User talk:Hamamelis/2012

2012 ARCHIVE :

Bambusa vulgaris
If you are still interested, I have taken the article to have a peer review (Peer review/Bambusa vulgaris/archive1). Please, check and comment. Aditya (talk • contribs) 04:34, 25 January 2012 (UTC)
 * Should I remove the content on clumping and running bamboos? Valuable as it is, the content isn't fitting too well at the moment. Aditya (talk • contribs) 12:24, 25 January 2012 (UTC)
 * In my judgement, the information about the genus doesn't need to be included, but that doesn't mean it must be excluded. I think it might be usefull, but it's a judgement call –see what others think (especially those used to rating articles as GA). Hamamelis (talk) 12:40, 25 January 2012 (UTC)
 * Okies. Aditya (talk • contribs) 04:25, 26 January 2012 (UTC)

What an interesting
Hi Hamamelis,

Thank you for your note about your plans. I wish you a very satisfying college experience, and a major career boost from certification! I'm impressed that keeping databases inline isn't just an occasional hobby for you.

I too have had much less time to work on wikipedia for several months now because of a confluence of things, rather than a single time sink. Just coping with the usual vandalism/silliness patrol is about all that's possible most days. I've added Ruiz y Pavón to my watch list; what an astonishing amount of work you put in there!

It seems possible that very now and then a weekend of comparative boredom might open up and make it possible to put in a serious effort on dehiscence and shattering ... I hope ... (a bit of boredom right now would be very welcome) ... there might be one or two photos from a trip that I just made to a botanic garden that could move it along slightly. The amount of thought and reading that is required for each little addition is indeed daunting, but it would certainly be a different kind of resource. A rather funny thing happened at the botanic garden: there were some pomegranate trees with fruit hanging on them that looked for all the world as if they had exploded, so I just did a bit of a search to see if pomegranates, perhaps the wilder uncultured kinds, might be prone to explosive dehiscence. There's no evidence that I can find of that at all, in fact it would be ridiculous that pomegranates sitting in fruit bowls on kitchen counters could possibly explode, but those fruit looked for all the world as if that had happened!

Many best wishes for your new venture!

Nadia

Thanks
... for correcting my mistaken removal of an entry at List of botanists by author abbreviation when adding a new one. Peter coxhead (talk) 09:55, 28 April 2012 (UTC)
 * Hi Peter, no problem. I once deleted almost a whole page of material in the same way. Hamamelis (talk) 08:25, 30 April 2012 (UTC)

Hi, and sorry!
Hi Hamamelis, I'm so sorry that I left you and Rkitko to do battle for the dehiscensce/indehiscence categories. I had thought that you were off working on more promising things, and got so discouraged that I took that discussion page off my watch list. In case you haven't seen the resolution, the categories have (just) survived the latest Alan Leifting attack, thanks to you and Rkitko.

I've listed myself as retired in wikipedia, but since doing that I'd had to sign in again several times to respond to nice messages from Choess (on User:JonRichfield's page) and Rkitko, and have had nice email from two other editors. I've added a few plants to the categories, but not many.

I do hope that in your studies you are with a cheerful group of people.

Best wishes, Nadiatalent (talk) 20:58, 23 May 2012 (UTC)

Thomas Bather Moore
1850
 * http://trove.nla.gov.au/work/34470415?q=thomas+bather+moore&c=book&versionId=42636481

thanks for your interest SatuSuro 11:21, 30 October 2012 (UTC)


 * he was a hero of a number of us who used to be in western tasmania in the mid 1970's - if we had done even a half of a half of what he had done - doing the very rough country with little more than very simple provisions go long distances in mountainous and rough country for weeks at a time sometimes with his dogs (whom he named rivers after :)   ) - in the 70's we would go out into thew edge of the country that he cut trails in, in our work toyota land cruisers and be back home for a good evening meal and the tv etc etc... I have a photo of his grave at strahan on a hard drive I currently cannot access.... so you have invoked interest in a long untouched stub...  SatuSuro 14:43, 30 October 2012 (UTC)

Italics
In a recent edit to the page Zilla (plant) which you labelled "Italics fixes", you changed the  tag from   to. That was actually the opposite of a fix:  is a magic word, not a template, and is meant to use a colon.

That said, really the best thing to use would have been, which is a convenient standard and completely dodges the whole problem of remembering whether a colon is correct. (And with titles that have a bit in brackets at the end, it knows not to italicize that bit, in case you thought that might be a problem.)

Hope this helps. — Paul A (talk) 01:36, 30 November 2012 (UTC)


 * Hi Paul A, I can't remember everything that went on in that edit, but I know the page is supposed to have the title appear like this: Zilla (genus), and even with the magic word there, the display was this: Zilla (genus). I tried a few different things, and when I looked at the preview, whatever I did seemed to work; the display looked like Zilla (genus), which is correct. I have used quite a bit in the past, but seldom do anymore, because if the plant's only name is the scientific one (in most cases, it is), all I have to do is remove the 'name' parameter, and the title automatically displays in italics. I didn't know that  now recognizes words in parentheses as something to ignore, it didn't always do that. Thank you for that, and thanks also for telling me about the magic words. I haven't looked into them sufficiently, only a little a long time ago, and not enough to make good use of them. I will look more into it now, as you've given me the handy link :) Hamamelis (talk) 10:37, 30 November 2012 (UTC)

yoga
What is your objection to the cited edits from the foremost authority in the English language? 81.106.127.14 (talk) 08:25, 18 December 2012 (UTC)
 * I'll review it, hang on. Hamamelis (talk) 08:28, 18 December 2012 (UTC)
 * Responded at your talk. Hamamelis (talk) 09:03, 18 December 2012 (UTC)
 * I have moved the content to the appropriate location. Hopefully, it should be alright now. Correct Knowledge «৳alk» 09:12, 18 December 2012 (UTC)