This is an archive of past discussions with User:FunkMonk. Do not edit the contents of this page. If you wish to start a new discussion or revive an old one, please do so on the current talk page.
Our first double issue in almost four years, although we will try to return to a monthly schedule henceforth (incidentally, the last double issue saw Markham's storm petrel at GAN, and this one sees it finally pass FAC).
The March 2024 GAN Backlog Drive starts today; everyone is welcome to participate and help reduce the backlog of GANs.
The January edition of our monthly rolling contest was won by Quetzal1964 with 100 points from 40 articles, mainly related to various species of marine fish. simongraham was second with 80 points from 14 articles on jumping spiders.
The February edition saw Quetzal1964 win for the second time in a row, with 114 points from 43 articles. In second place was Snoteleks, with 21 points from 7 seven articles on various unicellular eukaryotes, including the GA Telonemia.
January DYKs
... that Dacrytherium, literally meaning 'tear beast', was named after its "tear-pit"? (3 January)
... that the wood-pasture hypothesis posits that semi-open wood pastures and not primeval forests are the natural vegetation of temperate Europe? (5 January)
... that until April 2023, when the genusTriassosculda was discovered, the mantis shrimp fossil record contained a gap of more than a hundred million years? (5 January)
... that although Olga Hartman believed that her basic research on marine worms had no practical value, it was applied to experimental studies of oysters? (6 January)
... that Oxford ivy grows towards the light to bloom and then towards the darkness when going to seed? (17 January)
... that S. F. Light(pictured) disliked using his full name? (20 January)
... that the fossil turtle Acherontemys was named for a "river of the fabled lower world"? (26 January)
... that having lived in Central Park for more than a year after becoming homeless, Flaco(pictured) has been accused of being a peeping tom? (19 February)
Thanks for uploading File:TimeAndAWordUS.jpg. The image description page currently specifies that the image is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, the image is currently not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the image was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that images for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).
Ah, thanks, yeah, absolutely no hard feelings, just thought it would be best to get a wider range of opinions. FunkMonk (talk) 21:49, 10 April 2024 (UTC)
Quite right, can't hurt to see what the "been there, got the tee shirt" gang think about it. Still, being even handed over something you feel strongly about is a rare skill. Gog the Mild (talk) 21:54, 10 April 2024 (UTC)
Disambiguation link notification for April 18
An automated process has detected that when you recently edited Laysan honeycreeper, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Acrocephalus.
Congratulations, FunkMonk! The article you nominated, Nasutoceratops, has been promoted to featured status, recognizing it as one of the best articles on Wikipedia. The nomination discussion has been archived.This is a rare accomplishment and you should be proud. If you would like, you may nominate it to appear on the Main page as Today's featured article. Keep up the great work! Cheers, David Fuchs (talk) via FACBot (talk) 00:05, 4 May 2024 (UTC)
The newsletter will not be returning to a monthly format (mainly because the author is busy failing every exam imaginable) and is on a bimonthly schedule for the foreseeable future.
The second round of the WikiCup was very competitive, requiring the highest points total to advance since 2014. Two TOL editors, AryKun and Fritzmann2002, advanced to the third round.
The March edition of our monthly rolling contest was won by simongraham, who amassed 118 points from 21 articles on various species of jumping spider; in second place was Quetzal1964 with 109 points from 53 articles on marine ray-finned fish.
Quetzal1964 and simongraham were also the top two in the April edition, although Quetzal was ahead this time, with 68 points to simongraham's 48. In the annual leaderboard, Quetzal and simongraham are in first and second place respectively, with 291 and 246 points; in third place is Snotoleks, with 76 points.
... that the cherry blossom was used symbolically in Japanese World War II propaganda, with falling petals representing "young soldiers' sacrifice for the emperor"? (8 March)
... that the Kīlauea lava cricket disappears from a lava field as soon as any plants start to grow there? (13 March)
... that Julian Assange's lawyer argued that the rules set by the Ecuadorian embassy requiring Assange to take care of his pet cat Michi were "denigrating"? (13 March)
... that mule deer sometimes prefer the flavor of one Rocky Mountain juniper tree, like "ice cream", over another? (21 March)
... that the skeleton panda sea squirt was known on the Internet for its skeleton-like appearance years before its formal description? (26 March)
... that only one fruit but several thousand seeds were known when Allenbya collinsonae was named? (26 March)
... that while named for alliums, the fossil Paleoallium(pictured) was not necessarily directly related to any allium species? (27 March)
... that the extinct genus Mixtotherium, meaning 'mixed beast', has traits of both extinct primates and hyraxes? (28 March)
... that the fossil fern Dickwhitea was described from a single block of chert? (28 March)
... that only six years after its 2016 discovery, the Meratus blue flycatcher(pictured) was found being sold in Indonesian songbird markets? (30 March)
... that the spirit liverwort is called such because of its proximity to the Māori afterlife? (31 March)
... that cultures of the fungus Lentinus brumalis have been flown on three different satellites? (31 March)
... that the English herbalist Nicholas Culpeper claimed that eating alkanet leaves would make a person's spit deadly to serpents? (31 March)
Eufriesea purpurata
Korowai gecko
Paleoallium billgenseli fossil
Male Meratus blue flycatcher
April DYKs
... that despite its name meaning 'unscented', Hypericum × inodorum can smell strongly of goat? (1 April)
... that color-changing cats(artist's impression pictured) could help us communicate with the future? (2 April)
... that the white-tailed jay(example pictured) found in Ecuador and Peru was once thought to have been brought to Mexico by pre-Columbian trade? (5 April)
I am here to ask (beg?) for you to take a look at this page, particularly the High and Late Middle Ages sections, because you are on the list at FA as having an interest in art, culture and history. I am hoping that might include this page. I can use any help you are willing to offer. Jenhawk777 (talk) 19:15, 10 May 2024 (UTC)
Sure looks interesting, will give it a look when I have the time. I'll comment at the PR if it's open by that time. FunkMonk (talk) 19:23, 10 May 2024 (UTC)
Dear FunkMonk, tell me the reason you reverted my edit at Baryonyx. The page is missing etymology of the name Baryonyx. Tell me when I can write the information again. Waiting for your reply. Amogh Tripathi (talk) 05:24, 9 June 2024 (UTC)
If you actually bothered to read FunkMonk's reason given, you were reverted because you were repeating information that already appears in that first paragraph. Mr Fink (talk) 05:35, 9 June 2024 (UTC)
Congratulations, FunkMonk! The article you nominated, Laysan honeycreeper, has been promoted to featured status, recognizing it as one of the best articles on Wikipedia. The nomination discussion has been archived.This is a rare accomplishment and you should be proud. If you would like, you may nominate it to appear on the Main page as Today's featured article. Keep up the great work! Cheers, Ian Rose (talk) via FACBot (talk) 00:06, 14 July 2024 (UTC)
Disambiguation link notification for July 18
An automated process has detected that when you recently edited Atrociraptor, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Generic name.
Hello FunkMonk, I saw that you have in your boxes when you show your many article expansion projects, and i notice that you were going to work on the Cretaceous pliosaurid Brachauchenius. Were you going to take on one straight away or are you interested in another animal ? Personnaly, i would like to help you about expansion Amirani1746 (talk) 06:02, 6 August 2024 (UTC)
At a glance, it looks a bit short, and a FAC from 2004 and FAR from 2007 seems well before the modern standards existed... FunkMonk (talk) 22:56, 10 August 2024 (UTC)
Not unsourced / Doesn't apply
Hi FunkMonk. This edition of yours definitely doesn't apply. Content in sections "Scientific terminology in Dinosaur!" and "Inconsistencies" is verifiable by the blue links in them and by the content in the documentary itself. What will you do with section "Plot" in this article? Delete it with a comment like "Removed unsourced synth."? Same thing... Kintaro (talk) 22:01, 17 August 2024 (UTC)
Wow! How lapidary! Ok, so... "None of that is sourced. Wikilinks are not citations". Then... why did you keep the section "Content" in the very same article? Now, please, answer to the substance of my argument. Kintaro (talk) 08:59, 18 August 2024 (UTC)
Yes, see MOS:PLOTSOURCE for the plot summary. Regarding the sourcing, for example, you seem to write that "duck-billed" actually referrs only to the genus Hadrosaurus and the movie gots it wrong, but I don't think that is the case. Statements like this need a source. The Synth problem is a different, independent one (we should only include criticism that has actually been voiced/published by criticists); it is also fundamental for Wikipedia. Jens Lallensack (talk) 10:28, 18 August 2024 (UTC)
@Jens Lallensack, you just said: "you seem to write that duck-billed actually referrs only to the genus Hadrosaurus and the movie gots it wrong". No! it's the opposite! Let's copy-paste the deleted text, the whole content of section "Scientific terminology in Dinosaur!": [Quotation]The genus Brontosaurus is named as such in the documentary, although at that time (1985) the scientific consensus considered it to be synonymous with Apatosaurus. Also, at the beginning of the documentary, Christopher Reeve, who hosts the programme, mentions several dinosaur genera. Starting with Hadrosaurus, Reeve signs to the audience that dinosaur names are fun to say, but this is the only moment in Dinosaur! when the genus Hadrosaurus is mentioned as such. For the rest of the programme, including the segments referring to the specimens studied in Montana by Jack Horner (genus Maiasaura though not mentioned as such in the documentary), both Reeve and the narrator use the term "duck-billed" which refers to all hadrosaurids. Hadrosaurus, as a genus, refers to one single species and specimen found in New Jersey. The documentary Dinosaur! abundantly uses the term "duck-billed", thus referring to all hadrosaurids, not only to the genus Hadrosaurus.[End of quotation]. Please friends provide some effort when reading others' arguments. Kintaro (talk) 11:30, 18 August 2024 (UTC)
In that case, it's not even a movie error. In any case, we need a reliable source that states that this particular movie had this particular mistake. Enough said. Jens Lallensack (talk) 12:07, 18 August 2024 (UTC)
@Jens Lallensack... why do you persistently talk about mistakes when referring to this specific section, "Scientific terminology in Dinosaur!"? Aren't you reading the section's title, nor the section's content neither? it's not intended to sign mistakes and there's no reason to suppress it (same as there's no reason to suppress the following section neither, section titled "Inconsistencies"). Simply read both sections, please, click here for the last edit where they were present before FunkMonk suppresses them. Thank you in advance. Kintaro (talk) 12:26, 18 August 2024 (UTC)
So, its almost an entire paragraph to point out that the movie uses the term "duck-billed" in the correct way? I still don't get the point. Another function of providing sources is to demonstrate that the included information is actually relevant and important enough (we should try to keep things as concise as possible). Anyway, let's end the discussion here, it does not change the fact that we need a source (a fundamental, non-negotiable Wikipedia policy that none of us has influence on). Jens Lallensack (talk) 12:42, 18 August 2024 (UTC)
Thank you today for Laysan honeycreeper, introduced: "One of the saddest articles I've written here, as it follows the path to extinction of this species almost by the minute, like a train wreck in slow motion. I've been able to track down all sources that say anything substantial about the species, and luckily it lived so recently that we have footage and photos of it, which are also old enough to be in the public domain."! - Alexander Goehr is on the same page. -- Gerda Arendt (talk) 09:35, 3 September 2024 (UTC)
That's cute! - Today's story has 3 composers, I couldn't decide for the one on the Main page or the one who didn't make it on his bicentenary, so took both, and the pic has a third. Listen if you have a bit of time. The music, played by the Kyiv Symphony Orchestra in Germany in April 2022, impressed me. --Gerda Arendt (talk) 14:47, 4 September 2024 (UTC)
Today is Schoenberg's 150th birthday! On display, portrayed by Egon Schiele, with music from Moses und Aron, and with two DYK hooks, one from 2010 and another from 2014; the latter, about his 40th birthday, appeared on his 140th birthday, which made me happy then and now again. - See places for a stunning sunrise, on the day Bruckner's 200th birthday was celebrated (just a few days late). --Gerda Arendt (talk) 12:50, 13 September 2024 (UTC)
Congratulations, FunkMonk! The article you nominated, Atrociraptor, has been promoted to featured status, recognizing it as one of the best articles on Wikipedia. The nomination discussion has been archived.This is a rare accomplishment and you should be proud. If you would like, you may nominate it to appear on the Main page as Today's featured article. Keep up the great work! Cheers, David Fuchs (talk) via FACBot (talk) 00:05, 18 September 2024 (UTC)
The article will be discussed at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Palaeotapirus until a consensus is reached, and anyone, including you, is welcome to contribute to the discussion. The nomination will explain the policies and guidelines which are of concern. The discussion focuses on high-quality evidence and our policies and guidelines.
Users may edit the article during the discussion, including to improve the article to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the article-for-deletion notice from the top of the article until the discussion has finished.
Thank you and all who helped for Markham's storm petrel, introduced: "This article was first FAC nominated by Therapyisgood last year, who withdrew it, but with their blessing, I and Jens Lallensack have since worked on it because it was a shame to let the good work go to waste."! -- Gerda Arendt (talk) 07:52, 6 October 2024 (UTC)
Hello! I'm want to submit the Stingless bee artile as FAC. I found your username in a list of possible mentors and you were the only one with a biology background. Do you think you can help me with this? Thanks Sintropepe (talk) 19:29, 22 October 2024 (UTC)
The Wikimedia Foundation is conducting a survey of Wikipedians to better understand what draws administrators to contribute to Wikipedia, and what affects administrator retention. We will use this research to improve experiences for Wikipedians, and address common problems and needs. We have identified you as a good candidate for this research, and would greatly appreciate your participation in this anonymous survey.
You do not have to be an Administrator to participate.
The survey should take around 10-15 minutes to complete. You may read more about the study on its Meta page and view its privacy statement .
Please find our contact on the project Meta page if you have any questions or concerns.
Hello! Voting in the 2024 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23:59 (UTC) on Monday, 2 December 2024. All eligible users are allowed to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once.
The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail.
Hello or good evening FunkMonk, in view of the many surprisingly free acess sources to which I have concerning this animal, I am ready to accept that you be my mentor in order to expand this article. Cordially, Amirani1746 (talk) 18:33, 14 November 2024 (UTC)
Great! Seems you know the ropes about article expansion and GAN by now, so just tell me at what point I should comment on some of the text or if you have any questions. FunkMonk (talk) 21:05, 14 November 2024 (UTC)
Yeah, if you mean section order, articles usually have discovery/history sections first, but you can of course start expanding whichever you like first. There is also an ok selection of additional images on Commons for when the article expands. FunkMonk (talk) 21:50, 14 November 2024 (UTC)
Actually, I've already started a draft on Wikipedia in French, but I think that if you start writing first I'll catch up with you. For my part, I want to point out that I'm quite interested moi the discovery and classification section than other, but than should be ok. Amirani1746 (talk) 22:25, 14 November 2024 (UTC)
Ah, so you mean more of a collaboration. As a mentor, I would work more as an overseer and make suggestions I think would make it ready for a FAC nomination. Unfortunately I don't have time for actual writing myself for the foreseeable future. FunkMonk (talk) 22:50, 14 November 2024 (UTC)
By the way, I find the "research history" title superfluous if we already have a history or taxonomy section. Those titles are sufficient. FunkMonk (talk) 09:38, 20 November 2024 (UTC)
It's optional, but mainly used in cases where a section simply covers too many aspects to not only fit under a taxonomy/history/discovery moniker. Personally I never use it, because I prefer to spread disparate information into more relevant subsections instead of one hodgepodge section. FunkMonk (talk) 15:53, 21 November 2024 (UTC)
Thank you today for Atrociraptor, introduced as "the first FAC about a dromaeosaurid (or "raptor") dinosaur in more than a decade, and this particular genus has recently become (in)famous as antagonist in a recent Jurassic World movie. Because their portrayal in that film is atrociously inaccurate, improving this article will hopefully set the record straight."! -- Gerda Arendt (talk) 16:04, 16 November 2024 (UTC)
Oh yes, that was a few months ago. It certainly looks better, also with additional images it seems, but I'd have to give it a detailed read through to judge it, which I unfortunately don't have time for at the moment. FunkMonk (talk) 02:05, 3 December 2024 (UTC)
Thank you today for Mimodactylus, introduced (in 2023): "This is the first FAC about a fossil species from Lebanon, where significant palaeontological discoveries are increasingly being made. As it's a relatively recently named animal, most of what has been published about it is covered here, and the images are mainly from the scientific paper that described it."! -- Gerda Arendt (talk) 08:40, 5 December 2024 (UTC)
Good for you! - Today's story comes from a DYK about a concert that fascinated me, and you can listen! For my taste, the hook has too little music - I miss the unusual scoring and the specific dedication - but it comes instead with a name good for viewcount. --Gerda Arendt (talk) 16:04, 6 December 2024 (UTC)
Thanks, and same to you! I bought most of my gifts myself haha. Nice you're still updating the old articles, what are you working on next? FunkMonk (talk) 12:44, 26 December 2024 (UTC)
I got a bit curious with the new papers. Speaking about them, what do you think about the Pêgas paper regarding Thalassodromidae[2]? It's actually interesting, it doesn't really do anything phylogenetically, but it does kinda solve the naming inconsistency (Thalassodromidae/Thalassodrominae). I've put up a discussion at Talk:Thalassodrominae about it. Regarding projects, I'm not really into it as much as before, but things could always change though. JurassicClassic767 (talk | contribs) 20:15, 26 December 2024 (UTC)
I guess it's a matter of waiting to see if it gains consensus? By the way, isn't it possible to do something with the cladograms in Thalassodromeus so the white space in their right can be filled by an image instead of the strange clash that is currently there? Usually it can be done by making the cladogram text smaller, or the cladograms narrower or something. FunkMonk (talk) 20:32, 26 December 2024 (UTC)
By reducing the width. It didn't work when you did it before because the "font-size" and "line-height" functions had equal signs instead of colons, which was my mistake when creating the cladogram. Adding an image beside them might not actually be a bad idea now that I think about it. I always thought having bigger cladogram text would be better for the reader, so I tend to not leave space at the right. JurassicClassic767 (talk | contribs) 21:17, 26 December 2024 (UTC)
There also seems to be a lot of unused space between the cladograms, can that be reduced? Yeah, I always use that right white space for a relevant image that wouldn't fit anywhere else haha. Could be convenient here. FunkMonk (talk) 21:23, 26 December 2024 (UTC)
Should we move or at least put a question mark in the Stenonychosaurus if the Neotype is granted and or another paper comes out going along with and even citing the latest paper on the subject? Bubblesorg (talk) 16:27, 16 May 2025 (UTC)
As Darren Naish points out, this is just one paper, and we already know there are dissenters, so it will not be the last word on the issue. If scientific consensus is ever reached, then we can do something. ~~
Way too soon for that, it was just a Facebook comment. But there are other recent papers with another group that disagree with using the name Troodon for anything but the holotype tooth. They're likely to respond. FunkMonk (talk) 16:03, 18 May 2025 (UTC)