User talk:Divingpetrel

Welcome
Welcome!

Hello, Divingpetrel, and welcome to Wikipedia! Thank you for your contributions. I hope you like the place and decide to stay. Here are some pages that you might find helpful: I hope you enjoy editing here and being a Wikipedian! Please sign your messages on discussion pages using four tildes ( ~ ); this will automatically insert your username and the date. If you need help, check out Questions, ask me on my talk page, or ask your question on this page and then place  before the question. Again, welcome! jonkerz♠ 07:40, 27 April 2011 (UTC)
 * The five pillars of Wikipedia
 * Tutorial
 * How to edit a page and How to develop articles
 * How to create your first article (using the Article Wizard if you wish)
 * Manual of Style

Binomials and common names
Hi there. Please try to leave the binomial in place when adding a common name, like so. Cheers, mgiganteus1 (talk) 19:49, 1 May 2011 (UTC)

Fish taxonomy
Hi, Myliobatiformes is recognized as a valid order by almost all current sources, based on strong phylogenetic evidence. The reason that FishBase doesn't list it is because it sources that part of its taxonomy to Last and Stevens (1994), and no one has yet updated it because the site is mostly run by volunteers. I've made a proposal to address the taxonomic issue here and your input would be appreciated. For the time being however, would you be willing to hold off on changing the higher-level fish taxonomies? I don't believe that FishBase reflects the most accurate taxonomy available. -- Yzx (talk) 00:40, 7 June 2011 (UTC)


 * Since I haven't had any response to my proposal, I think I'm just going to make the changes to the Fish Project guidelines. Since this affects you, do you have any thoughts before I do this? -- Yzx (talk) 18:43, 12 June 2011 (UTC)

Thanks for asking my input. My main interest, as you may have noticed is more along the lines of the actual taxon authorities rather than the taxonomy, though I do try to make some corrections regarding species as I find them. If you feel that there is another, more accurate, resource out there, I have no issues with that and it would help to have a single resource that everyone is working from. -- Divingpetrel (talk) 19:47, 12 June 2011 (UTC)

An Award for You
Anna Frodesiak (talk) 22:46, 2 July 2011 (UTC)

Anna, Thank you for the award. It is nice to know that the work is appreciated. Again, thanks. Divingpetrel (talk) 17:31, 3 July 2011 (UTC)
 * Can barnstars be seconded? If not, well, maybe I should give you another one... Wonderful stuff, thank you. Gurt Posh (talk) 22:24, 30 July 2011 (UTC)

Thank you Gurt.

Autopatrolled?
Hi, I've been noticing over a period of time that you create a bunch of decent stubs. I'd be glad to grant to you the status of "autopatrolled", which actually mainly affects new page patrollers rather than you. Shall I? Lady  of  Shalott  04:06, 5 August 2011 (UTC)

I am assuming that the page patrollers are looking for unacceptable content? That would be fine with me. Thank you.
 * ✅ :) Lady  of  Shalott  16:44, 5 August 2011 (UTC)

Page moves
Hi Divingpetrel, please see Help:How to move a page. Melchoir (talk) 03:49, 25 August 2011 (UTC)


 * Thank you. I am getting ready to knock off for the night and will review this on the morrow.Divingpetrel (talk) 03:59, 25 August 2011 (UTC)


 * No prob! I've fixed up Nemacheilus scaturigina, Triplophysa paradoxa, Schistura multifasciata, Nemacheilus kullmanni, Schistura himachalensis, Schistura baluchiorum, Angora loach, and Afronemacheilus abyssinicus. I think that's all. Melchoir (talk) 04:13, 25 August 2011 (UTC)


 * Thank you Melchior. I gave it a try with Nemacheilus sikmaiensis - Schistura sikmaiensis.  Much easier than what I was doing.  Thanks for the advice and assistance.


 * Glad I could help! :-) Melchoir (talk) 21:20, 26 August 2011 (UTC)

Interlanguage links
Hello again! That's a lot of cyprinids. I've noticed that for most of the articles you're working on, there are already mirror articles in Catalan and Spanish, and sometimes other languages as well. I went back and added interlanguage links where I could, from Delminichthys through Leucalburnus satunini. I just found the links by Googling, for example, "Gobiocypris rarus site:wikipedia.org -site:en.wikipedia.org".

If it's not too much trouble, I wonder if you could add these links to future articles yourself? I'm sure our Spanish friends would appreciate the help! Thanks, Melchoir (talk) 03:36, 5 October 2011 (UTC)

Sure, I will work on it. I believe that an easier method would be to just Google Wikipedia and that takes you to a page where you can search all language versions of Wikipedia without all of the extra typing. I have used that extensively in the past. ThanksDivingpetrel (talk) 00:30, 6 October 2011 (UTC)

Pteronotropis
I'm posting this message on your talk page because I noticed that you've recently created the new article Pteronotropis--The content seems well-organized.However, I noticed there are some holes that may need filling: the article does not contain in-line citations, and so doesn't follow Wikipedia style guidelines. Jipinghe (talk) 03:59, 26 October 2011 (UTC)

Weird changes in fish articles
Do you have any idea who's pasting all kinds of weird stuff into fish stubs? I've spotted three so far: Luxilus coccogenis, Popeye Shiner‎, and Etheostoma neopterum. It seems to be class-work. Anyway, it looks like you're active on a lot of fish articles, so I thought I'd ask you about it. Thanks.&mdash; alf.laylah.wa.laylah (talk) 01:13, 21 November 2011 (UTC)

I really don't know who that individual is. I generally do not deal with conservation information, dealing mostly with taxonomic considerations, particularly the identity of the taxon authorities as well as range information where I either create the article or feel that it would help improve the article.Divingpetrel (talk) 01:23, 21 November 2011 (UTC)


 * OK, sorry to bother you with it. Keep up the great work!&mdash; alf.laylah.wa.laylah (talk) 01:25, 21 November 2011 (UTC)

No problem. Thank you.Divingpetrel (talk) 01:30, 21 November 2011 (UTC)

Speedy deletion nomination of Pyrrhulina


A tag has been placed on Pyrrhulina requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section A7 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because the article appears to be about a person, organization (band, club, company, etc.) or web content, but it does not indicate how or why the subject is important or significant: that is, why an article about that subject should be included in an encyclopedia. Under the criteria for speedy deletion, such articles may be deleted at any time. Please see the guidelines for what is generally accepted as notable.

If you think that this notice was placed here in error, contest the deletion by clicking on the button labelled "Click here to contest this speedy deletion". Doing so will take you to the talk page where you will find a pre-formatted place for you to explain why you believe the page should not be deleted. You can also visit the page's talk page directly to give your reasons, but be aware that once tagged for speedy deletion, if the page meets the criterion, it may be deleted without delay. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag yourself, but don't hesitate to add information to the page that would render it more in conformance with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. If the page is deleted, you can contact one of these administrators to request that the administrator userfy the page or email a copy to you. Thehistorian10 (talk) 19:28, 11 December 2011 (UTC)

Proposed deletion of Pyrrhulina


The article Pyrrhulina has been proposed for deletion&#32; because of the following concern:
 * such a genus does not exist

While all 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. Thehistorian10 (talk) 08:50, 12 December 2011 (UTC)
 * Contested. Lady  of  Shalott  13:29, 12 December 2011 (UTC)
 * Thank you Lady. This has been going on for a few days now.  I fail to understand what Historian is doing.  I checked the link to Fishbase that I included in the article and it takes me to a list of Pyrrhulina species, I Googled "Pyrrhulina" and came up with plenty of references including Fishbase, aquarist sites, Encyclopedia of Life, and scientific papers that all refer to it.  I hope that it is an honest mistake, but twice?.Divingpetrel (talk) 01:07, 13 December 2011 (UTC)
 * Yeah, I'm almost hoping he'll take it to AfD. I did a Google book search on Pyrrhulina earlier - there's no lack of sources we can use if need be. There seem to be some other odd edits from the account as well. Lady  of  Shalott  01:17, 13 December 2011 (UTC)

Osteogeneiosus militaris
This is an automated message from CorenSearchBot. I have performed a web search with the contents of Osteogeneiosus militaris, and it appears to include material copied directly from http://ispecies.org/?q=osteogeneiosus+militaris&submit=Go.

It is possible that the bot is confused and found similarity where none actually exists. If that is the case, you can remove the tag from the article. The article will be reviewed to determine if there are any copyright issues.

If substantial content is duplicated and it is not public domain or available under a compatible license, it will be deleted. For legal reasons, we cannot accept copyrighted text or images borrowed from other web sites or printed material. You may use such publications as a source of information, but not as a source of sentences. See our copyright policy for further details. (If you own the copyright to the previously published content and wish to donate it, see Donating copyrighted materials for the procedure.) CorenSearchBot (talk) 19:18, 31 December 2011 (UTC)

This tag was applied in error - ispecies copied my work (almost immediately after I posted it) and even credited it as having come from Wikipedia (might want to change search bot parameters).Divingpetrel (talk) 19:32, 31 December 2011 (UTC)

New articles
Thank youDivingpetrel (talk) 03:09, 13 February 2012 (UTC)

Synodontis euptera
Thanks for sorting that out. I wasn't quite sure what to do about it. CarrieVS (talk) 19:32, 11 March 2012 (UTC)
 * Your Welcome.

Loricariid taxonomy
Hi, I see you have made several changes to loricariid taxonomy based on FishBase. However, FishBase is at odds with what current taxonomists follow in the Loricariidae. FishBase references Ferraris 2007, the checklist of catfishes, a work that was outdated on its date of publication in terms of loricariids. This publication does not follow Armbruster 2004 (on phylogenetics of Hypostominae) because Armbruster 2004 was simply published too late to be included in this checklist. Therefore, many of the changes you have included do not follow what loricariid taxonomists currently follow. Please refer to Armbruster's loricariid taxa list found here: http://www.auburn.edu/academic/science_math/res_area/loricariid/fish_key/TAXALIST/taxalist.html as well as PlanetCatfish, an aquarist website that also follows up-to-date taxonomy (based on Armbruster's work). Although his website is still outdated, it is more up to date than Ferraris 2007 and even includes some of the text from his publications. MiltonT (talk) 21:19, 14 March 2012 (UTC)

Milton, Thank you for the information, however I am pretty much done with loricariids except for new species. I know that people take issue with Fishbase and I also am aware that taxonomy, whether for fish, flies or fungi, will always remain a contentious matter, but for my purposes Fishbase works quite well and there are several out-of-date articles out there. It is constantly updated, covers every family of fish and, most importantly for me, provides comparatively detailed information regarding original sources and taxon authorities. I have to go now, so I again thank you for your message.Divingpetrel (talk) 23:58, 27 March 2012 (UTC)

Smile!
Thank you.Divingpetrel (talk) 23:56, 2 April 2012 (UTC)

Fish articles
Hey, great work on all the fish-related articles lately! I just wanted to ask that while you're at it, it would be a huge help to tag the article talk pages for WikiProject Fishes by adding. You are more than welcome to join that project too! Steven Walling &bull; talk   23:48, 12 May 2012 (UTC)

I could do that, it wouldn't be a problem. As for joining the project, my interests are more on taxonomy (particularly the taxon authorities) than the fishes themselves and thus I shall eventually mostly depart the realm of fishes into that of amphibians. I thank you for the invitation though.Divingpetrel (talk) 23:56, 12 May 2012 (UTC)


 * Thanks! There is also a WikiProject Tree of Life covering taxonomy, of course. :) Steven Walling &bull; talk   00:03, 13 May 2012 (UTC)


 * For clear stubs, it would be good to go ahead and add the assessment in the tag like this: . Thank you for all your work creating these articles!  Lady  of  Shalott  04:39, 29 December 2012 (UTC)

A barnstar for you!
Thank youDivingpetrel (talk) 02:35, 9 July 2012 (UTC)

Moving pages
Hi, and thank you for your contributions to Wikipedia. It appears that you recently tried to give Profundulidae a different title by copying its content and pasting either the same content, or an edited version of it, into another page with a different name. This is known as a "cut and paste move", and it is undesirable because it splits the page history, which is needed for attribution and various other purposes. Instead, the software used by Wikipedia has a feature that allows pages to be moved to a new title together with their edit history.

In most cases, once your account is four days old and has ten edits, you should be able to move an article yourself using the "Move" tab at the top of the page. This both preserves the page history intact and automatically creates a redirect from the old title to the new. If you cannot perform a particular page move yourself this way (e.g. because a page already exists at the target title), please follow the instructions at requested moves to have it moved by someone else. Also, if there are any other pages that you moved by copying and pasting, even if it was a long time ago, please list them at Cut and paste move repair holding pen. Profundulus Thank you for the information and correction. I obviously did not read the instructions thoroughly as I have had problems regarding moving pages to titles that already exist. As for other pages, possibly Spratellomorpha, Barbatula sawadai, Barbatula potaninorum, Barbucca diabolica, I did not do nearly as many once someone directed me to the Move function and I see that Melchior went in and cleaned up after me. Again thank you (you appear to have forgotten the tildes after your post so I am not sure who you are) Divingpetrel (talk) 20:34, 14 September 2012 (UTC)

Platypanchax modestus
A tag has been placed on Platypanchax modestus, requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under the criteria for speedy deletion, because it is a redirect to itself.

If you can fix this redirect to point to an existing Wikipedia page, please do so and remove the speedy deletion tag. However, please do not remove the speedy deletion tag unless you also fix the redirect. Feel free to leave a note on my talk page if you have any questions about this. R'n'B (call me Russ) 10:03, 21 September 2012 (UTC)

Ways to improve Llanolebias stellifer
Hi, I'm Wikishagnik. Divingpetrel, thanks for creating Llanolebias stellifer!

I've just tagged the page, using our page curation tools, as having some issues to fix. Please Cite sources using the template

The tags can be removed by you or another editor once the issues they mention are addressed. If you have questions, you can leave a comment on my talk page. Or, for more editing help, talk to the volunteers at the Teahouse.

Speedy deletion declined: Lepidogalaxias salamandroides
Hello Divingpetrel. I am just letting you know that I declined the speedy deletion of Lepidogalaxias salamandroides, a page you tagged for speedy deletion, because of the following concern: When you tried to make the same move in July you were told to try WP:RM; please start a move discussion. Thank you. — Malik Shabazz Talk/Stalk 04:48, 11 November 2012 (UTC)

Greetings Shabazz. If you can give me a bit more information on starting a move discussion I would appreciate it. As to your contention that I was told to start a move discussion back in July, I have looked through my talk page and can find no message regarding this issue advising me to start said discussion. I have been trying to figure out how to do this the proper way and would definitely appreciate some guidance. Thank youDivingpetrel (talk) 05:13, 11 November 2012 (UTC)


 * Hi. To start the move discussion, begin a new section at the bottom of Talk:Lepidogalaxias following the instructions at WP:Requested moves. Thank you. — Malik Shabazz Talk/Stalk 05:25, 11 November 2012 (UTC)

Thank you. I will look into this tomorrow. I appreciate the assistance.Divingpetrel (talk) 05:32, 11 November 2012 (UTC)

Excellent
Hi Divingpetrel, I have come across a large number of your articles of late and I just wanted to say thanks a million for doing the good work! Kindest regards and happy wiki-ing, (MrNiceGuy1113 (talk) 07:27, 2 December 2012 (UTC))

Thank you for the kind words. I very much appreciate it.Divingpetrel (talk) 15:21, 2 December 2012 (UTC)

Ways to improve Lepidobero sinensis
Hi, I'm Ana Bykova. Divingpetrel, thanks for creating Lepidobero sinensis!

I've just tagged the page, using our page curation tools, as having some issues to fix. Thank you for making a wiki page, it looks great. Please refer to the tags added to find out how you could improve it. Best wishes, Anastasia Bykova (talk) 02:54, 29 December 2012 (UTC)

The tags can be removed by you or another editor once the issues they mention are addressed. If you have questions, you can leave a comment on my talk page. Or, for more editing help, talk to the volunteers at the Teahouse.


 * Might as well add here that I enjoy your little articles very much. I think your hard work is exceptional. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Ana Bykova (talk • contribs) 03:23, 29 December 2012 (UTC)

Sculpins
Thank you very much.Divingpetrel (talk) 03:19, 30 December 2012 (UTC)

About Yssolebias martae and so on
Hi Divingpetrel, and first off thanks for creating all those great articles! (I particularly like the way you include the full name of the authorities in red-links. Dunno how, but I've ended up specialising in biographies of zoologists... to the extent tha I specialise in anything. )

As for Y. martae: "with only one specimen (the type) known" - would that one specimen be the holotype?

--Shirt58 (talk) 03:15, 1 January 2013 (UTC)


 * Thank you for the kind words. I am glad that you appreciate the use of the red-links to show the full names.  I am somewhat proud of coming up with the idea, though I am sure that others have thought of it as well.  And yes that is the holotype and I have just changed the article to reflect that.


 * Again, ThanksDivingpetrel (talk) 03:26, 1 January 2013 (UTC)

January 2013
Hello, I'm Andreasmperu. I noticed that you recently removed some content from Homaloptera maxinae without explaining why. In the future, it would be helpful to others if you described your changes to Wikipedia with an edit summary. If this was a mistake, don't worry, I restored the removed content. If you think I made a mistake, or if you have any questions, you can leave me a message on my talk page. Thanks! Andreasm just talk to me  03:59, 4 January 2013 (UTC)
 * So maybe moving the page is the appropiate action to follow, in order to get a redirect to the new title but preserving the page history. Regards, Andreasm  just talk to me  04:13, 4 January 2013 (UTC)

Recent edits to Neolamprologus meeli
Hello, and thank you for your recent contributions. I appreciate the effort you made for our project, but unfortunately I had to undo your edit(s) because I believe the article was better before you made that change. Feel free to contact me directly if you have any questions. Thank you! Amit (talk) 08:48, 1 June 2013 (UTC)

Monotrete
Hello,

I wonder why you want to remove information on taxonomic uncertainty surrounding the genus Monotrete, including the reference to Eschmeyer? If Wikipedia only contains information from FishBase, then one can look FishBase directly. I also wonder why do you want to change automatic taxoboxes/speciesboxes into taxoboxes? This seems a backward change to me. Best wishes, Micromesistius (talk) 21:44, 12 July 2013 (UTC)

A barnstar for you!
Thank you. As for the "type species", that is of importance when dealing with the genus level. It is the species upon which the genus is established. So if two species in a genus are determined to not be closely related and one of them is the "type species", the type is retained in the genus and the other one would be re-classified into another genus. Hope this helps.Divingpetrel (talk) 20:23, 26 July 2013 (UTC)

A fish for you!!!

 * Thank you very much.Divingpetrel (talk) 00:44, 1 September 2013 (UTC)

"Redundant" deletions
Hello. I have reverted your changes in Oplopomus oplopomus, and partially in Oplopomus. Textual descriptions of taxonomies are not "redundant". Not everyone can read the information of the taxobox as presented.

IMO, we should not remove similar information in other articles. Our readers are not specialists, and thus explicitly describing the relationships of the taxon in text, as well as their type species, localities, original authors, synonyms, etc. are desirable, in addition to what is already present in the taxobox.

Same with the links to the current valid names of type species/genera in non-monotypic taxa, as well as synonyms. Especially when they are not explained in-text, as in Gobius oplopomus (= Oplopomus oplopomus) in the Oplopomus article. By removing the link, you are making it far more difficult for our readers to identify what the accepted name of G. oplopomus currently is.

Regards.-- O BSIDIAN  †  S OUL  00:33, 15 September 2013 (UTC)
 * The lead paragraph is also always treated as discrete from the body of the article. It's a summary of the contents. Thus information repeated in the lead (including repeated linked terms) is not "redundant".-- O BSIDIAN  †  S OUL  00:40, 15 September 2013 (UTC)

Thank you, Divingpetrel!
One of the binomial authorities for Xenomedea rhodopyga (and authority for many other fishies) now has an article. This couldn't have happened without your ongoing great work. Thanks again. Pete AU aka --Shirt58 (talk) 11:49, 9 January 2014 (UTC)


 * Thank you Pete. That is one of the results that I hoped for when I started this.  I have noticed several new articles regarding taxon authorities (I have contributed a small number - all translations from other language sites), but I do not know how many of them are a result of my work.  It is nice to know that in at least this case the new article resulted from my efforts.  Again, many thanksDivingpetrel (talk) 02:18, 10 January 2014 (UTC)

Lonchopishtus → Lonchopisthus
You recently started Lonchopishtus. Could you please move it to the correct spelling Lonchopisthus (note typo in current article name: Lonchopis ht us). I have already corrected the genus spelling in the article text and taxobox; the only things that remain are to move the article to the correct name and correct the spelling in the genus list of Opistognathidae. Regards, 62.107.209.193 (talk) 17:50, 19 April 2014 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for May 6
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.


 * Blackfin darter (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver)
 * added a link pointing to Duck River


 * Egg-mimic darter (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver)
 * added a link pointing to Duck River


 * Striated darter (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver)
 * added a link pointing to Duck River

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 08:49, 6 May 2014 (UTC)

Speedy deletion nomination of Gorogobius


A tag has been placed on Gorogobius requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section A7 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because the article appears to be about a person or group of people, but it does not indicate how or why the subject is important or significant: that is, why an article about that subject should be included in an encyclopedia. Under the criteria for speedy deletion, such articles may be deleted at any time. Please read more about what is generally accepted as notable.

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 "Click here to 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 removed 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. If the page is deleted, and you wish to retrieve the deleted material for future reference or improvement, then please contact the deleting administrator, or if you have already done so, you can place a request here. Amortias (T)(C) 20:17, 31 March 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) 16:45, 24 November 2015 (UTC)

Ways to improve Xenocharax
Hi, I'm Robvanvee. Divingpetrel, thanks for creating Xenocharax!

I've just tagged the page, using our page curation tools, as having some issues to fix. This stub could use more references.

The tags can be removed by you or another editor once the issues they mention are addressed. If you have questions, you can leave a comment on my talk page. Or, for more editing help, talk to the volunteers at the Teahouse.  Rob van  vee  17:29, 5 December 2016 (UTC)

Thalassenchelys foliaceus listed at Redirects for discussion
An editor has asked for a discussion to address the redirect Thalassenchelys foliaceus. Since you had some involvement with the Thalassenchelys foliaceus redirect, you might want to participate in the redirect discussion if you have not already done so. — billinghurst  sDrewth  10:42, 30 December 2016 (UTC)

Speedy deletion nomination of Category:Arapaimidae


A tag has been placed on Category:Arapaimidae indicating that it is currently empty, 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 it remains empty for seven days or more, it may be deleted under section C1 of the criteria for speedy deletion.

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. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag from the page yourself. Liz Read! Talk! 15:34, 19 July 2021 (UTC)

Speedy deletion nomination of Category:Neosebastidae


A tag has been placed on Category:Neosebastidae indicating that it is currently empty, 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 it remains empty for seven days or more, it may be deleted under section C1 of the criteria for speedy deletion.

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. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag from the page yourself. Qwerfjkl talk  18:22, 5 January 2022 (UTC)

Speedy deletion nomination of Category:Caracanthidae


A tag has been placed on Category:Caracanthidae indicating that it is currently empty, 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 it remains empty for seven days or more, it may be deleted under section C1 of the criteria for speedy deletion.

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. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag from the page yourself. Liz Read! Talk! 16:45, 13 March 2022 (UTC)

Speedy deletion nomination of Category:Apistidae


A tag has been placed on Category:Apistidae indicating that it is currently empty, 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 it remains empty for seven days or more, it may be deleted under section C1 of the criteria for speedy deletion.

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. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag from the page yourself. Liz Read! Talk! 05:04, 14 March 2022 (UTC)

Speedy deletion nomination of Category:Perryenidae


A tag has been placed on Category:Perryenidae indicating that it is currently empty, 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 it remains empty for seven days or more, it may be deleted under section C1 of the criteria for speedy deletion.

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. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag from the page yourself. Liz Read! Talk! 01:35, 24 May 2022 (UTC)

Speedy deletion nomination of Category:Parabembridae


A tag has been placed on Category:Parabembridae indicating that it is currently empty, 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 it remains empty for seven days or more, it may be deleted under section C1 of the criteria for speedy deletion.

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. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag from the page yourself. Liz Read! Talk! 01:04, 3 July 2022 (UTC)

"Naga-buna" listed at Redirects for discussion
An editor has identified a potential problem with the redirect Naga-buna and has thus listed it for discussion. This discussion will occur at Redirects for discussion/Log/2022 July 7 until a consensus is reached, and anyone, including you, is welcome to contribute to the discussion. TraderCharlotte (talk) 23:01, 7 July 2022 (UTC)

Speedy deletion nomination of Category:Comephoridae


A tag has been placed on Category:Comephoridae indicating that it is currently empty, 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 it remains empty for seven days or more, it may be deleted under section C1 of the criteria for speedy deletion.

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. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag from the page yourself. Liz Read! Talk! 01:21, 8 March 2023 (UTC)