User talk:Ptcamn/Archive 4

Kenkai

A

Hi there Ptcamn. You may hv seen already, but if you have some time would appreciate you looking over this discussion at the Aztec calendar talkpg, concerning an ext link to an animated "aztec" calendar (found here, scroll down to the bottom to see it; there's also apparently a book associated with it). I have raised my concerns there re the accuracy of how these sources portray the workings and interpretations of the aztec calendrical systems. Possibly I'm mistaken and it really does show something useful and accurate about calendrics, but if you have any observations to make would be glad to hear them. Cheers, --cjllw ʘ TALK 07:48, 9 May 2008 (UTC)

On Psychatog, which you created or substantially expanded. If you know of another interesting fact from a recently created article, then please suggest it on the Did you know? talk page .

I've always been a Sligh player myself; would love to one day restore that article. --Bedford 22:54, 17 May 2008 (UTC)

If you're going to do this, wouldn't it be simpler to change the taxobox to automatically do this? (Watching for replies) - UtherSRG (talk) 21:44, 31 May 2008 (UTC)

Wouldn't that require splitting the name and the year into separate parameters? (And, I guess, another parameter to display parentheses.) Or are templates smart enough to pick out the year from a string on their own? --Ptcamn (talk) 21:50, 31 May 2008 (UTC)

• While the article at present may only deal with the historic group, that does not mean it could not be expanded to include present day Afghan Australians. The fact that not all people described as Afghans came from Afghanistan is not in my view an overriding consideration in having an article outside the naming convention resolved in discussion at WikiProject Demographics of Australia which was that articles to be named in format Booian Australian - no hyphen , no plural - see Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Demographics of Australia/Archive 1. The name Afghan Australian is perfectly legitimate in terms of the Wikipedia MOS. --Matilda ^talk 22:12, 1 June 2008 (UTC)
  • Agreed that change in scope would justify the change in name and the change in scope is not required, rather an article on
    Afghan Australians is required which may refer back to the article on the historic group --Matilda ^talk 22:35, 1 June 2008 (UTC)
    • No that isn't what I said - rather - to clarify- I said an article on the people is required and it will refer to the article on the camel drivers but both articles to stay (ah but you have deleted your comment so I think although I didn't make myself clear enough you understand now what I was getting at) --Matilda ^talk 22:46, 1 June 2008 (UTC)

Hi, I have opened a new discussion thread at

If you look here, you'll see a massive pileon in virtual unanimous opposition to the creation of redirects from species to genus (unless there is only one species in the genus). It is considered much better to leave these as redlinks, rather than direct someone where they didn't actually want to go. I'm going to nuke the ones you've created today.

Cheers, Hesperian 11:25, 22 July 2008 (UTC)

... which brings me to my other point. I noticed these redirects while checking your contributions to see if you're still active, seeing as I have used your name in vain here. Hesperian 11:25, 22 July 2008 (UTC)

Hi,

Do you know Shona? Could you check out the article, I tried to add the IPA to the alphabet, but I don't know what I'm doing. kwami (talk) 09:58, 18 August 2008 (UTC)

hi there :)

i've been noticing you've been doing some taxo work lately; thanks for this, you're doing mostly a very decent job. just wanted to give you a few hints:

• if you create new arthropod pages, add something like {{ArthropodTalk|Stub|Low}} to its Talk page, this way the page is easily found by people working on arthropods. Spiders got their own project, so replace ArthropodTalk by WPSpiders.
• columns-list doesn't seem to work the way you intended.
• if you're doing spider genus pages, check the respective list (eg. List of Tetragnathidae species). I update these whenever the world spider catalog is updated, so you can mostly just cut'n'paste from there.
• when doing genus or species pages, it's better to shorten the hierarchy, ie. not include every above hierarchy, but only the five or so important ones.
• somebody already mentioned this: please no mass redirects from species to genus. this way it's very hard to find out which species already have a page, and which need one.

keep up the good work, if you have any questions regarding this stuff, leave me a note :) -- cheers Sarefo (talk) 13:25, 17 September 2008 (UTC)

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