Talk:Henry Hicks (geologist)

External links modified
Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Henry Hicks (geologist). Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
 * Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20131030104244/http://www.ccgc.gov.uk/landscape--wildlife/geological-gems/geologists-who-changed-the-map/henry-hicks.aspx to http://www.ccgc.gov.uk/landscape--wildlife/geological-gems/geologists-who-changed-the-map/henry-hicks.aspx

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

Cheers.— InternetArchiveBot  (Report bug) 12:50, 10 January 2018 (UTC)

with regard to my reversion
I reverted seven edits by. As this is my first wholesale reversion of this editor&mdash;though all of the edits were explained previously in edit summaries&mdash;I'm explaining them here. If anyone has any questions, I'm watching this article and will reply. —  Fourthords  &#124; =Λ= &#124; 20:55, 24 October 2020 (UTC)
 * I've additions as unsourced (and sometimes unclear in their meaning).
 * I've replaced citations that were removed w/o explanation.
 * I've removed all spacing from before and within citations IAW MOS:PUNCTREF.
 * I've removed the undue elaboration of organisms that aren't relevant to the biography of Henry Hicks. I'm slowly verifying the sources provided and putting them concisely into the columned list present in the article.  The prose concerning the individual list entrants is appropriate at their articles, not here.
 * I've removed instances of inappropriate capitalization.

"detailed circumscription history"
On 30 January 2021, commented out the entirety of the section "Fossils described by Hicks", saying,. A version of that section was initially first added by. As I detailed above, there've been a lot of problems with verifiability, the manual of style, and consistent formatting of sources, but I have tried to retain it with slow progress towards improving Micktherocktapper's contributions.

I can't speak to what's usually in the biographies of geologists, but I didn't find a specific prohibition at WikiProject Geology, WikiProject Biography, or any other manual of style or guideline (please, though, correct me if I just missed them). Among other edits, I've de-commented those fossil entrants which I've vetted, formatted, and sourced. If Kevmin can point to why Micktherocktapper really shouldn't have this section in the article, I'll cull it and the accompanying sources. —  Fourthords  &#124; =Λ= &#124; 17:21, 31 December 2021 (UTC)
 * Biography practice for geologists, paleontologists, biologists, naturalists are the precedent for my actions. can you show WP practice to have this level of detail included in the naming taxonomists article, as a basis, looking at the articles for Linaeus, Charles Darwin, David Grimaldi, Alexandr Rasnitsyn, etc..  The closest article to to this is Rasnitsyn and even that article is not this detailed. I would suggest the notification of relevant WPs for a fuller discussion of the remaining tagged out section-- Kev  min  § 20:13, 31 December 2021 (UTC)
 * I think you're saying that listing described fossils isn't common? I was asking if there's a prohibition that would warrant removing Micktherocktapper's section whole-cloth.  Is there such a prohibition?  As for the commented-out content, I plan to vet it and list similarly to the six currently visible, not the jumbled mess of sources and prose that's currently hidden.  (By the way, you don't need to type my username or link to my userpage when replying; you can just indent with a colon under the text to which you're replying&mdash;see WP:THREAD for examples.)  —   Fourthords  &#124; =Λ= &#124; 04:58, 1 January 2022 (UTC)