Open main menu

Archive
Archives

Contents

Nomenclature of fungiEdit

Hey there. I recently stumbled across an issue of Nova Hedwigia Beheift titled "the genera of fungi" (or was it agaricaceae?). It's filled to the brink with mind-numbing nomenclatural discussions of all the genera ever described (I think, anyway). Would it be any use if I looked up the specific ref or any specific genera? Circeus 00:20, 14 June 2007 (UTC)

That would be friggin' trés bién. The first one that would be absolutely great to get a clarification on is Agaricus which was called Psalliota in many texts fro many years and I've been mystified as to why. Other articles I intend cleaning up are Amanita muscaria, which is the one I intended taking to FA first but it just didn't come together well, Gyromitra esculenta as a future FA, Agaricus bisporus as a future FA, and cleaning up the destroying angels – Amanita virosa, Amanita bisporiga and Amanita verna. Boletus edulis would be a good one to check too. let me know if anything interesting pops up. I'll see ifd I can think of any other taxonomic quagmires later today. Work just got real busy :( cheers, Cas Liber | talk | contribs 02:01, 14 June 2007 (UTC)
Generally, that's pretty arcane and only relevant to genus articles, or species that were tightly involving in defining them (for example, there seems to be an odd debate over the multiple type species for Amanita). I'll look up Agaricus, Amanita (since A. muscaria's the current type) and Psalliota. I'll also dig up the ref so you can look it up yourself, with any chance. Circeus 04:52, 14 June 2007 (UTC)
Cool, keen to see what pops up. Cheers, Cas Liber | talk | contribs 05:17, 14 June 2007 (UTC)
I only quickly thumbed through it and noted the full ref (Donk, M.A. (1962). "The generic names proposed for Agaricaceae". Beiheifte zur Nova Hedwigia. 5: 1–320. ISSN 0078-2238.) because I forgot about it until the last minute. Psalliota looks like a classic synonym case. It shares the same type with Agaricus, and might be older. Circeus 01:02, 16 June 2007 (UTC)
Weird! I thought Linnaeus was calling all sorts of things Agaricus so I wonder how it could predate that really....anyway I am curious.cheers, Casliber (talk · contribs) 02:46, 16 June 2007 (UTC)


Okay, First thing I have to say is... Damn, 18th–19th century taxonomy and nomenclature of fungi is a right mess. Whose bright idea was it to give fungi 3 starting dates in the ICBN???

LOTS of "per" in citation here. See [1]

On Agaricus
Etym.: Possibly "from Agarica of Sarmatica, a district of Russia" (!). Note also Greek ἀγαρικ[1]όν "a sort of tree fungus" (There's been an Agaricon Adans. genus, treated by Donk in Persoonia 1:180)
Donk says Linnaeus' name is devalidated (so that the proper author citation apparently is "L. per Fr., 1821") because Agaricus was not linked to Tournefort's name (Linnaeus places both Agaricus Dill. and Amanita Dill. in synonymy), but truely a replacement for Amanita Dill., which would require that A. quercinus, not A. campestris be the type. This question compounded by the fact that Fries himself used Agaricus roughly in Linnaeus' sense (which leads to issues with Amanita), and that A. campestris was eventually excluded from Agaricus by Karsten and was apparently in Lepiota at the time Donk wrote this, commenting that a type conservation might become necessary.
All proposals to conserve Agaricus against Psalliota or vice versa have so far been considered superfluous.

References

  1. ^ Letter is script and looks like a Russian и.
On Lepiota
Etym. Probably greek λεπις, "scale"
Basionym is Agaricus sect. Lepiota Pers. 1797, devalidated by later starting date, so the citation is (Pers.) per S.F.Gray. It was only described, without species, and covered an earlier mentioned, but unnamed group of ringed, non-volvate species, regardless of spore color. Fries restricted the genus to white-spored species, and made into a tribe, which was, like Amanita repeatedly raised to genus rank.
The type is unclear. L. procera is considered the type (by Earle, 1909). Agaricus columbrinus (L. clypeolarus) was also suggested (by Singer, 1946) to avoid the many combination involved otherwise in splitting Macrolepiota, which include L. procera. Since both species had been placed into different genera prior to their selection (in Leucocoprinus and Mastocephalus respectively), Donk observes that a conservation will probably be needed, expressing support for Singer's emendation.
On Psalliota
Etym.: ψάλιον, "ring"
Psalliota was first published by Fries (1821) as trib. Psalliota. The type is Agaricus campestris (widely accepted, except by Earle, who proposed A. cretaceus). Kummer (not Quélet, who merely excluded Stropharia) was the first to elevate the tribe to a genus. Basically, Psalliota was the tribe containing the type of Agaricus, so when separated, it should have caused the rest of the genus to be renamed, not what happened. It seems to be currently not considered valid, or a junior homotypic synonym, anyway the explanation is that it was raised by (in retrospect) erroneously maintaining the tribe name.
On Amanita
Etym.: Possibly from Amanon,a mountain in Cilicia.

A first incarnation from Tentamen dispositionis methodicae Fungorum 65. 1797 is cited as devalidated: "Introduced to cover three groups already previously distinguished by Persoon (in [...] Tent. 18. 1797) under Agaricus L., but at that time not named. It is worth stressing that [The species now known as Amanita caesarea] was not mentioned."

With Agaricus L. in use, Amanita was a nomen nudum per modern standard, so Persoon gave it a new life unrelated to its previous incarnations, and that is finally published after a starting date by Hooker (the citation is Pers. per Hook., 1821). He reuses Withering's 1801 definition (A botanical arrangement of British plants, 4th ed.). "The name Amnita has been considered validly published on different occasions, depending on various considerations." Proposed types include (given as Amanita. Sometimes they were selected as Agarici):
  • A. livida Pers. (By Earle, in 1909). Had been excluded in Vaginata or Amanitopsis and could not be chosen.
  • A. muscaria Pers. (By Clemens & Shear, 1931) for the genus (1801) from Synopsis fungorum, was generally transferred to the one from Hooker's Flora of Scotland, which is currently considered the valid publication of Amanita (or was in the 50s).
  • A. phalloides (by Singer, 1936) for the 1801 genus.
  • A.bulbosa (by Singer & Smith, 1946) for Gray's republication. This is incorrect as Gray's A. bulbosa is a synonym of A. citrina. Some authors consider Gray to be the first valid republisher.
  • A. caeserea (by Gilbert, 1940). Troublesome because not known personally to Persoon or Fries.

Donk concludes the earliest valid type is A. muscaria, the species in Hooker, adding that he'd personally favor A. citrina.

The name has been republished three times in 1821: in Hooker, Roques and Gray (in that order). Roques maintained Persoon's circumscription, including Amanitopsis and Volvaria. Gray excluded Amanitopsis and Volvariella into Vaginata. Right after, Fries reset the name by reducing the genus to a tribe of Agaricus, minus pink-spored Volvariella. This tribe became a subgenus, than genus via various authors, Quélet, altough not the first, often being attributed the change. Sometimes it was used in a Persoonian sense (whether that is a correct use according to ICBN is not clear to me).
Homonyms of Amanita Pers. are Amanita adans. (1763, devalidated) and Amanita (Dill) Rafin. (1830)
On Boletus
Not including (Not in Agaricaceae, sorry).

Phew! Circeus 18:52, 18 June 2007 (UTC)

I hope you intend to clean that prose ASAP? It's definitely not article-worthy as is. Circeus 01:05, 20 June 2007 (UTC)
I'm working on it. Got distracted this morning...cheers, Casliber (talk · contribs) 01:08, 20 June 2007 (UTC)

PorkEdit

LOL, I love your sense of humour. Maimonedes is a good reference. The reality is that Islam takes food restrictions from Judaism; and Christianity doesn't have any restriction (courtesy of three references in the New Testament). The reason why pork should be restricted (along with many other things) is not given explicitly in the Hebrew Bible, hence Bible commentators have been offering guesses since ancient times. My own favourite, however, is Mary Douglas, wife of Louis Leakey, daughter of a Lutheran pastor. Her theory is excellent, based on her cultural anthropological observations, with a decent feel for how Biblical text works. It's rather an abstract theory though. Anyway, I'll see if I can manage a literature review of dietry restrictions in the ANE, especially if there's anything explicit about pork. Don't think I'll find a reference for "why" the pork taboo is in place, though, if it's documented, I'd have read about that in commentaries. Perhaps a clay tablet with the answer has been destroyed in only the last few years during the "troubles" in Iraq. :( Alastair Haines (talk) 21:27, 7 April 2008 (UTC)

This is the great thing about uncertainty. Lacking an answer, the reports of Maimonides, Mary Douglas and the other guy mentioned are fascinating.Cheers, Casliber (talk · contribs) 22:15, 7 April 2008 (UTC)
Scotish pork taboo is a remarkable article! Thanks for that, lol. Alastair Haines (talk) 21:59, 8 April 2008 (UTC)

Spotted this. I'll look for a ref to the Maimonides comment. The normal teaching is that pork is no more or less offensive to Jews than any other forbidden meat (dog, horse etc) or forbidden part of kosher animal (blood, Gid Hanasheh etc). The pig (NB pig, not pork – an important distinction which is relevant for the Maimonides comment too, I note) is "singled out" because it alone of the animals that have one of the two "signs" (it has split hooves but doesn't chew the cud) lies down with its legs sticking out. Most quarapeds have their legs folded under them. There's a midrashic lesson to be learned there, apparently, that the pig is immodestly and falsely proclaiming its religious cleanliness, when it is not. Anyway, that said, I'll look into the M comment – he was quite ahead of his time in terms of medical knowledge (check his biog). And NB my OR/POV antennae buzzed when I read that little section. --Dweller (talk) 22:52, 7 April 2008 (UTC)

Someone has tagged the Religious restrictions on the consumption of pork for OR, though the talk page seems to indicate it is for a different reason....Cheers, Casliber (talk · contribs) 23:03, 7 April 2008 (UTC)
Hmm... makes me more dubious, but I'll check. btw... I'm not Alastair! --Dweller (talk) 23:10, 7 April 2008 (UTC)

Have found good stuff, including online version of Maimonides text. I'll dump it here for you to use as you wish.

I maintain that the food which is forbidden by the Law is unwholesome. There is nothing among the forbidden kinds of food whose injurious character is doubted, except pork (Lev. xi. 7), and fat (ibid. vii. 23). But also in these cases the doubt is not justified. For pork contains more moisture than necessary [for human food], and too much of superfluous matter. The principal reason why the Law forbids swine's flesh is to be found in the circumstance that its habits and its food are very dirty and loathsome. It has already been pointed out how emphatically the Law enjoins the removal of the sight of loathsome objects, even in the field and in the camp; how much more objectionable is such a sight in towns. But if it were allowed to eat swine's flesh, the streets and houses would be more dirty than any cesspool, as may be seen at present in the country of the Franks.[1]

So, Maimonides argues "pork contains more moisture than necessary [for human food], and too much of superfluous matter", whatever that means! More importantly, the "principal reason" is that if you keep pigs, you end up with a dirty and unhealthy environment. Important note: Maimonides was writing from Islamic Egypt at the time, which is why he mentions "as may be seen at present in the country of the Franks." (ie France)

The comments about the pig's habit of lying with its legs outstretched come from Midrash Vayikra Rabba (ch 13) where it is mentioned as part of an elaborate metaphor, but not in connection with any reason for particularly abhorring the creature.

Hope that helps. --Dweller (talk) 09:48, 8 April 2008 (UTC)

References

  1. ^ Maimonides, Guide for the perplexed, Book III ch.48. Can be viewed online at http://www.sacred-texts.com/jud/gfp/gfp184.htm

Alpha CentauriEdit

I have unfortunately had to revert much of the changes you have made to the Alpha Centauri page – mainly to the structure revisions that you have done. While I agree it is best to standardise between bright star pages (i.e. Sirius), there is significant problems doing so to the Alpha Centauri page. The problem in previous edits is the confusion with Alpha Centauri the star and Alpha Centauri as a system. There was much about alpha centauri, especially its brightness compared to Arcturus as well as the relationship with Proxima Centauri. (See the Discussion with the associated page to this article.) It was thought best to avoid complexity by giving the basic information, and add complexity in sections so information could be understood at various levels of knowledge. Also as there is much interest in Alpha Centauri from children to amateur astronomers, it was best to give the introduction as brief as possible and explain the complexities as we go. As to modifications of articles as drastically as you have done to complex article, it might be better to do so with some discussion in the discussion section before doing so. Although I note that you have much experience in doing wiki edits, much better than me, it is better to make small changes in complex articles paragraph by paragraph than carte blanche changes. (I am very happy to discuss any issues on the article with you in the alpha centauri discussion to improve the article.)

As to the introduction, much of the additions you have made are actually speculative, and are not necessary on fact. I.e. "This makes it a logical choice as "first port of call" in speculative fiction about interstellar travel, which assumes eventual human exploration, and even the discovery and colonization of imagined planetary systems. These themes are common to many video games and works of science fiction." has little to do with the basic facts on alpha centauri. I.e. Nearest star, third brightest star, binary star, etc. As for "Kinematics" as a title, this is irrelevant (Sirius article also has it wrong). (Also see Discussion page for Alpha Centauri with SpacePotato) Note: I have contributed much to this page – 713 edits according to the statistics. (27th April 2008 to today) Arianewiki1 18:04, 6 August 2009 (UTC)

O-kay...taken it to the talk page.Casliber (talk · contribs) 20:29, 6 August 2009 (UTC)

Hi seems you're an expert for the bird species your help is needed to fix this or upgrade Hawaiʻi ʻakepa article thank you. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 49.148.188.171 (talk) 13:16, 5 March 2018 (UTC)

Bract patternEdit

Banksia menziesii cone.jpg

You know what I don't get? On page 245 of George (1981), and again on page 40 of Collins (2007), George gives a diagram showing the arrangement of unit inflorescences on a Banksia flower spike. Both diagrams clearly show a hexagonal layout; i.e. every common bract is surrounded by six equidistant common bracts, thus forming little hexagons. In support of this, George (1981) states "The unit inflorescences are so arranged on the axis that there are three pattern lines—vertical, and both dextral and sinistral spiral."

I haven't dissected an inflorescence, but in some species the pattern persists right through flowering and can be seen on the infructescence. You won't get a better example than this B. menziesii cone. Look at that pattern. There's no way you could call it hexagonal. It is a rectangular (or rather diamond, since the lines are diagonal) grid. Depending on how you define a neighbourhood, you could argue that each common bract has 4 or 8 neighbours, but there's no way you could argue for 6. Similarly, you could argue for two pattern lines (dextral and sinistral spiral) or four (dextral, sinistral, vertical and horizontal), but there is no way you could argue for 3, because there is no reason to include vertical whilst excluding horizontal). On top of that there is a beautiful symmetry in the way each common bract is surrounded by its own floral bracts and those of its neighbours. But George's diagrams destroy that symmetry.

I thought maybe B. menziesii was an exception to a general rule, but you can see the same diamond grid, though not as clearly, in File:Banksia serrata4.jpg, and I reckon (but am not certain) I can see it in my B. attenuata cone. And in File:Banksia prionotes mature cone.jpg too. What the heck is going on?

(I'm not just being a pretentious wanker here. I thought the diagram was interesting and informative enough for me to whip up an SVG version for Wikipedia. But since copying George's diagram isn't really on, and it is much better to go straight from nature if possible, I was basing my version on this B. menziesii cone. But it isn't going to work if the diagram shows a rectangular grid and the text has to say it is hexagonal.)

Hesperian 13:28, 29 August 2009 (UTC)

Thanks for reminding me on this one – I think it was Alex (or Kevin??) who told me that every bract pattern was unique to a species and hence diagnostic, but as far as I know not much if anything has been published on this area. The similarity between archaeocarpa and attenuata was noted (the bract pattern remaining in the fossils). I seem to recall feeling bamboozled as well by the description when I read it some time ago. I will have to refresh myself with some bedtime reading....Casliber (talk · contribs) 13:50, 29 August 2009 (UTC)
Update: I had a look at the pages in question in the banksia book(s), there is a little bit more in the 1981 monograph but not much. I meant to ring Alex George about this and should do so in the next few days...I guess the photos look sort of like hexagons stretched vertically :P Casliber (talk · contribs) 06:46, 2 September 2009 (UTC)
Dipsacus fullonum Just passing through. I am not an expert with flora but I do take photos now and again. Does this image from my personal collection help or hinder your discussion? I see diamonds --Senra (talk) 12:58, 22 July 2010 (UTC)
Haha yeah. Not a bad comparison at all. a diamond pattern it is there as well. You sorta let your eyes go a little out of focus and see two diagonal lines....Casliber (talk · contribs) 14:12, 22 July 2010 (UTC)

QuestionEdit

If this is what developing flower pairs look like...
then what are these brown and white furry things?

I note that the last six images to be posted on your talk page were posted by me. I'm not sure whether to apologise....

What is going on in the lower image? Clearly this is an inflorescence in very early bud, but those furry white things are apparently not developing flower pairs. Are they some kind of protective bract or something?

Hesperian 01:24, 1 September 2009 (UTC)

You certainly see those thingies on the developing buds of alot of banksias. I'd be intrigued what the Nikulinsky book, which is essentially a series of plates of a developing menziesii inflorescence, says (not sure, I don't recall whether it had commentary...). Another thing to look up. Was about to look up the patterns just now. Casliber (talk · contribs) 02:35, 1 September 2009 (UTC)
Now I have looked at the books and bract architecture, question is are they common bracts or are they something which falls off (don't think so but..). Something else to ask Alex. Casliber (talk · contribs) 06:49, 2 September 2009 (UTC)
Having found nothing in George, I've been reading Douglas's stuff on ontogeny of Proteaceae flowers, and found nothing there either.

If you snap a spike axis in half, they are just that brown colour, and essentially made of closely packed fuzz. I wonder if there is initially no gap in the axis for the flower to grow, so the developing flower literally has to shove some of the axis out in front of it as it extends. This would explain everything except for the white tip. Hesperian 10:23, 2 September 2009 (UTC)


I have today taken a long lunch and gone bushwalking with Gnangarra. While he took happy-snaps, I did some OR on this question. My diagnosis is: these are peduncles that have developed common bracts, but have not yet developed floral bracts or flowers.

In very young spikes like the one pictured here, they are not yet very densely packed together, so they can be perceived as individual peduncles. Given time, they will continue to grow, and as they do so they will become more and more densely packed together, until eventually they are jammed together so tightly that their dense coverings of hairs form the fibrous brown material that comprises a typical flower spike, and the common bracts at their apex will form the bract pattern on the surface of the spike. At that point, they will no longer be distinguishable as individual peduncles, but will simply be part of the spike.

When the flowers start to develop, they get squeezed together even more. At this point, sometimes, a peduncle may break off the axis and be squeezed right out of the spike as the flowers around it develop. Thus you may see one or two of these furry things sitting at random positions on the surface of a developed flower spike.

As evidence for this hypothesis I offer the following observations:

  1. Wherever one of those "furry things" is found loose on the surface of a spike, you will also find a gap in the bract pattern beneath it, where the common bract is absent;
  2. "Furry things" may occasionally be found partly out of the spike, but partly in, in which cases the white tip is quite obviously the common bract. In such cases removal of the "furry thing" leaves behind a visible hole in the spike where a common bract ought to be.

Hesperian 05:58, 15 September 2009 (UTC)

Interesting – Gah! Forgot to ring Alex – evening is a crazy time with little availability for me, but will see what I can do. Casliber (talk · contribs) 20:57, 15 September 2009 (UTC)

Not OR any more. Look at the picture of "Banksia flower bud seen in profile" here: clear evidence of the common and floral bracts forming one of those little furry upside-down pyramids, with the flower arising from it. Hesperian 03:38, 19 September 2009 (UTC)

On a tangential point, the first image would most likely pass FPC if it ever finds a home that is appropriate. Noodle snacks (talk) 06:55, 17 October 2010 (UTC)
Hmmm, okay, hopefully Hesperian will see this thread. :) Casliber (talk · contribs) 11:31, 17 October 2010 (UTC)
Gosh, would it really?! I was quite proud of it but a bit unsure whether it had enough depth of field. But if I'll take anyone's word that it would probably pass, I'll take Noodle snacks. :-) Hesperian 23:27, 17 October 2010 (UTC)

Banksia menziesii with persistent floretsEdit

Banksia menziesii inflorescence with persistent florets.jpg
Banksia menziesii with persistent florets.jpg

While I was out a-walking in the bush one day last week, I spied a banksia with an unfamiliar jizz. Even on closer inspection I was bamboozled for half a minute until the pieces fell together and I realised I was looking at a B. menziesii with persistent florets. Not just a bit late to fall: there were old cones from previous seasons with the florets still bolted on. In fact, there wasn't a single bald cone on the whole tree. I've never seen anything like it. Have you? Hesperian 04:42, 2 February 2010 (UTC)

Hmm..interesting. I have not ever noticed a menziesii like this, but not to say it can't happen. Might it be a menziesii/prionotes hybrid – how far is the tree from you? I'd compare the newgrowth/leaf dimensions/trunk all for comparison. Did it have any new flowers? Some of these old cones have an aura of prionotes about them...Casliber (talk · contribs) 05:11, 2 February 2010 (UTC)
prionotes crossed my mind at first, but the bark is that of menziesii, and nothing like the distinctive prionotes bark. And the flower spikes lack the woolliness of old prionotes florets.

It's quite near my place; about ten minutes drive. Even closer to where Alex lives (assuming he still lives at the address he has been publishing under lately): only five minutes drive from there I would guess. If it's prionotes (which it isn't), then we've extended the known range of that species 10km south. Likewise, a hybrid means there's a prionotes population nearby, so it amounts to the same thing. Hesperian 05:30, 2 February 2010 (UTC)

Banksiamyces againEdit

I finally made it to the library and got a hold of the article you had asked about a couple of weeks ago. There's enough info there to make DYK-worthy stubs on the genus, and three of the species (macrocarpus, katerinae, toomanis), or, alternatively, maybe enough for a GA on the genus. What are the chances of images? Apparently these fungi make small but visible apothecia on the seed capsules. Berkeley and Broome first wrote about the fungus in 1887, so maybe there's a sketch from the protologue that's useable. Anyway, I'll start adding text in a day or two and maybe we can have the first Banksia/Fungi wikiproject collaboration? Sasata (talk) 14:25, 18 February 2010 (UTC)

Berkeley & Broome (1887) is online at http://www.biodiversitylibrary.org/item/13683 — see page 217. There is a picture at Plate 29 figure 18. Hesperian 02:09, 19 February 2010 (UTC)
That's a nice image on plate 29 there. They call it Tympanis toomanis on page 224 decription of plate. How do we capture that image and replicate it on commons? Casliber (talk · contribs) 03:06, 19 February 2010 (UTC)
Like this. Hesperian 03:37, 19 February 2010 (UTC)
On page 222, they talk about finding it on a banksia cone near the Tooma River in southern NSW, which leaves me thinking it is a cone of Banksia marginata although they do not state this (OR alert ++++). Funny looking marginata cone but marginata is a hugely variable species....Casliber (talk · contribs) 03:11, 19 February 2010 (UTC)
Check your email; I've sent you a copy of Beaton (1982), where they do state that the cone is B. marginata. (You guys should have asked me first; I could have saved Sasata a walk to the library.) Hesperian 03:26, 19 February 2010 (UTC)
@Sasata – I'll leave it up to you whether a solid GA and one DYK for the whole shebang, or 4 species articles – you've got the material and I am happy either way. cheers, Casliber (talk · contribs) 03:11, 19 February 2010 (UTC)
Am working on the article behind-the-scenes now... that picture you uploaded is excellent, and thanks Hesp for finding the protologue. Too bad the scan resolution is so crappy; I can upload a screen capture/crop to Commons, but will first investigate to see if there's a copy of the original around here so I might rescan at higher resolution. Four DYKs and 1 GA doesn't sound unreasonable for the lot, but I'll see what I can come up with. Sasata (talk) 03:32, 19 February 2010 (UTC)
The resolution is good. I guess you were looking at it at 25%. Try zooming in. Hesperian 03:40, 19 February 2010 (UTC)
Yeah, it'll do the trick. I gave the article a good push towards GA. Hesp, do you have easy access to Beaton 1984, or maybe Fuhrer, B,; May, T. (1993). "Host specificity of disc-fungi in the genus Banksiamyces on Banksia." Victorian Naturalist (South Yarra) 110 (2):73–75? I think once those two are located and added, that'll be it from journals (but you may find stuff to add from your Banksia books?). I could start stubs for the species, but it would be a shame to have to leave out B. maccannii. Sasata (talk) 07:09, 19 February 2010 (UTC)
I can probably get Vic Naturalist at UNSW Library next tuesday or friday (slim chance on weekend). Casliber (talk · contribs) 07:25, 19 February 2010 (UTC)
When you get to Victorian Naturalist, you'll also want to grab Sommerville, K.; May, T. (2006). "Some taxonomic and ecological observations on Banksiamyces". The Victorian Naturalist. 123: 366–375.CS1 maint: Multiple names: authors list (link) Hesperian 08:43, 19 February 2010 (UTC)
Thanks for finding that, wonder why it didn't show up in my database search. Cas, if it's too mush hassle for you to get these, let me know and I can order them, would take 1–2 weeks to get here.
I'll have easy access to Beaton (1984) on Monday. No access to Victorian Naturalist. Hesperian 08:38, 19 February 2010 (UTC)
Sorry, forgot again. I've just scanned it now. Cas: I'll forward shortly; if you have Sasata's email address, can you forward it on please? Otherwise, Sasata: send me an email so I know where to send this scan. Hesperian 04:16, 25 February 2010 (UTC)
I don't see any email link on your user page... I can wait until Cas forward a copy. Thanks kindly Sasata (talk) 15:25, 25 February 2010 (UTC)
I guess you've never noticed the "Email this user" link in the sidebar toolbox.... Hesperian 23:22, 25 February 2010 (UTC)
! Wouldya look at that... That's embarrassing! Now excuse me while I go give eyewitness testimony in a murder trial. Sasata (talk) 23:46, 25 February 2010 (UTC)
Hang on a sec, will send. Also, will be near the library again for Vic Naturalist. Casliber (talk · contribs) 20:03, 25 February 2010 (UTC)
Hahaha. Fantastic. I just realised I never uplaoded a funny photo I took in WA a few years ago. I need to double check.
This old cone of Banksia violacea had these dark objects on it which might be a fungus as they certainly weren't on any other cones I saw about the place.
Casliber (talk · contribs) 20:25, 18 February 2010 (UTC)

As OZtrylia has a notoriously under described rang of and field of mycology study – any signs of further fungi or algae work is to be encouraged at all points SatuSuro 01:51, 19 February 2010 (UTC)


Taking pity on poor Cas, whose Banksia books are still packed up in boxes:

From Collins, Collins and George (2008), page 47, first paragraph of a section entitled "Fungi and lichens":

"Many kinds of fungi are associated with Banksias. There is even a genus of fungi named for their association with these plants—Banksiamyces. The first species of these was recognised in the 1880s and placed in the genus Tympanis, then in the 1950s transferred to the genus Encoelia. Further collections and research led to the description of the genus Banksiamyces by Beaton and Weste in 1982, with two further species. Six taxa are now recognised, so far known from 13 species of Banksia (Sommerville & May, 2006). Commonly known as banksia discs, they have all been found on eastern Australian Banksias and one is also known in Western Australia. They are discomycete fungi, growing on the fruit and appearing as small, shallow dark cups on the follicles (Fuhrer, 2005). When dry they fold inwards and look like narrow slits. Their effect is unk[n]own but it seems unlikely that they are responsible for degradation of the seeds."

At the bottom of the page there is a photo of Banksiamyces on B. lemanniana. They look like little light grey maggots on the follicles. Based on the photo and textual description, I would suggest that the B. violacea photo doesn't show this genus. Hesperian 11:17, 19 February 2010 (UTC)

Hmmm, that's what I initially thought when I read the description and sketches in Beaton 1982, but after seeing B&B's 1872 sketches, I was pretty sure Cas's pic was a Banksiamyces. I guess I should reserve judgment until I get more info. Sasata (talk) 17:09, 19 February 2010 (UTC)
From the abstract of Somerville and May 2006: "Apothecia of these crops are of different macroscopic appearance, with lighter apothecia being mostly immature, and darker apothecia producing spores." ... so who knows? Sasata (talk) 17:11, 19 February 2010 (UTC)

Anything else to add to this article? Shall we put it up for GAN? Sasata (talk) 17:39, 18 May 2010 (UTC)

Yeah put it up, there might be some bits and pieces. I'll take a look. Casliber (talk · contribs) 20:32, 18 May 2010 (UTC)
Any Banksia experts you're chums with that might be able to give a confirmation on your putative Banksiamyces photo? Sasata (talk) 05:45, 21 May 2010 (UTC)
damn, I meant to contact Tom May about it (who has been helpful before). Will dig up his email and see what he says. Casliber (talk · contribs) 07:09, 21 May 2010 (UTC)

More bedtime readingEdit

[2]—the most recent phylogeny and dating of Proteaceae. Easy to miss with such an obscure title. Hesperian 12:08, 28 February 2010 (UTC)

Abraham HalpernEdit

You may want to have a look there as well. Appears to have been improved by a Szasz fan. I've read diagonally this article, but even that doesn't seem to support the light in which the Halpern-Szasz issue is presented in Wikipedia. Tijfo098 (talk) 13:19, 3 November 2010 (UTC)

Just go back from a weekend break with no innernet..now where was I.....Casliber (talk · contribs) 10:21, 7 November 2010 (UTC)

FigsEdit

Okay, I'm giving my impression on F. maxima, since I'm not clear what you are actually asking. The description, I must say, is a particularly lacking part of the article under any evaluation criterion. Even as one who appreciates the topic, I'm finding the taxonomy section very confusing. As in Entoloma sinuatum, I'll gladly have a look into rewriting it if you want me to. The huge list of synonym suggest there is significant variation in the plant, possibly infraspecific taxa? I agree the Reproduction section is possibly too detailed. It can probably be reduced to a 2-paragraph primer and merged into "Ecology", though I have a hard time identifying what is species (or could be!) species-specific and what is not, as I have no familiarity with the plants in question (not to mention I am not an actual plant scientist even compared to you).

One of the greater-scale problem I see, which you might want to work on if you're going to take aim at several of these articles, is that information on the peculiar reproduction suystem in figs as a whole is spread across multiple articles (the genus article, Common fig and other species, syconium) and poorly focused, leaving no good article to aim {{main}} links at. I suspect using syconium as he main article and linking to it from others (including Ficus) might be, in the long run, the best course of action. Circéus (talk) 02:56, 18 March 2011 (UTC)

Sounds good. Don't worry about rewriting anything yet. I was looking at overall meta-article structure WRT reproduction, which you've given me a good idea to work with. Cheers, Casliber (talk · contribs) 03:21, 18 March 2011 (UTC)

Constellation task force assessmentEdit

Certainly Assessment boxes like the one for the cardiology task force are made by User:WP 1.0 bot. Just post to talk there and it can make your box easily. —Justin (koavf)TCM 18:37, 12 August 2012 (UTC)

Thanks for that! I've not used bots in my time here. Casliber (talk · contribs) 01:07, 13 August 2012 (UTC)

Aboriginal AstronomyEdit

Hi Casliber – thanks for your note. Yes there's quite a bit more out there which Duane Hamacher and I are slowly trying to get written up. You can find some more stuff on www.emudreaming.com and you may find some papers you havent come across on http://www.atnf.csiro.au/people/rnorris/papers/papers.htm

Have fun! RayNorris (talk) 03:34, 8 October 2012 (UTC)

Great! I'll have a look and if I find anything specific to nag you on...I will :) cheers, Casliber (talk · contribs) 03:49, 8 October 2012 (UTC)

Gene migration research, India --> AustraliaEdit

This http://www.economist.com/news/science-and-technology/21569688-genetic-evidence-suggests-four-millennia-ago-group-adventurous-indians points to a gene study you may be interested in.... Likely people from the Indian sub-continent mixed with Australian aboriginies 4xxxx years ago. An maybe brought dingos. Regards, Ariconte (talk) 09:24, 22 January 2013 (UTC)

Will read anon. Casliber (talk · contribs) 10:59, 22 January 2013 (UTC)

Glasser's choice theoryEdit

Could use some work if you're interested. Someone not using his real name (talk) 09:36, 28 January 2014 (UTC)

ok – will take a look soonish....Cas Liber (talk · contribs) 14:14, 28 January 2014 (UTC)

Orange-bellied ParrotEdit

Neophema99 (talk) 07:58, 19 February 2014 (UTC) Hi. I would like to open for discussion the format of the entry for 'Orange-bellied Parrot'. As news occurs in the recovery program for this species, the limitations of the current format of the Wikipedia entry become more obvious. The heading, 'Conservation Status' should, I believe, be reserved for the actual conservation status in Australia, and in the three states, SA, Tasmania and Victoria. What follows after that, but still under that heading, at present, is a running commentary of events since about 2010. This is not acceptable. I propose another heading be inserted, 'Recovery Program' or similar. In it, a short history of the OBP recovery program could be given – since 1980 or so – and then, new events could be smoothly inserted as they happen. What do others think? The Wikipedia entry is an important first port of call for many people interested in this bird. We owe it to them, and to history, to provide a better entry.

Neophema99 (talk) 07:58, 19 February 2014 (UTC)

Agreed. Will take a look. sounds good – helps with seamless updating and no doubt there is a lot of info that could be added. Cas Liber (talk · contribs) 08:52, 19 February 2014 (UTC)

Obsolete ConstellationsEdit

I just found an amazing source for articles on them: John Hill's Urania Adam Cuerden (talk) 22:55, 7 March 2014 (UTC)

Cool! I was judt giving some feedback to core contest and will look at stub. Cas Liber (talk · contribs) 23:00, 7 March 2014 (UTC)
Urania's Mirror has gotten a wee bit less stubby. Adam Cuerden (talk)


got any advice for writing a constellation FA?Edit

Thinking of diversifying and trying Corona B. Double sharp (talk) 16:17, 7 September 2014 (UTC)

It's easier than stars as there is less hardcore physics involved, but trickier as you have to make the material not "listy", which it sort of is by very nature. Smaller constellations are easier as there is less material to list generally. Star guide books, alot of which are on google, are good for general overview, how to find things, what's next to what etc. but alot of their factual info (distance/luminosity) is outdated. I have even suspected this in newer reprints/editions where new material is coming out. SIMBAD is a godsend and makes finding other material easy. I was using it as a ref itself but probably better to use the refs it cites. Overall I find astronomy articles more challenging than biology ones – trickeir to make engaging. We can collaborate on CrB if you like as I did plan on taking it All the Way at some point and then having it as a double mainpage with CrA. Collaborating is good as it makes for less work in some ways – each of us can copyeidt the other etc. 20:43, 7 September 2014 (UTC)
Just popping in during some of the rare free time I have at the moment to say that the hardest part of the constellation articles is figuring out exactly what objects to write about, since there is generally quite a bit of discretion in whether or not something should be in the article. I generally try to write about all stars brighter than magnitude 5.0, and the most-studied astronomical objects within the constellation, as well as a few other things such as extremes (e.g. R136a1) and unusual objects. One tip to find notable stars, I've found, is this SIMBAD query, which lists all Bayer, Flamsteed, and variable stars in each constellation by number of refs. Of course further research is necessary for other stars without said designations, but it's a good start. I would help, but I don't anticipate having much free time at all until at least December. StringTheory11 (t • c) 21:18, 7 September 2014 (UTC)
StringTheory11 Wow! Great idea/find! That really helps. Agree with what you've said. I think it is good to get these in order as it also highlights what other articles are underdone or incorrect etc. Cas Liber (talk · contribs) 01:51, 8 September 2014 (UTC)
Yup the small size was part of the reason I chose CrB (it's not the only reason though :-P). I'm cool with a collaboration. ST11's suggestions, as always, make a lot of sense. Going to read through some constellation FAs to get an idea of what to write – not least CrA... Double sharp (talk) 02:38, 8 September 2014 (UTC)
Double sharp, I have started buffing with this one. Just arting with the brighter stars – SIMBAD is best place to start and then chasing refs. Not sure how much you know about them (figuring distance from parallax etc...) so just ask away..or start on deep sky objects and I'll continue with stars (??) Cas Liber (talk · contribs) 01:05, 12 November 2014 (UTC)

Carcinoma in situEdit

The carcinoma in situ page has been updated and it explains the different views that sometimes carcinoma in situ is seen as a cancer and sometimes it is not. You will probably remember earlier this year that you supported changing my use of the term "invasive cancer" to "cancer". The expression "invasive cancer" is used frequently in books particularly when talking about cancer of the cervix and in my opinion using the term "invasive cancer" can improve clarity. What do you think of the explanations in the carcinoma in situ article? Snowman (talk) 13:13, 4 November 2014 (UTC)

As it reads right now, which ones are you thinking should have invasive added to them? Cas Liber (talk · contribs) 19:35, 4 November 2014 (UTC)
Whoops, I have phrased it badly above, but you seem to have understood me. I should have said that you did not support my use of "invasive cancer" and you preferred the use of "cancer" instead. Actually, to me, it is not as simple as just inserting the word "invasive". Back then, I saw a better phrase in a reference and I thought about using it, because I thought that it would be accurate, readable, and I hoped keep everyone happy; however, the situation become unnecessarily tense and I felt like I was walking on eggs (and you know what that means). I did not get around to developing the article any further nor mentioning the "magical" phrase. I will see if I can find the phrase again. I recall that the solution was to use a short phrase in the place of cancer or invasive cancer in the introduction. I am talking in riddles at the present time, because I want to make sure that I can find that phrase again, and that will mean thinking about the introduction again. Snowman (talk) 20:32, 4 November 2014 (UTC)
Okay, let me know what you are thinking of once you get it clear. It is an intriguing question. Cas Liber (talk · contribs) 11:56, 5 November 2014 (UTC)
I would recommend the amendment belew, because the demarcation between non-cancer and cancer varies according to the literature, as we have seen, and this is made more difficult by a simplified language and vocabulary used to communicate the complex situation to patients. A definition of cancer that includes in-situ cancer is well established, but perhaps the world of the cytologist or histopathologist is a small world, where to say "invasive cancer" is not unusual. This is the current line in the introduction; "Cervical cytology tests can often detect precursors of cervical cancer and enable early successful treatment.". I think that it would be more accurate if it said something like; "The main aim of cervical cytology screening is to detect precursors of cancer and early cervical cancer to enable early successful treatment.". In this new line a full spectrum from viral changes to dysplasia to carcinoma-in-situ to early invasive cancer is included, so the controversy over where to put the non-cancer/cancer line disappears, and the meaning is clear no matter where the reader puts the line in his or her own mind-map. Snowman (talk) 13:05, 6 November 2014 (UTC)
I reworded it like this to make it flow better yet be inclusive and cover all interpretations. Cas Liber (talk · contribs) 13:24, 6 November 2014 (UTC)
After some deep thought, I think that your edit is good enough. Snowman (talk) 14:09, 6 November 2014 (UTC)
  • What do you think about making a joint nomination with me to take the cervix article to FA review sometime? I would not be planning to edit much of the "History" and "Other animals" sections, because I do not know much about those topics. I am not usually on the nominator's side of the fence, but I would be willing to step into that role here, partly to test the water. Snowman (talk) 13:29, 6 November 2014 (UTC)
I think it is a good idea – the prerequisites for being a nominator are being reasonably familar with the article and having the ability to address issues raised at FAC. Do you see anything else that needs fixing before listing it at FAC? 02:15, 7 November 2014 (UTC)
Oh good. I would like to have a long look at the article before FA nomination, and I expect that I will not feel happy with the article as a potential FA nomination for several weeks. There is some content and page organization in the article (as it is now) that I would like to reflect on. The peer review is also worth re-visiting to see what was not achieved there. I will probably attempt to start a few discussions on the article talk page where relevant. Do you have any time frame in mind or any particular schedule of your own to work around? Of course, I would ask you to constructively criticize my work whenever you think that anything can be improved, and I will try to focus on the issue and answer honestly and objectively trying not to be fractious nor stubborn, with a view to learning from my errors. It think that it will work better like that, than keeping quite or not speaking up when you do not agree with your co-nominator. I am saying that because I guessed that you have not felt easy about not supporting your co-nominator in FA reviews previously. Also, as before, please be alert to my writing style, which can sometimes need re-phrasing owing to clumsy grammar, although the content is often unambiguous (to me at least). Apart from that, it could be challenging writing for general readers and even more challenging writing for specialist readers that are unfamiliar with the small world of histopathology. Snowman (talk) 12:08, 7 November 2014 (UTC)
Snowmanradio I have no time scale on this so it sorta takes as long as it takes. The refs need fixing for page numbers. The material is pretty good – only thing from PR left is double checking lymphatic drainage really I thought. Anyway. Posting things step by step on talk page is good. Cas Liber (talk · contribs) 20:39, 7 November 2014 (UTC)
  • I would have though that the "Function" heading would be about normal function. Surly, putting a barrier in front of the cx is not a normal function of the cervix. Also, oc pills are more about pharmacology and modified functioning of the cervix. Should the "Contraception" heading have its own level-2 heading? This has been discussed before, but it is worth starting another discussion on the talk page about this? Snowman (talk) 21:42, 7 November 2014 (UTC)
I think that the human altering of function is fine there. I think it is fine as a level 3 heading underneath function Cas Liber (talk · contribs) 23:10, 7 November 2014 (UTC)
When medicines affect function, it is called pharmacology. Snowman (talk) 22:49, 12 November 2014 (UTC)
  • In the introduction; "... the cervix is usually between 2 and 3 cm long and roughly round in shape". Change to: ?
1. "... the cervix is cylindrically shaped usually between 2 and 3 cm long and roughly round in cross section".
2. "... the cervix is usually between 2 and 3 cm long and roughly round in in cross section" Snowman (talk) 17:30, 8 November 2014 (UTC)

I think the first one or something like it – will take a look now. I wonder if the fact it is roughly cylindrical makes saying it's round in cross-section redundant. Cas Liber (talk · contribs) 22:22, 8 November 2014 (UTC)

Your amendment looks find to me. Snowman (talk) 11:32, 10 November 2014 (UTC)
  • Should there be more consistency in using {{main| under more of the headings where there is an obvious main article else where? Snowman (talk) 11:49, 12 November 2014 (UTC)
Snowmanradio Yes that sounds like a good idea. Cas Liber (talk · contribs) 18:54, 12 November 2014 (UTC)
OK, I expect that I will add some when I do some editing there. Snowman (talk) 20:47, 12 November 2014 (UTC)
  • Re Vaginal portion of cervix. Have you got any ideas on what to do with this article on the portio (or ectocervix)? I do not know why WP Anatomy has so many articles on sub-parts. If relevant, I expect that a formal discussion would be needed to consider a merge. Snowman (talk) 20:47, 12 November 2014 (UTC)
I think it should be merged. Will post something. Cas Liber (talk · contribs) 21:42, 12 November 2014 (UTC)
I plan to watch for a while and express an opinion, if needed. Snowman (talk) 22:49, 12 November 2014 (UTC)
It is off to a good start over there. I think that there is nothing on the unreferenced portio page that can be copied over to the cervix page. We could start planing how to present the portio (and its various names) on the cervix page. Snowman (talk) 12:04, 13 November 2014 (UTC)
  • In have found what to me looks like a 2003 copyrighted version of File:Cervix dilation sequence.svg, so I have started a deletion discussion on Commons. Commons administrators will now have a look at it. Initially, I left an message with the uploader on Commons to ask a technical question about the image, and I noticed that he is currently blocked for three months, so I did a search for other copies of the cervix dilation image. The image should show the babies head moving down the birth canal as the cervix dilates, but the head looks stuck. The image is on about a dozen or more Wikis, so they might all be removed by a bot in due course. I am not sure if the image needs removing from the Cervix page at this juncture or not, so I wonder what you think about removal from the en Wiki. Snowman (talk) 09:01, 13 November 2014 (UTC)
Oh dear – I suspect it will have to be removed, though maybe hold for a moment and see if an explanation is forthcoming. Cas Liber (talk · contribs) 09:23, 13 November 2014 (UTC)
I recently found a photograph of a rare parrot with the wrong copyright and it was deleted from Commons one week after I started the deletion discussion. Snowman (talk) 14:23, 13 November 2014 (UTC)
That sounds in keeping with deletion discussions elsehwere – around 1 week. Cas Liber (talk · contribs) 19:17, 13 November 2014 (UTC)
Update: Image was deleted this yesterday. Snowman (talk) 13:10, 21 November 2014 (UTC)
  • The Cervical cancer article has had a lot of work on it since about June, and it is well worth looking at. I expect that we could shorten (or otherwise amend) the section on cervical cancer in the "cervix" article, because the "cervical cancer" article offers a good readable account. Snowman (talk) 12:40, 14 November 2014 (UTC)
@Snowmanradio: I will take a look. Cas Liber (talk · contribs) 10:05, 15 November 2014 (UTC)
  • Re HPV vaccines. Sometimes, I like to tidy up the linked pages. This article was moved from the singular to the pleural in March 2014. I am aware that there is more than one HPV vaccine, but I would expect this to be on the singular name, unless there something controversial about it that I have missed. Snowman (talk) 12:59, 14 November 2014 (UTC)
@Snowmanradio: yes that is unusual and I think I prefer it at singular. I think it is worth discussing on the talk page. Cas Liber (talk · contribs) 10:05, 15 November 2014 (UTC)
  • The "Anatomical abnormalities" section looks like a mixture of acquired and congenital diseases. Could this be organized differently? I nearly did a reorganization, but a little re-organization does not change much, and I suspect that it would be easier to do a bit of a re-write. Also, it may be possible to expand the section with a little about the developmental abnormalities of the female genital tract seen in Cryptophthalmos syndrome, Johanson-Blizzard syndrome, Rokitansky Anomalod, and as less commonly seen in Roberts syndrome and Trisomy 18 syndrome. These diseases are not at the front of my mind, however these are in the index of my rather old second-hand book on human malformation. This is not a small change, so I welcome your opinion. Snowman (talk) 13:34, 14 November 2014 (UTC)
@Snowmanradio: let me take a look. I don't recall it right now and I thought I was happy with it before but will look. Cas Liber (talk · contribs) 10:05, 15 November 2014 (UTC)
I have become unexpectedly busy in real life, so I have not had much time for editing the Wiki. I hope that I will be able to contribute with more editing and work on the cervix article again after about two or three months . Snowman (talk) 10:03, 15 December 2014 (UTC)
@Snowmanradio: no worries. I found that I have lost interest in it. My free time (of which I have little) has to be enjoyable and thus something I have real enthusiasm for. I found I did get a bit enthusiastic about this one but comes and goes. More interested in frigatebird and brachychiton rupestris now. Cas Liber (talk · contribs) 10:11, 15 December 2014 (UTC)
Also orange-bellied parrot – very interesting story. I find writing about extinct species makes me sad (I leave them to FunkMonk) but rare ones are ok. Cas Liber (talk · contribs) 10:12, 15 December 2014 (UTC)
Apart from manual editing, I was hoping to write a few scripts for fun to do scanning and mass editing tasks on the Wiki this Autumn and Winter, but can not participate in a meaningful way at the present time. I plan to return when I can and I will look to see what you and User FunkMonk are doing then. Incidentally, have you any thoughts on why discussions about anatomy topics tend to be rather brittle? I might ask that question on the WP Anatomy talk page. Snowman (talk) 10:49, 15 December 2014 (UTC)
What do you mean by 'brittle'? Cas Liber (talk · contribs) 12:30, 15 December 2014 (UTC)
I will ask open-ended questions instead. Do you have any observations about discussions on anatomy topics? Snowman (talk) 12:48, 15 December 2014 (UTC)

Range mapEdit

Hi CasLiber, can you add range map to Tufted Tit-tyrant and Crested auklet--Anass (talk) 00:46, 27 May 2018 (UTC)

@Anass: I'll see what I can do. Cas Liber (talk · contribs) 01:25, 28 May 2018 (UTC)
Can you develop one of this articles to be a featured article--Anass (talk) 01:28, 28 May 2018 (UTC)
I am looking at the auklet Cas Liber (talk · contribs) 01:54, 28 May 2018 (UTC)

BerkhamstedEdit

Quick note: Sending you many thanks for undertaking the much appreciated task of carrying out the Good Article review of the Berkhamsted article. I will try to respond as soon as I can, but I will also try not get in the way. ~ BOD ~ TALK 12:24, 26 January 2019 (UTC)

hi Casliber I am wondering, are you waiting for an action by me? the Berko article did get visited by a fellow editor requesting a few reasonable clarifications, all got resolved (i think, to my knowledge). (its only been a couple of weeks, maybe I am rushing unnecessarily lol) ~ BOD ~ TALK 22:42, 12 February 2019 (UTC)

(facepalm) oh am very sorry @Bodney: I forgot/got distracted and will be back there soon! Cas Liber (talk · contribs) 11:22, 13 February 2019 (UTC)

Apus as TFA...Edit

All the usual - it's set for Wikipedia:Today's featured article/February 17, 2019. Help Dan out if you see anything in the blurb that needs fixing. Ealdgyth - Talk 19:17, 26 January 2019 (UTC)

Okies. Cas Liber (talk · contribs) 19:18, 26 January 2019 (UTC)
Thank you ;) --Gerda Arendt (talk) 08:56, 17 February 2019 (UTC)

DYK for Ambassis macleayiEdit

Updated DYK query.svgOn 28 January 2019, Did you know was updated with a fact from the article Ambassis macleayi, which you recently created, substantially expanded, or brought to good article status. The fact was ... that Macleay's glassfish (pictured) is partly transparent? The nomination discussion and review may be seen at Template:Did you know nominations/Ambassis macleayi. You are welcome to check how many page hits the article got while on the front page (here's how, Ambassis macleayi), and it may be added to the statistics page if the total is over 5,000. Finally, if you know of an interesting fact from another recently created article, then please feel free to suggest it on the Did you know talk page.
Alex Shih (talk) 00:01, 28 January 2019 (UTC)

This week's article for improvement (week 5, 2019)Edit

Hello, Casliber.

The following is WikiProject Today's articles for improvement's weekly selection:

Assassination attempts

Please be bold and help to improve this article!


Previous selections: Street fair • Vicki Gunvalson


Get involved with the TAFI project. You can: Nominate an article • Review nominations


Posted by: MusikBot talk 00:05, 28 January 2019 (UTC) using MediaWiki message delivery (talk) on behalf of WikiProject TAFI • Opt-out instructions

Your GA nomination of Crater (constellation)Edit

The article Crater (constellation) you nominated as a good article has passed Symbol support vote.svg; see Talk:Crater (constellation) for comments about the article. Well done! If the article has not already been on the main page as an "In the news" or "Did you know" item, you can nominate it to appear in Did you know. Message delivered by Legobot, on behalf of AhmadLX -- AhmadLX (talk) 17:02, 30 January 2019 (UTC)

This week's article for improvement (week 6, 2019)Edit

Finnish school lunch.jpg

A typical Finnish school meal lunch, served free of charge to all pupils.

Hello, Casliber.

The following is WikiProject Today's articles for improvement's weekly selection:

School meal

Please be bold and help to improve this article!


Previous selections: Assassination attempts • Street fair


Get involved with the TAFI project. You can: Nominate an article • Review nominations


Posted by: MusikBot talk 00:05, 4 February 2019 (UTC) using MediaWiki message delivery (talk) on behalf of WikiProject TAFI • Opt-out instructions

DYK for Ficus coronulataEdit

Updated DYK query.svgOn 5 February 2019, Did you know was updated with a fact from the article Ficus coronulata, which you recently created, substantially expanded, or brought to good article status. The fact was ... that indigenous peoples in the Northern Territory of Australia would toss fruit of the river fig into rivers to attract turtles? The nomination discussion and review may be seen at Template:Did you know nominations/Ficus coronulata. You are welcome to check how many page hits the article got while on the front page (here's how, Ficus coronulata), and it may be added to the statistics page if the total is over 5,000. Finally, if you know of an interesting fact from another recently created article, then please feel free to suggest it on the Did you know talk page.
Alex Shih (talk) 00:02, 5 February 2019 (UTC)

WikiCup 2019 ReminderEdit

Hi. I'm DannyS712 (talk), and I just wanted to remind you that you have signed up to compete in this year's WikiCup! There are about 2 weeks left before the first round ends – if you haven't yet made your first submission, there is still time to start; if you have already started, keep up the good work. See your submissions page: here. Good luck!

Delivered by MediaWiki message delivery (talk) at 07:33, 10 February 2019 (UTC)

This week's article for improvement (week 7, 2019)Edit

Pondicherry Panorama 1.jpg

Pondicherry is the capital and the most populous city of the Indian Union Territory of Puducherry.

Hello, Casliber.

The following is WikiProject Today's articles for improvement's weekly selection:

Pondicherry

Please be bold and help to improve this article!


Previous selections: School meal • Assassination attempts


Get involved with the TAFI project. You can: Nominate an article • Review nominations


Posted by: MusikBot talk 00:05, 11 February 2019 (UTC) using MediaWiki message delivery (talk) on behalf of WikiProject TAFI • Opt-out instructions

FAC nomEdit

Hi, I've gone ahead and nominated Cardiff City F.C. for another run at FAC. I'd be very grateful if you could take a look if you have the time and let me know your thoughts, thanks. Kosack (talk) 19:41, 12 February 2019 (UTC)

@Kosack: I was wondering what took you so long! There soon....Cas Liber (talk · contribs) 20:04, 12 February 2019 (UTC)

DYK for Tidying Up with Marie KondoEdit

 — Amakuru (talk) 00:02, 13 February 2019 (UTC)
We had so many book donations yesterday at our UK based charity secondhand bookshop, where I work, fellow volunteers thought it was maybe partly the result of the rumour that Marie Kondo supposedly said folks should only have 30 books. ~ BOD ~ TALK 13:33, 15 February 2019 (UTC)
Oh dear.....Cas Liber (talk · contribs) 13:37, 15 February 2019 (UTC)

got there at lastEdit

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Category:Unknown-importance_Australian_biota_articles - under 10k - please it would help if you create new Australian biota articles if you could be please be so kind enough to actually put biota-importance=low on the talk page - which is the default - so we keep the number under 10 k - it would be much appreciated if you can help with this (keeping the number down that is) - thanks... JarrahTree 08:40, 15 February 2019 (UTC)

wow, ok Cas Liber (talk · contribs) 13:11, 15 February 2019 (UTC)
no big deal - and if it seems a bit loopy - my messages to darrenhughes and cygnis insignis might be more fitting (and obscure) - nothing to worry about - I'll eventually get the unknown to 0 - but there is a bit of donald rumsfeld logic about where there is nothing - where no one knows who didnt know about put anything about biota in animal and plant talk pages :) - spooky - the trees falling in the forest and the related cia jokes of the early 70s - JarrahTree 13:19, 15 February 2019 (UTC)
but take care - geoff adjusted all his caladenia in one fell swoop earlier this evening (creepy to see my watchlist light up) - I dont want to say this particular mission of mine harms editors, shopping centres or gerbils, or whatever - it will all sort out - it is more the future - dont worry about the past edits, I'll get to them... JarrahTree 13:23, 15 February 2019 (UTC)
YES! biota tags for farm animals is a furphy in my post facto reasoning state (having tagged about 10 or so into biota) - your edit summary hits the point - I will return to them at some stage and fix that! thanks for that JarrahTree 13:29, 15 February 2019 (UTC)

FACEdit

Hi Casliber,

I would like to request for review of my FA nomination. The article is in quite a good shape I think, but still there may be erros and areas for improvement, so your opinion and suggestions are much appreciated. Secondly, it has been on FAC for about two weeks, and I fear it may be archived if there is no further activity in next couple of weeks. Thank you AhmadLX (talk) 00:10, 16 February 2019 (UTC)

Yes I'd be happy to. Cas Liber (talk · contribs) 01:37, 16 February 2019 (UTC)

TFAs for MarchEdit

Australasian gannet on the 10th, Hydnum repandum on the 24th. You know the drill.--Wehwalt (talk) 14:37, 17 February 2019 (UTC)

cool/thx. Cas Liber (talk · contribs) 23:11, 17 February 2019 (UTC)
Thank you for the bird today, announced "I buffed this article in a fit of patriotic pride after northern gannet was promoted to Featured status." - I'm "buffing up" Michael Gielen for the sad reason that he died. Just noticed that I mentioned im in a DYK as early as 2010. --Gerda Arendt (talk) 07:38, 10 March 2019 (UTC)

A barnstar for you!Edit

Writers Barnstar Hires.png The Writer's Barnstar
Thank you for all you do to expand and improve articles, including taking many of them to FA within short periods of time. Your work here is much appreciated. SkyGazer 512 Oh no, what did I do this time? 14:42, 17 February 2019 (UTC)
thx! Cas Liber (talk · contribs) 23:11, 17 February 2019 (UTC)

This week's article for improvement (week 8, 2019)Edit

Mixian Rice Noodles Being Prepared in Copper Pots.jpg

Mixian rice noodles being cooked on a gas stove at a noodle restaurant in Kunming, Yunnan, China

Hello, Casliber.

The following is WikiProject Today's articles for improvement's weekly selection:

Gas stove

Please be bold and help to improve this article!


Previous selections: Pondicherry • School meal


Get involved with the TAFI project. You can: Nominate an article • Review nominations


Posted by: MusikBot talk 00:05, 18 February 2019 (UTC) using MediaWiki message delivery (talk) on behalf of WikiProject TAFI • Opt-out instructions

Coconut lorikeetEdit

Cause my backlog of articles isn't big enough? Sabine's Sunbird talk 03:29, 19 February 2019 (UTC)

Yer just saying that cos it ain't a seabird or a groundbird...Cas Liber (talk · contribs) 10:33, 19 February 2019 (UTC)
My current target is very arboreal. Actually, if you're in the mood for a collaboration, I just threw a great paper into the talk page of Shining bronze cuckoo and looking around it seems well researched and you've already done the DYK for it. Sabine's Sunbird talk 22:33, 20 February 2019 (UTC)
cool, will take a look Cas Liber (talk · contribs) 23:24, 20 February 2019 (UTC)
Although a quick look at HBW suggests a potential four way split, so maybe not such an ideal candidate. Sabine's Sunbird talk 23:29, 20 February 2019 (UTC)
Hmmm, need to look that up....Cas Liber (talk · contribs) 23:36, 20 February 2019 (UTC)

hmmmEdit

might be of interest, or not [3] - cheers JarrahTree 06:10, 19 February 2019 (UTC)

DYK for Acacia shirleyiEdit

Updated DYK query.svgOn 23 February 2019, Did you know was updated with a fact from the article Acacia shirleyi, which you recently created, substantially expanded, or brought to good article status. The fact was ... that the bark of the lancewood (pictured) smells like violets when cut or exposed? The nomination discussion and review may be seen at Template:Did you know nominations/Acacia shirleyi. You are welcome to check how many page hits the article got while on the front page (here's how, Acacia shirleyi), and it may be added to the statistics page if the total is over 5,000. Finally, if you know of an interesting fact from another recently created article, then please feel free to suggest it on the Did you know talk page.
Cas Liber (talk · contribs) 00:02, 23 February 2019 (UTC)

This week's article for improvement (week 9, 2019)Edit

Cheeseburger - BrewDog Camden, Camden Town, London.jpg

A cheeseburger at a restaurant

Hello, Casliber.

The following is WikiProject Today's articles for improvement's weekly selection:

Cheeseburger

Please be bold and help to improve this article!


Previous selections: Gas stove • Pondicherry


Get involved with the TAFI project. You can: Nominate an article • Review nominations


Posted by: MusikBot talk 00:05, 25 February 2019 (UTC) using MediaWiki message delivery (talk) on behalf of WikiProject TAFI • Opt-out instructions

DippyEdit

As one of the all-time top 3 editors of Diplodocus, I thought you might be interested in a related article I created yesterday (Dippy (Diplodocus carnegii)) – it's considered the world's best known dinosaur skeleton, and has a fascinating story behind it. Any comments or suggestions for improvement would be greatly appreciated. Onceinawhile (talk) 11:38, 25 February 2019 (UTC)

Interesting article @Onceinawhile: Cas Liber (talk · contribs) 09:55, 27 February 2019 (UTC)


Articles you might like to edit, from SuggestBotEdit

SuggestBot predicts that you will enjoy editing some of these articles. Have fun!

Views/Day Quality Title Tagged with…
341 Quality: Low, Assessed class: Stub, Predicted class: Start Sexual tension (talk) Add sources
551 Quality: Medium, Assessed class: C, Predicted class: C Lucretia (talk) Add sources
1,139 Quality: Medium, Assessed class: C, Predicted class: C Mustelidae (talk) Add sources
24 Quality: Medium, Assessed class: Start, Predicted class: C Corallus (talk) Add sources
11 Quality: Medium, Assessed class: Stub, Predicted class: C BirdLife Australia (talk) Add sources
180 Quality: Low, Assessed class: Stub, Predicted class: Start Paradise Regained (talk) Add sources
34 Quality: Medium, Assessed class: C, Predicted class: C Bada' (talk) Cleanup
7 Quality: Low, Assessed class: Start, Predicted class: Start Plushcap (talk) Cleanup
20 Quality: Medium, Assessed class: Start, Predicted class: C Eddie May (talk) Cleanup
148 Quality: High, Assessed class: Start, Predicted class: GA Atheris (talk) Expand
13 Quality: Low, Assessed class: NA, Predicted class: Stub 450s (talk) Expand
12 Quality: Low, Assessed class: NA, Predicted class: Stub 430s (talk) Expand
209 Quality: Medium, Assessed class: C, Predicted class: C Porsche 962 (talk) Unencyclopaedic
525 Quality: Medium, Assessed class: Start, Predicted class: C Fasciculation (talk) Unencyclopaedic
32 Quality: Medium, Assessed class: C, Predicted class: C Almudena Grandes (talk) Unencyclopaedic
30 Quality: Low, Assessed class: Stub, Predicted class: Stub Robustness (morphology) (talk) Merge
2,681 Quality: High, Assessed class: B, Predicted class: FA Huns (talk) Merge
4 Quality: Low, Assessed class: Stub, Predicted class: Start Lisvane (CAC) Tennis Club (talk) Merge
47 Quality: Medium, Assessed class: Start, Predicted class: C Brian Murphy (association footballer) (talk) Wikify
163 Quality: Medium, Assessed class: Start, Predicted class: C Callum Paterson (talk) Wikify
76 Quality: Medium, Assessed class: C, Predicted class: C Greg Cunningham (talk) Wikify
2 Quality: Low, Assessed class: Stub, Predicted class: Stub Colin Tibbett (talk) Orphan
9 Quality: Low, Assessed class: NA, Predicted class: Start Thar Power Plant (talk) Orphan
10 Quality: Low, Assessed class: NA, Predicted class: Start Radwa Mount (talk) Orphan
6 Quality: Low, Assessed class: Stub, Predicted class: Start Norman H. Baynes (talk) Stub
12 Quality: Low, Assessed class: Stub, Predicted class: Start Gongylophis (talk) Stub
49 Quality: Low, Assessed class: Stub, Predicted class: Start Shemr (talk) Stub
8 Quality: Low, Assessed class: Start, Predicted class: Start Eryx whitakeri (talk) Stub
6 Quality: Low, Assessed class: Stub, Predicted class: Stub Otto Harrassowitz (talk) Stub
1 Quality: Low, Assessed class: Stub, Predicted class: Stub Reidar Sørlie (talk) Stub

Note: All columns in this table are sortable, allowing you to rearrange the table so the articles most interesting to you are shown at the top. All images have mouse-over popups with more information. For more information about the columns and categories, please consult the documentation and please get in touch on SuggestBot's talk page with any questions you might have.

SuggestBot picks articles in a number of ways based on other articles you've edited, including straight text similarity, following wikilinks, and matching your editing patterns against those of other Wikipedians. It tries to recommend only articles that other Wikipedians have marked as needing work. Your contributions make Wikipedia better — thanks for helping.

If you have feedback on how to make SuggestBot better, please tell me on SuggestBot's talk page. Thanks from Nettrom (talk), SuggestBot's caretaker. -- SuggestBot (talk) 09:59, 27 February 2019 (UTC)

WikiCup 2019 March newsletterEdit

And so ends the first round of the competition. Everyone with a positive score moves on to Round 2. With 56 contestants qualifying, each group in Round 2 contains seven contestants, with the two leaders from each group due to qualify for Round 3 as well as the top sixteen remaining contestants.

Our top scorers in Round 1 were:

  • United States L293D, a WikiCup newcomer, led the field with ten good articles on submarines for a total of 357 points.
  • Pirate Flag of Henry Every.svg Adam Cuerden, a WikiCup veteran, came next with 274 points, mostly from eight featured pictures, restorations of artwork.
  • Denmark MPJ-DK, a wrestling enthusiast, was in third place with 263 points, garnered from a featured list, five good articles, two DYKs and four GARs.
  • United States Usernameunique came next at 243, with a featured article and a good article, both on ancient helmets.
  • Flag of the United States Library of Congress 2.svg Squeamish Ossifrage was in joint fifth place with 224 points, mostly garnered from bringing the 1937 Fox vault fire to featured article status.
  • Ohio Ed! was also on 224, with an amazing number of good article reviews (56 actually).

These contestants, like all the others, now have to start scoring points again from scratch. Between them, contestants completed reviews on 143 good articles, one hundred more than the number of good articles they claimed for, thus making a substantial dent in the review backlog. Well done all!

Remember that any content promoted after the end of Round 1 but before the start of Round 2 can be claimed in Round 2. Invitations for collaborative writing efforts or any other discussion of potentially interesting work is always welcome on the WikiCup talk page. Remember, if two or more WikiCup competitors have done significant work on an article, all can claim points. If you are concerned that your nomination—whether it is at good article candidates, a featured process, or anywhere else—will not receive the necessary reviews, please list it on Wikipedia:WikiCup/Reviews.

If you want to help out with the WikiCup, please do your bit to keep down the review backlogs! Questions are welcome on Wikipedia talk:WikiCup, and the judges are reachable on their talk pages or by email. Good luck! If you wish to start or stop receiving this newsletter, please feel free to add or remove yourself from Wikipedia:WikiCup/Newsletter/Send. Godot13 (talk), Sturmvogel 66 (talk), Vanamonde (talk) and Cwmhiraeth (talk).

UnlockEdit

Perhaps half a decade later this can be unlocked? https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Jefferson_(Philadelphia_University_%2B_Thomas_Jefferson_University)&diff=569276055&oldid=569275210

--2604:2000:E010:1100:481C:C04B:CF99:1210 (talk) 01:35, 3 March 2019 (UTC)

sure why not.... Cas Liber (talk · contribs) 01:38, 3 March 2019 (UTC)
Thanks. 2604:2000:E010:1100:481C:C04B:CF99:1210 (talk) 02:01, 3 March 2019 (UTC)

Project Plants articles ratingEdit

Hi Casliber, Could I please ask you to have a look at the quality rating of Mairia, Corymbium, Roridula, Phaneroglossa, and Felicia filifolia. Thank you in advance! Greetings, Dwergenpaartje (talk) 11:00, 3 March 2019 (UTC)

Sure, no problem! Cas Liber (talk · contribs) 12:55, 3 March 2019 (UTC)
Thanks! Dwergenpaartje (talk) 09:23, 6 March 2019 (UTC)

FAC advice?Edit

Hi Casliber! Do you like tennis? Regardless, I was interested in promoting Kim Clijsters to FA status and wanted to know what you thought of the current state of the article. I have re-written the entire article and am currently waiting for it to be reviewed for GA status. Though, I was considering skipping that step and instead putting it up for peer review or jumping straight to FAC. Do you think it is ready for an FAC? Thank you! Sportsfan77777 (talk) 18:52, 3 March 2019 (UTC)

I'll review it for GAN Cas Liber (talk · contribs) 23:58, 3 March 2019 (UTC)

This week's article for improvement (week 10, 2019)Edit

WANTED in 2004 (468010).jpg

Wanted posters in Japan, 2004

Hello, Casliber.

The following is WikiProject Today's articles for improvement's weekly selection:

Wanted poster

Please be bold and help to improve this article!


Previous selections: Cheeseburger • Gas stove


Get involved with the TAFI project. You can: Nominate an article • Review nominations


Posted by: MusikBot talk 00:05, 4 March 2019 (UTC) using MediaWiki message delivery (talk) on behalf of WikiProject TAFI • Opt-out instructions

History of Tottenham Hotspur F.C. scheduled for TFAEdit

This is to let you know that the History of Tottenham Hotspur F.C. article has been scheduled as today's featured article for April 14, 2019. Please check the article needs no amendments. If you're interested in editing the main page text, you're welcome to do so at Wikipedia:Today's featured article/April 14, 2019, but note that a coordinator will trim the lead to around 1000 characters anyway, so you aren't obliged to do so.

We also suggest that you watchlist Wikipedia:Main Page/Errors on the day before and the day of this TFA. Thanks! Jimfbleak - talk to me? 13:13, 6 March 2019 (UTC)

@Jimfbleak: maybe they'll be buoyed by their main page appearance and win the Champions' League Cas Liber (talk · contribs) 19:08, 6 March 2019 (UTC)
Absolutely. Pity Real Madrid have gone, since we beat them in the qualifiers... Jimfbleak - talk to me? 06:46, 7 March 2019 (UTC)

Re: Semi-Protected edit request on 3/5/19 for the article Bipolar disorder to include a link for Ronald BraunsteinEdit

Hello Dr. Casliber : Just a quick note to update you about a Semi-Protected edit request which has been posted on the talk page for the article Bipolar disorder. Perhaps if you have spare time you might share your medical expertise and extensive experience as a Wikipedia Administrator in order to evaluate the proposal to incorporate the following text at the end of the section entitled Society and Culture

In an effort to ease the social stigma associated with bipolar disorder, the orchestra conductor Ronald Braunstein cofounded the

ME/2 Orchestra with his wife Caroline Whiddon in 2011. Braunstein was diagnosed with bipolar disorder in 1985 and his concerts with the ME/2 Orchestra were conceived in order to create a welcoming performance environment for his musical colleagues, while also raising public awareness about mental illness.[1] [2]

The can be no doubt that your expert opinion would be greatly appreciated. Many thanks in advance for your thoughtful consideration and best wishes for your continued success on Wikipedia. Respectfully yours, 104.207.219.150 (talk) 23:46, 6 March 2019 (UTC)PS

Ok adding it now Cas Liber (talk · contribs) 00:44, 7 March 2019 (UTC)

DYK for Red-collared lorikeetEdit

Updated DYK query.svgOn 9 March 2019, Did you know was updated with a fact from the article Red-collared lorikeet, which you recently created, substantially expanded, or brought to good article status. The fact was ... that red-collared lorikeets sometimes appear drunk at the end of the dry season in Darwin? The nomination discussion and review may be seen at Template:Did you know nominations/Red-collared lorikeet. You are welcome to check how many page hits the article got while on the front page (here's how, Red-collared lorikeet), and it may be added to the statistics page if the total is over 5,000. Finally, if you know of an interesting fact from another recently created article, then please feel free to suggest it on the Did you know talk page.
 — Amakuru (talk) 12:02, 9 March 2019 (UTC)

DYK helpEdit

Hi. As per this revision of Bandaru Dattatreya, the article has 922 characters. I expanded the article and currently the article has 4832 characters (well above the 5x threshold of 4610 charatcer). However, the DYK tool shows "Article has not been created or expanded 5x or promoted to Good Article within the past 10 days". Can you please have a look into this matter and help me understand where I have gone wrong? Thanks in advance. RRD (talk) 04:44, 10 March 2019 (UTC)

@Royroydeb: unfortunately it seems it needs a 922 char article to be expanded to 5x 1500. Something like that? MPS1992 (talk) 05:18, 10 March 2019 (UTC)
@MPS1992: No. I do not think so. I expanded Mausam Noor from 1100 characters to 6500+ characters and promoted to DYK. Firhad Hakim was also expanded from around 600 characters. Same for Muhammad Kam Bakhsh. During these, the DYK tool did not display such a message. RRD (talk) 05:51, 10 March 2019 (UTC)
You could read Wikipedia:Did you know#Eligibility criteria. Also, why do you describe an election that occurred in 1996 as "upcoming"? Are you re-living those years through music, as some westerners do? MPS1992 (talk) 07:32, 10 March 2019 (UTC)
Without checking further: sometimes the tool looks at an earlier version, which may have been longer, but was perhaps deleted as copyvio. - You also can nominate and xplain as above. We reviewers look at the thing, not the tool, --Gerda Arendt (talk) 07:35, 10 March 2019 (UTC)
@Royroydeb: The word count has expanded 5-fold. The characters are just shy of 5-fold. If you can add a sentence or two it would get it safe. Cas Liber (talk · contribs) 08:51, 10 March 2019 (UTC)
@Casliber: Thanks! As per your suggestion, I have added a sub-section about his image. RRD (talk) 13:33, 10 March 2019 (UTC)
Great! It is fine now sizewise Cas Liber (talk · contribs) 13:35, 10 March 2019 (UTC)

This week's article for improvement (week 11, 2019)Edit

Coil plastic and metal zippers.jpg

Zippers with common teeth variations: metal teeth (top), coil teeth and plastic teeth

Hello, Casliber.

The following is WikiProject Today's articles for improvement's weekly selection:

Zipper

Please be bold and help to improve this article!


Previous selections: Wanted poster • Cheeseburger


Get involved with the TAFI project. You can: Nominate an article • Review nominations


Posted by: MusikBot talk 00:05, 11 March 2019 (UTC) using MediaWiki message delivery (talk) on behalf of WikiProject TAFI • Opt-out instructions

DYK for Coconut lorikeetEdit

Updated DYK query.svgOn 13 March 2019, Did you know was updated with a fact from the article Coconut lorikeet, which you recently created, substantially expanded, or brought to good article status. The fact was ... that the binomial name of the coconut lorikeet translates as "bloody hair-tongue"? The nomination discussion and review may be seen at Template:Did you know nominations/Coconut lorikeet. You are welcome to check how many page hits the article got while on the front page (here's how, Coconut lorikeet), and it may be added to the statistics page if the total is over 5,000. Finally, if you know of an interesting fact from another recently created article, then please feel free to suggest it on the Did you know talk page.
 — Amakuru (talk) 12:01, 13 March 2019 (UTC)

Some baklava for you!Edit

Baklava - Turkish special, 80-ply.JPEG For being such a sweetie! Carrolquadrio (talk) 05:34, 15 March 2019 (UTC)

Mairia hirsuta or Mairia purpurataEdit

M. hirsuta or M. purpurata?
Hi Casliber, I have just created Mairia hirsuta, but this seems to be a later synonym of Cineraria purpurata. Perhaps I could ask you to have a look at the Taxonomy section. The new combination Mairia purpurata does not seem to be widely used. Did I make the right choice here to create this article, or should I have created Mairia purpurata? Should I create a redirect for M. purpurata even if it is not (yet) well known? Thank you for your advice. Kind regards, Dwergenpaartje (talk) 23:13, 16 March 2019 (UTC)
Interesting. Looks like Mairia purpurata has not gained traction yet. I'd leave at hirsuta until accepted. Yes I'd make a redirect. In fact I just did :) Cas Liber (talk · contribs) 23:40, 16 March 2019 (UTC)
Thank! Dwergenpaartje (talk) 11:26, 17 March 2019 (UTC)

This week's article for improvement (week 12, 2019)Edit

Internal organs.png

Many of the internal organs of the human body

Hello, Casliber.

The following is WikiProject Today's articles for improvement's weekly selection:

Organ (anatomy)

Please be bold and help to improve this article!


Previous selections: Zipper • Wanted poster


Get involved with the TAFI project. You can: Nominate an article • Review nominations


Posted by: MusikBot talk 00:05, 18 March 2019 (UTC) using MediaWiki message delivery (talk) on behalf of WikiProject TAFI • Opt-out instructions

This week's article for improvement (week 13, 2019)Edit

Monster Ball Money Honey.jpg

Lady Gaga playing a keytar, which is a type of keyboard instrument

Hello, Casliber.

The following is WikiProject Today's articles for improvement's weekly selection:

Keyboard instrument

Please be bold and help to improve this article!


Previous selections: Organ (anatomy) • Zipper


Get involved with the TAFI project. You can: Nominate an article • Review nominations


Posted by: MusikBot talk 00:05, 25 March 2019 (UTC) using MediaWiki message delivery (talk) on behalf of WikiProject TAFI • Opt-out instructions

Canvassing on Rigel talkpageEdit

It appears that you have been canvassing—leaving messages on a biased choice of users' talk pages to notify them of an ongoing community decision, debate, or vote. While friendly notices are allowed, they should be limited and nonpartisan in distribution and should reflect a neutral point of view. Please do not post notices which are indiscriminately cross-posted, which espouse a certain point of view or side of a debate, or which are selectively sent only to those who are believed to hold the same opinion as you. Remember to respect Wikipedia's principle of consensus-building by allowing decisions to reflect the prevailing opinion among the community at large. Thank you. Arianewiki1 (talk) 00:29, 28 March 2019 (UTC)

Replied there. These editors are nonpartisan and would not hesitate to offer a different opinion to mine. Cas Liber (talk · contribs) 04:03, 28 March 2019 (UTC)
I am preparing the WP:ANI now. Thanks. Arianewiki1 (talk) 02:34, 29 March 2019 (UTC)

Precious anniversaryEdit

Precious
Cornflower blue Yogo sapphire.jpg
Seven years!

--Gerda Arendt (talk) 08:01, 28 March 2019 (UTC)

DYK for Pink-necked green pigeonEdit

 — Amakuru (talk) 00:01, 29 March 2019 (UTC)

Thomas Crisp scheduled for TFAEdit

Since you nominated this...

This is to let you know that the Thomas Crisp article has been scheduled as today's featured article for April 18, 2019. Please check the article needs no amendments. If you're interested in editing the main page text, you're welcome to do so at Wikipedia:Today's featured article/April 28, 2019, but note that a coordinator will trim the lead to around 1000 characters anyway, so you aren't obliged to do so.

We also suggest that you watchlist Wikipedia:Main Page/Errors on the day before and the day of this TFA. Thanks! Jimfbleak - talk to me? 07:33, 29 March 2019 (UTC)

NewberryEdit

If you have the time to give it another look, I've nominated Newberry Volcano at FAC. ceranthor 21:46, 31 March 2019 (UTC)

This week's article for improvement (week 14, 2019)Edit

ErfgoedLeiden LEI001015553 Gymnastiekzaal van de Gymnastiekschool aan de Pieterskerkgracht in Leiden.jpeg

The interior of a gym in The Netherlands, around 1900

Hello, Casliber.

The following is WikiProject Today's articles for improvement's weekly selection:

Gym

Please be bold and help to improve this article!


Previous selections: Keyboard instrument • Organ (anatomy)


Get involved with the TAFI project. You can: Nominate an article • Review nominations


Posted by: MusikBot talk 00:05, 1 April 2019 (UTC) using MediaWiki message delivery (talk) on behalf of WikiProject TAFI • Opt-out instructions

This week's article for improvement (week 15, 2019)Edit

Hello, Casliber.

The following is WikiProject Today's articles for improvement's weekly selection:

Story of the Negro

Please be bold and help to improve this article!


Previous selections: Gym • Keyboard instrument


Get involved with the TAFI project. You can: Nominate an article • Review nominations


Posted by: MusikBot talk 00:05, 8 April 2019 (UTC) using MediaWiki message delivery (talk) on behalf of WikiProject TAFI • Opt-out instructions

I've been a world champion now for 11 years straightEdit

Wikipedia:Biographies of living persons/Contest --Dweller (talk) Become old fashioned! 14:01, 10 April 2019 (UTC)

I believe you are the last person to fix an unreferenced BLP. Guettarda (talk) 14:27, 10 April 2019 (UTC)
Oh dear. No wonder there's always so much work at CAT:BLPPROD --Dweller (talk) Become old fashioned!
Hehehe....I was mistaking Terry Butcher for Mark Butcher before I clicked Cas Liber (talk · contribs) 20:51, 10 April 2019 (UTC)

DYK for Gloeocantharellus purpurascensEdit

Updated DYK query.svgOn 11 April 2019, Did you know was updated with a fact from the article Gloeocantharellus purpurascens, which you recently created, substantially expanded, or brought to good article status. The nomination discussion and review may be seen at Template:Did you know nominations/Gloeocantharellus purpurascens. You are welcome to check how many page hits the article got while on the front page (here's how, Gloeocantharellus purpurascens), and it may be added to the statistics page if the total is over 5,000. Finally, if you know of an interesting fact from another recently created article, then please feel free to suggest it on the Did you know talk page.
Materialscientist (talk) 04:31, 11 April 2019 (UTC)

Incomplete DYK nominationEdit

Symbol question.svg Hello! Your submission of Template:Did you know nominations/Red Irish lord at the Did You Know nominations page is not complete; if you would like to continue, please link the nomination to the nominations page as described in step 3 of the nomination procedure. If you do not want to continue with the nomination, tag the nomination page with {{db-g7}}, or ask a DYK admin. Thank you. DYKHousekeepingBot (talk) 03:47, 12 April 2019 (UTC)

This week's article for improvement (week 16, 2019)Edit

Good Dairy Sources.png

Various dairy products: milk, feta cheese, yogurt and parmesan cheese (clockwise from upper-left)

Hello, Casliber.

The following is WikiProject Today's articles for improvement's weekly selection:

Dairy product

Please be bold and help to improve this article!


Previous selections: Story of the Negro • Gym


Get involved with the TAFI project. You can: Nominate an article • Review nominations


Posted by: MusikBot talk 00:05, 15 April 2019 (UTC) using MediaWiki message delivery (talk) on behalf of WikiProject TAFI • Opt-out instructions

Cortinarius violaceus scheduled for TFAEdit

This is to let you know that Cortinarius violaceus has been scheduled as WP:TFA for 22 May 2019. Please check that the article needs no amendments. If you're interested in editing the main page text, you're welcome to do so at Wikipedia:Today's featured article/May 22, 2019. Thanks! Ealdgyth - Talk 22:37, 17 April 2019 (UTC)

Thank you! --Gerda Arendt (talk) 06:00, 22 May 2019 (UTC)

Black stork scheduled for TFAEdit

This is to let you know that black stork has been scheduled as WP:TFA for 28 May 2019. Please check that the article needs no amendments. If you're interested in editing the main page text, you're welcome to do so at Wikipedia:Today's featured article/May 28, 2019. Thanks! Ealdgyth - Talk 23:26, 17 April 2019 (UTC)

Hey, it's a co-nom again! Ealdgyth - Talk 23:26, 17 April 2019 (UTC)

Your GA nomination of Eastern brown snakeEdit

Hi there, I'm pleased to inform you that I've begun reviewing the article Eastern brown snake you nominated for GA-status according to the criteria. Time2wait.svg This process may take up to 7 days. Feel free to contact me with any questions or comments you might have during this period. Message delivered by Legobot, on behalf of Opabinia regalis -- Opabinia regalis (talk) 07:21, 22 April 2019 (UTC)

WikiCup 2019 ReminderEdit

Hi. I'm DannyS712 (talk), and I just wanted to remind you that you are a current participant in round 2 of this year's WikiCup! There are only a few days until the second round ends – if you haven't made you first submission for this round yet, there is still time to start; if you have already started, keep up the good work. See your submissions page: here. Good luck!

Delivered by MediaWiki message delivery (talk) at 05:00, 25 April 2019 (UTC) on behalf of DannyS712 (talk)

Cretoxyrhina FACEdit

Hello,

I a posting to inform you that the Cretoxyrhina article has been renominated for FAC, which you helped review. Because the second FAC seems to be dragging out due to the absence of reviewers, I am posting on this talk page to let you know in hopes that you may be able to re-review the FAC.

Macrophyseter | talk 07:17, 27 April 2019 (UTC)

This week's article for improvement (week 18, 2019)Edit

Gunilla Persson.jpg

Gunilla Persson in 2013

Hello, Casliber.

The following is WikiProject Today's articles for improvement's weekly selection:

Gunilla Persson

Please be bold and help to improve this article!


Previous selections: Biodegradable plastic • Dairy product


Get involved with the TAFI project. You can: Nominate an article • Review nominations


Posted by: MusikBot talk 00:05, 29 April 2019 (UTC) using MediaWiki message delivery (talk) on behalf of WikiProject TAFI • Opt-out instructions

Today's Wikipedian 10 years agoEdit

Awesome
Cscr-featured.svg
Ten years!

--Gerda Arendt (talk) 10:38, 30 April 2019 (UTC)

The WikiCupEdit

As a WikiCup judge, I have removed your submission of Eastern brown snake as a GA from the Round 2 submissions because the GAR was completed on 30 April. Please submit it again after the new round starts, when it will get you off to a flying start! Cwmhiraeth (talk) 17:31, 30 April 2019 (UTC)

ok will do Cas Liber (talk · contribs) 00:14, 1 May 2019 (UTC)

Your GA nomination of Eastern brown snakeEdit

The article Eastern brown snake you nominated as a good article has passed Symbol support vote.svg; see Talk:Eastern brown snake for comments about the article. Well done! If the article has not already been on the main page as an "In the news" or "Did you know" item, you can nominate it to appear in Did you know. Message delivered by Legobot, on behalf of Opabinia regalis -- Opabinia regalis (talk) 17:41, 30 April 2019 (UTC)

ThanksEdit

Hi, I don't know if you noticed or not, but my very first FA Cardiff City F.C. got across the line last week. Just wanted to say thanks for your help with the GA and FA reviews of the article. It wouldn't have made it if you hadn't encouraged me in the GA review nearly two years ago! Thanks again. Kosack (talk) 15:45, 1 May 2019 (UTC)

Heh, no worries @Kosack: it was well deserved...now for the next one....heheheCas Liber (talk · contribs) 21:11, 1 May 2019 (UTC)

WikiCup 2019 May newsletterEdit

The second round of the 2019 WikiCup has now finished. Contestants needed to scored 32 points to advance into round 3. Our top four scorers in round 2 all scored over 400 points and were:

  • Scotland Cas Liber (1210), our winner in 2016, with two featured articles and three DYKs. He also made good use of the bonus points available, more than doubling his score by choosing appropriate articles to work on.
  • Wales Kosack (750), last year's runner up, with an FA, a GA, two FLs, and five DYKs.
  • Pirate Flag of Henry Every.svg Adam Cuerden (480), a WikiCup veteran, with 16 featured pictures, mostly restorations.
  • Kingdom of Prussia Zwerg Nase (461), a seasoned competitor, with a FA, a GA and an ITN item.

Other notable performances were put in by Chicago Barkeep49 with six GAs, United States Ceranthor, England Lee Vilenski, and Saskatchewan Canada Hky, each with seven GARs, and Denmark MPJ-DK with a seven item GT.

So far contestants have achieved nine featured articles between them and a splendid 80 good articles. Commendably, 227 GARs have been completed during the course of the 2019 WikiCup, so the backlog of articles awaiting GA review has been reduced as a result of contestants' activities. The judges are pleased with the thorough GARs that are being performed, and have hardly had to reject any. As we enter the third round, remember that any content promoted after the end of round 2 but before the start of round 3 can be claimed in round 3. Remember too that you must claim your points within 14 days of "earning" them.

If you are concerned that your nomination—whether it is at good article nominations, a featured process, or anywhere else—will not receive the necessary reviews, please list it on Wikipedia:WikiCup/Reviews Needed (remember to remove your listing when no longer required). Questions are welcome on Wikipedia talk:WikiCup, and the judges are reachable on their talk pages or by email. Good luck! If you wish to start or stop receiving this newsletter, please feel free to add or remove your name from Wikipedia:WikiCup/Newsletter/Send. Godot13 (talk), Sturmvogel 66 (talk), Vanamonde (talk) and Cwmhiraeth (talk) MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 17:45, 1 May 2019 (UTC)

ArbCom 2019 special circularEdit

Icon of a white exclamation mark within a black triangle
Administrators must secure their accounts

The Arbitration Committee may require a new RfA if your account is compromised.

View additional information

This message was sent to all administrators following a recent motion. Thank you for your attention. For the Arbitration Committee, Cameron11598 02:34, 4 May 2019 (UTC)


Green mambaEdit

Do you need the books to add more information or just to make sure the text is cited properly? I can do that. LittleJerry (talk) 00:49, 4 May 2019 (UTC)

The latter would be fine. Cas Liber (talk · contribs) 05:23, 4 May 2019 (UTC)
I think I'll help you out with the article, but you'll have to take the drivers seat. Do you need me to use the sources I have to replace some the cites that you don't have? LittleJerry (talk) 20:55, 8 May 2019 (UTC)
That would be great as I have on way of checking otherwise in case someone asks Cas Liber (talk · contribs) 20:57, 8 May 2019 (UTC)
Do you have access to any of the other books? LittleJerry (talk) 21:00, 8 May 2019 (UTC)
Only what I can find on google books Cas Liber (talk · contribs) 21:43, 8 May 2019 (UTC)
Well I don't think I can replace all of them. LittleJerry (talk) 03:38, 9 May 2019 (UTC)
No I figured you mightn't - just check what you can and we can figure what to do next Cas Liber (talk · contribs) 04:01, 9 May 2019 (UTC)
I'll try to get to it this coming week. LittleJerry (talk) 22:55, 10 May 2019 (UTC)
Hey, there are a few things in my personal life that will hopefully get resolved next week. I hope theirs no rush. LittleJerry (talk) 19:50, 15 May 2019 (UTC)
No its all fine. Take your time Cas Liber (talk · contribs) 20:36, 15 May 2019 (UTC)

Administrator account security (Correction to Arbcom 2019 special circular)Edit

ArbCom would like to apologise and correct our previous mass message in light of the response from the community.

Since November 2018, six administrator accounts have been compromised and temporarily desysopped. In an effort to help improve account security, our intention was to remind administrators of existing policies on account security — that they are required to "have strong passwords and follow appropriate personal security practices." We have updated our procedures to ensure that we enforce these policies more strictly in the future. The policies themselves have not changed. In particular, two-factor authentication remains an optional means of adding extra security to your account. The choice not to enable 2FA will not be considered when deciding to restore sysop privileges to administrator accounts that were compromised.

We are sorry for the wording of our previous message, which did not accurately convey this, and deeply regret the tone in which it was delivered.

For the Arbitration Committee, -Cameron11598 21:03, 4 May 2019 (UTC)


This week's article for improvement (week 19, 2019)Edit

Hello, Casliber.

The following is WikiProject Today's articles for improvement's weekly selection:

Production logo

Please be bold and help to improve this article!


Previous selections: Gunilla Persson • Biodegradable plastic


Get involved with the TAFI project. You can: Nominate an article • Review nominations


Posted by: MusikBot talk 00:05, 6 May 2019 (UTC) using MediaWiki message delivery (talk) on behalf of WikiProject TAFI • Opt-out instructions

Resident fun guyEdit

Hi Cas, looking through WLE 2019 images and found this it too small to go far but since you're into fungi I thought you might find it interesting any way
Watagans National Park detail.jpg
Gnangarra 07:39, 9 May 2019 (UTC)
noice...bit hard to tell what it is though...but noice Cas Liber (talk · contribs) 10:06, 9 May 2019 (UTC)

MalayopythonEdit

Hi Casliber: great that you started this page!! Had this on mind too since I revised the list a few months ago. -- BhagyaMani (talk) 15:06, 12 May 2019 (UTC)

@BhagyaMani:, yes after looking at the literature it is so obvious that it is surprising n-one has done it. Bit ITIS appears to be dragging its feet.... Cas Liber (talk · contribs) 22:54, 12 May 2019 (UTC)

This week's article for improvement (week 20, 2019)Edit

Plat de sashimi au restaurant japonais Au soleil levant de Colmar en 2013.jpg

Sashimi at a restaurant

Hello, Casliber.

The following is WikiProject Today's articles for improvement's weekly selection:

Sashimi

Please be bold and help to improve this article!


Previous selections: Production logo • Gunilla Persson


Get involved with the TAFI project. You can: Nominate an article • Review nominations


Posted by: MusikBot talk 00:05, 13 May 2019 (UTC) using MediaWiki message delivery (talk) on behalf of WikiProject TAFI • Opt-out instructions

Template:Did you know nominations/Red Irish lordEdit

Cas Liber, you last posted that you were going to do some edits to the article based on the DYK review. I can see that you did some that same day, but nothing since, and haven't posted to the DYK nomination page since then. Are you still interested in pursuing this nomination? If so, please post to the nomination page; it's been over a month. Many thanks. BlueMoonset (talk) 03:46, 15 May 2019 (UTC)

DYK nomination of Red Irish lordEdit

Symbol question.svg Hello! Your submission of Red Irish lord at the Did You Know nominations page has been reviewed, and some issues with it may need to be clarified. Please review the comment(s) underneath your nomination's entry and respond there as soon as possible. Thank you for contributing to Did You Know! Yoninah (talk) 22:56, 15 May 2019 (UTC)

Cleopatra will be on Wiki's main page as today's featured article for June 1 !!!Edit

Mark Antony to Cleopatra VII Philopator: "dude, if I die, you can have my entire Megadeth collection."

Cleopatra: "but dude, we're already dead!"

Antony: "Oh. Well then they're yours, dude."

Hehe. ;) Thanks for the support! Pericles of AthensTalk 13:44, 19 May 2019 (UTC)

Crater (constellation)Edit

TFA for June 29. Also note that black mamba was successful for June 5. Cheers,--Wehwalt (talk) 19:36, 19 May 2019 (UTC)

This week's article for improvement (week 21, 2019)Edit

NAMA Alphabet grec.jpg

Ancient Greek letters painted on the body of an Attic black-figure cup

Hello, Casliber.

The following is WikiProject Today's articles for improvement's weekly selection:

Letter (alphabet)

Please be bold and help to improve this article!


Previous selections: Sashimi • Production logo


Get involved with the TAFI project. You can: Nominate an article • Review nominations


Posted by: MusikBot talk 00:05, 20 May 2019 (UTC) using MediaWiki message delivery (talk) on behalf of WikiProject TAFI • Opt-out instructions

DYK for Red Irish lordEdit

Updated DYK query.svgOn 23 May 2019, Did you know was updated with a fact from the article Red Irish lord, which you recently created, substantially expanded, or brought to good article status. The fact was ... that while a red Irish lord can change color, it is not a yellow Irish lord? The nomination discussion and review may be seen at Template:Did you know nominations/Red Irish lord. You are welcome to check how many page hits the article got while on the front page (here's how, Red Irish lord), and it may be added to the statistics page if the total is over 5,000. Finally, if you know of an interesting fact from another recently created article, then please feel free to suggest it on the Did you know talk page.
 — Amakuru (talk) 00:03, 23 May 2019 (UTC)
Return to the user page of "Casliber".