User talk:Invertzoo/Archive 24

ARCHIVE PAGE 24: December 2009

Pteraeolidia ianthina
Hello, tip for new article: when ready, feel free to write Pteraeolidia ianthina. Twenty images are available at Commons:Category:Pteraeolidia ianthina and I can crop some of them for details if needed. I do not know this species much. --Snek01 (talk) 11:43, 2 December 2009 (UTC)

Verification
Lottia gigantea
 * http://www.flickr.com/photos/jkirkhart35/1559245475/
 * http://www.flickr.com/photos/jkirkhart35/1795875046/
 * http://www.flickr.com/photos/jkirkhart35/1560119732/
 * http://www.flickr.com/photos/jkirkhart35/1795047549/

Lottia insessa
 * http://www.flickr.com/photos/jkirkhart35/2132222305/

Lottia palacea
 * http://www.flickr.com/photos/jkirkhart35/3196368734/
 * http://www.flickr.com/photos/jkirkhart35/3195524567/

Determined correctly? --Snek01 (talk) 20:51, 3 December 2009 (UTC)

New image of mine
Hi Susan, I have added my new image File:Tide pools in Santa Cruz from Spray-splash zone to low tide zone.jpg to  Intertidal zone and Tide pool. IMO the image is encyclopedic and adds value to the articles. I am not sure about format. May I please ask you to take a look and tell me what you think. Thank you for your time.--Mbz1 (talk) 18:06, 5 December 2009 (UTC)

Reproductive system terminology
Hello, could you check terminology of the image of reproductive system of Paryphanta busbyi, please? I think, it could be like this:


 * Instead of "UT = uterus" I will use "SO = spermoviduct". I think that the term uterus is not used in current terminology.


 * Is there any term to use instead of "PR = prostate"? The term "MG = mucus glands" does not point out that it is a male gland. But in the image at Biomphalaria tenagophila there is also used term prostate, so if it is important to note that the gland is a part of male, then it is probably OK. (Female system has a term nidamental gland.)

--Snek01 (talk) 00:41, 8 December 2009 (UTC)


 * This is something I do not know much about at all unfortunately. If I have time I will try to research the correct, more up to date terminology. Invertzoo (talk) 21:44, 8 December 2009 (UTC)
 * So, it does not matter, do not worry about it. I will find it and check it out. I have not verified all available sources yet. --Snek01 (talk) 01:48, 9 December 2009 (UTC)

Welcome Template
Dear Invertzoo. Thank you very much for posting a warm welcome and template on my talk page. It is most appreciated! I look forward to building up the nudi pages! Antarctic-adventurer (talk) 01:59, 9 December 2009 (UTC)

service badge
Thanks so much Invertzoo! I am spending a couple of months in the Dark Ages (dailup of 16.8kpbs on a good day) so am only managing to check my watchlists at the moment, but will get back to editing as soon as I have a decent internet connection. best wishes Seascapeza (talk) 04:30, 9 December 2009 (UTC)

Info
In the reference in biogeography of gastropods there is a list of Atlantic opistobranchs. Enjoy. --Snek01 (talk) 23:31, 9 December 2009 (UTC)

adjunct/regular member of Project Gastropods
Greetings again Invertzoo! and thanks for the listing -- today's dialup access is at 19.2 kbps so I am feeling positively civilised. With respect to the adjunct/regular member of the project, you decide. I am committed to uploading all the Cape Peninsula molluscs I have on file and once done with them, will move on to the rest of Southern Africa and other places I have dived and have decent pictures of -- as I go though, you may have noticed that I am also having a looking further 'up taxon' and trying to sort out any discrepancies I find ... so if that constitutes a regular member, by all means change my status. I should perhaps add though that I will be moving on to the other phyla once I have my section of the gastropods more or less uploaded and will then only return to gastropods when there is a need/new species /more to add.

best wishes 196.208.166.77 (talk) 05:23, 10 December 2009 (UTC) Okay that was WEIRD -- I had signed in but my dialup access, well I don't know what happened. Anyway, The above message was sent to you by Seascapeza! —Preceding unsigned comment added by 196.208.166.77 (talk) 05:26, 10 December 2009 (UTC)


 * Hi Seascapeza, That happened because you are currently logged out of Wikipedia. Next time you access Wikipedia you will need to log back in again, using the tab on the upper left of your page. That happens to all of us every few months on a regular basis. Best, Invertzoo (talk) 15:02, 10 December 2009 (UTC)

Hydrobiidae
I've been working on this family and have expanded the article a lot. As usual, I'm asking to take a look at my work and see if you can improve my style somewhat. At the same time, I think that the assessment on the talk page can now be upgraded. Thanks. JoJan (talk) 19:31, 10 December 2009 (UTC)

RE: new articles
Thanks for the praise, Invertzoo. It means a lot coming from someone with your level of activity in this project. I probably wont be able to be as active as you and Snek01, who seem to be here all the time, but I will gradually add nudi species as I can. I'll start by working on nudis for which there are images in the commons library but no page for. Snek01 has helped me a lot with questions regarding taxa and how the articles are best arranged here so I shouldn't be too lost I hope. I will ask you if I need to know something technical and let me know if I make any mistakes/inaccuracies in what I do. Thanks again. Antarctic-adventurer (talk)  17:11, 11 December 2009 (UTC)

Haile sites
I wasn't sure about italics on an article just listing genus and species. I was told not to once but I've seen it done before so yes I'll do that. Thank you. Noles1984 (talk) 12:34, 12 December 2009 (UTC)

Link
Authorities are from 1758 to ~1994 are in http://uio.mbl.edu/NomenclatorZoologicus/ --Snek01 (talk) 12:13, 13 December 2009 (UTC)


 * Ah great, that's terrific, now I don't have to keep bothering JoJan to go get them for me. Invertzoo (talk) 15:51, 13 December 2009 (UTC)

Onchidoris bilamellata
Hi, Susan. I've expanded this article somewhat into something more decent. As usual, can you look at it and change the assessment ? Thanks. JoJan (talk) 17:22, 13 December 2009 (UTC)

New note
Could you look at the hook(s) at the portal, please? --Snek01 (talk) 00:01, 14 December 2009 (UTC)


 * I did clean the new hooks up a bit Invertzoo (talk) 02:52, 14 December 2009 (UTC)

Is correct "Wrinkled Whelk" or "Wrinkle Whelk" for a one of subspecies of Neptunea lyrata? --Snek01 (talk) 00:01, 14 December 2009 (UTC)


 * Yes, wrinkled whelk is correct. Invertzoo (talk) 02:52, 14 December 2009 (UTC)

Semicassis granulata
You are welcome to take over the review if you wish, I just picked this at random from the biology pages. If you are happy for me to continue, you can obviously address some issues yourself, if you wish, rather than waiting for the nom. Thanks for help in any case  Jimfbleak -  talk to me?  16:57, 14 December 2009 (UTC)

I had logged in
Greetings! What was very strange was that I had just lo0gged in and for some reason the login failed. Odd. Anyway, no harm done, hope all well with you, best wishes Seascapeza (talk) 04:22, 15 December 2009 (UTC)

Seasons Greetings
Hi Invertzoo. Thanks for the seasons greetings! The same to you. From the choice on your card, Saturnalia sounds the most fun so I'll choose that one. Hope you have a pleasant winter in NY. Best Antarctic-adventurer  (talk)  14:18, 16 December 2009 (UTC)

Scotch bonnet (shell)
Thank you for your willingness to provide attention to the Scotch Bonnet article. First, I recognize that no one holds ownership over any content within Wikipedia; therefore this is only a humble request. It is my hopes that the students will perform the lions share of work especially in the area of content research. They would likely need guidance on formatting issues and organization. It is a fine line between help and enabling; especially with this crew - who wait for the dead lines and respond to help request with phrases like "all of it". Perhaps pointing out the errors and forcing them to seek solutions where-ever possible - the fewer direct edits the better. Hopefully, the GA review process will be both brutal and thorough - holding them accountable for their short comings. I don't believe the current GA nomination represents their true potential - in fact - I sense they are throwing a hail Mary pass and hoping for divine intervention. Again, thanks for exercising patience; eventually they should catch on that this project requires an expenditure of time and effort! Feel free to prod them in that direction. Cheers! --JimmyButler (talk) 18:45, 16 December 2009 (UTC)

Glossodoris amoena
Hi Invertzoo. I am gradually working my way through all the nudibranch articles, (carefully) adding genera where there aren't any yet, so that at the very least we will eventually have a list of all described species even if they don't all have their own page. As I am sure you are very well aware, there have been many revisions, placing different genera into different families, and different species into different genera. I am checking the most recent sources I can and consulting a multitude of places. Synonyms for many species abound. On that note, while reviewing all the Glossodoris articles I came across this page: Glossodoris amoena. This nudibranch is actually Ceratosoma amoenum for which we already have a page. (Which seems to have a copyvio on it but that is another matter. I will clear that up in due course). Normally I would re-direct the Glossodoris amoena page to Ceratosoma amoenum but I can't find a record anywhere of it ever having been named this. It would seem it is not a synonym and whoever created the original page did so in error. Deletion of the page would seem in order. Is that appropriate in this case? How does one go about doing that? Thanks and Happy Holidays. Antarctic-adventurer (talk)  20:27, 17 December 2009 (UTC)


 * Thanks so much Arctic-adventurer for all this very good work you are doing. I am not really any kind of nudibranch expert, I am better on the shelled species, but I think that this duplicate name was probably taken from the A.W.B. Powell book which is listed as a reference. I say that because the person who started the article unfortunately was not very expert and usually he just copied species after species from that book verbatim, which is why all his articles were tagged with copyvio back in March of this year and had to have a lot of their content removed. Of course that person might also have made an error in copying the name I suppose. To get an article erased we have to ask an admin, and I usually ask User:JoJan, who is the person who started WikiProject Gastropods back in 2004. Although before you ask JoJan to  delete that article you might transfer any valid info into the other article first, such as the size in mm and anything else which might be useful. When you ask JoJan to delete it, explain that it is a duplicate. You will find more than one message on JoJan's talk page from me asking him to delete similar extra articles. Best wishes, Invertzoo (talk) 21:25, 17 December 2009 (UTC)

Grammar
Are these two sentences from article Fiona pinnata contradicting?

"Body is not tapering behind. VERSUS The foot is long and lanceolate, rounded in front and produced into a fine point behind."

I am not sure with these. I am still working on the article, so do not tweak it yet. --Snek01 (talk) 00:58, 18 December 2009 (UTC)


 * OK, no problem I will not look at it until you tell me you are ready. Yes those two sentences are contradicting. The second sentence means that the shape of the foot is rather like these two lance points, but even more thin at the pointed end: Best, Invertzoo (talk) 02:01, 18 December 2009 (UTC)


 * Thanks. Then I have deleted the first sentence cited from Suter (1913) that he used according to incorrect(!?) drawing by Hutton (1882). --Snek01 (talk) 11:32, 18 December 2009 (UTC)

Hello, I would like to give you a task for Fionna pinnata: Read the MacFarland's 1966 work and check the "Circulatory and respiratory system" and the part of "Digestive system" starting with "The hepatic apparatus is...". There are some errors and many inaccuracies in the article, but I would like to let you solve this task. Thank you. (I will provide ~two more images to these systems.)

I also do not understand this detail: what MacFarland is talking about otocyst, optic ganglion and even EYE!

I will check this and other systems in the future and I will correct terminology based on MacFarland's work. (However term "jaws" is better than "mandible".) --Snek01 (talk) 01:38, 20 December 2009 (UTC)

RE: Sponges and ascidians
Good find! On second thoughts, the nudibranchs that eat porifera probably don't eat ascidians as well. (Certainly I can find no secondary sources with this information). So I should probably remove the ascidian comment from the pages where we have direct sources of them eating sponges. Antarctic-adventurer (talk)  09:30, 18 December 2009 (UTC)

Long time no gastropod
Hello! Long time no slime. How are you? User:Antarctic-adventurer just made me think of something. I noticed that you moved to the left, the "See text" that appears in the bottom of the taxoboxes. I centered them on new stubs because at the time there weren't solid conventions that I knew of. I plan to fix them. Is this an easy bot task?

I plan to make some of the new stubs that need doing that I see on the project page. There is a really lovely purple cowry that caught my eye. Even though cowries are inherently evil, I feel compelled. Regards, --Anna Frodesiak (talk) 23:06, 19 December 2009 (UTC)

Happy Holidays!


Mbz1 (talk) is wishing you Seasons Greetings! Whether you celebrate your hemisphere's Solstice or Xmas, Eid, Diwali, Hogmanay, Hannukah, Lenaia, Festivus or even the Saturnalia, this is a special time of year for almost everyone!

Spread the holiday cheer by adding to your friends' talk pages.

I could not say any better than you did. All the best to you, Susan, from Mbz1 (talk) 22:35, 15 December 2009 (UTC)

seasons greetings!
Thanks so much for your wonderful festive season message Invertzoo! Wishing you the same on your side of the world!

(Whichever festival you're celebrating... the picture is of the underside of a starfish, which I took while snorkelling in Madagascar and adapted, perhaps not multiculturally enough, for the season)

Seascapeza (talk) 08:03, 20 December 2009 (UTC)

Gastropod Hyperaulax ridleyi
Hey there! I've always been intrigued by gastropods, particularly tree snails (long story), but after trying to research this one I've found the taxonomy to be a nightmare! I'll try to help out where I can.--Mike - Μολὼν λαβέ 15:51, 20 December 2009 (UTC)
 * Thanks, this one was actually created as an offshoot of a reptile article (while reptile's are my specialty, the one in question was not!). There's not much source material that I could find on it, but I saw a picture of the shell and it did remind me of Liguus fasciatus. Would you know for sure if that species is a tree snail or be able to point me to a resource?  It would make the feeding habits of Amphisbaena ridleyi even more intriguing!--Mike - Μολὼν λαβέ 16:20, 20 December 2009 (UTC)

GA Review
I have fixed your requested revisions, I hope my request about moving the failure date to January 8th is not to forward, and again I want to apologize for my inactivity on the article.Reddevil1421 (talk) 22:51, 28 December 2009 (UTC)

Mandelia species
Hi Invertzoo. Have been off for a few days for Christmas so gave myself a break from Wikipedia. In answer to your question, I had wondered the same thing myself. I searched for as much literature on the species as I could find, and it seems that, "the specific name is derived from the Latin mirus (odd) and cornus (horn) in reference to the peculiar shape of the rhinophores of this species." You can find a reference here. The original paper on this species was "Valdés, A. & Gosliner, T.M. 1999. Phylogeny of the radula-less dorids (Mollusca, Nudibranchia), with the description of a new genus and a new family. Zoologica Scripta 28: 315-360." ; but I don't have access to it so I cannot verify for 100%. Interestingly there is no reference at all to this species at the seaslug forum, although nudipixel carries a page for it at, so it would seem correct although I cannot be totally sure without seeing the original paper. Antarctic-adventurer (talk)  06:02, 30 December 2009 (UTC)


 * No indeed thanks to you for checking it out. Although a scientist, I am not a biologist so no doubt will make many mistakes. Having someone around such as yourself who is expert is such areas is very reassuring. Have a great New Year and see you in 2010! Antarctic-adventurer  (talk)  16:47, 30 December 2009 (UTC)