User talk:Pavel Ne

Welcome!
Hello, Pavel Ne, and welcome to Wikipedia! I hope you like the place and decide to stay. Here are some pages you might find helpful:
 * Introduction
 * The five pillars of Wikipedia
 * How to edit a page
 * How to write a great article
 * Simplified Manual of Style
 * Your first article
 * Discover what's going on in the Wikimedia community
 * Feel free to make test edits in the sandbox
 * and check out the Task Center, for ideas about what to work on.

I hope you enjoy editing here and being a Wikipedian! Please sign your name on talk pages using four tildes ( ~ ); this will automatically produce your name and the date. If you need help, please see our help pages, and if you can't find what you are looking for there, please feel free to ask me on my talk page or place  on this page and someone will drop by to help. Again, welcome! SchreiberBike &#124; ⌨ 22:17, 1 February 2021 (UTC)

Changes based on iNaturalist
Hello, I've seen some of the additions you've made to lists about Lepidoptera and wanted to share a concern. iNaturalist is not considered to be a reliable source for the presence of species in places. See this recent discussion.

I really don't want to discourage you from editing and I'm not going to go back and remove the things you've added, because they are probably right and it's not that bit a deal. I hope that you continue to work on Wikipedia and contribute relating to butterflies and moths or whatever strikes your fancy. If you have any questions, feel free to respond below and we can discuss. Thank you, SchreiberBike &#124; ⌨ 20:44, 8 March 2022 (UTC)


 * Hello! Thank you very much for your comment. Sorry, I really haven't heard about the unreliability of observations on the platform iNaturalist. Confirmations of observations were made by respected experts in this field of science, including curators. So you think we should refrain from adding such observations to this Wikipedia article? Thank you! Pavel Ne (talk) 10:02, 9 March 2022 (UTC)
 * Yes. It is Wikipedia's consensus to not use iNaturalist. Wikipedia uses secondary sources like peer reviewed articles published in the scientific literature rather than primary sources like iNaturalist. I understand the frustration because iNaturalist is produced by a mix of amateurs and professionals who are doing valuable scientific work, but it doesn't qualify as a reliable source on Wikipedia. Thank you. SchreiberBike &#124; ⌨ 16:11, 9 March 2022 (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) 00:55, 28 November 2023 (UTC)