User talk:Adityavagarwal/Archives/2017/February

Sorry
Hello again, and sorry for not being around for a few days. First there were the internet problems I told you about last time we spoke, and then by the time those cleared up, I had fallen ill. (Influenza/tonsillitis with a multiple-day-sustained 39.6C/~103.3F fever with the occasional peak above 40C/104F. Not fun. Very much not fun.) I see you've remained active on Wikipedia while I was away&mdash;great job! I haven't had the time yet to check out each of those edits, but I glanced at a few of them and they look good. Looks like you're starting to get the hang of Wikipedia editing on species articles. :)

I'll look at our earlier conversation in a bit and respond, but I figured I'd drop off a note as quick as possible now that I'm again around. AddWittyNameHere (talk) 20:03, 1 January 2017 (UTC)
 * "Hello again, and sorry for not being" No no. Do not say sorry or anything. Can you take it back? :D
 * Really, it is cool. You were not well so how would you anyways be around? Yeah, the internet problem, it was so apparent. How would you have replied to the earlier things due to your internet being fitful? It is all fine. How more polite and nice can somebody be? That fever seems a lot, so instead of being around, are you making sure to become healthy? This is because the next time you reply, you might want to say that you are healthy and not ill instead of being ill. Yeah, because of all your helps, the articles that were edited were more easier than normal.
 * Can you write your name in the wikicup? Would it not be nice if you pariticipated? Just do it quickly. There are quite a few questions, and now that you are around, I can ask them. :D ( Although there does not seem to be any, but still, I am sure there may be any question that might come around as well )Adityavagarwal (talk) 15:13, 3 January 2017 (UTC)
 * If you prefer; nonetheless I regret being unable to do so, though I'll grant that the circumstances were such that I had no other choice; if you'd prefer I do not regret my own lack of action, I'll simply regret the existence of those circumstances.

Again my response is late, this time not so overly much, though. Hopefully I'll have eased back into my Wikipedia 'workflow' in another day or two.
 * My health is not overtly problematic at the moment, at the least, even if I would hesitate to say 'healthy'. I am not fully recovered, but I am healthy enough to participate in my general activities both on- and offline. My health is never the best, anyway. Not much I can do about that, I'm afraid. I'm just glad that although I am ill or somewhat-ill fairly frequently, it usually isn't too serious. Or at least, not so long as things get treated and such. (Pyelonephritis, which I had about 18 months ago, for example, can become quite serious if untreated for too long, but it's quite well-treatable. Downside is that antibiotics tend to mess up my resistance against other illness for a while, so I had a throat infection within days of me recovering. That's a pretty common 'theme', anyway: I fall ill and in return my resistance gets lowered enough that by the time I've recovered, I've either already picked up another illness or am dealing with increased symptoms from my more chronic issues.)
 * The main issues are that I'm fairly susceptible to certain kinds of illnesses&mdash;especially those that deal with throat/lungs/nose/ears, probably because those mucous membranes are chronically irritated&mdash;and that my insomnia and other sleeping-related issues frequently worsen my resistance against illness in general. As a result, every now and then I tend to get swept up in months-long strings of falling ill, recovering and falling ill again with little to no time in between. Those strings aren't as common as they used to be, though, thankfully, nor do they tend to last as long as they used to.
 * I could join WikiCup, yes, but I probably won't. It's not really geared towards the kind of thing I do on Wikipedia: the WikiCup is mainly geared towards content-building, and then especially with a focus on either creating high-quality articles or bringing individual articles up to a much higher quality. My work is mostly focused on maintenance, but even my content work rarely focuses on sizeable content additions and improvements. Rather than bringing a single article up from, say, start-class to Good Article, I focus on bringing a lot of our stubs up from 'well, it's technically a stub, but only because there's no lower rate' to 'Well, it's a stub, fair enough, but with some work someone could reasonably improve it to start or higher', because a lot of Lepidoptera stubs are really of very low quality. And of very little content, though that's at least in part because there often isn't that much information available to start with.
 * Yes, please, do feel free to ask me whatever questions pop up. If I take a bit long to respond and you've specifically asked a question, do feel free to let me know on my talkpage so I'll put priority on answering you before going off to do whichever bunch of highly repetitive edits I plan on doing that day. AddWittyNameHere (talk) 01:20, 5 January 2017 (UTC)
 * It is fine. You can really take your time in answering. :D It is better for you to make sure your health is dandy. Also, should you not get treated completely? This is because you might not know when the illness increases and what it's negetive effects may be. There may be more natural ways to be treated as well for that illness, like yoga, etc. (Even though you may not be knowing what yoga is) which is like an exercise. I think that the problem might be cured completely by that exercise.
 * Yeah, but there are these categories in wikicup right? Like good articles, etc. in which you can improve the articles bit by bit, or something like that. However, as you already said, you do not add substantial information to those articles, so good article review? That is a category as well. (Even though you may already be knowing about it) Yeah, those moth articles have less information in the first place, or so. That may as well be the reason for them to have less information. (Along with fewer editors for moth articles) This was mentioned by you earlier I think anyways.
 * Yeah, there are fewer questions which may arise. Repetitive edits? Yeah, do you mean about those similar looking article redirection? Do you find those articles to be redirected so easily?
 * Also, those articles really look so small, like the ones I made with the wrong information of genera instead of species as well. Atleast the links which were not having any article were fine I think.Adityavagarwal (talk) 15:22, 5 January 2017 (UTC)
 * So, there was this hexapoda article I was editing and the number of species in a website described by wilson for it were around 750,000. However, the taxobox has some other name in it but not Wilson. Also, somebody removed that number of species saying something about "listed". I do not understand exactly what he meant. So can you say something on that so that I understand it? Thank You. Adityavagarwal (talk) 17:37, 20 February 2017 (UTC)