User talk:Melburnian/Archive 2

Archive 1 Nov 2005 - Mar 2008

The Flora of Australia category subtree is a mess
But don't worry, I'm going to fix it. Check this out. Hesperian 05:54, 4 April 2008 (UTC)
 * Thanks for that. There has been talk at WP:PLANTS of dividing "Flora of Australia"-style categories into "Flora native to/naturalised in/endemic to Australia"-style categories. You've already seen me make a very small start to rolling this out for WA. So "Palms of Australia" eventually needs to be subcategorised, or, if that isn't justified, replaced, by "Palms native to Australia". But until that happens, you're quite right that "Palms of Australia" has a native-only semantics. I'll need to fix that and do another run.
 * Right now it is a huge task, but it is not a job that has to be done all at once - half-finished is still a big improvement. Once the initial clean-up has been done it will just be a matter of re-running the script every month or so to pick up new articles and changes in the category structure. Hesperian 06:49, 4 April 2008 (UTC)
 * That's fixed. I did a new run, which crashed after a query timed out, but I still got the first 250 taxa reports, which is plenty to be going on with. I've done the first 28 tonight, and have found a few minor semantic errors of my own, but also found and fixed some seriously bad categorisation errors, such as Category:Gastrolobium not being in the Flora of Australia subtree despite being an Australian endemic, and Category:Haemodoraceae being tagged into Category:Commeliniales instead of Category:Commelinales. My verdict is that this script is bloody brilliant, if I do say so myself. Hesperian 13:41, 4 April 2008 (UTC)
 * Cheers. I've just started APG-II'ing Category:Flora of Australia by taxonomy. I didn't know what to do with the Boraginaceae of Australia because it is unplaced at order level in APG-II. Solved the problem by creating Category:Asterids of Australia, and all of a sudden I'm up to my neck in it. Rosids are next. Hesperian 12:01, 5 April 2008 (UTC)

I dread to think what I'm doing to your watchlist, as if Eubot and SatyrBot weren't already doing enough. Sorry about that.

There's an interesting discrepancy in category sizes at Category:Flora of Australia by state or territory. WA has 527 articles; next comes NSW with 219, and so it goes down to ACT with 7. My rough rule of thumb is that a category should be split if it has more than 200 entries i.e. more than one page. I think WA is definitely due to be split. I'm just not sure how to do it. Category:Myrtales of Australia currently has 194 pages, and will bust through 200 pretty soon at the rate I'm tagging; plus it has 40-odd WA Verticordia in a subcategory. Category:Proteales of Australia has only 119 articles but has plenty of Banksia and Hakea in subcategories. Category:Fabales of Australia has 133 articles but not much in subcategories. So one or both of Category:Myrtales of Western Australia and Category:Proteales of Western Australia might do the trick. Any suggestions? (There's a full list of categories with their sizes at User:Hesperian/Floracat.)

Hesperian 01:57, 7 April 2008 (UTC)


 * Roger that; I will probably start with Proteales, for no other reason than my own bias. Hesperian 05:09, 7 April 2008 (UTC)

Cherry Lake (Altona, Victoria)
I like sedges but have almost no time. I love co-evolutionary relationships between insects and plants (and the viruses that hitchhike between them), and would like to do more with this butterfly and sedge, but don't have said aforementioned time. Don't know if it's in your interest area, but the wetlands look interesting, as does the skipper and its primary food plant. --Blechnic (talk) 07:00, 3 May 2008 (UTC)


 * Thanks, and for the assorted clean-ups. --Blechnic (talk) 22:38, 3 May 2008 (UTC)

Dredging images
Hi Melburnian, just wanted to say that the images you added to the Port Phillip Channel Deepening Project article look great! I've been in contact with Blue Wedges' professional photographer and so I may have some photos up soon. Davido321 (talk) 11:44, 8 May 2008 (UTC)

RE Welcome
Hi Melburnian - thanks for the Welcome - I see you've been busy for some time and have a full record of Port Phillip Bay dredging. Many moons ago I was part of an environmental study team for PPB. It takes a while to get used to the structure of WP and what is going on so I might be in touch now and again, seeing that you've offered ... but I like its rather anarchic muddling towards goals. Must see what you are up to with the Australian Flora. Will be in touch. Thanks for the welcome. --Granitethighs (talk) 05:57, 9 May 2008 (UTC)

Thanks for that
Hope I left enough explanation round to explain the folly of the action :( - thank you for your oversight on that one - I owes ya! - cheeraio and good night ( i think) SatuSuro 13:20, 11 May 2008 (UTC) Yeah well it goes down to wanting be a minder for poor ole cygnis down there in the great southern - he had dabbled in that one - and I have been to a place that had an exhibition of gibbs things in south perth - so the association is perhaps not so obvious - SatuSuro 13:33, 11 May 2008 (UTC)

Stylidium images
You may be interested in the discussion here in terms of a source of Stylidium  images. --Melburnian (talk) 07:02, 12 May 2008 (UTC)


 * Thanks for the notice! There are indeed two photos on there that will be useful when I begin creating Stylidium species stubs again. Thanks again for letting me know about it! Cheers, Rkitko (talk) 22:55, 13 May 2008 (UTC)

Hass avocado
Hi,

Why the preference for Hass (avocado) over Hass avocado? WP:NAME seems to support the unbracketed version. I'm not as familiar with plant pages, is there a sub-guideline that exists or some discussion on a wikiproject with more guidance? Thanks for any help, WLU (talk) 12:41, 16 May 2008 (UTC)
 * Ah, that explains it. Since I'm not an admin I can't overwrite redirects so unfortunately I'm stuck with cut-and-pastes, a habit I should get out of.  I also wasn't worried about the implications for other pages!  My flimsy recall of WP:NAME is that the best choice is the least ambiguous to the reader, not editor, and I think the unbracketed version is that.  But I'm quite willing to be over-ruled if the wikiproject coughs up anything relevant and it's not like it's onerous for the reader to deal with redirects.  I don't mind tedious redirect corrects, so if clarity arises from the wikiproject discussion please feel free to drop me a line and I can help with that task on Hass or other pages.  Redirect corrects are an easy way to feed my editcoutitis.  WLU (talk) 15:00, 16 May 2008 (UTC)

Tecticornia pergranulata
Nice to see more of these species articles; thanks for contributing it. I was surprised that you hadn't used the Commons image. Is that photo correctly identified as T. pergranulata? It's used as such in the glasswort article. Easchiff(talk) 10:13, 27 May 2008 (UTC)
 * I'm as certain as I can be it's correctly identified. Marked as such on a nearby sign, and backed up by a vegetation audit of the constructed wetland this is in a few years ago (Ecological Management and Restoration, August 2004). As far as I can find out the only other Tecticornia in the area is flabelliformis; which has a harder, less beaded construction than pergranulata - Peripitus (Talk) 12:38, 27 May 2008 (UTC)
 * Thanks to both of you. The image will remain at glasswort; I'll leave it to you whether to incorporate it into the pergranulata infobox. Easchiff(talk) 22:46, 27 May 2008 (UTC)

Unbelievable
I made a start on a red link, Tecticornia arbuscula, a couple of days ago, but got distracted and had to leave the edit window up for a few days. I have just got back to it, finished writing it, hit the save button, and discovered that you have written a stub in the interim! Judging by the edit history, we were originally working on it at the same time. What are the chances! Hesperian 13:03, 27 May 2008 (UTC)
 * Okay, that is too creepy. Next on my list was Suaeda australis, and you did that one too. Methinks you must have figured out the method to my madness, and decided to help out. Shall I leave the plant redlinks to you, and focus on the island redlinks? Hesperian 13:18, 27 May 2008 (UTC)
 * Golly, so it was a coincidence, more or less! I'm working through the red links on North Island (Houtman Abrolhos), with a view to FACing it one of these days. Since I have a copy of Flora of Australia IV, I thought I'd do the Amaranthaceae first. I was working on the second last one, took a break, and on returning to it found you'd done both.
 * The only plant left on both our lists is Myoporum insulare. Frankly, blueing this list is feeling like a bit of a chore at the moment, so I should be happy to leave M. insulare in your capable hands. And if you want to tackle any others on my list, feel free. Hesperian 01:41, 28 May 2008 (UTC)
 * Thanks fro your help in releasing up that talk page! Granitethighs (talk) 07:22, 12 June 2008 (UTC)

proofing?
Would you be interested in proofreading a Wikisource article I've been working on? It is only five pages so proofing it would only take about half an hour. Read on if interested; it's fine if you're not.

The article is Characters of a new Liliaceous Genus called Brodiaea. I've transcribed it and proofed it, but the next step towards Featured Text status is to get a third party to validate it. This is done by clicking on the page links in the left margin, checking the text against the page scan, then editing the page to (a) if you don't find any mistakes, click the green box to mark the page as "Validated", then save; (b) fix any mistakes you find, then mark the page as "Validated", and save; or (c) if you find mistakes that you can't or don't want to fix, click the purple box to mark the page "Problematic", and save.

Hesperian 06:40, 30 June 2008 (UTC)
 * Done Melburnian (talk) 08:34, 30 June 2008 (UTC)
 * Much obliged! Hesperian 11:16, 30 June 2008 (UTC)

Willie Wagtail
Willie Wagtail is showing up at Featured article candidates/Featured log/August 2008 as promoted. Has Sandy stuffed up?--Grahame (talk) 13:35, 4 August 2008 (UTC)

Cedrus deodar
Thanks for incorporating most of the inputs from my article into the Cedar deodar article.However, I would like to suggest including a comparative text of the three types of cedars with the gallery of pictures from my article as it would be quite informative on the shape of the canopy of the trees. The article is now farily exhaustive.--Nvvchar (talk) 15:40, 26 August 2008 (UTC)
 * Replied at Talk:Cedrus deodara Melburnian (talk) 00:54, 27 August 2008 (UTC)

BOOM!
Sorry, your watchlist just blew up again. I'm dragging Proteaceae taxoboxes kicking and screaming into the 21st century. Hesperian 02:56, 3 September 2008 (UTC)
 * Nah mate, I'm branching out. I ended up doing all the Proteales. That's the Proteaceae plus 12 more species!
 * But seriously, "Proteaceae" and "Australian" are my security blankets, but lately I've been doing all manner of other stuff. e.g. I did a hell of a lot of kiwi plants last week. And just to drive home my point, I'm about to APG-II-ify another family of taxoboxes. Hmm, what would blow up your watchlist the worst? Myrtaceae? Fabaceae? Myoporaceae? Oops, sorry, I forgot that I started this paragraph with "but seriously".
 * But seriously, no seriously, if you want a family got out of the way, or deferred until later, let know know. Hesperian 05:00, 3 September 2008 (UTC)

Gymnostachys
And a photo too! That's pretty darn good service! Ta. Hesperian 23:25, 3 September 2008 (UTC)
 * Ah yes, you just never know when that old Gymnostachys photo in the shoebox might come in handy one day. Melburnian (talk) 01:09, 4 September 2008 (UTC)
 * You spoil me; thanks. Hesperian 13:26, 7 September 2008 (UTC)

Any thoughts

 * This suspect caught flowering near Bolgart, Western Australia is wanted for questioning in relation to wide spread unidentified flowering in the area, believed to have also been sighted further south in the hills east of Perth. Known to associates include Orthrosanthus, Diuris, Wandoo. Information in identifying the suspect is greatly appreciated Gnangarra 11:35, 5 September 2008 (UTC)
 * Hmmm...this is definitely one for the FBI. Will report back in due course. Melburnian (talk) 11:55, 5 September 2008 (UTC)
 * Yeah I've been looking through the book of mug shots for the Iridaceae family but no luck so far Gnangarra 12:08, 5 September 2008 (UTC)
 * Chamaescilla, perhaps? 12:37, 5 September 2008 (UTC)
 * Ah you just beat me to it - I think it may be too Melburnian (talk) 12:41, 5 September 2008 (UTC)
 * Someone needs to put FloraBase into a tag-based system, so you can plug in ["purple flowers", "six petals", "six stamens", "radical leaves", "panicle"] and see what pops out.... Hmm, actually I suppose that is what DELTA-Intkey does, isn't it?.... Bags not doing the data entry on that one. Hesperian 12:57, 5 September 2008 (UTC)
 * Yes it would be nice if this had a few of those fields. Melburnian (talk) 13:25, 5 September 2008 (UTC)
 * Thanks for that, ok I'm looking this concluding its Chamaescilla corymbosa rather than Chamaescilla spiralis as that flowers sep-oct and this though late august was into its flowering. My only issue is that visually, colour differential aside the flowers are more open like spiralis. any thoughts Gnangarra 13:51, 5 September 2008 (UTC)
 * Based on this photo it's not spiralis as it hasn't got that crazy curly leaf thing going on. Your specimen has a much more intense colour then any other pictures. I hereby christen it Chamaescilla "Gnangarra Violet". Was this inside the Drummond Reserve? Melburnian (talk) 14:10, 5 September 2008 (UTC)
 * about 5-10ks south at -31.34528°N, 116.41663°W, Drummond NR plant survey lists both species Gnangarra 14:22, 5 September 2008 (UTC)
 * Chamaescilla versicolor also occurs at Bolgart, though I can't find any images of it. Melburnian (talk) 14:29, 5 September 2008 (UTC)

Move dandelion to Taraxacum
I notice you moved dandelion to Taraxacum. Another example (no doubt of many, many) that needs moving is Teak to Tectona. best, Plantsurfer (talk) 22:45, 7 September 2008 (UTC)

Lechenaultia
The plant was at a botanic gardens, and I got the species name from the label or sign. —Pengo 03:11, 11 September 2008 (UTC)

Crataegus
When you add Crataegus specimens to the category Category:Crataegus make sure that you seperate the genus and species with a seperator (|). For example Crataegus rivularis wouold be Category:Crataegus|rivularis. Thanks --Cottonapple4 (talk) 20:51, 16 September 2008 (UTC)
 * I've asked for opinions regarding category sorting at Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Plants --Melburnian (talk) 03:31, 17 September 2008 (UTC)

VIC tags
Hi, I have restored the Victorian country tags. I apologise for causing any trouble on this front.

Re usefulness: the VIC category itself wasn't so bad, but the Melbourne one is beyond useless. (Until this morning, every tram service was listed as needing a photo!) When I was in Melbourne myself with 8 days and a camera, I accessed it but in the haze of listed suburbs there, couldn't figure out what was priority and what was not (or even what was nearby) from the 360 or so entries and whether any of them had in fact been "requested" at all, and gave up - this will be the problem of *anyone* who tries to use that category with the same aim in mind. As a former database developer, too, I'm well aware of the concept of redundancy and the fact that this list will quickly become desynchronised with the number of articles actually needing photos - the more incoherent and complex, the less likely it is to be updated as the less likely anyone will use it. Is there any way the use of this category can be improved, or should it be replaced with a WikiProject to-do list which can be categorised? Orderinchaos 05:50, 19 September 2008 (UTC)

Wilson
One can often find " Wisonii " in the latin names of plants. I was curious about this Wilson for a long time. But searching on just wilson... well, that doesn't help. Hopeless. Finally I got to know who he is! Warrington (talk) 10:20, 20 September 2008 (UTC)

Many other species with the epithet wilsonii are named after Ernest Henry Wilson, as well as other Wilsons, so you need to know the history of the naming of each individual species to determine who each was named after. Melburnian (talk) 10:37, 20 September 2008 (UTC)

Thats sad. I hoped I solved the problem. It sounds like some material for an article called Wilsonii... Is there any article on plants, latin names, named after people?

Sc Crass
I had signed outside of login there - I had forgotten the usual delay in flowering times when cultivars in the scarp/range have a marked delay compared to the swan coastal sand plain - it can play funny tricks on the plants to say the least - as well as the photographer :) SatuSuro 09:14, 1 October 2008 (UTC)
 * The distribution covers roughly 2500 km of coastline in WA, so the variables in climate, soil and the plants themselves over the range could lead to quite a variation between local flowering times, and the FloraBase range would supposedly encompass the whole statewide variation. Melburnian (talk) 13:34, 1 October 2008 (UTC)

Hi Melburnian,

I have notice that you have uploaded a photo of Centro Oakleigh, I was wondering if you may be able to take some photos of Centro shopping Centres near you, as we are currently starting a gallery for Centro Properties Group article on Wikipedia. It would be greatly appreciated if you could, you may find a list of Centro Shopping Centres in Australia here:List of Centro Shopping Centres in Australia.

Thank you in advance!

Best Wishes, Sheepunderscore (talk) 07:49, 7 October 2008 (UTC)

Centro Oakleigh
Hi Melburnian,

I have notice that you have uploaded a photo of Centro Oakleigh, I was wondering if you may be able to take some photos of Centro shopping Centres near you, as we are currently starting a gallery for Centro Properties Group article on Wikipedia. It would be greatly appreciated if you could, you may find a list of Centro Shopping Centres in Australia here:List of Centro Shopping Centres in Australia.

Thank you in advance!

Best Wishes, Sheepunderscore (talk) 07:49, 7 October 2008 (UTC)

Acanthocarpus
Just a heads-up. I made a major edit, then masked it with a typo fix. Hesperian 00:12, 8 October 2008 (UTC)
 * Thanks for that, I'll update other related genera accordingly. Melburnian (talk) 01:49, 8 October 2008 (UTC)

Just in case you didn't already see it, there's a discussion at WikiProject Stub sorting/Proposals/2008/November that will impact you. Hesperian 22:52, 3 November 2008 (UTC)

Ulmus x viminalis... not... much rarer
Your Ulmus x viminalis is in fact a much rarer elm. We have Ulmus x viminalis in Brighton & Hove here in UK. The leaves don't match yours at all. The surprizing thing is that your leaves match a description of an elm mentioned by WG Bean as being 'Betulaefolia' (Birch Like leaves). This is a botanical rediscovery... well done. Perhaps there have been cuttings to save it? Contact me... Ulmus man

Tallong Midge Orchid
It amuses me how often I come across Australian plants that aren't in the Flora of Australia category tree. But this one takes the cake. Tallong Midge Orchid has been quietly sitting in Category:New South Wales for over 3½ years. Hesperian 00:41, 10 November 2008 (UTC)
 * Yes, they do pop up from time to time, if they are not on the tree or linked to my genus list I tend to miss them. Melburnian (talk) 01:50, 10 November 2008 (UTC)
 * Thanks. → Hesperian 02:35, 10 November 2008 (UTC)

Thank you
Thank you very much for your support in my RfA, which closed as successful a few hours ago. The admin reading list makes clear there's a million foolish errors to avoid, so feel free to stop by with any advice or gentle pushing in the right direction if I make any silly mistakes along the way. Also, thanks for your edits to HM Bark Endeavour, its nice to have someone to work with on an otherwise rarely visited page. :) Euryalus (talk) 11:18, 12 November 2008 (UTC)

Begonias
Hi - could I be very cheeky and ask you to take a look at three articles I have recently created (Begonia boliviensis, Begonia pearcei and Begonia veitchii) and correct any botanical errors that I've made. Cheers. Daemonic Kangaroo (talk) 08:50, 14 November 2008 (UTC)
 * Thanks for the input. Daemonic Kangaroo (talk) 12:49, 14 November 2008 (UTC)

Odontoglossum crispum
Hi - I'm being cheeky again. Could you look at the article I have created about an orchid, Odontoglossum crispum, and fix any botanical, or other, errors I've made. Cheers. Daemonic Kangaroo (talk) 07:55, 1 December 2008 (UTC)

wrong wrong wrong
I think the stub I just fixed may hold the record for the highest density of taxonomy error. It was Urandra... but that is a synonym of Stemonurus, so I moved it to the latter title. It was listed as a member of the Icacinaceae, but Icacinaceae has long since been found to be polyphyletic, and split into four families; this genus belongs in Stemonuraceae. It was given order Celastrales, but it should have been Aquifoliales. It was tagged as a rosid-stub: it's an asterid. At class rank, it was listed, and still is, as Magnoliopsida, an obsolete name for an obsolete taxon (the dicots). So it didn't get anything right until divisional rank, when it struck upon "Magnoliophyta". :-) Hesperian 05:14, 8 December 2008 (UTC)
 * Are you sure it's a plant genus ;) BTW, thank you for your valuable inputs at the WP:NC(flora) megadebate. Melburnian (talk) 07:26, 8 December 2008 (UTC)

Thanks, and a merry Christmas to you too. (as you can see I'm still lurking) Hesperian 01:16, 24 December 2008 (UTC)

RFC on " Astobiological Potential "
Is what is happening here what I think is happening here? 198.163.53.11 (talk) 20:56, 7 January 2009 (UTC)
 * It's IP canvassing spam from a City of Winnipeg network. Make what you will of that, no need to disrupt your break!. . dave souza, talk 12:51, 8 January 2009 (UTC)

Orphaned non-free image (Image:Picking Up Pebbles 3.jpg)
 Thanks for uploading Image:Picking Up Pebbles 3.jpg. The image description page currently specifies that the image is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, the image is currently orphaned, meaning that it is not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the image was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that images for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).

If you have uploaded other unlicensed media, please check whether they're used in any articles or not. 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 images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. Aspects (talk) 17:36, 16 January 2009 (UTC)