User talk:MtBotany/Archive 2024

2023 ← Back ≪🌿≫ Forward → 2025

Welcome to the 2024 WikiCup!
Happy New Year and Happy New WikiCup! The 2024 competition has just begun and all article creators, expanders, improvers and reviewers are welcome to take part. Even if you are a novice editor you should be able to advance to at least the second round, improving your editing skills as you go. If you have already signed up, your submissions page can be found here. If you have not yet signed up, you can add your name here and the judges will set up your submissions page ready for you to take part. Any questions on the scoring, rules or anything else should be directed to one of the judges, or posted to the WikiCup talk page. Signups will close on 31 January, and the first round will end on 26 February; the 64 highest scorers at that time will move on to round 2. The judges for the WikiCup this year are:, , and. Good luck! If you wish to start or stop receiving this newsletter, please feel free to add or remove your name from WikiCup/Newsletter/Send. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 00:21, 1 January 2024 (UTC)

Response to your edits of Asclepias syriaca

 * You reverted my edits to Asclepias syriaca that had bundled citations using an obsolete format. I have therefore created in that article new bundled citations in accordance with "WP:CITEBUNDLE: Use a bullet list". 2601:140:9480:81B0:346F:3316:C446:69CA (talk) 15:26, 8 January 2024 (UTC)
 * @26001015b126631e7d146b4e50c1fa72 I doubt you will see this since you do not have an account. I made a mistake and I apologize. The bundling thing did something that made it seem like you were breaking references. 🌿MtBotany (talk) 20:10, 9 January 2024 (UTC)

DYK for Cymbalaria muralis
Isabelle Belato 🏳‍🌈 00:02, 16 January 2024 (UTC)

A Plant for You

 * Thanks, @Cynthia Nocton. It is fairly easy to learn about plants, because they're modular. Lots of repeating patterns and structures. Shall I create a draft for Pycnanthemum muticum then? I'd be pleased to teach the tricks of plant editing. The best first step for Wikipedia is double checking with some really good databases like POWO, FNA, and/or World Plants to see if botanists have this one settled or are still having punch outs over the right name. if you check the draft you can see how I formatted the information from POWO and interpreted the information in plain English for a general audience. I always start with taxonomy because that is actually easiest once you know the way author abbreviation and suchlike work. 🌿MtBotany (talk) 20:40, 22 January 2024 (UTC)
 * Hey, that would be pretty cool! Thank you! Cynthia-Coriníon (talk) 03:56, 23 January 2024 (UTC)
 * @Cynthia Nocton Almost done with my draft. Want to check it out? I'm going to search for some pictures in iNaturalist. Let me know if you'd like do some work or if I should finish it off. 🌿MtBotany (talk) 00:26, 26 January 2024 (UTC)
 * Hi, I think it's pretty good as it is. It gives me some idea on how to write botanical articles, as well! Thank you! Cynthia-Coriníon (talk) 22:58, 28 January 2024 (UTC)
 * @Cynthia Nocton Excellent. Possibly said with a Mr Burns style steepling of my fingers.
 * If you have any questions about my method of finding sources, do ask. Happy To increase the knowledge of how to write this stuff. I'm also writing an essay about botanical writing but it is far from done and I don't know if my style is understandable. 🌿MtBotany (talk) 06:48, 29 January 2024 (UTC)

New page reviewer granted
Hi MtBotany. Your account has been added to the " " user group. Please check back at the permissions page in case your user right is time-limited or probationary. This user group allows you to review new pages through the Curation system and mark them as patrolled, tag them for maintenance issues, or nominate them for deletion. The list of articles awaiting review is located at the New Pages Feed. New page reviewing is vital to maintaining the integrity of the encyclopedia. If you have not already done so, you must read the tutorial at New Pages Review, the linked guides and essays, and fully understand the deletion policy. If you need any help or want to discuss the process, you are welcome to use the new page reviewer talk page or ask via the NPP Discord. In addition, please remember:
 * Be nice to new editors. They are usually not aware that they are doing anything wrong. Do make use of the message feature when tagging  pages for maintenance so that  they are aware.
 * You will frequently be asked by users to explain why their page is being deleted. Please be formal and polite in your approach to them – even if they are not.
 * If you are not sure what to do with a page, don't review it – just leave it for another reviewer.
 * Accuracy is more important than speed. Take your time to patrol each page, including checking for copyright violations using Earwig's copyright violation detector, checking for duplicate articles, and evaluating sources (both in the article, and if needed, via a Google search) for compliance with the general notability guideline.
 * Please review some of our flowcharts (1, 2) to help ensure you don't forget any steps.
 * Use the message feature to communicate with article creators and offer advice as much as possible.

The reviewer right does not change your status or how you can edit articles. If you no longer want this user right, you also may ask any administrator to remove it for you at any time. In cases of abuse or persistent inaccuracy of reviewing, or long-term inactivity, the right may be withdrawn at administrator discretion. If you can read any languages other than English, please add yourself to the list of new page reviewers with language proficiencies. – robertsky (talk) 07:50, 23 January 2024 (UTC)

Fixing redirects
In your WP:RMTR, you said The page is edited and I can perform clean up of redirects once the move is completed.

Of course, you're welcome to clean up the redirects, but unless the redirect is high traffic you don't need to; there is a bot that comes around fixes double redirects every few hours. BilledMammal (talk) 12:34, 28 January 2024 (UTC)


 * I like to @BilledMammal. Gives me the chance to make sure they have the correct scientific name templates and look for errors. Moving as an excuse for cleaning. 🌿MtBotany (talk) 14:07, 28 January 2024 (UTC)
 * Makes sense, just thought I would comment in case you weren't aware - thank you for your good work! BilledMammal (talk) 14:10, 28 January 2024 (UTC)

Schedonorus to Lolium
Wanted your advice on whether Schedonorus (arundinaceus, pratensis, giganteus and if there are any others) should be moved to Lolium, in line with WOPO. In Festuca gigantea there is a 10 year old discussion about doing just this. It looks like a complicated change, though, and I'm not sure how to tackle it. E Wusk (talk)
 * Since POWO, WFO, and World Plants all agree on Schedonorus being synonymous with Lolium I think that there will be broad agreement with the move. I start a new topic on a relevant talk page like Talk:Lolium requesting comment on the proposed move and also post one to WT:PLANTS announcing the discussion. If no one comments at all I'll assume that there is no objection after a month. Then I just start knocking out one page after another after making sure the genus page and list of species is reasonably correct. Add a little bit to the Taxonomy section, or start it if absent, briefly talking about the history of various classifications. With that in hand I'll try to move the page myself and if it does not move post for technical help in the uncontroversial moves page.
 * I'm about to do Cupressus macnabiana to Hesperocyparis macnabiana and recently moved Hesperocyparis bakeri, as examples. The talk about the move seems to have settled down. The last one I completed was Mahonia to Berberis. 🌿 Mt B o t a n y (talk)) 18:49, 7 February 2024 (UTC)
 * Thanks, I'll give it a go as you suggest. E Wusk (talk)
 * I look forward to seeing the edits. I just finished my first edit of Cupressus macnabiana to prepare it for the move. I always take the opportunity to do a small amount of cleaning up of any article I'm preparing to move as long as I'm there. Make sure all the synonyms are correctly spelled by copying them directly out of Plants of the World Online, etc. I also personally like to see if I can find some of the papers where names were first published to see if there is anything of interest. In the one I just did I found information about who suggested the name and why, a good find. I did not go through all the synonyms because I just wanted to get the basics done. Since I could not move the page myself I posted a notice at Technical Requests with links to the discussions. 🌿 Mt B o t a n y (talk) 21:06, 7 February 2024 (UTC)

WikiCup 2024 February newsletter
The 2024 WikiCup is off to a flying start, with 135 participants. This is the largest number of participants we have seen since 2017.

Our current leader is newcomer, who has one FA on John Littlejohn (preacher) and 10 GAs and 12 DYKs mostly on New Zealand coinage and Inuit figures. Here are some more noteworthy scorers:


 * , with one FA on Hö'elün, two GAs on Mongolia-related articles, and two DYKs;
 * , with one FA on Doom (2016 video game), one GA on Boundary Fire (2017), and 11 reviews;
 * , with one FA on Holidays (Meghan Trainor song), a nine-article FT on 30 (album), and two DYKs;
 * , with one FA on OneShot and one DYK;
 * , with five GAs and five DYKs on television and radio stations;
 * and, both with one FA and one DYK each.

As a reminder, competitors may submit work for the first round until 23:59 (UTC) on 27 February, and the second round starts 1 March. Remember that only the top 64 scoring competitors will make it through to the second round; currently, competitors need at least 15 points to progress. If you are concerned that your nomination will not receive the necessary reviews, and you hope to get it promoted before the end of the round, please list it on WikiCup/Reviews. However, please remember to continue to offer reviews at GAN, FAC and all the other pages that require them to prevent any backlogs which could otherwise be caused by the Cup. As ever, questions are welcome on Wikipedia talk:WikiCup and the judges (,, and ) are reachable on their talk pages. Good luck! If you wish to start or stop receiving this newsletter, please feel free to add or remove your name from WikiCup/Newsletter/Send. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 17:58, 11 February 2024 (UTC)

WikiCup 2024 March newsletter
The first round of the 2024 WikiCup ended at 23:59 (UTC) on 27 February. Everyone with at least 30 points moved on to Round 2, the highest number of points required to advance to the second round since 2014. Due to a six-way tie for the 64th-place spot, 67 contestants have qualified for Round 2.

The following scorers in Round 1 all scored more than 300 points:


 * , who has 916 points mostly from one FA on John Littlejohn (preacher), 15 GAs, and 16 DYKs on a variety of topics including New Zealand coinage and Inuit figures, in addition to seven reviews
 * , who has 790 points from two FAs on Felix M. Warburg House and Doom (2016 video game), two GAs, one DYK, and 11 reviews
 * , who has 580 points from one FA on Hö'elün, two GAs on Mongolia-related articles, two DYKs, and five reviews
 * , who has 420 points mostly from nine GAs and seven DYKs on television and radio stations
 * , who has 351 points from one FA on Holidays (Meghan Trainor song), a nine-article FT on 30 (album), and three DYKs
 * , who has 345 points from one FA on OneShot, one DYK and two reviews

In this newsletter, the judges would like to pay a special tribute to, who unfortunately passed away this February. At the time of his death, he was the second-highest-scoring competitor. Outside the WikiCup, he had eight other featured articles, five A-class articles, eight other good articles, and two Four Awards. Vami also wrote an essay on completionism, a philosophy in which he deeply believed. If you can, please join us in honoring his memory by improving one of the articles on his to-do list.

Remember that any content promoted after 27 February but before the start of Round 2 can be claimed in Round 2. Invitations for collaborative writing efforts or any other discussion of potentially interesting work is always welcome on the WikiCup talk page. Remember, if two or more WikiCup competitors have done significant work on an article, all can claim points. If you are concerned that your nomination—whether it is at good article candidates, a featured process, or anywhere else—will not receive the necessary reviews, please list it on WikiCup/Reviews Needed. If you want to help out with the WikiCup, feel free to review one of the nominations listed on Wikipedia:WikiCup/Reviews Needed. Questions are welcome on Wikipedia talk:WikiCup, and the judges are reachable on their talk pages. Good luck! If you wish to start or stop receiving this newsletter, please feel free to add or remove your name from WikiCup/Newsletter/Send. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 00:41, 28 February 2024 (UTC)

RFA2024 update: no longer accepting new proposals in phase I
Hey there! This is to let you know that phase I of the 2024 requests for adminship (RfA) review is now no longer accepting new proposals. Lots of proposals remain open for discussion, and the current round of review looks to be on a good track towards making significant progress towards improving RfA's structure and environment. I'd like to give my heartfelt thanks to everyone who has given us their idea for change to make RfA better, and the same to everyone who has given the necessary feedback to improve those ideas. The following proposals remain open for discussion:


 * Proposal 2, initiated by, provides for the addition of a text box at Requests for adminship reminding all editors of our policies and enforcement mechanisms around decorum.
 * Proposals 3 and 3b, initiated by and, respectively, provide for trials of discussion-only periods at RfA. The first would add three extra discussion-only days to the beginning, while the second would convert the first two days to discussion-only.
 * Proposal 5, initiated by, provides for a trial of RfAs without threaded discussion in the voting sections.
 * Proposals 6c and 6d, initiated by, provide for allowing users to be selected as provisional admins for a limited time through various concrete selection criteria and smaller-scale vetting.
 * Proposal 7, initiated by, provides for the "General discussion" section being broken up with section headings.
 * Proposal 9b, initiated by, provides for the requirement that allegations of policy violation be substantiated with appropriate links to where the alleged misconduct occured.
 * Proposals 12c, 21, and 21b, initiated by, , and , respectively, provide for reducing the discretionary zone, which currently extends from 65% to 75%. The first would reduce it 65%–70%, the second would reduce it to 50%–66%, and the third would reduce it to 60%–70%.
 * Proposal 13, initiated by, provides for periodic, privately balloted admin elections.
 * Proposal 14, initiated by, provides for the creation of some minimum suffrage requirements to cast a vote.
 * Proposals 16 and 16c, initiated by and, respectively, provide for community-based admin desysop procedures. 16 would desysop where consensus is established in favor at the administrators' noticeboard; 16c would allow a petition to force reconfirmation.
 * Proposal 16e, initiated by, would extend the recall procedures of 16 to bureaucrats.
 * Proposal 17, initiated by, provides for "on-call" admins and 'crats to monitor RfAs for decorum.
 * Proposal 18, initiated by, provides for lowering the RfB target from 85% to 75%.
 * Proposal 24, initiated by, provides for a more robust alternate version of the optional candidate poll.
 * Proposal 25, initiated by, provides for the requirement that nominees be extended-confirmed in addition to their nominators.
 * Proposal 27, initiated by, provides for the creation of a training course for admin hopefuls, as well as periodic retraining to keep admins from drifting out of sync with community norms.
 * Proposal 28, initiated by, tightens restrictions on multi-part questions.

To read proposals that were closed as unsuccessful, please see Requests for adminship/2024 review/Phase I/Closed proposals. You are cordially invited once again to participate in the open discussions; when phase I ends, phase II will review the outcomes of trial proposals and refine the implementation details of other proposals. Another notification will be sent out when this phase begins, likely with the first successful close of a major proposal. Happy editing! theleekycauldron (talk • she/her), via:

MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 10:53, 14 March 2024 (UTC)

Noccaea fendleri
Would you be interested in creating an article for Noccaea fendleri? A lot of the literature pre-2014 refers to it as Noccaea montana, which is now considered to be an exclusively European species. I created the N. montana article years ago by splitting some content from another Wikipedia article where the western North American species was getting mixed-up with another European species due to them sharing the vernacular name "alpine pennywort". The result is that N. montana is really about N. fendleri; I'm not sure that there is anything in the N. montana article that is really worth salvaging aside from maybe the range map. Plantdrew (talk) 22:26, 18 March 2024 (UTC)


 * @Plantdrew I can and I'm happy to do. I'll start a draft today since the information at N. montana is not worth saving. I'll probably have a page ready by the end of the week. 🌿 Mt B o t a n y (talk) 16:09, 19 March 2024 (UTC)

DYK for Juniperus scopulorum
RoySmith (talk) 00:03, 20 March 2024 (UTC)

DYK for Anchusa officinalis
—Ganesha811 (talk) 12:02, 30 March 2024 (UTC)

New Pages Patrol newsletter April 2024
Hello ,

Backlog update: The October drive reduced the article backlog from 11,626 to 7,609 and the redirect backlog from 16,985 to 6,431! Congratulations to, who led with over 2,300 points.

Following that, New Page Patrol organized another backlog drive for articles in January 2024. The January drive started with 13,650 articles and reduced the backlog to 7,430 articles. Congratulations to, who achieved first place with 1,340 points in this drive.

Looking at the graph, it seems like backlog drives are one of the only things keeping the backlog under control. Another backlog drive is being planned for May. Feel free to participate in the May backlog drive planning discussion.

It's worth noting that both queues are gradually increasing again and are nearing 14,034 articles and 22,540 redirects. We encourage you to keep contributing, even if it's just a single patrol per day. Your support is greatly appreciated!

2023 Awards won the 2023 cup with 17,761 article reviews last year - that's an average of nearly 50/day. There was one Platinum Award (10,000+ reviews), 2 Gold Awards (5000+ reviews), 6 Silver (2000+), 8 Bronze (1000+), 30 Iron (360+) and 70 more for the 100+ barnstar. led on redirect reviews by clearing 36,175 of them. For the full details, see the Awards page and the Hall of Fame. Congratulations everyone for their efforts in reviewing!

WMF work on PageTriage: The WMF Moderator Tools team and volunteer software developers deployed the rewritten NewPagesFeed in October, and then gave the NewPagesFeed a slight visual facelift in November. This concludes most major work to Special:NewPagesFeed, and most major work by the WMF Moderator Tools team, who wrapped up their major work on PageTriage in October. The WMF Moderator Tools team and volunteer software developers will continue small work on PageTriage as time permits.

Recruitment: A couple of the coordinators have been inviting editors to become reviewers, via mass-messages to their talk pages. If you know someone who you'd think would make a good reviewer, then a personal invitation to them would be great. Additionally, if there are Wikiprojects that you are active on, then you can add a post there asking participants to join NPP. Please be careful not to double invite folks that have already been invited.

Reviewing tip: Reviewers who prefer to patrol new pages within their most familiar subjects can use the regularly updated NPP Browser tool.

Reminders:
 * You can access live chat with patrollers on the New Pages Patrol Discord.
 * Consider adding the project discussion page to your watchlist.
 * To opt out of future mailings, please remove yourself here.

MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 16:26, 2 April 2024 (UTC)

DYK for Hesperocyparis guadalupensis
Z1720 (talk) 00:02, 5 April 2024 (UTC)

WikiCup 2024 April newsletter
We are approaching the end of the 2024 WikiCup's second round, with a little over two weeks remaining. Currently, contestants must score at least 105 points to progress to the third round.

Our current top scorers are as follows:


 * with 642 points, mostly from 11 GAs about radio and television;
 * with 530 points, mostly from two FAs (Well he would, wouldn't he? and Cora Agnes Benneson) and three GAs;
 * with 523 points, mostly from 11 GAs about coinage and history;
 * with 497 points, mostly from a FA about the 2020 season of the soccer club Seattle Sounders FC and two GAs;
 * with 410 points, mostly from a FA about the drink Capri-Sun and three GAs;
 * with 330 points, mostly from a FA about the English botanist Anna Blackburne and a GA.

Competitors may submit work for the second round until the end of 28 April, and the third round starts 1 May. Remember that only competitors with the top 32 scores will make it through to the third round. If you are concerned that your nomination will not receive the necessary reviews, and you hope to get it promoted before the end of the round, please list it on WikiCup/Reviews. Please remember to continue to offer reviews at GAN, FAC and all the other pages that require them to prevent any backlogs. As a reminder, competitors are strictly prohibited from gaming Wikipedia policies or processes to receive more points.

If you would like to learn more about rules and scoring for the 2024 WikiCup, please read WikiCup/Scoring. Further questions are welcome on Wikipedia talk:WikiCup and the judges (,, and ) are reachable on their talk pages. Good luck! If you wish to start or stop receiving this newsletter, please feel free to add or remove your name from WikiCup/Newsletter/Send. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 15:05, 12 April 2024 (UTC)

Synonyms
There's always been an issue over listing synonyms in a species taxobox when the species has infrataxa. At Linnaea borealis, the reference given supports only the two listed here. If there is to be a combined list, i.e. synonyms of the species itself plus its infrataxa, then references for all of them need to be given. At Solidago virgaurea, each synonym says what it is of; I prefer the style at Prunus mahaleb. Peter coxhead (talk) 16:47, 18 April 2024 (UTC)

DYK nomination of Andrena astragali
Hello! Your submission of Andrena astragali at the Did You Know nominations page has been reviewed, and some issues with it may need to be clarified. Please review the comment(s) at your nomination's entry and respond there at your earliest convenience. Thank you for contributing to Did You Know! Generalissima (talk) (it/she) 21:20, 21 April 2024 (UTC)

WikiCup 2024 May newsletter
The second round of the 2024 WikiCup ended on 28 April. This round was particularly competitive: each of the 32 contestants who advanced to Round 3 scored at least 141 points. This is the highest number of points required to advance to Round 3 since 2014.

The following scorers in Round 2 all scored more than 500 points:
 * with 707 points, mostly from 45 good article nomination reviews and 12 good articless about radio and television;
 * with 600 points, mostly from 12 good articles and 12 did you know nominations about coinage and history;
 * with 552 points, mostly from a featured article about the 2020 Seattle Sounders FC season, three featured lists, and two good articles;
 * with 548 points, mostly from a featured article about the snooker player John Pulman, two featured lists, and one good article;
 * with 530 points, mostly from two featured articles (Well he would, wouldn't he? and Cora Agnes Benneson) and three good articles.

The full scores for Round 2 can be seen here. So far this year, competitors have gotten 18 featured articles, 22 featured lists, and 186 good articles, 76 in the news credits and at least 200 did you know credits. They have conducted 165 featured article reviews, as well as 399 good article reviews and peer reviews, and have added 21 articles to featured topics and good topics.

Remember that any content promoted after 28 April but before the start of Round 3 can be claimed during Round 3, which starts on 1 May at 00:00 (UTC). Invitations for collaborative writing efforts or any other discussion of potentially interesting work is always welcome on the WikiCup talk page. Remember, if two or more WikiCup competitors have done significant work on an article, all can claim points. If you are concerned that your nomination—whether it is at good article candidates, a featured process, or anywhere else—will not receive the necessary reviews, please list it on WikiCup/Reviews Needed.

If you would like to learn more about rules and scoring for the 2024 WikiCup, please see this page. Further questions are welcome on Wikipedia talk:WikiCup and the judges (,, and ) are reachable on their talk pages. Good luck! If you wish to start or stop receiving this newsletter, please feel free to add or remove your name from WikiCup/Newsletter/Send. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 13:38, 29 April 2024 (UTC)

RFA2024 update: phase I concluded, phase II begins
Hi there! Phase I of the Requests for adminship/2024 review has concluded, with several impactful changes gaining community consensus and proceeding to various stages of implementation. Some proposals will be implemented in full outright; others will be discussed at phase II before being implemented; and still others will proceed on a trial basis before being brought to phase II. The following proposals have gained consensus:

See the project page for a full list of proposals and their outcomes. A huge thank-you to everyone who has participated so far :) looking forward to seeing lots of hard work become a reality in phase II. theleekycauldron (talk), via MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 08:09, 5 May 2024 (UTC)
 * Proposals 2 and 9b (phase II discussion): Add a reminder of civility norms at RfA and Require links for claims of specific policy violations
 * Proposal 3b (in trial): Make the first two days discussion-only
 * Proposal 13 (in trial): Admin elections
 * Proposal 14 (implemented): Suffrage requirements
 * Proposals 16 and 16c (phase II discussion): Allow the community to initiate recall RfAs and Community recall process based on dewiki
 * Proposal 17 (phase II discussion): Have named Admins/crats to monitor infractions
 * Proposal 24 (phase II discussion): Provide better mentoring for becoming an admin and the RfA process
 * Proposal 25 (implemented): Require nominees to be extended confirmed

DYK for Andrena astragali
RoySmith (talk) 00:02, 18 May 2024 (UTC)

DYK for Toxicoscordion venenosum
RoySmith (talk) 00:02, 18 May 2024 (UTC)

Take it or leaf it
Hahaha. Your RFA comments always crack me up :) – Novem Linguae (talk) 01:40, 31 May 2024 (UTC)


 * Thanks, . Though, I think I need to start working on actual ahead of time nonsense. Gotta keep growing as an editor and not just relying on the universe to provide me with something approaching funny in the moment. 🌿 Mt B o t a n y (talk) 02:02, 31 May 2024 (UTC)
 * My tips for growing as an editor: 1) Place yourself in an area that gets plenty of sun. 2) Make sure that others water you frequently. 3) Watch out for aphids. Good luck my friend. It's a jungle out there! – Novem Linguae (talk) 02:39, 31 May 2024 (UTC)
 * , I totally agree that It's a Jungle Out There. Disorder and confusion everywhere. Though I disagree that no one seems to care. I could be wrong now... but I don't think so! Take care of yourself too, 'Cause it's a jungle out there. Send Sharona for wipes. ;) 🌿 Mt B o t a n y (talk) 22:16, 4 June 2024 (UTC)

Navigation 2023 ← Back ≪🌿≫ Forward → 2025