User talk:Donlammers/Archive 1

Archive 1

Archive 2

Archive 3

Archive 4

WikiProject Zoo

I would like to know if you are still an active participant in the WP:ZOO, If you are please confirm by way of responding on my talk page. I am just trying to get an idea of how many people are still engaged in the project as to better work out how to manage and address things that are listed in the project. Kind Regards ZooPro 13:55, 26 October 2009 (UTC)

IMPORTANT!!! ALERT CONCERNING WIKIPROJECT ZOO!!!!

Ok, so I remembered you as someone that collaborated on WikiProject Zoo with ZooPro and me. Well, apparently in the last few days ZooPro completely lost his cool with another editor, got his rollback rights revoked, and has apparently quit Wikipedia. I have taken over coordination of WikiProject Zoo, and I was wondering if you wanted to co-coordinate it with me. Hopefully, ZooPro will calm down and come back. Cheers, The Arbiter^★_★^★ 00:53, 30 November 2009 (UTC)

I have not been around long, and really don't know the ropes well (it took me a while to figure out how to respond to you). I'm not sure I'm qualified to try to coordinate (or co-coordinate) anything yet. My primary interest is not Zoos, though I am sort of working on Denver Zoo (my home zoo) and Phoenix Zoo (long story). I'm actually more interested in gradually improving specific articles than in classes of articles. My primary research right now is focused on Red Panda. I'm not an admin (and not sure I want to be) and don't even know if I'm allowed to roll back (let alone how to do it -- I just go in and compare with my last known good edits and fix it). Having said that, if there is anything specific and not terribly time consuming that I can help with, I will try. I have a day job, and an 8 year old that take up much of my time (today was off to the aquarium).Donlammers (talk) 03:11, 30 November 2009 (UTC)

Ok, just wanted to make you aware that ZooPro is gone, and that I am the new coordinator. If you're having trouble with Wiki-formatting and doing general things, you could become an adoptee of mine if you want. That being said, happy editing, and I'll ask you if help is needed concerning the WikiProject. Cheers, The Arbiter^★_★^★ 22:55, 1 December 2009 (UTC)

Kyoto Zoo

Don--I have no idea what edition of the Lonely Planet you are using. Does it also recommend viewing the cigarette smoking monkey? The basic problem is that the article on the Kyoto Zoo does not contain information. It contains misinformation--even if the "facts" are accurate it creates an impression that is so far from reality that outright lies would be far better. Having a "criticisms" section as a balm to that is like having a "criticisms" section in the article on Darfur, or a "criticisms" section that says that "shit smells." Have you ever been to the Kyoto Zoo? If so, when was your last visit. If you go and you do not feel that the Wikipedia article that you are carefully shepherding gives a better description of what the Kyoto Zoo is like than, let's say--ABSOLUTELY NO ARTICLE ABOUT THE KYOTO ZOO--I will gladly pay your 800 Yen entrance fee. JDH

I have copied the above comment and moved the answers to this to the Talk:Kyoto Municipal Zoo#Criticisms, since that is where they should be discussed. Plese continue any discussion there. Donlammers (talk) 03:33, 5 October 2010 (UTC)

Georgia disambiguation (in Atlanta, Georgia)

Awesome. :) That's a great idea. I sort of have the same sort of thing for the pages that need to be disammed almost daily. --User:Woohookitty ^{Disamming fool!} 12:51, 5 January 2010 (UTC)

Bog Turtle

Hello, I've noticed some of your work and dropped by to tell you a story and ask you a question. A group of students and I recently brought the bog turtle article up to GA as a part of this project (which is designed for high school students), but we hope to attain FA in the near future. We were told by the community to condense our reference list, but we're all fairly new and don't exactly know how all that jazz works. We've done nearly all the research and writing for that page (as we were instructed by our teacher) so we were hoping someone would come along and help us with the clean up phase, which we're certainly in (along with the ends of the research phase). Will you help?--NYMFan69-86 (talk) 22:11, 26 January 2010 (UTC)

I assume you are watching this page now, so I will reply here. I haven't actually pushed anything I'm working to FAC yet either. It will be interesting to see what the reviewers will require.

It does look like you have your references in order. First step is to remove the duplicates. For instance, "Bog Turtles Slipping Away". Pick one instance (I usually do the first, but it doesn't have to be). You already have <ref name=slipping> there. Then, everywhere else you reference this, remove the big long reference and use <ref name=slipping/>. You will end up with a single item under Notes. Although not strictly necessary, I try to always quote values in markup (it's easier to always do it then remember where you must and where it's optional), as in <ref name="slipping"/>.

The References title really should be "Notes" or "Footnotes" (Wikipedia seems to prefer "Notes", so that's what I use). Then, remove the "Notes" subtitle and promote "Bibliography". I usually use either "References" for your Bibliography (if the books were actually used as general references) or "Further Reading" (if you didn't really use it as a reference but you think it would be interesting for someone that is already interested in Bog Turtles.

I have put a watch on the Bog Turtle article. I'm not sure how much time I will have, but I will try to help as I can.Donlammers (talk) 22:32, 26 January 2010 (UTC)

OK, thanks for the help and explanation, I will try to condense the list if I can. Maybe we'll both learn something from this experience.--NYMFan69-86 (talk) 02:23, 28 January 2010 (UTC)

I've done some work with the list, it should look a little better now (I condensed the slipping away" ref and renamed "References" as "Bibliography" and visa versa. However, I am havin a hard time naming new refs, do you know how?--NYMFan69-86 (talk) 20:40, 28 January 2010 (UTC)

Yes, this cleaned it up considerably, especially since you consolidated the citation with the largest number of duplicates.

Do you mean how to set up the "master" reference with a name you can refer to elsewhere? If so, you just add name="newname" in the <ref> tag, like so: <ref name="newname">. You can pick any name you like. I usually use the author and year separated by an underbar (I work on multiple platforms, so I'm in the habit of using no spaces on these things). If you mean something else, I probably need a bit of clarification (or an example).

I guess I didn't explain the references sections adequately last time. For arrangement of reference sections, you might want to take a look at Wikipedia:Citing sources and see how the various section headings are used at the bottom of that article. All reference sections are at the same heading level (i.e., you don't have a "References" section with several subsections). Bibliography seems to be only used for lists of works by writers, and for articles that are only lists of works. The sections for references and links mean approximately the following, and they don't all need to be present:

• See Also: links to other relevant articles on Wikipedia.
• Notes: Is for the inline citations (footnotes) that are shown using the {{reflist}} template.
• References: Are for general references that you used which may not be cited specifically. In some cases, there may be items in both Notes and References.
• Further Reading: Is for additional related material that you may not have used as a reference. I haven't used this much, as usually I use these documents as references.
• External Links: Is for the "official" web site (if there is one), and other related web resources. This should always be the last section if it is used.

In this article, you are only using Notes and References. Donlammers (talk) 02:45, 29 January 2010 (UTC)

No, no...don't misunderstand my confusion, you are doing a wonderful job of explination, it's just that I didn't know how to name the refs (yes for the first time). So I add the new name before and after the first instance of the inline citation? Like <refname=newname> here would be the reference with the author's name and date written and all of that </refname=newname>...I would do this the first time the citation appears in the article and all other times just put <refname=newname>? (I'm sorry i'm sort of a slow learner >_< )--NYMFan69-86 (talk) 18:30, 29 January 2010 (UTC)

Ah, sorry, I'm assuming you know more than you do about the tags used in Wikipedia. You have it almost right. In the "master" instance, you do the following <ref name="newname">here would be the reference with the author's name and date written and all of that</ref>. Note the space after ref in the first tag. name="newname" is an attribute, not part of the tag name, so it is not repeated in the closing tag. Now, where you want to put "copies" of this reference, you just put a single tag <ref name="newname"/>. Note the slash at the end of the tag. This closes the tag without having to use a closing tag. It's the same as if you typed <ref name="newname"></ref>, except it's easier and looks cleaner. This is formatted just like HTML markup. In case you didn't know, most (maybe all, but I don't know for sure) HTML markup will work in Wikipedia, though for a lot of things the wiki markup is easier to use.

BTW: I went ahead and changed the titles in the references section to match recommendations in WP:CITE. Sorry, it's one of my pet peeves, and I've been working over in Olympics to straighten their titles out as well. Donlammers (talk) 02:05, 30 January 2010 (UTC)

Okay, thanks for taking an initiative. Let me ask you a question, would it be easier for you to walk me through this process (although I think the walk's almost over) or to go through and do it? This remark does not come out of laziness, it's just that I am terrible with computer and HTML and all that. Actually, could you just name all the refs and i'll sort through the mess (i.e. putting the new tags in the lines where I originally had the long citation)?--NYMFan69-86 (talk) 02:25, 30 January 2010 (UTC)

I went in and consolidated the only two other duplicate sets that I found.

Thank you very much.--NYMFan69-86 (talk) 14:34, 30 January 2010 (UTC)

More Bog Turtle

Donny my friend, we're putting the bog article up for FA perhaps this weekend, could you run through our citations maybe check our formatting? Much obliged.--NYMFan69-86 (talk) 21:04, 2 March 2010 (UTC)

Just for calling me Donny, I should refuse. But, I will do what I can. Unfortunately, at work I'm in release mode for the next couple of weeks, but I can probably spend some time looking at it Friday and Saturday. Donlammers (talk) 22:36, 2 March 2010 (UTC)

Sorry man. You're a saint.--NYMFan69-86 (talk) 23:52, 3 March 2010 (UTC)

Thank you so much for helping the bog turtle article. I am at a loss when it comes to referencing format, so all of your help is greatly appreciated.--Merry Beth (talk) 23:24, 8 March 2010 (UTC)

It's been great watching this article evolve. And, you folks have been doing the heavy lifting. I'm just taking care of some of the technical details. Donlammers (talk) 00:55, 9 March 2010 (UTC)

Phoenix Zoo

Thanks very much for picking up this article's GA reassessment; I know it's a PITA, but it's got to be done.

I'll be happy to sign this off now just as soon as the image issue is resolved. --Malleus Fatuorum 00:56, 31 January 2010 (UTC)

Singpost

Hello! As a very active member of WikiProject Olympics, you have been chosen to be featured in this week’s Wikipedia Signpost!!

Please answer the questions by tonight, it goes to press tomorrow!! Thank you,

Belugaboy535136 ^contribs 19:55, 7 February 2010 (UTC)

I do deadlines at work. I don't do deadlines on Wikipedia. A also don't answer surveys or conduct interviews. If I'm the only Olympics member you can find, you are in deep trouble, as I know very little about the topic and have been only doing consistency editing to date. Donlammers (talk) 20:06, 7 February 2010 (UTC)

Nevermind, we found some people and we put them to press, see how it turns out tomorrow (I ended up not writing the questions, but I did the headers). Happy editing and we hope to see you on the Signpost one day!! Belugaboy535136 ^contribs 23:31, 7 February 2010 (UTC)

WP:CITE

Please don't waste time changing "References" to "Notes" etc. Per WP:CITE: "the alternative titles 'References' or 'Footnotes' may be used rather than 'Notes.'" Thanks. Rklawton (talk) 15:03, 9 February 2010 (UTC)

Sorry if I offended you by my edits. Is this about my time wasted (though I can't imagine why you would care about this), about citing the article, or about the title itself? I am not walking through articles to find instances of this to change. I would consider that a waste of my time. I am only making changes when I am in an article for some other reason, so any extra time spent is minimal. I am currently going through zoo articles to match up the state zoo templates with the list of zoos, and since this involves adding and then checking links, while I am in each article I have been checking to make sure that the appropriate zoo templates are in place and that the references sections are consistent. If citing the article is the problem, I can use consistency as my reason. If you specifically don't like my choice of "Notes" as the title for footnotes, then I guess my only answer is that I'm following what I interpret to be the preferred terminology from the text of the article, its examples, and the article itself while trying to make a series of articles a bit more consistent. If you are offended by changes I made in a particular article, I apologize, but again, I'm just trying to make things a bit more consistent in a little corner of Wikipedia (namely zoos) Donlammers (talk) 16:23, 9 February 2010 (UTC)

Please don't make unnecessary changes to articles. WikiProject Oregon has spent some good effort to bring all the articles under our eye to the same standard, and that uses a References section. Changing some of those to Notes violates the intent of the Manual of Style. —EncMstr (talk) 03:52, 13 February 2010 (UTC)

I guess this is a matter of perspective. I was just trying to make zoo articles consistent (these are the articles that are "under our eye"), and you are obviously working on Oregon articles, and there are inevitably some intersections. I'm assuming that you are referring to "following the predominent style" (If not, please let me know -- I want to understand the issues a bit better here). Before starting to standardize the Zoo articles, I read the various articles on end-of-article materials closely in the hopes of avoiding conflicts. The article you point to uses "Notes" as the citation section, and "References" for general references (a bulleted list). WP:CITE has the same layout, and says "Footnotes or References may also be used", which implies that "Notes" is preferred. Although I have indeed seen all three used for citation sections, where there are both citations and general references, the general references section seems to be named "References". So I am not simply randomly changing things -- I did try to do the research to get it right. So, a couple of questions... Do you simply not use any general reference section? If you do, how do you handle the two separate lists? Donlammers (talk) 11:32, 13 February 2010 (UTC)

There is a tag more frequent on older articles which complains about general references and requests editors to use inline citations. It is {{inline}}. I just looked at WP:CITE and indeed it does show that what you were doing conforms. I haven't looked at it for a couple years, so perhaps it has changed. I note that the talk page has recent suggestions to eliminate general references.

Other WP:ORE editors also have the same take as me: References is the only section needed, and it is for inline citations. The guideline does reinforce that general references are frequently used on less developed articles. But, you raise a good point. I'll do more digging. —EncMstr (talk) 17:34, 13 February 2010 (UTC)

OK, I see the discussion (it's really recent), and it sounds like there has been a fairly recent rewrite of the article (in January) with which I am not familiar since my reading was about 5 months ago. I will reread everything before I do anything else with section naming. Donlammers (talk) 19:08, 13 February 2010 (UTC)

Hello

Hello Donlammers. I have just looked at your user page and, thus, have found that we are neighbors of a sort since I live in Wheat Ridge. It is nice to bump into a wikipedian from my neck of the woods. I always tell friends and neighbors that one of the main reasons to go to the Denver Zoo is to see the red pandas. I also like going by their enclosures during their Xmas lights season since they are, sometimes, more active in the evening then they are during regular zoo hours. Cheers and happy editing. MarnetteD | Talk 14:59, 23 February 2010 (UTC)

Hello! I live up in the foothills -- Coal Creek Canyon. Good to hear that someone local is watching Red Panda as well. I've managed to upgrade the Denver Zoo article to B-class over the last few months, and will push for GA-class when I have some time. lmillertekdoc (who did some editing a couple of months ago) is also local, and is employed in the same tech writing department that I am. My son likes the bug toss at Bird World best (he's 8) -- I'm just a follower there. Donlammers (talk) 15:54, 23 February 2010 (UTC)

Hi again. I'm afraid that I can't guarantee anything as my schedule is somewhat full for the next couple of weeks, but if I can I will try to get to Auraria to look up the book that you mentioned. Seeing the zoo through a child's eyes has got to be great. I can still remember my grandparents taking me there back in the 1960's. All of the birds were jammed into one little structure and the smell almost knocked you back out of the door when you went in. I am pretty sure that the frame of that building is still there. I think they took off the walls and it is now an open air exhibit housing the bald eagles (maybe). Congrats on all of the work that you have done on the zoo's article and stay warm in the midst of all of this snow. MarnetteD | Talk 17:28, 23 February 2010 (UTC)

Fair enough. We didn't move here until 1977, and didn't really start going to the zoo until about 7 years ago. The glassed-in section of the old bird house is now wire mesh, and houses bald eagles and Andean condors. the walled section is still walled, and one end of it is the winter quarters for the flamingos. And yes, looking at it through a kids eyes is a great experience -- even if it is a kid that can spout twice as much as I can about every animal, and knows most of the Latin names already. Donlammers (talk) 17:36, 23 February 2010 (UTC)

Re: 170.158.63.137

Yours is the last warning I see on the talk page for this IP address. This IP is at it again in Red Panda. I can't block, but I assume you can. I will revert the edit now Donlammers (talk) 15:13, 24 February 2010 (UTC)

No, I cannot block. Furthermore, the warning on that page is from 2008. Gurch (talk) 23:26, 24 February 2010 (UTC)

Sorry. I wasn't paying attention to the date. Also, I guess I assumed that if someone was threatening to block, the actually could. Oh well. I reverted the edit anyway. Donlammers (talk) 02:37, 25 February 2010 (UTC)

At no point in the warning did I "threaten to block". You may have me confused with the author of the message below mine. Gurch (talk) 15:54, 28 February 2010 (UTC)

Please accept my apologies. You are correct. Because it was in a box after your name (not looking like a separate post, I just didn't pay attention to the name in it. Again, I'm sorry for my confusion. Donlammers (talk) 16:25, 28 February 2010 (UTC)

re:It's FA Now!!

Hey I replied generally to your comments on my talk page. I like to keep the discussion together so please view my reply there. In short thanks for your help and also for seeing the importance of the FAC for the 1956 Winter Games. H1nkles _{citius altius fortius} 23:08, 5 April 2010 (UTC)

Deletion nomination of Talk:St Augustine Alligator Farm

blanked page

Hi Donlammers, this is a message from an automated bot, regarding Talk:St Augustine Alligator Farm. You blanked the page and, since you are its sole author, FrescoBot has interpreted it as a request for deletion of the page and asked administrators to satisfy the requests per speedy deletion criterion G7. Next time you want a page that you've created deleted, you can explicitly request the deletion by inserting the text {{db-author}}. If you didn't want the page deleted, please remove the {{db-author}} tag from the page and undo your blanking or put some content in the page. Admins are able to recover deleted pages. Please do not contact the bot operator for issues not related with bot's behaviour. To opt out of these bot messages, add {{bots|deny=FrescoBot}} somewhere on your talk page. -- FrescoBot (msg) 00:30, 17 April 2010 (UTC)

Zoo Basel

Thanks for all your help. It greatly appreciated !!! This weekend I am going to review and edit ALL references on Zoo Basel's main page and all subpages. For example the whole intro is currently without any references...

I will also work on the history and will put some older pictures in. lucasuvu (talk) 14:36, 28 May 2010 (UTC)

WP Zoo in the Signpost

Don't forget to post your answers to the interview questions for next week's article. I answered your questions about the simple interview process on the project's talk page, but let me know if you have any other questions regarding the interview. Thanks! -Mabeenot (talk) 19:44, 28 May 2010 (UTC)

Zoo Miami

Thanks for your message. I am eager to work with you in the future on improving the article ... and possibly others like it! Esb94 (talk) 23:10, 4 July 2010 (UTC)

Glad to help! I will keep an eye on Zoo Miami. I think this article could be taken to B-class without too much trouble, but right now I'm working mostly on trying to assess start-class zoo articles and make sure they meet project standards (and I'm only in the B's). If you are interested in helping on zoo articles, there is certainly plenty to do at just about any level -- even if you only want to work on Florida articles. You are welcome to join WikiProject Zoo and declare your interests if you wish. Donlammers (talk) 09:39, 8 July 2010 (UTC)

American Association of Zoo Keepers

This is an automated message from CorenSearchBot. I have performed a web search with the contents of American Association of Zoo Keepers, and it appears to include a substantial copy of http://www.aazkdetroit.org/mission.html. For legal reasons, we cannot accept copyrighted text or images borrowed from other web sites or printed material; such additions will be deleted. You may use external websites as a source of information, but not as a source of sentences. See our copyright policy for further details. (If you own the copyright to the previously published content and wish to donate it, see Wikipedia:Donating copyrighted materials for the procedure.)

This message was placed automatically, and it is possible that the bot is confused and found similarity where none actually exists. If that is the case, you can remove the tag from the article and it would be appreciated if you could drop a note on the maintainer's talk page. CorenSearchBot (talk) 01:20, 7 July 2010 (UTC)

WP:ZOO

I was wondering in honor of ZooPro if we could fly the Australia flag every WP:ZOO Birthday. We'll talk about it officially when The Arbiter comes back, but I just wanted to get your opinion. Thanks!

Belugaboy 22:00, 8 July 2010 (UTC)

Much as I miss having a good (not to mention very knowledgeable) contributor, he unfortunately kind of self destructed at the end. Also, though I don't particularly object to memorials, I think they are probably more appropriate in the user space, not on a WikiProject (among other issues, this probably counts as PoV). As you say, we should probably wait until the Arbiter can weigh in on the subject. Donlammers (talk) 23:16, 8 July 2010 (UTC)

Red Pandas

Hey Donlammers, I thought maybe we could combine efforts to some extent with the red panda wikipedia article. Maybe we could list references we wish to find and categorise them by what useful information we believe is in them. I already have a list going which I am gradually working through. The more I get through though, the more articles are referenced which I then seek to find too. I know that I have access to some material you don't and vice versa, so I think it could be quite beneficial. What do you think? Innocenceisdeath (talk) 21:28, 30 July 2010 (UTC)

Sorry, not ignoring you. Recently I have been mostly working on zoo articles, and have been pretty busy at my day job as well. I agree that a list would be helpful, though right now I don't have much of a "backlog" myself. We could put it on the Red Panda Talk page. I would suggest that we start with what information we want (for instance "Subspecies name confirmation", "First record", etc.), and then list the references where we think we might find this information. That would also let anyone else that might have access see what information we are looking for. Donlammers (talk) 13:13, 1 August 2010 (UTC)

Speedy deletion nomination of HawkQuest

A tag has been placed on HawkQuest requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section A7 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because the article appears to be about an organization or company, but it does not indicate how or why the subject is important or significant: that is, why an article about that subject should be included in an encyclopedia. Under the criteria for speedy deletion, such articles may be deleted at any time. Please see the guidelines for what is generally accepted as notable, as well as our subject-specific notability guideline for organizations and companies. You may also wish to consider using a Wizard to help you create articles - see the Article Wizard.

If you think that this notice was placed here in error, you may contest the deletion by adding {{hangon}} to the top of the page that has been nominated for deletion (just below the existing speedy deletion or "db" tag - if no such tag exists then the page is no longer a speedy delete candidate and adding a hangon tag is unnecessary), coupled with adding a note on the talk page explaining your position, but be aware that once tagged for speedy deletion, if the page meets the criterion, it may be deleted without delay. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag yourself, but don't hesitate to add information to the page that would render it more in conformance with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. Lastly, please note that if the page does get deleted, you can contact one of these admins to request that they userfy the page or have a copy emailed to you. --ANowlin: talk 23:27, 31 July 2010 (UTC)

Thank you

For this edit. I agree completely about the proper focus of pictures in zoo articles. postdlf (talk) 12:59, 1 August 2010 (UTC)

Thanks for the update

Thanks for getting me up to speed with the project, much appreciated. Give me a week of two to get back into the swing of it all and I will be fully back on track. Is there anything you would like me to do? ZooPro 00:47, 9 August 2010 (UTC)

I've been trying to deal with assessing and updating, basically from the bottom up. I've at least gotten rid of the "needs work" articles and have been managing to handle "unassessed" as they show up (this isn't too frequent). Obviously if we could get an army to update stubs to start it would be great, but that seems unlikely. So I think the next thing in terms of spiffing up the project is to finish the portal, which has not had any work done on it since you and ZooFari left. If you could tackle that, it would basically finish up the "refresh" that you started a while back. There is plenty of other grunt work, but that will just have to happen a bit at a time. Donlammers (talk) 01:52, 9 August 2010 (UTC)

Random thanks

Hi Donlammers, since I joined this project I've been looking for a feature that puts all named refs in the References section, thanks! Also, thanks for all your great contributions, cheers, jonkerz♠ 11:35, 12 August 2010 (UTC)

Glad to help. In my opinion, this is really a lot easier to deal with than sticking long citations in the body of the text. Note that trying to make it 2 column does not work. You must use colwidth=30em instead (I discovered this by trial and error). Donlammers (talk) 11:38, 12 August 2010 (UTC)

I agree. I had to try it with 2 columns, it does seem to work, at least the references shows up in two columns in preview mode (but it does not work if the "|2" is put after the refs). colwidth=30em should probably be used anyway, since it takes different screen sizes/resolutions into account. jonkerz♠ 11:51, 12 August 2010 (UTC)

Hmm. I thought I tried that. Anyway, as you say, colwidth is probably better anyway. Donlammers (talk) 12:22, 12 August 2010 (UTC)

Reverts to my edits

Well, i added a note that both of the zoos that i edited are closed to the public due to a labour strike. It wasn't a news section but a note. News and note are different things. --Zalgo (talk) 19:17, 24 August 2010 (UTC)

I saw the first, almost did something, then reverted the Insectarium after seeing the other revert. I think that putting it right in the lead, without citation and in italics makes it an announcement. I think it would be more appropriate to put such information into the History section, or at the very least un-italicize it. Donlammers (talk) 20:10, 24 August 2010 (UTC)

Australia Zoo

Thanks for working on the Australia Zoo article, I generally leave it alone as it would be a conflict of interest for me. If you want to know anything or need some help with info let me know. ZooPro 10:46, 5 September 2010 (UTC)

They've completely revamped the Web site, so a lot of the citations no longer line up. Once I get through all of the citations I'll try to figure out where to go next. In the meantime I am doing some reorganization and some expansion as I go. Donlammers (talk) 11:29, 5 September 2010 (UTC)

Its the fourth time the website has changed in the last 6 yrs. I do miss the original simple style that was easy to navigate. I think the web team gets the budget for the year and decide to go crazy. Considering this is what we started out with the new one is like a highway. Good luck ZooPro 11:42, 5 September 2010 (UTC)

Thanks for the help with Arkansas Zoo article

Thanks for the help. -      Hydroxonium (talk) 09:27, 9 September 2010 (UTC)!

Yummy!! The article should be out of the woods now, though you never know.

• Unless you can use the file listed in Sources as a citation, it should probably be removed. It probably says something that we could use, but unless someone can verify what that is (the page is blanked for me on Google), it shouldn't be in the article, and if we are getting specific info from it, then it should be turned into a inline citation.
• I would also change "References" to "Notes", as that seems to be slightly preferred, but I don't generally mess with it unless there are clearly both citations (Notes) and general references (References) because some people get emotional about the titles.

I will try to take a closer look at the citations over the next couple of days and see what other information we may be able to extract. In particular, I would like to see citations for # of animals and species, and have a land area for the facility. Donlammers (talk) 09:57, 9 September 2010 (UTC)

First I have to say thanks very much. I've learned a great deal from watching your work. I'll remove the sources section as I can't confirm the information in the source. I saw this article was up for deletion and decided to try and save it, and it has been a great learning experience. I will defer to your knowledge and experience as I'm a newbie trying to learn and I welcome all input. I'll do some more searching and see if I can find other useful information to add. Thanks again for the help. -      Hydroxonium (talk) 11:56, 9 September 2010 (UTC)

I think (though I can't be sure) that the "trigger" for this deletion request was that there was nothing signifying why the article should exist in the opening sentence (don't ever talk about 501 (c)3 charity status in the first sentence either -- there is a guy looking for that). The first sentence in a zoo article should generally establish that it is a zoo (the reason for its notability), and include acreage, opening date, and location if available. Note that this in itself won't make it immune from deletion requests, but it does eliminate one more thing that deleters look for. Yes, there are people who go around looking for articles to delete, and unfortunately their job (tagging the article) is a whole lot easier than our job (actually finding citations and including information. There are of course many articles that deserve to be deleted (for instance, use of Wikipedia for advertising or self-aggrandizement). However, in general I prefer to rescue articles if possible rather than throwing away information. Donlammers (talk) 12:13, 9 September 2010 (UTC)

That is some good information to know. Thanks for sharing that. The AfD nominator is withdrawing the AfD so I think we saved this article. I'll spend a little more time with the article and then leave the rest to others. Thanks for all your support -      Hydroxonium (talk) 17:39, 9 September 2010 (UTC)

License tagging for File:Alice Springs Desert Park logo.png

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

For help in choosing the correct tag, or for any other questions, leave a message on Wikipedia:Media copyright questions. Thank you for your cooperation. --ImageTaggingBot (talk) 11:05, 15 September 2010 (UTC)

Slaughterhouse-Five

Could you please explain your reason for adding this to wikiproject zoo? To me it would appear to have nothing to do with zoo's. I ask because it is listed as a top priority and is now listed as one of our articles for release on wikipedia 0.8 release. ZooPro 00:34, 20 September 2010 (UTC)

This was added when I did my list sweep, based on the fact that it is in List of zoos#Fictional zoos. There are a couple of other fictional zoos that were added as a result of this sweep. If we want to leave it in the list (I didn't put it there) but not include it in the WPZOO list, we should probably try to make a note or something so that it doesn't get added again at some point, as well as remove the WPZOO template from the other similar articles. I don't have an opinion either way on this one. Donlammers (talk) 01:54, 20 September 2010 (UTC)

Just stopping by

I created the Chehaw Park page for my English 1101 class last year and it's fun to go back to it and see all of the changes made. Thanks for helping the page look so great! —Preceding unsigned comment added by 141.165.242.224 (talk) 03:24, 24 September 2010 (UTC)