User talk:Invertzoo/Archive 15

This is an archive of past discussions with User:Invertzoo. 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.

ARCHIVE PAGE 15: March 2009

Regarding the slug, I have already written to him and await any information. A thing to note is that the WP:TOL convention for monotypic genera is that the genus article merely redirects to the species article (as stated here Wikipedia:Naming_conventions_(fauna)). Shyamal (talk) 01:39, 2 March 2009 (UTC)

Regarding the slug - there is a cautious suggestion that it could be a Mariaella dussumieri. Shyamal (talk) 07:09, 4 March 2009 (UTC)

Thanks so much for the possible ID. It is very much appreciated. Invertzoo (talk) 12:57, 4 March 2009 (UTC)

NOTE: Adding that the species and genus author and date is Gray 1855. This seems to perhaps be another monotypic genus, a reference that lists the species and genus is:[1] Invertzoo (talk) 13:21, 4 March 2009 (UTC)

I'd like your opinion on the folowing relevant to articles pertaining to the Ammonoidea, redirected to Ammonite

Ammonoidea is a proper taxon within the Cephalopoda, commonly thought of as a subclass. It deserves an article of its own, under that title. and with taxobox.

Ammonoid is simply the familiar term for Ammonoidea and refers to any member of the subclass. The term can be linked directly to Ammonoidea without going around through redirect.

Ammonite, as it refers to ammonoids, is a vernacular term without taxonomic meaning. In the general sense it can refer to any member or members of the Ammonoidea as in the Ceratitida are ammonites from the Triassic, or in a more specific sence to the Ammonitida as in Lytoceras is a Jurassic ammonite. Ammonite might need a page of its own to explain the term and its origin, without going into the biology and taxonomy, and without the need for a taxobox.

Ammonoidea is alway capitalized, ammonoid and ammonite only at the beginning of a sentence.

From my perspective as a paleontologist the whole set of ammonite, ammonoid, and Ammonoidea articles need revision with Ammonoidea being the principal. The scientifically relevant material in the Ammonite article could be converted as is. The supplimental material regarding the history of the term can be left to a short explanation of the meaning of ammonite in a separate page.

I'm reluctant to make major "mess ups with other peoples work so please give me your take.

Regards John M, my talk. Mar 07/2009

copy to Mgiganteus!, Smith609, Ammonite Discussion.

Hi Susan, may I please ask you, when you have a time, to take a look at the article I extentended User:Mbz1/Mbz1 Châteauneuf-du-Faou. I'll try to nominate it for DYK, when it is ready. Thank you for your time.--mbz1 (talk) 04:05, 8 March 2009 (UTC)

Hi Mila, I was away traveling all yesterday from dawn to dusk, and now I am back there is a great deal of stuff going on on WP that I need to attend to right away. So I will not get around to looking at and fixing up your article for maybe a couple/few days, but give me a bit of time and I will get around to it eventually. This week will be a bit crazy for me in real life too so we will have to see how much I get done in general, Best, Invertzoo (talk) 16:58, 8 March 2009 (UTC)

Hi Susan, I moved the article from my user space to Châteauneuf-du-Faou. I'm going to nominate it for DYK. I'll add you to the nomination. Thank you for working at the article! Best wishes. --mbz1 (talk) 16:32, 9 March 2009 (UTC)

OK, I fixed it up some more, and will look at it all again at least one more time. You may certainly want to run the "hook" for the proposed DYK by me before you submit it, so I can clean up the hook as necessary. Good wishes, Invertzoo (talk) 16:58, 9 March 2009 (UTC)

Thank you. I've submitted it already. I f you have a time, please take a look. Thank you.--mbz1 (talk) 21:52, 9 March 2009 (UTC)

I had to shorten the hook you submitted because it was way too long (too many characters). I see someone else also wrote an alternate which also seems OK. Best, Invertzoo (talk) 22:05, 9 March 2009 (UTC)

Thank you, Susan!Best.--mbz1 (talk) 23:08, 9 March 2009 (UTC)

I've been expanding the biography of Winston Ponder, a giant among malacologists. Could you look it over and see where you can improve my English ? Thanks. JoJan (talk) 16:01, 9 March 2009 (UTC)

Hi JoJan, There was not much wrong with the English really, just a few things looked as if they could be improved with some tweaking, so I went ahead and did that. You are welcome, ask me anytime for that kind of help. Best, Susan Invertzoo (talk) 17:54, 9 March 2009 (UTC)

Hi Susan, I wrote one more article. It is in my user space now. Could you please tell me, if you have a time, and if you're interested in helping me with this. I would like to move it to Wikipedia before you do changes, otherwise your name will not be seen in the history. Thank you.--mbz1 (talk) 21:01, 12 March 2009 (UTC)

I just saw you cannot type. Please do not worry about the article. Get well!--mbz1 (talk) 22:30, 12 March 2009 (UTC)

I can type a little bit, not very much though: I have to be careful. You can at least tell me where the article is. best, Invertzoo (talk) 14:36, 13 March 2009 (UTC)

Sorry, Susan. Here it is Lac_de_Monteynard_Avignonet, but please take it easy. May I please ask you to respond only here? It will save you some typing. I'll check on your response myself. Thank you.--mbz1 (talk) 15:00, 13 March 2009 (UTC)

Hello, there is a Third opinion user at wikiproject gastropod talk and he demands sumarization. Should I publish my short prepared my desagreement view first? --Snek01 (talk) 22:43, 12 March 2009 (UTC)

Hello, information for you: I have sent a message User talk:CrispMuncher. I have not post it to Wikiproject Gastropods, because I thought that my message is out of theme. --Snek01 (talk) 18:00, 14 March 2009 (UTC)

Sorry to hear about your fingers. I suggest you type monosyllabically. I didn't realize the copyvio problem is so serious and widespread. If there is anything I can do to help, please tell me. Maybe there's a clever phrasal search and replace trick that will work. If my paraphrasing of copy from SlugForum in new articles is not enough, tell me. You needn't reply to this until your fingers are better, and even then, you can reply in grunts or telegram style. All the best to you and your digits. --Anna Frodesiak (talk) 14:47, 13 March 2009 (UTC)

I have to go work in the museum today but I will reply to you soon, thanks, Invertzoo (talk) 14:55, 13 March 2009 (UTC)

This is a program I use a lot. It is a little tape recorder, but it's software. I swap MP3 letters with friends when I don't want to type. If you have a headset, or hidden microphone in your laptop, and use Windows, then you can use it. It is safe, small, free and easy to use. The site it is from is very safe. (I am very paranoid about software.) I have been using it for years. If your fingers hurt, this may serve as an alternative in some cases. --Anna Frodesiak (talk) 15:40, 13 March 2009 (UTC)

This is really bad news. Put me down as a willing helper, Invertzoo. I do not, unfortunately, have any sort of ready access to Powell's book, so can't be sure exactly what portions of what articles are the problem. If someone could figure out an easy way to mark those parts of a bunch of articles, I will be happy to dive in and erase, revise, or stubify as needed/possible. (Actually, maybe you can just put double brackets around the offending language, turning it red, as a pseudo-link.) I can work pretty fast. Tim Ross (talk) 21:35, 13 March 2009 (UTC)

Thanks Tim. Yes a big part of the problem is that none of us have any access to a copy of the book, otherwise this would have been caught a long time ago. (If you look in my archives, I did ask GB this question on the 26th February 2008, in a message entitled "Doto pita and others" where I gave him a link to the WP Copyrights guideline, and quoted part of those guidelines in my message... but somehow GB managed to sidestep the question while making it look like a no.) I finally got to look at a few entries in a copy of the book down in Delaware last Saturday. It seems that most of the text is copied, but as far as I can tell:

• The taxoboxes and photos are OK, although the taxonomy is totally out of date. The first sentence is OK. Maybe the size info is OK.

In that case, I guess the best approach, to take care of the issue as rapidly as possible, will be to delete everything else, and put in a few original descriptive words, if possible. Send me a list of articles - say a 100 of them - and I'll get to work immediately (I'm best at gastropods). (Will be out in the field all of tomorrow.) Tim Ross (talk) 22:02, 13 March 2009 (UTC)

You are really amazing handling this whole copyvio mess.

Thanks for signing. I have been doing that a lot lately. I have been crazy busy over here and have been quite absent-minded. I promise to be more careful.

I saw that Graham tweaked the prose, but really, when I take info from SlugForum, isn't the result the same? I just rearrange the info. There are only so many ways to restate the facts. Am I committing the same crime?

Have you told GrahamBould he is wasting his time? From what I have read, he has spoken up on the matter only one time, with a single sentence.--Anna Frodesiak (talk) 23:53, 14 March 2009 (UTC)

Yes I did tell GB that, on March 11th the very same day he did those 30 tweaks. Take a look on his talk page User_talk:GrahamBould#Another update on the CopyVio problem. Best, Invertzoo (talk) 01:54, 15 March 2009 (UTC)

Also as a friend of mine in publishing said: There is no copyright on information itself. What there is a copyright on, is how exactly you express the information, how you write about it.

I have not yet checked your SeaSlugForum-based contributions. I am assuming (and hoping!) that you rewrote the info so it sounds like you wrote it from scratch Anna, rather than sounding as if Bill Rudman wrote it, or as if it was some version of Bill Rudman's prose? Invertzoo (talk) 01:54, 15 March 2009 (UTC)

Anna, it depends upon what facts you are restating. A rose is a plant whose "leaves are alternate and pinnately compound, with sharply toothed oval-shaped leaflets," no matter the varied ways you try to say it. But, the copyvios from these books are not such basic copies, but rather unique wordings and key phrasings. If you have questions about a specific article you have written, please feel free to weigh in at my talk page, and I can give you feedback. --KP Botany (talk) 01:35, 15 March 2009 (UTC)

I am more than a little offended that you not only wholesale dismissed, but then deleted my concerns[2] without allowing anyone else to comment upon them or address the underlying issue which you keep ignoring: it appears Wikipedia is now the web owner of a large portion of a copyrighted work.

I will allow WP:gastropod to deal with the issue as they see fit and bow out. --KP Botany (talk) 01:25, 16 March 2009 (UTC)

I am so sorry that you are offended KP. I read your messages several times but hurriedly, and I did not understand that that was the main point you were trying to make. I do very much value your contributions to the gastropod project, and I apologize if you thought I was "dismissing" your concerns, that was not my intention. I didn't delete your messages, I archived that whole thread which is still at the top of the page in the archive for anyone to read. As for the CopyVio: so far we are following Wp policy in the way this CopyVio is being treated. If you feel that the overall policy is mistaken, then you need to take that objection up to a much higher level. You could start off by talking to Moonriddengirl about it, since she is an admin who specializes in Wp CopyVio problems and policy.

Just to remind everyone, we are operating under crisis mode right now, in unfamiliar territory, so occasionally we may accidentally step on someone's toes in the rush. Please when that happens try your best not to take it personally. All my very best wishes to everyone, Invertzoo (talk) 12:36, 16 March 2009 (UTC)

Almost all of the 100+ Cs were fine. Five were strange. There, as usual, the black box told me to follow the link to the temp page. At the temp page, I encountered another black box directing me to a \temp\temp page. So I didn't do those because it would not let me save the page, I think. Crosseola bollonsi, Crosseola cuvieriana, Crosseola errata, Crosseola favosa, Cytora pallida. Thanks. Please check a sample or two of my work and assign me some more if I did an okay job.--Anna Frodesiak (talk) 06:02, 17 March 2009 (UTC)

Hi Sluggy! I hope your health issues are going away. I just wanted to say that I fixed the five articles above. The problem was that the subpage had a black box whereas none of the others did. Strange. Anyway, they are all now in line with the other Cs. When I did them, I was following Tim Ross' work as a model. I was overwhelmed with info and did not notice the instructions about ignoring the temp page link in the black box. I also failed to put the required info in the discussion page. So, Tim merged his temp pages into the main page. Mine are still on the temp page. Also, I would be happy to put the required info into the discussion page if you would tell me which discussion page: The temp page's discussion page or the main page's discussion page.

As for the rest of the letters I did, they are all in line with the instructions and were done properly. Sorry for the hassle. Bestest and bubbliest. --Anna Frodesiak (talk) 09:06, 18 March 2009 (UTC)

Hello, Invertzoo. You have new messages at Whpq's talk page.
You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.

No, I don't have a copy of the Powell book, though I may be able to get one out of the library system if that would help. --Geronimo20 (talk) 19:42, 17 March 2009 (UTC)

Well I hate to drag you into the mollusk clean-up efforts, but... if the book is easy to get we might want to ask you questions based on it when our other editor who has access to the book is not available. But the first priority is for you to go ahead and check any fish articles that were started by GB (or ones where GB made large contributions) to make sure we don't need to widen the copyvio alert. All best wishes to you, Invertzoo (talk) 20:02, 17 March 2009 (UTC)

Well I'm not expert on fishes, so you might contact WikiProject Fishes. But I'll help where I can. What would be really useful would be a script which can list Graham's edits by category (this, by the way, would be a useful script for all users). You can then assign helpers to the appropriate categories. Can you check with your bot expert whether such a script exists, or whether it could be simply written? --Geronimo20 (talk) 20:55, 17 March 2009 (UTC)

Okay, the book's on order. I'm would be happy to look at the GB entries to do with fishing and fisheries, but, as I indicated above, it is not easy to manually look at 26,000 edits in the edit history to determine which are the relevant articles. Nor do I see how the people in the fish project can be of practical assistance, unless the script which listed the gastropod articles is modified so it lists all the articles GB edited by category. Then the job would be relatively simple. This script could also be used on future occasions where mass copy violation occur. --Geronimo20 (talk) 19:28, 18 March 2009 (UTC)

I agree. I did post on the Project fish talk page too but I don't know if anyone has seen that yet. I will ask around and see if someone can find out whether we have a bot that can do that or can customize one to what you suggested. We have just now determined that at least some of GB's fish article have CopyVio problems. Thanks again, Invertzoo (talk) 20:44, 18 March 2009 (UTC)

Gadfium has transferred to me his copy of the Powell book, also Morley's A Photographic Guide to Seashells of New Zealand, Miller's Reef and Beach Life of New Zealand and Ayling's Collins Guide to the Sea Fishes of New Zealand. --Geronimo20 (talk) 20:29, 20 March 2009 (UTC)

Hi. Just wanted to tell you that I put your quote in a collapsebox at Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard. My reasoning is that I know that if the thread looks too long and complex some admins just won't read it. :) I hope you don't mind. If you do, please feel free to remove it. The text, of course, is readable behind the "show" button. --Moonriddengirl ^(talk) 01:24, 18 March 2009 (UTC)

Thanks Moonriddengirl, that's perfect. I did not know how to do that so I appreciate your doing it for me. Very best to you, Invertzoo (talk) 12:30, 18 March 2009 (UTC)

I barely know how to do it myself. :) The more "codey" parts of Wikipedia tend to be mysterious to me. But I was actually coming by to reiterate how impressed I am with your project and your particular work in motivating cleanup of this problem. I have never seen a taskforce mobilized this swiftly. I know I've barnstarred you for this already, but I continue to be impressed. (And challenged at coming up with a good synonym for impressed to avoid redundancy.) --Moonriddengirl ^(talk) 14:01, 18 March 2009 (UTC)

Thanks for the compliment: it's always nice to have your work be appreciated. I have to say though, that I would instead give the credit to all the people, including all the CopyVio project volunteers, who are actually down "in the trenches" doing the clean-up itself. I have done hardly any of that so far. (And in an aside: I think what helped me put this together is that I did one very big community activist project back in the late 80s when I lived in a really bad group of Single Room Occupancy buildings, near Times Square. We cleaned it up every which way, and it is now, even after 20 years, stable respectable low-income housing. That was the best thing I ever did.) Best wishes to you, Invertzoo (talk) 17:06, 18 March 2009 (UTC)

←That sounds like a pretty great thing to do! Admirable. :) I've cleaned up a bit more at the project subpage, including more archiving of material. If you think I've overly abbreviated anything, please feel free to fix it. My point is to keep the page usable so that open conversations don't get lost among the closed ones. --Moonriddengirl ^(talk) 16:03, 20 March 2009 (UTC)

I think your clean-up of the project page is very good, thanks. Invertzoo (talk) 20:26, 20 March 2009 (UTC)

Hello, I wrote a Strophocheilus popelairianus for you with nice big image. Have a nice day. --Snek01 (talk) 23:38, 19 March 2009 (UTC)

Thanks, it's nice. Invertzoo (talk) 00:35, 20 March 2009 (UTC)

New York City Meetup Next: Sunday March 29th, Columbia University area Last: 01/18/2009 This box: view • talk • edit

In the afternoon, we will hold a session dedicated to meta:Wikimedia New York City activities, sign official incorporation papers for the chapter, review recent projects like Wikipedia Loves Art and upcoming projects like Wikipedia at the Library, and hold salon-style group discussions on Wikipedia and the other Wikimedia projects (see the January meeting's minutes).

In the evening, we'll share dinner and chat at a local restaurant, and generally enjoy ourselves and kick back.

You can add or remove your name from the New York City Meetups invite list at Wikipedia:Meetup/NYC/Invite list.

To keep up-to-date on local events, you can also join our mailing list.
This has been an automated delivery by BrownBot (talk) 19:23, 21 March 2009 (UTC)

In the wake of the copyvio cleanup, I did some work on the Buccinidae. Well,actually, it took me several days to find most of the genera, and their authorship, included in this very large family. I've included even a genus discovered last year off the coast of Madagascar. I've also added a general description. And as usual, can you give it a closer look and rephrase my sometimes awkward English wherever possible. Thanks. JoJan (talk) 19:56, 22 March 2009 (UTC)