User talk:Jackhynes/Archive 3

Sunda Loris
I just wanted you to know that I'm not ignoring the excellent work you're doing on Sunda Loris. I've been a little busy, and hopefully—starting tonight—I will be returning to the slow loris collaboration. First I need to finish the Slow loris conservation article, but after that, I will jump in and help (if you want) with the Sunda slow loris. Keep up the good work, and thanks! –  VisionHolder « talk » 22:23, 13 February 2011 (UTC)
 * It's just missing the taxonomy section and then it needs feedback on prose/coverage etc. during the GAC. It'll be great to have the slow loris articles all done though; the start of your slow loris conservation article in your sandbox is very impressive, look forward to reading the whole thing! I'll try and get the taxonomy section done within the next few days to free you up and help with your (considerable) workload. Maybe then WP:MAMM would be able to get going on vampire bats! Cheers, Jack (talk) 23:11, 13 February 2011 (UTC)
 * The others haven't started? O.o  –  VisionHolder  « talk » 23:25, 13 February 2011 (UTC)

Primates and CITES
Since the Primate article mostly your baby, I was wondering if you would have time to track down info and add a glaring omission to the conservation information. On 2 April 1977, it appears that all primates were listed under either CITES Appendix I or II. Not only does this need to be discussed in the article, but it could also be added to the infobox. –  VisionHolder « talk » 21:56, 17 February 2011 (UTC)
 * The report, Born to be wild: Primates are not pets by the IFAW, notes on page 14 that, "All primates are listed in Appendix II of CITES, with the exception of 50 species/subspecies which require total protection from trade and are thus listed in Appendix I." I'm not sure of the date of this publication. I got the 2 April 1977 date from pages such as this CITES database page.  This table could also be a source. –  VisionHolder  « talk » 22:35, 17 February 2011 (UTC)
 * I'll have a look into it. Cheers, Jack (talk) 13:05, 18 February 2011 (UTC)
 * Actually now that I think about it, there's no way to add it to the infobox because some species are covered under Appendix I and others under Appendix II. For some reason, I was thinking of something like the Slow loris article. –  VisionHolder  « talk » 13:25, 18 February 2011 (UTC)
 * Added the information, well done on the sources. I didn't include the date, but it could start "Since 1977..." if you think it's important. Cheers, Jack (talk) 20:51, 26 February 2011 (UTC)
 * Until we find a source that talks about that assignment, I think it's fine as is. I'm just surprised no books talk about it.  Or maybe smuggling negates the benefit...  –  VisionHolder  « talk » 21:44, 26 February 2011 (UTC)

Rating importance
The importance rating for WP:PRIMATES is a little difficult for me to judge on the new Conservation of slow lorises article. I set it as "Low", but if you disagree, please change it. –  VisionHolder « talk » 03:16, 26 February 2011 (UTC)
 * For such an excellent article I feel the importance should be higher, but from our importance rating standards it probably is technically a low importance topic. Also you're in the best position to judge the importance probably, having written the best part of the standards! Cheers, Jack (talk) 20:02, 26 February 2011 (UTC)

Fair use rationale for File:Letitbeastcolor.jpg
Thanks for uploading or contributing to File:Letitbeastcolor.jpg. I notice the image page specifies that the image is being used under fair use but there is no explanation or rationale as to why its use in Wikipedia articles constitutes fair use. In addition to the boilerplate fair use template, you must also write out on the image description page a specific explanation or rationale for why using this image in each article is consistent with fair use. Suggestions on how to do so can be found here.

Please go to the image description page and edit it to include a fair use rationale. Using one of the templates at Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to ensure that your image is in compliance with Wikipedia policy, but remember that you must complete the template. Do not simply insert a blank template on an image page.

If you have uploaded other fair use media, consider checking that you have specified the fair use rationale on those pages too. You can find a list of 'image' pages you have edited by clicking on the "my contributions" link (it is located at the very top of any Wikipedia page when you are logged in), and then selecting "Image" from the dropdown box. Note that any non-free media lacking such an explanation will be deleted one week after they have been uploaded, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you. Do you want to opt out of receiving this notice? Melesse (talk) 22:43, 13 March 2011 (UTC)

Thanks
Thanks for moving this to the correct section, heh. The link to the discussion for the proposed merge apparently didn't pinpoint a specific subsection. I got fooled by the similar icons for move, heh. Anyway, cheers. -- Obsidi ♠ n Soul  04:32, 10 April 2011 (UTC)
 * No worries, I was pretty sure that was where you had meant to write! Cheers, Jack (talk) 10:18, 10 April 2011 (UTC)

Main page appearance
Hello! This is a note to let the main editors of this article know that it will be appearing as the main page featured article on July 6, 2011. You can view the TFA blurb at Today's featured article/July 6, 2011. If you think it is necessary to change the main date, you can request it with the featured article directors or his delegate, or at Wikipedia talk:Today's featured article/requests. If the previous blurb needs tweaking, you might change it—following the instructions of the suggested formatting. If this article needs any attention or maintenance, it would be preferable if that could be done before its appearance on the Main Page so Wikipedia doesn't look bad. :D Thanks! Tb hotch .™ Grammatically incorrect? Correct it! See terms and conditions.  04:07, 3 July 2011 (UTC)

 

Primates are a mammalian order which includes modern humans. Most non-human primates live in tropical or subtropical regions of the Americas, Africa, and Asia. Primates range in size from the Madame Berthe's mouse lemur, which weighs only 30 g to the mountain gorilla weighing 200 kg. According to fossil evidence, the primitive ancestors of primates may have existed in the late Cretaceous period around 65 million years ago, and the oldest known primate is the Late Paleocene Plesiadapis, c. 55–58 million years ago. Primates are characterized by their large brains, and increased reliance on stereoscopic vision at the expense of smell. These features are most marked in monkeys and apes, and noticeably less so in lorises and lemurs. Three-color vision has developed in some primates. Most also have opposable thumbs and some have prehensile tails. (more...)

Long Eared Jerboas
the references I used are much more objective and do not come from an orginization I will use those.Matsuiny2004 (talk) 22:09, 3 January 2012 (UTC)

Never mind what I said before added as a quote insteadMatsuiny2004 (talk) 22:41, 3 January 2012 (UTC)

If you are concerned about overquoting in the article all thats needed is someone who can put them into their own wordsMatsuiny2004 (talk) 12:13, 4 January 2012 (UTC)

Yes I do need some help with grouping references. I am worried about screwing up the references I added and am not very good figuring out how to do itMatsuiny2004 (talk) 12:32, 4 January 2012 (UTC)\

can you point out which sentences I have repeated? I am just having a hard time finding themMatsuiny2004 (talk) 12:35, 4 January 2012 (UTC)

Alright I think I grouped all the referenceMatsuiny2004 (talk) 12:53, 4 January 2012 (UTC)

The books you mentioned to group are actually different sourcesMatsuiny2004 (talk) 12:58, 4 January 2012 (UTC)

Did I make all the fixes you wanted?Matsuiny2004 (talk) 13:06, 4 January 2012 (UTC)

I think I have addressed all of your concerns :) 13:20, 4 January 2012 (UTC)

Thank you :) Matsuiny2004 (talk) 13:25, 4 January 2012 (UTC)

Can you tell me where you got the code or what app you used to group references?Matsuiny2004 (talk) 13:39, 4 January 2012 (UTC)

Greetings from the Zoo
firstly > see sleep because  "It is well to be up before daybreak, for such habits contribute to health, wealth, and wisdom." Drift chambers (talk) 12:22, 5 January 2012 (UTC)
 * Thanks for the advice. However, "it's at night, when perhaps we should be dreaming, that the mind is most clear, that we are most able to hold all our life in the palm of our skull." Jack (talk) 12:40, 5 January 2012 (UTC)

This error is yours. Please explain reasoning of > 22:44, 4 January 2012‎  (rm irrelevent images) with
 * Musée de Préhistoire, Tautavel (Perpignan-region, France): Cave bear (Ursus deningeri) from Arago cave, archaeological context of finds as displayed in the Musée de Préhistoire
 * Arago-cave, near Tautavel (Perpignan-region), France: archaeological context of finds as displayed in the Musée de Préhistoire, Tautavel: fossil raindeers

To Err is Human Alexander Pope

Drift chambers (talk) 13:09, 5 January 2012 (UTC)
 * Generally if you have an article about a species you don't include pictures of its food items, especially when there are too many images on the page itself. Please stop adding white space to the article, it is against the Manual of Style/Layout, I will revert you one more time and after that I will have to bring this matter up elsewhere. Remember that it may look okay on your screen but on others it will look different (just resize your browser and you will see). Instead move the pictures into a more suitable position or create an Image gallery at the bottom of the page to accommodate all the images. Jack (talk) 13:20, 5 January 2012 (UTC)

List of fictional apes
The reason I've broken them down into sub-pages is for the same reason you cite we probably shouldn't have the sub-articles. You see, when everything points to the "main page" the main page quickly becomes overwhelmed with useless, trivial entries that are of no use to anyone... By splitting the article up, and keeping only the most notable examples in each section we eliminate all cruft from the main article and also move the more obscure listings to the more specifically-named sub-articles. Most people will be looking for the most well known and common fictional apes, fewer people will be looking for the obscure ones which is part of the reason they're in sub-articles... =/ does that make sense? Ncboy2010 (talk) 15:42, 1 February 2012 (UTC)


 * Now I could understand redirecting the smaller sub-articles until they're actually large enough to warrant an article. If you feel like doing that, please go ahead. I can see redirecting the Video Games article, the TV article, I say keep the animation article but clear out some of the lesser examples, the film section is only slightly smaller than the sub article, but I say keep it as well... the comics article is much larger than the section so I think it should stay as well, apes in literature might get redirected, although I'm actually thinking about merging List of fictional monkeys into this list, and renaming it List of fictional primates. so... redirecting any of them just yet might not be a good idea... I've not really looked at the number of monkeys on the other list...

I am trying my damndest to clean up these articles and consolidate information in an as-easy-as-possible-to-navigate manner. I know that the sub-articles seem fairly short at the moment and ultimately redundant but once I've moved the monkeys over here it might not be the case.... Do you see where I'm coming from? Ncboy2010 (talk) 15:49, 1 February 2012 (UTC)


 * That's fine, I like the idea. Having List of fictional primates instead of separating apes and monkeys, so lemurs can also be included, sounds like a good plan. Keep on with the clean up. Jack (talk) 17:25, 1 February 2012 (UTC)


 * Thanks, I've finished merging those two and now I'm working on the Big Cats (there are 4 separate articles I'm merging into one) Ncboy2010 (talk) 23:21, 1 February 2012 (UTC)

Orangutan
Hello, I plan on bring this article to GA status. Would you have the time to help? I found some dead links and cites with no info beside the title. The second paragraph of the communication section is also largely uncited. These will be a problem. LittleJerry (talk) 19:00, 19 February 2012 (UTC)
 * Hi LittleJerry, yeah I'll give you a hand. I would keep a note of the stuff you've been taking out, some of it we may find references for later. Are you going to start with any specific sections? Cheers, Jack (talk) 14:09, 20 February 2012 (UTC)
 * Could you please add in some information on the evolutionary history of orangutans like you did for gorillas and chimps? The article currently judt touches on the two species. LittleJerry (talk) 23:55, 21 February 2012 (UTC)

Rhesus
"Rhesus" is a proper name, so the monkey is "Rhesus monkey" or "Rhesus macaque". - UtherSRG (talk) 12:26, 9 March 2012 (UTC)
 * I may be wrong, again... - UtherSRG (talk) 12:34, 9 March 2012 (UTC)
 * Yeah I wasn't entirely sure and only did a cursory Google Scholar search but it seemed like most authors used lowercase. Unlike the Rhesus factor, which seems to use the capitalisation. Cheers, Jack (talk) 12:52, 9 March 2012 (UTC)
 * I think most places that use "Rhesus" for the monkey (when they user lower case for others) think as I did that it's named after the river or the Greek (see Rhesus), however the first line of Rhesus macaque indicates otherwise, and that was the kicker for me. - UtherSRG (talk) 12:59, 9 March 2012 (UTC)

Orangutan images
The problem with the way you've moved these images (alternately left and right) is that now they sandwich text. Manual_of_Style/Images says that this should be avoided. So if you really want the images alternated in this way, you need to add breaks at the end of sections (e.g. via ) although this introduces blank spaces. Image layout is not a simple matter! Peter coxhead (talk) 14:45, 27 March 2012 (UTC)
 * Yeah you're right! I can never seem to get images to sit well in articles unless there are large walls of paragraphed text. I didn't realise you weren't meant to follow subsections with images, if that's the case we could only use one or two left aligned images, which in my opinion doesn't look great. I'll rearrange them now and see what you think. Cheers, Jack (talk) 14:57, 27 March 2012 (UTC)


 * Sorry if it wasn't clear; images and subsections are fine; when I said "breaks at the end of sections" I mean "sections or subsections or subsubsections ...". It's just that you're not supposed to have text between two images, one to the left and one to the right. It looks ok on a normal sized computer screen but if you try looking at it on a 7" pad or some other device with a small screen, sandwiching really doesn't work. Peter coxhead (talk) 18:30, 27 March 2012 (UTC)


 * Yeah I understood you, but found even more rules on the page you linked to! Hopefully I've sorted out the sandwiching issues, but it's difficult to know all aspect ratios. Does it look alright on your screen? How would it look on an iPad? Cheers, Jack (talk) 18:39, 27 March 2012 (UTC)


 * Seems fine to me now, and if the images don't sandwich text when you reduce the browser window size to say 500 pixels (about a third of my usual screen), then it should be ok on all systems. (Mobile phones normally pick up the mobile version of the site, which centralizes all images: look at this version.) By the way, I haven't myself studied all the rules at the page I linked to, so you probably know more about this now than I do! I end up putting centralized collections of images on pages, as I did at Cactus, because (a) I wanted to show the full range of growth habits (b) there's no way individual images could be fitted in. However, some editors object to these collections of images, and they seem to be omitted by the mobile version. It's all very tricky! Peter coxhead (talk) 10:53, 28 March 2012 (UTC)

Ape References
You complained about a lack of refences in my contribution to Great ape language. But the article is essentially a summary article, and the references are in the obvious detailed articles. So I put them in to make you happy, but this is very tedious and not really helpful.

Good references are indeed invaluable when controvertial statements are being made. But please do not become obsessed about them. You might note that most of the rest of this article is unreferenced, but that does not make it invalid.

So before criticizing again, ask yourself is the statement controversial? Is it easily verified in some way, e.g. by looking at an obviously related wikipedia article? If so, just accept that others may not work to your high standards.

Actually, I don't do much editing these days because I cannot be bothered dealing with the revert artists that are now so common. You did the right thing in posting to my talk page, many others just revert! Tuntable (talk) 23:51, 3 April 2012 (UTC)

Your free 1-year HighBeam Research account is ready
Good news! You are approved for access to 80 million articles in 6500 publications through HighBeam Research. Thanks for helping make Wikipedia better. Enjoy your research! Cheers, Ocaasit &#124; c 04:43, 3 May 2012 (UTC)
 * Account activation codes have been emailed.
 * To activate your account: 1) Go to http://www.highbeam.com/prof1
 * The 1-year, free period begins once you enter the code.
 * If you need assistance, email "help at highbeam dot com", and include "HighBeam/Wikipedia" in the subject line. Or go to WP:HighBeam/Support, or ask User:Ocaasi.  Please, per HighBeam's request, do not call the toll-free number for assistance with registration.
 * A quick reminder about using the account: 1) try it out; 2) provide original citation information, in addition to linking to a HighBeam article; 3) avoid bare links to non-free HighBeam pages; 4) note "(subscription required)" in the citation, where appropriate. Examples are at WP:HighBeam/Citations.
 * HighBeam would love to hear feedback at WP:HighBeam/Experiences
 * Show off your HighBeam access by placing on your userpage
 * When the 1-year period is up, check the applications page to see if renewal is possible. We hope it will be.

Chacma baboon
Hi Jackhynes, thank you so much for your excellent work on the early sections of Chacma baboon. I've done a bit of tidying but as GA reviewer I shouldn't intervene substantially myself. Good news is, there are just a couple of claims (now tagged) in 'Conservation' that need attention, and then I think the article will be ready. If you could take a look at them? Chiswick Chap (talk) 15:26, 9 December 2012 (UTC)


 * Thanks for the review of the page. Personally, I think that the article isn't ready to pass as a GA, the nominator needs to put more time into improving the page. I have just been fixing some of the most obvious omissions and mistakes. Cheers, Jack (talk) 16:11, 9 December 2012 (UTC)


 * Oh bother, I just passed it, feeling it was ok on each of the criteria. Having seen how much better it looks with your changes I can see there is room for improvement, but then GA is not meant to be as comprehensive as 'Featured', and I think it passes muster defensibly now. As for the nominator, I suspect he's completed his student assignment and departed for pastures new, so I doubt waiting for him will be very productive. Is there anything that urgently needs doing? Chiswick Chap (talk) 16:28, 9 December 2012 (UTC)


 * I'll add a few parts that are desperately needed, but don't really have the time to address the article properly. This is a species with a lot of research behind it so there is a lot to cover, I think that's what makes the article feel sparse to me. There is a lot of opportunity to improve! I'll get on to it now, cheers for reviewing anyway. Jack (talk) 16:31, 9 December 2012 (UTC)


 * Sorry to add to the burden. I'll keep an eye on the article. all the best Chiswick Chap (talk) 16:46, 9 December 2012 (UTC)

Request: Update the West Buckland School logo
Jack, is there any chance you could update the File:Westbucklandschoollogo.jpg with a higher resolution image from the current website? When performing a Google search for the school, the low res wiki image is displayed at a much larger size and thus looks very poor quality.

This request has come from the Bursar

callmepops 12:17, 31 January 2013 (UTC) — Preceding unsigned comment added by Callmepops (talk • contribs)
 * Unfortunately the logo is under UK copyright laws and so the only way Wikipedia can use the image is by showing a low quality reproduction and use it under fair use. See this page for more information. Cheers, Jack (talk) 22:07, 31 January 2013 (UTC)

Stanford Archives
Hey, thanks for the help with the Stanford Archives. It's been so long since I've seen anyone else edit them that I almost forgot there were other wikipedians out there. Oh, and check this out: there was one answer that said "Indigo Girls on Film", maybe you remember it? It took me a while to figure it out, but it's actually a mashup of "Indigo Girls" and "Girls on Film". Tricky, right? I thought I'd share that one with you in case you ever decided to come visit me again. Peace!

Oh, and before I forget...


 * Thanks! I always end up doing them when I've got something important to do! I tell myself, just a few more, and an hour later I have no idea why I'm still there :) I'll be doing them for quite a while longer. Cheers, Jack (talk) 17:54, 12 February 2013 (UTC)

Merge discussion for List of books about philosophy
An article that you have been involved in editing, List of books about philosophy, has been proposed for a merge with another article. If you are interested in the merge discussion, please participate by going, and adding your comments on the discussion page. Thank you. Anthrophilos (talk) 18:04, 18 February 2013 (UTC) Anthrophilos (talk) 18:04, 18 February 2013 (UTC)

Bonobo edit
Hello Sir, I made an edit to the Bonobo article. Your opinion please; is it in the wrong place? Could it be edited for clarity? (Worth reading the excellent Nat Geo article whilst you're there too) Thanks PhilMacD (talk) 21:36, 28 February 2013 (UTC)
 * Thanks for that. It is certainly interesting but I worry that is does read a bit like trivia, maybe it would be better if moved to the Evolutionary history section where it talks about Schwartz's paper? Cheers, Jack (talk) 10:21, 12 March 2013 (UTC)

DYK for North Devon's Biosphere Reserve
Graeme Bartlett (talk) 16:03, 6 March 2013 (UTC)

Talkback
04:06, 10 March 2013 (UTC)
 * Hey Jack I reviewed the sourcing. Also it was determined that we should not have kept going on the failed GA1 page so I have moved it to the GA2 page, no big deal.    04:13, 10 March 2013 (UTC)
 * Hey Jack just posted last round of notes. You're probably less than 30 minutes worth of work away from GA.   00:21, 12 March 2013 (UTC)
 * Thanks! I'll get on to it now. Cheers, Jack (talk) 10:06, 12 March 2013 (UTC)

Cotton-top tamarin passed for GA
Cotton-top tamarin is passed for GA, great work. Please let me know if you take it to WP:FAC, I'd like to help support it. 17:30, 12 March 2013 (UTC)
 * Thanks so much for all your help! I think for the moment I want to improve a wider range of articles but I'll let you know if I put it up. Cheers, Jack (talk) 08:19, 14 March 2013 (UTC)

Article Feedback deployment
Hey Jackhynes; I'm dropping you this note because you've used the article feedback tool in the last month or so. On Thursday and Friday the tool will be down for a major deployment; it should be up by Saturday, failing anything going wrong, and by Monday if something does :). Thanks, Okeyes (WMF) (talk) 22:57, 13 March 2013 (UTC)

Capuchin monkey
The format at the top of Capuchin monkey looks funny because of the two images below the taxobox, I think. The primate project looks quiet so I thought I would let you adjust to to standard. I just came across it because Justin Beiber has one in quarintine in Germany. He flew it in, tabloids say smuggled, without health papers. One vet says it is too young to be away from its mother and should be with a family group. It may be worth an add to the article but up to you or the project I would assume.--Canoe1967 (talk) 18:17, 23 April 2013 (UTC)
 * Thanks for the notification, you're right the images should really be staggered down the article, I'll get on to it now! As for the trivia it's certainly not-notable enough to be added to the article. Cheers, Jack (talk) 18:40, 23 April 2013 (UTC)

AFT5 re-enabled
Hey Jackhynes :). Just a note that the Article Feedback Tool, Version 5 has now been re-enabled. Let us know on the talkpage if you spot any bugs. Thanks! Okeyes (WMF) (talk) 00:52, 24 April 2013 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for April 25
Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Beekeeping, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Mari (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver). 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) 00:34, 25 April 2013 (UTC)

Cotton-top tamarin - OK to nominate it for FA?
Hi Jack, I was wondering if it would be OK with you if I nominated Cotton-top tamarin for FA. You wouldn't necessarily have to do anything or be involved in the process (although it would be great if you were!). It's GA now and even if it does not pass FA it'd still be GA. I think it might be FA quality or could be without too much work. It needs a bit of cleanup with the refs or other little things that I'd get done before nominating. I'd like to do this not just because I think the article deserves it but also because I'd like a little experience with the FA process. Would it be OK with you if I did so? Thanks... 15:29, 16 May 2013 (UTC)
 * Hi Zad68, yeah that would be awesome if you got it passed as a FA! I'm currently working in Brazil at the moment and just logged in to update my userpage that I won't be active for about three months, so unfortunately I won't be able to help out. Hope it goes well! Cheers, Jack (talk) 19:39, 19 May 2013 (UTC)
 * Awesome, thank you! Have fun in Brazil, bring back lots of images for Wikipedia!    13:26, 21 May 2013 (UTC)

Re:Pygmy marmoset GAN
Great, that's no problem- I'll be happy to offer another review when you renominate, if you like. J Milburn (talk) 19:34, 1 June 2013 (UTC)

Ref style
I hope I didn't step on any toes with this edit (the choice of reference style is serious business here on WP ;) I assumed is was a typo rather than a deliberate editorial decision. jonkerz ♠talk 06:34, 17 June 2013 (UTC)

Half million award
The Million Award is a new initiative to recognize the editors of Wikipedia's most-read content; you can read more about the award and its possible tiers (Quarter Million Award, Half Million Award, and Million Award) at Million Award. You're also welcome to display this userbox:

If I've made any error in this listing, please don't hesitate to correct it; if for any reason you don't feel you deserve it, please don't hesitate to remove it; if you know of any other editor who merits one of these awards, please don't hesitate to give it; if you yourself deserve another award from any of the three tiers, please don't hesitate to take it! Cheers, -- Khazar2 (talk) 16:45, 30 August 2013 (UTC)

North Devon's Biosphere Reserve GA review
Hello. It's been more than a month since I last posted at North Devon's Biosphere Reserve GA review. There were no responses to my concerns from you since then. I wanted to let you know that I'll be failing the nomination, should the review does not receive any responses within a week. Please let me know if you need more time for this. Thanks.--Jetstreamer $Talk$ 00:14, 2 September 2013 (UTC)

Category:UK BAP habitats
Category:UK BAP habitats, which you created, has been nominated for possible deletion, merging, or renaming. If you would like to participate in the discussion, you are invited to add your comments at the category's entry on the Categories for discussion page. Thank you. DexDor (talk) 05:11, 10 September 2013 (UTC)

Books and Bytes: The Wikipedia Library Newsletter
Books and Bytes Volume 1, Issue 1, October 2013 by , Greetings Wikipedia Library members! Welcome to the inaugural edition of Books and Bytes, TWL’s monthly newsletter. We're sending you the first edition of this opt-in newsletter, because you signed up, or applied for a free research account: HighBeam, Credo, Questia, JSTOR, or Cochrane. To receive future updates of Books and Bytes, please add your name to the subscriber's list. There's lots of news this month for the Wikipedia Library, including new accounts, upcoming events, and new ways to get involved... New positions: Sign up to be a Wikipedia Visiting Scholar, or a Volunteer Wikipedia Librarian Wikipedia Loves Libraries: Off to a roaring start this fall in the United States: 29 events are planned or have been hosted. New subscription donations: Cochrane round 2; HighBeam round 8; Questia round 4... Can we partner with NY Times and Lexis-Nexis?? New ideas: OCLC innovations in the works; VisualEditor Reference Dialog Workshop; a photo contest idea emerges News from the library world: Wikipedian joins the National Archives full time; the Getty Museum releases 4,500 images; CERN goes CC-BY Announcing WikiProject Open: WikiProject Open kicked off in October, with several brainstorming and co-working sessions New ways to get involved: Visiting scholar requirements; subject guides; room for library expansion and exploration Read the full newsletter ''Thanks for reading! All future newsletters will be opt-in only. Have an item for the next issue? Leave a note for the editor on the Suggestions page. --The Interior 21:49, 27 October 2013 (UTC)''

The Wikipedia Library Survey
As a subscriber to one of The Wikipedia Library's programs, we'd like to hear your thoughts about future donations and project activities in this brief survey. Thanks and cheers, Ocaasit &#124; c 15:52, 9 December 2013 (UTC)

Fork-marked lemur nominated for DYK!
—Cerabot (talk) 12:10, 30 December 2014 (UTC)

The Wikipedia Library needs you!
We hope The Wikipedia Library has been a useful resource for your work. TWL is expanding rapidly and we need your help!

With only a couple hours per week, you can make a big difference for sharing knowledge. Please sign up and help us in one of these ways: Sign up now Send on behalf of The Wikipedia Library using MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 04:31, 7 July 2015 (UTC)
 * Account coordinators: help distribute free research access
 * Partner coordinators: seek new donations from partners
 * Communications coordinators: share updates in blogs, social media, newsletters and notices
 * Technical coordinators: advise on building tools to support the library's work
 * Outreach coordinators: connect to university libraries, archives, and other GLAMs
 * Research coordinators: run reference services

Category:British butterflies
Category:British butterflies, which you created, has been nominated for possible deletion, merging, or renaming. If you would like to participate in the discussion, you are invited to add your comments at the category's entry on the Categories for discussion page. Thank you. DexDor(talk) 21:19, 2 August 2015 (UTC)

ArbCom elections are now open!
MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 12:55, 23 November 2015 (UTC)

Proposed deletion of Devon hedge bank


The article Devon hedge bank has been proposed for deletion&#32; because of the following concern:
 * Page is simply a duplicate of the information already included on the parent page: Hedge.

While all constructive contributions to Wikipedia are appreciated, content or articles may be deleted for any of several reasons.

You may prevent the proposed deletion by removing the notice, but please explain why in your edit summary or on |the article's talk page.

Please consider improving the article to address the issues raised. Removing will stop the proposed deletion process, but other deletion processes exist. In particular, the speedy deletion process can result in deletion without discussion, and articles for deletion allows discussion to reach consensus for deletion.  Onel 5969  TT me 13:24, 8 December 2015 (UTC)

Nomination of Devon hedge for deletion
A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Devon hedge is suitable for inclusion in Wikipedia according to Wikipedia's policies and guidelines or whether it should be deleted.

The article will be discussed at Articles for deletion/Devon hedge until a consensus is reached, and anyone is welcome to contribute to the discussion. The nomination will explain the policies and guidelines which are of concern. The discussion focuses on high-quality evidence and our policies and guidelines.

Users may edit the article during the discussion, including to improve the article to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the article-for-deletion notice from the top of the article.  Onel 5969  TT me 01:20, 13 December 2015 (UTC)