User talk:Hesperian/Archive 29


 * The following text is preserved as an archive of discussions at User talk:Hesperian. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on User talk:Hesperian. No further edits should be made to this page.

Proposal RE: User:Mikkalai's vow of silence
You are a previous participant in the discussion at WP:AN/I about User:Mikkalai's vow of silence. This is to inform you, that I have made a proposal for resolution for the issue. I am informing all of the users who participated, so this is not an attempt to WP:CANVAS support for any particular position.

The proposal can be found at: Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents  Jerry  talk ¤ count/logs 01:35, 1 March 2008 (UTC)


 * Messages like this annoy me, and this one reeks of self-importance to boot. I have a watchlist; if I want to follow the discussion, I am quite capable of doing so. It is unnecessary to personally inform me that you have made a proposal. Hesperian 11:21, 1 March 2008 (UTC)

cult refs
or for your information - cultural references - i was gonna play around in there - but i suspect that i might get the batavia ship stuff which i had tried to tidy at one stage in the past - (its almost a separate article unto intself if adequately pursued) - so shall let your brilliant mind fix it - however will be watching over your shoulder for most - henrietta has some bits of use in there - cheers SatuSuro 14:43, 2 March 2008 (UTC)
 * I was hoping to avoid enumerating the books on the Batavia, because there are so many, and because the Batavia article is a better place for that. But I still want to communicate the sheer importance of the Batavia in Australian history. Not sure I've got that quite right yet. Hesperian 00:57, 3 March 2008 (UTC)

I personally feel frustrated by the issue - tagging cat talk pages is less taxing after having been repeatedly dumped in the surf at south trig today :( - btw it looks like the alexander pearce industry is trying to keep up with batavia industry :( bah cannibals and murderers as if we havent had enough SatuSuro 13:21, 3 March 2008 (UTC)

Stirling
I wonder if you'd mind looking at Portal:Australia/Anniversaries/March/March 4 and considering whether the entry for Stirling isn't a bit obtuse obscure, or whether its necessary at all. &mdash;Moondyne click! 03:46, 4 March 2008 (UTC)
 * Seems more like a DYK, than an anniversary of note, the March 4 1831 date is not mentioned in any of the linked articles. --Melburnian (talk) 04:43, 4 March 2008 (UTC)

I don't think it is important enough to be included. If I were to write down a timeline of 20-odd events in the establishment of the Swan River Colony, Stirling's commissioning as Lieutenant-Governor wouldn't be in it. If I expanded the list to 100 events, it would.

My guess is that Matilda has added the day of appointment for each of our governors, on the assumption that these are inherently important anniversaries. The bitter irony is that if she had gone with the naive and simplistic "James Stirling appointed Lieutenant-Governor of Western Australia", then we probably wouldn't be having this discussion. Instead she was so good as to lay out the circumstances of the event, and thus she has shed doubt on its significance, and here were are discussing reverting her. :-)

Hesperian 04:55, 4 March 2008 (UTC)

In hindsight, I suppose I should have posted the question at Matilda's talk page - I'm sending her a note now. But anyway, for the record, my view is that it should probably go as its a bit too obscure. Then again, I won't be losing any sleep over this. &mdash;Moondyne click! 05:05, 4 March 2008 (UTC)


 * Sleep? Bet not one current serving civil servant in the wa govt would know those sort of dates either :| SatuSuro 06:30, 4 March 2008 (UTC)


 * I like obtuse things :-) but now there are more things for that date I don't care - but everyone learnt something and isn't that part of the point?--Matilda talk 10:04, 4 March 2008 (UTC)
 * Indeed I did, a happy Lieutenant-Governor legitimisation day to you :-) --Melburnian (talk) 10:54, 4 March 2008 (UTC)


 * I have now added to the Stirling article and the Governor of WA article. The document (which I have now included as a ref in additions to the articles) is one of 110 founding documents of Australia in a collection put together byt he National Archives. I think that probably makes it a significant event enough for the wikipedia Australian event calendar :-)  I have copied this conversation to the talk page of the date in case the issue comes up in years to come  Regards--Matilda talk 23:38, 4 March 2008 (UTC)

Actually, what's been written there isn't quite right. Stirling was told before he left for the Swan River that he would be Lieutenant-Governor. He did indeed adopt that title, for example his Proclamation of the Colony begins "Proclamation By His Excellency James Stirling Esquire Captain in the Royal Navy and Lieutenant Governor of His Majesty's Settlement in Western Australia." However he didn't yet have a formal commission to back him up. When he eventually received his commission on 4 March 1831, it was a commission to full Governor, not Lieutenant-Governor: "... do constitute and appoint you the said James Stirling to be our Governor and Commander in Chief in and over our Territory called Western Australia...." But that document is now being used as a citation for the claim that he was appointed Lieutenant-Governor. Hesperian 00:12, 5 March 2008 (UTC)
 * Yes - Governor it is--Matilda talk 00:19, 5 March 2008 (UTC)

Re: Yagan
Hi Hesperian, thank you for sharing your thoughts. I agree with you, and I think a section on Yagan's legacy is needed. Maybe it could be titled 'Legacy'? I also had a look at Wikipedia's guideline on lead sections (WP:LS) and saw the bit on reliable sources. Maybe it would be best to completely remove the statement from the lead section? According to WP:NPOV we should 'let the facts speak for themselves', so I guess this means not saying what I said there.

Anyway, thank you for your points! Littleteddy (roar!) 11:51, 5 March 2008 (UTC)
 * OK, thanks and good luck. Littleteddy (roar!) 13:05, 5 March 2008 (UTC)
 * That's great! Will we need a reference? A quick Google Search found this result: Littleteddy (roar!) 10:32, 6 March 2008 (UTC)
 * OK, I see what you mean there. So if it is referenced further on there is no need for a reference in the lead section? Littleteddy (roar!) 10:54, 6 March 2008 (UTC)
 * I understand. Thank you! Littleteddy (roar!) 11:36, 6 March 2008 (UTC)
 * I agree. Even the eldest of great minds can learn something new every day :) Thank you for working with me. Littleteddy (roar!) 11:39, 6 March 2008 (UTC)

Humor tax
I have in real life laughed more from things you did and wrote here than I have from any of the things that are supposed to make me laugh.

So, I am thinking right now that the encyclopedia cannot be protected if the protector of it is called Snow White? -- carol (talk) 12:59, 8 March 2008 (UTC)


 * Did you ever read The Voyage of the Dawn Treader? It is one of my most favorite books; I read it often enough that I should have it memorized -- but I don't.  That is the reason it is 'Snow White' and not the wizard on the one island in that book, I didn't think that I would be stuck where I have been for so long without access to all of the stuff I used to have access to and I can't remember his name.  -- carol (talk) 13:05, 8 March 2008 (UTC)
 * His name was never given - he was simply "The Magician". Hesperian 04:28, 9 March 2008 (UTC)
 * If it matters so much then I won't call you Snow White, but it is that much less affectation. I thought his name started with a CR or something.  I suppose I should thank you for responding while in such a traumatizing situation. -- carol (talk) 06:35, 9 March 2008 (UTC)
 * It isn't the specific nickname that matters to me. What matters is the tendency of some people to hide insults behind a veneer of crypticism or faux humour. That way, if the insulted person takes offense, the perpetrator gets to claim to be the victim. "Poor me, all I did was nickname someone Snow White, that's completely harmless, and now they've flown right off the handle, completely over-reacted, no sense of humour, etc." But what usually happens, in my experience, is the insulted person hides the hurt and laughs at the "joke". Personally, I find the best response is to recognise these passive aggressive mind games for what they are, and to loudly and early label them as such. Hesperian 11:35, 9 March 2008 (UTC)
 * Pop-psychology catch phrases! I am uncertain if those are a product of the self-help psychology industry or of role playing games; both are like vinegar on baking soda to me.  The last time I heard the phrase used was in The Venture Brothers when Pete White didn't want to help Master Billy Quiz Boy clean the house.  I lived so many years before those pop-psychology mind-defusing bombs were known and allowed.  The wiki talk page forum generally doesn't seem to allow the things like 'an asshole, but an articulate asshole' so pop-psych it will be!  Could you categorize this (feel free to use whatever psych book or role playing anal. book you can find): having authoritative privilege somewhere doesn't guarantee anything except that you have authoritative privilege somewhere?  I don't know anyone who doesn't like their dignity to be kept in tact.  I did perhaps need just a pinch (that is a pre-pop-psychology measurement, btw - 1/8 teaspoon or less) of yours. I didn't resort to name-calling until the block had gone measurably overtime.


 * In my life lately, everyone writes comedy from the high ground. I constantly wonder if comedy will still exist if/when the writers of it are all on a level ground.  Or is it the performers?  Did you want my attention or did you want to really stop something wrong that was happening?  My attention could have been gotten via a situation where I would not have assigned a name and probably I would have found reason to laugh.  If you were stopping something bad from happening, I have a list of very horrible things that seemed to have happened via wiki software and people with permission on other computers.  Hell, I am on that list maybe.... -- carol (talk) 15:23, 9 March 2008 (UTC)
 * If have just read this crap correctly you have just said that Hesperian is an arsehole. That to me is a personal attack. Now please clarify in simple straight forward english what you mean, if it the way have read considered yourself warned for WP:NPA and remove the comment. Gnangarra 15:32, 9 March 2008 (UTC)
 * No. I clearly said that I would like to call him (or her) an articulate asshole but can't -- so it is Snow White instead. Stop reading between the lines. -- carol (talk) 16:12, 9 March 2008 (UTC)

North Island
I think the map looks great as it is. The following are off-the-cuff thoughts rather than advice, you can incorporate or ignore them at will


 * add scale
 * label the island
 * label surrounding water bodies (in blue), otherwise you have the right amount of information
 * solid triangle for hills, perhaps a very small black circle for lighthouse
 * show non-gazetted names - italics rather than quotes
 * Features in black rather than grey (maybe) --Melburnian (talk) 12:58, 10 March 2008 (UTC)


 * Ditto - excellent start - nothing much to add - I'd agree on non gazzetted names being diff from those that are (I have just uncovered a geographic names treasure trove over the weekend - more about that some othertime) SatuSuro 13:23, 10 March 2008 (UTC)

Okay, I've done all of the above, except that I changed the infrastructure from 50% grey to 60% grey, instead of to black. The lighthouse is infrastructure like the huts, so I am inclined to maintain it in grey, and in approximate shape on the ground, rather than an icon. In response to other peoples' suggestions I've expanded trig to trig station and given the picture a bit more ocean. Another iteration of advice would be very welcome. Hesperian 02:11, 11 March 2008 (UTC)


 * Nice cartography. A few suggestions:
 * Could the jetties be squared off a bit?
 * The feature labels (eg. trig station, lighthouse etc.) should be in a slightly smaller font to the place names (eg. North Point, Shag Rock etc.)
 * The jetties, huts and airtsrip labels should be horizontal, IMHO
 * I'd keep the text as text, unless there was a reason not to, such as kerning issues
 * &mdash;Moondyne click! 02:24, 11 March 2008 (UTC)
 * The only reason not to is the text won't render on machines that don't have the font-family (i.e. Arial) installed. Hesperian 05:32, 11 March 2008 (UTC)
 * Which would be not very many I presume. But I had thought I'd read that you could set Inkscape to embed the fonts in the svg, but I may have imagined that. &mdash;Moondyne click! 06:41, 11 March 2008 (UTC)
 * A bit of research and I see I was wrong. Inkscape won't do that apparently. &mdash;Moondyne click! 13:00, 12 March 2008 (UTC)
 * Okay, I know nothing about Inkscape other than having installed it once and poked at it, but I wonder whether the operation might be called "convert fonts to outline" rather than imbed. Corel Draw used to do (and call it) that (it may still; I haven't used it in a while).--Curtis Clark (talk) 13:53, 12 March 2008 (UTC)
 * That's basically it; it is called something "convert text to path". It makes the file font-independent, but much bigger. The question was whether or not I should do it. Hesperian 22:35, 12 March 2008 (UTC)
 * The problem is, its a one way trip. If you want to change the words later on, you need to delete the pathed object and reinsert a new text object from scratch. I don't see the point.  &mdash;Moondyne click! 02:47, 13 March 2008 (UTC)
 * The point would be if you were using an unusual font that most users didn't have on their systems and that the substitutions were hideous. Not an issue here.--Curtis Clark (talk) 05:39, 13 March 2008 (UTC)
 * Gosh, I never thought of that! That settles it then. Hesperian 02:51, 13 March 2008 (UTC)


 * Could the jetties be squared off a bit? Scrap that. I just looked at satellite pic on maps.google.com and see why you've drawn them as you have. Silly me. &mdash;Moondyne click! 11:28, 15 March 2008 (UTC)
 * I actually made the map by grabbing screen dumps from Google Maps, importing them into Inkscape, mosaicing them together, then tracing their outlines. Hence the jetties.
 * This last half hour or so I have started to doubt my scale. I worked it out based on the fact (or what I thought was a fact) that Google Earth uses Ikonos imagery, which has 1 metre square pixels. I'm thinking that must be wrong, because I now think my 1 km long linear scale is really only 500 metres long. Will need to check with the Google Earth distance tool later, and perhaps fix it.
 * The other interesting thing is that my map was only made possibly by the appearance, about three weeks ago, of a beautiful, fresh, high-res image of North Island. The imagery of the rest of the Houtman Abrolhos looks disgusting in comparison. I was wondering how they decide which imagery to update when, and it did cross my mind that my creation of eight articles on geographic features in the vicinity, may have affected their algorithm. That is to say, their algorithm may be clever enough to realise that a crap image covering such a feature-dense area is a high priority for replacement, but not clever enough to attribute the feature density to some Wikipedia nerds obsession systemic bias.
 * Putting two and two together. I suspect that most of the Houtman Abrolhos is covered by Ikonos imagery, but North Island has recently been upgraded to a image with even higher resolution, possibly because of my non-notable feature articles, and this has made my map possible, but screwed up my scale computation.
 * Hesperian 11:45, 15 March 2008 (UTC)
 * It a shame there's not more high-res imagery. I just rechecked Gun Island and its still crappy - a high-res photo misses it by 500 m to the south-east :(  &mdash;Moondyne click! 00:26, 16 March 2008 (UTC)
 * Scale was wrong; fixed now. Google Earth uses a hodge-podge of whatever imagery it can get its hands on, so resolution varies all over the place. Yes, a shame. Hesperian 23:54, 16 March 2008 (UTC)

Stats
Gee, I wonder what happened on the 7th February? ? &mdash;Moondyne click! 06:36, 11 March 2008 (UTC)
 * Wow, I can see why that's a deeply distressing dilemma. ;-) &mdash;Moondyne click! 00:14, 12 March 2008 (UTC)

I was wondering if it may have been a recently departed friend returning. &mdash;Moondyne click! 05:34, 12 March 2008 (UTC)
 * It should go without saying that that's not who I meant! I was contemplating a common interest thread (with one degree of separation) which I thought you'd have seen.  But I'll say no more as I'm probably seeing shadows.  &mdash;Moondyne click! 05:44, 12 March 2008 (UTC)

Nic Park and Frank Zappa
are the older part of that problem (wallace and gromit and the burglar penguin, or the late Zappas penguin in bondage, boing line) - and the australian film director that did the dancing penguin - put them together and theres the terrible mix of pre adolescent angst, (sic), and angst over melting ice caps - (where will all the penguins go to slide off glaciers?) - its a collective panic - thank god im only trawling inadequate eucalypt stubs as part of the 54,876 threads pursued at present - they dont even get single slyly inserted swear word or anything :( SatuSuro 12:47, 13 March 2008 (UTC)


 * Thanks for the well explained item at noticeboard of oz project - I think I need to pull my head in the cat issue - long live the bot (or not) SatuSuro 06:05, 15 March 2008 (UTC)
 * Thanks also for the item at the WA noticeboard - I appreciate the well explained item SatuSuro 11:31, 15 March 2008 (UTC)
 * gmail - please check - im off - but it might need attending to - cheers SatuSuro 10:17, 16 March 2008 (UTC)

Archive
Yes, it is getting a bit long, I blame it all on chatty West Australians :). Think I'll go for an end of the month cutoff. --Melburnian (talk) 06:15, 16 March 2008 (UTC)

Serpulorbis zelandicus and Stephopoma
Hi Hesperian. I have checked my reference (Powell, 1978) and what I wrote matches that. You obviously have a more up-to-date source, so please just correct anything you see as out-of-date. Thanks for taking the time to discuss it with me. Cheers GrahamBould (talk) 07:02, 20 March 2008 (UTC)
 * Just wanted to qualify what I said about Serpulorbis zelandicus - the actual synonym statement, in part, reads "..., Serpulorbis sipho (not of Lamarck, 1818), Suter, 1913, ...". I hope this helps in some way, I'm not a taxonomist or scientist. GrahamBould (talk) 12:45, 20 March 2008 (UTC)
 * So should any changes be made? eg, S. sipho removed as a synonym in Serpulorbis zelandicus? GrahamBould (talk) 06:51, 21 March 2008 (UTC)

Don't panic
Hi everyone.

The more you read, the more you learn, the more reasons you find to panic. Did you ever label an Australian place article with its latitude and longitude from the Gazetteer of Australia, then have a look at where Google Earth places it? Often the location is embarrassingly inaccurate. Record Hill plots in the ocean for Chrissake!

I have always put this down to inaccuracy in the Gazetteer, but lately I've been reading about geodesy, and it occurred to me that this inaccuracy might be caused by one of these sources giving authalic latitude and the other geodetic latitude; or by both sources giving geodetic latitude but with reference to different datums.

On investigation, I discovered that the Gazetteer gives a geodetic location based on GDA94, whereas Google Earth gives a geodetic location based on WGS84. Oh, woe is us, we've been causing Google Earth to plot GDA94 coordinates on a WGS84 map! Then I read a little more deeply, and discovered that GDA94 was designed to differ from WGS84 by no more than 1 metre. Apparently the error is currently about 45 centimetres.

So like I said, don't panic.

Hesperian 04:20, 21 March 2008 (UTC)

Never - when there is a hesp to give such well made explanations- is there any point in telling what remains of oz places and oz notcebrd about this?

The various incarnations of what is probably landgate has a different datum on more recent material procued - so fine print of hardcopy maps is vip in wa - cos nat mapping, older versions of lands dept et, and landgate are - i think (havent checked details of ones i have on hand yet) - all working off diff datums.

Never panic - someone else somewhere else has made a bigger booboo or is in a deeper pile of it than you are - of this we can always be sure :| SatuSuro 07:32, 21 March 2008 (UTC)

Category:Naturalised flora of Western Australia
I'm starting to wonder whether this should be Category:Naturalised flora in Western Australia to make it clearer that it's not WA flora that has naturalised elsewhere. Melburnian (talk) 01:26, 25 March 2008 (UTC)
 * Hmmm. Good point. Or Category:Flora naturalised in Western Australia? Hesperian 01:32, 25 March 2008 (UTC)
 * Even better --Melburnian (talk) 01:42, 25 March 2008 (UTC)

Screenshot of Banksia integrifolia on front page
.....now where was that screenshot you did...Cheers, Casliber (talk · contribs) 22:58, 25 March 2008 (UTC)

Blackburn, Button, Beamish, Negus, Lawrence, Easton, Next Stop...?
There's a danger in this Wikipedia, a bit like finding newspapers under old lino. I took a look at the links on my start-article on Estelle Blackburn and off it's taken me. You've noticed the reformat I did on the Lawrence talk page (Sorry about the bogus attrib. It was so messy I lost track of what went with whom. I've fixed it now.) and I thought you might be interested in the Easton affair stub which it inspired me to start. It's basically some of my copyedited stuff from the Lawrence article with some new trim added to the chassis.

In the course of looking for background I discovered this. Take note of the comment by Mike of Vegas. I don't know if it made "Wikipedia In the News" on Signpost. I'd like to put the guy straight some time. Retarius | Talk 06:54, 27 March 2008 (UTC)

reversions
does that mean there is an oz prject thingy 'inside' the tag that exists there? or are you averse to it? or satyr is mucking up? SatuSuro 06:30, 29 March 2008 (UTC) dosnt matter i see now - it cannot read the tag with the oz prject in there- no need to respond - dumb me again:) 06:32, 29 March 2008 (UTC)
 * There's that, and the fact that the silly bot has been tagging the talk pages of redirects - redirects from common names that I had tagged into Category:Banksia taxa by common name. Check out my deletion log. I suspect the bot hasn't gotten to Category:Banksia taxa by scientific name yet. When it does get there, I'll have to think hard about whether to roll back or not, because the WP Aus tag is redundant, except that it allows you to put articles into WP WA, whereas WP Banksia doesn't. Hesperian 06:40, 29 March 2008 (UTC)

Therein lies a problematic point - because of the sheer size of wp oz field - maybe the task really should be to see what sub projects can be placed on arts with just wp oz tags - to break the whole thing down - and surely no bot can think through that one.... in the end - either that the wp oz as a parent tag must have a subsidiary tag added for it to be considered a completed tag? or perhaps there is another way of thinking it through - hmm sounds like a lot of work whichever way it goesSatuSuro 08:09, 29 March 2008 (UTC)

Then when everything goes quiet - its like eubot wanders in and scrapes taxoboxes for colour - never a dull moment :| SatuSuro 13:41, 29 March 2008 (UTC)

Questions from SatyrBot =D
Left a couple questions for you at User talk:SatyrBot. Just as an FYI, when you leave a message on the bot's talk page, it stops the bot in it's tagging project. Which isn't a problem - it's designed that way on purpose. Just wanted to let you know =D -- SatyrTN (talk / contribs) 14:51, 29 March 2008 (UTC)


 * Eh. Hm. 100 talk page created. Hm.  That shouldn't have happened.  I'll check the bot's code for why it did that.  Sorry for the extra work!  -- SatyrBot (talk) 21:41, 29 March 2008 (UTC)

Talk page
Thanks for fixing up my talk page. That user sure spent quite a bit of time on it! Somno (talk) 02:05, 30 March 2008 (UTC)

Deleted Document
Any chance I can get a copy of the Cylinder Heads table out of the Cox Model Engines file that you guys deleted? I dont have a copy of it and I would not like to have to do it over again.

BTW Thanks for letting me back on.

Kind Regards Warren —Preceding unsigned comment added by Warrenlead (talk • contribs) 11:02, 30 March 2008 (UTC)

Twenty to Five
Just a quick note that ive changed the name from Twenty Years to Five Years. Thanks. Five Years 16:18, 2 April 2008 (UTC)

V.
101 total; 98 are endemic, 2 also occur in NT and are already categorised. 1 occurs only in NT, the redlink. The outliers are in a section called Tropica:
 * V. cunninghamii - V. verticillata - V. decussata

I was cheating, to be neat, and pondering whether to add a hatnote to the cat. cygnis insignis 19:59, 2 April 2008 (UTC) 20:06, 2 April 2008 (UTC)


 * Cheers, I will now. cygnis insignis 05:46, 4 April 2008 (UTC)


 * Brilliant! Would it simplify your task if some cats were created beforehand; I think the cosmopolitan Eucalyptus and Acacia  need refining. Incidentally, E. is currently in, likewise Acacia. Should they also get 'taxa of another region'?  Another thing that popped out of my scategorical notion-mill was Category:Lists of Australian plants. cygnis insignis 08:28, 4 April 2008 (UTC)
 * Yeah, E. and A. will need to be fixed. There's not a lot of point in doing this if it doesn't prompt us to iron out stuff like that. The only categories that E. and A. should be in are C:E and C:A respectively. But my script won't tell you that, because it only understands the semantics of categories. It is not clever enough to know that Eucalyptus and Category:Eucalyptus reference the same concept (c.f. Phoenix and Category:Phoenix, e.g.).
 * Go for it; make whatever categories changes you want. The whole point of this is that next time I run the script it will tell me what changes have been made, and what articles need updating.
 * Don't trust the current outputs. The issue that Melburnian points out below is endemic (tee hee) throughout those results, and there was also a problem with WesternAustralia-stub. They're fixed in the code now, but I won't be able to run it again for a little while.
 * Hesperian 11:24, 4 April 2008 (UTC)


 * Do you know of a sysop with a penchant for history merges and GFDL? cygnis insignis 04:04, 7 April 2008 (UTC)
 * I'll do it if you want; what do you want done? Hesperian 04:05, 7 April 2008 (UTC)
 * What service! The problem is with Posidonia and Posidonia oceanica. The background to this is at Kitko and Petey's talk pages, if you need to know what happened. I must stop having DYK ideas... Cheers cygnis insignis 04:15, 7 April 2008 (UTC)
 * That oughta do it. Hesperian 04:26, 7 April 2008 (UTC)
 * Ta. It seems a contribution of mine was erased from the history during the move, shown in the last diff at the genus. I will manually add the information after a tea break ;-) cygnis insignis 04:45, 7 April 2008 (UTC)
 * Reverted to your version there. Hesperian 04:57, 7 April 2008 (UTC)
 * A flower - is that what it is!? A poor substitute for a 'large blonde'. cygnis insignis 07:33, 7 April 2008 (UTC)

The Flora of Australia category subtree
Wow, that's some task you're undertaking. One thing (isn't there always) - there appears to be an issue with the method of generation of recommended changes in terms of entries for naturalised flora - e.g. Phoenix dactylifera being removed from Category: Palms and added to Category:Palms of Australia.--Melburnian (talk) 06:33, 4 April 2008 (UTC) Nice work with your script. Thanks also for repatriating Gastrolobium and saving Galium migrans from the clutches of the Asteraceae during your floracat travels. --Melburnian (talk) 11:56, 5 April 2008 (UTC)

No worries about the watchlist, it's good to see things being sorted out. Your subcategory suggestions for WA flora seem a logical way to go Melburnian (talk) 05:07, 7 April 2008 (UTC)

Secret pages MfD
You might want to look at User:Aliasd's comments, just above break 10 on the MfD. He is an established and productive user who has stated that he may leave the project if his secret pages are deleted. This seems to disprove your thesis that all users are either "productive" or "unproductive" and that only unproductive users will be affected by the deletion of "fun" pages. WaltonOne 09:58, 5 April 2008 (UTC)

Magnoli*
Thanks for the correction; I was using the order listed in the infobox as my guide. I think in future I will leave the botanical stubs to wiser heads...! Her Pegship  (tis herself) 17:13, 7 April 2008 (UTC)

Tortelduif Island
I've started plowing my way through Sailormen's Ghosts and saw mention of the 'Tortelduif Islands' which seemed to have been mistaken for the Abrolhos Islands at one stage. I then find you've written Turtle Dove Shoal, crikey! Anyway, the book is an pleasant read, if a bit long on the narrative/adventures of the author. Uren reminds me a bit of Ion Idriess who is of similar vintage. Cheers. &mdash;Moondyne click! 01:16, 8 April 2008 (UTC)
 * I enjoyed it immensely. For serious earnest Wikipedians like you and me, it is not possible to read that book without feeling obliged to write an article on the Tortelduif Islands. Admit it - you were going to write an article on it. You'd have suffered the same temptation when you got to the Circle of Stones, if you didn't already know that I tackled that one already.. Hesperian 01:48, 8 April 2008 (UTC)
 * Guilty your honour, but serious? You've got to be joking! &mdash;Moondyne click! 02:10, 8 April 2008 (UTC)

Magnoli
OK.--Grahame (talk) 03:20, 8 April 2008 (UTC)

Ding
You have new mail. seicer &#x007C;  talk  &#x007C;  contribs  05:15, 8 April 2008 (UTC)

Reverting RfA before transclusion
Sorry to revert, there was some drama a couple of weeks ago about folks voting before the RfA was transcluded. I am just waiting for SS to come back to accept. Cheers, Casliber (talk · contribs) 05:38, 8 April 2008 (UTC)
 * Shame to have to cater to rubbish like that. I should be able to vote when it suits me and get back to what I am doing with a minimum of fuss. But this isn't about me, so I'll toe the line for now. ;-) Hesperian 05:42, 8 April 2008 (UTC)


 * Requests for adminship/Sabine's Sunbird - ok transcluded nowCheers, Casliber (talk · contribs) 06:01, 8 April 2008 (UTC)

Tournefortia argentea
G'day mate,

I noticed that you moved Argusia argentea to Tournefortia argentea. FloraBase still lists it under Argusia, but GRIN lists it under Tournefortia, so I had a bit of a dig around to find out who was right, and it seems the answer is "Neither". Apparently in 2003 this species was transferred into Heliotropium as Heliotropium foertherianum. Can you think of any reason why this shouldn't be moved yet again?

Hesperian 03:33, 9 April 2008 (UTC)


 * Sounds good to me. I'm glad you noticed it! I was just performing a history merge after User:Dysmorodrepanis completed a page merge. Blasted taxonomy changes so often that even our respected and reliable databases can only do so much. --Rkitko (talk) 12:23, 9 April 2008 (UTC)

Please make sure
You tell me to get off - if any of my tagging is getting in the way of your scripting SatuSuro 01:21, 10 April 2008 (UTC)
 * Nah, not a problem mate. Hesperian 01:48, 10 April 2008 (UTC)

Vandalism
I think I said "apparent vandalism" so I guess you still have to wait for a full force accusation. Must admit I didn't check your obviously exemplary editing record before reversing - it just seemed like the sort of silly trick some vandals get up to. --Michael Johnson (talk) 06:05, 10 April 2008 (UTC)

A warm inner glow......
Cheers, Casliber (talk · contribs) 19:35, 13 April 2008 (UTC)
 * Sweet! I'm going to show this off at WP:AWNB. Hesperian 23:40, 13 April 2008 (UTC)
 * Wow! Congrats :) Orderinchaos 01:19, 14 April 2008 (UTC)
 * Yes, well done! --Melburnian (talk) 01:57, 14 April 2008 (UTC)

Custard-apple
Please undo your split. It's just quite illogical. Badagnani (talk) 05:16, 15 April 2008 (UTC)

Because it's been undiscussed. It's also, in my opinion, illogical because a single article covers this plant and fruit quite well, and splitting is quite unnecessary. Badagnani (talk) 05:43, 15 April 2008 (UTC)

Doesn't matter if some botanists think the fruit is so different from the plant that short articles should be split. It must be addressed to the community as a whole so this judgement can be considered. Please don't move on to Peach or Banana next. If an article grows so long that the food use must be split out, then that can be discussed and done if consensus is developed. Badagnani (talk) 05:48, 15 April 2008 (UTC)

Celery is both a species and a food. Discussion of its use as food goes under "Uses" or "Culinary use." That's the standard and it works well, preventing any confusion. Splitting should take place only after discussion and consensus, and then only after the article is so large that a split seems absolutely necessary. Sofrito needs its own article because it's chopped celery that is cooked. Badagnani (talk) 06:11, 15 April 2008 (UTC)

Contrary to your assertion, there was no consensus attempted nor attained at the articles in question. Badagnani (talk) 06:15, 15 April 2008 (UTC)

I'm familiar with consensuses that form at WikiProjects, which were not well thought in terms of the general user (as, for example, a splitting into two articles a plant (celery, as it grows) and a plant (celery, as eaten), especially when there was no necessity nor consensus for doing so, and when it most likely will confuse users who would be looking for information about how the plant grows, is harvested, is prepared and consumed, is used for medicinal purposes, etc.--in a single article. Badagnani (talk) 06:39, 15 April 2008 (UTC)

No consensus was sought nor attained at the articles in question, and, as stated, consensuses in a specialist project have proven in the past to have been poorly applicable and received to the community as a whole. In this case, splitting an article between a plant (as it grows) and a plant (as it's eaten) was particularly poorly thought out; however, we shall see how editors specializing in celery-related articles respond to the proposal for such a split, whatever the rationale or necessity for such a split might be. Badagnani (talk) 07:08, 15 April 2008 (UTC)

Not around
Hes not the only one (cygnis) just a brief nose up and dip in the friendly tag and then maybe not again for a few days maybe -congrats on the banksia stuff above -SatuSuro 01:03, 16 April 2008 (UTC)
 * Thanks mate. Hope you're enjoying yourself down there. Hesperian 01:05, 16 April 2008 (UTC)


 * ''The above text is preserved as an archive of discussions at User talk:Hesperian. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on User talk:Hesperian. No further edits should be made to this page.