User talk:Paleocemoski/Archive 1

Fair use images
Please don't use fair use images in userspace. Also you user page should not be listed in article categories. CambridgeBayWeather (talk) 03:08, 3 July 2013 (UTC)

Sandboxing your userpage
It might be a good idea as it appears like an article. Would you like me to help with that? Anna Frodesiak (talk) 04:10, 5 July 2013 (UTC)

October 2013
Hello, I'm In Transit. I wanted to let you know that I undid one of your recent contributions, such as the one you made with this edit to Pareiasuchus, because it didn’t appear constructive to me. If you think I made a mistake, or if you have any questions, you can leave me a message on my talk page. Thanks. Martinian  Leave a message!   19:55, 13 October 2013 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for October 14
Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Pumiliopareiasauria, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Anthodon (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver). Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ* Join us at the DPL WikiProject.

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 11:47, 14 October 2013 (UTC)

Hello Paleocemoski, and welcome to Wikipedia. Your addition to Deltavjatia has had to be removed, as it appears to have added copyrighted material without permission from the copyright holder. While we appreciate your contributing to Wikipedia, there are certain things you must keep in mind about using information from your sources to avoid copyright or plagiarism issues here.


 * You can only copy/translate a small amount of a source, and you must mark what you take as a direct quotation with double quotation marks (") and a cited source. You can read about this at Non-free content in the sections on "text". See also Referencing for beginners, for how to cite sources here.
 * Aside from limited quotation, you must put all information in your own words and structure, in proper paraphrase. Following the source's words too closely can create copyright problems, so it is not permitted here; see Close paraphrasing. (There is a college-level introduction to paraphrase, with examples, hosted by the Online Writing Lab of Purdue.) Even when using your own words, you are still, however, asked to cite your sources to verify information and to demonstrate that the content is not original research.
 * Our primary policy on using copyrighted content is Copyrights. You may also want to review Copy-paste.
 * In very rare cases (that is, for sources that are public domain or compatibly licensed), it may be possible to include greater portions of a source text. However, please seek help at the help desk before adding such content to the article. 99.9% of sources may not be added in this way, so it is necessary to seek confirmation first. If you do confirm that a source is public domain or compatibly licensed, you will still need to provide full attribution; see Plagiarism for the steps you need to follow.
 * Also note that Wikipedia articles may not be copied without attribution. If you want to copy from another Wikipedia project or article, you can, but please follow the steps in Copying within Wikipedia.

It's very important that contributors understand and follow these practices, as policy requires that people who persistently do not must be blocked from editing. If you have any questions about this, you are welcome to leave me a message on my talk page. Thank you. Theroadislong (talk) 17:02, 14 October 2013 (UTC)

Talkback
Ross Hill ( talk ) 23:31, 16 Oct 2013 (UTC) 23:31, 16 October 2013 (UTC)

Re: Adopt Me
Hi, Paleocemoski. I really appreciate the request, but I haven't been very active on Wikipedia as of late due to a number of things going on in my life. I would have loved to have adopted you, but with my current inconsistent editing I don't think I'd be a good option. If you wish, I can help you find another adopter, though.

Sorry.

CtP (t • c) 19:35, 18 October 2013 (UTC)

Adoption
OK Paleo (is that an OK nickname?), your adoption center is located here. Shall we begin?  Go  Phightins  !  17:25, 20 October 2013 (UTC)
 * Sure,it's ok (My first nickname at Wikipedia) and let's begin.--Paleocemoski (talk) 17:48, 20 October 2013 (UTC)
 * OK, sign at the top of the adoption page, watchlist it, read the first lesson, and let me know in the questions section if you have any questions or are ready for the test.  Go  Phightins  !  17:52, 20 October 2013 (UTC)
 * I have a question; what is the wikiparaphernalia?--Paleocemoski (talk) 17:56, 20 October 2013 (UTC)
 * Oh, sorry. That would be barnstars and the like.  Go  Phightins  !  17:58, 20 October 2013 (UTC)
 * Any questions, or are you ready for your first quiz?  Go  Phightins  !  21:26, 20 October 2013 (UTC)
 * I looked at the page but I'm busy today.I'll be ready for my first quiz at tomorrow night.--Paleocemoski (talk) 21:34, 20 October 2013 (UTC)

All right, no rush.  Go  Phightins  !  22:48, 20 October 2013 (UTC)
 * I didn't understand pillar four and five.--Paleocemoski (talk) 17:27, 21 October 2013 (UTC)
 * Pillar four is asserts that Wikipedians should treat one another with respect and civility - basically, be nice and assume others are acting in good faith. Pillar five essentially says that our rules could be wrong, so if one impedes something you are trying to do to improve the encyclopedia, you have license to ignore it.  Go  Phightins  !  15:21, 22 October 2013 (UTC)
 * Any other questions?  Go  Phightins  !  16:49, 24 October 2013 (UTC)

Avenantia
Hello Paleocemoski!

As I don't want to fight an edit-war, I want to discuss the Avenantia/Moschops issue with you here. You argued that Avenantia is synonymous with Moschops, because the Moschops article said so. There are two problems with that:

1. The article says following: This apparently aberrant form may simply be a juvenile of Moschops. It doesn't say it was a synonym, just that it could have been one.

2. It cites no source, therefore we don't know if it is from a quality source. If you have one, I would appreciate if you can show it. Furthermore, the paper in the Avenantia article (the only free access article I could find via google scholar) listed four synonyms for Moschops. Avenantia was not among them. Therefore, I doubt we should simply redirect the article to Moschops. Jinfengopteryx (talk) 18:27, 23 October 2013 (UTC)


 * Hello,Jinfengopteryx. I found the source at here at Paleos.com and most editors find it as a reliable source. I agree on : It doesn't say it was a synonym, just that it could have been one. but Avenantia isn't fully grown animal. It's junior synonym of a Tapinocephalid (and most likely it's Moschops' junior synonym). Paleocemoski (talk) 19:04, 23 October 2013 (UTC)


 * Thank you for providing the source! However, I find it somewhat questionable. It had some unfounded claims (like 5 m for Moschops) and it seems to be a second hand source (added to this, most of it's sources are quite terrible). By the way, I suggest you to edit the "Classfication" section in the Moschops article, because it is exactly the same text, as in your link and this is a NoGo at Wikipedia, so we should paraphrase it. Jinfengopteryx (talk) 19:21, 23 October 2013 (UTC)


 * You are right about classfication section in the Moschops article.I've been editing articles about Permian life (my favorite subject) since I become a wikipedian but I need help about it.Many of them are far from being good.Paleocemoski (talk) 19:38, 23 October 2013 (UTC)


 * What should we do with the Avenantia article now?
 * P.S. I will take care about the the Classification section of Moschops. Jinfengopteryx (talk) 14:08, 24 October 2013 (UTC)

Walking with Dinosaurs
Hello, why did you remove a couple of items from the "Creatures in film" section at Walking with Dinosaurs (film)? All the items have a reference. For the two you removed, they are shown here. Thanks, Erik (talk &#124; contribs) 12:10, 7 November 2013 (UTC)
 * Hello, I did it because Edmontonia is the ankylosaur and Quetzalcoatlus is the pterosaur in the movie so I deleted those two.Paleocemoski (talk) 13:07, 7 November 2013 (UTC)
 * Okay, got it! Do you think we should reverse that? While Edmontonia and Quetzalcoatlus are more specific, the other labels are used on the official movie website, maybe because they are more recognizable labels. Erik (talk &#124; contribs) 01:45, 8 November 2013 (UTC)
 * I think, it is better to keep them as genus, like rest of them. By doing that people can research those animals.Paleocemoski (talk) 14:12, 8 November 2013 (UTC)

DYK for Lythronax
The DYK project (nominate) 16:04, 14 November 2013 (UTC)

DYK for Teratophoneus
The DYK project (nominate) 16:05, 14 November 2013 (UTC)