User talk:Berton

Welcome
Hi! welcome to Wikipedia!

Hope you enjoy contributing to Wikipedia. Be bold in editing pages. Here are some links that you might find useful:


 * Try the Tutorial. If you have less time, try How to edit a page.
 * To sign your posts (on talk pages, Articles for deletion page etc.) use 	 ~ (four tildes). This will insert your name and timestamp. To insert just your name, type (3 tildes).
 * You can experiment in the test area.
 * You can get help at the Help Desk
 * Some other pages that will help you know more about Wikipedia: Manual of Style and Five pillars, Neutral point of view, Civility, What Wikipedia is not, How to write a great article

Please use edit summaries and Show preview button more liberally. Welcome!! --Gurubrahma 18:02, 30 November 2005 (UTC)


 * /Archive 2006

Rubiaceae pic
Hi Berton - thanks for the note; sorry, it isn't a plant I am familiar with, so I can't really help. If you're sure of it, go ahead and change it, though - MPF 09:10, 30 October 2006 (UTC)

Race and cladistics
Hi,

I found your sub-page on cladistics via Google while trying to get some information to help straighten out a perennial problem, the race article. The page has a couple of owners who have resisted any changes and who have been quite dismissive of people who do not agree with them. A major source of trouble with the article is simply that some people cannot read and cannot write. When I can figure out what the actual intent of the writer is sometimes I have been able to make improvements. However, a major dispute has broken out because, it appears, some people who like the idea of "race" have made it appear that what they term a "clade" or what they term a "lineage" is a candidate for what I guess they might term "the true definition of 'race'," or "the true explanation that justifies the use of the term 'race.'"

I suspect that some people are taking the definitions given in Wikipedia articles on cladistics and lineage in a much too literal way. I know that to leave my present condition of being in over my head I would have to make myself thoroughly conversant with what is a rather large field, and that task is not one that I would finish in a few weeks or even a few months. So I thought I would ask you to have a look at the relevant parts of the article and the talk page and see whether you might have something to contribute.

Thanks.

Patrick Moran (P0M 06:28, 6 June 2007 (UTC))

Smiley Award
Feel free to place this award on your user page, as a token of appreciation for your contributions. If you're willing to help spread the good cheer to others, please see the project page for the Random Smiley Award at: User:Pedia-I/SmileyAward

 For your contributions to Wikipedia and humanity in general, you are hereby granted the coveted Random Smiley Award originated by Pedia-I (Explanation and Disclaimer)

Flood
Hi Berton - thanks for the note! It has been wet up here, but no flooding like further south. Even if there was flooding up here, I am safe on a hill ;-) MPF 17:34, 25 July 2007 (UTC)

Acampe
Hi Rkitko, I notice that you substituted the category African flora to Flora of Africa, but I am trying to do exactly the inverse, I consider that to classify the Flora in continents unnecessary, because either the plants are classified by country or by region, that is, floristic areas (Kingdom, Subkingdoms, Regions, Provinces). The name African refers to African subkingdom, and not to continent African. Thanks Berton 16:33, 26 July 2007 (UTC)


 * Greetings, Berton. From what I understand, the convention or consensus is to place species or genera into their respective flora by country. The convention appears to be Category:Flora of Country or Flora of Continent not Country flora etc. That's why I moved the page into the other category since Category:African flora appears to be redundant with Category:Flora of Africa, so I was emptying it out to be nominated for deletion. Following from this discussion, I believe consensus was to keep the Flora of Country categories. If you'd like, you can again bring this subject up at WT:PLANTS. User:Hesperian would be able to describe the flora categories better than I. Cheers, --Rkitko (talk) 17:00, 26 July 2007 (UTC)


 * Rkitko, the formula Flora by country, without a doubt should be preserved. The problem is in Flora by continents, there is not any importance in classifying by continent, the floristic regions they don't correspond to that are considered the continents, examples: African subkingdom excludes Capensic Kingdom (in South Africa), Antarctic Kingdom includes areas of Chile, Argentina and New Zealand. I uses African flora to differentiate the floristic region of the continent, for this reason there is not redundancy. These categories by region, are important to avoid overcategorization of genera or species with large distribution areas, for this reason, not at all, they should be deleted.Berton 17:17, 26 July 2007 (UTC)


 * Unfortunately, I don't know much about floristic provinces. See World Geographical Scheme for Recording Plant Distributions for information on the system that I think we had consensus to use. I also meant to say something about Category talk:Flora of Togo. There's no consensus for the category circumscription you described in the category main space, so I moved it to the talk page where we can discuss it. Take a look! Cheers, --Rkitko (talk) 17:50, 26 July 2007 (UTC)

Categorising plants along political lines is of course totally artificial... but there remains a definite need to do it, not only here but in the wider world. Since the rest of the world persists in categorising by political region, I think it would be wrong for us to abandon the practice here. Yes there are some very difficult problems with this. But these problems have been resolved, or at least compromises agree upon, in the real world. It think it is best follow the published standard, rather than debate and go over the same ground ourselves, have the same debates, and be faces with the same compromises. As Rkitki says above, the World Geographical Scheme for Recording Plant Distributions is a published standard that lays out a political categorisation for flora. I think we should be following it. Hesperian 00:21, 27 July 2007 (UTC)

Bombacaceae
Berton, I don't have the new edition of the Heywood book nor is it in our library yet, so I can't check how they handle Bombacaceae (or any other family) except that I have heard they have favored a splitting approach to most families. However, I suspect that if they are recognizing Bombacaceae as a family separate from Malvaceae, they must be circumscribing it more narrowly than it has been traditionally circumscribed, and if so the article should reflect this. Unfortunately this is a major problem with any of these major references--Cronquist, Thorne, APG, Heywood, etc.--in the absence of lists of genera, family circumscriptions are generally implicit rather than explicit and should be approached cautiously. MrDarwin 13:21, 22 August 2007 (UTC)
 * MrDarwin, I have got the new edition of the Heywood and see my user subpage User:Berton/Malvales for more details. Berton 13:34, 22 August 2007 (UTC)
 * Okay, but it's not enough to say that Heywood et al. recognize Bombaceae as a family separate from Malvaceae; the text of the article should be more explicit that Heywood et al. are recognizing a Bombacaceae that is more restricted than in the traditional sense in order to make it monophyletic with respect to Malvaceae.
 * And once again the big question is, how do the Malvales specialists treat these groups? This has been a major weakness of all the Malvales articles. MrDarwin 13:48, 22 August 2007 (UTC)
 * Are you doubting of Heywood et al.? It is obvious that they followed that the specialists researched on Bombacaceae.Berton 13:52, 22 August 2007 (UTC)

Rautavaara
hello Berton! do you have facebook? if yes, do join the rautavaara community at http://www.facebook.com/group.php?gid=7081010852

rautavaara's also one of my favourite composers!

JohnWYC —Preceding unsigned comment added by 203.185.57.66 (talk) 08:33, 30 September 2007 (UTC)

Phytogeography
hello Berton. Please get back to me about your comments on the phytogeography article. I am wondering how it was rated; I do not agree with that rating. I have been using the phytogeography article as a way to learn the wiki interface and learn how to contribute articles. I am a professional in the field, and am wondering what specific issues you have with the article. Thanks Threelovemonkeys (talk) 14:56, 21 January 2008 (UTC)

hi
Hi. I found you in categories of users who can contribute in English and Portuguese. I myself am a native speaker of English, but I'm well on my way to learning Portuguese. Just check out my user page and talk page, and join in any of the discussions. To keep updated, you can even put a watch on my user page, which will automatically watch my talk page. :-) learnportuguese (talk) 18:42, 7 February 2008 (UTC)

You are now a Reviewer
Hello. Your account has been granted the "reviewer" userright, allowing you to review other users' edits on certain flagged pages. Pending changes, also known as flagged protection, is currently undergoing a two-month trial scheduled to end 15 August 2010.

Reviewers can review edits made by users who are not autoconfirmed to articles placed under pending changes. Pending changes is applied to only a small number of articles, similarly to how semi-protection is applied but in a more controlled way for the trial. The list of articles with pending changes awaiting review is located at Special:OldReviewedPages.

When reviewing, edits should be accepted if they are not obvious vandalism or BLP violations, and not clearly problematic in light of the reason given for protection (see Reviewing process). More detailed documentation and guidelines can be found here.

If you do not want this userright, you may ask any administrator to remove it for you at any time. Courcelles (talk) 05:10, 20 June 2010 (UTC)

Chione
Please see the talk page for Chione (plant genus). I thought that i should notify you, just in case it is not on your watchlist. 128.171.106.253 (talk) 01:53, 25 January 2011 (UTC)

Welcome message
Hi Berton, thank you for your message. I'm very proud to partecipate to english version of Wiki. Unfortunately I'm able to dedicate a few time, but I'll do my best. Greetings--Massimiliano Panu (talk) 00:34, 16 April 2011 (UTC)

Opinion on APG III?
Hi Berton, I haven't studied botany outside of the bits and pieces I've picked up on Wikipedia, but I noticed your edit to Cucurbitaceae and became quite interested in your user page. I wonder if you have a more favorable view on APG III than its predecessors? Just curious! Cheers, Melchoir (talk) 00:36, 3 May 2011 (UTC)

Apologies
I was trying to figure how to fix the link and I thought that was the way. Can you explain how do I fix it for future reference? La Fuzion ( What's up? ) 16:52, 15 September 2011 (UTC)
 * Yes, a redirect. La Fuzion  ( What's up? ) 17:50, 15 September 2011 (UTC)

Links to Author
Berton, thank you for placing the "links to author" on my recent Calliostoma articles! Is there a list somewhere of malacological authors who have pages on Wikipedia so we can put links in, or do we just have to take our best guess and use the square parentheses "Shellnut (talk) 16:07, 9 October 2011 (UTC)

Survey for new page patrollers
Delivered by MessageDeliveryBot on behalf of Wiki Media Foundation at 11:38, 25 October 2011 (UTC).

Rosaceae and Spiraeoideae
Hi, I've reverted you change to Rosaceae for a complicated reason that I've tried to explain on the talk page. It is an awkward situation having to do with the code of nomenclature that will become easier to explain when the code finally appears. Hopefully, that will be this month, at least for the printed version. Best wishes, Sminthopsis84 (talk) 17:58, 4 November 2012 (UTC)

Barnstar
Thanks for that barnstar! I don't have a clear idea of what it is or where it comes from, but it looks good to me. I finished expanding the article on Bignoniaceae. I hope you like it. 98.150.181.36 (talk) 07:17, 29 November 2012 (UTC)

Correction to Luiz Roberto Tommasi - thank you!
Hi Berton,

The original text is Doutorado em Ciências.

Universidade de São Paulo, USP, Brasil.

Título: OS QUINODERMOS DA REGIAO DA ILHA GRANDE., Ano de obtenção: 1969. When it's simple things like that, I like to do the translations myself, without using Google Translate. I thought "quinodermos" and "regiao" might be Brazilian Portuguese. I was wrong, but I'm rather happy with myself to be wrong in this case.

Peter in Australia aka --Shirt58 (talk) 09:05, 13 June 2013 (UTC)

Russky Aktash
Hi, Berton! Russky Aktash used to be an urban-type settlement, but it was demoted to rural status in 2004. The administrative divisions of the Republic of Tatarstan only lists the urban-type settlements which currently have this status, which is why I removed your addition. The inclusion of Russky Aktash on this page in the Russian Wikipedia seems to be a mistake (that page claims to be based on the 2010 Census results, but in those results Russky Aktash is already listed as rural). Hope this helps! Let me know if you need anything else clarified. Cheers,—Ëzhiki (Igels Hérissonovich Ïzhakoff-Amursky) • (yo?); October 22, 2013; 15:25 (UTC)
 * I am fully satisfied with yor answer. Cheers, Berton (talk) 15:50, 22 October 2013 (UTC)

Category:Flora of West Africa has been nominated for discussion
Category:Flora of West Africa, which you created, has been nominated for possible deletion, merging, or renaming. A discussion is taking place to see if it abides with the categorization guidelines. If you would like to participate in the discussion, you are invited to add your comments at the category's entry on the categories for discussion page. Thank you. DexDor(talk) 18:14, 7 August 2018 (UTC)

Lady Juliana
Its confusing but that Juliana is said by Seth to be a different one. The Juliana of Agra article is going to need some further work I think. Philafrenzy (talk) 20:23, 4 November 2018 (UTC)
 * Ok, Thank you Berton (talk) 20:26, 4 November 2018 (UTC)

Speedy deletion nomination of Category:Flora of Anguilla


A tag has been placed on Category:Flora of Anguilla requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section C1 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because the category has been empty for seven days or more and is not a disambiguation category, a category redirect, a featured topics category, under discussion at Categories for discussion, or a project category that by its nature may become empty on occasion.

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. UnitedStatesian (talk) 02:17, 14 August 2020 (UTC)

"Engl." listed at Redirects for discussion
An editor has identified a potential problem with the redirect Engl. and has thus listed it for discussion. This discussion will occur at Redirects for discussion/Log/2022 April 13 until a consensus is reached, and anyone, including you, is welcome to contribute to the discussion. BD2412 T 05:09, 13 April 2022 (UTC)

ArbCom 2022 Elections voter message
 Hello! Voting in the 2022 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23:59 (UTC) on. 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.

If you wish to participate in the 2022 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. If you no longer wish to receive these messages, you may add to your user talk page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 00:22, 29 November 2022 (UTC)

Your access to AWB may be temporarily removed
Hello Berton! This message is to inform you that due to editing inactivity, your access to AutoWikiBrowser may be temporarily removed. If you do not resume editing within the next week, your username will be removed from the CheckPage. This is purely for routine maintenance and is not indicative of wrongdoing on your part. You may regain access at any time by simply requesting it at WP:PERM/AWB. Thank you! &mdash; MusikBot II  talk  17:14, 14 February 2023 (UTC)