User talk:Dracontes

Welcome!

Hello, and welcome to Wikipedia. Thank you for your contributions. I hope you like the place and decide to stay. Here are a few good links for newcomers: I hope you enjoy editing here and being a Wikipedian! By the way, you can sign your name on Talk and vote pages using three tildes, like this: &#126;&#126;&#126;. Four tildes (&#126;&#126;&#126;&#126;) produces your name and the current date. If you have any questions, see the help pages, add a question to the village pump or ask me on my Talk page. Again, welcome!
 * How to edit a page
 * Editing, policy, conduct, and structure tutorial
 * Picture tutorial
 * How to write a great article
 * Naming conventions
 * Manual of Style
 * If you're ready for the complete list of Wikipedia documentation, there's also Topical index.

You might also be interested in WikiProject Tree of Life, where a lot of the general guidelines on classification were decided (paleontology didn't have any significant representation).

68.81.231.127 03:53, 31 Mar 2005 (UTC)

Ampelosaurus
Good work on Ampelosaurus. Aggressive editing indeed, but you seem to have arrived at a good result. Have you checked out the dinosaur wikiproject? Link on my user page if you're interested. Soo 17:49, 4 January 2006 (UTC)
 * Thanks, I do hope so. The aggressiveness of the editing may be explained by my m.o.: I prepare my article stubs at home by pouring over the pertinent scientific articles and then single out the main points. That's why my contributions tend to be very formulaic. So when I found you've beaten me to it I may've gotten a bit aggravated since I had prepared the article before Christmas.
 * Actually if you look closely at the participant list, you'll notice I've already added myself to it besides adding a host of new genera to the missing list. Good enough? Dracontes 18:09, 4 January 2006 (UTC)
 * Good enough :). You can just indicate on here if you want to reserve a page, so we don't clash. That's probably the easiest way to avoid stepping on each others toes. By the way, it's easier if you reply on my talk page rather than your own, as then I get told about it. Ta! Soo 20:52, 4 January 2006 (UTC)
 * I guess stubborness comes with the package as I'd rather keep a discussion in one place ;-) Anyway, I'll go over my files and make a list of the genera for which I have the original description papers, though I'll only reserve those that I've prepared a stub for. But don't worry too much about stepping on each others' toes. That, I think, is run-of-the-mill here. Dracontes 09:59, 5 January 2006 (UTC)
 * You guys have both been doing great work. Is there a page like the one for missing dinosaurs that's just a list of all genera (maybe a "completed" page)? Also, many of the new pages have been using class Archosauria. Check out List of dinosaur classifications for the current standardized ranking system. There's still some discussion on my talk page over whether to use Reptilia or Sauropsida, but Archosauria has been pretty much ruled out.Dinoguy2 21:43, 4 January 2006 (UTC)
 * Thanks on my part, Matt :-) You can find that list at List of dinosaurs. I've taken the stance of minding reviews once the missing list at least has been cleared, so I'm just copy/pasting the taxoboxes I find for relatives of the genera I create stubs for and leaving it at that. Dracontes 09:59, 5 January 2006 (UTC)

The taxobox disclaimer
Before anyone starts fretting about it let me just state that it's an attempt at humour pilfered from Dinoguy2 and completed using Mikko Haaramo's Phylogeny archive and Wikipedia's pertinent entries. Hopefully it will make people think before going gung-ho over ranking every taxon. As the extension of the taxobox will certainly develop in me a feeling of chagrin it will be one more reason for me to fill up the contributions section. Dracontes 12:51, 5 January 2006 (UTC)

Artwork
I checked out your artwork on the Dinosauricon and may I say, it's really excellent. One thing taht Wikipedia lacks as a whole (and especially on the dinosaur articles) is pictures, as they are so hard to obtain under a free license. Have you considered releasing some of your articles under the GFDL or similar? That way we could put them on Wikipedia Commons and significantly enhance the dinosaur articles on several different-language Wikipedias all at once. That would be really awesome, so it would be great if you would contemplate it. Soo 17:29, 6 January 2006 (UTC)
 * Fantastic! Can't wait to see what you come up with. Soo 16:41, 10 January 2006 (UTC)

update for you
I ran across your user page while cleaning up links following a merger/re-write. I just wanted to let you know, because I'm wary of editing people's user pages. --TheLimbicOne (talk) 04:01, 10 January 2006 (UTC)
 * body cavity
 * was coelom, pseudocoel, accoelomate (and a bunch of variations of those words)

My Attempt:
Since WikiProject Dinosaurs is becoming a bit dormant of late, I've decided to get it reactivated. I've started putting the following templates all over the show, & I'd appreciate if someone would try putting them on too. Remember, they only go on Dinosaur orientated artcle's TALK pages. Not the articles themselves.

So, finally, while I work on the project with a designer, in order to get more people, thus more pages, I would appreciate if you didn't move or shift (or stuff up for that matter) any of the work I'll be doing, like adding templates, protocols to the project page, etc etc. I'm hoping to get it up to the standard of The military history project. So, tell your friends to join up, or spam unknowing people & continue to do great articles. I no time, we'll have an awesome, professional project page! Spawn Man 03:50, 1 March 2006 (UTC)

New improvement
As per step three (on the dinosaur project talk page), I promised to ask a general consensus about any new improvements made. So, I'd like everyone to give comments on the new talk page banner:

What does everyone think of it? It's meant to be placed on the talk page of dinosaur related articles, so everytime you edit an article, placing this there would make our job easier. So a few questions I'd like everyone to answer:

1)Does everyone like the picture? 2)Is the wording adequate? 3)Any other queries/problems?

I'll let you know when a new improvement arises... Spawn Man 00:07, 2 March 2006 (UTC)

New improvement 2
As per step three (on the dinosaur project talk page), I promised to ask a general consensus about any new improvements made. So, I'd like everyone to give comments on the new talk page banner:

What does everyone think of it? It's meant to be placed on the user talk page or user page of members of the Dinosaur wikiproject, so placing this there would make our job easier. So a few questions I'd like everyone to answer:

1)Does everyone like the picture? 2)Is the wording adequate? 3)Any other queries/problems?

I'll let you know when a new improvement arises... Spawn Man 00:51, 2 March 2006 (UTC).

New improvement 3
As per step three, I'm informing you that... A new userbox has been created!! Please give comments and feedback (not including the picture, which may be due to change).

I will inform on arrival of more improvements. Spawn Man 19:28, 2 March 2006 (UTC)

New Task bar
I've successfully created an open list of tasks on the WikiProject Dinosaurs main page for those who would actually like to know what to do with their time on the project. Add tasks as you wish, no too long though! Add your name to tasks you wish to be part of & that's as complicated as it gets... Thanks, Spawn Man 23:36, 9 March 2006 (UTC)

WikiProject Dinosaurs
Hi Dracontes!

There's currently less than 100 dinosaurs left on the Missing dinosaur page. We've come a long way! I was thinking that since there's just under 100 dinosaurs left, and since there are 25 of us signed on for the project, if we each wrote about four articles, we'd be done! Well, not "done", obviously, as many of the articles are in need of expansion. But then we could focus on expansion and other things.

You could take, say, Lourinhasaurus, Lucianosaurus, Lukousaurus, and Lycorhinus.

It's just an idea, of course, and you're of course not obligated and can do whatever you like; I just figured I'd mention the idea, and see if you were interested. No harm, right?

Take care, --Firsfron 06:22, 23 April 2006 (UTC)


 * No harm at all! ;-) I had time to kill and I went to my web references and just typed away. Dracontes 17:00, 26 April 2006 (UTC)

Trigonosaurus
This has been listed on Articles for deletion/Trigonosaurus. Please go and vote for it to be kept. I'm sure it's a real dinosaur, for the reasons I've explained there. Do you know more about it such as whether it's a sauropod or theropod? The Dutch WP says sauropod, but the new article here says theropod. Thanks. RupertMillard (Talk) 16:24, 1 May 2006 (UTC)

Mekosuchinae
I'm not bothered. I certainly understand the value of being precise with proper designations. I made a small modification so that the alternate is there for people whose eyes glaze over when scientific names are mentioned (even mine do on occasions). Sabine's Sunbird talk 03:40, 20 May 2006 (UTC)

Nice catch
Nice to see you're keeping tabs on new dinosaurs, Dracontes! Some of the recent additions aren't even in Google, yet, so it's likely, as we already saw with Trigonosaurus and others (such as on the list of dinosaurs), that they may get deleted by folks who are searching google. I've got to say I'm impressed, though, that you're quicker than the google-bots! Keep up the great work! :) --Firsfron 20:01, 29 May 2006 (UTC)
 * Thank you very much. Unlike those bots, I know where and what to look for :-D Besides I don't want Dinoguy2 to get all the credit :-P Dracontes 08:58, 30 May 2006 (UTC)

DinoProject proposals
Hello Dracontes,

I was just wondering if you had been by the Project talk page lately and seen some of the proposals I threw out there at the bottom of the page. I would love to get your comments as a long-time member (longer than me) before anything happens.

1) New Project page... most of the text is the same or similar, but I think it looks a little snazzier and better organized. Feel free to comment on everything from color scheme to its existence in the first place! Link: User:Sheep81/WPDinopage

2) Featured Dinosaur Initiative... there have been several attempts to get something going in order to regularly get dino articles featured. This is the latest iteration of that. Again, feel free to make any comments you like. This plan does not necessarily have to come to fruition. Link: User:Sheep81/FeaturedDinoInitiative

Thanks for your consideration! Sheep81 23:02, 31 May 2006 (UTC)

Dinosaur short articles
Saw your update on the short articles page. HUGE thanks! :) -- Firsfron of Ronchester 15:42, 8 June 2006 (UTC)

Dinosaur text sources
Hello, I was just looking over Suuwassea, and noticed that the text had an unusual, somewhat bookish style. Did you write it yourself, or did you import it from some other source? If the latter, could you identify the source? Thanks. --Improv 17:44, 17 August 2006 (UTC)

"Mekosuchin"
Actually the vernacular name of any family level taxon is not regulated by the ICZN and as such there is no official way of changing the name ending. Any vernacular name ending -IN could refer to a subfamily, tribe or subtribe though in many papers people use it as denoting a tribe, but it is also used as denoting a subfamily. One of the interesting matters in this problem is no-one has (to my knowledge) proposed a vernacular name for a subtribe. The website you refered to in your post has no "legal" status on this matter i'm afraid, and although it would help to harmonise the community into using a common vernacularisation, until the ICZN in the fifth addition formalises this the problem will persist. Mark t young 16:58, 19 September 2006 (UTC)

Richard Arkwright
Dear Dracontes

What does you addition Hr gav mean on the Richard Arkwright page?

Yours Faithfully Martin Cordon Martin Cordon 17:49, 17 October 2006 (UTC)

Dear Dracontes

I apologise for my misunderstanding. Removing the offending item was my intent. Thank you for That.

Yours Faithfully Martin Cordon Martin Cordon 11:29, 18 October 2006 (UTC)

Stegosaurus
Hi Dracontes!

I'm planning to send Stegosaurus to Featured Article candidacy. The article failed its first nomination, but user:Casliber and I have been hard at work fixing stuff. As you're listed as a member of WikiProject Dinosaurs, I figured I'd drop you a line and see if there was anything you thought should be added/removed/cited on the article before it is sent to FAC. We definitely want it to pass! :)

(Feel free to make any edits on the article itself, comment on the talk page, or leave a note on my talk page). Thanks for your time, Firsfron of Ronchester  19:28, 26 October 2006 (UTC)

Auroraceratops
Oops - my bad. Thx for clearing that up. What about if we change it to say "...two pairs of fangs with superficial ridges." so it's clearer for lay people? Also, are they really "fangs" (large pointed teeth) or just teeth? Thanks. Secret Squïrrel, approx 10:45, 29 May 2007 (UTC)

Delichon
I saw your changes to this article, which I have no problem with. I just wondered about the list of species in the taxobox where you have changed the  format I normally use to a bullet list. Is this an MOS thing, or just personal preference? jimfbleak 11:59, 31 May 2007 (UTC)
 * This is the culprit: Wikipedia_talk:WikiProject_Dinosaurs scroll down a bit for a new take at using the Taxobox template. Besides it wont become confusing if someone decides to find the citation for each of the species, which I probably will given time ;-) Dracontes 12:26, 31 May 2007 (UTC)

The Amphibians and Reptiles Portal (P:AAR)
--Melanochromis 06:17, 3 July 2007 (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) 21:26, 7 February 2008 (UTC)

Thanks for the author catch on Diceratus
Thanks for the fix! I must have merged him with Oliver Rauhut in my mind. J. Spencer (talk) 14:01, 27 February 2008 (UTC)

List of characters in Magic: The Gathering: Y
Do you want List of characters in Magic: The Gathering: Y restored? I hold no ill will. Cheers! Wassupwestcoast (talk) 19:31, 25 March 2008 (UTC)
 * OK. All yours. Cheers! Wassupwestcoast (talk) 16:20, 26 March 2008 (UTC)

Re: add ing images of list of plesiosaurs
Looking back at the list, i agree with what you've said. some of the images ( such as Pliosaurus) are in desperate need of re-sizing. i'll also start looking at moving/getting-rid-of some images to make things line up again.Ryan shell (talk) 19:54, 27 March 2008 (UTC)

message
I'm sending this to all the wikiproject:mammals participants. There's a naming guideline up for discussion on the talk page, and the more people get involved the more valid any consensus drawn. Ironholds 19:14, 30 June 2008 (UTC)

I, Dinobird
It's me, Dinobird (the guy who founded WikiProject Sea Monsters), only I've gotten a new account. Just thought you mgiht want to know that I'll continus working on Sea Monsters, thoguh I will have to balance it with Pterosaurs, Dinosaurs, and Danny Phantom. Tutthoth-Ankhre (talk) 18:56, 28 August 2008 (UTC)

WikiProject Amphibians and Reptiles: Rollcall
At WikiProject Amphibians and Reptiles, we recently did a purge of the members list, which your name was on. Please re-add your username as well as your area of expertise at our list of participants if you plan to stay active in this Wikiproject. Also, a discussion is going on regarding the standardization of taxonomy in lizard articles, located in this section. We'd like to have some more voices in this matter. Thanks everyone!  bibliomaniac 1  5  23:13, 24 September 2008 (UTC)

Beast Quest
You asked about the book list. You can see the published books at http://www.beastquest.co.uk/ or in the books themselves. Perhaps the other list was pre-publication and someone was guessing possible future titles?--Dan.M.McLaughlin (talk) 22:09, 10 December 2008 (UTC)

WikiProject Amphibians and Reptiles needs you!
Ahoy there! We're conducting our annual purge of the participants list for WikiProject Amphibians and Reptiles, in an effort to make sure our members stay current with events at the WikiProject. If you would like to renew your participation with the WikiProject, simply drop by the participants list and re-add your name to the list in alphabetical order using the following format:. Also feel free to add your specialties or points of interest. If you don't have the time or don't feel like rejoining, then ignore this request; you can rejoin at any time you'd like. Cheers,  bibliomaniac 1  5  00:12, 28 November 2009 (UTC)

Announcement
Hello! I'm The Arbiter, one of the coordinators for WikiProject Zoo. I am proud to announce the launch of a new portal: Portal:Zoos and Aquariums! ZooPro, ZooFari, and I worked hard to create a new portal for information on zoos, aquariums, and the associated projects and articles on Wikipedia. If you could head on over, take a look at our work, and maybe learn some more about zoos and Wikiproject Zoo, it would be great! Cheers and Happy Editing!

Delivered by MessageDeliveryBot on behalf of The Arbiter (talk) at 03:32, 14 December 2010 (UTC).

Notification: changes to "Mark my edits as minor by default" preference
Hello there. This is an automated message to tell you about the gradual phasing out of the preference entitled "Mark all edits minor by default", which you currently have (or very recently had) enabled.

On 13 March 2011, this preference was hidden from the user preferences screen as part of efforts to prevent its accidental misuse (consensus discussion). This had the effect of locking users in to their existing preference, which, in your case, was. To complete the process, your preference will automatically be changed to  in the next few days. This does not require any intervention on your part and you will still be able to manually mark your edits as being 'minor'. The only thing that's changed is that you will no longer have them marked as minor by default.

For established users such as yourself there is a workaround available involving custom JavaScript. If you are familiar with the contents of WP:MINOR, and believe that it is still beneficial to the encyclopedia to have all your edits marked as such by default, then this discussion will give you the details you need to continue with this functionality indefinitely. If you have any problems, feel free to drop me a note.

Thank you for your understanding and happy editing :) Editing on behalf of User:Jarry1250, LivingBot (talk) 18:25, 14 March 2011 (UTC)

List formatting
Huh? Abyssal (talk) 15:52, 7 May 2012 (UTC)
 * Oh, you mean where a lot of the information isn't filled in? I stopped manually adding information because I was collaborating with another user on a possible bot that would do it automatically. Abyssal (talk) 15:56, 7 May 2012 (UTC)
 * The table proposal was rejected from the dinosaur list because it was too long and the major changes would cause it to lose its featured status, none of which apply to the shorter non-featured lists. So, I'd just keep going with the table version since no one has voiced any complaints about those specific articles. Abyssal (talk) 21:05, 7 May 2012 (UTC)
 * It seems wanting to undo the table was your intention from the beginning. I wish you had been more forthright. If you had an argument against that style, you should have just said so. Anyway, you don't have my blessing for erasing the tables, but if you really want to I'm not going to push the issue. Do as you see fit. Abyssal (talk) 03:21, 8 May 2012 (UTC)

Talk:Academic Journals Database
Thank you for the additional information on Academic Journals Database. These are all in foreign languages I can only speak English and Arabic. Is there a way that you can source these into the actual article? Your help would be greatly appreciated. Thanks. --Morning277 (talk) 18:31, 11 May 2012 (UTC)

Sikhism
Some nice work on that. Thanks for your input. I'm trying to make it sound more legible and less of a "fundementalists guide" to abstract concepts. Keep it up. Thanks S H 11:09, 30 November 2013 (UTC)

Sikhism
Could you keep an eye on this editor. He has a history of WP:Disruptive behaviour and lacks WP:Competence. He uses hit and run tactics to block evade. Thanks S H 14:36, 6 December 2013 (UTC)

Arcovenator
Hallo, Dracontes! First of all my congratulations with your gorgeous new article Arcovenator! Regarding it, I have a request to make. Due to the Christmas holidays, I will only have institutional access to the publication in the second week of January at the earliest. Could you indulge my curiosity as to the formal number of the holotype? (and perhaps of the referred specimens as well). Also, I wonder what the formal diagnosis was. Were any autapomorphies determined, or perhaps a unique combination of traits?

Kind regards, --MWAK (talk) 08:05, 15 December 2013 (UTC)
 * Much obliged for the compliments :) To be honest, I'd rather send you the paper instead, no matter how much the publisher grumbles. My email shouldn't be too difficult to find among my userboxes. Send me something with a pertinent subject and I'll reply suitably. --Dracontes (talk) 08:18, 15 December 2013 (UTC)


 * Well, to be quite honest myself, I secretly hoped that you would add the holotype number and the diagnosis to your article, bringing it to even greater perfection — and allowing me to quickly update my own article at the Dutch Wikipedia ;o).--MWAK (talk) 08:39, 15 December 2013 (UTC)
 * Fair enough. I'll do that in a bit... A day or so. Busy elsewhere now :-P --Dracontes (talk) 08:44, 15 December 2013 (UTC)
 * While expanding the description I questioned the importance of it all: I had a nice sequential description thing going on and having to reorganize things so what the authors deemed as important stands out seemed to be the less agreeable option. So I peppered some adjectives throughout which I hope will suffice. --Dracontes (talk) 00:42, 16 December 2013 (UTC)
 * That was an elegant solution. Many thanks for your efforts!--MWAK (talk) 08:37, 16 December 2013 (UTC)

Re - age range. This is a pretty big problem with the way the range template works and should probably be fixed. The range is meant to display actual fossil range, not error bars for a taxon known for one specimen. Writing 72-76 may implies it existed for this span of time. The fix I and others have been using is to use the earliest/latest parameter to show a ghosted error bar, but you also need to enter an actual date, so I just added the median. It would be good if there were some way to have it display something along the lines of "some time between x and y". MMartyniuk (talk) 18:17, 15 December 2013 (UTC)

Inappropriate "Tertiary" change
Your mass edits switching "Tertiary" to "Cenozoic" changed a direct quotation at Puget Sound faults — that is unacceptable, and I have reverted it. I wonder how many other inappropriate changes you have made.

I wonder about the advisability of your one-man crusade, which appears to be undiscussed. At the least you should provide some explanation, including citations to competent authority that "Tertiary" is deprecated. ~ J. Johnson (JJ) (talk) 20:34, 18 December 2013 (UTC)
 * I agree. The term "Tertiary" is still used even though the Tertiary article says it is officially deprecated. I am against any further switching from "Tertiary" to "Cenozoic".  Volcano guy  21:59, 18 December 2013 (UTC)
 * J. Johnson (JJ): First, while I admit I made a mistake in changing that reference, and can only allege some tiredness in that regard, because otherwise I would avoid doing it, I don't entirely see why an honest error would be unacceptable. Change the reference back. Go over your sources and ascertain a smaller time span to or use the pair Paleogene and Neogene.
 * This was indeed discussed elsewhere. I provided an explanation in linking to the article on the Tertiary... which I now notice has the link to the ICS' International Chronostratigraphic Table dead (fixed, and added some refs while at it) which is pretty much the competent authority in these matters. Allow me a few choice quotes from those references:
 * "The Cenozoic is divided into Paleogene and Neogene Periods. We refrain from using the informal terms Tertiary and Quaternary, remnants of a classification that included Primary and Secondary (e.g. by Arduino, 1760b; see also second color plate), but their origins and history are well described in Harland et al. (1990) and Berggren (1998)."


 * "The widely used ‘Tertiary’ has no official rank. The status of the Quaternary is not decided; its base may be assigned as the base of Gelasian."


 * "The term Tertiary (Arduino, 1759) has been traditionally used to indicate the time interval between the Mesozoic and the Quaternary and therefore comprises the Paleogene and the Neogene. The use of the term Tertiary is discouraged, since the term is equally as antiquated as Primary and Secondary, and the latter have fallen into disuse in the 20th century. However, the term Tertiary still has widespread use, in particular since the ratification of the term Quaternary as a period (Head et al., 2008)."


 * Also, the main editors of the GTS are by my experience eminently contactable if you can't access the books. --Dracontes (talk) 22:31, 18 December 2013 (UTC)
 *  Volcano guy : While this is in essence a definitional thing, aren't you giving undue weight to people who either aren't aware of or can't bother using the recommended terminology? If we're going by popular vote, I would surely give far more weight to those people whose job it is to manage the nomenclature so it doesn't explode into regional fiefs (more than it has anyway). Notably important regional Geology associations that make charts of their own available, instead of simply pointing to the ICS, do follow the latter and treat the Tertiary as informal, in most cases suppressing it:
 * Geological Society of America
 * Geological Society of London
 * Geological Society of Australia
 * --Dracontes (talk) 03:32, 19 December 2013 (UTC)


 * 1) Changing a quotation to something other than what the source said (aside from clearly indicated modifications) is not acceptable, period. "Honest" does not excuse the error.
 * 2) Your isolated, single comment on another editor's talk page ("elsewhere" being User_talk:Gruekiller) does not rise to discussion of the point, let alone consensus for making mass, broad-reachng changes.
 * 3) For all that "Cenozoic" may be the officially recommended term, that hardly requires immediate, rampaging enforcement of geo-political correctness. Which I hope you will understand is rather how you have come across as. I second VolcanoGuy's suggestion that you cease, at least until there is broader discussion. (If this was in a maritime context I would fly the Uniform X-ray flag, signifying: "Stop carrying out your intentions and watch for my signals.") ~ J. Johnson (JJ) (talk) 23:21, 19 December 2013 (UTC)


 * Another problem is that "Tertiary" and "Cenozoic" are not interchangeable in terms of stratigraphic nomenclature. As informal as Tertiary is, it still a more specific period of time than the Cenozoic as the latter includes the Quaternary, which the Tertiary does not. Instead, Tertiary needs to be replaced with more time-specific nomenclature than Cenozoic. I would not change "Tertiary" unless a person has done enough research to replace it with either the Paleogene, Neogene, both, or the appropriate epochs. Paul H. (talk) 03:04, 20 December 2013 (UTC)


 * J. Johnson:
 * 1) Suit yourself.
 * 2) FWIW, that was an admin we were discussing with. I assumed if they didn't tell me to rethink things then it would be fine to go ahead.
 * 3) This isn't geopolitical correctness: this is about people practicing science having a common language. Wikipedia being a work of reference should reflect this with informal language generally avoided. Why else would we have such bodies as the ICZN or the IAPT to regulate disputes? These international chronostratigraphic names and definitions were thoroughly discussed: the Quaternary stayed because people argued for it being kept. As for the Tertiary, apparently no one cared enough to do so. In the GTS2012 (p. 3) they do admit to a bad mistake handling that. But like many misnomers in Biology what is done is done.
 * Paul H.:
 * Fair enough. I'll clean up after myself then.
 * In any case I started the discussion at WikiProject Geology
 * --Dracontes (talk) 03:30, 20 December 2013 (UTC)
 * You seem to not understand: we do not alter direct quotations. It is not a matter of "suit yourself" (or myself); it is a fundamental matter of integrity.
 * You also assume too much, that something is okay if an admin has not told you not to. I would recommend that you review WP:consensus. Being a little more open in discussing what you propose to do would be good; WikiProject Geology is a good start. ~ J. Johnson (JJ) (talk) 23:00, 20 December 2013 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for December 20
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.


 * List of art critics (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver)
 * added links pointing to William Sharp, Allan Cunningham, Prince Hoare and Edward Dubois

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 09:01, 20 December 2013 (UTC)

DYK for Arcovenator
  Tentinator    12:22, 23 December 2013 (UTC)

ArbCom elections are now open!
MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 13:01, 23 November 2015 (UTC)

Invitation from Wikimedia Portugal
(English below)

Olá. A Wikimedia Portugal é uma associação portuguesa sem fins lucrativos, fundada em 2009, reconhecida pela Wikimedia Foundation como "chapter" de Portugal. A nossa missão é, em geral, contribuir para a disseminação generalizada do saber e da cultura, através do incentivo à recolha e criação de conteúdos isentos de restrições de utilização, modificação e distribuição, e da difusão dos mesmos; e em particular, promover e apoiar os projetos da Wikimedia Foundation, entre os quais a Wikipédia, com ênfase para os projetos nas línguas faladas em Portugal, o português e o mirandês.

Gostaríamos de contar com o apoio de (e reciprocamente apoiar) todos os voluntários naturais, residentes ou simplesmente interessados em Portugal. Embora fundada em 2009, a associação teve um largo período de inatividade, que estamos agora a ultrapassar. Vimos por isso convidá-lo, caso nisso tenha interesse, a inscrever-se como associado da associação, demonstrar apoio à existência de um "chapter" em Portugal, e a envolver-se em atividades futuras inscrevendo-se na lista de distribuição de email. Recentemente, a Comissão de Afiliações da Wikimedia suspendeu o apoio à Wikimedia Portugal, pendente, entre outras coisas, do apoio da comunidade de editores portugueses. 

Agradecemos desde já!

Hi! Wikimedia Portugal is the Portuguese chapter of Wikimedia, founded in 2009 and recognized by the Wikimedia Foundation. Our mission is to contribute to the general dissemination of knowledge and culture through the incentive to the collection and creation of content without restrictions on use, modification and distribution, and promote their difusion; we promote and support the Wikimedia Foundation projects, among which Wikipedia, with emphasis on projects in Portuguese and Mirandese.

We would like however to count on the support of (and in turn ourselves support) all volunteers that are citizens, resident, or simply interested in Portugal. Despite being founded in 2009, the chapter has gone through a long period of inactivity that we are trying to overcome. We have sent you this message to invite you, if you are interested, to enroll as associate to the chapter, demonstrate your support to the existence of a chapter in Portugal, and get involved in the discussion of future activities by registering in the mailing list. Recentely, the Wikimedia Affiliations Committee suspended support to Wikimedia Portugal pending, among other things, the support from the community of portuguese editors. GoEThe (talk) 14:15, 2 August 2018 (UTC)