User talk:Abductive/Archive 17

Articles you might like to edit, from SuggestBot
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. We appreciate that you have signed up to receive suggestions regularly; your contributions make Wikipedia better — thanks for helping!

If you have feedback on how to make SuggestBot better, please let us know on SuggestBot's talk page. -- SuggestBot (talk) 23:45, 7 October 2018 (UTC)

Articles you might like to edit, from SuggestBot
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. We appreciate that you have signed up to receive suggestions regularly; your contributions make Wikipedia better — thanks for helping!

If you have feedback on how to make SuggestBot better, please let us know on SuggestBot's talk page. -- SuggestBot (talk) 23:40, 21 October 2018 (UTC)

Fencepost limestone coordinates.
Hi. Since you expressed an opinion, you get the question. What should be coordinates of a geological unit that runs all the way up into Canada? No, seriously, what coordinate should be use for the Dakota formation which has discontinuous outliers from Minnesota, to Iowa, Texas, Utah, Montana, and Saskatchewan? Or for the Fort Hays, which as about 3/4 the extent of the Dakota?

As for the Fencepost, (which I have seen outcropped in a mine NW of Fort Collins, CO!) I chose to use the center of the outcrop since that is better defined. Why would the museum be better (La Crosse is rather out on an outlier, tiny Liebenthal has much more of the stone still standing.)? Why not Lincoln, The Post Rock Capital of Kansas? Why not Lucas, where the Kansas Department of Wildlife, Parks and Tourism is holding the meetings? IveGoneAway (talk) 03:34, 16 November 2018 (UTC)
 * I'm not sure. A big mine or quarry would be fine. If there is a secondary source that gives coordinates then that would work. Abductive  (reasoning) 03:43, 16 November 2018 (UTC)
 * (Mind you, I am not fighting over the coordinate of this article, but over the general concept of tagging articles about disparate, discontiguous, or distributed regions for missing coordinates. If it makes no sense to apply a coordinate to a subject, then why tag it? (Ah, justify the inapplicability of a coordinate and remove the tag.)) (and I'm chatty)
 * If you are not sure, then why set the coordinate? Personally I would leave the coordinates out, because setting a single coordinate for a wide-ranging geological unit makes no contribution to the article; but every time I leave the coordinate out (for not making sense), a well-meaning editor tags or sets it to something. Coordinates for the big quarries are set in the articles about the big quarries (no big quarry for the Fencepost, all were Pop and Poppa outfits); coordinates for the museums are set in the article about the museums. The coordinate for Kansas is set near the center of the state, not at the state's capital or museum. I would have to think that the geological unit as well as any physiographic region would have some way to mark the extent rather than using the single coordinate. There may be something like that, but I just don't know enough.
 * "If there is a secondary source that gives coordinates then that would work." That is just not done for large geologic units, AFAIK. Where is the secondary source that says a museum should be the coordinate for large geologic units? Or, is the real issue that me picking the center of the outcrop myself is OR?
 * Type location for a rock unit might be justifiable as the coordinate (which is often way off to the edge of the unit), except that there is no type locality for the Fencepost, except for, perhaps, the center of the initial activity, which was the forts and Kansas Pacific Railway, particularly the ridge between the Solomon and the Smoky, where I initially set it, and where I-70 really does cut through the middle of the proposed district.
 * (I know, an issue for the geology group anyway.)
 * So, why not the center of the outcrop and historic district?
 * IveGoneAway (talk) 23:39, 16 November 2018 (UTC)
 * Yes, the issue really is OR in finding the center. If geologists don't publish such things then Wikipedia shouldn't either. Perhaps it would be best to comment out the coordinates. If there is a NRHP district, it should receive its own article. Abductive  (reasoning) 23:54, 16 November 2018 (UTC)
 * If geologists don't publish such things then Wikipedia shouldn't either. Then editors shouldn't tag the coordinates are missing, because that is Speculation that coordinates are given. I have (almost?) always left it blank. Is it OR to choose one of the museums or one of the quarries?
 * How about 38.84903°N, -99.19612°W? The location is described in the literature, and more are near the center of the outcrop.
 * IveGoneAway (talk) 02:32, 17 November 2018 (UTC)
 * I just saw that you commented out the coordinate. Thank you. IveGoneAway (talk) 03:01, 17 November 2018 (UTC)

Articles you might like to edit, from SuggestBot
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. We appreciate that you have signed up to receive suggestions regularly; your contributions make Wikipedia better — thanks for helping!

If you have feedback on how to make SuggestBot better, please let us know on SuggestBot's talk page. -- SuggestBot (talk) 19:44, 2 December 2018 (UTC)

DYK for Prunus kansuensis
Mifter (talk) 00:03, 12 December 2018 (UTC)

Articles you might like to edit, from SuggestBot
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. We appreciate that you have signed up to receive suggestions regularly; your contributions make Wikipedia better — thanks for helping!

If you have feedback on how to make SuggestBot better, please let us know on SuggestBot's talk page. -- SuggestBot (talk) 00:34, 17 December 2018 (UTC)

Low-fat diet
Editing the Low-fat diet article (in terrible shape) I was amazed to see a statement in the lead that these diets cause obesity. From the edit history I see this was first added by you just over a year ago. So far as I can see, the source says no such astonishing thing. Rather the opposite: "In general, the results suggest that the proportion of macronutrients in the diet is not important in prevention of obesity" (from the conclusion). Since then the page has had over 100,000 views. Do you have an explanation for your edit? Alexbrn (talk) 09:25, 24 December 2018 (UTC)
 * One must consider that one's calories can only come from three sources; carbohydrates, protein and fat. One must change the proportions while keeping the calories constant. So higher x means lower y and/or z. "According to the data, high intake of whole grains, fruit, nuts and high-fat dairy protect against increasing obesity, whereas refined grains, white bread, meat and sweets and desserts seem to promote gains in weight or WC." The first grouping is high fat to moderate fat, the second grouping is low fat. But if you want to change it to say that low fat diets have not been shown to prevent obesity, I'm fine with that. Abductive  (reasoning) 10:52, 24 December 2018 (UTC)
 * Yours was a blatant misrepresention of the source then. Whether this was shocking incompetence or shocking bias I don't know or care, but any more of this and I suspect some kind of sanction will be in order. I have mentioned this at WT:MED. Alexbrn (talk) 11:08, 24 December 2018 (UTC)
 * Are you sure? It is a reasonable interpretation of the source, and you seem to be all in a tizzy. There won't be any sanction, and I don't know where you thing that there'll be "more of this." Why don't you check some of my other edits and see if I am some sort of biased incompetent?  Abductive  (reasoning) 04:24, 25 December 2018 (UTC)
 * Yes I am sure, you cannot pick stuff out of an article to arrive at different conclusions to the article itself. Plonking it in the lede of an article (and ledes are meant to summarize bodies) is doubly bad. Alexbrn (talk) 06:17, 25 December 2018 (UTC)

Articles you might like to edit, from SuggestBot
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. We appreciate that you have signed up to receive suggestions regularly; your contributions make Wikipedia better — thanks for helping!

If you have feedback on how to make SuggestBot better, please let us know on SuggestBot's talk page. -- SuggestBot (talk) 12:57, 31 December 2018 (UTC)

Welcome to the 2019 WikiCup!
Hello and Happy New Year!

Welcome to the 2019 WikiCup, the competition begins today. If you have already joined, your submission page can be found here. If you have not yet signed up, you can add your name here and we will set up your submissions page. One important rule to remember is that only content on which you have completed significant work during 2019, and which you have nominated this year, is eligible for points in the competition, the judges will be checking! Any questions should be directed to one of the judges, or left on Wikipedia talk:WikiCup. Signups will close at the end of January, and the first round will end on 26 February; the 64 highest scorers at that time will make it to round 2. Good luck! The judges for the WikiCup are, , and. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 11:14, 1 January 2019 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for January 2
An automated process has detected that when you recently edited Gray snub-nosed monkey, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Acer ([//dispenser.info.tm/~dispenser/cgi-bin/dablinks.py/Gray_snub-nosed_monkey check to confirm] | [//dispenser.info.tm/~dispenser/cgi-bin/dab_solver.py/Gray_snub-nosed_monkey?client=notify fix with Dab solver]).

(Opt-out instructions.) --DPL bot (talk) 09:26, 2 January 2019 (UTC)

Articles you might like to edit, from SuggestBot
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. We appreciate that you have signed up to receive suggestions regularly; your contributions make Wikipedia better — thanks for helping!

If you have feedback on how to make SuggestBot better, please let us know on SuggestBot's talk page. -- SuggestBot (talk) 11:43, 14 January 2019 (UTC)

Bank of North America
Hi! I've reverted, sort of, your unsourced edit to Bank of North America that changed the building's location to 315 Chestnut. The uncropped version of that image clearly says that it's at 307 Chestnut, and the Library of Congress confirms that it's at least at 305–307 Chestnut. :-) Ed [talk] [majestic titan] 01:58, 15 January 2019 (UTC)
 * I was confused. Abductive  (reasoning) 19:53, 15 January 2019 (UTC)

Articles you might like to edit, from SuggestBot
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. We appreciate that you have signed up to receive suggestions regularly; your contributions make Wikipedia better — thanks for helping!

If you have feedback on how to make SuggestBot better, please let us know on SuggestBot's talk page. -- SuggestBot (talk) 12:17, 28 January 2019 (UTC)

Articles you might like to edit, from SuggestBot
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. We appreciate that you have signed up to receive suggestions regularly; your contributions make Wikipedia better — thanks for helping!

If you have feedback on how to make SuggestBot better, please let us know on SuggestBot's talk page. -- SuggestBot (talk) 12:34, 11 February 2019 (UTC)

Nomination of Reactions to the 2019 Pulwama attack for deletion
A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Reactions to the 2019 Pulwama attack is suitable for inclusion in Wikipedia according to Wikipedia's policies and guidelines or whether it should be deleted.

The article will be discussed at Articles for deletion/Reactions to the 2019 Pulwama attack 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. Gotitbro (talk) 10:41, 17 February 2019 (UTC)

Discretionary sanctions alert
NinjaRobotPirate (talk) 12:24, 17 February 2019 (UTC)

I have unreviewed a page you curated
Thanks for reviewing Reactions to the 2019 Pulwama attack, Abductive.

Winged Blades of Godric has gone over this page again and marked it as unpatrolled. Their note is:

"CONTENTFORK. Merge to main article."

Please contact Winged Blades of Godric for any further query. Thanks.

Message delivered via the Page Curation tool, on behalf of the reviewer.

&#x222F; WBG converse 14:55, 17 February 2019 (UTC)
 * Ridiculous creation from someone with the auto-patrol hat and certainly, one of the most blatant violation of QUOTEFARM; I've ever seen. &#x222F; WBG converse 14:57, 17 February 2019 (UTC)

Speedy deletion nomination of Reactions to the 2019 Pulwama attack


A tag has been placed on Reactions to the 2019 Pulwama attack requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section G12 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because the page appears to be an unambiguous copyright infringement. This page appears to be a direct copy from https://www.indiatoday.in/india/story/condolences-pour-in-from-across-the-globe-for-pulwama-terror-attack-1456479-2019-02-14. For legal reasons, we cannot accept copyrighted text or images taken from other web sites or printed material, and as a consequence, your addition will most likely be deleted. You may use external websites or other printed material as a source of information, but not as a source of sentences. This part is crucial: say it in your own words. Wikipedia takes copyright violations very seriously and persistent violators will be blocked from editing.

If the external website or image belongs to you, and you want to allow Wikipedia to use the text or image — which means allowing other people to use it for any reason — then you must verify that externally by one of the processes explained at Donating copyrighted materials. The same holds if you are not the owner but have their permission. If you are not the owner and do not have permission, see Requesting copyright permission for how you may obtain it. You might want to look at Wikipedia's copyright policy for more details, or ask a question here.

If you think this page should not be deleted for this reason, you may contest the nomination by visiting the page and clicking the button labelled "Contest this speedy deletion". This will give you the opportunity to explain why you believe the page should not be deleted. However, be aware that once a page is tagged for speedy deletion, it may be deleted without delay. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag from the page yourself, but do not hesitate to add information in line with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines.  CASSIOPEIA(talk) 16:05, 17 February 2019 (UTC)

Articles you might like to edit, from SuggestBot
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. We appreciate that you have signed up to receive suggestions regularly; your contributions make Wikipedia better — thanks for helping!

If you have feedback on how to make SuggestBot better, please let us know on SuggestBot's talk page. -- SuggestBot (talk) 12:03, 25 February 2019 (UTC)

Re:Assessment
Thank you!! I'll keep that in mind: I don't know why it slipped-time maybe? Until then, Fimbriata (talk) 18:21, 28 February 2019 (UTC)

Importance assessment
We appear to read WikiProject Plants/Assessment differently. In Thus, subjects with greater popular notability may be rated higher than topics which are arguably more "important" but which are of interest primarily to students of botany, I pay attention to the "may" – firstly I decide whether the topic is important to students of botany or gardeners, and then up-rate if it's popular. You seem to be rating based solely on page views; I don't believe there's a consensus for this at WP:PLANTS, but we should perhaps try to test this if you disagree (although there seem to be few editors around at present).

I would also point out that newly created articles naturally don't have many page views, nor may those that have been moved to a more recognizable and better-linked title.

The specific issue with invasive knotweeds is that they are regularly mis-identified, since the taxonomy has been a mess. So the topic is more important than current pageviews suggest. Peter coxhead (talk) 09:04, 3 March 2019 (UTC)
 * I am not gauging based solely on pageviews, far from it. You would have to see the list I am working from. Here's a rough glimpse into my protocol: Using the massviews tool and looking at either the last year or the last month, I work my way from the bottommost of the, say, Mid-importance plant articles, having just compared to the topmost of the Low-importance plant articles. There are over 5,000 of the Mids. Then I read each article for any sign of any claim of interest. If a plant is invasive, or in any way cultivated, or used in traditional medicine, or anything other than X is a taxon (or Y was a botanist), I give it a pass to remain in Mid. As I moved up the list I found fewer and fewer Mids that should be Lows. I have already finished reassessing all them, so about 159 out of 5300, is that so surprising? Abductive  (reasoning) 11:49, 3 March 2019 (UTC)
 * Ok, well, your edit summaries suggested otherwise in the cases that appeared on my watchlist. Peter coxhead (talk) 17:15, 3 March 2019 (UTC)

Articles you might like to edit, from SuggestBot
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. We appreciate that you have signed up to receive suggestions regularly; your contributions make Wikipedia better — thanks for helping!

If you have feedback on how to make SuggestBot better, please let us know on SuggestBot's talk page. -- SuggestBot (talk) 11:51, 11 March 2019 (UTC)

We need YOU!
 Hello Abductive,

Unregistered editors cannot create articles on Wikipedia, but they can use the articles for creation process to submit drafts that registered editors can either accept and publish or decline. WikiProject Articles for creation is looking for experienced editors who want to partake in this peer review process. If you have what it takes to get involved, then please take a look at the reviewing instructions. To discuss specific AfC reviews, do so freely on the designated talk page.

There is currently a backlog of over 2600 drafts (17 very old).

If you know an editor who may be willing to help out, please use the template you are currently reading to draw attention to this WikiProject. Many hands make light work!

The One and Only  Boothsift  04:06, 20 March 2019 (UTC)

Articles you might like to edit, from SuggestBot
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. We appreciate that you have signed up to receive suggestions regularly; your contributions make Wikipedia better — thanks for helping!

If you have feedback on how to make SuggestBot better, please let us know on SuggestBot's talk page. -- SuggestBot (talk) 12:12, 25 March 2019 (UTC)

A barnstar for you

 * Hear hear!! —hike395 (talk) 07:03, 8 April 2019 (UTC)

Articles you might like to edit, from SuggestBot
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. We appreciate that you have signed up to receive suggestions regularly; your contributions make Wikipedia better — thanks for helping!

If you have feedback on how to make SuggestBot better, please let us know on SuggestBot's talk page. -- SuggestBot (talk) 11:24, 8 April 2019 (UTC)

Articles you might like to edit, from SuggestBot
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. We appreciate that you have signed up to receive suggestions regularly; your contributions make Wikipedia better — thanks for helping!

If you have feedback on how to make SuggestBot better, please let us know on SuggestBot's talk page. -- SuggestBot (talk) 11:47, 22 April 2019 (UTC)

WikiCup 2019 May newsletter
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:

Other notable performances were put in by Barkeep49 with six GAs, 🇺🇸 Ceranthor, 🏴󠁧󠁢󠁥󠁮󠁧󠁿 Lee Vilenski, and  Canada Hky, each with seven GARs, and 🇩🇰 MPJ-DK with a seven item GT.
 * 🏴󠁧󠁢󠁳󠁣󠁴󠁿 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.
 * 🏴󠁧󠁢󠁷󠁬󠁳󠁿 Kosack (750), last year's runner up, with an FA, a GA, two FLs, and five DYKs.
 * Pirate_Flag_of_Henry_Every.svg (480), a WikiCup veteran, with 16 featured pictures, mostly restorations.
 * Zwerg Nase (461), a seasoned competitor, with a FA, a GA and an ITN item.

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 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 WikiCup/Newsletter/Send. Godot13 (talk), Sturmvogel 66 (talk), Vanamonde (talk) and Cwmhiraeth (talk) MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 17:45, 1 May 2019 (UTC)

Precious anniversary
--Gerda Arendt (talk) 06:57, 5 May 2019 (UTC)

Articles you might like to edit, from SuggestBot
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. We appreciate that you have signed up to receive suggestions regularly; your contributions make Wikipedia better — thanks for helping!

If you have feedback on how to make SuggestBot better, please let us know on SuggestBot's talk page. -- SuggestBot (talk) 11:37, 7 May 2019 (UTC)

WikiProject Tree of Life Newsletter

 * April 2019&mdash;Issue 001


 * Tree of Life


 * Welcome to the inaugural issue of the Tree of Life newsletter!

Tree of Life editors are making a respectable showing in this year's WikiCup, with three regular editors advancing to the third round. Overall winner from 2016,, topped the scoreboard in points for round 2, getting a nice bonus for bringing Black mamba to FA. continues to favor things remotely related to bats, bringing Stellaluna to GA. Plants editor also advanced to round 3 with several plant-related DYKs. A March 2019 paper in PLOS Biology found that Wikipedia page views vary seasonally for species. With a dataset of 31,751 articles about species, the authors found that roughly a quarter of all articles had significant seasonal variations in page views on at least one language version of Wikipedia. They examined 245 language versions. Page views also peaked with cultural events, such as views of the Great white shark article during Shark Week or Turkey during Thanksgiving.
 * WikiCup heating up
 * Wikipedia page views track animal migrations, flowers blooming
 * Did you know ... that Tree of Life editors bring content to the front page nearly every day?

You are receiving this because you added your name to the subscribers list of the WikiProject Tree of Life. If you no longer wish to receive the newsletter, please remove your name. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 16:24, 7 May 2019 (UTC)

Articles you might like to edit, from SuggestBot
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. We appreciate that you have signed up to receive suggestions regularly; your contributions make Wikipedia better — thanks for helping!

If you have feedback on how to make SuggestBot better, please let us know on SuggestBot's talk page. -- SuggestBot (talk) 11:35, 21 May 2019 (UTC)

Diestrammena asynamora
Greetings - I have suggested a rename (in light of recent work) of this article that you worked on. Any objections? Brgds Roy Bateman (talk) 19:27, 21 May 2019 (UTC)

Following your species classification
Here is the 'real' thing: https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Xylocopa_pubescens_1.jpg Thank you for your help! Etan J. Tal(talk) 21:57, 27 May 2019 (UTC)
 * Great! Glad to been able to assist. Abductive  (reasoning) 03:42, 28 May 2019 (UTC)

May 2019 Tree of Life Newsletter

 * May 2019&mdash;Issue 002


 * Tree of Life


 * Welcome to the Tree of Life newsletter!

On 23 May, user created a talk page post, "Revamp of Wikiproject Biology--Who is In?". In the days since, WP:BIOL has been bustling with activity, with over a dozen editors weighing in on this discussion, as well as several others that have subsequently spawned. An undercurrent of thought is that WP:BIOL has too many subprojects, preventing editors from easily interacting and stopping a "critical mass" of collaboration and engagement. Many mergers and consolidations of subprojects have been tentatively listed, with a consolidation of WikiProjects Genetics + Molecular and Cell Biology + Computational Biology + Biophysics currently in discussion. Other ideas being aired include updating old participants lists, redesigning project pages to make them more user-friendly, and clearly identifying long- and short-term goals.
 * Fundamental changes being discussed at WikiProject Biology

Editors and  had a very fruitful month, collaborating to bring two dinosaur articles to GA and then nominating them both for FA. They graciously decided to answer some questions for the first ToL Editor Spotlight, giving insight to their successful collaborations, explaining why you should collaborate with them, and also sharing some tidbits about their lives off-Wikipedia.
 * Editor Spotlight: These editors want you to write about dinosaurs

1) Enwebb: How long have you two been collaborating on articles? 2) Enwebb: Why dinosaurs? 3) Enwebb: Why should other editors join you in writing articles related to paleontology? Are you looking to attract new editors, or draw in experienced editors from other areas of Wikipedia?
 * Jens Lallensack: I started in the German Wikipedia in 2005 but switched to the English Wikipedia because of its very active dinosaur project. My first major collaboration with FunkMonk was on Heterodontosaurus in 2015.
 * FunkMonk: Yeah, we had interacted already on talk pages and through reviewing each other's articles, and at some point I was thinking of expanding Heterodontosaurus, and realised Jens had already written the German Wikipedia version, so it seemed natural to work together on the English one. Our latest collaboration was Spinophorosaurus, where by another coincidence, I had wanted to work on that article for the WP:Four Award, and it turned out that Jens had a German book about the expedition that found the dinosaur, which I wouldn't have been able to utilise with my meagre German skills. Between those, we also worked on Brachiosaurus, a wider Dinosaur Project collaboration between several editors.
 * JL: Because of the huge public interest in them. But dinosaurs are also highly interesting from a scientific point of view: key evolutionary innovations emerged within this group, such as warm-bloodedness, gigantism, and flight. Dinosaur research is, together with the study of fossil human remains, the most active field in paleontology. New scientific techniques and approaches tend to get developed within this field. Dinosaur research became increasingly interdisciplinary, and now does not only rely on various fields of biology and geology, but also on chemistry and physics, among others. Dinosaurs are therefore ideal to convey scientific methodology to the general public.
 * FM: As outlined above, dinosaurs have been described as a "gateway to science"; if you learn about dinosaurs, you will most likely also learn about a lot of scientific fields you would not necessarily be exposed to otherwise. On a more personal level, having grown up with and being influenced by various dinosaur media, it feels pretty cool to help spread knowledge about these animals, closest we can get to keeping them alive.
 * JL: Because we are a small but active and helpful community. Our Dinosaur collaboration, one of the very few active open collaborations in Wikipedia, makes high-level writing on important articles easier and more fun. Our collaboration is especially open to editors without prior experience in high-level writing. But we do not only write articles: several WikiProject Dinosaur participants are artists who do a great job illustrating the articles, and maintain an extensive and very active image review system. In fact, a number of later authors started with contributing images.
 * FM: Anyone who is interested in palaeontology is welcome to try writing articles, and we would be more than willing to help. I find that the more people that work on articles simultaneously with me, the more motivation I get to write myself. I am also one of those editors who started out contributing dinosaur illustrations and making minor edits, and only began writing after some years. But when I got to it, it wasn't as intimidating as I had feared, and I've learned a lot in the process. For example anatomy; if you know dinosaur anatomy, you have a very good framework for understanding the anatomy of other tetrapod animals, including humans.

4) Enwebb: Between the two of you, you have over 300 GA reviews. FunkMonk, you have over 250 of those. What keeps you coming back to review more articles?
 * FM: One of the main reasons I review GANs is to learn more about subjects that seem interesting (or which I would perhaps not come across otherwise). There are of course also more practical reasons, such as helping an article on its way towards FAC, to reduce the GAN backlog, and to "pay back" when I have a nomination up myself. It feels like a win-win situation where I can be entertained by interesting info, while also helping other editors get their nominations in shape, and we'll end up with an article that hopefully serves to educate a lot of people (the greater good).
 * JL: Because I enjoy reading Wikipedia articles and like to learn new things. In addition, reviews give me the opportunity to have direct contact with the authors, and help them to make their articles even better. This is quite rewarding for me personally. But I also review because I consider our GA and FA system to be of fundamental importance for Wikipedia. When I started editing Wikipedia (the German version), the article promotion reviews motivated me and improved my writing skills a lot. Submitting an article for review requires one to get serious and take additional steps to bring the article to the best quality possible. GAs and FAs are also a good starting point for readers, and may motivate them to become authors themselves.

5) Enwebb: What are your editing preferences? Any scripts or gadgets you find invaluable? 6) Enwebb: What would surprise the ToL community to learn about your life off-wiki?
 * FM: One script that everyone should know about is the duplink highlight tool. It will show duplinks within the intro and body of a given article separately, and it seems a lot of people still don't know about it, though they are happy when introduced to it. I really liked the citationbot too (since citation consistency is a boring chore to me), but it seems to be blocked at the moment due to some technical issues.
 * JL: I often review using the Wikipedia Beta app on my smartphone, as it allows me to read without needing to sit in front of the PC. For writing, I find the reference management software Zotero invaluable, as it generates citation templates automatically, saving a lot of time.
 * Editor's note: I downloaded Zotero and tried it for the first time and think it is a very useful tool. More here.
 * FM: Perhaps that I have no background in natural history/science, but work with animation and games. But fascination with and knowledge of nature and animals is actually very helpful when designing and animating characters and creatures, so it isn't that far off, and I can actually use some of the things I learn while writing here for my work (when I wrote the Dromaeosauroides article, it was partially to learn more about the animal for a design-school project).
 * JL: That I am actually doing research on dinosaurs. Though I avoid writing about topics I publish research on, my Wikipedia work helps me to keep a good general overview over the field, and quite regularly I can use what I learned while writing for Wikipedia for my research.

Get in touch with these editors regarding collaboration at WikiProject Dinosaurs!
 * Marine life continues to dominate ToL DYKs

Discuss this issue

You are receiving this because you added your name to the subscribers list of the WikiProject Tree of Life. If you no longer wish to receive the newsletter, please remove your name.

Sent by DannyS712 (talk) using MediaWiki message delivery (talk) at 03:44, 4 June 2019 (UTC)