User talk:Chhandama/Archive 3

DYK for Salmonella bongori
Graeme Bartlett (talk) 08:03, 26 February 2013 (UTC)

DYK for Raillietina tetragona
The DYK project (nominate) 08:28, 9 March 2013 (UTC)

DYK for Raillietina cesticillus
The DYK project (nominate) 00:04, 13 March 2013 (UTC)

DYK for Paramphistomum
The DYK project (nominate) 00:03, 22 March 2013 (UTC)

DYK for Paramphistomum cervi
The DYK project (nominate) 00:03, 22 March 2013 (UTC)

DYK for Amphistomiasis
The DYK project (nominate) 00:04, 22 March 2013 (UTC)

A page you started has been reviewed!
Thanks for creating Soil-transmitted helminthiasis, Chhandama!

Wikipedia editor Uncletomwood just reviewed your page, and wrote this note for you:

"excellent article.it was an honor to review this article."

To reply, leave a comment on Uncletomwood's talk page.

Learn more about page curation.

Science Vision
Unfortunately, I'm not highly familiar with notability standards for journals, so I've asked input from someone else who's more familiar; if you don't hear back from anyone at all, feel free to re-ask and I'll do my best. Nyttend (talk) 16:02, 20 April 2013 (UTC)
 * Please see the comment on my talk page. Shall I move it for you? What will happen at AfD is unpredictable.  DGG ( talk ) 02:11, 21 April 2013 (UTC)

Zawlbûk for DYK?
Hello, Chhandama. Thank you for writing up the wikiarticle on Zawlbûk. I have nominated it for DYK. You may want to monitor the nomination in case DYK reviewers have questions regarding this article. Looking forward to seeing this article featured on MainPage. Hope this helps. Happy editing. Cheers! --PFHLai (talk) 01:53, 26 April 2013 (UTC)

DYK for International Society on Toxinology
— Crisco 1492 (talk) 08:03, 28 April 2013 (UTC)

DYK for Redi Award
— Crisco 1492 (talk) 08:03, 28 April 2013 (UTC)

DYK for Zawlbuk
Casliber (talk · contribs) 08:04, 29 April 2013 (UTC)

DYK for Ochroconis anomala
The DYK project (nominate) 00:02, 31 May 2013 (UTC)

DYK for Rugosodon
Allen3 talk 12:09, 29 August 2013 (UTC)

Ancyronyx
Hello. I don't know if you were aware of it, but I had finished writing an article on Ancyronyx on August 22 in my draft space, five days before your article. I didn't know about your version until today when I tried to move mine to mainspace. On reading your version, I deemed it safe to overwrite what you had already written completely, as I have also already discussed the same information (though in more detail). Feel free to look it over and see if I have taken out something which may still be relevant to the article.

As I had planned, I'm nominating the article for DYK. I'll credit you as co-author in light of what you had already previously written. Though I hope it doesn't get disqualified due to now failing to meet the 5x expansion criteria.-- O BSIDIAN  †  S OUL  08:11, 15 September 2013 (UTC)
 * Good to hear. :) Sorry for all this. This is the first time I've actually had something like this happen. I guess we just read the same science articles at the same time, heh. :P -- O BSIDIAN  †  S OUL  00:30, 16 September 2013 (UTC)

DYK for Cupiennius salei
Gatoclass (talk) 21:32, 25 September 2013 (UTC)

Hey, congrats on the American Wandering Spider DYK!
Surprised to see we didn't already have an article on that particular specimen.

Keep up the good work! :-) Kurtis (talk) 23:26, 25 September 2013 (UTC)

DYK for World Access for the Blind
The DYK project (nominate) 00:02, 5 October 2013 (UTC)

Proposed deletion of Tao Deng


The article Tao Deng has been proposed for deletion&#32; because of the following concern: Tao Deng – news, books, scholar Consequently, this article is about a subject that appears to lack sufficient notability. Please see the plain-language summary of our notability guidelines.'''
 * '''A search for references failed to find significant coverage in reliable sources to comply with notability requirements. This included web searches for news coverage, books, and journals, which can be seen from the following links:

While all constructive contributions to Wikipedia are appreciated, content or articles may be deleted for any of several reasons.

You may prevent the proposed deletion by removing the notice, but please explain why in your edit summary or on the article's talk page.

Please consider improving the article to address the issues raised. Removing will stop the proposed deletion process, but other deletion processes exist. In particular, the speedy deletion process can result in deletion without discussion, and articles for deletion allows discussion to reach consensus for deletion. Abductive (reasoning) 17:57, 15 October 2013 (UTC)

DYK for Ancyronyx
The DYK project (nominate) 16:02, 17 October 2013 (UTC)

DYK for Reseda minoica
The DYK project (nominate) 08:02, 19 October 2013 (UTC)

Mercurana
Hello, a comment about your recent edit to Mercurana. You switched back to the abbreviated authors, saying that "More than two authors is abbreviated with et al. in ICZN". This is not entirely correct—the code only says the abbreviation may be used:
 * "The surnames (family names) of authors of scientific names should not be abbreviated. However, when a name was published by more than three authors, the surname of the first author (as given in the original publication) may be cited alone in the text and followed by the term "et al." (meaning "and others"); the names of all the authors should be cited in the bibliography."

So this is a matter of choice. I do not see "et al." used so much in Wikipedia articles on frogs though, and prefer to write them all out, but I do not have a strong opinion. Thanks for a nice article! Micromesistius (talk) 06:50, 21 October 2013 (UTC)
 * Correct, it is purely of choice, and I did not say ICZN imposed it. In fact, it is better to abbreviate, whether it is in Wikipedia or technical papers, if the complete authors are mentioned in the text (References, in this case). However, if there is no mention of the other authors other than the first anywhere in the text, it is honourable to credit all of them. Thanks for the attention. Chhandama (talk) 07:27, 21 October 2013 (UTC)
 * By the way, you commented that "Zootaxa is not open-access" which is not entirely true either. The journal says: [It] has published more open access taxonomic papers than any other journal. Chhandama (talk) 08:17, 21 October 2013 (UTC)
 * Zootaxa is a "hybrid" journal that offers open access for a fee (like almost all journals nowadays do). For example the Abraham et al. article is not open access. Usually journals that publish open-access papers only are called open-access journals. Micromesistius (talk) 16:00, 21 October 2013 (UTC)
 * That's the point I am making on saying not entirely true (I did not say not true). On the other hand, if all authors pay the publication fee, then it would be a fully open access journal, as most open access journals do. Chhandama (talk) 02:46, 22 October 2013 (UTC)

DYK nomination of Mercurana
Hello! Your submission of Mercurana at the Did You Know nominations page has been reviewed, and some issues with it may need to be clarified. Please review the comment(s) underneath your nomination's entry and respond there as soon as possible. Thank you for contributing to Did You Know! BlueMoonset (talk) 22:35, 30 October 2013 (UTC)
 * Note that this is one of three DYK nominations you've made, each of which requires you to do a QPQ (quid pro quo) review of another nominated DYK article before your own can be approved. It has been about a week since this was noted on the various reviews; please respond there if you intend to do these reviews. (I hope you do; it would be a shame to have to reject these simply because you haven't done your own reviews.) Thanks. BlueMoonset (talk) 22:35, 30 October 2013 (UTC)

DYK for Mercurana
— Crisco 1492 (talk) 16:03, 2 November 2013 (UTC)

DYK for Campsicnemus popeye
Gatoclass (talk) 16:04, 3 November 2013 (UTC)

DYK for Pristimantis jamescameroni
Cas Liber (talk · contribs) 05:23, 7 November 2013 (UTC)

DYK for Cystomastacoides kiddo
Cas Liber (talk · contribs) 23:48, 8 November 2013 (UTC)