User talk:Metanoid

Welcome! (We can't say that loudly enough!)

Here are a few links you might find helpful:


 * Be Bold!
 * Don't let grumpy users scare you off.
 * Meet other new users
 * Learn from others
 * Play nicely with others
 * Contribute, Contribute, Contribute!
 * Tell us about you

You can sign your name on talk pages and votes by typing &#126;&#126;&#126;&#126;; our software automatically converts it to your username and the date.

If you have any questions or problems, no matter what they are, leave me a message on my talk page. Or, please come to the New contributors' help page, where experienced Wikipedians can answer any queries you have! Or, you can just type   on your user page, and someone will show up shortly to answer your questions.

We're so glad you're here! 22:06, 21 May 2006 (UTC)

Snapping Turtle and Chelydridae
Thanks for cleaning those articles up, I'll get more references for fossil chelydrids up soon Brickman1000 15:46, 29 December 2006 (UTC)
 * cool!  Metanoid 16:46, 29 December 2006 (UTC)

Oh,btw, I have randomly ended up with a baby snapper as well, he/she is a vicious little thing. Unfortunately, its from the Mississippi and I'm in FL...Brickman1000

Komodo dragon
I like the work you did on the Komodo dragon article.

Just one thing - I think it is premature to say the Komodo dragon has venom - this has not actually been published anywhere. I think you are referring to the article below:

'''Nature. 2006 Feb 2;439(7076):584-8.'''

''Early evolution of the venom system in lizards and snakes.

''Among extant reptiles only two lineages are known to have evolved venom delivery systems, the advanced snakes and helodermatid lizards (Gila Monster and Beaded Lizard). Evolution of the venom system is thought to underlie the impressive radiation of the advanced snakes (2,500 of 3,000 snake species). In contrast, the lizard venom system is thought to be restricted to just two species and to have evolved independently from the snake venom system. Here we report the presence of venom toxins in two additional lizard lineages (Monitor Lizards and Iguania) and show that all lineages possessing toxin-secreting oral glands form a clade, demonstrating a single early origin of the venom system in lizards and snakes. Construction of gland complementary-DNA libraries and phylogenetic analysis of transcripts revealed that nine toxin types are shared between lizards and snakes. Toxinological analyses of venom components from the Lace Monitor Varanus varius showed potent effects on blood pressure and clotting ability, bioactivities associated with a rapid loss of consciousness and extensive bleeding in prey. The iguanian lizard Pogona barbata retains characteristics of the ancestral venom system, namely serial, lobular non-compound venom-secreting glands on both the upper and lower jaws, whereas the advanced snakes and anguimorph lizards (including Monitor Lizards, Gila Monster and Beaded Lizard) have more derived venom systems characterized by the loss of the mandibular (lower) or maxillary (upper) glands. Demonstration that the snakes, iguanians and anguimorphs form a single clade provides overwhelming support for a single, early origin of the venom system in lizards and snakes. These results provide new insights into the evolution of the venom system in squamate reptiles and open new avenues for biomedical research and drug design using hitherto unexplored venom proteins.''

Anyway, this article looks in detail at a range of lizards and demonstrates venom, but in the case of the Komodo dragon they do not conclude that the Komodo dragon has venom. Rather they speculate that it may have venom, which is what I changed the article to read. It is an interesting possibility, so it deserves to be in there, but it is not verifiable fact, just speculation at this stage. Actually the speculation is quite weak, just a line-one sentence saying that one of the author who does not have medical training saw rapid inflammation around a single Komodo dragon bite, which in their opinion could have reflected a weak venom (or equally could have reflected a DTH response to bacterial antigens in the saliva).Sad mouse 17:22, 22 December 2006 (UTC)


 * i think i responded back at the komodo dragon page, but i'm so scattered - i'll just leave another here. :) i appreciate the positive critique on the article; the info you mention was actually there before me, i just left it there. but you're right, i don't know of any solid cinfirmation of venom in monitors, anyhoo. (tho imo there's a good chance they do.) i think that section's fine as you've worded it, at least till further evidence comes in! later....  Metanoid 01:10, 27 December 2006 (UTC)

Edits to Eagle
I reverted your order change in the genera of eagles. The order was taxonomic and denotes relateness within the group. All (most?) Tree of Life articles are arranged thusly. Just thought I'd let you know. Sabine's Sunbird talk 23:44, 27 December 2006 (UTC)
 * i just figured it out (duh) - much appreciated!  Metanoid 23:48, 27 December 2006 (UTC)


 * That's cool. BTW, as a editor with a seeming fondness for eagles feel free to drop by the Bird Wikiproject. Cheers! Sabine's Sunbird talk 23:52, 27 December 2006 (UTC)

references for the marine mammal pages
hi there! i have added much material to some of the marine mammal pages...the material is all based from the book marine mammal medicine and the thousands of studies cited in that book...i could load up those pages with references...hundreds on each page...yet i really dont have the time...so as to (citation needed) in the polar bear page regarding hibernation induction trigger...i think u could put tags like this on all the MM pages i have edited, and in fact i could place tags all over wikipedia...millions of tags that say citation needed...yet at the bottom of the page in references u will see i have cited marine mammal medicine...yet someone is obviously going to have to meticulously go back thru and place the citations next to every sentence as these pages will likely be edited in the future by people that will place tags or even just erase the info...thankyouBenjiwolf 13:28, 22 January 2007 (UTC)

Polar Bear
And you made it even better. Cheers. Xiner (talk, email) 03:40, 30 January 2007 (UTC)

Please do not delete content from articles on Wikipedia. If you continue to do so, it may be considered vandalism. If you would like to experiment, please use the sandbox. Hi there...i dont consider it vandalism and i know u are a good faith editor...yet you continue to remove my sentences in the evolution section such as on hibernation induction trigger even after i have referenced this to "marine mammal medicine"...a comprehensive 1000+ page tome thoroughly referenced with thousands of scientific studies and written by an expert in the field...i am inclined to believe these expert marine veternarians...the last addtions i made to the evolution section i am willing to heavily defend and believe they should remain...if someone else had content removed when i restored my sentences, and that was a valuable adddition, i sincereley apologize...u can read my further response on my talk page...thank you...and thank you for maintaining the polar bear page in the best condition u see fit...Benjiwolf 10:27, 31 January 2007 (UTC)


 * Whoa, I don't think that warning was justified, but anyway, Metanoid, I don't think I'm right. I'm not satisfied with the way it stands, and I'm sure you don't either. I posted a message on the article's talk page. Maybe you can come up with a better alternative. I certainly will be obsessing over it tonight. Xiner (talk, email) 01:40, 1 February 2007 (UTC)

Yeah, text isn't the most expressive way to communicate, that's for sure. About my degrees, CS undergrad and Edu MS. Why? You? Xiner (talk, email) 15:43, 1 February 2007 (UTC)


 * It's good to have someone knowledgeable about the topic on board. Xiner (talk, email) 19:49, 1 February 2007 (UTC)

I know what you mean. Two degrees later and I'm no more sure of where I'm going than I was at the start. Sometimes I wish I weren't interested in so many things! Xiner (talk, email) 17:14, 2 February 2007 (UTC)

RFC
Please comment at Requests_for_comment/ForrestLane42. &mdash; goethean &#2384; 15:32, 5 February 2007 (UTC)

Snapping turtle
Cool, thanks! Love what you've done to it so far. Shrumster 14:46, 15 October 2007 (UTC)

Tiger snake
Just to let you know that when changing an article like that the best way is to follow the instructions at Help:Moving a page. The reason is that copy and paste moves loose the page history. Also you should check for double redirects which need to be fixed. I've moved the page now so that the edit history is intact and fixed the double redirects. Cheers. CambridgeBayWeather (Talk) 22:57, 31 October 2007 (UTC)
 * No problem. The Help:Moving a page instructions are really confusing. CambridgeBayWeather (Talk) 23:09, 31 October 2007 (UTC)

Allegheny woodrat
Fixed and there were no double redirects. Cheers. CambridgeBayWeather (Talk) 23:29, 31 October 2007 (UTC)
 * much appreciated - happy halloween! - Metanoid (talk, email) 23:33, 31 October 2007 (UTC)

American Mink
Hi, I see you recategorized American Mink from Category:Mammals of North America to Category:Fauna of Canada, Category:Fauna of Northwestern United States, Category:Fauna of Appalachia U.S., and Mink, American; Category:Mammals of the United States remains in both. This is problematic in several ways. First of all, Category:Fauna is less precise than Category:Mammals, so Fauna of Canada is too broad. Secondly, the categories overlap too much, and there is not much reason to include both subordinate (Appalachia) and superordinate (United States) categories. It is of course true that the American Mink is not endemic to all regions of North America, but in the absence of more reasonable sub-units than individual states and so on, I don't see the value of many individual categories like this. I see you've been doing the same on other animals, so I think it would be useful to clear this up. --Macrakis 14:20, 1 November 2007 (UTC)

Colubrid stubs
No prob; sorry to burst your bubble. I'm a librarian by trade so tend to have a knack for finding stuff in the archives. Good luck with whatever category we end up with! Cheers, Her Pegship  (tis herself) 01:34, 19 November 2007 (UTC)
 * Whoops, forgot to mention - the "numerosity" clause is in the How to propose a stub type section. It's 60+ for articles that aren't "parented" by a WikiProject, 30+ for those that do. TTFN, Her Pegship  (tis herself) 02:35, 19 November 2007 (UTC)

WikiProject Birds March 2008 Newsletter
The March 2008 issue of the Bird WikiProject newsletter has been published. You may read the newsletter, change the format in which future issues will be delivered to you, or unsubscribe from this notification by following the link. Thank you. This has been an automated delivery by BrownBot (talk) 18:45, 1 March 2008 (UTC)

group common names
It's so hard to figure out which ones should be used. It really depends on which of the "common names" is actually used by folks, and which are just simply derivatives from the scientific name. Do folks call cats "felids" more often than folks would say "members of Felidae"? Not to mention the terrible usage of calling all cats "felines". "Lagomorphs" is much easier than saying "rabbits and hares, et al", and is used more often then "members of the order Lagomorpha". *shrugs* - UtherSRG (talk) 16:14, 25 March 2008 (UTC)


 * yeah, "Lagomorphs" is prob better than "rabbits, hares, and pikas". but imo, Felidae should be "Cat family", with the pet called "House Cat" or "Domestic Cat" (and the equivalent for the Canidae). i myself would use "Felid" -- and it's better, i think, than "members of the Felidae". but when it comes down to it, ALL Felids are types of "Cats", just as all Phocids are "Seals". - Metanoid (talk, email) 18:54, 25 March 2008 (UTC)

creationists
You are right of course, and I guess I really knew that when I rose to the bait. Interesting diversion from the long-running "birds are dinosaurs" thread though Jimfbleak (talk) 12:03, 29 March 2008 (UTC)


 * jeez, needed some kinda diversion from that, mos def ;-) - Metanoid (talk, email) 12:30, 29 March 2008 (UTC)

Reptile edits
Hi Metanoid, sorry about that! Yeah the comment should have gone on the talk page, my bad (i tend to sometimes put comments in my manuscripts and occaisonally webpages and sometimes there are comments on Wikipedia pages like this). The History of classification needs reorganising, because Sauropsida comes before Cladistics, and there should be something on Linnaeus's definition, and those of others in the 18th and 19th centuries. I'll make a brief comment on the talk page. Cheers, M Alan Kazlev (talk) 06:03, 31 March 2008 (UTC)

King Cobra
Re comment on User talk:Why Not A Duck -- "there's a movement away from wikilinking to entries that don't relate to the given subject matter" -- now that you mention it, I seem to recall reading of that too (don't recall where -- though WP:OVERLINK appears to cover it). And I guess I agree with it. I just didn't see a reason given in the edit summaries (and in a pile of edits, most of which were vandalism or incomplete fixes to vandalism, it just seemed "cleaner" to me to revert back to the last "good" version). My opinion is, go ahead and re-do the delinking. -- Why Not A Duck 01:46, 1 April 2008 (UTC)

WikiProject Birds April 2008 Newsletter
The April 2008 issue of the Bird WikiProject newsletter has been published. You may read the newsletter, change the format in which future issues will be delivered to you, or unsubscribe from this notification by following the link. Thank you. This has been an automated delivery by BrownBot (talk) 00:58, 2 April 2008 (UTC)

WikiProjet Birds May 2008 Newsletter
The May 2008 issue of the Bird WikiProject newsletter has been published. You may read the newsletter, change the format in which future issues will be delivered to you, or unsubscribe from this notification by following the link. Thank you. This has been an automated delivery by BrownBot (talk) 00:42, 1 May 2008 (UTC)

WikiProject Birds June 2008 Newsletter
The June 2008 issue of the Bird WikiProject newsletter has been published. You may read the newsletter, change the format in which future issues will be delivered to you, or unsubscribe from this notification by following the link. Thank you. This has been an automated delivery by BrownBot (talk) 13:14, 1 June 2008 (UTC)

July 2008 Birds Project Newsletter Link
The July 2024 issue of the Bird WikiProject newsletter has been published. You may read the newsletter, change the format in which future issues will be delivered to you, or unsubscribe from this notification by following the link. Thank you. --Addbot (talk) 16:21, 28 June 2008 (UTC)

message
I'm sending this to all the wikiproject:mammals participants. There's a naming guideline up for discussion on the talk page, and the more people get involved the more valid any consensus drawn. Ironholds 19:14, 30 June 2008 (UTC)

August 2008
Welcome, and thank you for experimenting with Wikipedia. Your test worked, and it has been reverted or removed. Please take a look at the welcome page to learn more about contributing to this encyclopedia. If you would like to experiment further, please use the sandbox. TestEditBot (talk) 06:20, 1 August 2008 (UTC)

Better?
In Category:Algonquian loanwords, subdivided to toponyms, ethnonyms and personal names. Put the page as a sub-cat of Algonquian languages. Plenty more candidates at User:CJLippert/notes. CJLippert (talk) 03:31, 4 August 2008 (UTC)


 * most definitely better! i am steeped in biology, while in linguistics i'm more an appreciative observer; but whatever the subject, i do so love to see order arise out of chaos. :) - Μετανοιδ  (talk, email) 03:44, 4 August 2008 (UTC)
 * meno-izhiwebizij! ("That's good" in Ojibwe language) CJLippert (talk) 03:49, 4 August 2008 (UTC)


 * I think it's great. It's really overwhelming how many Algonquian terms are a regular part of North Americans' lives, and these categories serve well to document them in a comprehensive and logical way. My hat is off to you all. Badagnani (talk) 06:15, 4 August 2008 (UTC)
 * Calling it quits for the day... at 500 in the toponym subcategory. Should this subcategory be split to something a bit smaller? CJLippert (talk) 03:09, 5 August 2008 (UTC)
 * if you think it's necessary/approprite; it's at three pages, 200/pg. is that too long, think? maybe "geographical features" and "cities & counties" or some such? something that makes a split between human settlements/jurisdictions/corporate entities, and natural features such as lakes, rivers, and mountains. (not sure where, say, National Forests might fall, tho.) - Μετανοιδ  (talk, email) 03:20, 5 August 2008 (UTC)


 * That might be a good idea, but I'm not sure it's necessary, as with this subcat one can see all 4, 5, 6 or whatever place names (city, county, river, lake, pond, etc.) are named after the same word. I believe there are probably several hundred more; have you all looked at the Google Books link I placed into the cat? It has hundreds of pages, and each page has at least about a half dozen Algonquian (or likely Algonquian) place names, probably at least 20 to 30 percent of which are so small (streams and lakes, primarily) we don't yet have WP articles for them. Badagnani (talk) 05:46, 5 August 2008 (UTC)

Category space
Although there might be very good reason to do so - essays on category pages are wasted - it should be in an article somewhere! SatuSuro 12:20, 6 August 2008 (UTC)

My apologies - I think I noew understand and see what you are doing - and well done - I am sure there are not enough regional categories for such a subject - keep up the good work! SatuSuro 13:35, 6 August 2008 (UTC)


 * cool! ;) i wasn't sure what you meant at first, but no offense taken. see ya 'round  - Μετανοιδ  (talk, email) 14:12, 6 August 2008 (UTC)

Thats ok - there is always need for south east asia categories to tie in the disparate but linked issues - i dont think the project is very active - and most national based projects dont seem to speak t each other - if at all :( SatuSuro 14:22, 6 August 2008 (UTC)

I strongly suggest you talk to an admin about the issue - they could help you - if you know one - i think ones in my area are either asleep or finished for the night - I am sorry I m not one and have very mixed feelings about how to deal with malicious vandals who may also be puppets SatuSuro 14:58, 6 August 2008 (UTC)
 * cool, thanks for the advice. to tell the truth, i did fan the flames a teensie bit. been up all night and whatnot, hehe. - Μετανοιδ  (talk, email) 15:02, 6 August 2008 (UTC)

Have mentioned it to an admin - but hey if you gonna get into sleep deprivation (I know of some eds who do) you gotta be very very careful with that sort of stuff - believe me - honesty might save you - but hey you can get reprimands from others not so gentle :) SatuSuro
 * much appreciated! - Μετανοιδ  (talk, email) 15:16, 6 August 2008 (UTC)

WikiProject Birds August newsletter
The August 2008 issue of the Bird WikiProject newsletter has been published. You may read the newsletter, change the format in which future issues will be delivered to you, or unsubscribe from this notification by following the link. Thank you. MeegsC | Talk 01:03, 11 August 2008 (UTC)

Illustrated reconstructions of extinct species
Thanks for your last response. Sorry if you thought my posts were rancorous, I was only giving certain people a taste of their own medicine - this approach has already taught one well-known bully a lesson. I actually find the debate tedious, but I'm not going to let a couple of self-righteous rule-wavers deprive us of a competent artist. -- Philcha (talk) 13:42, 12 August 2008 (UTC)
 * my complaints weren't with you! actually, i think we're mostly in agreement. if i used your handle instead of someone else's, i apologize. - Μετανοιδ  (talk, email) 14:24, 12 August 2008 (UTC)


 * No, you didn't name names. But I was aware that I was taking no prisoners, which is not my normal style. -- Philcha (talk) 16:24, 12 August 2008 (UTC)

WikiProject Amphibians and Reptiles: Rollcall
At WikiProject Amphibians and Reptiles, we recently did a purge of the members list, which your name was on. Please re-add your username as well as your area of expertise at our list of participants if you plan to stay active in this Wikiproject. Also, a discussion is going on regarding the standardization of taxonomy in lizard articles, located in this section. We'd like to have some more voices in this matter. Thanks everyone!  bibliomaniac 1  5  23:20, 24 September 2008 (UTC)

WikiProject Birds October newsletter
The October 2008 issue of the Bird WikiProject newsletter has been published. You may read the newsletter, change the format in which future issues will be delivered to you, or unsubscribe from this notification by following the link. Thank you. This has been an automated delivery by BrownBot (talk) 00:25, 11 October 2008 (UTC)

WikiProject Birds November newsletter
The July 2024 issue of the Bird WikiProject newsletter has been published. You may read the newsletter, change the format in which future issues will be delivered to you, or unsubscribe from this notification by following the link. Thank you. This has been an automated delivery by TinucherianBot (talk) 07:49, 11 November 2008 (UTC)

WikiProject Birds February newsletter
The February 2009 issue of the Bird WikiProject newsletter has been published. You may read the newsletter, change the format in which future issues will be delivered to you, or unsubscribe from this notification by following the link. Thank you. MeegsC | Talk 22:08, 10 February 2009 (UTC)

WikiProject Birds March newsletter
The March 2009 issue of the Bird WikiProject newsletter has been published. You may read the newsletter, change the format in which future issues will be delivered to you, or unsubscribe from this notification by following the link. Thank you. This has been an automated delivery by BrownBot (talk) 21:40, 3 March 2009 (UTC)

Mucophagy
I reverted (sorry, with insufficiently clear explanation) because this is a borderline case. Neither mucophagy nor carnivore articles provide reliable references in support of this categorization. Template, as you may guess, is not a valid proof, no insult intended. I may agree with the phrase "In a more general sense, an animal may be considered a carnivore if it prefers feeding on animal matter over plant matter," but it is unreferenced, too. I am not an expert in vores. If there were a black-and-white split herbi/carni then I would close my eyes on "citations missing". But the mentioned template contains "other" section for whatever reason. I respect the desire to make an order here. But please start from solid and numerous references in carnivore page. Then you may proceed to templates, categories etc. I have no idea how it is in biology, but Linguistics project witnessed bloody battles about classifications of languages in early days of wikipedia until solid foundation of basic references was set. - 7-bubёn >t 04:31, 4 March 2009 (UTC)


 * clear enough! maybe i'll look into it. - Μετανοιδ  (talk, email) 04:41, 4 March 2009 (UTC)

WikiProject Birds April newsletter
The April 2009 issue of the Bird WikiProject newsletter has been published. You may read the newsletter, change the format in which future issues will be delivered to you, or unsubscribe from this notification by following the link. Thank you. MeegsC | Talk 15:54, 8 April 2009 (UTC)

WikiProject Birds May newsletter
The May 2009 issue of the Bird WikiProject newsletter has been published. You may read the newsletter, change the format in which future issues will be delivered to you, or unsubscribe from this notification by following the link. Thank you.
 * Newsletter delivery by xenobot  06:10, 17 May 2009 (UTC)

WikiProject Birds June newsletter
The June 2009 issue of the Bird WikiProject newsletter has been published. You may read the newsletter, change the format in which future issues will be delivered to you, or unsubscribe from this notification by following the link. Thank you.
 * Newsletter delivery by xenobot  13:54, 3 June 2009 (UTC)

WikiProject Birds August newsletter
The August 2009 issue of the Bird WikiProject newsletter has been published. You may read the newsletter, change the format in which future issues will be delivered to you, or unsubscribe from this notification by following the link. Thank you.
 * Newsletter delivery by –xeno talk 02:22, 6 August 2009 (UTC)

Astrodon
i read WP:STUB. i'm still not sure why this article wouldn't be under the purview of sauropodomorph-stubs. what am i not getting? Μετανοιδ  (talk, email)
 * Hi Metanoid,
 * WP:STUB states that stubs are "only a few sentences of text which is too short to provide encyclopedic coverage of a subject". The article on Astrodon has 13 sentences, two images, a taxobox, inline citations, and external links. This is a stub: it desperately needs expansion and attention. It has two sentences.
 * You should feel free to expand Astrodon, if you have good, solid scientific sources for the article; I encourage you to do so. But adding goofy maintenance tags that aren't applicable won't help readers of the article. Best wishes and happy editing, Firsfron of Ronchester  02:10, 27 November 2009 (UTC)
 * i don't see why a stub tag shouldn't be added to an entry that is clearly rated as "stub-class". please explain. Μετανοιδ  Μετανοιδ  (talk, email) 17:36, 27 November 2009 (UTC)
 * It was rated as stub class on June 13, 2008, when it looked like this. If we based stub tags on very old article assessments from users who don't bother to update the tags, we'd have a lot of stub tags on articles. Firsfron of Ronchester  17:59, 27 November 2009 (UTC)

Arctodus
Arctodus is a member of Tremarctinae subfamily, not of Ursinae; I've just corrected your edit.--Supremo (talk) 21:19, 28 March 2010 (UTC)


 * new paper, i see. good enough! Μετανοιδ  (talk, email) 02:13, 29 March 2010 (UTC)

Announcement
Hello! I'm The Arbiter, one of the coordinators for WikiProject Zoo. I am proud to announce the launch of a new portal: Portal:Zoos and Aquariums! ZooPro, ZooFari, and I worked hard to create a new portal for information on zoos, aquariums, and the associated projects and articles on Wikipedia. If you could head on over, take a look at our work, and maybe learn some more about zoos and Wikiproject Zoo, it would be great! Cheers and Happy Editing!

Delivered by MessageDeliveryBot on behalf of The Arbiter (talk) at 03:34, 14 December 2010 (UTC).

ArbCom elections are now open!
MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 13:52, 23 November 2015 (UTC)

edit on Homo erectus
Yea, I put a "ridiculous reference to Walmart" in order to cheer things up. Wikipedia's been known for jokes and pranks to help lighten the stuffy mood. In a way, it's kind of true, in a very loose way, as there are people who most likely go to Walmart that look a lot like cavemen and early humans/hominids. Some of them probably act like them too. However, they are of the subspecies Homo sapiens sapiens, as we both know, definitely not Homo erectus.137.118.106.113 (talk) 23:36, 5 March 2018 (UTC)


 * Just because we're serious here doesn't mean we don't have a sense of humor-- I like a good laugh as much as anyone. Regardless of your intent, however, this is an encyclopedia, and jokes inserted into public pages will not be well received. This is for the same reason that physical/prop comedy would not go over well in a glass-blowing foundry: it's not because glass-blowers don't have a sense of humor, it's because joking around makes a mess and gets in the way of the work to be done. There's a time and a place, no? Maybe find some other venue in which to practice; it's a big internet, after all. Μετανοιδ  (talk, email) 00:38, 6 March 2018 (UTC)

Category:Mammals of Southwest Asia has been nominated for discussion
Category:Mammals of Southwest Asia, which you created, has been nominated for possible deletion, merging, or renaming. A discussion is taking place to decide whether this proposal complies with the categorization guidelines. 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) 07:09, 21 December 2018 (UTC)