User talk:Mgiganteus1/Archive 3

Hi - I note from the edit history of Nepenthes veitchii, that you added the statement "(after George Veitch, nurseryman of the Veitch Nurseries)" in May 2006. Can you confirm that this is correct. I am currently endeavouring to create/expand the articles about the Veitch family and can find no trace of a "George". He's certainly not mentioned in "Hortus Veitchii", nor can I find him anywhere else after a Google search. Any help would be greatly appreciated. Cheers. --Daemonic Kangaroo (talk) 12:16, 9 October 2008 (UTC)

A

Thanks for uploading Image:Aliens unleashed.PNG. The image has been identified as not specifying the source and creator of the image, which is required by Wikipedia's policy on images. If you don't indicate the source and creator of the image on the image's description page, it may be deleted some time in the next seven days. If you have uploaded other images, please verify that you have provided source information for them as well.

For more information on using images, see the following pages:

• Wikipedia:Image use policy
• Wikipedia:Image copyright tags

This is an automated notice by OrphanBot. For assistance on the image use policy, see Wikipedia:Media copyright questions. 05:22, 23 October 2008 (UTC)

Sorry for the conflict! I didn't see the edit summary until after I'd made the change.Hackfish (talk) 00:50, 27 October 2008 (UTC)

Thanks for your uploads. You've indicated that the following images are being used under a claim of

• That there is a non-free use rationale on the image's description page for each article the image is used in.
• That every article it is used on is linked to from its description page.

• Image:Virtual Reality Studio 2.0 back.jpg
• Image:Virtual Reality Studio 2.0.jpg

This is an automated notice by FairuseBot. For assistance on the image use policy, see Wikipedia:Media copyright questions. --07:52, 4 November 2008 (UTC)

Hi - could I be very cheeky and ask you to take a look at three articles I have recently created (Begonia boliviensis, Begonia pearcei and Begonia veitchii) and correct any botanical errors that I've made. Cheers. --Daemonic Kangaroo (talk) 07:57, 14 November 2008 (UTC)

Because the Signpost hasn't been sent in a while, to save space, I've condensed all seven issues that were not sent into this archive. Only the three issues from November are below.

Weekly Delivery

You are receiving this message because you have signed up for the

Thanks for the correction here! It seems I don't have the eyes of a botanist. :) FlyingToaster 21:30, 26 November 2008 (UTC)

Hi - I'm being cheeky again. Could you look at the article I have created about an orchid,

Three issues have been published since the last deliver: November 24, December 1, and January 3.

Weekly Delivery

You are receiving this message because you have signed up for the Signpost spamlist. If you wish to stop receiving these messages, simply remove your name from the list.--ragesoss (talk) 21:42, 3 January 2009 (UTC)

Weekly Delivery

You are receiving this message because you have signed up for the Signpost spamlist. If you wish to stop receiving these messages, simply remove your name from the list.--ragesoss (talk) 20:00, 11 January 2009 (UTC)§hepBot (Disable) 19:55, 13 January 2009 (UTC)

Weekly Delivery

You are receiving this message because you have signed up for the Signpost spamlist. If you wish to stop receiving these messages, simply remove your name from the list.--ragesoss (talk) 21:12, 17 January 2009 (UTC)

Delievered by

Weekly Delivery

You are receiving this message because you have signed up for the Signpost spamlist. If you wish to stop receiving these messages, simply remove your name from the list.--ragesoss (talk) 03:08, 25 January 2009 (UTC)

Delivered at 04:35, 25 January 2009 (UTC) by §hepBot (Disable)

Good catch on the vandalism! I thought it had all been corrected, but clearly not, thanks to your eagle eyes. Cheers Jasper33 (talk) 10:04, 26 January 2009 (UTC)

Weekly Delivery

You are receiving this message because you have signed up for the Signpost spamlist. If you wish to stop receiving these messages, simply remove your name from the list.--ragesoss (talk) 20:49, 1 February 2009 (UTC)

Delievered by

Weekly Delivery

You are receiving this message because you have signed up for the Signpost spamlist. If you wish to stop receiving these messages, simply remove your name from the list.--ragesoss (talk) 15:35, 9 February 2009 (UTC)

Delivered by §hepBot (Disable) at 22:27, 9 February 2009 (UTC)

Volume 5, Issue 7

Weekly Delivery

2009-02-16

Delivered by §hepBot (Disable) at 07:09, 16 February 2009 (UTC)

This week, the Wikipedia Signpost published volume 5, issue 8, which includes these articles:

• Philosophers analyze Wikipedia as a knowledge source
• An automated article monitoring system for WikiProjects
• News and notes: Wikimania, usability, picture contest, milestones
• Wikipedia in the news: Lessons for Brits, patent citations
• Dispatches: Hundredth Featured sound approaches
• Wikiproject report: WikiProject Islam
• Discussion Reports And Miscellaneous Articulations
• Features and admins: Approved this week
• Technology report: Bugs, Repairs, and Internal Operational News
• Arbitration report: The Report on Lengthy Litigation

The kinks are still being worked out in a new design for these Signpost deliveries, and we apologize for the plain format for this week.

Delivered by §hepBot (Disable) at 16:37, 24 February 2009 (UTC)

This week, the Wikipedia Signpost published volume 5, issue 9, which includes these articles:

• Books extension enabled
• News and notes: Stewards, Wikimania bids, and more
• Wikipedia in the news: Wikipedia's role in journalism, Smarter Wikipedia, Skittles
• Dispatches: WikiProject Ships Featured topic and Good topics
• Wikiproject report: WikiProject Norse History and Culture
• Discussion report: Discussion Reports And Miscellaneous Articulations
• Features and admins: Approved this week
• Technology report: Bugs, Repairs, and Internal Operational News
• Arbitration report: The Report on Lengthy Litigation

Delievered by

Thanks for your great work with Jeljen getting this article up and presentable; you guys are so quick off the mark! I'm glad that some of you have been able to access our article despite the relatively exclusive source. Cheers, Attenboroughii (talk) 07:53, 9 March 2009 (UTC)

This week, the Wikipedia Signpost published volume 5, issue 10, which includes these articles:

• News and notes: Commons, conferences, and more
• Wikipedia in the news: Politics, more politics, and more
• Dispatches: 100 Featured sounds milestone
• Wikiproject report: WikiProject Christianity
• Discussion report: Discussion Reports And Miscellaneous Articulations
• Features and admins: Approved this week
• Technology report: Bugs, Repairs, and Internal Operational News
• Arbitration report: The Report on Lengthy Litigation

Delivered by §hepBot (Disable) at 00:09, 10 March 2009 (UTC)

          
      __________._______.--.                                                  .
   .-'           ,-. --__...```--...  _..'''..___________{{{1}}}______________-..``  
  <   \/        ( o ) ____..--"""""""--.,_''-..______________________________ooo/                                                            
   '-.___________`-'_________.-~-~````~-~-._`-.__.'      `.`._ -..`         ``
                `                `.`-.__.'.`~---`          `.,o_o/  
                                  `-.__.~                    ``

----Bugz were here!--t--c--⇾ I noticed that you do a lot of work in this area, so I thought I would give you a friendly award.

Wikipedia Signpost — 16 March 2009

Unsubscribe · Single-page · Full edition »

  — 16 March 2009

Delivered by §hepBot (Disable) at 23:18, 16 March 2009 (UTC)

Delievered by

Delievered by

Greetings!
Thanks for your contributions to

If you have uploaded other unlicensed media, please check whether they're used in any articles or not. You can find a list of 'image' pages you have edited by clicking on the "my contributions" link (it is located at the very top of any Wikipedia page when you are logged in), and then selecting "Image" from the dropdown box. Note that all non-free media not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. BJBot (talk) 05:06, 6 April 2009 (UTC)

If you have uploaded other unlicensed media, please check whether they're used in any articles or not. You can find a list of 'image' pages you have edited by clicking on the "my contributions" link (it is located at the very top of any Wikipedia page when you are logged in), and then selecting "Image" from the dropdown box. Note that all non-free media not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. BJBot (talk) 05:07, 6 April 2009 (UTC)

If you have uploaded other unlicensed media, please check whether they're used in any articles or not. You can find a list of 'image' pages you have edited by clicking on the "my contributions" link (it is located at the very top of any Wikipedia page when you are logged in), and then selecting "Image" from the dropdown box. Note that all non-free media not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. BJBot (talk) 05:12, 6 April 2009 (UTC)

If you have uploaded other unlicensed media, please check whether they're used in any articles or not. You can find a list of 'image' pages you have edited by clicking on the "my contributions" link (it is located at the very top of any Wikipedia page when you are logged in), and then selecting "Image" from the dropdown box. Note that all non-free media not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. BJBot (talk) 05:12, 6 April 2009 (UTC)

Delievered by

If you have uploaded other unlicensed media, please check whether they're used in any articles or not. You can find a list of 'image' pages you have edited by clicking on the "my contributions" link (it is located at the very top of any Wikipedia page when you are logged in), and then selecting "Image" from the dropdown box. Note that all non-free media not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. BJBot (talk) 05:05, 7 April 2009 (UTC)

If you have uploaded other unlicensed media, please check whether they're used in any articles or not. You can find a list of 'image' pages you have edited by clicking on the "my contributions" link (it is located at the very top of any Wikipedia page when you are logged in), and then selecting "Image" from the dropdown box. Note that all non-free media not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. BJBot (talk) 05:06, 7 April 2009 (UTC)

If you have uploaded other unlicensed media, please check whether they're used in any articles or not. You can find a list of 'image' pages you have edited by clicking on the "my contributions" link (it is located at the very top of any Wikipedia page when you are logged in), and then selecting "Image" from the dropdown box. Note that all non-free media not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. BJBot (talk) 05:06, 7 April 2009 (UTC)

If you have uploaded other unlicensed media, please check whether they're used in any articles or not. You can find a list of 'image' pages you have edited by clicking on the "my contributions" link (it is located at the very top of any Wikipedia page when you are logged in), and then selecting "Image" from the dropdown box. Note that all non-free media not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. BJBot (talk) 05:06, 7 April 2009 (UTC)

If you have uploaded other unlicensed media, please check whether they're used in any articles or not. You can find a list of 'image' pages you have edited by clicking on the "my contributions" link (it is located at the very top of any Wikipedia page when you are logged in), and then selecting "Image" from the dropdown box. Note that all non-free media not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. BJBot (talk) 05:10, 7 April 2009 (UTC)

An image or media file that you uploaded or altered,

Delievered by

Please put tag {{fact}} if you need referance, don't simply remove other people contribution. http://www.snow-forecast.com/resorts/Hkakabo-Razi Hkakabo Razi is an extension of the Eastern Himalayas. Yosri (talk) 03:27, 15 April 2009 (UTC)

If you have uploaded other unlicensed media, please check whether they're used in any articles or not. You can find a list of 'image' pages you have edited by clicking on the "my contributions" link (it is located at the very top of any Wikipedia page when you are logged in), and then selecting "Image" from the dropdown box. Note that all non-free media not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. BJBot (talk) 05:07, 15 April 2009 (UTC)

If you have uploaded other unlicensed media, please check whether they're used in any articles or not. You can find a list of 'image' pages you have edited by clicking on the "my contributions" link (it is located at the very top of any Wikipedia page when you are logged in), and then selecting "Image" from the dropdown box. Note that all non-free media not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. BJBot (talk) 05:07, 15 April 2009 (UTC)

If you have uploaded other unlicensed media, please check whether they're used in any articles or not. You can find a list of 'image' pages you have edited by clicking on the "my contributions" link (it is located at the very top of any Wikipedia page when you are logged in), and then selecting "Image" from the dropdown box. Note that all non-free media not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. BJBot (talk) 05:07, 15 April 2009 (UTC)

If you have uploaded other unlicensed media, please check whether they're used in any articles or not. You can find a list of 'image' pages you have edited by clicking on the "my contributions" link (it is located at the very top of any Wikipedia page when you are logged in), and then selecting "Image" from the dropdown box. Note that all non-free media not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. BJBot (talk) 05:08, 15 April 2009 (UTC)

If you have uploaded other unlicensed media, please check whether they're used in any articles or not. You can find a list of 'image' pages you have edited by clicking on the "my contributions" link (it is located at the very top of any Wikipedia page when you are logged in), and then selecting "Image" from the dropdown box. Note that all non-free media not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. BJBot (talk) 05:08, 15 April 2009 (UTC)

If you have uploaded other unlicensed media, please check whether they're used in any articles or not. You can find a list of 'image' pages you have edited by clicking on the "my contributions" link (it is located at the very top of any Wikipedia page when you are logged in), and then selecting "Image" from the dropdown box. Note that all non-free media not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. BJBot (talk) 05:23, 15 April 2009 (UTC)

If you have uploaded other unlicensed media, please check whether they're used in any articles or not. You can find a list of 'image' pages you have edited by clicking on the "my contributions" link (it is located at the very top of any Wikipedia page when you are logged in), and then selecting "Image" from the dropdown box. Note that all non-free media not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. BJBot (talk) 06:02, 16 April 2009 (UTC)

Hi there. The image File:Moroteuthis robusta.jpg was deleted due to a misunderstanding. I meant the old version of this image (under the same name) should be deleted, but I !voted to keep the newly uploaded version. User:BQZip01 seems to have misunderstood my comment in his !vote as well. mgiganteus1 (talk) 18:27, 18 April 2009 (UTC)

Restored.

talk

) 18:29, 18 April 2009 (UTC)

I supported it because I did not know what necking was. Now I do. I watched it for half an hour. The only thing I see at the picture in the article are two giraffes staying next to each other. Where is necking? They do not even touch each other.But whatever who cares about EV as long as the image is "clear"? Best regards.--Mbz1 (talk) 17:08, 20 April 2009 (UTC)

It only means that he did not see one. As I said I watched it for half-an-hour maybe more. I thought they were male and female engaged in courtship, and then zookeeper explained to me what was going on. Never for this half-an-hour they were staying like at the image, which is in the article now. BTW here what necking is about and what my image is showing, but as I said who cares about EV here, right? Best regards.--Mbz1 (talk) 17:43, 20 April 2009 (UTC)

Maybe, but would you agree that my image shows necking behavior much better?--Mbz1 (talk) 23:41, 20 April 2009 (UTC)

Delivered by

Delivered by

Hi, you created a stub on this journal a few years ago. I just looked at it (and moved it), but please note that there are TWO journals with this title listed in PubMed, one from India and one from Pakistan. Perhaps you could expand this minimal stub a bit. Thanks. --Crusio (talk) 13:35, 29 April 2009 (UTC)

Delivered by

Delivered by

Most authorities recognise that this is a not a true species, but a hybrid; is there any guidance in place to suggest how entries such as this are dealt with on Wikipedia?

Stew McPherson's new book is shortly going to press; in it, we update the species list (to 120), but a couple of taxa on the Wikipedia list are no longer considered valid. As the most active CP member, perhaps you have some experience of such cases already? Attenboroughii (talk) 07:55, 25 May 2009 (UTC)

Urgh, you'll love this; I just searched through the manuscript to locate the N. sharifah-hapsahii reference only to find that it hasn't been included - N. naquiyuddinii and N. zakriana have. Oh dear, talk about missed opportunities. Still, it may have crept in after handover, so we'll just have to wait and see.

I understand. Yes, your summary is about right; N. globosa should probably never have been entered in Wikipedia since it was never published - Shigeo himself decided it was just an extreme form of N. mirabilis. Nonetheless, it is treated as an unknown taxon, N. sp. Phang Nga, and may yet be described - I wonder whether there is room for partially known taxa here? Plenty of information is provided to flesh out entries about the concerned taxa, but perhaps it'd be overkill in a public encyclopaedia prior to official clarification. The rest of the bin list is correct; N. naga would have been on there, but we decided that without being able to observe material, we have to give the authors the benefit of the doubt, even if everything about it screams N. bongso (which Charles C. has recorded bifurcated apical appendages in, probably from the same locality). Thanks for your response! Attenboroughii (talk) 16:21, 28 May 2009 (UTC)

Excellent proposal; that looks like a good way of doing it and makes the distinction clear. Also, good news; we found a space in the hybrid section for a single sentence that clearly identifies N. sharifah-hapsahii as a hybrid - just in time to make printing this week. It appears on page 1181. Cheers! Attenboroughii (talk) 08:32, 2 June 2009 (UTC)

Yes indeed; N. gracilis and N. mirabilis are specified as its parent species. Attenboroughii (talk) 11:54, 3 June 2009 (UTC)

Delivered by

I'll not argue too strenously about Octopoida since I'm not an expert but I do note that while the page you cite does indeed list 1817 for Octopoida (nice find!) ... all of the references the page itself refers to gives the name as Octopoda and 1818 Leach ... Octopoida seems to be the German term for Octopoda ... seems like everyone agrees it's Leach for the classification and the original English reference give 1818 as the date ... it's not my field, it's only one year, it's about octopuses and I don't have the original sources so I'll let it go! BobKawanaka (talk) 00:28, 27 May 2009 (UTC)

I saw in this diff that you added an "accessmonthday" and/or "accessdaymonth" parameter. Please be informed that these are deprecated. The preferred way is to put day, month, and year together in the "accessdate" parameter. See {{Cite web}}. Thank you, Debresser (talk) 16:50, 31 May 2009 (UTC)

Delivered by

I am now proud owner of a TUSC account!

Hi Manders, thanks for bringing those to my attention; a lovely spread! You're spot on with N. peltata and N. micramphora, but the "N. copelandii" look to be N. mindanaoensis (the former has not been recorded from Mount Hamiguitan, and unless indicated otherwise, all these photos seem to have been taken there). There are some interesting strains of N. alata on the same mountain, and there is much introgression between the two species, giving rise to swarms of plants with intermediate characteristics; this is well illustrated here. A couple of the stout-peristomed N. alata may be hybrids with N. peltata, but it's hard to say from these images alone. The first lot of books are due tomorrow; if you have one on order, look for the hybrid section for one of the most startling natural hybrids out there - N. peltata x micramphora - very beautiful indeed! Attenboroughii (talk) 11:07, 11 June 2009 (UTC)

Oops! Sincere apologies; I was multitasking between Wikipedia and a forum thread and crossed wires. I can appreciate why you'd think it was N. copelandii, but to be honest, without seeing the upper pitchers, it's often difficult to tell them apart. I see that the leaves may be petiolate (but they're dead and may have curled), which is unusual for N. mindanaoensis, but as with many of the species in the N. alata group, there is considerable overlap where populations occur together Attenboroughii (talk) 16:30, 14 June 2009 (UTC).

Delivered by

Delivered by

This article was receiving over 100 hits a day as I recall. It was therefore achieving greater interest than most well written and produced but obscure articles on cephalopods. I assumed its removal was because it was like a wiktionary entry but when I went to Wiktionary it was nowhere to be seen. I do not think simply removingh an entry for "locus classicus" is a sensible mopve. Modify it, move it or whatever - but delete, no. Could you let me know why this was done (please reply on my page). Granitethighs (talk) 03:48, 24 June 2009 (UTC)

Delivered by

Please comment at Talk:Outline of sharks#Merge. --Stefan ^talk 05:57, 30 June 2009 (UTC)

I understand the undescribed nature of the plant but could you add some information about how it "feeds" as this plant is carnivorous and plants of this genus do have some information that can be added to lengthen this article. Thanks. :D Cliffsteinman (talk) 19:11, 30 June 2009 (UTC)

Hello, Mgiganteus1. You have new messages at Cliffsteinman's talk page.
You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.

Hey mgiganteus1. I wanted to respond to your comment about the notability of

Delivered by

Hi there,

I've just processed a semi-protected edit request on the

I'm not an expert in the topic area, therefore I looked at major contributors to the article that were active, and hence found you.

Please could you check my response to the request, and see if my comments were appropriate - in

Many thanks,  Chzz  ►  06:06, 23 July 2009 (UTC)

(I don't watchlist pages, so please drop me a note on my own talk or something, cheers)

Delivered by --

If you have uploaded other unlicensed media, please check whether they're used in any articles or not. You can find a list of 'file' pages you have edited by clicking on the "my contributions" link (it is located at the very top of any Wikipedia page when you are logged in), and then selecting "File" from the dropdown box. Note that all non-free media not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. BJBot (talk) 04:33, 29 July 2009 (UTC)

Delivered by

Delivered by

Delivered by

I was just about to point out the same thing. In addition, the taxon described in the article should be in bold in the taxobox and please take care when copy/pasting articles to ensure that all fields have been substituted as appropriate. I'd also be cautious with using a source as old as Flower (1962) when it comes to matters of cephalopod taxonomy. There has undoubtedly been a great deal of research subsequent to its publication. mgiganteus1 (talk) 22:42, 23 August 2009 (UTC)

Noted and I'm returning to all articles to do as you mentioned. Isn't having an article posted (where there was none) better even though the source, in this case Flower, is dated and have the framework there for another editor to pick up and continue? Noles1984 (talk) 11:40, 24 August 2009 (UTC)

Delivered by

As you are one of the principal contributors to this article I wanted to be sure you were aware that

can you please take out the spelling errors out of my uwe kils page - I am from Germany - your frontpage is beautifull - http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:Kils —Preceding unsigned comment added by 62.214.137.214 (talk) 13:45, 3 October 2009 (UTC)

You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that images for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media

).

If you have uploaded other unlicensed media, please check whether they're used in any articles or not. You can find a list of "file" pages you have edited by clicking on the "

ZooFari

20:52, 2 November 2009 (UTC)

The Wikipedia Signpost: 2 November 2009

• Article contest: Durova wins 2009 WikiCup

• Conference report: WikiSym features research on Wikipedia

• Election report: 2009 ArbCom elections report

• Audit Subcommittee: Inaugural Audit Subcommittee elections underway

• Dispatches: Wikipedia remembers the Wall

• News and notes: Strategic planning, November conference, brief news and milestones

• Discussion report: Discussion Reports and Miscellaneous Articulations

• WikiProject report: Project banner meta-templates

• Features and admins: Approved this week

• Arbitration report: The Report on Lengthy Litigation

• Technology report: Bugs, Repairs, and Internal Operational News

Read this Signpost in full · Single-page · Unsubscribe · EdwardsBot (talk) 04:45, 3 November 2009 (UTC)

The Wikipedia Signpost: 9 November 2009

• Fundraiser: Controversial "Wikipedia Forever" fundraiser to start 10 November

• New pages experiment: Wikipedians test the water at new page patrol

• German controversy: German Wikipedia under fire from inclusionists

• Multimedia usability: Multimedia usability meeting concludes in Paris

• Election report: Arbitration Committee candidate nominations open 10 November

• Book review: Review of Connected Minds, Emerging Cultures: Cybercultures in Online Learning

• News and notes: Ant images, public outreach, and more

• In the news: Beefeater vandalism, interview, and more

• Sister projects: Meta-wiki interview

• Discussion report: Discussion Reports and Miscellaneous Articulations

• Features and admins: Approved this week

• Arbitration report: The Report on Lengthy Litigation

Read this Signpost in full · Single-page · Unsubscribe · EdwardsBot (talk) 01:37, 10 November 2009 (UTC)

The Wikipedia Signpost: 16 November 2009

• Fundraiser: "Wikipedia Forever" fundraiser begins

• Bulgarian award: Bulgarian Wikipedia gets a prestigious award

• Election report: Arbitration Committee Election: Several candidates standing

• News and notes: Kiswahili contest, new advisory board members, Foundation-l and more

• In the news: German lawsuit, Jimbo interview and more

• Sister projects: Wiktionary interview

• Discussion report: Discussion Reports and Miscellaneous Articulations

• Features and admins: Approved this week

• Arbitration report: The Report on Lengthy Litigation

• Technology report: Bugs, Repairs, and Internal Operational News

Read this Signpost in full · Single-page · Unsubscribe · EdwardsBot (talk) 16:01, 17 November 2009 (UTC)

Query

Do you have access to the articles on Springerlink?--Mr Fink (talk) 21:26, 22 November 2009 (UTC)

Well, when you do regain access, can you get these two articles in particular [2] and [3] ? I've been searching for references of galeaspids and amphiaspids, and while I think I have just a few more missing of the former group, I've found pathetically little information for the latter.--Mr Fink (talk) 21:47, 22 November 2009 (UTC)

The Wikipedia Signpost: 23 November 2009

• Uploading tool: New tool for photo scavenger hunts

• Election report: Arbitration Committee Election: Nominations closing November 24

• Fundraiser: "Wikipedia Forever" fundraiser continues

• News and notes: Government stubs, Suriname exhibit, milestones and more

• In the news: The Decline of Wikipedia, and more

• Discussion report: Discussion Reports and Miscellaneous Articulations

• Features and admins: Approved this week

• Arbitration report: The Report on Lengthy Litigation

• Technology report: Bugs, Repairs, and Internal Operational News

Read this Signpost in full · Single-page · Unsubscribe · EdwardsBot (talk) 13:00, 24 November 2009 (UTC)

The Wikipedia Signpost: 30 November 2009

• Election report: ArbCom election begins December 1, using SecurePoll

• News and notes: 35k donated, WikiProject for Wikipedia-Books, 2M rated articles, and more

• In the news: Reports of Wikipedia's demise, prescriptions for its ills, and more

• Discussion report: Discussion Reports and Miscellaneous Articulations

• Features and admins: Approved this week

• Arbitration report: The Report on Lengthy Litigation

• Technology report: Bugs, Repairs, and Internal Operational News

Read this Signpost in full · Single-page · Unsubscribe · EdwardsBot (talk) 13:45, 1 December 2009 (UTC)

Carnivorous Plant Newsletter

Hi, I really think that those lists are not appropriate. Image if someone would create an article on the Kew Bulletin (doesn't exist yet, I see) and would try to include all taxa ever described in that journal... There must be thousands of them... If you find this argument convincing, perhaps you can self revert. Thanks. Happy editing! --Crusio (talk) 19:41, 4 December 2009 (UTC)

The Wikipedia Signpost: 7 December 2009

• From the editors: 250th issue of the Signpost

• Editorial: A digital restoration

• Election report: ArbCom election in full swing

• Interview: Interview with David G. Post

• News and notes: Wikipedia's death report premature, fundraiser, usability, new CSD, noms, and more

• In the news: Ron Livingston sues vandal, disclosure of IP address ordered, brief headlines

• Discussion report: Discussion Reports and Miscellaneous Articulations

• Features and admins: Approved this week

• Arbitration report: The Report on Lengthy Litigation

• Technology report: Bugs, Repairs, and Internal Operational News

Read this Signpost in full · Single-page · Unsubscribe · EdwardsBot (talk) 05:44, 9 December 2009 (UTC)

Orphaned non-free image File:Terminator 2 Commodore 64.jpg

You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that images for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media

).

If you have uploaded other unlicensed media, please check whether they're used in any articles or not. You can find a list of "file" pages you have edited by clicking on the "my contributions" link (it is located at the very top of any Wikipedia page when you are logged in), and then selecting "File" from the dropdown box. Note that any non-free images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. JaGa^talk 05:31, 11 December 2009 (UTC)

Orphaned non-free image File:Terminator 2- Judgment Day NES.jpg

You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that images for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media

).

If you have uploaded other unlicensed media, please check whether they're used in any articles or not. You can find a list of "file" pages you have edited by clicking on the "my contributions" link (it is located at the very top of any Wikipedia page when you are logged in), and then selecting "File" from the dropdown box. Note that any non-free images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. JaGa^talk 05:32, 11 December 2009 (UTC)

The Wikipedia Signpost: 14 December 2009

• Election report: Voting closes in the Arbitration Committee Elections

• News and notes: Mapping geotagged articles language, import sources enabled, and more

• Discussion report: Discussion Reports and Miscellaneous Articulations

• Features and admins: Approved this week

• Arbitration report: The Report on Lengthy Litigation

• Technology report: Bugs, Repairs, and Internal Operational News

Read this Signpost in full · Single-page · Unsubscribe · EdwardsBot (talk) 16:08, 16 December 2009 (UTC)

The Wikipedia Signpost: 21 December 2009

• Election report: ArbCom election result announced

• News and notes: Fundraiser update, milestones and more

• In the news: Accusation of bias, misreported death, and more

• Discussion report: Discussion Reports and Miscellaneous Articulations

• Features and admins: Approved this week

Read this Signpost in full · Single-page · Unsubscribe · EdwardsBot (talk) 03:19, 23 December 2009 (UTC)

The Wikipedia Signpost: 28 December 2009

• News and notes: Flagged revisions petitions, image donations, brief news

• In the news: Criticism from climate change sceptic, decade in review

• Discussion report: Discussion Reports and Miscellaneous Articulations

• Features and admins: Approved this week

Read this Signpost in full · Single-page · Unsubscribe · EdwardsBot (talk) 02:41, 30 December 2009 (UTC)

The Wikipedia Signpost: 1 January 2010

• News and notes: Fundraiser ends, content contests, image donation, and more

• In the news: Financial Times, death rumors, Google maps and more

• Features and admins: Approved this week

• Arbitration report: The Report on Lengthy Litigation

Read this Signpost in full · Single-page · Unsubscribe · EdwardsBot (talk) 23:35, 6 January 2010 (UTC)

Propagating misinformation - aka. Heliamphora ionasi

Hello there, and happy new year! I've lately had cause to turn my botanical eye towards the Heliamphora, and notice that Heliamphora ionasi is incorrectly written as Heliamphora ionasii everywhere on Wikipedia. Unfortunately, I also note that this error has crept into Stewart's Pitcher Plants of the Americas, which is now one of the best references on the genus - I didn't edit that volume, don't look at me! To double check, I have today had a look at Maguire's description, and at the type specimens at Kew Herbarium (still there as of this afternoon - splendid collections to be sure) and confirm that the spelling with only one i is the correct one; it may read unpleasantly in English, but in botanical terms, the name is fine and ionasii invalid. I am certain that Fleischmann will also confirm this as being the case. Attenboroughii (talk) 17:49, 7 January 2010 (UTC)

Thank you for seeing to this; I wouldn't begin to know how to move an entire page to a new name for starters. The move might not be a popular one, but I hope sense prevails. Cheers, Attenboroughii (talk) 18:33, 7 January 2010 (UTC)

File:Nepenthes insignis.PNG listed for deletion

An image or media file that you uploaded or altered,

Wikipedia:Files for deletion. Please see the discussion to see why this is (you may have to search for the title of the image to find its entry), if you are interested in it not being deleted. Thank you. Ricky81682 (talk

) 00:24, 10 January 2010 (UTC)

AfD nomination of Japanese Journal of Tropical Medicine and Hygiene

What Wikipedia is not

").

Your opinions on whether the article meets inclusion criteria and what should be done with the article are welcome; please participate in the discussion(s) by adding your comments to

sign your comments

with four tildes (~~~~).

You may also edit the article during the discussion to improve it but should not remove the

articles for deletion

template from the top of the article; such removal will not end the deletion debate.

Please note: This is an automatic notification by a

talk

) 01:10, 10 January 2010 (UTC)

Cyathea

I see that several years ago you were doing a lot of work on Cyathea. You decided to group everything under that genus rather than segregating Alsophila and Sphaeropteris. I'm wondering why you didn't use those genera, which I think are justified, for organization if nothing else, but I think they're cladistically justified. jaknouse (talk) 03:42, 11 January 2010 (UTC)

The Wikipedia Signpost: 11 January 2010

• From the editor: Call for writers

• 2009 in review: 2009 in Review

• Books: New Book namespace created

• News and notes: Wikimania 2011, Flaggedrevs, Global sysops and more

• In the news: Wikipedia in British schools, Hitler's Downfall meme, and more

• Features and admins: Approved this week

Read this Signpost in full · Single-page · Unsubscribe · EdwardsBot (talk) 08:54, 12 January 2010 (UTC)

AfD nomination of Japanese Journal of Tropical Medicine and Hygiene

What Wikipedia is not

").

Your opinions on whether the article meets inclusion criteria and what should be done with the article are welcome; please participate in the discussion(s) by adding your comments to

sign your comments

with four tildes (~~~~).

You may also edit the article during the discussion to improve it but should not remove the

articles for deletion

template from the top of the article; such removal will not end the deletion debate.

Please note: This is an automatic notification by a

talk

) 01:12, 17 January 2010 (UTC)

Unreferenced BLPs

unreferencedBLP

}} tag. Here is the article:

1. Hugo Steiner - Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL

Thanks!--DASHBot (talk) 22:29, 17 January 2010 (UTC)

The Wikipedia Signpost: 18 January 2010

• News and notes: Statistics, disasters, Wikipedia's birthday and more

• In the news: Wikipedia on the road, and more

• WikiProject report: Where are they now?

• Features and admins: Approved this week

• Arbitration report: The Report on Lengthy Litigation

• Technology report: Bugs, Repairs, and Internal Operational News

Read this Signpost in full · Single-page · Unsubscribe · EdwardsBot (talk) 15:00, 19 January 2010 (UTC)

The Wikipedia Signpost: 25 January 2010

• BLP madness: BLP deletions cause uproar

• Births and deaths: Wikipedia biographies in the 20th century

• News and notes: Biographies galore, Wikinews competition, and more

• In the news: Wikipedia the disruptor?

• WikiProject report: Writers wanted! The Wikiproject Novels interviews

• Features and admins: Approved this week

• Arbitration report: The Report on Lengthy Litigation

• Technology report: Bugs, Repairs, and Internal Operational News

Read this Signpost in full · Single-page · Unsubscribe · EdwardsBot (talk) 04:13, 26 January 2010 (UTC)

Squids, squids, and more sqiuds. We have more cephalopds than you can shake a stick at!

Hey, I don't know if you still maintain List of giant squid specimens and sightings, but I noticed your name all over the article history. I left some leads and references at Talk:List of giant squid specimens and sightings for you to peruse to see if you can use them. Two more recent sightings, one from September 2009 that looks really good, and a recent one from yesterday that notes that last week they were being caught "by the hundreds" off the coast of California. Hope you can use them! --Jayron32 16:14, 2 February 2010 (UTC)

And as an aside, its PROBABLY time to archive your talk page. Its getting a bit unweildy. --Jayron32 16:16, 2 February 2010 (UTC)

The Wikipedia Signpost: 1 February 2010

• From the editor: Writers wanted to cover strategy, public policy

• Strategic planning: The challenges of strategic planning in a volunteer community

• News and notes: New CTO, Britain Loves Wikipedia, Telefónica partnership, Multimedia and more

• In the news: Wikipedia on CDs, BBC uses Wikipedia content, and more

• WikiProject report: WikiProject Dinosaurs

• Sister projects: Sister project roundup

• Features and admins: Approved this week

• Arbitration report: The Report on Lengthy Litigation

• Technology report: Bugs, Repairs, and Internal Operational News

Read this Signpost in full · Single-page · Unsubscribe · EdwardsBot (talk) 21:39, 2 February 2010 (UTC)

The Wikipedia Signpost: 8 February 2010

• News and notes: Commons at 6 million, BLP taskforce, milestones and more

• In the news: Robson Revisions, Rumble in the Knesset, and more

• Dispatches: Fewer reviewers in 2009

• WikiProject report: WikiProject Olympics

• Features and admins: Approved this week

• Arbitration report: The Report on Lengthy Litigation

Read this Signpost in full · Single-page · Unsubscribe · EdwardsBot (talk) 02:56, 9 February 2010 (UTC)

The Wikipedia Signpost: 15 February 2010

• News and notes: New Georgia Encyclopedia, BLPs, Ombudsmen, and more

• In the news: Labor squeeze revisited, journalist consultations, philosophy bungles, and more

• WikiProject report: WikiProject Singapore

• Features and admins: Approved this week

• Arbitration report: The Report on Lengthy Litigation

• Technology report: Bugs, Repairs, and Internal Operational News

Read this Signpost in full · Single-page · Unsubscribe · EdwardsBot (talk) 13:14, 16 February 2010 (UTC)

{{italictitle}}

Hi there. I posted here re mechanisms for achieving italic titles. I broadcast to WikiProject Arthropods participants to get a consensus approach that could be applied on all articles within the project. I didn't get a huge response as it happens, so I went with the approach that had the limited weight of support (reasons given). I am several hundred articles into the task, but have noted your reversal of a change. I don't want to get into an edit war over it, but perhaps you might have a read of what was discussed and offer your thoughts re preference. Cheers. Heds (talk) 00:32, 23 February 2010 (UTC)

The Wikipedia Signpost: 22 February 2010

• News and notes: $2 Million donation, cybersquatting, comScore statistics and more

• In the news: Macmillan's Wiki-textbooks and more

• WikiProject report: WikiProject Mammals

• Features and admins: Approved this week

• Arbitration report: The Report on Lengthy Litigation

Read this Signpost in full · Single-page · Unsubscribe · EdwardsBot (talk) 12:18, 24 February 2010 (UTC)

Category:Nepenthes

Something I've been mulling over - what do you think about updating Category:Nepenthes the way I have Category:Utricularia arranged? Individual pages sorted by lowercase species epithet, synonyms recategorized in Category:Nepenthes by synonymy. Thoughts? Cheers, Rkitko ^(talk) 15:35, 1 March 2010 (UTC)

Oh, and forgot to mention, I'd be more than willing to take this one so you wouldn't have to do all the grunt work. And what would you want to do with the hybrids? Sort them in Category:Nepenthes under ×, or create a new subcategory for them, e.g. Category:Nepenthes hybrids or Category:Nepenthes natural hybrids? Rkitko ^(talk) 15:38, 1 March 2010 (UTC)

The Wikipedia Signpost: 1 March 2010

• Reference desk: Wikipedia Reference Desk quality analyzed

• News and notes: Usability, 15M articles, Vandalism research award, and more

• In the news: Idealizing the Star Spangled Banner, Curious Announcement, and more

• WikiProject report: WikiProject Severe Weather

• Features and admins: Approved this week

• Arbitration report: The Report on Lengthy Litigation

• Technology report: Bugs, Repairs, and Internal Operational News

Read this Signpost in full · Single-page · Unsubscribe · EdwardsBot (talk) 00:11, 3 March 2010 (UTC)

revertion of Nepenthes clipeata

Why did you modify the changes I just made? I do not understand, as my says are correct. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Merciadriluca (talk • contribs) 19:20, 8 March 2010 (UTC)

The text which was cited comes from my article, and this is consequently not a copyright violation. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Merciadriluca (talk • contribs) 20:20, 8 March 2010 (UTC)

As you say, it comes from Cantley, R., C.M. Clarke, J. Cokendolpher, B. Rice & A. Wistuba 2004. This is not a problem, as I cite this source and my report, which also cites this reference. What is the matter? There is a copyright violation once a reference is not cited in its context. That is the case, and there is consequently no copyright violation.--Luca Merciadri (talk) 20:59, 8 March 2010 (UTC)

The Wikipedia Signpost: 8 March 2010

• News and notes: Financial statements, discussions, milestones

• In the news: Pentagon shooter used Wikipedia, soon iPhone OS will too

• WikiProject report: WikiProject Java

• Features and admins: Approved this week

• Arbitration report: The Report on Lengthy Litigation

Read this Signpost in full · Single-page · Unsubscribe · EdwardsBot (talk) 03:10, 10 March 2010 (UTC)

The Wikipedia Signpost: 15 March 2010

• News and notes: A Wikiversity controversy, Wikimedian-in-Residence, image donation, editing contest, WMF jobs

• In the news: Studies on collaboration and student usage, Main Page drives traffic to Time.com

• Dispatches: GA Sweeps end

• WikiProject report: WikiProject Ireland

• Features and admins: Approved this week

• Arbitration report: The Report on Lengthy Litigation

Read this Signpost in full · Single-page · Unsubscribe · EdwardsBot (talk) 21:42, 17 March 2010 (UTC)

AfD nomination of Acetylseryltyrosylseryliso...serine

talk

) 06:29, 18 March 2010 (UTC)

The Wikipedia Signpost: 22 March 2010

• Wikipedia-Books: Wikipedia-Books: Proposed deletion process extended, cleanup efforts

• News and notes: Explicit image featured on Wikipedia's main page

• In the news: Campaign for video, costs of crowdsourcing, iPhone app, brief headlines

• WikiProject report: Percy Jackson Task Force

• Features and admins: Approved this week

• Arbitration report: The Report on Lengthy Litigation

Read this Signpost in full · Single-page · Unsubscribe · EdwardsBot (talk) 19:04, 24 March 2010 (UTC)

The Wikipedia Signpost: 29 March 2010

• News and notes: Usability rollout, downtime, admin phishing, Wikimania scholarships and more

• In the news: Overdue correction, Critical Point of View conference, brief headlines

• Sister projects: A handful of happenings

• WikiProject report: The WikiProject Bulletin: news roundup and WikiProject Chicago feature

• Features and admins: Approved this week

• Arbitration report: The Report on Lengthy Litigation

Read this Signpost in full · Single-page · Unsubscribe · EdwardsBot (talk) 18:44, 31 March 2010 (UTC)

The Wikipedia Signpost: 5 April 2010

• News and notes: New board member, rights elections, April 1st activities, videos

• In the news: Wikipedia influences drug terminology, brief headlines

• WikiProject report: WikiProject Baseball and news roundup

• Features and admins: This week in approvals

• Arbitration report: The Report on Lengthy Litigation

• Technology report: Bugs, Repairs, and Internal Operational News

Read this Signpost in full · Single-page · Unsubscribe · EdwardsBot (talk) 03:08, 7 April 2010 (UTC)

Borneo peat swamp forests

Thanks, Mgiganteus1, for your ^{[citation needed]} edits to Borneo peat swamp forests. I see you put one in earlier on too. It does seem like an awful - astronomicla - lot of carbon (making me wonder whether it's worth pulling out plugs at bed time). I've added a few more citations, which I hope does the job. --Annielogue (talk) 14:04, 11 April 2010 (UTC)

Going for Bathyteuthis abyssicola

I see we're both after something to say about Bathyteuthis abyssicola after the species has set blank for so long. You're right, Bathyteuthoidea is from the Tree of Life web project page. I'll have to see if the citation change applies elsewhere. Cheers J.H.McDonnell (talk) 01:56, 14 April 2010 (UTC)

Bathyteuthis abyssicola

New page, fine by me, and I must say, well written. I had included the species description on the Bathyteuthis genus page and was working on the other two species to have everything related at one place. Whether this or separate pages is the best approach I know is debatable. Cheers J.H.McDonnell (talk) 13:22, 14 April 2010 (UTC)

Question on article

Hi, I've got a question about an article, you've been working on. In April 2008, you've edited the article about Cryptobiosis and added some information about the state of chemobiosis. Despite a long internet research, I can't find anything else about this topic. Have you maybe got some further information or literature for me? -Johannes Rieke 14:46, 14 April 2010 (UTC)

Hi Johannes. That's going back quite a bit - I made those edits 4 years ago (April 2006)! I can't remember exactly where I got the information from, but I think it must have been from the tardigrade Wikipedia article (article as it appeared in April 2006). Google Scholar doesn't seem to turn anything up, which does put this term into question. I will add a "citation needed" tag to the article for now and maybe see if I can dig up some references later. Cheers, mgiganteus1 (talk) 14:13, 14 April 2010 (UTC)

The Wikipedia Signpost: 12 April 2010

• Sanger allegations: Larry Sanger accuses Wikimedia of hosting illegal images

• News and notes: Studying German flagged revisions, French library agreement, German court case

• In the news: SCOTUS hopeful edited bio, criticism from article subject

• WikiProject report: WikiProject Motorcycling

• Features and admins: Approved this week

• Arbitration report: The Report on Lengthy Litigation

Read this Signpost in full · Single-page · Unsubscribe · EdwardsBot (talk) 01:17, 15 April 2010 (UTC)

The Wikipedia Signpost: 19 April 2010

• News and notes: Berlin WikiConference, Brooklyn Museum & Google.org collaborations, review backlog removed, 1 billion edits

• In the news: Study of featured article quality, Facebook's integration of Wikipedia, and more!

• WikiProject report: WikiProject Environment

• Features and admins: Approved this week

• Arbitration report: The Report on Lengthy Litigation

Read this Signpost in full · Single-page · Unsubscribe · EdwardsBot (talk) 12:29, 20 April 2010 (UTC)

Fair use rationale for File:3d construction kit 2.0 advert.jpg

Thanks for uploading or contributing to

fair use but there is not a suitable explanation or rationale as to why each specific use in Wikipedia constitutes fair use. Please go to the file description page and edit it to include a fair use rationale

.

If you have uploaded other fair use media, consider checking that you have specified the fair use rationale on those pages too. You can find a list of 'file' pages you have edited by clicking on the "my contributions" link (it is located at the very top of any Wikipedia page when you are logged in), and then selecting "File" from the dropdown box. Note that any non-free media lacking such an explanation will be deleted one week after they have been uploaded, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you. Sfan00 IMG (talk) 11:37, 25 April 2010 (UTC)

The Wikipedia Signpost: 26 April 2010

• From the team: Introducing Signpost Sidebars

• Museums conference: Wikimedians meet with museum leaders

• News and notes: Wikimedia announcements, Wikipedia advertising, and more!

• In the news: Making sausage, Jimmy Wales on TV, and more!

• Sister projects: Milestones, Openings, and Wikinews contest

• WikiProject report: WikiProject Gastropods

• Features and admins: Approved this week

• Arbitration report: The Report on Lengthy Litigation

• Technology report: Bugs, Repairs, and Internal Operational News

Read this Signpost in full · Single-page · Unsubscribe · EdwardsBot (talk) 12:51, 27 April 2010 (UTC)

Wikipedia:Featured picture candidates/Review of closure process 2

Because you've contributed to FPC either recently or in the past, I'm letting you know about the above poll on the basis of which we may develop proposals to change our procedures and criteria. Regards, Papa Lima Whiskey (talk) 22:52, 27 April 2010 (UTC)

File source problem with File:Giant squid alecton.png

Thank you for uploading File:Giant squid alecton.png. I noticed that the file's description page currently doesn't specify who created the content, so the copyright status is unclear. If you did not create this file yourself, you will need to specify the owner of the copyright. If you obtained it from a website, please add a link to the website from which it was taken, together with a brief restatement of that website's terms of use of its content. However, if the copyright holder is a party unaffiliated from the website's publisher, that copyright should also be acknowledged.

If you have uploaded other files, consider verifying that you have specified sources for those files as well. You can find a list of files you have created in your upload log. Unsourced and untagged images may be deleted one week after they have been tagged per Wikipedia's criteria for speedy deletion, F4. If the image is copyrighted and non-free, the image will be deleted 48 hours after 10:18, 4 May 2010 (UTC) per speedy deletion criterion F7. If you have any questions or are in need of assistance please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you. Sfan00 IMG (talk) 10:18, 4 May 2010 (UTC)

File source problem with File:Giant squid Alecton2.png

Thank you for uploading File:Giant squid Alecton2.png. I noticed that the file's description page currently doesn't specify who created the content, so the copyright status is unclear. If you did not create this file yourself, you will need to specify the owner of the copyright. If you obtained it from a website, please add a link to the website from which it was taken, together with a brief restatement of that website's terms of use of its content. However, if the copyright holder is a party unaffiliated from the website's publisher, that copyright should also be acknowledged.

If you have uploaded other files, consider verifying that you have specified sources for those files as well. You can find a list of files you have created in your upload log. Unsourced and untagged images may be deleted one week after they have been tagged per Wikipedia's criteria for speedy deletion, F4. If the image is copyrighted and non-free, the image will be deleted 48 hours after 10:19, 4 May 2010 (UTC) per speedy deletion criterion F7. If you have any questions or are in need of assistance please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you. Sfan00 IMG (talk) 10:19, 4 May 2010 (UTC)

The Wikipedia Signpost: 3 May 2010

• Book review: Review of The World and Wikipedia

• News and notes: iPhone app update, Vector rollout for May 13, brief news

• In the news: Government promotes Tamil Wikipedia, and more

• WikiProject report: WikiProject U.S. Roads

• Features and admins: Approved this week

• Arbitration report: The Report on Lengthy Litigation

Read this Signpost in full · Single-page · Unsubscribe · EdwardsBot (talk) 15:10, 4 May 2010 (UTC)

New Nepenthes species

Hey, I didn't see this in {{Nepenthes}}, but surely you're aware of it. Just wanted to make sure, though, in case that one slipped by you. :-) Cheers, Rkitko ^(talk) 21:17, 4 May 2010 (UTC)

Well, egg on my face. How did I miss that? I have this vague recollection that there was a new species. Oh! There it is. Are you on McPherson's email list? He sent an email a while ago about another new species but it is not on the website yet. Heard of Nepenthes gantungensis? I still have the email and can forward it if you'd like. And yes, I saw Brian's additions to the Byblis article; I was going to take care of it, but I see you did. I recall a recent CPN article about the pulvini. I think that's fine to reference. Maybe if I get motivated I'll add back some of the info sourced to that article and we'll have to wait for the next publication for the new cultivar description. Rkitko ^(talk) 22:51, 4 May 2010 (UTC)

Yep! The CPUK link has the same photos in the email. And yes, it's the Redfern list. I'll forward you the email. I received it on 6 March, 6 days after the CPUK post. He must have decided pretty quickly that it was a new species! Rkitko ^(talk) 23:20, 4 May 2010 (UTC)

The Wikipedia Signpost: 10 May 2010

• From the editor: Reviewers and reporters wanted

• Commons deletions: Porn madness

• Book review: Dan O'Sullivan's Wikipedia: a new community of practice?

• Wikipedia books launched: Wikipedia books launched worldwide

• News and notes: Public Policy and Books for All

• In the news: Commons pornography purge, and more

• WikiProject report: WikiProject Birds

• Features and admins: Approved this week

• Arbitration report: The Report on Lengthy Litigation

Read this Signpost in full · Single-page · Unsubscribe · EdwardsBot (talk) 12:51, 11 May 2010 (UTC)

The Wikipedia Signpost: 17 May 2010

• News and notes: Backstage at the British Museum

• In the news: In the news

• WikiProject report: WikiProject Essays

• Features and admins: Approved this week

• Arbitration report: The Report on Lengthy Litigation

Read this Signpost in full · Single-page · Unsubscribe · EdwardsBot (talk) 19:11, 18 May 2010 (UTC)

Fair use rationale for File:Blumea journal.jpg

Thanks for uploading or contributing to

fair use but there is not a suitable explanation or rationale as to why each specific use in Wikipedia constitutes fair use. Please go to the file description page and edit it to include a fair use rationale

.

If you have uploaded other fair use media, consider checking that you have specified the fair use rationale on those pages too. You can find a list of 'file' pages you have edited by clicking on the "my contributions" link (it is located at the very top of any Wikipedia page when you are logged in), and then selecting "File" from the dropdown box. Note that any non-free media lacking such an explanation will be deleted one week after they have been uploaded, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you. Sfan00 IMG (talk) 11:00, 19 May 2010 (UTC)

The Wikipedia Signpost: 24 May 2010

• News and notes: New puzzle globe, feature for admins, Israel's "Wikipedia Bill", unsourced bios declining

• WikiProject report: WikiProject Saints

• Features and admins: Approved this week

• Arbitration report: The Report on Lengthy Litigation

Read this Signpost in full · Single-page · Unsubscribe · EdwardsBot (talk) 04:06, 27 May 2010 (UTC)

The Wikipedia Signpost: 31 May 2010

• Photography: Making money with free photos

• News and notes: Wikimedians at Maker Faire, brief news

• WikiProject report: WikiProject Zoo

• Features and admins: Approved this week

• Arbitration report: The Report on Lengthy Litigation

Read this Signpost in full · Single-page · Unsubscribe · EdwardsBot (talk) 22:18, 1 June 2010 (UTC)

Columbus image

hello...I just wanna address your concerns a bit here. Since drive-by edit comments can't always give the explanation (by either your or me), I felt I should communicate with you here (and maybe on the Columbus talk page too).

first of all, your reason (main original reason) for removing that image was because you somehow considered it "purely decorative". I pointed out that that it's not ONLY "purely decorative" but contextually mainly COMMEMORATIVE.

that image is not just for show. Or "purely decorative", but is mainly contextually part of the Section of "Legacy", and is COMMEMORATIVE...as in the point of paintings and portraits of Columbus more recently.

Otherwise to be consistent, the other image right in the very same section should also be removed as "purely decorative"...the image of the "Replicas" of the three ships. What's really the point of THAT image then, if that's the case? The point is the same as the other image of the portrait of Columbus juxtaposed with his three ships, as pointing out the commemorative "legacy" of Columbus and his voyages. The image is useful and has no REAL need to be summarily removed.

That image has been there for MONTHS, with people appreciating and wanting it there (solid editors). The only change that was ever done to that image was by a reputable editor who simply changed what the caption said. No one (but you) ever felt the need to simply get rid of that image because of supposed "decorative" or "fair use" etc. WP Admins themselves never asked for that image to be removed from WP. The image should stay. It's interesting, commemorative, and fits fairly well in that specific section. I hope we can work this out, and see some agreement. I appreciate your consideration to this. thanks. Sweetpoet (talk) 19:04, 8 June 2010 (UTC)

The Wikipedia Signpost: 7 June 2010

• From the team: Changes to the Signpost

• News and notes: "Pending changes" trial, Chief hires, British Museum prizes, Interwiki debate, and more

• In the news: Cancer coverage, cognitive surplus, Wikipedia monarchy, and more

• Free Travel-Shirts: "Free Travel-Shirts" signed by Jimmy Wales and others purchasable

• WikiProject report: WikiProject Comedy

• Features and admins: Approved this week

• Arbitration report: The Report on Lengthy Litigation

• Technology report: Bugs, Repairs, and Internal Operational News

Read this Signpost in full · Single-page · Unsubscribe · EdwardsBot (talk) 11:59, 9 June 2010 (UTC)

Concerning Nautilus clarkanus

Do you have any information or know of any place that has up to date information about Nautilus clarkanus, the Carboniferous nautilus? I've seen a picture of the shell, and it, in my opinion, looks drastically different from the modern species, but, I haven't found any information to suggest it's been synonymized as something else.--Mr Fink (talk) 12:40, 11 June 2010 (UTC)

I suggest we write to the people behind the Treatise on Invertebrate Paleontology series. Certainly, they would have the pertinent resources.--Mr Fink (talk) 00:15, 12 June 2010 (UTC)

In the meantime, does this [4] have any relevant information for our situation?--Mr Fink (talk) 01:25, 12 June 2010 (UTC)

Then we should write to the wizards behind the Treatise, then.--Mr Fink (talk) 02:19, 12 June 2010 (UTC)

The Wikipedia Signpost: 14 June 2010

• News and notes: Pending changes goes live, first state-funded Wikipedia project concludes, brief news

• In the news: Hoaxes in France and at university, Wikipedia used in Indian court, Is Wikipedia a cult?, and more

• WikiProject report: WikiProject Guild of Copy Editors

• Features and admins: Approved this week

• Arbitration report: The Report on Lengthy Litigation

• Technology report: Bugs, Repairs, and Internal Operational News

Read this Signpost in full · Single-page · Unsubscribe · EdwardsBot (talk) 20:52, 15 June 2010 (UTC)

NO valid reason to delete that image

why did you have to do that exactly? Why did you have to get THAT uptight about that particular photo, and try to have it deleted? It HAD rationale and tags for it, so what was your big problem with it? Why be so rude and uptight? You're the only one who has had an issue with that photo, and its placement in the article. What was the big problem with the picture? I mean, in general. What you did was NOT necessary, and comes off as a bit cold and rude and spiteful. (Just being honest and frank.) The ONLY reason you did that disrespectful and spiteful thing was cuz you did not want that picture on that article. (Your reason for removing it was not valid, as it was NOT "purely decorative" but was mainly COMMEMORATIVE, fitting that particular section.) And once you saw that I was not putting up with your uptight attitude and edit about it, you decided to (unnecessarily) have the thing deleted all together. What you did reeked of weaselishness. And was just plain rude. I'm uploading the image again anyway (at some point), with rationale, tags, etc...., and will simply put the image back on the article at a later date.

Again, what you did was NOT really called for. That image violated nothing really. Yet you somehow SPUN it that way. The image had sources and rationales for it, whether you personally agreed with them or not. It's not your place really to do that cold uptight rude disrespectful nonsense. I don't appreciate it. What you did I'm sure you did mainly out of spite. You PERSONALLY for whatever uptight reason did not like that image, so you went out of your way to simply remove it from the article, even if it meant deleting the image from WP altogether. NOT COOL. I'm just letting you know that at some future date (not soon) the picture WILL go back. thank you... Sweetpoet (talk) 01:30, 17 June 2010 (UTC)

Hi Mgiganteus1, I just wanted to write to note that the editor who wrote the above here on your talk page was warned recently for incivility (here is that noticeboard discussion and here is that warning and another and another) and was previously blocked for edit warring (here is that noticeboard discussion). He was also blocked for image upload issues (Sweetpoets block log), so it may be worth reporting if Sweetpot follows through on his reinsertion threats. Happy editing! Novaseminary (talk) 14:43, 17 June 2010 (UTC)

Yes, Nova...it's par for your course to chime in like that, and be the rude trouble-maker that you are, and harass me and stalk over my business that has nothing to do with you. Hence why I told you off. You like to run to people and get them in unwarranted trouble for this or that. Stoking the fire, neurotically. And show off your biases. Leaving facts out, while exaggerating what actually does go on. (then you wonder why I can't stand you....) You notice that the Admin did not think you had a case overall though, didn't you. As for this case, which you AUTOMATICALLY think I'm wrong in, cuz you're not really objective we know, and you're also uptight like Mg is, so birds of a feather, well no one but him (and maybe you too lol) would have a problem with that image, and I merely stated (in strong terms that annoy you cuz you're hyper-sensitive in many ways, and I'm sure you'll report this too cuz that's what you do), that it was not warranted and it was disrespectful. Kinda like the nonsense you do, sir. And even if he did have a warrant, that business is BETWEEN HIM AND ME. NOT YOU, for you to butt in and be like this.

And what you're doing with me is bordering on harassment (against WP policy), as you show now that you won't leave me or my business alone. But for some reason are creepily watching over me, to make things difficult, NO MATTER what the issue is, or whom with. You got serious issues, bro. Serious. No one's perfect. I never had THIS much problem or aggravation or dis-heartening insanity with any other editor. And believe me, I've had my run-ins. But not quite like you. (In fact there are people I've had disputes with that I'm actually cool with and work well with...I never see that happening with you, cuz you just seem different, unfortunately.) I TRIED to be cool and polite and reasonable with you, and civil, to some extent, but you chose to have this pattern and goal TO SIMPLY HAVE ME KICKED OFF AND YOU WOULD USE ANYTHING. Real or imagined, big or small. But I find something seriously disjointed and petty and mean-spirited in you. Not cool, and not necessary. Anyway, like I said, this junk you did here, cuz you're a stalker type now with me, and you have me on your watch list no doubt (kinda creepy right there) is NO surprise, as I already knew how you were, from the get-go. Sweetpoet (talk) 18:52, 17 June 2010 (UTC)

Orphaned non-free image File:Jack the Ripper- The Final Solution.jpg

You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that images for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media

).

If you have uploaded other unlicensed media, please check whether they're used in any articles or not. You can find a list of "file" pages you have edited by clicking on the "

talk

) 06:53, 22 June 2010 (UTC)

The Wikipedia Signpost: 21 June 2010

• Sister projects: Picture of the Year results declared on Wikimedia Commons

• News and notes: Collaboration with the British Museum and in Serbia, Interaction with researchers, and more

• In the news: Wikipedia better than Britannica, Pending changes as a victory of tradition, and more

• WikiProject report: WikiProject U2

• Features and admins: Approved this week

• Arbitration report: The Report on Lengthy Litigation

• Technology report: Bugs, Repairs, and Internal Operational News

Read this Signpost in full · Single-page · Unsubscribe · EdwardsBot (talk) 19:07, 22 June 2010 (UTC)

Disputed non-free use rationale for File:3d construction kit 2.0 advert.jpg

Thank you for uploading

image copyright tag

; descriptions for files used under the non-free content policy require both a copyright tag and a non-free use rationale.

If it is determined that the file does not qualify under the non-free content policy, it might be deleted by an administrator within a few days in accordance with our criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions, please ask them at the media copyright questions page. Thank you. Sfan00 IMG (talk) 10:18, 25 June 2010 (UTC)

Reviewer Right Granted

Hello. Your account has been granted the "reviewer" userright, allowing you to review other users' edits on certain flagged pages. Pending changes, also known as flagged protection, is currently undergoing a two-month trial scheduled to end 15 August 2010.

Reviewers can review edits made by users who are not

autoconfirmed to articles placed under pending changes. Pending changes is applied to only a small number of articles, similarly to how semi-protection is applied but in a more controlled way for the trial. The list of articles with pending changes awaiting review is located at Special:OldReviewedPages

.

For the guideline on reviewing, see

here, and the general policy for the trial can be found here

.

If you do not want this userright, you may ask any administrator to remove it for you at any time. The Helpful One 17:05, 28 June 2010 (UTC)

The Wikipedia Signpost: 28 June 2010

• Objectionable material: Board resolution on offensive content

• News and notes: 2010–15 plan, Smithsonian outreach, Teaching Wikipedia, brief news

• In the news: Wikipedia controlled by pedophiles, left-wing trolls, Islamofascists and Communist commandos?

• Public Policy Initiative: Introducing the Public Policy Initiative

• WikiProject report: Talking with WikiProject Ships

• Features and admins: Approved this week

• Arbitration report: The Report on Lengthy Litigation

• Technology report: Bugs, Repairs, and Internal Operational News

Read this Signpost in full · Single-page · Unsubscribe · EdwardsBot (talk) 21:37, 29 June 2010 (UTC)

The Wikipedia Signpost: 5 July 2010

• News and notes: WMF expansion, community hires, award for MediaWiki, admin recall

• In the news: Accidentally anonymized donation, democratized learning and more

• Wikimania preview: Gearing up for Wikimania in Gdańsk

• WikiProject report: WikiProject Children's Literature

• Features and admins: This week's highlights

• Arbitration report: The Report on Lengthy Litigation

• Technology report: Bugs, Repairs, and Internal Operational News

Read this Signpost in full · Single-page · Unsubscribe · EdwardsBot (talk) 16:00, 6 July 2010 (UTC)

Octopus

Hi. You seem to know quite a bit about the octopus. Perhaps you could clarify something for me. It is my (perhaps flawed) understanding that the plural of "octopus" should be "octopi", when referring to the animal, in general, and that it should be "octopuses" when it is referring to different species of octopus. Is this incorrect?

talk

) 04:06, 10 July 2010 (UTC)

File

Hi. I noticed you removed the file because misleading composite image. Is there a way to find out in general if an image is composed? --

IdaShaw (talk

) 04:41, 11 July 2010 (UTC)

Hi

Would you mind explaining this edit? I was especially puzzled by the edit summary. Per

WP:MOSFLAG. Best, --John (talk

) 02:51, 13 July 2010 (UTC)

In fact,

WP:BURDEN does not require the editor wishing to restore material to a page "to demonstrate consensus". What it requires are reliable sources. The article is replete with reliable sources in this case, as demonstrated here. Consensus would however be required if an editor wished to remove the flags. Such an editor would need to demonstrate why images of the flags have no relevance to the choices Paul made. --Epipelagic (talk

) 05:19, 13 July 2010 (UTC)

The Wikipedia Signpost: 12 July 2010

• UK COI edits: British politicians accused of WP cover-ups

• News and notes: Board changes, Wikimania, Public Policy Initiative

• In the news: Foundation plans, David Barton, dangerous occasional glitches

• Discussion report: Article ownership, WikiProjects vs. Manual of Style, Unverifiable village

• WikiProject report: WikiProject Apple Inc.

• Features and admins: The best of the week

• Arbitration report: The Report on Lengthy Litigation

• Technology report: Bugs, Repairs, and Internal Operational News

Read this Signpost in full · Single-page · Unsubscribe · EdwardsBot (talk) 21:01, 13 July 2010 (UTC)

Have you considered joining WikiProject Cryptozoology? We are a group of editors dedicated to improving the overall quality of Wikipedia's coverage on cryptozoology. If you would like to join, simply add your name to the list of participants. Please see our list of open tasks for ideas on where to get started. If you have any questions, don't hesitate to ask at the project talk page. We look forward to working with you in the future! ~~~~

Colossal Squid Edit

WP:CRYZOO. If you have any questions or disagreements with this template, please discuss on the source project's talk page here.--Gniniv (talk

) 10:10, 17 July 2010 (UTC)

Source for Colossal Squid Article

I refer you to the

Colossal Squid it still qualifies as a largely "hidden" animal.^[1]

I agree that the Colossal squid is not considered to be a former cryptid by modern scientists. However, considering that scientists still know little about it and its habitat (the point I was making with the above source) the Colossal squid and its relatives are of interest to Cryptozoology, which is literally the study of "hidden" animals.--Gniniv (talk) 11:12, 17 July 2010 (UTC)

I do not wish to start an edit war (believe me, I've had plenty of experience with them) and I will stop attempting to add the template to the

Colossal Squid article until your doubts are satisfied on its warranting inclusion.--Gniniv (talk

) 11:14, 17 July 2010 (UTC)

1. ^ Thawing colossal squid continues to reveal information Radio New Zealand.

The Wikipedia Signpost: 19 July 2010

• News and notes: Politician defends editing own article, Google translation, Row about a small Wikipedia

• In the news: Wikimania, Former Wikimedia employee looks back, Editing controversial articles

• Vandalism: Vandalism edits fool media and a government, become object of bets

• WikiProject report: Up close with WikiProject Animals

• Features and admins: The best of the week

• Arbitration report: ArbCom to appoint CU/OS positions after dumping election results

• Technology report: Bugs, Repairs, and Internal Operational News

Read this Signpost in full · Single-page · Unsubscribe · EdwardsBot (talk) 16:13, 19 July 2010 (UTC)

File source problem with File:Giant squid west coast.png

Thank you for uploading File:Giant squid west coast.png. I noticed that the file's description page currently doesn't specify who created the content, so the copyright status is unclear. If you did not create this file yourself, you will need to specify the owner of the copyright. If you obtained it from a website, please add a link to the website from which it was taken, together with a brief restatement of that website's terms of use of its content. However, if the copyright holder is a party unaffiliated from the website's publisher, that copyright should also be acknowledged.

If you have uploaded other files, consider verifying that you have specified sources for those files as well. You can find a list of files you have created in your upload log. Unsourced and untagged images may be deleted one week after they have been tagged per Wikipedia's criteria for speedy deletion, F4. If the image is copyrighted and non-free, the image will be deleted 48 hours after 16:20, 25 July 2010 (UTC) per speedy deletion criterion F7. If you have any questions or are in need of assistance please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you. Sfan00 IMG (talk) 16:20, 25 July 2010 (UTC)

Altered speedy deletion rationale: ARE WE ON THE RIGHT TRACK OF LIFE ?

Hello Mgiganteus1. I am just letting you know that I deleted ARE WE ON THE RIGHT TRACK OF LIFE ?, a page you tagged for speedy deletion, under a different criterion from the one you provided, which doesn't fit the page in question. Thank you. —fetch·comms 22:40, 25 July 2010 (UTC)

The Wikipedia Signpost: 26 July 2010

• News and notes: New interwiki project improves biographies, and other news

• In the news: Wikipedia leads in customer satisfaction, Google Translate and India, Citizendium transition, Jimbo's media accolade

• WikiProject report: These Are the Voyages of WikiProject Star Trek

• Features and admins: The best of the week

• Discussion report: Controversial e-mail proposal, Invalid AfD

• Arbitration report: The Report on Lengthy Litigation

• Technology report: Bugs, Repairs, and Internal Operational News

Read this Signpost in full · Single-page · Unsubscribe · EdwardsBot (talk) 03:32, 27 July 2010 (UTC)

Frilled shark clip

Hello my friend. Was the clip a copyvio because it was used by snotr without authorization? Just so I know for the future. Best. Anna Frodesiak (talk) 03:58, 27 July 2010 (UTC)

Hello, Mgiganteus1. You have new messages at Anna Frodesiak's talk page.
You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.

Orphaned non-free image File:Nepenthes dubia x Nepenthes izumiae.jpg

You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that images for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media

).

PLEASE NOTE:

• I am a
  bot
  , and will therefore not be able to answer your questions.
• I will remove the request for deletion if the file is used in an article once again.
• If you receive this notice after the image is deleted, and you want to restore the image, click here to file an un-delete request.
• To opt out of these bot messages, add {{bots|deny=DASHBot}} to your talk page.
• If you believe the bot has made an error, please turn it off here and leave a message on my owner's talk page.

Thank you. DASHBot (talk) 05:32, 29 July 2010 (UTC)

Photo priorities?

Hey! So, this week is the ICPS conference and I'll be going. I was hoping to convince many of the participants to stand still long enough for a photo or two for our articles about them. I know Allen Lowrie and Stewart McPherson will be there; Siggi Hartmeyer should be there, too, and a photo would go nicely on the Drosera hartmeyerorum article whenever I get around to updating it. Available plants will likely be common, but just in case, what's your top priority for plant photos? Any Nepenthes articles that are imageless? Let me know how I can be helpful since this is a good opportunity. Cheers, Rkitko ^(talk) 03:40, 2 August 2010 (UTC)

Not home yet, but the conference is over. I have so many photos to upload, but unfortunately few of them are new Nepenthes. I think I have some Heliamphora, Drosera and Sarracenia var. and subsp. ones that we didn't have before. Interesting, over all. I plan to write up a trip report and share it later. The most interesting part was the heated debate at the very end in a discussion over ex situ conservation and CITES permit requirements. Rob Cantley even reported that the N. clipeata project has failed, but I feel somehow that was more widely known that I realized. Allen Lowrie promised new Drosera species in the next few months and Fernando Rivadavia mentioned that there are more Genlisea species to tease out from those species complexes. Lots to look forward to. Cheers, Rkitko ^(talk) 12:06, 9 August 2010 (UTC)

The Wikipedia Signpost: 2 August 2010

• News and notes: Canadian political edits, Swedish royal wedding, Italian "right of reply" bill, Chapter reports

• In the news: Gardner and Sanger on why people edit Wikipedia, Fancy and frugal reading devices, Medical article assessed

• WikiProject report: Always Expanding: WikiProject Images and Media

• Features and admins: The best of the week

• Arbitration report: Tricky and Lengthy Dispute Resolution

• Technology report: Major MediaWiki release, password security, vulnerable MediaWiki installations, and more

Read this Signpost in full · Single-page · Unsubscribe · EdwardsBot (talk) 23:32, 2 August 2010 (UTC)

Your reverts at Dinosaur

Thanks for making it clear that the

WP:BOLD does not apply to Dinosaur, I was trying to clarify the article so that editors less-experienced in the field wouldn't fall into the same traps I was in assuming the cladistics range. Evidently one needs to be part of the in-crowd to make edits there. Sorry for wasting your time. Icalanise (talk

) 07:12, 9 August 2010 (UTC)

The Wikipedia Signpost: 9 August 2010

• News and notes: FBI requests takedown of seal, Public Policy advisors and ambassadors, Cary Bass leaving, new Research Committee

• In the news: Wikinews interviews Umberto Eco, and more

• Admin stats: RfA drought worsens in 2010—wikigeneration gulf emerging

• Sister projects: Strategic Planning update

• WikiProject report: Chocks away for WikiProject Aviation

• Features and admins: The best of the week

• Arbitration report: Tricky and Lengthy Dispute Resolution

• Technology report: Bugs, Repairs, and Internal Operational News

Read this Signpost in full · Single-page · Unsubscribe · EdwardsBot (talk) 00:58, 10 August 2010 (UTC)

WP Cryptozoology in the Signpost

"WikiProject Report" would like to focus on WikiProject Cryptozoology for a Signpost article to be published this month. This is an excellent opportunity to draw attention to your efforts and attract new members to the project. Would you be willing to participate in an interview? If so, here are the questions for the interview. Just add your response below each question and feel free to skip any questions that you don't feel comfortable answering. Also, if you know anyone else who would like to participate in the interview, please share this with them. Have a great day. -Mabeenot (talk) 16:49, 10 August 2010 (UTC)

Evolution of Chinese from Homo Erectus

Dear Mgiganteus1,

Thank you for your good faith edits! I am a scientist and I would like to introduce to you the peer reviewed scientific evidence supporting a separate independent evolution of the modern Chinese people from an archaic form of Homo Erectus.

Please watch this: 1.) http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CJnuMx8KD84&feature=related

Below I have provided the results of scientific

Homo Erectus. These scientific studies have both been published in peer reviewed scientific journals

and are well received by the scientific community. Please take some time to read them and feel free to ask me any questions regarding human evolution.

1.)Genetics Society of America's Genetics Journal, "Testing for Archaic Hominin Admixture on the X Chromosome: Model Likelihoods for the Modern Human RRM2P4 Region From Summaries of Genealogical Topology Under the Structured Coalescent" by Murray P. Cox, Fernando L. Mendez, Tatiana M. Karafet, Maya Metni Pilkington, Sarah B. Kingan, Giovanni Destro-Bisol, Beverly I. Strassmann and Michael F. Hammer.

2.)

Oxford Journals, Evidence for Archaic Asian Ancestry on the Human X Chromosome

by Daniel Garrigan, Zahra Mobasher, Tesa Severson, Jason A. Wilder and Michael F. Hammer

Thank you

Dear Mgiganteus,

I have offered to open a discussion with you but you have apparently been avoiding a scientific dialogue with me. I implore you to discuss with me your opinions.

Thank you! —Preceding unsigned comment added by 68.222.236.154 (talk) 00:32, 11 August 2010 (UTC)

New scientific evidence supports a partial Multi-Regional evolution of humans & the independent evolution of the Chinese from Homo Pekinensis, the Chinese species of Homo Erectus

Dear Mgiganteus1,

Thank you for your good faith edits!

As you probably already know I am a scientist specializing in the fields of anthropology and paleoanthropology and you must realize that I have no intention, never had and never will, of so-called "edit warring." While you and umerous other editors have been attempting to push their personal POV "that Chinese are indeed descended from anatomically modern

Homo Erectus Pekinensis

. Below I have provided you links with irrefutable scientific evidence showing that the Neanderthals in Europe interbred with African Homo Sapiens in much the same way that some Chinese Homo Erectus Pekinensis have interbred with African Homo Sapiens. This is supported by the fact many Chinese today carry uniques genes from archaic humans such as Homo Erectus Pekinensis, this has been published in peer reviewed scientific journals which I have provided links below for you to read.

Numerous Archaeological fossil studies and as well as the relatively recent

shovel-shaped incisors, and high frequencies of metopic sutures, which are virtually absent in modern day European, Middle Eastern, and African populations but widely present in the modern population of the Han Chinese

. This presents fossil evidence strongly suggesting a direct evolutionary lineage of the modern Chinese people from their ancestors of the species Homo Erectus Pekinensis.

I would like to introduce to you the peer reviewed scientific evidence supporting a separate independent evolution of the modern Chinese people from an archaic species of Homo Erectus, specifically the separate species known as Homo Pekinensis. Below I have provided the results of scientific DNA studies that provide strong irrefutable support for an independent origin of the Chinese from Homo Pekinensis. These scientific studies have both been published inpeer reviewed scientific journal and are well received by the scientific community. Please take some time to read them and feel free to ask me any questions regarding human evolution.

1.) Genetics Society of America's Genetics Journal, "Testing for Archaic Hominin Admixture on the X Chromosome: Model Likelihoods for the Modern Human RRM2P4 Region From Summaries of Genealogical Topology Under the Structured Coalescent" by Murray P. Cox, Fernando L. Mendez, Tatiana M. Karafet, Maya Metni Pilkington, Sarah B. Kingan, Giovanni Destro-Bisol, Beverly I. Strassmann and Michael F. Hammer.

2.)

Oxford Journals, Evidence for Archaic Asian Ancestry on the Human X Chromosome

by Daniel Garrigan, Zahra Mobasher, Tesa Severson, Jason A. Wilder and Michael F. Hammer

3.) National Geographic Society Peking Man (Homo Pekinensis) Lived in China 200,000 Years Earlier Than Previously Thought

It is tempting to simply dismiss the new

humans, the modern day Chinese

people. But unfortunately, the reality of human evolution during the past 4 billions of life on our planet Earth is not as clear cut as the "out of Africa" theory attempts to address it. The "out of Africa" theory tries to say that "ALL" humans are descended from the same group of anatomically modern "

Homo Erectus

that we are talking about human beings. And even though they are a classified as a separate species of human beings, nothing can take away their "humanity," for if one of them were dressed up in a modern day suit, they would still be recognized as "humans."

Please watch the evidence on these links:

1.) Scientific evidence from the Chinese Academy of Sciences
2.) All Non Africans Living Today Are Part Neanderthal
3.) New evidence that Neanderthals interbred with Humans

Adding further support to the Multi-regional theory of human evolution are the recent

Homo Neanderthalensis

.

Please read the following evidence:

1.) NewScientist Neanderthal genome reveals interbreeding with humans
2.) Archaic admixture in the human genome, Neanderthal genes in modern humans
3.) Signs of Neanderthals Mating With Humans
4.) Discovery News "Neanderthals, Humans Interbred, DNA Proves"
5.) USA Today Neanderthals and humans interbred, fossils indicate
6.) BBC "Neanderthals 'mated with modern humans'"
7.) Official report Neanderthal/Homo Sapien interbred
8.) Cosmos Humans and Neanderthals interbred, according to our anatomy
9.) Neanderthals live on in DNA of humans

Thank you! —Preceding unsigned comment added by 75.182.49.198 (talk) 22:04, 13 August 2010 (UTC)

The Signpost: 16 August 2010

• News and notes: Book publisher apologizes for plagiarizing photos by Wikipedians, brief news

• Spam attacks: Large scale vandalism revealed to be "study" by university researcher

• In the news: Supportive communication and missing incentives on Wikipedia, and more

• WikiProject report: A Pit Stop with WikiProject NASCAR

• Features and admins: The best of the week

• Arbitration report: ArbCom releases names of CU/OS applicants after delay

• Technology report: Bugs, Repairs, and Internal Operational News

Single-page · Unsubscribe · EdwardsBot (talk

) 08:33, 17 August 2010 (UTC)

Suggested deletion of Giant Target

From everything I've read, the Giant Target page meets criteria for a page existing. In addition, there are myriad pages about bands that have far less information and references than the Giant Target page. All the information contained in the page is objective and supported by references and/or external links. In my opinion, common sense dictates that there is enough evidence to support the existence of this page. If you continue to contest it's validity, please provide more specific details.

Mozltovcoktail (talk) 21:58, 20 August 2010 (UTC)

Zedonk /Zorse

Please stop undoing these merges. There was a discussion carried out on the talk page of Zorse, and after several days no one had brought in a dissenting opinion. If you have a differing opinion, please take it to the Zebroid talk page, but at the moment you are going against consensus.

Also, as a slightly off-topic note, have you considered archiving your talk page? It's really large, and even on a fast computer it takes a while to load. Dana boomer (talk) 02:51, 21 August 2010 (UTC)

Deep sea Squid

Hi!
I have found a strange squid from the deep sea. But I can't identify him, what you know him? Best regards--Citron (talk) 22:51, 21 August 2010 (UTC) Ha! Gonatus fabricii? --Citron (talk) 23:09, 21 August 2010 (UTC)

Octopus levis

Thanks for your minor edits to this article. It's nice to know there's someone more in the know than me checking I'm not slipping up too much :) J Milburn (talk) 22:38, 22 August 2010 (UTC)

Species ID confirmed?

Were you able to confirm that the species is Sepioteuthis lessoniana? I noticed the photographer was being speculative about it. Papa Lima Whiskey (talk) 17:39, 23 August 2010 (UTC)

Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk:Mgiganteus1/Archive_3&oldid=1166513866"