User talk:Davros69999

Moved your data to a new timeline
Your information added to Timeline of natural history has been moved to its own timeline, Timeline of the formation of the Universe.  Serendi pod ous  13:08, 4 June 2015 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for July 4
Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Timeline of the formation of the Universe, you added links pointing to the disambiguation pages Europa and Titan. Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ* Join us at the DPL WikiProject.

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 09:17, 4 July 2015 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for August 5
Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that you've added some links pointing to disambiguation pages. Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ* Join us at the DPL WikiProject.


 * Timeline of natural history
 * added links pointing to Iapetus, Spicules and Gamburtsev


 * Timeline of the formation of the Universe
 * added links pointing to Copernican and Hyades

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 10:53, 5 August 2015 (UTC)

Dating
I appreciate the work you've done on Timeline of natural history, but please remember, the timeline is dated in Megaanni, not Gigayears/Megayears. If you feel more comfortable with Gigayears/Megayears, that's fine, just remember to change the entire article, so that it's consistent, and make the distinction between Gyr and Myr clear to the casual reader.  Serendi pod ous  21:33, 6 August 2015 (UTC)

ArbCom elections are now open!
Hi, You appear to be eligible to vote in the current Arbitration Committee election. The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to enact binding solutions for disputes between editors, primarily related to serious behavioural issues that the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the ability 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, you are welcome to review the candidates' statements and submit your choices on the voting page. For the Election committee, MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 17:11, 24 November 2015 (UTC)

Bird vocalisation: topheavy with audio files
Hi, just to let you know I've reverted your latest additions of files, I already stated in an edit comment that the article was getting topheavy: three more is certainly not justified. Take it to the article talk page if you like, but it's very unusual for an article to have more than one or two audio files - I've been holding off on reverting, but since you were rolling on regardless, I felt the time had come to wave a red flag. All the best, Chiswick Chap (talk) 12:34, 26 July 2018 (UTC)


 * Please STOP! It's time to discuss this if you want to go any further, I totally disagree with the additions. Chiswick Chap (talk) 12:40, 26 July 2018 (UTC)

Hi I totally disagree with your point Chiswick Chap (talk) At the present the choices of bird samples (the blackbird and the Australian Raven) don't cut the mustard. Both are too short. One (the blackbird) sounds like it has been engineered too much and takes on a tinny synthesized sound quality. I can see a couple of samples being lopped off (the Blue Turaco and the Chickadee gargling) but the others are sound choices. The pewee song is a better example of bird song than the blackbird. The phrasing is simple (an ascending and descending set of phrases grounded by a single note. It's accessible because if you are new to bird vocalization the song is simple and straight forward.  I chose a black-capped chickadee call and response again because it is very clear, straight forward and accessible to anyone listening to bird song and trying to understand the concepts of the duet in birds.  There is an even better example of a duet sung by two black-headed gonoleks onsite.  In nature there are not a lot of animals that duet.  Usually the male or female does all the work of attracting the mate.  So it seems to me that this is an important element to point up.  There is absolutely no examples of bird mimicry even though there are two very good soundbytes (one of a superb lyrebird and the other a lengthy recording of a brown thrasher) that would really enhance this element.  They are lengthy recordings and they show off the repertoires of both birds. Audio Mimicry is not a common element of animal behavior. Birds are among the few creatures in nature that resort to audio mimicry as a survival strategy. So again it seems to me that the present article is completely lacking in this fundamental element. As for the nightingale song: it has nice length so one can get an appreciation of the bird's call and it is the most noteworthy considering how influential it has been in human art and writing. I did not go into this willy nilly. I analysed the article with the intention of enhancing it. Since this is an article about bird vocalization it seems to me (considering the diversity and complexity of the subject) it should reflect that. One doesn't understand a subject by one or two examples. While I agree one doesn't want the article to be clunky, at the same time one needs to highlight elements that are extremely important. One also should also look at examples that are accessible to the listener. Sorry Chis, at the moment, the Bird Vocalization article doesn't vocalize. It isn't being enhanced by some of it's original samples. By the way: consistency is a necessary evil. If the Whale Song and Cicada sections of Wikipedia were enhanced by a bevy of samples why shouldn't the article on bird vocalization not benefit from this as well. These were my concerns when I looked at the article. I believe most of my choices make sense. I stand by them (by the way the mimicry examples were the last I was going to add to the article. At that point audio additions would not make anymore sense. By the way Chiswick Chap (talk) the addition of the woodpecker is a brilliant one.  I can't find it and I have been looking.  You're from chiswick.  I'm from Atikokan.  I'm from deep in the heartland of Canada where the robins have stopped singing and the crows wake me up.  I'm not kidding a large proportion of birds have disappeared from the area.  I saw an American robin for the first time, two weeks ago.  Nuts considering that after the spring peepers singing in the lake, they are the first birds to see running about.  Anyway.  I do apologize to you.  I did not mean to make trouble.  I am new to the initiate dialogue thing.  Hell it took me half a day (trial and error) to figure out how to add an audio file. So please forgive me. I had no intention of being an issue. But I do still stand on the choices I made in Bird Vocalization. But I apologize for causing a headache in getting them aboard. Again please forgive a novice.
 * Thanks, and of course you're forgiven. I totally share your delight in birds and their song, and concern at global losses. I'm sure we can fix something sensible for the article. Balance is everything. Well, along with citations. Chiswick Chap (talk) 17:42, 26 July 2018 (UTC)

Chiswick Chap (talk) I was checking the Wikipedia page on the Common Blackbird and there is a nicer version of the same song taken in Finland. I was wondering what you thought about swapping out the blackbird song on Bird Vocalization with that one. A much nicer sound quality and a nicer length for appreciating it's song. It is actually another influential bird in music since Olivier Messiaen composed a piece Le Mair Noir based entirely on the animal's song. Anyway tell me what you think. By the way I do have another idea (one I was trying and failing to make happen on the Bird's Page. In Whale Song there is a section marked "Media" and a slew of different Whale songs are represented in a couple of big box thumbs (there is also a tag "List of Whale Vocalizations" where one can listen to more examples of whale songs).  Just giving ideas.  Again tell me what you think.