User talk:Kennethcgass

Welcome!

Hello,, and welcome to Wikipedia! Thank you for your contributions. I hope you like the place and decide to stay. Here are a few good links for newcomers: I hope you enjoy editing here and being a Wikipedian! Please sign your name on talk pages using four tildes (~&#126;); this will automatically produce your name and the date. If you need help, check out Where to ask a question, ask me on my talk page, or place  on your talk page and someone will show up shortly to answer your questions. Again, welcome! --Mgiganteus1 17:59, 24 March 2007 (UTC)
 * The five pillars of Wikipedia
 * How to edit a page
 * Help pages
 * Tutorial
 * How to write a great article
 * Manual of Style

Image:Ichnofossils_from_Cambrian_of_Wisconsin.pdf listed for deletion
An image or media file that you uploaded or altered, Image:Ichnofossils_from_Cambrian_of_Wisconsin.pdf, has been listed at Images and media for deletion. Please see the to see why this is (you may have to search for the title of the image to find its entry), if you are interested in it not being deleted. Thank you. User:Gay Cdn (talk) (Contr) 18:18, 30 June 2007 (UTC)

Aglaspidididly
Does Aglaspidida refer to Aglaspididae, or should we redirect Aglaspida to Aglaspidida?--Mr Fink (talk) 02:12, 22 January 2008 (UTC) Current usage of the order and family in the peer-reviewed journals spells them Aglaspidida and Aglaspididae, respectively. This has been the case since 1979 or earlier and carries on to this day. Those are the correct spellings.

Welcome to Wikipedia!
Hi, just thought I'd drop by and thank you for your contributions to trace fossil related pages! It's unfortunately been somewhat rare for any editors to pay these articles much attention, and our coverage of most things geological leaves a lot to be desired, so your contributions are very gratefully received! All the best, Smith609  Talk  09:22, 2 June 2008 (UTC)

License tagging for File:Stranded scyphozoans with Climactichnites trackways - Blackberry Hill, WI - Cambrian.jpeg
Thanks for uploading File:Stranded scyphozoans with Climactichnites trackways - Blackberry Hill, WI - Cambrian.jpeg. You don't seem to have indicated the license status of the image. Wikipedia uses a set of image copyright tags to indicate this information.

To add a tag to the image, select the appropriate tag from this list, click on this link, then click "Edit this page" and add the tag to the image's description. If there doesn't seem to be a suitable tag, the image is probably not appropriate for use on Wikipedia. For help in choosing the correct tag, or for any other questions, leave a message on Media copyright questions. Thank you for your cooperation. --ImageTaggingBot (talk) 01:05, 23 July 2012 (UTC)

Your submission at Articles for creation
 Blackberry Hill, which you submitted to Articles for creation, has been created. The article has been assessed as Start-Class, which is recorded on the article's talk page. You may like to take a look at the grading scheme to see how you can improve the article. You are more than welcome to continue making quality contributions to Wikipedia. Note that because you are a logged-in user, you can create articles yourself, and don't have to post a request. However, you are more than welcome to continue submitting work to Articles for Creation. Thank you for helping improve Wikipedia! Icy // ♫ 03:06, 30 July 2012 (UTC)
 * If you have any questions, you are welcome to ask at the help desk.
 * If you would like to help us improve this process, please consider.

Possibly unfree File:1970 Atlanta Pop Festival program.jpg
A file that you uploaded or altered, File:1970 Atlanta Pop Festival program.jpg, has been listed at Possibly unfree files because its copyright status is unclear or disputed. If the file's copyright status cannot be verified, it may be deleted. You may find more information on the file description page. You are welcome to add comments to its entry at if you are interested in it not being deleted. Thank you. Stefan2 (talk) 11:48, 29 August 2012 (UTC)

Image copyright problem with File:Tickets for 1970 Atlanta Pop Festival.jpg
Thank you for uploading File:Tickets for 1970 Atlanta Pop Festival.jpg.

This image is a derivative work, containing an "image within an image". Examples of such images would include a photograph of a sculpture, a scan of a magazine cover, or a screenshot of a computer game or movie. In each of these cases, the rights of the creator of the original image must be considered, as well as those of the creator of the derivative work.

While the image description page states the source and copyright status of the derivative work, it only names the creator of the original work without specifying the status of their copyright over the work.

Wikipedia takes copyright very seriously. It may be deleted soon, unless we can determine the license and the source of the original image. If you know this information, then you can add a copyright tag to the image description page.

If you have uploaded other derivative works, consider checking that you have specified their license and tagged them, too. You can find a list of files you have created in [ your upload log].

If you have any questions, please feel free to ask them at the media copyright questions page. Thanks again for your cooperation. Stefan2 (talk) 20:03, 29 August 2012 (UTC)

File:1970 Atlanta Pop Festival program.jpg listed for deletion
A file that you uploaded or altered, File:1970 Atlanta Pop Festival program.jpg, has been listed at Files for deletion. Please see the to see why this is (you may have to search for the title of the image to find its entry), if you are interested in it not being deleted. Thank you. :Jay8gInspect-Berate-Know  WASH-BRIDGE-WPWA-MFIC 03:17, 28 March 2013 (UTC)

Notification of automated file description generation
Your upload of File:Adam Carolla - The Hammer.jpg or contribution to its description is noted, and thanks (even if belatedly) for your contribution. In order to help make better use of the media, an attempt has been made by an automated process to identify and add certain information to the media's description page.

This notification is placed on your talk page because a bot has identified you either as the uploader of the file, or as a contributor to its metadata. It would be appreciated if you could carefully review the information the bot added. To opt out of these notifications, please follow the instructions here. Thanks! Message delivered by Theo's Little Bot (opt-out) 11:26, 10 December 2013 (UTC)

regarding Euthycarcinoidea
Hi Kenneth, I recently made some expansions to Euthycarcinoidea, a process which you started, and it seems to me the current citation system is unnecessarily complicated, requiring a reader to correlate two notations. Rather than a footnote and then the full reference, wouldn't it be simpler to directly link the source? I don't believe page numbers are required, especially with journal articles from only 4 to 20 pages (and page numbers are rarely cited unless from a large book and/or citing a direct quote). (see for example, Arthropod) The sources that aren't cited in text (such as Anderson 1991), can appropriately be placed in a new "Further reading" section. Unless you have strong objections I can make the changes. Cheers, --Animalparty-- (talk) 22:15, 27 March 2014 (UTC)

ArbCom elections are now open!
MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 16:38, 23 November 2015 (UTC)

Your submission at Articles for creation: Cyclopites has been accepted
 Cyclopites, which you submitted to Articles for creation, has been created. The article has been assessed as Stub-Class, which is recorded on the article's talk page. You may like to take a look at the grading scheme to see how you can improve the article. You are more than welcome to continue making quality contributions to Wikipedia. . Thank you for helping improve Wikipedia! Graeme Bartlett (talk) 22:18, 1 December 2016 (UTC)
 * If you have any questions, you are welcome to ask at the  .
 * If you would like to help us improve this process, please consider.

Help me!
Yesterday I created an article, Mosineia. All links to this page work fine, but the page doesn't come up when I search for it in a browser. Could you please see what the problem is? Please help me with...

Kenneth C Gass (talk) 16:58, 7 December 2019 (UTC)
 * The article you speak of has not yet been formally reviewed and tagged as reviewed; once it is, it will take time for search engines to index it. 331dot (talk) 17:04, 7 December 2019 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for January 3
Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. An automated process has detected that when you recently edited Frammia, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Cornwallis Island ([//dispenser.info.tm/~dispenser/cgi-bin/dablinks.py/Frammia check to confirm] | [//dispenser.info.tm/~dispenser/cgi-bin/dab_solver.py/Frammia?client=notify fix with Dab solver]). Such links are usually incorrect, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of unrelated topics with similar 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) 10:12, 3 January 2020 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for January 10
An automated process has detected that when you recently edited Ronald Pearson Tripp, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Taxonomy ([//dispenser.info.tm/~dispenser/cgi-bin/dablinks.py/Ronald_Pearson_Tripp check to confirm] | [//dispenser.info.tm/~dispenser/cgi-bin/dab_solver.py/Ronald_Pearson_Tripp?client=notify fix with Dab solver]).

(Opt-out instructions.) --DPL bot (talk) 09:49, 10 January 2020 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for February 5
An automated process has detected that when you recently edited Waukesha Biota, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Terrestrial ([//dispenser.info.tm/~dispenser/cgi-bin/dablinks.py/Waukesha_Biota check to confirm] | [//dispenser.info.tm/~dispenser/cgi-bin/dab_solver.py/Waukesha_Biota?client=notify fix with Dab solver]).

(Opt-out instructions.) --DPL bot (talk) 12:24, 5 February 2020 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for March 26
An automated process has detected that when you recently edited Milwaukee Formation, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Type locality ([//dispenser.info.tm/~dispenser/cgi-bin/dablinks.py/Milwaukee_Formation check to confirm] | [//dispenser.info.tm/~dispenser/cgi-bin/dab_solver.py/Milwaukee_Formation?client=notify fix with Dab solver]).

(Opt-out instructions.) --DPL bot (talk) 11:43, 26 March 2020 (UTC)

Weis Earth Science Museum
Hi. I got your email. I don't know why the article isn't appearing in Google. It does appear if you do a more specific search Weis Earth Science Museum site:wikipedia.org so Google knows it's there. I can't find anything when looking in the page's html that would put Google off the page. Being a relatively new page, it might take a little while for Weis Earth Science Museum to appear in the search results. I can't see anything from Wikipedia that would stop it appearing. Regards --John B123 (talk) 20:53, 18 July 2020 (UTC)

The status of Latromirus and parioscorpio
Wait so if Latromirus is conspecific with Parioscorpio, shouldn't its page be redirected to parioscorpio. Is there even enough evidence that proves this considering the weird way this genus was named. Fossiladder13; Talk  08:35, 16 April 2022 (UTC)
 * Well, maybe I am wrong but probably "some" specimen of "Latromirus" is later considered as Parioscorpio, and some other specimens referred as possible cheloniellids? What is your opinion ? Ta-tea-two-te-to (talk) 01:49, 25 April 2022 (UTC)
 * As much as what I known, only some intended "Latromirus" specimens were reassigned to Parioscorpio, and most importantly, it doesn't include the intended holotype of "Latromirus" (UWGM 2439). I don't have access to Braddy & Dunlop 2021, so I'm not sure if there're any subsequent reassignments in that paper, but it's worth to note that according to a comment from Dr. James Lamsdell (one of the co-authors of Pariosrorpio's redescription), the cheloniellid affinity of Parioscorpio will soon be disputed again.--Junnn11 (talk) 03:37, 25 April 2022 (UTC)
 * As I see in Braddy & Dunlop 2021, holotype of "Latromirus", UWGM 2439 is written like, "the cheloniellid holotype, regarded as a separate taxon by Anderson et al. 2021", so currently it is considered as cheloniellid and separated from Parioscorpio. Ta-tea-two-te-to (talk) 08:27, 25 April 2022 (UTC)
 * @Ta-tea-two-te-to I dunno what to do here. Currently the page on Latromirus is redirected to Parioscorpio so until that paper comes out or someone gets access on the ¨Latromirus¨ paper, should we just discuss this on the main paleontology discussion page or wait for new developments?.  Fossiladder13 (talk) 16:27, 25 April 2022 (UTC)
 * See my latest edit to the Parioscorpio Wiki article. Also, let's keep in mind that in terms of the ICZN, "Latromirus" is not a valid genus. Even if any of the "type" lot (of which there isn't one, because the name Latromirus was never officially published) is eventually assigned to another species or genus, it can not be assigned to "Latromirus," because that "genus" does not exist, and if anyone tried to resurrect it, it would undoubtedly be struck down. I'm referring to the rules of the ICZN, because those are the only ones that should matter. Kenneth C Gass (talk) 01:05, 26 April 2022 (UTC)
 * @Kennethcgass I get that, So basically "Latromirus" is invalid because it does not fit with the terms of the ICZN, but if UWGM 2439 is different from parioscorpio it will just be named something new that fits with the guidelines.  Fossiladder13 (talk) 12:55, 26 April 2022 (UTC)
 * That is correct. Kenneth C Gass (talk) 14:22, 26 April 2022 (UTC)
 * So and, now redescription paper is released, and according to the paper, UWGM 2439 is possibly cheloniellid while Parioscorpio itself is not likely to be at all. So "Latromirus" and Parioscorpio are different things, so I think it is ok to recover the page as undescribed arthropod taxon. Ta-tea-two-te-to (talk) 15:03, 21 June 2022 (UTC)
 * Ah, when I read the end of the paper, it says something like this: "UWGM 2439 cannot be completely excluded from cheloniellid, but it may belong to another clade, maybe Parioscorpio. It is difficult to judge because of the state of preservation. "
 * I haven't read the entire paper yet and I'm lacking in knowledge for this group, so I hope if can help for a detailed interpretation. (P.S. I wrote holotype specimen number wrong so I fixed, it is UWGM 2439) Ta-tea-two-te-to (talk) 15:10, 21 June 2022 (UTC)

ArbCom 2022 Elections voter message
 Hello! Voting in the 2022 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23:59 (UTC) on. All eligible users are allowed to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once.

The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail.

If you wish to participate in the 2022 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. If you no longer wish to receive these messages, you may add to your user talk page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 00:32, 29 November 2022 (UTC)

Removal of some of the Waukesha Taxa
Hey, I greatly appreciate the amount of edits you made on the Waukesha biota article, but I was wondering why you got rid of most of the trilobite genera. All of those were in https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/abs/pii/S0031018220300754, so I am not sure why they were removed, but the Dalmanitid was not. Fossiladder13 (talk) 06:13, 4 February 2023 (UTC)


 * Oh, I just saw how you mentioned them with the dalmanitid, sorry. Fossiladder13 (talk) 06:17, 4 February 2023 (UTC)
 * Thanks for fixing! Yes, that's the main reason. I thought it would be more concise than to duplicate some of the text, and to increase space because of all of the extra images. All of that can be easily obtained on other Wikipedia pages. One of my other reasons is that some readers may be inclined to think that the fossils shown are all from the Waukesha Biota or at least of the same species, when most of them are not. Over the next week or so, I'll probably replace some of the remaining images with ones that I took of the actual WB species. Thanks again for fixing my technical problem.   Chris Kenneth C Gass (talk) 07:11, 4 February 2023 (UTC)
 * I just noticed that the article is experiencing the same technical problem I had yesterday. Notice that the data for Cheloniellida in the Abundance and Notes columns should be in the Notes and Images columns. Kenneth C Gass (talk) 08:32, 4 February 2023 (UTC)
 * @Kennethcgass I’ll fix that, also very much excited for those Biota fossil images!. Fossiladder13 (talk) 13:49, 4 February 2023 (UTC)
 * @Kennethcgass, The issue has been fixed. Fossiladder13 (talk) 13:56, 4 February 2023 (UTC)
 * Thank you! Kenneth C Gass (talk) 16:29, 4 February 2023 (UTC)
 * @Kennethcgass Also, would it be ok ask what species you have photos of (Aside from your photos of Parioscorpio, the Dalmanitid, Meroperix, and the "Leech", because I've already uploaded a fossil of Venustulus. Fossiladder13 (talk) 20:54, 4 February 2023 (UTC)
 * I'm saving most of my images for after my review of the WB is published (with Simon Braddy in July/August). What I plan to add before then are images of Desmograptus, Conularia niagarensis, Thallograptus, and a leperditocopid ostracod. We're not including images of them in our review. I see no point in including images of organisms commonly found in other biotas. The significance of the WB doesn't pertain to those taxa. I've photographed many other fossils of soft-bodied animals from the WB, but, as I said, I prefer to save them until after they've been published. Right now I'm waiting to hear back from UWGM regarding permissions details. Kenneth C Gass (talk) 02:28, 5 February 2023 (UTC)
 * @Kennethcgass Hope the publication goes well, can't wait to read it. Fossiladder13 (talk) 03:39, 5 February 2023 (UTC)

ArbCom 2023 Elections voter message
 Hello! Voting in the 2023 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23:59 (UTC) on. All eligible users are allowed to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once.

The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail.

If you wish to participate in the 2023 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. If you no longer wish to receive these messages, you may add to your user talk page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 00:27, 28 November 2023 (UTC)