User talk:FunkMonk/Archive 17

Your GA nomination of Stegoceras
The article Stegoceras you nominated as a good article has passed ; see Talk:Stegoceras for comments about the article. Well done! If the article has not already been on the main page as an "In the news" or "Did you know" item, you can nominate it to appear in Did you know. Message delivered by Legobot, on behalf of IJReid -- IJReid (talk) 22:21, 18 August 2016 (UTC)
 * , do you feel up to taking this to FAC some time? FunkMonk (talk) 16:48, 19 August 2016 (UTC)
 * Looks ready. LittleJerry (talk) 19:13, 19 August 2016 (UTC)
 * Ok, so we need a hook... How about: "This article is about a genus of dome-headed dinosaur (the pachycephalosaurs), and the only member of this group to ever be nominated for FAC. Since it is one of the most completely (and first) known of these dinosaurs, it has been the subject of many studies, which we have attempted to summarise here, including various theories about what the dome was used for. It is a GA, has been copyedited, and the bulk of the images are from the CC-licensed journal Plos One." FunkMonk (talk) 21:13, 19 August 2016 (UTC)
 * Sounds great! LittleJerry (talk) 21:44, 19 August 2016 (UTC)
 * Added! FunkMonk (talk) 22:01, 19 August 2016 (UTC)

Copyright query
This was presumably taken in 1877 and would be useful for an article I am working on. Can I upload it to Commons as being in the public domain after expiry of its copyright? Cwmhiraeth (talk) 08:31, 22 August 2016 (UTC)
 * There doesn't seem to be an artist credited, but see the PDF here, where the image is taken from, might have some extra info, and that old magazine should be listed as the source... May count as an anonymous work, which seems to have its own rules. FunkMonk (talk) 09:41, 22 August 2016 (UTC)
 * Thank you. Cwmhiraeth (talk) 10:27, 22 August 2016 (UTC)
 * I decided it was too difficult. Cwmhiraeth (talk) 10:04, 23 August 2016 (UTC)
 * I think you would be safe, see UK rules on anonymous works: We just need to find the correct tag... FunkMonk (talk) 12:14, 23 August 2016 (UTC)
 * Not sure where Brexit leaves UK copyright, but it would either be this, or this, I believe. FunkMonk (talk) 12:18, 23 August 2016 (UTC)
 * Or more specifically this, PD UK unknown: FunkMonk (talk) 12:20, 23 August 2016 (UTC)
 * I am currently involved in the West Country Challenge and have been rewriting the article on the Severn Railway Bridge in my sandbox. Uploading the troublesome image will just have to wait. Cwmhiraeth (talk) 13:37, 23 August 2016 (UTC)
 * I can do it for you, and take full responsibility, hehe... FunkMonk (talk) 13:40, 23 August 2016 (UTC)
 * Well, thanks. Cwmhiraeth (talk) 19:41, 23 August 2016 (UTC)
 * Here ya go, I think would suffice. FunkMonk (talk) 23:08, 23 August 2016 (UTC)
 * Brilliant! Cwmhiraeth (talk) 08:02, 24 August 2016 (UTC)

Thanks is too small a word
I don't know how to thank you for all your hard work in shoving Bluebuck toward success in FAC, though it was supposed to be a collaboration between us I'm sorry I've not been able to help out really at the FAC. But you've handled all those comments so efficiently that my absence couldn't even be felt! Maybe I can thank you with a surprise which you'll soon be getting.. wait a week and you'll know :) Sainsf  (talk · contribs) 05:23, 26 August 2016 (UTC)
 * Exciting! And well, you did most of the work on the actual article, so it's just fair that I do a bit more at the FAC.... FunkMonk (talk) 19:36, 26 August 2016 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for August 28
Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Giganotosaurus, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page National Geographic. 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) 10:28, 28 August 2016 (UTC)

FAC voluntary mentoring scheme
During a recent lengthy discussion on the WP:FAC talkpage, several ideas were put forward as to how this procedure could be improved, particularly in making it more user-friendly towards first-time nominees. The promotion rate for first-timers at FAC is depressingly low – around 16 percent – which is a cause for concern. To help remedy this, Mike Christie and I, with the co-operation of the FAC coordinators, have devised a voluntary mentoring scheme, in which newcomers will guided by more experienced editors through the stages of preparation and submission of their articles. The general format of the scheme is explained in more detail on Mentoring for FAC, which also includes a list of editors who have indicated that they are prepared to act as mentors.

Would you be prepared to take on this role occasionally? If so, please add your name to the list. By doing so you incur no obligation; it will be entirely for you to decide how often and on which articles you want to act in this capacity. We anticipate that the scheme will have a trial run for a few months before we appraise its effectiveness. Your participation will be most welcome. Brianboulton (talk) 18:15, 29 August 2016 (UTC)
 * Cool, will sign on! FunkMonk (talk) 18:20, 29 August 2016 (UTC)


 * Many thanks for signing up. The response from would-be mentors has been most encouraging. Schemes like this are often slow to take off, and it may be a while before we know if it's  working.  But with this level of support, including that of many of our most experienced FA editors, I think it has  every chance. Brianboulton (talk) 16:28, 30 August 2016 (UTC)

Your GA nomination of Giganotosaurus
Hi there, I'm pleased to inform you that I've begun reviewing the article Giganotosaurus you nominated for GA-status according to the criteria. This process may take up to 7 days. Feel free to contact me with any questions or comments you might have during this period. Message delivered by Legobot, on behalf of Dunkleosteus77 -- Dunkleosteus77 (talk) 20:00, 30 August 2016 (UTC)

TFA the right day
--Gerda Arendt (talk) 05:33, 1 September 2016 (UTC)
 * Yay! FunkMonk (talk) 12:42, 1 September 2016 (UTC)

Blood 6.3
Hey Blood 6.3 (talk) 15:03, 1 September 2016 (UTC)
 * Hey? FunkMonk (talk) 15:09, 1 September 2016 (UTC)

Aegirocassis image
Sorry, I have to remove this image on the left from the article, because it is clear rip-off of one of mine. I uploaded the original instead. Hope you don't mind. Cheers Nobu Tamura (talk) 03:07, 19 August 2016 (UTC)
 * Come to think of it, it is very possible that all the reconstructions uploaded by this particular editor are rip-offs. Take the image on the right Pelagornis sandersi (artist view).jpg. It is a slightly modified image from artist Liz Bradford (check: http://phys.org/news/2014-07-world-largest-ever-bird.html). NobuTamura (talk) 03:37, 19 August 2016 (UTC)
 * Strange, I'll look into this user's uploads... Probably make some deletion requests. FunkMonk (talk) 04:58, 19 August 2016 (UTC)
 * I have started a first DR here if you have anything to add: FunkMonk (talk) 17:44, 19 August 2016 (UTC)
 * Good. Could you request deletion of the Aegirocassis image as well (original: http://spinops.blogspot.com/2015/03/aegirocassis-benmoulae.html)? Thanks. NobuTamura (talk) 02:42, 26 August 2016 (UTC)
 * Yep. Might be tricky, because the original is CC licensed. But I'll try... At least the author info etc would have to be changed in the derivative. FunkMonk (talk) 19:35, 26 August 2016 (UTC)
 * DR: FunkMonk (talk) 20:32, 26 August 2016 (UTC)
 * I'm retired now, but before this, I wrote under a lot of Nobu's drawings "artist's view by Nobu Tamura". My derivative works ARE NOT ART. But only some palaeontological restorations, and my restaurations are not creative works, but must thereby being in order to stay within the limits of what is allowed by researchers at the time it is made, and must necessarily be inspired by other pictures already scientifically proved. If one confused the artistic creative process with the derivative scientific process of « conjecturally reconstituted being » (whose most impressive examples are the « real size Dinosaurs » sitting proeminently in the gardens or in the front square of various Museums, or else prehistorical Hominidae presented in dioramas by many Museums), this one will consider as « inaccurate » and/or as a « copyviol », the whole of the artist's views, of the computer-generated images, of the volumic reconstitutions, and Paleontology, Archaeology or Naval history will be deprived of all its iconography intended for general public, apart from the scientific pictures in specialized magazines, that will evade this iconographical « cleaning », possibly concerning even some proeminent illustrators as Mauricio Antón, Nobu Tamura, Dimitri Bogdanov, Zdeněk Burian, Heinrich Harder or Charles R. Knight, says une of my collegues. Now, you can delete Aegirocassis if Nobu wants it, but not my Compsognathus in the Natural Historu Museum of Toulon where I'm working as a illustrative provider !! Be rational and do not get upset plase, --Spiridon Ion Cepleanu (talk) 19:28, 1 September 2016 (UTC)
 * One thing is being "inspired", another is to directly copy existing images, which is entirely different. FunkMonk (talk) 19:38, 1 September 2016 (UTC)

Your GA nomination of Giganotosaurus
The article Giganotosaurus you nominated as a good article has passed ; see Talk:Giganotosaurus for comments about the article. Well done! If the article has not already been on the main page as an "In the news" or "Did you know" item, you can nominate it to appear in Did you know. Message delivered by Legobot, on behalf of Dunkleosteus77 -- Dunkleosteus77 (talk) 22:21, 1 September 2016 (UTC)

Great timing for thanks
Great to see our first collaboration work out so well :)) Tomorrow wait for your gift! Thanks friend Sainsf  (talk · contribs) 14:19, 3 September 2016 (UTC)
 * Weeee! And yep, we should do it again! FunkMonk (talk) 16:33, 3 September 2016 (UTC)

FA Mentoring
Hi FunkMonk, I saw your name on the list of FA mentors. I am keen to bring Balfour Declaration to FA status ahead of the 100th anniversary next year (which will attract a lot of media interest). But I have never taken an article to FA before. Would you be willing to mentor me on this?

Cheers

Oncenawhile (talk) 09:26, 3 September 2016 (UTC)

Great! I have been working on it slowly since 2011, and am now the main contributor by edits. I brought it to GA between February and April this year, and have had a peer review open for the last 4 months. A lot of sources are used throughout the article, with perhaps the main one being Schneer's 2010 monograph on the subject, together with Huneidi, Gelvin and Friedman (although the latter is not referenced there yet). Oncenawhile (talk) 16:43, 3 September 2016 (UTC)
 * Alright, seems it was requested you use Arab soruces as well? I can recommend A History of the Arab Peoples by Lebanese historian Albert Hourani (read it years ago) for soem context maybe, some excerpts here: FunkMonk (talk) 16:48, 3 September 2016 (UTC)
 * Thank you. I have responded at the PR page as I suspect it'll be easier to follow. Oncenawhile (talk) 20:56, 3 September 2016 (UTC)

Editor of the Week [3 September 2016]
User:Sainsf submitted the following nomination for Editor of the Week:
 * I nominate to be Editor of the Week for his thankless contributions to Wikipedia's coverage on extinct animals, most notably Dodo. He is a most amiable, polite and helpful editor, a good colleague of mine here, and has quite a lot of GAs and FAs to his name. Moreover, he is a prominent uploader of a variety of images. I feel he deserves greater recognition for his efforts. Thanks.

You can copy the following text to your user page to display a user box proclaiming your selection as Editor of the Week: Thanks again for your efforts! Kevin ( aka L235 ·&#32; t ·&#32; c) 23:39, 3 September 2016 (UTC)
 * Woah, thaaaanks! FunkMonk (talk) 01:54, 4 September 2016 (UTC)
 * This is a good call, congratulations! Cwmhiraeth (talk) 06:09, 4 September 2016 (UTC)

A barnstar for you!

 * Thanks! FunkMonk (talk) 14:45, 11 September 2016 (UTC)

Alt text
I afraid I don't know what kind of alt-text is needed. I'm new at this. LittleJerry (talk) 12:31, 12 September 2016 (UTC)
 * I think it's this (I haven't really done that much either), but it seems the reviewer changed their mind, not sure... FunkMonk (talk) 12:33, 12 September 2016 (UTC)

Featured article candidates/Stegoceras/archive1
Thanks for the ping- no promises I'm afraid. I've a lot on and I'm not really a dino-enthusiast (my fianceé's super keen; shame I'm yet to convince her to sign up). If you're still struggling for lack of reviews by Friday, let me know and I'll try to fit in a review over the weekend. Best of luck with it either way! Josh Milburn (talk) 00:31, 21 September 2016 (UTC)
 * Thanks! Birds are dinosaurs after all, so maybe she should be the one convincing you of their greatness, hehe... FunkMonk (talk) 09:41, 21 September 2016 (UTC)

Today's featured article/September 18, 2016
Hi FunkMonk, here's another one of yours at TFA, I'm working on the TFA text now. - Dank (push to talk) 15:06, 4 September 2016 (UTC)
 * Cool, say of you need help cutting. FunkMonk (talk) 15:19, 4 September 2016 (UTC)
 * Sure, let's tag-team this one. I've done the first pass; that's about the right length. I've done some rewording; that's not a criticism of your language at all, which is great for an article where someone is looking for detailed information, but perhaps is not ideal as a column that someone glances at when they're clicking on the Main Page (and there are 10M of those people per day ... many are casual readers, probably). If you object to identifying specimen, we could perhaps say just "specimen" (unlinked). - Dank (push to talk) 15:54, 4 September 2016 (UTC)
 * Yeah, I think you can do whatever you want when it comes to simplifying, my only objection is to if meaning is changed (which would probably be accidental anyway). FunkMonk (talk) 16:05, 4 September 2016 (UTC)

--Gerda Arendt (talk) 13:04, 21 September 2016 (UTC)
 * Welcome! FunkMonk (talk) 13:05, 21 September 2016 (UTC)

Reference errors on 21 September
Hello, I'm ReferenceBot. I have automatically detected that an edit performed by you may have introduced errors in referencing. as follows: Please check this page and fix the errors highlighted. If you think this is a false positive, you can [//en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?action=edit&preload=User:A930913/RBpreload&editintro=User:A930913/RBeditintro&minor=&title=User_talk:A930913&preloadtitle=ReferenceBot%20–%20&section=new report it to my operator]. Thanks, ReferenceBot (talk) 00:18, 22 September 2016 (UTC)
 * On the Nemegtomaia page, [//en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?diff=740513568 your edit] caused a broken reference name (help) . ([ Fix] | [//en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:Help_desk&action=edit&section=new&preload=User:ReferenceBot/helpform&preloadtitle=Referencing%20errors%20on%20%5B%5BSpecial%3ADiff%2F740513568%7CNemegtomaia%5D%5D Ask for help])

GA Cup Announcement
--MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 22:38, 28 September 2016 (UTC)

Giganotosaurus
Hello:

The copy edit that you requested from the Guild of Copy Editors of the article Giganotosaurus has been completed.

Please let me know if you have any questions or concerns.

Kind regards,

Twofingered Typist (talk) 13:26, 30 September 2016 (UTC)
 * Thanks, looks great! FunkMonk (talk) 14:06, 30 September 2016 (UTC)

A barnstar for you!

 * Thanks, and without your review, it might have gotten nowhere! FunkMonk (talk) 08:38, 4 October 2016 (UTC)

TFAR
Today's featured article/requests/Bluebuck, for orderly notification, thanks for the thank-you-click for it ;) --Gerda Arendt (talk) 09:28, 27 October 2016 (UTC)

Source review
Hi there, I see that you had requested a source review for your nomination, but it has got no response. I have a same situation with Featured_article_candidates/Bradley_Cooper/archive1. If interested, you can provide one for my nomination and I will do for yours. - Liebe99 (talk) 16:40, 31 October 2016 (UTC)
 * Thanks, I have zero experience with source reviews, though, they're quite complicated to do... I can do the image review if you want? FunkMonk (talk) 16:47, 31 October 2016 (UTC)
 * No problem though it's not that complicated. All you have to do is check sources if they are reliable and properly formatted (except if it's for first-time nominees where you also need to spot-check). Have a good day! - Liebe99 (talk) 16:54, 31 October 2016 (UTC)
 * Hmmm, don't feel qualified for it, but I might take a look... FunkMonk (talk) 19:30, 31 October 2016 (UTC)
 * No problem and don't feel obliged to do it. I have conducted a SR for your nomination. Have fun. – Liebe99 (talk) 20:21, 31 October 2016 (UTC)

Chilantaisaurus and Teratophoneus
Hey. I don't quite know how or where I'm supposed to reply to your edits, so I'll just put them here for now until I find out.

Regarding my Chilantaisaurus, I admit, I should have specified, I took a few liberties with the lacrimal horns regarding size, and I added a speculative membrane connecting the horns to the 'brow', which made them seem bigger than they really are. Nothing too outlandish IMO, but I should have specified. As for muscle definition, I figured that there were too many reconstructions out there depicting dinosaurs like bodybuilders, looking like their skin is struggling to contain their bulging muscles. I made Chilantai a little more 'fatty', thus obscuring a lot of underlying muscle.

Moving on to Teratophoneus, that problem also came in a lack of specification on my part. I deemed it more accurate because I obscured the sunken fenestrae of the old (new?) image with skin and fat and such. I also added more feathers, and, given that IIRC Terato was smaller than Yutyrannus, I don't think that a feathered Teratophoneus is at all out of the realms of plausibility.

Again, sorry for not specifying these things. I will make sure to rectify that in the future. TKWTH (talk) 22:15, 1 November 2016 (UTC)
 * I think the "anti-shrink-wrapping" arguments are being taken to the extremes in some cases, no animals are completely smoothed out like that. Look at de-feathered birds, there are clear muscle and sinew definition and plenty of details: Same with lizards, there is clear muscle definition: Of course, we shouldn't show sunken fenestrae and skeletal animals, but there is nothing wrong with defining muscles. In fact, it is more natural than overly smooth surfaces of skin. In any case, we have the dinosaur image review page, where new images should preferrably be posted for review before being inserted into articles. FunkMonk (talk) 09:02, 2 November 2016 (UTC)

WikiProject Good Articles's 2016-2017 GA Cup
--MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 01:38, 3 November 2016 (UTC)

FAC reviewing barnstar

 * Thanks! FunkMonk (talk) 10:54, 4 November 2016 (UTC)

Your GA nomination of Tahiti rail
Hi there, I'm pleased to inform you that I've begun reviewing the article Tahiti rail you nominated for GA-status according to the criteria. This process may take up to 7 days. Feel free to contact me with any questions or comments you might have during this period. Message delivered by Legobot, on behalf of J Milburn -- J Milburn (talk) 15:40, 6 November 2016 (UTC)

Orphaned non-free image File:Hezbollah Flag.jpg
 Thanks for uploading File:Hezbollah Flag.jpg. The image description page currently specifies that the image is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, the image is currently not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the image was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that images for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).

Note that any non-free images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described in the criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. --B-bot (talk) 18:52, 7 November 2016 (UTC)

Your GA nomination of Tahiti rail
The article Tahiti rail you nominated as a good article has passed ; see Talk:Tahiti rail for comments about the article. Well done! If the article has not already been on the main page as an "In the news" or "Did you know" item, you can nominate it to appear in Did you know. Message delivered by Legobot, on behalf of J Milburn -- J Milburn (talk) 23:21, 7 November 2016 (UTC)

Deletion of Komlosaurus resv2
The image was used as an "Speculative Restoration", with changes with the time. The deletion is not valuable.

I see that you create images to related articles, if you want to make your own picture, do it. But no left the article withouth one... — Preceding unsigned comment added by Yewtharaptor (talk • contribs) 09:04, 9 November 2016 (UTC)
 * But the image is anatomicaly incorrect, bipedal ornithischians could not pronate their hands. We don't use incorrect images here, unless they are of historical significance. You should post such restorations at the dinosaur image review in the future: FunkMonk (talk) 09:08, 9 November 2016 (UTC)

No time to edit it. If you want/are interested, i can give you the original tho make you the changes you want to see. The article needs an image, if for an study. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Yewtharaptor (talk • contribs) 15:33, 9 November 2016 (UTC)
 * Well, it is a footprint taxon, so it's not really a life restoration the article needs... FunkMonk (talk) 15:53, 9 November 2016 (UTC)

The problem is here, there are a few Heterodontosaurid? fossils found on 2011(A complete thooth, a fragment thooth and two vertebrae), assigned to the genus...and the genus yes, is a footprint genus...here the problem. It is like the case of Koreanosaurus Theropod and Koreanosaurus ornistichian... I remember that a few weeks ago the creator of the article still with the false information of the synonym with Grallator... Yewtharaptor (talk • contribs) 17:06, 9 November 2016 (UTC)
 * Well, there are still the following problems with using the image: 1 - it has anatomical inaccuracies, 2 - it has not been reviewed, 3 - if all we know is that the trackmaker may have been a heterodontosaur, we shouldn't make up some fantasy creature to illustrate it, but show an already known heterodontosaur as example. FunkMonk (talk) 21:13, 9 November 2016 (UTC)

Im going to see the changes that needs the article, making contacts tho look for something about the fossils, and other mistakes to do the necesary changes ... Yewtharaptor (talk • contribs) 17:06, 9 November 2016 (UTC)

TFA
--Gerda Arendt (talk) 08:44, 17 November 2016 (UTC)
 * Thanks! FunkMonk (talk) 08:45, 17 November 2016 (UTC)

Extinct insect
Did you ever think of doing the Rocky Mountain locust? LittleJerry (talk) 21:01, 24 November 2016 (UTC)
 * I have done a bit of editing on it, but I'm very unfamiliar with the relevant literature (and insect literature in general). Do you know any good sources?FunkMonk (talk) 09:36, 25 November 2016 (UTC)
 * Unfortunately no. Just google books. LittleJerry (talk) 18:51, 25 November 2016 (UTC)
 * Ok. I might join in with some taxonomy stuff, if I can find any... Slowed a bit down on writing lately due to work... FunkMonk (talk) 19:58, 27 November 2016 (UTC)

Tahiti rail
Hello, FunkMonk -- I have just completed the copy-edit for Tahiti rail. The article was quite well written. I wanted to mention a few things:

1) In the section Tahiti rail you have a two-paragraph block quote (formatted with the "quote" template). After I saved my edits and looked again at the article, I saw that the two paragraphs of the quote are quite far from the left margin. I guess they are being pushed over to the right by the image of the bird that is located to the left, right under the heading "Description". Thus, there is quite a bit of white space under the image and to the left of the two paragraphs. I wonder if you could figure out a way to place or size the image so that the paragraphs are closer to the left margin.

2) I just wanted you to know that I removed commas after initial phrases such as "In 1973". I don't think they are necessary because few native speakers pause there when they speak (unless the phrase is followed by a parenthetical phrase enclosed between two commas). I have checked on this with the lead coordinator of the GOCE and have been advised that either style (i.e., with or without the comma) is fine, but it should be consistent within the article. If you feel strongly that a comma should follow "In + year", I'd be glad to put the commas back in. I just prefer no comma.

3) The last sentence of the Tahiti rail section is the following:


 * Flightlessness can be advantageous because it conserves energy by decreasing the mass of flight muscles; the absence of especially mammalian predators and a reduced need for dispersal are factors that allow this feature to develop in island birds.

I'm not sure I like the phrase "especially mammalian predators". The adverb "especially" could be read as intensifying the adjective (mammalian) (i.e., really, really mammalian) rather than distinguishing mammalian from other types of predators. Perhaps you would consider one of these:


 * the absence of predators, particularly mammalian predators, and a reduced need for dispersal...


 * the absence of predators, especially mammalian predators, and a reduced need for dispersal...


 * the absence especially of mammalian predators, and a reduced need for dispersal...

– Corinne (talk) 04:02, 30 November 2016 (UTC)
 * Thanks for the CE! I think "particularly mammalian" would look well. As for the space between the quote and the image, I think it is because quotes are always indented more than the article text, so the two are not confused. So in this case, I think it serves to make it clear that this part of the text is distinct from the rest? FunkMonk (talk) 09:21, 30 November 2016 (UTC)

4th Annual GA Cup - Round 1
--MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 15:00, 5 December 2016 (UTC)

Happy Christmas!


A very Happy Christmas and a restful Wikibreak!

Chiswick Chap (talk) 10:47, 19 December 2016 (UTC)
 * Thanks, break from work means more Wiki! FunkMonk (talk) 11:02, 19 December 2016 (UTC)

Northern Syria listed at Redirects for discussion
An editor has asked for a discussion to address the redirect Northern Syria. Since you had some involvement with the Northern Syria redirect, you might want to participate in the redirect discussion if you have not already done so. -  C HAMPION  (talk) (contributions) (logs) 06:33, 21 December 2016 (UTC)

Columbian mammoth for TFA
This is to let you know that the Columbian mammoth article has been scheduled as today's featured article for 3 January 2017. If you're interested in editing the main page text, you're welcome to do so at Today's featured article/January 3, 2017. Thanks! Mike Christie (talk - contribs - library) 01:00, 23 December 2016 (UTC)
 * Oh, but it already ran this year! Similar FAs that haven't run could be Smilodon or Paraceratherium. FunkMonk (talk) 10:27, 23 December 2016 (UTC)
 * Thanks for letting me know; I'll fix it and will probably run one of the two you suggest instead. Mike Christie (talk - contribs - library) 11:11, 23 December 2016 (UTC)
 * I put Smilodon in its place; I think everything is cleaned up now. Mike Christie (talk - contribs - library) 11:20, 23 December 2016 (UTC)
 * Cool! FunkMonk (talk) 11:24, 23 December 2016 (UTC)

Neanderthal running
You are right - was a stupid idea to put it in there. Just felt the need to find something that relates to the anatomy section, could not find anything better. ATBWikirictor (talk) 14:24, 27 December 2016 (UTC)
 * Hehe, I'd say anything is better than that image! We have a fairly good understanding of how Neanderthals looked like today, and that image makes even 19th century depictions look accurate... FunkMonk (talk) 14:27, 27 December 2016 (UTC)

Holiday Greetings! FM

 * Thanks, and same to you! May the new year bring more quality articles and less dead musicians! FunkMonk (talk) 19:20, 26 December 2016 (UTC)
 * I consulted my Magic 8 Ball and the demographics. As to your second request, the answer is "Outlook not so good"  7&amp;6=thirteen (☎) 19:28, 26 December 2016 (UTC)
 * Perhaps I jinxed Carrie Fisher by only specifying musicians... FunkMonk (talk) 14:29, 29 December 2016 (UTC)
 * Not to mention Debbie Reynolds. Trying to overshadow her daughters death maybe? IJReid  discuss 16:28, 29 December 2016 (UTC)
 * Watch out, the year isn't over yet! FunkMonk (talk) 16:30, 29 December 2016 (UTC)

Huia
Hi Funkmonk: In 2014, you added this information to the Huia article, and (probably unwittingly) added a disambiguation to it. And unfortunately, I can't find any existing "ino" article that seems to match your intent. Is "ino" something widely known (or easily explained)? Or should I just remove that part of the sentence? MeegsC (talk) 13:31, 29 December 2016 (UTC)
 * The subject is dealt with in the article Ino budgerigar mutation, it is just too specific to link to. So either we need a new article on the subject, or it could be dealt with in another, broader article about pigmentation deficiencies. Just removing it would be a cop-out, I think... FunkMonk (talk) 13:34, 29 December 2016 (UTC)
 * Okay, but right now it's going to a disambiguation page, with no appropriate article linked — so that does nothing but confuse the reader. Should I redlink ino (pigment deficiency) or something of that sort? MeegsC (talk) 19:01, 29 December 2016 (UTC)
 * Yeah, and to be honest, much of that budgerigar article is about the mutation in general, not about the bird specifically, so I think much of that text (entire genetics section) could be copied or moved to a new article about that subject... But I'm certainly no expert. FunkMonk (talk) 19:04, 29 December 2016 (UTC)

4th GA Cup - Round 2
--MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 22:21, 1 January 2017 (UTC)

Precious anniversary
--Gerda Arendt (talk) 08:04, 2 January 2017 (UTC)
 * Thanks! FunkMonk (talk) 09:13, 2 January 2017 (UTC)
 * Thank you for Smilodon is one of the best known prehistoric mammals, and the best known saber-toothed cat! --Gerda Arendt (talk) 22:54, 3 January 2017 (UTC)
 * Welcome! Wouldn't have happened without LittleJerry's GA groundwork. FunkMonk (talk) 09:04, 4 January 2017 (UTC)

Archie vs Predator pages
My email is now set up. Thanks for the help! Argento Surfer (talk) 14:15, 5 January 2017 (UTC)
 * Nice! I will mail you when I get home from work. --FunkMonk (talk) 14:22, 5 January 2017 (UTC)

Achievements
Hey FM,

Regarding this edit on the Achievements page, my intention, many years ago, was to provide context: the the blank cells have no dinosaurs from that era, while the cells where the word "none" appears were areas where there could be GAs/FAs in those categories, but were none. It wasn't done very well, obviously, and it's no problem that you removed that info, I just wanted to explain why the word "none" appeared in some of the cells in the table, and not others.

Speaking of achievements, congratulations on getting Stegoceras up to FA! The article is really nice. Firsfron of Ronchester 07:26, 9 January 2017 (UTC)
 * Thanks! Yeah, it seemed strange, because I added Limusaurus as a Jurassic ceratosaur, though that space previously said "none", so since there were obviously ceratosaurs in the jurassic (Ceratosaurus itself), I was thinking the intention might have been that there were no promoted articles that fit the bill. Which of course made it inconsistent with all the other empty slots that don't say "none"... But yeah, it could be re-added in the spaces where no members f said groups are known so far? FunkMonk (talk) 08:52, 9 January 2017 (UTC)

Your GA nomination of Nemegtomaia
Hi there, I'm pleased to inform you that I've begun reviewing the article Nemegtomaia you nominated for GA-status according to the criteria. This process may take up to 7 days. Feel free to contact me with any questions or comments you might have during this period. Message delivered by Legobot, on behalf of Ashorocetus -- Ashorocetus (talk) 22:20, 12 January 2017 (UTC)

Nemegtomaia

 * Thanks again, looks great! FunkMonk (talk) 01:15, 15 January 2017 (UTC)

Thanks! We just had an edit conflict. Now I'll post what I have just finished writing:

Hello, Funk Monk - I have just finished copyediting Nemegtomaia. The article was interesting and quite well written. I only made a few small edits. I have a few questions for you:

1) I notice that in the lead you have "the Nemegt and Baruungoyot formations", but in the section Nemegtomaia you have "Nemegt Formation", with a capital "f" on "formation", and in the third paragraph of that section you have "Baruungoyot Formation", and later in the paragraph "Nemegt Formation", with "formation" capitalized. At the beginning of Nemegtomaia, you have "Nemegt and Baruungoyot formations", with "formations" in lower case, and then again "Nemegt Formation" and "Baruungoyot Formation". It looks like you think "formation" should be in lower case if it is plural (following "Nemegt and Baruungoyot") but capitalized if it is singular. I don't think that is right. I think it should be capitalized in the plural phrase if it is capitalized in the singular phrase. What do you think?
 * I don't know which is right, but I'll just capitalise it, then we can see if others object later on... FunkMonk (talk) 19:02, 15 January 2017 (UTC)

2) As I was editing today (my second session of copy-editing the article), I came across a sentence in which a word was missing (it had to be a word like genus, genera, species, etc.), but now I can't find it. I would have liked to add the missing word, but I didn't want to guess which word it should be. It was in a discussion regarding in which category scientists/researchers would place a specimen. You may want to read through the article carefully to see if you can find it. If I remember, I will try to find it tomorrow if you haven't already found it.
 * I read through the classification section, which seems to be the most likely place for this, but couldn't find it. But I'll look out. FunkMonk (talk) 19:02, 15 January 2017 (UTC)

3) I notice that the word "found" appears often in this article, in its various meanings. I guess it is understandable because of the subject matter, but I'd like you to look at three sentences. They are the first sentences in the second paragraph in Nemegtomaia:


 * In 2004 Lü and colleagues found the skeleton to belong to a new, distinct taxon, and made it the holotype specimen of Nemegtia barsboldi. The genus name refers to the Nemegt Basin, and the species name honours the Mongolian palaeontologist Rinchen Barsbold, the leader of the team who found the specimen. In 2005 the describers found (after being notified by a biologist) that the name Nemegtia had already been used for a genus of freshwater seed shrimp (Ostracoda) from the same formation in 1978, and was therefore preoccupied.

I have highlighted the verb "found" in these sentences. In the first sentence, I think "found" means "determined", or "decided". However, since the very next sentence contains "found" (meaning "discovered"), I'm wondering whether you would consider changing the first one to:


 * In 2004 Lü and colleagues determined that the skeleton to belong to a new, distinct taxon, or


 * In 2004 Lü and colleagues decided that the skeleton to belong to a new, distinct taxon.

In the third sentence, "found" means "discovered", or "learned". I wonder if you would consider changing "found" to one of those:


 * In 2005 the describers discovered (after being notified by a biologist) that the name Nemegtia had already been used..., or


 * In 2005 the describers learned (after being notified by a biologist) that the name Nemegtia had already been used...

That way, each sentence would have a different verb, making for more interesting reading.
 * You're quite right, only noticed it now, so changed a bunch. FunkMonk (talk) 19:02, 15 January 2017 (UTC)

4) I saw many instances throughout the article where you first give a measurement in the metric system and then, in parentheses, the equivalent imperial measurement in inches, feet, pounds, etc. I notice also that you were careful to add the "no-break space" between the number and the abbreviation for the measurement. I don't know if you know about the conversion templates. If you didn't use them, you must have had a reason, but I thought, in case you didn't know about them, I would give you the link to the templates:

Converting units (height, weight, length, distance, speed, etc.) from one system to another:


 * Information about the conversion templates:
 * List of units: Template:Convert/list of units


 * Template:Convert

Note in Template:Convert, in the section "Round to a given number of significant figures", that you can select how many figures to the right of the decimal point you want to show, and to what degree you want to round a number up or down. That is helpful for displaying inches and keeping fractions of inches to reasonable numbers of digits. The nice thing about using the conversion template is that you don't have to worry about putting in the "no-break space", so it saves time. Also, if, for some reason, you have one number (either the metric or the imperial), but it's not the one you want to put first, you can use the conversion template, discover the equivalent measurement in preview, and then put that one first. Well, that's all. – Corinne (talk) 01:55, 15 January 2017 (UTC)
 * The non-breaking space was added by someone else, I do think conversion templates are the best way to go, but when I write in a hurry, I just write in the numbers directly, for speed... Bad habit, but I always just hope someone will take care of it later... FunkMonk (talk) 19:02, 15 January 2017 (UTC)
 * I'd be glad to go through and add the conversion templates. Would you like me to do that? Also, once you get used to typing the basic conversion templates, you'll see it doesn't take that much time. – Corinne (talk) 23:17, 15 January 2017 (UTC)
 * That would be great, thanks! Yeah, I'll try it next time... FunkMonk (talk) 08:43, 16 January 2017 (UTC)

Your GA nomination of Nemegtomaia
The article Nemegtomaia you nominated as a good article has been placed on hold. The article is close to meeting the good article criteria, but there are some minor changes or clarifications needing to be addressed. If these are fixed within 7 days, the article will pass; otherwise it may fail. See Talk:Nemegtomaia for things which need to be addressed. Message delivered by Legobot, on behalf of Ashorocetus -- Ashorocetus (talk) 04:20, 20 January 2017 (UTC)

Your GA nomination of Nemegtomaia
The article Nemegtomaia you nominated as a good article has passed ; see Talk:Nemegtomaia for comments about the article. Well done! If the article has not already been on the main page as an "In the news" or "Did you know" item, you can nominate it to appear in Did you know. Message delivered by Legobot, on behalf of Ashorocetus -- Ashorocetus (talk) 21:21, 20 January 2017 (UTC)

Persecution of Alawites
Hi FunkMonk, would it make more sense to move the category to Category:Violence against Alawites per the the parent category. All the pages in that category refer to acts to violence (terrorist attacks, massacres, etc.) rather than historical narratives/accounts of persecution; so Category:Violence against Alawites would be more accurate at this point, IMHO. Yazan (talk) 08:22, 23 January 2017 (UTC)
 * I think that's too specific, the category follows the naming conventions that have previously been used for other groups. Naming should be consistent. FunkMonk (talk) 08:49, 23 January 2017 (UTC)

Pre-Islamic listed at Redirects for discussion
An editor has asked for a discussion to address the redirect Pre-Islamic. Since you had some involvement with the Pre-Islamic redirect, you might want to participate in the redirect discussion if you have not already done so. Flow 234 (Nina)  talk  10:53, 30 January 2017 (UTC)

4th GA Cup - Round 3
--MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 21:10, 1 February 2017 (UTC)

Tahiti rail
I looked for Birds of French Polynesia; the closest I came was the review in the Journal of the Polynesian Society. Quoting Bruner the review has a different name for the Tahiti rail, Porzana tahitiensis, which also shows up in the catalogue of the British Museum's collection. Yet another name, Rallus tahitiensis, appears there as well. Taxonomy's not my strong point, so the relationships among all these aren't clear to me, but they might be worth a mention in the article. BlackcurrantTea (talk) 06:13, 2 February 2017 (UTC)
 * Oh, thanks, it confirms my suspicion that Bruner's account is somewhat unreliable... I'll see how I can incorporate it into the article. FunkMonk (talk) 09:35, 2 February 2017 (UTC)
 * I see that this name actually refers to a Tahitian form of the Spotless crake, not the Tahiti rail. FunkMonk (talk) 15:28, 4 February 2017 (UTC)
 * Re-reading the British Museum catalogue, I see what you mean. I went looking for other references and only managed to confuse myself further. You may find these useful, though: pages 52 & 53 of Catalogue of the Birds of the Tropical Islands of the Pacific Ocean, and pages 214 & 212 of General zoology. BlackcurrantTea (talk) 00:57, 5 February 2017 (UTC)
 * Nice, I can see it confirms some of the text already in the article, so it might be good for making the sourcing more robust... FunkMonk (talk) 09:20, 5 February 2017 (UTC)

Deletion of my Cylindraspis photos!?
Hi FunkMonk, Please explain why you removed my Cylindraspis photos from this article https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Saddle-backed_Rodrigues_giant_tortoise It looks like they were deleted too! I made a point of taking those photos myself for this article, so I'm put out that you've zapped them.

You wrote "Sadly, these images may not be releasable by photographers. Replaced." Does that mean that if I took these photos myself, then I cannot upload them? Is it prohibited to upload photos of sculptures in public areas? Please explain the rule to me, because I was under the impression that public area monuments could be photographed. Abu Shawka (talk) 16:12, 6 February 2017 (UTC)
 * Those were some nice photos, but see Mauritian freedom of panorama law: FunkMonk (talk) 16:16, 6 February 2017 (UTC)
 * Interesting. But now these photos aren't "for commercial purposes". If commercial use is the issue, do the images not just need a different release license when uploaded, or can they just never legally be shared in public? Abu Shawka (talk) 14:31, 10 February 2017 (UTC)
 * Yeah, that is an unfortunate issue with Wikipedia images, they have to be available for commercial use, for some reason... --FunkMonk (talk) 14:44, 10 February 2017 (UTC)
 * Point taken. That why they have these rather stringent requirements?: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Category:Non-commercial_use_only_images Abu Shawka (talk) 11:24, 13 February 2017 (UTC)
 * Yeah, I personally think the policy is a bad idea, but as a Commons admin, I have to enforce it. FunkMonk (talk) 11:33, 13 February 2017 (UTC)

DYK for Nemegtomaia
Mifter (talk) 15:46, 13 February 2017 (UTC)

Newton's parakeet scheduled for TFA
This is to let you know that the Newton's parakeet article has been scheduled as today's featured article for February 17, 2017. Please check the article needs no amendments. If you're interested in editing the main page text, you're welcome to do so at Today's featured article/February 17, 2017, but note that a coordinator will trim the lead to around 1100 characters anyway, so you aren't obliged to do so. Thanks! Jimfbleak - talk to me?  08:01, 2 February 2017 (UTC)
 * Cool enough! FunkMonk (talk) 09:36, 2 February 2017 (UTC)

Thank you for another little-known bird! --Gerda Arendt (talk) 07:42, 17 February 2017 (UTC)
 * Welcome! FunkMonk (talk) 09:06, 17 February 2017 (UTC)