked at it again. Can't find a clear discussion and find examples either way.

I capped them.TCO (talk) 18:17, 8 March 2011 (UTC)

• Add navigation Template:state insignia perhaps?

Yes, please. Also, is there a state by state nav template? (all the symbols of AL, all the symbols of AZ, etc.) — Preceding unsigned comment added by TCO (talk • contribs)

Added this. Regards,

talk

) 16:55, 8 March 2011 (UTC)

TY.TCO (talk) 18:16, 8 March 2011 (UTC)

Regards,

) 12:53, 8 March 2011 (UTC)

(twas a redlink in our article) TCO (talk) 05:59, 9 March 2011 (UTC)

1. Is this additive/desirable? Yes, some of the creatures are are endangered. Just want to make sure this is a field we really want added to the table as it is a fair amount of work to do it right.

2. I guess we would need to add a field to the table and then some discussion in article.

which column of the table?

I assume we use the IUCN ratings. Would like to key that somehow (by note perhaps) and then also make it sortable (is that possible)?

We need to have a ref for each item. Should that go in the same field as the rating itself? And then how does that look with the ref field in there currently? Should that go on top of the year? Or just put the IUCN refs in the existing ref column?

3. The genuses don't have a rating per se (I think). Would need to handle that with a note (I might discuss the common garter snake or whatever for Mass).

TCO (talk) 11:23, 6 March 2011 (UTC)

I have some questions also, the biggest one being the reference formatting. For a source, www.iucnredlist.org is pretty nice, I would probably use it for all of them. This would mean strictly the IUCN rating would be used for all, not state specific ratings...is this okay? Do we want the rating given to it by the state that named it? (That would probably mean repeats would have multiple ratings, probably confusing to some readers). My final question: how necessary is a column like this? I could see it's value (and I guess it depends on how many have a rating and how severe the sum of them are), but it seems almost secondary to all the other information we give. I'm unsure, would really like feedback from the reviewers. Thank you.  :-)--NYMFan69-86 (talk) 01:43, 8 March 2011 (UTC)

I would vote for the overall status, not the state specific. We can clarify this in a note. Really, I see that column needing an nb note, no matter what, to explain the abbreviations and the ranking of them (lc and the like).TCO (talk) 02:10, 8 March 2011 (UTC)

RexxS to help

He will set up the table for us mechanically and had advice on placement and sorting and all that. I told him go ahead and create the architecture and we will fill in. He helped us before on format and is a total whiz. Did the subspecies gallery for us in picta. (Just informing y'all.)TCO (talk)

As I don't have the data about the conservation status of individual reptiles, I'll make you a one-column example table that you can use to add a new column to your table when you have all the info.

IUCN Status

Status
EX
EW
CR
EN
VU
NT
LC
CR
EW
CR
EW
CR

There are 7 categories; you can sort on the column and get an order from "extinct" to "least concern" or reversed (try it). Let me know if you need more. --RexxS (talk) 00:22, 10 March 2011 (UTC)

This looks great! Thanks RexxS! I'll get all of my citations for the different reptiles formatted and will start adding information to the table. Looks awesome!--NYMFan69-86 (talk) 00:55, 10 March 2011 (UTC)

IUCN content update

I went and researched all of the species. I have refs, understanding, ratings. Don't worry, this is all in an Excel spreadsheet. Let me know if you want this conveyed or to coordinate somehow. Otherwise, I'm also fine with someone re-looking all of these up. I actually don't mind doing the reference template coding either (is easy in a spreadsheet when so much is duplicative.

What would really help me is if someone would please ADD the column code, header and field to the table. I can probably fill in all the rest. That said, NYM, if you want to do this, have at it.

State State reptile Scientific name Conservation status URL comments Alabama Alabama red-bellied turtle Pseudemys alabamensis Endangered http://www.iucnredlist.org/apps/redlist/details/18458/0 Arizona Arizona ridge-nosed rattlesnake Crotalus willardi subspecies willardi Least concern http://www.iucnredlist.org/apps/redlist/details/62253/0 As species, but subspecies also not threatened California Desert tortoise Gopherus agassizii Vulnerable http://www.iucnredlist.org/apps/redlist/details/9400/0 Colorado Western painted turtle Chrysemys picta subspecies belli Least concern Rhodin footnote As species Florida American alligator (state reptile) Alligator mississippiensis Least concern http://www.iucnredlist.org/apps/redlist/details/46583/0 Florida Loggerhead sea turtle (state saltwater reptile) Caretta caretta Endangered http://www.iucnredlist.org/apps/redlist/details/3897/0 Florida Gopher tortoise (state tortoise) Gopherus polyphemus Vulnerable http://www.iucnredlist.org/apps/redlist/details/9403/0 Georgia Gopher tortoise Gopherus polyphemus Vulnerable http://www.iucnredlist.org/apps/redlist/details/9403/0 Illinois Painted turtle Chrysemys picta Least concern Rhodin footnote Kansas Ornate box turtle Terrapene ornata Near threatened http://www.iucnredlist.org/apps/redlist/details/21644/0 Louisiana American alligator Alligator mississippiensis Least concern http://www.iucnredlist.org/apps/redlist/details/46583/0 Maryland Diamondback terrapin Malaclemys terrapin Near threatened http://www.iucnredlist.org/apps/redlist/details/12695/0 Massachusetts Garter snake Thamnophis (whole genus) Least concern http://www.iucnredlist.org/apps/redlist/details/62240/0 Common garter snake species is least concern. Many different species exist in genus; nearly all are least concern. Michigan Painted turtle Chrysemys picta Least concern Rhodin footnote Mississippi American alligator Alligator mississippiensis Least concern http://www.iucnredlist.org/apps/redlist/details/46583/0 Missouri Three-toed box turtle Terrapene carolina subspecies triunguis Near threatened http://www.iucnredlist.org/apps/redlist/details/21641/0 As species Nevada Desert tortoise Gopherus agassizii Vulnerable http://www.iucnredlist.org/apps/redlist/details/9400/0 New Mexico New Mexico whiptail lizard Cnemidophorus neomexicanus Least concern http://www.iucnredlist.org/apps/redlist/details/64278/0 New York Common snapping turtle Chelydra serpentina Least concern Rhodin footnote North Carolina Eastern box turtle Terrapene carolina subspecies carolina Near threatened http://www.iucnredlist.org/apps/redlist/details/21641/0 As species Ohio Black racer Coluber constrictor subspecies constrictor Least concern http://www.iucnredlist.org/apps/redlist/details/63748/0 As species Oklahoma Collared lizard Crotaphytus (whole genus) Least concern http://www.iucnredlist.org/apps/redlist/details/64007/0 Several species. Vary from least concern to endangered, but comment based on wide-ranging eastern collared lizard, found in Oklahoma South Carolina Loggerhead sea turtle Caretta caretta Endangered http://www.iucnredlist.org/apps/redlist/details/3897/0 Tennessee Eastern box turtle Terrapene carolina subspecies carolina Endangered http://www.iucnredlist.org/apps/redlist/details/3897/0 Endangered Texas Texas horned lizard Phrynosoma cornutum Least concern http://www.iucnredlist.org/apps/redlist/details/64072/0 Discuss in text the juxtaposition versus overall rating, and the east of Texas remarks. Vermont Painted turtle Chrysemys picta Least concern Rhodin footnote West Virginia Timber rattlesnake Crotalus horridus Least concern http://www.iucnredlist.org/apps/redlist/details/64318/0 Wyoming Horned lizard Phrynosoma (whole genus) Least concern http://www.iucnredlist.org/apps/redlist/details/64072/0 (texas) Most species in genus are least concern

I'll format all the sources? Then you can "rip tits?"--NYMFan69-86 (talk) 01:00, 10 March 2011 (UTC)

You go, girl! — Preceding unsigned comment added by TCO (talk • contribs) 01:36, 10 March 2011

Conservation status column added as requested. --RexxS (talk) 19:20, 10 March 2011 (UTC)

(I hope I am not stealing NYM's fun.) I will generate and add the references in the refs column. They are mostly IUCN, but a couple are from Rhodin. Will do that first, I guess (offline and then insert). Then I need to build some content description for the conservation (will do in sandbox and then drop in). In addition to general discussion of the trends from the table (and explanation of caveats and the like), I found some really cool papers by Gibbons on the general reptile issues and many of the exmplees are state reptiles. I have some other environmental impacts sources as well discussing the interaction of state reptiles and lobbying for land use. Will do a bunch of table ref re-using, but several other refs. And I have an image I want to put in there as well of a roadkill since it fits the topic (endangered turtle) and is Federal free. Will be another section with 3 paras or so. good stuff actually. For teh readers. But some work to get it done... Actually makes me think of taking on the overall reptile article and trying to get it to GA/FA. Wow... TCO (talk) 21:51, 10 March 2011 (UTC)

I was wondering if we should add those, when I wrote it. They are all studies referenced by Gibbons 2000. Will get them in. Tried reading them, but I don't have academic access, but I can do that whole "as cited by" thing. TCO (talk) 17:36, 15 March 2011 (UTC)

I can probably find them on my campus server. What specific names of the sources?--NYMFan69-86 (talk) 03:25, 16 March 2011 (UTC)

I'm almost done and you can just see where I had to do as cited by. It's in the first section of Conservation and around the 80s in refs. You can see that the as cited by is all from 2000 Gibbons (there is one as cited by for 1988 Gibbons, but that was there before and I doubt you get a 1953 copy of the Golden Guide). I think you will have a hard time getting too many on your server, but give it a shot. A lot are from conference proceedings and the like. BTW, if we have these as cited by's I think it's pretty legit (even more so than normally), since we are making the point that Gibbons chose these examples. I was able to get some electronically and those I verified correct (in fact and citation, and then just gave a cite on its own).TCO (talk) 03:41, 16 March 2011 (UTC)

Okay, nice work. I'll have a look tomorrow (kind of late right now). Maybe "cited by" is the way to go though.  :-)--NYMFan69-86 (talk) 04:12, 16 March 2011 (UTC)

I got a few more coming in. Gotta sleep though. Took care of all the CNs, but I know there are a few more where I should add them (like he was just putting CN on the long paras). I'll get it all done the same. Then some de-bugging. Then I'll put something on talk summarizing the status and chasing down substantial reviewers that have not given a vote yet. We've got two substantial supports from Dianne and Wehwalt. Then trhee substantial reviews from TRM, Giants and LSD. And everything taken care of. I do want to go over it to polish, and give them a chance on Conservation (LSD has looked at it though). Would like to get updowns from them and Makhole and just get the thing done. I actually had email contact with Gibbons in 2005, so I reached out and asked him to look at the page too. But I think once I get this last ref stuff in and take a look at it, we are ready for a thumbs up. I could go get more reviewers, but I don't think that makes sense. It has had enough and there are other things for people to mess with.TCO (talk) 04:35, 16 March 2011 (UTC)

Should be good to go now.

You did the vast majority of the work here, so whatever you feel is best. I tend to agree with you; if all that have given us a review have their concerns addressed then support, I see it eventually being promoted. You did fantastic work TCO.  :-) NYMFan69-86 (talk) 17:55, 16 March 2011 (UTC)

Look at ref 92. It is misbehaving somehow (see the url).TCO (talk) 19:29, 16 March 2011 (UTC)

This is kind of coming out of a Casliber comment, but there is some interesting political usage of some of the state reptiles, prior to their designation. Will go into history, and really help that section not be so sports dominated (balance it).

• timber rattlesnake (don't tread on me, Contintal Navy, WV mentions it as well)
• snapping turtle 1808 Embargo with the Brits (famous cartoon)
• gopher tortoise=Hoover chicken, depression-era swipe at previous president

Another thing that has been in the back of my mind is usage of state reptiles in general conservation lobbying (I had a story for California usage of the desert tortoise, and then sort of a tangential on on Flordia gopher tortoise in news stories.) I don't really have enough to flesh that into a para yet though and would have to research it.

TCO (talk) 22:29, 18 March 2011 (UTC)

Content is in. I re-arranged the section structure a little. You know how I am on thought heirarchy. Think it super important to the reader. Fixed the WL order. Fixed some of the ref order, but got frustrated. Asked a bot to fix the rest.TCO (talk) 22:54, 19 March 2011 (UTC)

here [14]. TCO (reviews needed) 20:22, 24 July 2011 (UTC)

I am bathing in it. TCO (talk) 01:25, 20 March 2011 (UTC)

Soak it all in man. You deserve a medal....but a barnstar's just as good.  :-P --NYMFan69-86 (talk) 02:31, 20 March 2011 (UTC)

Whit Gibbons was going to come in the beginning of next week and give a review on the board. I kid you not. I was getting pissed at the delay.TCO (talk) 04:15, 20 March 2011 (UTC)

Nice to linky a star from a star

talk

) 09:02, 20 July 2011 (UTC)

Yeah...I thought I was being sneaky, but you could see me giving it a little boost.TCO (reviews needed) 20:23, 24 July 2011 (UTC)

I will fix this in several places. Have the ref from OK state. Not sure if this is an issue with Sherer or just a holdover from the inital list, before we grabbed it. Anyhow. Since this is a Wiki...can fix...will fix!TCO (talk) 01:09, 4 December 2011 (UTC)

Think I got it all. What a pain in the ass.TCO (talk) 01:50, 4 December 2011 (UTC)

This page contains too much content as prose to be classed as a list, in my opinion. The list itself is fairly short (esp. without the pictures artificially lengthening the size) and is only a small part of overall content. Plus, it isn't even named as a list, being "U.S. state reptiles" instead of "List of U.S. state reptiles" (ridiculously, the logic for this during the nomination for featured list status was "it's not a list"). Wikipedia's definition for list articles is "encyclopedia pages consisting of a lead section followed by a list", and this is certainly more than just a lead. Considering all of this, shouldn't it go through the process for a featured article instead?--Remurmur (talk) 02:35, 9 January 2012 (UTC)