User talk:Cygnis insignis/Archive 3

-- hunted for food in the 18th century?

Hi. Where did you obtain the following information: "Targeting of this species by the whaling industry, for food, is recorded in the eighteenth century". SaberToothedWhale (talk) 22:58, 11 January 2012 (UTC)

Hi. From the ref you appeared to have found. I'm not sure whether the century error was mine, or whether MarineBio had corrected this later; I vaguely recall being unable to go back and fix some things (I was having some problems saving edits around that time). The edit was an after thought, I would have been focusing on the species in the Southern hemisphere, [1] Cheers, cygnis insignis 09:11, 24 January 2012 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification

Hi. When you recently edited Dave Evans Bicentennial Tree, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Department of Environment and Conservation (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver). Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 10:22, 25 January 2012 (UTC)

autopatrolled

User:Guillaume2303 suggested that you should receive autopatrolled rights, so your contributions are listed automatically as patrolled in New Pages--since the pages you have been writing seem fully suitable both to him and myself, this would enable the New Page patrollers to concentrate better on pages which are more likely to have problems. But I see that earlier in 2011 you requested not to have this right, so I don't want to change it unless you're willing. Please let me know on my talk page. DGG ( talk ) 18:47, 9 February 2012 (UTC)

Dingo

Who is really going to look up the Dingo and not notice the missing taxobox like we have for every other animal? It's in the news, just so you know, so other editors may descend on this one. I'm sensing this is a very "touchy" article I've discovered, with two different articles for the same animal. I direct you to this: "The dingo is legendary as Australia's wild dog, though it also occurs in Southeast Asia."[2] I tend to trust National Geographic over Wikipedia articles, generally. So, "The Australian Dingo is a free-roaming wild dog unique to the continent of Australia...", as the first sentence, doesn't look correct. It is not unique to the continent of Australia, and plenty of sources prove this. Why is the poorly-written other article (which has 13 references to the Dingo article's 134) worthy of the taxobox? Doc talk 07:21, 24 February 2012 (UTC)

Note - BRD is a suggestion, really, a way to avoid edit-warring. I'm not at all sure what you meant with your edit summary of "User needs to include the *D* part of BRD, 1 taxon, 1 taxobox. Two arts are a mess, this isn't helping" when you reverted me. Now, if you leave that as your only discussion and do not address this, that ain't exactly in the "spirit" of BRD. I would like a decent explanation as to why there is no taxobox in this article. If you do not attempt to provide one, I will reinsert it, as it only improves the article. Take your time: but do please respond, when you have the chance. Doc talk 07:37, 24 February 2012 (UTC)

Please undo your second reversion of my removal of that taxobox. cygnis insignis 16:06, 25 February 2012 (UTC)

Elephant taxbox

The taxbox was added by another user, so whether discussion there was before, the consensus now is that it stays. LittleJerry (talk) 16:46, 26 November 2012 (UTC)

Move request on Thomas Keightley (historian)

As past editor to the article, you are encouraged to participate in the discussion at Talk:Thomas Keightley (historian) to rename Thomas Keightley (historian)→Thomas Keightley since requirements of usage and lasting significance under WP:PRIMARYTOPIC appear to be easily met. Also "Thomas Keightley (historian)" would seem to be a misleading label to many nowadays who recognize him as mythology/folklore writer primarily. --Kiyoweap (talk) 13:58, 9 January 2014 (UTC)

Widow spiders

Hi, I noticed that back on March 8th of 2009 you created a redirect from Widow spider to Latrodectus stating "Ambiguous, misleading, and geocentric name: move as per KOJ, MF". I do not know what "KOJ" or "MF" stand for, and so am having difficulty understanding the reasoning behind the redirect decision. I am considering requesting a move of Latrodectus back over to Widow spider in accordance with WP:COMMONNAME, and have created an RfC on the talk page for Latrodectus but don't want to propose such a move without having discussed it with the relevant interested parties first. Can you tell me more about the decision back in 2009 and explain for me what "KOJ" and "MF" stand for? Thank you! --KDS4444^Talk (August 21, 2014, 5:34 AM)

ygm

Hello, Cygnis insignis. Please check your email; you've got mail!
It may take a few minutes from the time the email is sent for it to show up in your inbox. You can at any time by removing the {{You've got mail}} or {{ygm}} template.

User:JarrahTree 12:01, 2 May 2015 (UTC) (aka sats)

wow

great to hear from you, will check! give a call sometime! JarrahTree 23:09, 23 October 2015 (UTC)

mate, good to see you editing JarrahTree 02:13, 30 January 2016 (UTC)

Just dipping my toe in to see how chilly it is, so a warm welcome from you is much appreciated. There are problems within the culture here that make contributing content proper a difficult process, I expend more effort on trying to ignore the political machinations of career wikipedians and warrior princesses. cygnis insignis 05:57, 30 January 2016 (UTC)

pls ring me - you still got my mobile number? JarrahTree 06:17, 30 January 2016 (UTC)

Done [insert officious icon with big tick] :) cygnis insignis 08:46, 30 January 2016 (UTC)

 Done JarrahTree 09:00, 30 January 2016 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for October 24

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Australian Legendary Tales, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Athenaeum. Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 11:04, 24 October 2015 (UTC)

ArbCom elections are now open!

Hi,
You appear to be eligible to vote in the current Arbitration Committee election. The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to enact binding solutions for disputes between editors, primarily related to serious behavioural issues that the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the ability to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail. If you wish to participate, you are welcome to review the candidates' statements and submit your choices on the voting page. For the Election committee, MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 13:32, 24 November 2015 (UTC)

have no fear

elizabeth quay jetty is indeed in my opinion an oxymoron the quay has on its west side a structure to cope with the swan river transperth ferries, for some reason people think it is a jetty, it is really just a part of the quay, rather than a separate structure, but hey, the edit wars about eliz quay and its development make it a bit of a ditch. hundreds of people walked around it at the weekend, just to see the affectations on the side of the ditch. dont let anyone fool you, there is not much to see. just watching the people (I did so on saturday and sunday nights by accident, I was utilising the indian restaurant that looks over part of it) is fun enough, watching people, taking selfies, looking at not much to see. but then wiser persons than I have created the article. JarrahTree 15:55, 1 February 2016 (UTC)

I was worried that my favourite restaurant had disappeared ... thanks for putting my mind at rest. Perhaps the gubberment should have asked its unwitting financiers "how much would you like to pay?" for the redevelopment. I have no objection to the use of my monarch's name, just the wadjella scroungers she has let build their cementaries amidst sweeping plains of bitumen and green desert. Are the bull sharks given a berth at the jetty? Have the dolphins thought better of their return to the area? What about the eroding slopes of mount Eliza (no relation), any hope that that will be stabilised with more anzac memorials and 'short term' accommodation? cygnis insignis 17:17, 1 February 2016 (UTC)

ahhrgh me hearty, the waiting room has ethiopian spelling, and a very mesopotamian accent, with a distinct possibility of the remains of jellyfish and discarded prophylactics. but then, we live in a very strange world. JarrahTree 01:11, 2 February 2016 (UTC)

the call from the wild

arrghh me hearty, you shoudda had enough salt spray to return here - four months, four months, does this mean me and my assistant need to return to your shores with trinkets or gifts or something or other JarrahTree 02:34, 9 October 2016 (UTC)

ArbCom Elections 2016: Voting now open!

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

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

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

ArbCom 2017 election voter message

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

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

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

shivering timbers

you have edited after... what happened.. you watched a pirates of the carribean on the tv tonight - was that it? it seems too long since I have slung the metaphors mixed and jumbled your way - cripes pull out a groper for the barbie, hold the drinks, bring on the dancing sheep, whats happening? JarrahTree 14:31, 23 June 2018 (UTC)

Hey nony nony no, no baboon slings here - Singapore slings from the ole hotel maybe, shakespearian slings of fortune perhaps... JarrahTree 14:43, 28 June 2018 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for June 26

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. An automated process has detected that when you recently edited Corybas sulcatus, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Corybas (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver). Such links are usually incorrect, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of unrelated topics with similar titles. (Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.)

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 09:40, 26 June 2018 (UTC)

1914 botanist birth date

makes her now 104 - is she still alive? JarrahTree 15:34, 1 July 2018 (UTC)

Realised my mistake when slicing vegetables, then my finger. Cheers, cygnis insignis 15:49, 1 July 2018 (UTC)

it ok I have changed it - and added the full trove wikipedia thingoes - trust the cut wasnt too deep... JarrahTree 15:56, 1 July 2018 (UTC)

Thanks, I have left a wake of new articles that haven't got WA and biota tags. Cut is forgotten when there is midnight pizza. cygnis insignis 16:07, 1 July 2018 (UTC)

Not that long before midnight pizza time again then??

or maybe squid on the barbie? JarrahTree 14:27, 6 July 2018 (UTC)

Blech! BTW, we had better keep an eye on our 'lobster' articles, might be some gunship diplomacy when we rename our crayfish. Just checked after you seeded that pizza idea, but I've run out of strong flour. Now I'm hungry and proper take out is 50 nautical miles away. cygnis insignis 14:47, 6 July 2018 (UTC)

when i was in India early in the year, chocolate was a very unpleasant walk over a rocky driveway about kilometre long, or otherwise it had to be acquired long before it was on the radar - no nautical requirements on that one steep taxi drives... JarrahTree 14:54, 6 July 2018 (UTC)

oh well, enough of the qwertyuiop typing for the night, need to sign in for the interstellar travel of zarniwoop era, off for an interstellar trip in the office... JarrahTree 15:02, 6 July 2018 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for July 9

An automated process has detected that when you recently edited Thomas Carter (ornithologist), you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page North Cape (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver).

(Opt-out instructions.) --DPL bot (talk) 09:00, 9 July 2018 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for July 21

An automated process has detected that when you recently edited Crested pigeon, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Bronzewing (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver).

(Opt-out instructions.) --DPL bot (talk) 09:15, 21 July 2018 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for August 6

An automated process has detected that when you recently edited Alisterus, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Papua (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver).

(Opt-out instructions.) --DPL bot (talk) 09:44, 6 August 2018 (UTC)

Luna moth host plants

My preference in the article is to be conservative in naming possible host plants. Lindroth (1989) - already cited in the Luna moth article - cites references from 1972 that listed species from eight families of trees as host plants for Actias luna. To test these and two more not listed, Lindroth started with a fertilized female (collected in Kentucky), and raised larvae from those eggs on black walnut and shagbark hickory. These were raised to imago (winged), mated, and those eggs used for testing. Newly hatched larvae were placed with fresh leaves from eleven plant species. Only those presented with paper birch, black walnut, butternut and shagbark hickory survived to cocoon stage. Presented with leaves from the other seven tree species, the newly hatched larvae ate very little or ate nothing, and died. The author cites studies on other Saturniid species which suggest generalized diets at the species level but more specialized diets as the population level. Tuskes (1986) described regional adaptation, with paper birch in north, walnut, hickory, sumac, persimmon and sweet gum further south. Lindroth had not included those last three in his test. Bill Oehlke (see External sources) states paper birch in preferred in north, hickories, walnuts and sweet gum in mid-Atlantic states, add persimmon further south. Oehlke later mentions personal success with American beech and sumac, and has heard from others that pecan works in the south, most willows will work, and some people have succeeded with oaks (!). An interesting experiment that no one appears to have tried would be to raise larvae to - say - third instar, and then switch tree species. Or to take eggs collected in the north and try pecan leaves, and eggs collected in the south and try paper birch leaves. David notMD (talk) 06:27, 11 August 2018 (UTC)

That all seems reasonable, and I now have a better understanding of the paper (I could only access the intro and abstract). My thinking was that the families of those species might help with an overview of the moth's diet, moderately polyphygous being comparative, and set up the context for the deterrents and neutralisation by enzyme systems (eg. when it gets to walnut's Juglone). By the way, the same paper uses enzyme systems for 'enzymatic detoxification systems', maybe there is another article on those and a way of distinguishing it from the article's broader 'digestive system enzyme'. Hope this is helpful in some small way, an outside view, you can safely ignore me and what I don't know about moths and flora of the northern hemisphere. cygnis insignis 07:42, 11 August 2018 (UTC)

Likewise, you can ignore what I do not know about flora and fauna of the southern hemisphere (Australia?). There is an interesting research gap: Actias luna tolerate, and perhaps even prefer, host species with juglone (walnut, hickory, pecan). The larvae, as defense, regurgitate a fluid, and actually try to spread the fluid onto attacking insects. I wonder if this fluid acts as a deterrent because it contains juglone. Readings on other insects have many examples of plant toxins repurposed as defensive weapons. David notMD (talk) 12:38, 11 August 2018 (UTC)

Southwest Australia is my country, full of remarkable and poorly understood invertebrates; the ones I hear about turn up in some profound and ancient relationship with a plant. It is always interesting to see what research indicates in these relationships, more subtle and complex than one organism simply swallowing another. cygnis insignis 15:46, 11 August 2018 (UTC)

@Dunkleosteus77: This is a digression from your review, but I'm bringing it to your attention after commenting on the related content you are both discussing. Please excuse any distraction from your good work. —cygnis insignis 04:38, 12 August 2018 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for August 13

An automated process has detected that when you recently edited Eucalyptus patens, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Blackbutt (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver).

(Opt-out instructions.) --DPL bot (talk) 09:20, 13 August 2018 (UTC)

rs of tas

most rs's were so out of place its unbelievable in current context... as to a good source on the usage - unlikely - to find in short term JarrahTree 05:16, 22 August 2018 (UTC)

I'll keep an eye out. cygnis insignis 05:19, 22 August 2018 (UTC)

to unravel my crytpic message - most states RS's were mere extensions of the inferred power centric parts of the government house and elders of settler ancestry with professional or military heritage - in most cases - and as a result the very establishment of them was bad taste before you even uncover reasons for their aesthetic morony JarrahTree 09:57, 22 August 2018 (UTC)

rrrrrrrs, even further understood. When Miss Fletcher got up to speak, in 1934, there was bound to have been a conniption or two amongst the members. I can't be certain of the ID as a tiger, by the way, the artist made good with what they had: a broken tabletop, a blunt axe. and no paint. cygnis insignis 14:49, 22 August 2018 (UTC)

sounds like equipment being used in canberra and washington to resolve carrot and potato issues JarrahTree 04:50, 23 August 2018 (UTC)

sorry

not very good at anagram mysteries, opaqueness or focusing on sunday nights, the brain recession has increased due to lack of weekend editing - too much real life to deal with - not sure whcih way to loose on the lost glasses puns/anagrams/homonyms or anyonyms - maybe the declensions in lnguages other than english as to whether the deep south is 'up' or 'down' from here JarrahTree 12:45, 26 August 2018 (UTC)

in the minutes when a smart cookie redirects vegemite to shoe polish, and you address an ed on my talk which will go nowhere (about to archive the talk), I think its time for the early night cap and oversized woolly beanie with eucalyot acroma... JarrahTree 12:57, 26 August 2018 (UTC)

Crested bellbird

Hi there: You requested a clarification of the aboriginal name of the crested bellbird, but didn't describe where your confusion lay so I'm unsure what to explain more fully. Can you please elaborate so that we can clarify it for you? Thanks. MeegsC (talk) 16:48, 27 August 2018 (UTC)

@MeegsC: |I added a 'reason' to the nag tag, but the source probably probably does not say which people used that name. I will move it to the talk if you prefer, but I thought the language was easily resolvable with another source.

Red-capped parrot

Do you wanna be a co-nom at FAC? Ok with if you are or not, no problem either way...cheers, Cas Liber (talk · contribs) 02:50, 31 August 2018 (UTC)

I would like to contribute three or four more notes, on human interaction and ecology (if that is not the same thing :) I will also double-check my existing contributions, and anything I neglected to include.

Apologies too, if my silence complicated the last review; I should have noted my corrections when the reviewer identified text I added. Other than that, I am gaining a lot from watching do your stuff, so happy to see you take it through FA on your lonesome. Regards, — cygnis insignis

Alright, if you have the material then go for it. I will nominate this one soon Cas Liber (talk · contribs) 19:28, 31 August 2018 (UTC)

I doubt the stuff I want to add is needed for FA, though you would know more about that. I will edit the talk or article today and tomorrow, then handball it back to you. Again, excellent work Cas, someone ought to nominate you for a national honour. cygnis insignis 03:41, 1 September 2018 (UTC)

Oh gee shucks.... Cas Liber (talk · contribs) 04:20, 1 September 2018 (UTC)

I have more fiendish plans about that... JarrahTree 04:47, 1 September 2018 (UTC)

@JarrahTree: What are they are calling it these days, 'invisible volunteering'?, whatever, there are a number of Australian editors producing valuable, high quality content on subjects people can care about. They know who they are in some cases, I hope, but if you can make others aware of them then I will be cheering you on. cygnis insignis 02:25, 2 September 2018 (UTC)

the next time you are in the big smoke (or vice versa for the down south smoke) there is a very long conversation more than ine cofee or tea about all of this JarrahTree 04:26, 2 September 2018 (UTC)

Inanswer to your question try G - he might have, I know I have one on a disabled mac, but unlikely to get off for over 6 months the way the funds are going.... JarrahTree 13:19, 14 November 2018 (UTC)

Talk:Jellyfish

Hi, and thanks for your suggestion, but old reviews are basically always archived - they remain forever as /GAxx pages, and are permanently linked from article talk pages via the history box at the top. There's no need for a second transclusion as well. Many thanks, Chiswick Chap (talk) 14:43, 11 September 2018 (UTC)

Users expect talk to be on the talk, though I notice that some prefer that previous discussion is 'archived' as quickly as possible. I have trouble finding the link even when I know it is a sub-paged, a rare and unhelpful thing at wikipedias. Unless you fulfil the request, cite policy and guidance, I will ask that you restore my edit—at my review—before any further discussion. — cygnis insignis 14:59, 11 September 2018 (UTC)

I have restored the transclusion for the sake of harmony. Chiswick Chap (talk) 15:42, 11 September 2018 (UTC)

Ta. I expect we will be having more discussions, so we might try having a chat to avoid our minds filling in unknowns about the other party (relevant xkcd#?). I will kick it off, though I realise it looks awkward, answer if and when you have some time: what books, music, and film have you enjoyed lately? cygnis insignis 15:54, 11 September 2018 (UTC)

Not sure that we should be using Wikipedia for this, and I have more serious things I wish to say to you, but you may be right that a chat will help. I am enjoying William Atkins's The Immeasurable World | Journeys in Desert Places and Michael McCarthy's The Moth Snowstorm, both I suppose sharing a love of the natural world and concern for man's actions within it. I'm also dipping in to Carol Ann Duffy's wonderful Collected Poems: remarkably, every one of them is excellent. I recently saw Pawel Pawlikowski's film Cold War, oddly titled as it's a fine and true love story (that took place in the CW). xkcd is beyond my ken. What makes you tick, and why do you edit Wikipedia? Chiswick Chap (talk) 16:05, 11 September 2018 (UTC)

Not a social media site, you are quite right, but this can be helpful when meeting is unlikely. I can think of nothing more serious than literature and music, my ignorance of the works you mention needs rectifying :) What makes me tick is 'pathological volunteering', in the RL and here when I can. There are big gaps at wikipedia, things I read about and am keen to share with others. People's eyes glaze over when I talk about, for example, Brown planting marri seeds at Kew in 1802, so I add those facts here for the day when someone wants to know about that. I try to restrict my focus to a 'country' in the corner of Australia, one of the planet's most critically endangered biodiversity hotspots. I have edited on a range of other subjects, for a break from things on the edge of extinction and my continuing development as an online editor. Anyway, have at me when you have assembled your critique. — cygnis insignis 16:35, 11 September 2018 (UTC)

Yes indeed, it seems we are far removed geographically. Wikipedia seemed to me almost all gaps when I started; now it often seems to have wonderful coverage on random topics such as when I need to know about an Italian medieval church or painter, or an obscure film-maker. Edge-of-extinction things will probably never be covered adequately (there will be very many, unfortunately), but any that catch knowledgeable editors' attention will certainly be valuable --- indeed, they may end up as 'permanent' memorials. Kew at least I can visit easily, and it offers a huge resource at many different levels.

An assembled critique, hmm, I hope I won't have to go there. I think I will say simply that I did not do anything improper or say anything rude during the review, and I bore you no ill-will at any time, nor do I do so now. However, I do think the review had serious failings which I doubt I need to enumerate as my views on that matter will probably be clear enough to you, and I have no intention of going anywhere with them; you stated you were a new reviewer, and we co-noms tried extremely hard to accommodate you. I would suggest that you go very easy indeed on remarks about other editors; you are right, I think, that the very narrow 'bandwidth' of written discussion threads can easily become awkward as people naturally read in things they imagine are going on, whatever may be happening (invisibly) at the other end, and that chat may help, as dialogue nearly always does. I edited the other article you mentioned carefully and fully in line with policy (indeed, also in line with the standard definition of culture such as is written in that article's first paragraph, and in many places outside Wikipedia); I absolutely reject any suggestion that it embodies a personal point of view, far from it, it's a universal thing. For the record, I would see any pursuit of me and articles I edited as utterly inappropriate, based on an incorrect model of what I'm doing here. I work hard to create decent coverage of topics related to biology, among other things. I see 'decent' as 'of GA standard or better' (hence, properly cited, free of editorial, fully attributable) and that means a general faith in the decency and judgement of other editors. On the whole, it works very well, and whatever disagreements arise, other editors' comments, formal or informal, scientific or gut-feel, nearly always result in useful adjustments even to well-written articles. I suspect that we agree, by the way, that relaxed and informal discussion is far more likely to achieve useful agreement than any type of formalised process. GA usually works exactly because it's very freeform; nominators and reviewers can work out any method they like to reach agreement, and I'm sorry that in the review just closed it went astray (it seemed to me it came very close to working, actually). All the best, Chiswick Chap (talk) 17:07, 11 September 2018 (UTC)

@Chiswick Chap: Nice, but I'm not going to add to the clamour of pots and kettles. What I most want to know is about these policies and traditions of parallel articles for 'non-specialists'. Do you not see how that is content forking? How creating sets of articles, arranged by a non-systematic classification in templates lacking references, is opening up a can of worms? So much content in these articles conflates these common names with accepted taxonomy, and gives a lot of confusing and unsupportable assertions in defence of its avoidance of the same: the systematic names that were developed to share knowledge without the confusion and squabbles of what it is called. — cygnis insignis 08:14, 24 September 2018 (UTC)

@Chiswick Chap: I was reminded just now, while removing another one of those para-boxes I queried, that I never received a reply on these 'parallel articles' you have been creating and promoting. I would prefer that you did before I happen to edit something are invested in, although I now tend recognise your approach, and that is then interpreted in a way that you have preemptively characterised in your own critique cum defence above. — cygnis insignis 15:18, 18 October 2018 (UTC)

I am not sure I know what your question is, as it seems to me that you recognise that your position has shifted somewhat, and there are multiple implied doubts in what you have written. You are talking about the case where an article on a widespread folk-taxon like Whale overlaps to some extent with a taxon like Cetacea? If so, it is hardly for one editor like me to make some magisterial pronouncement from the papal throne, but it seems plain to me (as, evidently, to many others) that "Whale" is a widespread concept that readers expect to see as an article; that it is not isomorphic to any taxon, as it excludes the "dolphins"; and that we must do our best to explain the difference, given that there will be two separate articles. Policy is to insist on just one article where a common name, say 'dragonfly', maps pretty accurately to a clade, and we use redirects in those cases; but Whale is not a WP:FORK of Cetacea, and neither article could rightly be deleted. The same is true of Jellyfish, which again is not isomorphic to any clade, with the added twist that the name applies only to the medusa life-cycle stage of the taxa concerned: so it certainly isn't a fork, and any "parallelism" is only partial. No special pleading is involved here. I hope this answers your question, insofar as I am able to follow it. Chiswick Chap (talk) 17:37, 18 October 2018 (UTC)

The most surprising of your assertions, with reference to received ideas and knowing what the readers expect and therefore need, is that my position has shifted: what makes you say that? How is whale not a fork from received knowledge, transmitted in a meaningful way; this is not a point that gets a lot of emphasis in your "good" article. What prevents anyone grabbing a dab of a common name and assembling a candidate for the volk taxonomy you are publishing here. cygnis insignis 17:56, 18 October 2018 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for September 13

An automated process has detected that when you recently edited Corymbia calophylla, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page James Drummond (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver).

(Opt-out instructions.) --DPL bot (talk) 09:02, 13 September 2018 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for September 22

An automated process has detected that when you recently edited Red-eared firetail, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page John Gilbert (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver).

(Opt-out instructions.) --DPL bot (talk) 09:29, 22 September 2018 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for October 6

An automated process has detected that when you recently edited Red-eared firetail, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Alfred North (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver).

(Opt-out instructions.) --DPL bot (talk) 09:27, 6 October 2018 (UTC)

A page you started (Phytophthora multivora) has been reviewed!

Thanks for creating Phytophthora multivora, Cygnis insignis!

Wikipedia editor Usernamekiran just reviewed your page, and wrote this note for you:

If possible, kindly add relevant wikiproject banners to the talkpage of the article. It is suggested to take a look at the similar articles for reference. Regards.

To reply, leave a comment on Usernamekiran's talk page.

Learn more about page curation.

—usernamekiran(talk) 13:07, 10 October 2018 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for October 13

An automated process has detected that when you recently edited Stagonopleura, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Emblema (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver).

(Opt-out instructions.) --DPL bot (talk) 09:12, 13 October 2018 (UTC)

Alphabets

I'm sure you'll do a better job of extracting the remainder of the bird pics than I could. I just found those jpgs. DS (talk) 17:21, 13 October 2018 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for October 20

An automated process has detected that you recently added links to disambiguation pages.

Nankeen kestrel (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver)

added a link pointing to Falco

Western yellow robin (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver)

added a link pointing to John Gilbert

(Opt-out instructions.) --DPL bot (talk) 09:07, 20 October 2018 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for November 5

An automated process has detected that when you recently edited Western rosella, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Department of Environment and Conservation (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver).

(Opt-out instructions.) --DPL bot (talk) 09:28, 5 November 2018 (UTC)

A cheeseburger for you!

as an american boi i hope you enjoy the c h e e s e SleepForever (talk) 17:29, 9 November 2018 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for November 13

An automated process has detected that you recently added links to disambiguation pages.

Varied lorikeet (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver)

added a link pointing to Cape York

Western pebble-mound mouse (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver)

added a link pointing to Cassia

(Opt-out instructions.) --DPL bot (talk) 09:24, 13 November 2018 (UTC)

geewhizzery

Hi Cygnis insignis: I enjoyed reading your comment — . It cheered up this AfD considerably. Cheers from BhagyaMani (talk) 10:18, 15 November 2018 (UTC)

I prefer not to indulge in those sort of comments or risk fuelling drama, but if it saves others time and allows more pleasant and productive collaboration then I find the temptation irresistible (a dangerous notion). My general position is there plenty of contributions to make in biota articles, simple facts that knit together other information, people interfering in that for some agenda need to examine their priorities or be censored. That account could not be contentious for long without some craftiness, by accident or design it is disrupting the community for some obscure purpose; its a balancing act in responding to that when silence is a better option. What else are you working on? — cygnis insignis 11:06, 15 November 2018 (UTC)

Yes, there are plenty of pages that need updating and improving!! Recently, I worked on Cats in ancient Egypt, which has been upgraded to B-class now. Since I like the much neglected 'little people', I worked on Egyptian mongoose and African palm civet, two poorly ref'ed pages. And at present foremost on Virunga National Park with some excursions to Mgahinga Gorilla National Park and Ficalhoa laurifolia. -- Cheerio, BhagyaMani (talk) 11:28, 15 November 2018 (UTC)

Cats in … I must look away, until later, when I have some suggestions. And those others, damned by self-imposed scope, I bet they are fascinating and a joy to work on. cygnis insignis 12:12, 15 November 2018 (UTC)

Btw: do you like crocs ? Then have a look at gharial and mugger crocodile, to which I also contributed, and updated both last month. -- BhagyaMani (talk) 11:39, 15 November 2018 (UTC)

And I definitely will read about those for a break from the oddities in this corner of the world. cygnis insignis 12:12, 15 November 2018 (UTC)

cats in Egypt

I hope you didn't 'hurl the computer' !! I just ignore this person's posts, and think he may just be worried to be uncovered as the one who created many, if not most, of these redirects. , cheerio -- BhagyaMani (talk) 17:17, 27 November 2018 (UTC)

@BhagyaMani: I was reminded to find something for your article on egyptian cats, there is a legend noted at Battle of Pelusium (525 BC) cygnis insignis 18:04, 27 November 2018 (UTC)

WOW, thanks!! Looks like Polyaenus learned a Sun Tzu lesson. Will definitely follow up on this Stratagem. -- BhagyaMani (talk) 18:26, 27 November 2018 (UTC)

I recently had a look at Internet troll, which is defined as a person who "starts a digressive discourse, often off-topic, with the intent of provoking people". Rings a bell, doesn't it? -- BhagyaMani (talk) 15:22, 8 December 2018 (UTC)

BhagyaMani, I prefer to believe that is a myth, but will try to remain impartial :–) There is always a point underlying this activity, although it's generally unrelated to the purpose of the site; in any case compassion is virtuous yet something we can only try to achieve. I've tried to discount the notion that the account is an automated response bot because that just makes the interaction more intriguing. Nevertheless … cygnis insignis 15:46, 8 December 2018 (UTC)

This account is surely not a bot, but the discourse coming from this account often digressive. I don't know any other wikipedian whose page creations got deleted as often as his. Last week, I checked 70 pages containing redirects to lion subpages, most of them created by this account, quite a labyrinth. Redirected most to lion main page. -- BhagyaMani (talk) 16:20, 8 December 2018 (UTC)

ArbCom 2018 election voter message

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

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

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

Internal links

Hi, Cygnis insignis. Thanks for the great work you have been doing on Macrozamia riedlei. I notice you removed some internal links I had put in to the quote in the version, An older version of Macrozamia riedlei. Is there some wikipedia convention which frowns on such links? (I have always thought them useful, because the moment you come across an unfamiliar name, and do a control click, you have opened the article which gives an explanation, so I put them in on the basis that the reader will not have to search the page, hunting sometimes in vain for an explanation.) So I am hoping you can point me to some wikipedia policy which explains/justifies that particular change. Thanks for the hard work. MargaretRDonald (talk) 08:49, 20 November 2018 (UTC)

P.S. The links were to Vlamingh, La Perouse, Flinders and Sir George Grey. MargaretRDonald (talk) 08:52, 20 November 2018 (UTC)

I expanded that out with the link at each sentence, an unobjectionable solution I thought and hoped; can't always be right :) They were not an objectionable use of links in quotes, but I tend to link in the text around it because I have seen the words of another linked to mean what contributors wanted it to mean. The use of quotes is an interesting discussion, when to use them and so on, although I'm not across current guidance on when it is okay and follow 1. what I learned by watching those I thought produced the best content, and 2. giving a lot of thought to any different view on rules on thumb. This is during the time I edited and the time I did not, some years where I was still reading content, and much of that has to do with focusing on what I deem important. If you moved the link back I would not object, being more concerned about unravelling how to expand and clarify some incongruence in sources. We could talk about that too. Or cattle, sorry, but it is that or cattle, sheep, horses and explorers, animals is misleading to those who don't know this country and toxic was mentioned three or four times across two sentences. Regards, cygnis insignis 10:45, 20 November 2018 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for November 20

An automated process has detected that when you recently edited Western rosella, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Henry Richter (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver).

(Opt-out instructions.) --DPL bot (talk) 09:06, 20 November 2018 (UTC)

Paradise parrot‎

Hi, I saw you started working on paradise parrot‎, which I have also been thinking of expanding for years. Do you have any plans for it? FunkMonk (talk) 21:06, 21 November 2018 (UTC)

I just found an interesting note on Gilbert while skimming journals at BHL, looking up the parrot we are already working up, and didn't think to do anything more than add a bit of description. I have read some of articles on recent extinctions that I think you created, and it would be interesting to watch or assist in another of those. cygnis insignis 00:14, 22 November 2018 (UTC).

Could maybe be a future collaboration, if you find the time one day, ping me! FunkMonk (talk) 00:36, 22 November 2018 (UTC)

@FunkMonk: A book was in my hand, and I have come back to it. If you dive in now we can get at goodish C cum B in short order. Maybe someone can bring it more attention with a DYK, while it is freshly expanded, although I haven't done one in years and not inclined to familiarise myself with the process again. cygnis insignis 08:21, 23 November 2018 (UTC)

I've never done a DYK myself (they seem a bit pointless to me), so I'd be aiming more at GA/FA. FunkMonk (talk) 15:47, 23 November 2018 (UTC)

Nice to steer readers to these sorts of things, but too much bother to follow all the bureaucracy; only mentioned Justin Case because of time criteria. I'll just look at lumping stuff in as neatly as possible while it is floating up, and you can give it your attention when it suits. cygnis insignis 15:54, 23 November 2018 (UTC)

some nice pics ..

.. at https://scroll.in/article/903231/yawning-leopards-duelling-cobras-and-other-winners-at-the-sanctuary-wildlife-photography-awards -- the last is the funniest. Cheerio -- BhagyaMani (talk) 18:19, 23 November 2018 (UTC)

This is a nice glimpse at animals outside my general focus, 1st and 3rd places were deserved, and the first two in the merit section are interesting. Are they really oblivious. one or two of the blokes look decidedly purposeful and urgent to get across :) cygnis insignis 18:42, 23 November 2018 (UTC)

Can imagine that these four guys were not the only ones crossing this bridge on that day, but many more pilgrims on their way to a temple. -- BhagyaMani (talk) 18:54, 23 November 2018 (UTC)

Richard Garnett (philologist)

Is this the correct fix for a typo from 2010? Shenme (talk) 05:31, 24 November 2018 (UTC)

@Shenme: Damn our page histories, we need a statute of limitations on, as you so gently phrased it, 'typos'. I wonder what I intended to do? He wrote a key text on Blake that I transcribed at our sister site, btw, if you want to sample something less dry by him. cygnis insignis 05:42, 24 November 2018 (UTC)

(tee hee) Well, I do seem to be able to winkle out dark secrets from page histories. (Check the edit summary - that one was almost exactly 9 years old)

What does bother me more than a bit, though, is the number of years resident these 'goofs' have. We seem to prize creators of text here, but have no status for those readers with a heightened sense of... "Hey, something's rather whiffy here!"

If by sister site you mean Wikisource, alas, that's my latest timesink. Shenme (talk) 05:57, 24 November 2018 (UTC)

LOL, good work, prize creators are also prime targets for unproductive distraction, being ignored by gods and dogs is more a blessing. A mate and I were trying to introduce someone to the dear little site, an admitted wiki addict they described that free taste as equivalent to offering them heroin. cygnis insignis 06:27, 24 November 2018 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for November 27

An automated process has detected that when you recently edited Paradise parrot, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Roland Green (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver).

(Opt-out instructions.) --DPL bot (talk) 10:14, 27 November 2018 (UTC)

Autopatrolled

Hi Cygnis insignis. I wanted to let you know that per you and Sam Sailor's request at WP:PERM I have re-added the autopatrolled right to your account. Please let me know if you have any questions or if you would like the right removed. Best, Mifter (talk) 05:01, 1 December 2018 (UTC)

reverted myself

Had hoped to try to make a more substantial textual intro to the subject separating

indigenous understanding and usage

european perceptions

management and restoration of vegetation at or around

but... JarrahTree 07:37, 4 December 2018 (UTC)

@JarrahTree: I know exactly what you are getting at, the importance of these things is mind-boggling and it is hard to know where to start. Maybe have another go when I try to get the basic elements of the topic in, I find it easy to do the lead last. cygnis insignis 07:50, 4 December 2018 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for December 18

An automated process has detected that when you recently edited Eastern osprey, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Aquila (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver).

(Opt-out instructions.) --DPL bot (talk) 09:46, 18 December 2018 (UTC)

Lake Vancouver

Cheers for the edits, have to get down there for some photos in the new year. I'm headed back to Dullsville on Friday until the 31st. Merry Xmas and have a great new year!

Thanks, just another tweak on your excellent series and I'm looking forward to being able to link more significant locations than an article on a shire or town with no pub. Be safe in that silly place. cygnis insignis 07:46, 19 December 2018 (UTC)

tis the season to be jolly

tra la la la - make sure there is no need for frolly or brolly - bring out the elves and pixies I say... etc JarrahTree 10:36, 19 December 2018 (UTC)

perth is far too hot again - uncomfortable to say the least - trust it is cooler in albany for christmas - have a good one! JarrahTree 07:33, 24 December 2018 (UTC)

JarrahTree, I was sweltering under 29 degrees the other day, and enjoyed the novelty. The evening always cools off, and has been eerily still for this season. I sit back and enjoy the serene sounds of 4wds in the botanical reserve over the road. I'm going to surrender to the seasonal madness, but doing a christmas special on a bat before I do (and before it becomes extinct, which will be the next big storm). cygnis insignis 07:59, 24 December 2018 (UTC)

image use

@EEng: thank you for the reply, and I know too well how exasperating these situations … believe me! Ask me about curly quotation marks, which I note is linked as a perennial discussion at the top of the page; the solution is link any earlier discussion and anyone resurrecting them can expect to weather the short shrift of replies. Good! I was desysoped elsewhere over that issue, so also appreciate I strongly empathise with the exasperation and unproductive outcomes this sort of thing spirals off in to.

I read the diff and replied here because my limited access is inhibited by the size of your page. The key point I want to emphasise is the blowback effect, the impression of gate-keeping, and a generally neutral and civil air to discussion. Your reaction is genuine, I do think there needs to be some of that around, although it has made me a lot of adversaries who are undistracted by content, productivity or agf. Nothing you haven't heard before, but I hope to clarify my position should we meet again. cygnis insignis 06:37, 24 December 2018 (UTC)

OK, thanks. EEng 20:33, 24 December 2018 (UTC)

EEng, have a safe and merry season. cygnis insignis 20:59, 24 December 2018 (UTC)

Austral season's greetings

	Austral season's greetings
	Tuck into this! We've made about three of these in the last few days for various festivities. Supermarkets are stuffed with cheap berries. Season's greetings! Cas Liber (talk · contribs) 22:05, 24 December 2018 (UTC)

mmmmm! Reconstructed pav is trending I see :) Hope to find some at the garden party I'm going to, because I don't remember the last time I dived into one; the perfect accompaniment to some wine from the Stirlings. cygnis insignis 22:18, 24 December 2018 (UTC)

Notice of Edit warring noticeboard discussion

Hello. This message is being sent to inform you that there is currently a discussion involving you at Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Edit warring regarding a possible violation of Wikipedia's policy on edit warring. Thank you. Edelseider (talk) 11:26, 26 December 2018 (UTC)

Anzac day

I hope I using this forum correctly, apologies if not. Thx for suggestion and feedback re. Anzac day.Appreciated. I have added an additional historian source.(If i have understood you correctly, apologies if not) I know one might expect commemoration to be the preserve of commentators rather than historians, but after the history wars and preceding and during the centenary has been a tropic for professional historians (McKenna and Lake are two prominent historians in this arena) TomSear (talk) 04:23, 31 December 2018 (UTC) Tom Sear

@TomSear:, I'll assume you are the author, again, welcome. I added a new section for your post, viewing pages in edit mode will give you some clues to the few bits of wikisyntax (code) you will need to know. You can also click new section at the top of a talk page.

I also recommend you seek guidance on contributing as an author, without indicating how you should do that, but cautioning that this may come up again and you want to be familiar with the relevant guidelines. Options are also available to avoid impersonation. Citing yourself is legitimate in academic arenas, but in this open editing environment the general approach is to cite other authors.

I supposed it was something like that, it is not surprising and I recall a recommendation to read that text. One approach is attribution, Marilyn Lake has an article for example, the professor's notability can be presumed and that provides a reader with some context. Have a prosperous new year, cygnis insignis 06:19, 31 December 2018 (UTC)

Front page loading

The lag in the front page loading is because it always contains 18 images (the death star, the five featured sections, and the 12 sister projects), and a shedload of javascript, which between them account for well over 3⁄4 of the server load. Even if we reduced the text to nothing, it wouldn't make an appreciable difference, since the WMF isn't going to let us take away their logos or their scripts; the issue is one of accessibility and aesthetics rather than of page load times. ‑ Iridescent 19:44, 2 January 2019 (UTC)

Iridescent, thanks for replying, I didn't want to bog down that discussion. That is interesting, and eventually this country will stop using the telegraph system for its network, my stronger preference is for elegance and just grumble about page size. I recognise that inevitably volunteers will seek some sort of profit from their time, if google operated in the same way I'm guessing we could not point to them as an example of simple design. cygnis insignis 20:06, 2 January 2019 (UTC)

Your thread has been archived

Hi Cygnis insignis! You created a thread called columns in reflist at Wikipedia:Teahouse, but it has been archived because there was no discussion for a few days. You can still find the archived discussion here. If you have any additional questions that weren't answered then, please create a new thread. Archival by Lowercase sigmabot III, notification delivery by Muninnbot, both automated accounts. You can opt out of future notifications by placing {{bots|deny=Muninnbot}} (ban this bot) or {{nobots}} (ban all bots) on your user talk page. Muninnbot (talk) 19:01, 11 January 2019 (UTC)

@The Rambling Man:, it occurs to me, again, if you hit 3rr the documentation should support the compulsory status of this. Is that not reasonable to expect, when an option becomes compulsory? Is it your opinion it is an improvement, before it became compulsory, or are just enforcing a consensus that you claim I am subverting. Please consider also that I may be well informed in my opinion, that it is interfering with access, at least to some degree, and I'm not simply picking a side or expressing a personal preference. All I ask is that those who share that opinion be referred to a simple statement, even if no explanation is forthcoming. And do me a favour, please do not tell me how I can change my own layout, that is not the concern. cygnis insignis 19:27, 11 January 2019 (UTC)

A side note

Re this, it actually does come up (somehow) in such discussions. Mostly just histrionics and straw men (e.g. someone will argue that a proposal to not over-capitalize "Norwegian Forest Cat" must mean to write it as "norwegian forest cat", when of course everyone meant "Norwegian forest cat"). However, there is actually a convention in English (albeit not a universal one) to decapitalize when there is no clear or extant relationship between the original namesake and the term in question (Platonic ideals but a platonic relationship; the Draconian legal system, your parents' draconian rules when you were a kid; English as a language and cultural reference, english (side-spin) on the cue ball in a game of pool; Scotch whiskey but a scotch doubles tournament; French language and culture, french fries; Welsh language and culture, welshing or welching on a bet; the Young Turks political movement, and the young turks you work with; Bohemian in reference to the region, and bohemians in the hippie counterculture; etc., etc., etc.) Thus it can sometimes be seriously proposed that breeds that do not actually have a connection to the places they are named after (which is more common than one might think) should not have those placenames capitalized. No one will take this seriously because, a) it would be too inconsistent; b) the RS don't do it; and c) the actual origins of many breeds are disputed, with different sources claiming that a breed was developed from stock obtained from Elbonia or Kerblachistan or whatever, and others claiming this is not true and that the name was chosen just to sound exotic. PS: I dunno about breeds developed in Macedonia, but I'm sure there are some. Not sure any of them are notable enough for an article, though. We actually have too many breed articles, hundreds of which cannot reasonably be expected to ever expand. Back in the 2000s, someone seemed to be going through DAD-IS and creating an article here for every alleged breed then encountered in that database. A single mass AfD could probably nuke 100+ of these things (if we even do mass AfDs; I have no kept abreast of such deletion-related policy quibbles in a long time, outside of RM, CfD, TfD, and RfD; I pay very little attention to other XfDs like AfD and MfD).  — SMcCandlish ☏ ¢ 😼  02:52, 18 January 2019 (UTC)

SMcCandlish, cheers mate, I guessed it would be of interest to you at least, and thank you for an outline on how that has played out before. "Macedonia", in the news again, was selected for hypothetical purposes, because the term is politically charged and it is an example of where adherence to an MOS with a 'draconian' application of lower case would circumvent those territorial disputes leaking over into topics whose relevance is a mere name. I believe that this is example of a major hurdle met by any agency seeking to formalise nomenclature for animals, more so than other labels. In the example of whiskey, the place of origin is elevated with a capital because that is considered important, a marketable quality for example. This is little more than musing by me, and because it is probably of no use in discussion I have mercifully spared you from a lot of my ponderous replies. However, I will expound a view that if it can be demonstrated that the majority of those breed articles are likely not expandable then they only serve to increase their recognition as breeds, that is grounds for mass deletion and notability needs to be demonstrated in preserving or recreating each of them. A counter example is polbot articles for taxa: I find them loitering around with almost no useful information after 10 years here, but the source referred to a taxonomy that has or will be used by other reliable sources. The move to have those articles deleted had merit, but the idea that it could not be expanded is groundless and there is no harm resulting from the presence here of those binomials that are already integrated into a 'web of literature'.

Once again, I am about to digress from that topic to one that am am more concerned about, but perhaps it has some bearing on related discussions. If an agency used the extant taxonomy of organisms to elevate a parallel system of names, I would be questioning why they are doing so and whether this site should be partnering in that adventure. The unnamed example, though you can guess who I mean, used the accepted taxonomy to elevate their unstructured taxonomy, that source used a system to undermine the very substance of utility and broad acceptance of that same system and is, unsurprisingly, collapsing into a belligerent, more desperate, almost insane self referencing system that is redundant, less than useless and moving ever further from their stated objectives 'facilitating communication' about … those, umm, plumose reptilians. cygnis insignis 05:33, 18 January 2019 (UTC)

In shorter form this time:

• If you want to see something like that hypothetical actually playing out, check the histories of Van cat, Turkish Van, and Turkish Angora, which keep getting editwarred to re-brand them Armenian, Kurdish, Azerbaijani, etc. People have been topic-banned and blocked already.
• We're actually pretty routinely merging "un-articles" on species and subspecies in the higher-level taxon articles. If there's not really any info and no likelihood of expansion, we don't need a separate page.
• I don't want to get into cladistics versus traditional taxonomy. I think the dispute is pretty silly in most respects, since taxonomic names and our entire notions of species and genera are artificial and arbitrary (and even how we come up with and circumscribe them has radically changed over time) while determining actual genetic relationships has F-all to do with nomenclature, until people want to try to force it have something to do with nomenclature and thus create unnecessary disputes, mostly to further their own careers and to elevate the prominence of the scientific "faction". It's typically hominid territorial bullshit. This real-world sci-squabble has some negative effects on WP, too, but in the end we can actually fall back on "do what the majority of contemporary and genuinely reliable sources do", and cite WP:NOT#FORUM to avoid much of it.  — SMcCandlish ☏ ¢ 😼  06:36, 21 January 2019 (UTC)

• I'm pretty well predisposed in territorial disputes, a died in the wool australophile and a tendency to favour West in the southern hemisphere and East in the Northern Hemisphere. At least I am open about that.
• to[?] the higher-level taxon articles, I suppose you mean; wasn't aware of that. Any stub with a WD link is almost certainly expandable, easily and immediately, when it links to or from another article there is likely more facts to be incorporated. Maintenance is an issue of their existence I suppose, but we are fortunate in that regard.
• I don't see it that way, it being something about the diversity and complexity of life and our attempts to convey and increase our understanding of … it. I do see the scorched earth of an imagined 'cultural struggle', amplified by SPAs and gamers, touting more nebulous and unverifiable theories based on 'traditional' and 'common' typologies. That fog of war, clearer to many a decade later, has seen a gulf placed between what is known [eg science] and the sum of boy's squirmishs [muh naming]. But you didn't ask me about my solution to the hominid question, which is not final, I can only continue to write about a 'forest bat' that has not seen a forest, or one that did until it did not, as it is currently just entered on a path to probable extinction (I hear the bulldozer, tearing up a home of some now, along with as yet unknown genera being despeciated, or undiversified, depending on one's outlook). cygnis insignis 08:20, 21 January 2019 (UTC)

a note on scientific name formatting

Hello! I was perusing the MOS for something unrelated when I came across a policy I did not know of: Wikipedia:Manual of Style/Lead section#Organisms. Thought this could be of interest to you as well. Enwebb (talk) 04:44, 22 January 2019 (UTC)

Wikipedia_talk:Manual_of_Style/Lead_section#Systematic_suppression, it is and it isn't, interesting, that is. cygnis insignis 05:29, 22 January 2019 (UTC)

Your edit at Leonard Jenyns

Whoops, on Apple devices, the difference between an n-dash and an m-dash doesn't show up clearly, so you were right that a spaced m-dash needed fixing. However, in British English, appropriate for this subject, a spaced n-dash is more usual. Peter coxhead (talk) 19:41, 27 January 2019 (UTC)

Peter coxhead, The rendering on non Apple devices is exaggerated, but a spaced em-dash was noticeable to this proof readers eye. I touch type the key stroke for dashes, so to be certain I overwrite to confirm there is a change. I noticed the introduction of spaced en-dash at the MOS, another quirk in the history of its usage, but did not notice it was British English. Ask for my view on punctuation and spacing in digital [not static] documents, if you are interested.

While we are discussing British English, I was queried for spelling coloration as 'colouration'. Any comment? cygnis insignis 02:47, 28 January 2019 (UTC)

Well, "colouration" is certainly used in British English, but so is "coloration", which is how I would spell it. Google Scholar (a somewhat better indicator of thoughtful usage than Google) shows a ratio of about 9:1 for "coloration" vs. "colouration", whereas "color" is only about 10% more common than "colour". This clearly suggests to me that "coloration" is more common in British English. If we assume that no-one uses "colouration" + "color", some algebra suggests that to get these ratios, then of these sources roughly:

• 52% would use "color" + "coloration"
• 38% would use "colour" + "coloration"
• 10% would use "colour" + "colouration"

This gives about a 4:1 ratio of "coloration" to "colouration" in British English. A Google ngram applied to British English confirms this, with "coloration" at least 4 times as common as "colouration".

So I conclude:

• There is clear evidence that "coloration" is the most common spelling in English that uses the spelling "colour".
• Since where there are choices within an ENGVAR, we should choose the one with greatest commonality as per MOS:COMMONALITY, we should prefer "coloration" in British English.

Peter coxhead (talk) 09:30, 28 January 2019 (UTC)

Cheers! I messed up the statement, I used coloration and the user thought I should spell that as colouration. When I checked my sources, which indicated no foul or Brit/US split, Fowler opined that color is a less objectionable spelling shift with a lot of early usage. cygnis insignis 11:46, 28 January 2019 (UTC)

Well, Fowler is the bible! Since I've had run-ins with other editors before, I've now saved my argument above at User:Peter coxhead/Coloration, so I can refer to it in future. Peter coxhead (talk) 12:10, 28 January 2019 (UTC)

He is a joy to peruse, and either the starting point or last word on these matters. And I should read these things again, obviously, to help me edit my own content. I have been asked more than once if the old blue book I am reading intently is the bible? There was a list of English variants at a guidleline somewhere, I proposed 'coloration' be added and never got a response. I'll link your determination when I remember where the talk page is.cygnis insignis 12:21, 28 January 2019 (UTC)

Gorilla

Hi. Can you please unitalicize the title for gorilla? You did not get a consensus for the change. LittleJerry (talk) 05:07, 29 January 2019 (UTC)

LittleJerry, A genus name is rendered italic. cygnis insignis 05:08, 29 January 2019 (UTC)

The name "gorilla" is known more as a common name than a genus name. In fact the genus name comes from the common name. Please revert and take this to talk page for a consensus. LittleJerry (talk) 05:12, 29 January 2019 (UTC)

I see you re-italicized the gorilla article title again. Please change it back. You did not get a consensus and that is very disruptive editing. LittleJerry (talk) 22:10, 9 February 2019 (UTC)

Not falling for that again, I expect you already changed it before posting. Are you saying the article is not about the genus, there is no distinction, no diversity, the pictures look alike, and so on, seems more like gate-keeping or chest-thumping. I could write an article on the genus, if that is not the scope of that page. cygnis insignis 22:26, 9 February 2019 (UTC)

As I already stated, "gorilla" is more well known as a common name than a genus name. LittleJerry (talk) 16:21, 10 February 2019 (UTC)

Have you published that view? And as I ask, if the article is about the commonly named group, whatever that is, would you object to me moving out all that sciencey stuff.cygnis insignis 16:33, 10 February 2019 (UTC)

Your comments in the Chimpanzee discussion.

I consider your comments about my editing to be a personal attack. and an attempt to disparage my participation in the discussion on grounds completely irrelevant to the topic. I fix links to disambiguation pages in what has become an aggravating constantly losing battle to keep disambiguation links from again growing out of control, which is damaging to the morale of the disambiguation project. I fix them quickly because I have tremendous experience with the tools, and I am able to do this. The assertion that I do this work as "an opportunity to top up an edit count" is offensive and insulting. If that was my goal, I wouldn't take the time to get involved in discussions like these at all. Please remove the portion of your comments that are not germane to the title of the article under discussion. bd2412 T 14:37, 30 January 2019 (UTC)

I'll have another look at what I said. I am pointing out that your absolute and unverifiable position coincides with your making the mass edit then voting to support the switch from the general to the specific article that you decided everybody else had wrong, and you are right to be insulted if that is not what it looks like, that is, you in effect insulted other more thoughtful contributors at the rate of ten edits per minute. Being defensive about it is understandable, but is it justifiable? I have seen a group of editors explain how to achieve an outcome with less edits and you simply would not hear of that solution and continued to present a series of explanations as to why you had to do it that way. I am skeptical you are invested in the best solution to this particular title arrangement, especially as you (like others) present blinkered selection of evidence in support of the investment you already made. cygnis insignis 15:01, 30 January 2019 (UTC)

I'm comfortable with what I said, a bit strident but you and others seem to have this as some battleground for partisan views on articles titles. cygnis insignis 15:04, 30 January 2019 (UTC)

So you are basically arguing that the correct title of the article is somehow contingent on my edit rate. Irrespective of the outcome intended to be achieved, nothing happened over the course of this discussion except for my series of edits to reduce the thousand disambiguation errors being reported into the system every day that it went on. bd2412 T 16:22, 30 January 2019 (UTC)

I'm suggesting your arguments may be contingent on your edit rate. You avoided announcing your intention, afaik, and ignore that several solutions that allow others to continue correctly linking. If it was wrong it was that way for a long time, another matter you have not addressed in correcting your confusing and evidently wrong conclusions about the state of the page and incoming links before you arrived. This is being pointed out by several editors many times, and currently is again, it doesn't bother me but you should be cautious in your chosen path of contributing and be polite in answering concerns before making decisions that will generate at least some noise. Are we done? cygnis insignis 16:58, 30 January 2019 (UTC)

No, we are not done. If you are going to continue engaging in a personal attack that is not relevant to what the title of the article should be, the next step will be arbitration. bd2412 T 17:14, 30 January 2019 (UTC)

BD2412, I'm currently creating content unrelated to the discussion, in between answering your messages, although I appreciate you are concerned with engaging me about my scepticism and opinions on your continued investment in … something. What is the outcome you are seeking, that sees you continually disrupting my contributions on this talk page and bandying about threats of further compulsion to engage with you instead of doing that? cygnis insignis 17:31, 30 January 2019 (UTC)

I have clearly expressed the outcome I am seeking. You have accused me of fixing the disambiguation links at issue "to top up an edit count", a false and distressing assertion which has nothing to with the article title at issue. You have referenced my "making thousands of changes at the rate of 10 per minute" as if the rate at which edits are made has some bearing on the argument. Please remove these personal attacks against me. bd2412 T 17:37, 30 January 2019 (UTC)

• Note that this section was blanked by the user, but I was not sure how to view that and restored it. The matter may be resolved. cygnis insignis 06:43, 7 February 2019 (UTC)

Your comment at "Species:Talk"

Thank you for weighing in! I have found Chiswick Chap to be quite resistant to any of my edits when I appear as a "johnny come lately" to an article that he has edited and been monitoring for some time - and therefore thinks can't be made any better. Any suggestions as to how to handle this situation? Recruit people to weigh in and hope sheer numbers will persuade him? You replace the 1st paragraph with my edit and see if he rejects it again?

I am considering making one change at a time and waiting a few days between changes to see if that dissuades him, if you don't have any advice for me as to how to proceed. Regards, IiKkEe (talk) 19:00, 6 February 2019 (UTC)

IiKkEe, Personalising it would a mistake, so would provoking a user who has stated that any change must meet his personal approval; it is a bind we are in and I feel constrained by some ominous foreshadowing in their comments during my own interactions. I regard the page as more of an essay, akin to another page that was titled species problem until it was recently moved. As I said, you progressive changes are preferable, and we should seek to build on that on the talk. Regards cygnis insignis 06:37, 7 February 2019 (UTC)

Thank you. I will make one change at a time, the most trivial first; and hope for either an acceptance, or a detailed explanation of why it is not acceptable. I have begun by moving sentence 4 to become sentence 2. Please consider continuing to monitor the edits of "Species", and weigh in if you have an opinion regarding any contested edit. Best wishes, IiKkEe (talk) 13:24, 8 February 2019 (UTC)

IiKkEe, the content has bothered me for some time, so thanks to you too. I write or fix an article from the inside out, finding what emerges as the most notable points in sources and create a natural lead in to different aspects of the topic. Notabilty of content is an overarching concern in the way it has been assembled, which is more ad hoc. The article is crucial, and it will require a lot of careful attention by experienced editors to improve the page. I had some comments on binomials, prompted by Peter's own comment, but will step back to allow a variety of opinions to emerges. Cheers again for getting this underway, and recognising that a slow process is likely to pay dividends. cygnis insignis 14:10, 8 February 2019 (UTC)

Western rosella

Hello:

The copy edit you requested from the Guild of Copy Editors of the article Western rosella has been completed.

Please let me know if you have any questions or concerns.

Regards,

Twofingered Typist (talk) 22:22, 8 February 2019 (UTC)

Twofingered Typist, thank you for attending to that. Regards, cygnis insignis 05:35, 9 February 2019 (UTC)

"troglodytes"

Hi. It's a noun, when used as a species epithet. [3] Hope this helps. Dyanega (talk) 16:33, 11 February 2019 (UTC)

Dyanega, it would, had I not already seen it. The relevance or taxonomic pertinence beyond another noun is what I was trying to elicit. Have a good one, cygnis insignis 16:46, 11 February 2019 (UTC)

Copyedit of Setirostris (bristle-faced free-tailed bat) complete

Thank you Fluffernutter, I forgot to emend to requet notice when improving the article, pardon the instability. I'll send it off to GAN, cheers cygnis insignis 14:11, 12 February 2019 (UTC)

Marianne North

How come you responded to that? I do hope you are not following me around, that would be getting very close to trolling. Chiswick Chap (talk) 09:09, 13 February 2019 (UTC)

It is on my watchlist, has been for about a decade. I expect a reply on your assertion.cygnis insignis 13:14, 13 February 2019 (UTC)

Thanks for letting me know, it just seemed surprising. I'm very glad to hear there's such a good explanation. I hadn't imagined you had been around so long, btw. All the best, Chiswick Chap (talk) 15:13, 13 February 2019 (UTC)

There has been more than a little of this sort of thing, you are quick to shield yourself with preemptive accusation and seemingly wilful misinterpretation. Avoiding you would be preferable, but when, for a recent example, I see a box in an article with 'human uses of animals' or whatever "I well know" with a picture of those twins suckling from a wolf, I can bite my tongue no longer. Or haranguing newbs and telling them their contributions must meet your personal approval. Or locking your essays on key articles to all and sundry. No, I am not a new user and that shit wont work. Neither am I stalking or trolling you, nor is anyone appearing on your watchlist, get over yourself. cygnis insignis 15:35, 13 February 2019 (UTC)

Sorry to hear it, and thanks for the guidance. I've helped the newbie on Marianne North and we've just thanked each other for the other's contributions. I'll try to be sweet to old and new alike. Chiswick Chap (talk) 17:01, 13 February 2019 (UTC)

As will I. And that great news, she is an interesting artist and person. I read a lot about biological artists (illustrators), not so much about their biographical details. cygnis insignis 17:37, 13 February 2019 (UTC)

@Chiswick Chap: another artist turned up on my witchlist this day, Matilda Smith is worth a look if you are not aware of her work. It turns out I created it [shit!] twelve years ago. cygnis insignis 01:57, 14 February 2019 (UTC)

It seems in good order, barring a serious bit of research down the library! I've added a couple of links. Chiswick Chap (talk) 08:43, 14 February 2019 (UTC)