User talk:Graham Beards/Archives/2018

Collaborative editing
CE - just a suggestion: pls revert if not an improvement. A pleasure to see there are still editors who show some respect and consideration for others's hard work. Of course, I trust you absolutely to edit considerately and wisely. Be bold if you want. -- Colin°Talk 07:58, 28 March 2018 (UTC)
 * Thanks Colin - I hope to see this as a policy. Graham Beards (talk) 08:20, 28 March 2018 (UTC)
 * Great. If you agree with the sentiment (or parts of it) it would be great if you could say so on the talk page. It would be good to see what kind of support it has, to counter the "we want more videos" message that James appears to have misinterpreted. -- Colin°Talk 08:25, 28 March 2018 (UTC)

Asking a favor in regards to Cleopatra articles
Hi Graham Beards! Firstly, thank you for replacing hyphens with dashes in the inline citations/refs for Cleopatra, my current Featured Article candidate. I was wondering, however, if you wouldn't mind doing the same for a few other articles, namely: Early life of Cleopatra, Reign of Cleopatra, and Death of Cleopatra. If you have some sort of tool where you can just instantly fix this problem, that would save me the headache of going through each line of text and doing it manually! I would also be very grateful if you would do that, please. Regards, Pericles of Athens  Talk 20:59, 14 April 2018 (UTC)
 * Hi, I have done that for you. Graham Beards (talk) 06:31, 15 April 2018 (UTC)
 * Thanks a million! Pericles of Athens  Talk 12:14, 16 April 2018 (UTC)

Precious anniversary
--Gerda Arendt (talk) 06:19, 22 June 2018 (UTC)

Those wayward cites on George Washington...
I fixed the last three mangled multi-harvard cites (#82, 87 & 161). Harv-cites are not a style I am completely-comfortable with but I figured it all out. Will continue going through and moving all the cites to the Harvard-style to bring them in agreement with each other. Thanks for your time and attention to these various issues with the article, Shearonink (talk) 17:20, 25 June 2018 (UTC)
 * You are very welcome. I also have problems with the sfn and sfnm templates and rarely use them. Graham Beards (talk) 17:35, 25 June 2018 (UTC)

SchroCat
SchroCat's block can only be undone by a CheckUser.--Bbb23 (talk) 17:48, 3 August 2018 (UTC)

Merry Christmas!
Thanks Gavin. Very kind of you. Graham Beards (talk) 21:43, 16 December 2018 (UTC)

Rotavirus
According to the link you referenced: "Like a species name, a higher taxon name is written in italics and begins with a capital letter." So it is Rotavirus and not Rotavirus. Also please do not remove automated taxonomy templates from article, as they are the consensus way to include taxoboxes. --Nessie (talk) 21:09, 20 December 2018 (UTC)
 * Hi, pleased to meet you. Where have I written "Rotavorus"? The link I gave went on to say:

"A virus name should never be italicized, even when it includes the name of a host species or genus, and should be written in lower case. This ensures that it is distinguishable from a species name, which otherwise might be identical. The first letters of words in a virus name, including the first word, should only begin with a capital when these words are proper nouns (including host genus names but not virus genus names) or start a sentence. Single letters in virus names, including alphanumerical strain designations, may be capitalized. In most texts, virus names are used much more frequently than species names and may, therefore, be abbreviated." (My emphasis). I have had this problem before with editors who are not familiar with viral nomenclature. And why does the taxobox not give the family Reoviridae? If you revert my edits once more you will break the WP:3R rule. Graham Beards (talk) 21:21, 20 December 2018 (UTC)
 * You are mixing up the infraspecific clade "virus" with the domain Virus. The former means something like
 * Like what?? Graham Beards (talk) 21:31, 20 December 2018 (UTC)
 * Rotavirus is a genus, it contains the species Rotavirus A, Rotavirus B, Rotavirus C, Rotavirus D, Rotavirus E, Rotavirus F, Rotavirus G, Rotavirus H, and Rotavirus I. Simian rotavirus A/SA11 is a virus in Rotavirus A.  "Simian rotavirus A/SA11" is what is not italicized.  Likewise with Human rotavirus C/Bristol, Chicken rotavirus 05V0059, and Porcine rotavirus E/DC-9.  Also note that the species Rotavirus B (italicized) contains the virus Rotavirus B (not italicized). --Nessie (talk) 21:44, 20 December 2018 (UTC)
 * So you should have changed "rotavirus" NOT to "Rotavirus" but to "rotavirus A", (but that would be overly pedantic). I spent forty years researching rotaviruses. Please do not try to educate me on the subject. Graham Beards (talk) 21:51, 20 December 2018 (UTC)
 * I don't follow that at all. Why must you conflate genus, species, and member viruses?  --Nessie (talk) 21:54, 20 December 2018 (UTC)
 * This discussion belongs on the article's Talk Page - not here. And I say again, you are out of your depth and are clutching at straws. Graham Beards (talk) 04:36, 21 December 2018 (UTC)
 * Really? Because you never mentioned any concern over the use as a common name.  Perhaps if you referenced the relevant paragraph, i would have known what you were concerned about.  But you just wanted to talk in circles and swear.  If you looked, i did not italicize any plurals (rotaviruses). My accuracy may have been off, but you did not seemed to want to bother to check for what was baby and what was bathwater.  The article is changed now, and you stated you accepted it, so I think I had more than straws.--Nessie (talk) 12:42, 21 December 2018 (UTC)
 * It is customary before editing Featured Articles to discuss proposed changes on the article's Talk Page. You even changed the titles of some citations. Nor did you understand the ICTV source I directed you to. I still think you were out of your depth, which is why you had to ask for help from someone who is not and who has more patience than I do. Graham Beards (talk)