User talk:Rlendog/Archive 3

Recent edits to lemur articles
Hi Rlendog, what did you think about the recent edits to lemur articles? I haven't got the sources to verify them. Some of the name changes go against MSW3, is there a more recent source we are following? Cheers, Jack (talk) 18:42, 3 March 2009 (UTC)
 * I need to look this up. I initially got confused by some of the changes, but moving the common name of the Red-fronted Brown Lemur to Red-fronted Lemur seems ok - that actually put it in conformance with MSW3.  Calling E. rufus the Red Lemur and trying to assign E. rufifrons to the Red-fronted Lemur may be problematic, though.  I will check other sources, but it seems to be based on the IUCN entry for E. rufus, but that assigns E. rufus to the Red-fronted Lemur.  Also, the Red Lemur article, even if appropriate, seems currently just copied from IUCN.  Did you also check with User:Visionholder and User:UtherSRG?  They are pretty knowledgable about such matters. Rlendog (talk) 19:19, 3 March 2009 (UTC)
 * I did find one recent paper that may support some of this, but I cannot access it. But what was written in the "Red Lemur" article was just copied from the speculation in the IUCN entry for the Red-fronted Lemur, so I redirected there and added a section noting the possible species split.  For now I left the listings in Lemur, Lemuroidea etc. alone, pending someone finding out if it is supported by the paper whose abstract I linked to above. Rlendog (talk) 19:51, 3 March 2009 (UTC)
 * I've tried to correct things, though I can't remember what I've done. I was aiming to follow MSW3: Red-fronted Lemur (Eulemur rufus) and IUCN: Red-fronted Brown Lemur (Eulemur rufifrons). I've got access to the paper, it does indeed recognise those two species. I'll try and update the articles with some of the findings. Jack (talk) 20:23, 3 March 2009 (UTC)
 * I've updated a few pages from that paper, which should be a main source considering we follow most of those primatologists' work anyway. Not sure if we should follow them for the common names though, all of which are in lower case. Cheers, Jack (talk) 02:38, 4 March 2009 (UTC)
 * I agree that is what we should do. MSW is fine, but can become outdated, and this paper is authored by Groves and Mittermeier, so it is hard to argue with.  The one thing I would not change (if there are any instances; I haven't gotten through the paper yet) is if a taxon remains the same in this paper as in MSW, but a different common name is given.  Then it seems best to stick with the MSW common name as the article title, but refer to the name in the paper as an alternate common name. Rlendog (talk) 02:58, 4 March 2009 (UTC)

DYK for List of Central American monkey species
--Dravecky (talk) 04:36, 5 March 2009 (UTC)

Captive orcas
See the latest version of this article, where a lot of the trivia has been split out into List of captive orcas. I would appreciate any suggestions for improvement, e.g. topics needing expansion, other topics that should be covered. etc. Aymatth2 (talk) 20:48, 7 March 2009 (UTC)
 * I think it looks very good, and covers all the topics I could think of off the top of my head with only one exception. A section on captive care - space, diet, medical attention, training for shows - may be useful. Rlendog (talk) 21:02, 7 March 2009 (UTC)
 * Didn't think of those - big gaps! I will see if I can dig up some material. Thanks, Aymatth2 (talk) 21:14, 7 March 2009 (UTC)
 * Done. Captive orcas. Now perfect. Well, almost perfect. Well... I have spent way too much time on this one - it needs contributions from editors who actually know something about the subject. Aymatth2 (talk) 15:44, 8 March 2009 (UTC)

Congratulations
Congratulations on the birth of your little girl! I only just noticed. Best wishes, Clayoquot (talk | contribs) 23:15, 7 March 2009 (UTC)
 * Thank you very much! She takes up a lot of time and energy (that might otherwise be spent on hobbies like Wikipedia), but she is wonderful and it's all worth it. 01:31, 8 March 2009 (UTC)

DYK for List of Detroit Tigers Opening Day starting pitchers
--Dravecky (talk) 03:05, 11 March 2009 (UTC)

DYK for Josh Billings (pitcher)
--Dravecky (talk) 03:07, 11 March 2009 (UTC)

Imperial Napoleonic triple crown


Your Imperial Napoleonic Majesty, outstanding work! Especially on Primate - great work on a key topic for the project. Cirt (talk) 20:33, 11 March 2009 (UTC)

Talkback
cf38 talk  10:52, 12 March 2009 (UTC)

You may want to comment...
Here. Dabomb87 (talk) 00:17, 24 March 2009 (UTC)

Reviewing a couple lemur pages
Hey, sorry I fell silent again. Anyway, I just re-wrote the Gray Mouse Lemur page and I was wondering if you could do me a favor and review it and the Collared Brown Lemur page? They're currently listed as "Start Class", and I plan to submit them for GA review soon. If you think they merit a better class, would you mind marking them up at your earliest convenience? Thanks! –Visionholder (talk) 10:30, 29 March 2009 (UTC)
 * I reviewed both of them. Gray Mouse Lemur is excellent, easily B-class, although someone beat me to reassessing it.  I think it would do well in GA review, with my only concerns being the fact that there are relatively few distinct sources, and the lack of a range map.  But in my opinion (not that I am an expert), neither should be fatal.  Maybe some more sources could be found if any papers on Google Scholar have something relevant.  I did make a few edits to tighten the wording a bit, and added a taxonomy section.
 * I am less sure about how to assess the Collared Brown Lemur article. My concern regarding the B-class standards is whether it satsfies "The article reasonably covers the topic, and does not contain obvious omissions or inaccuracies."  I think the article reasobly covers the topic to the extent that there is information available specific to the species.  But there are some noticable ommissions, such as diet, predation and details about social structure.  So I am not sure how that should be handled.  For now, I upgaded it to C-class, but I wouldn't object if someone wanted to rate it higher due to the paucity of materials on the subject. Rlendog (talk) 20:55, 29 March 2009 (UTC)
 * Thanks for fixing up Gray Mouse Lemur. It looks very nice.  A range map is forthcoming, and I plan to access more research articles when I move down near Duke University in late May/early June.  My luck is always that I have to pay for the useful articles I find online.  I will probably submit the article for a GA review soon.  Unfortunately, I am very busy balancing work and some volunteer working involving the quarantine and care of... Gray mouse lemurs!
 * I also agree that more could be said on Collared Brown Lemur, but given the relatively recent split from Common Brown Lemur, there is very little out there. Again, this is where accessing Duke's library will be helpful.  Thanks for your time!  –Visionholder (talk) 04:50, 30 March 2009 (UTC)

WikiProject Films March 2009 Newsletter
The March 2009 issue of the Films 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. If you have an idea for improving the newsletter please leave a message on my talk page. Happy editing! --Nehrams2020 (talk) 00:17, 1 April 2009 (UTC)

Articles you might like to edit, from SuggestBot
SuggestBot predicts that you will enjoy editing some of these articles. Have fun!

SuggestBot picks articles in a number of ways based on other articles you've edited, including straight text similarity, following wikilinks, and matching your editing patterns against those of other Wikipedians. It tries to recommend only articles that other Wikipedians have marked as needing work. Your contributions make Wikipedia better -- thanks for helping.

If you have feedback on how to make SuggestBot better, please tell me on SuggestBot's talk page. Thanks from ForteTuba, SuggestBot's caretaker.

P.S. You received these suggestions because your name was listed on the SuggestBot request page. If this was in error, sorry about the confusion. -- SuggestBot (talk) 15:45, 1 April 2009 (UTC)

WikiBirthday
I saw from here that it's been exactly two years since you joined the project. Happy WikiBirthday! Keep up the good work, r ʨ anaɢ talk/contribs 12:21, 7 April 2009 (UTC)
 * And a "Happy Wiki-Birthday" from me as well! Good work on the baseball and music articles, keep up the good work. – Quadell (talk) 16:53, 7 April 2009 (UTC)

Queen AfD's
Would you be interested in giving your opinion on The Works Tour and Queen bootlegs? DHowell (talk) 07:06, 13 April 2009 (UTC)

Featured list candidates/List of San Francisco Giants managers/archive1
Were you aware of this? Was the list ready? Dabomb87 (talk) 14:17, 13 April 2009 (UTC)
 * I was not aware of this. That said, it is probably about ready.  I have been reluctant to nominate it primarily for two reasons:
 * I have been very busy with RL lately, so wasn't sure I would have the time to devote to responding to comments.
 * I wasn't sure it was good enough, not so much because I know of anything specific to change, but because so far all my FLCs have been Opening Day starting pitcher lists, for which I kind of had the hang of what was needed. This one I am less sure of.
 * That said, it may be a good idea to FLC it at this point and get feedback on what can be improved, and hopefully get it done. Rlendog (talk) 02:11, 14 April 2009 (UTC)
 * Well, KV5 left several comments. I would be happy to review the list if you have time to work on it. Dabomb87 (talk) 22:23, 16 April 2009 (UTC)
 * Yes. I should be able work on this over the next few days.  Thanks. Rlendog (talk) 15:37, 17 April 2009 (UTC)

Your opinion: creating a list of lemur species
I plan to post this question to the Primate project talk page, but before I do, I wanted your opinion. I would like to create a List of lemur species page to be used with a new Lemur article I hope to write soon. Do you agree that this is something we need? If so, then why hasn't it been created yet? Anyway, I will create it once you and a few others agree it's it needed, so don't worry about it. (I've never messed with list pages, and I'd like to get the experience of creating one.)

Just looking for your feedback. –Visionholder (talk) 22:44, 23 April 2009 (UTC)


 * I think it is useful. I was actually considering doing one, similar to the List of Central American monkey species list I did a while back, although obviously a lemur list would be more extensive.  The only reservation I have is whether it should just be included in the Lemur article, rather than a separate list.  However, the lemur article needs to cover the biological and other aspects of lemurs in general so a separate list makes sense.  It may even make sense to make it a "List of extant Madagascar primates" (maybe the word "extant" isn't really needed) so the aye-aye could be included as well.  If you want, I can work on this with you.  I think a list of lemur species (or similar) has great potential. Rlendog (talk) 17:15, 28 April 2009 (UTC)


 * Sounds good. I will start the list this weekend, and you're help in refining it would be appreciated. Please give me time to clean up a few loose ends in my personal life before I can get started.  Again, this weekend is looking pretty good. –Visionholder (talk) 19:46, 28 April 2009 (UTC)


 * I'm about to start constructing a page entitled List of Madagascar primates so that the Aye-aye can be included. (It may be posted tomorrow or Sunday.) However, should I create a redirect for List of lemur species to the page as well? –Visionholder (talk) 20:40, 1 May 2009 (UTC)


 * Actually, I was just reading the Mittermeier paper that established the latest classification system, and in it, the Aye-aye is referred to (multiple times) as a species of lemur. Therefore, I may only create List of lemur species instead of a List of Madagascar primates.  Again, I hope to post it this weekend.  Hopefully to follow within the coming weeks will be a complete (much-needed) re-write of Lemur. –Visionholder (talk) 23:31, 1 May 2009 (UTC)


 * That makes sense. The lead can discuss the classification issues around aye-aye. Rlendog (talk) 00:27, 2 May 2009 (UTC)


 * Not to break with tradition, the upcoming list of lemur species page will be anything but half-assed. (Sorry, I like to create pages that are nearly complete.)  Anyway, I hope to post it later today.  I would've posted it yesterday, but real life events called me away for a while.  Just to give you a heads-up, some of the common names used on the page will point to page redirects. With a lot of the new species, some common names used on Wiki don't appear to be the most frequently used common name for those species.  As a consequence, I plan to use the more popular common names on the list, and whenever I get around to updating the individual pages, I will hit the academic literature and try to determine which common name should be the primary.  Anyway, I'm up for discussing it, but that's where I'm at right now.  You've also probably noticed all the clean-up I've been doing as I've been moving along through all the lemur families.  Hopefully it's helpful.  Best wishes, –Visionholder (talk) 18:54, 4 May 2009 (UTC)


 * The page has been created. I can't thank you enough for the excellent example that I was able to use as a template: List of Central American monkey species. Please look it over and polish it up as needed.  I may submit it for FL review sometime soon. –Visionholder (talk) 02:54, 5 May 2009 (UTC)


 * I'm glad you liked the style I used for the Central American monkey list. I haven't had time to look at your list in too much detail, but so far it looks great.  The only thing I see that would be an issue at FLC is a few unsourced statements (e.g., a few speculations on the future of the lemurs in the lead, the sentence on the taxonomic status of the aye-aye). Rlendog (talk) 17:08, 7 May 2009 (UTC)

Notice to Members of Wikiproject Aquarium Fishes
Notice to Members of Wikiproject Aquarium Fishes If you have recieved this notice it is because you signed up for the WP:AQF mothly newsletter, and have made a contribution to wikipedia within the last month. Wikiproject Aquarium Fish has seen a decline in member involvement over the past several months. This project is neary dead. I am trying to revive this project. Anyone who is still interested in working on this project please reply back to Drew R. Smith (talk) 23:20, 26 April 2009 (UTC)). If you know of any active members who have not contributed recently and might be interested in the project please forward this message to them. If no reply is given member will be removed from member list. Thank you. Drew R. Smith (talk) 23:20, 26 April 2009 (UTC)
 * Thank you for your swift reply. I understand the need to balance between projects. Just needed to confirm active members vs. idle ones. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Drew R. Smith (talk • contribs) 21:40, 28 April 2009 (UTC)

categories for Resplendent Quetzal
Hi. I noticed your edits at Resplendent Quetzal. Personally, I'm against "fauna of X country" categories, because if they are applied consistently, some articles would be in well over 100 categories. However, some people don't feel it would be a problem, so there's no policy or consensus on this question. I'm just raising the issue for you to think about. &mdash;JerryFriedman (Talk) 17:43, 30 April 2009 (UTC)
 * I'm not sure what the right answer is. I see your point.  But if we remove the "fauna of X country" marker from individual animal species but retain the category itself, that will cause confusion too, since the category exist but exclude certain species. Rlendog (talk) 00:20, 1 May 2009 (UTC)
 * I guess I'm suggesting not adding those categories to articles. That way if people do decide that the categories shouldn't exist, you won't have wasted work.  On the other hand, the decision probably won't get made till somebody adds all the geographical categories to House Sparrow and people can see how they like it. &mdash;JerryFriedman  (Talk) 20:27, 5 May 2009 (UTC)
 * It probably depends on the country. For a country like Costa Rica, where the fauna are an important aspect of their tourism and where people are specifically interested in their fauna, it probably makes sense to have that category.  For others, maybe not.  Personally, I don't much care whether those categories exist or not, but if they do exist they ought to be as correct and as complete as possible. Rlendog (talk) 04:30, 6 May 2009 (UTC)

WikiProject Films April 2009 Newsletter
The April 2009 issue of the Films 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. If you have an idea for improving the newsletter please leave a message on my talk page. --Happy editing! Nehrams2020 (talk • contrib) 07:53, 1 May 2009 (UTC)

WikiProject Films May 2009 Newsletter
The May 2009 issue of the Films 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. If you have an idea for improving the newsletter please leave a message on my talk page. --Happy editing! Nehrams2020 (talk • contrib) 23:43, 31 May 2009 (UTC)

tamarins
Thanks for the edits! I was going to work on them this afternoon and evening. :) - UtherSRG (talk) 18:28, 4 June 2009 (UTC)
 * Your welcome! I haven't seen you around in a while. It's good to see you back. Rlendog (talk) 18:29, 4 June 2009 (UTC)

NagasakibombEdit.jpg
Just so you know, there's a.  wadester 16  20:05, 5 June 2009 (UTC)

Remember ever reading WP:AGF?
Your insinuation that I violated WP:CANVASS is offensive. I left a neutrally worded request to an editor to look at several AfD's. Some are being disputed, some well on their way to deletion, not even receiving a single keep vote. If I had done it for only the closely contested ones, I MIGHT see your suspicion. I note you only left your insinuation on the ones that are closely contested, not on the ones that are well on the way to deletion. If I were to stop AGF like you have, I'd start wondering why you selectively decided to post your note on just those pages and not all of them? Niteshift36 (talk) 15:10, 9 June 2009 (UTC)
 * I noted that there might have been canvassing done. I did so because you for some reason chose to send a note to an editor who claims on his user page to be a "proud deletionist/reductionist" asking him to look at some of your AfD nominations, where there is no indication that he has any particular interest in those topics other than his stated deletionist sympathies.  I did not leave my note on the ones that are obviously on their way to deletion because there was no point to doing so.  If you are offended by my note I wouldn't think you would want it repeated more often than necessary.  If you happened to stumble on leaving your note to that particular editor for some reason other than his stated deletionist sympathies, then I apologize. Rlendog (talk) 15:28, 9 June 2009 (UTC)
 * see also the "Votestacking" section of WP:CANVASS: "Votestacking is an attempt to sway consensus by selectively notifying editors who have or are thought to have a predetermined point of view or opinion (which may be determined, among other ways, from a userpage notice, such as a userbox, or from user categorization), and thus encouraging them to participate in the discussion." Rlendog (talk) 15:34, 9 June 2009 (UTC)


 * First, your assumption is that I bothered to look at his userpage. I did not. He was involved in several AfD discussion I voted on today and I clicked straight to his talk page. Feel free to look and verify that I have voted on several AfD's today that he was involved in BEFORE I posted him the note. Second, your selectivity is bogus. If it was "vote stacking" for the two you noted, then it is vote stacking for all of them. What you should have done was noticed that the note included both contested and uncontested AfD's and WP:AGF. Now that I have looked at his userpage, thanks to your suggestion, I see he supports deleting articles that need deleted. So what? You should to. Since you didn't participate in either of the AfD's that you posted your warning to, I can only deduce that you are watching either him or I. Since you seem to have the time, why don't you research a little and find that I have opposed that same editor on over a dozen AfD's and have not posted to his talk page before today? Let's recap.....you can verify that I never talked to him before. you can verify that I have opposed his nominatins before. You can verify that I participated in several AfD discussions today before I sent him a neutral note, asking him to look at several AfD's (including uncontested ones). So we can verify all that. What you can't verify is that I looked at his userpage before posting the note or that I had any motive other than asking someone who is active in AfD discussions to look at both contested and uncontested AfD's. Try stepping back and looking at that objectively and see if you can figure out why I find your actions offensive? Niteshift36 (talk) 15:51, 9 June 2009 (UTC)
 * I believe everything you say, and so I have no need to "verify" anything. I happened to notice that you left a note to a user whose user page states that he is a "proud deletionist/reductionist", asking him to look at some AfDs that you nominated.  Had you seen his user page, or been aware of the spate of sometimes questionable AfD's that user started, that could be interpreted as vote stacking.  So I left a note on the AfD's for which it would be relevant noting that I am "not sure" if some canvassing has occurred - not bothering to expand the audience for the comment to AfDs for which it was irrelevant.  You claimed that you were unaware of his user page or deletionist sympathies when you left the note, and I believed you per WP:AGF and retracted the comments.  I can understand why you might have been offended; now having read his user page, perhaps you can understand why I was concerned. Rlendog (talk) 16:03, 9 June 2009 (UTC)


 * My point has been that had you WP:AGF from the start, we'd have never spent all this time on this matter. Maybe a note to me on my talk page, asking me to clarify for you before posting your assertions publicly. After seeing his talk page, I can understand why you might have been concerned, but again, you made the assumption that I had bothered to look at his userpage and should have simply asked me before you selected two AfD's that you've shown no interest in to cast suspicion on me. As I said, I've opposed that user on at least a dozen AfD's in the past few weeks. I wasn't aware that there was a WP project on deletion until you prodded me to look at his userpage. Niteshift36 (talk) 16:22, 9 June 2009 (UTC)


 * Just out of curiosity, let me ask you this: There is a WP Project to rescue articles. At that project page, people discuss and note articles that are AfD and they think can be rescued. One could presume that members of that project are "inclusionists" that that tend to oppose deltions. Why is that different than sending a neutral note to someone? Is it legit now because they are a group with a page? Niteshift36 (talk) 01:08, 10 June 2009 (UTC)


 * Perhaps. But  the editor you happened to send your note to to check out your AfDs also:
 * Starts his user page by noting that he is a "proud deletionist/reductionist
 * Was recently banned from starting AfDs due to questionable nominations
 * Has never indicated (as far as I can tell) any particular interest in the subjects that the articles that were subject to these nominations were about
 * Hence it raised a concern. Hence, I left a note on the two pages where I felt it was relevant that "I'm not sure if there isn't some canvassing going on."  Which I then retracted when you informed me of how you came to notify this particular editor to check out your AfDs.  And I don't and didn't even care enough about any of the pages involved to bother !voting on them; I just wanted to make sure that any deletion/keep decision was done appropriately if there was canvassing going on.  Which is all there is to it. I apologize if I offended you.  If you choose to see some deeper significance to this, that is up to you. Rlendog (talk) 02:09, 10 June 2009 (UTC)


 * Deeper significance? I just asked you if you thought the activities of the rescue project could be seen as canvassing. Niteshift36 (talk) 03:25, 10 June 2009 (UTC)
 * I'm not the expert on this. Obviously, I was incorrect yesterday.  In most cases, I would think that just leaving a note for someone who is a member of a particular project would be fine, although continually asking that particular editor to look into AfDs you were interested in would become problematic. Rlendog (talk) 15:10, 10 June 2009 (UTC)
 * But isn't posting a note to a group of editors that all have a stated interest in opposing deletions be about the same thing as vote stacking in reality? Niteshift36 (talk) 18:36, 10 June 2009 (UTC)
 * Are the postings done with the intent of getting the group to vote for "keep", or to get them to try to improve the articles, which would then demonstrate that they shoudl be kept? If the former then that would seem to be vote stacking. But I think the purpose of the article rescue project is to actually improve the articles so that they will be deemed worthy of being kept.  Although I would imagine that sometimes notes are left there merely for the purpose of getting members to !vote to keep.  Rlendog (talk) 18:51, 10 June 2009 (UTC)
 * I think that the stated goal is to try to improve articles. But the practice I'm seeing is to essentially oppose deletion of anything that isn't a hoax or blatant spam. Niteshift36 (talk) 22:54, 10 June 2009 (UTC)

Deletion review for List of the Tonight Show with Conan O'Brien episodes
An editor has asked for a deletion review of List of the Tonight Show with Conan O'Brien episodes. Because you closed the deletion discussion for this page, speedily deleted it, or otherwise were interested in the page, you might want to participate in the deletion review. Tavix | Talk  16:18, 10 June 2009 (UTC)

Titan Globe
Kaldari has proposed a replacement image. Please consider updating your !vote.  wadester 16  04:50, 15 June 2009 (UTC)

Featured list candidates/List of New York Yankees managers/archive1
I think it was just promoted, but I left comments anyway. Cheers, Dabomb87 (talk) 16:02, 30 June 2009 (UTC)
 * Have the issues been addressed? I'd like to support, although it doesn't really matter :) Dabomb87 (talk) 16:29, 30 June 2009 (UTC)
 * Done. Thanks for the comments.  I wasn't thinking that the numbers in the first bullet were really "comparable" (I usually think of that as wins vs. losses, for example), but I usually stumble on interpreting that criterion. Rlendog (talk) 16:53, 30 June 2009 (UTC)
 * It's one of the more arcane points of the MOS :) Dabomb87 (talk) 21:10, 30 June 2009 (UTC)

WikiProject Films June 2009 Newsletter
The June 2009 issue of the Films 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. If you have an idea for improving the newsletter please leave a message on my talk page. --Happy editing! Nehrams2020 (talk • contrib) 08:42, 1 July 2009 (UTC)