User talk:Sasata/Archive 23

Asa Gray
I thought I'd do some work on this article. It is in sad shape. Look at the references. There are several letters and encyclopedias used. Are these acceptable? Do we format them like any other web/whatever reference? On another note, I'll probably be listing Cucurbita at FAC later today. Thanks. 14:49, 31 December 2014 (UTC)
 * See Template:Cite encyclopedia for formatting the encyc. refs. I'd be careful about using the letters for anything other than quotes, as they are a primary source. For example, "In 1868 Gray had a year's leave of absence and visited Darwin in England – the first time they had met since they started their correspondence. Darwin had Gray in mind when he wrote that "It seems to me absurd to doubt that a man may be an ardent theist & an evolutionist."" The first part is from the initial summary, but who wrote that? This should be indicated in the citation. As for the format to cite letters, see Template:Cite letter. Sasata (talk) 01:20, 1 January 2015 (UTC)

Cucurbita at FAC
It is finally there! Your input and review would be greatly appreciated. I can never thank you enough for helping me all you have. The main reason I got serious about editing was to improve this article. HalfGig  talk  00:17, 1 January 2015 (UTC)
 * Good stuff! I'll review it piecemeal over the next week. Sasata (talk) 01:12, 1 January 2015 (UTC)

Your suggestion about Cucurbita synonyms
Hi, I had a look to see what could be said about synonyms at Cucurbita and am at a bit of a loss because it is one of those situations of lumping and splitting that makes one wonder what possessed a particular person to make a new genus. Tropicos has some information such as that Tristemon is based on what is now Cucurbita pepo subsp. texana, Mellonia on Cucurbita melopepo L., Ozodycus on Cucurbita foetidissima, but for Sphenantha it doesn’t say anything helpful ... Perhaps it is in the spirit of your suggestion to add only the list of Linnaeus' originally included species? Would you be able to take a look at the latest version to see what you think? Sminthopsis84 (talk) 16:51, 1 January 2015 (UTC)

DYK for Hydnellum ferrugineum
Cas Liber (talk · contribs) 00:02, 6 January 2015 (UTC)

Your GA nomination of Hydnellum
Hi there, I'm pleased to inform you that I've begun reviewing the article Hydnellum you nominated for GA-status according to the criteria. This process may take up to 7 days. Feel free to contact me with any questions or comments you might have during this period. Message delivered by Legobot, on behalf of Casliber -- Casliber (talk) 08:41, 7 January 2015 (UTC)

Elsevier access
Chris Troutman ( talk ) 22:03, 7 January 2015 (UTC)

Your GA nomination of Hydnellum
The article Hydnellum you nominated as a good article has passed ; see Talk:Hydnellum for comments about the article. Well done! If the article has not already been on the main page as an "In the news" or "Did you know" item, you can nominate it to appear in Did you know. Message delivered by Legobot, on behalf of Casliber -- Casliber (talk) 08:01, 8 January 2015 (UTC)

Cucurbita FAC
I've left you a couple questions there. Could you respond and then we can move onward. Many thanks for helping improve the article. HalfGig  talk  22:45, 13 January 2015 (UTC)

Cladogram
Hello, would you be able to create a cladogram of Xenarthra for giant anteater based on this 155.138.251.128 (talk) 02:56, 14 January 2015 (UTC)
 * Sorry, I'm here for the fungi. Sasata (talk) 18:16, 14 January 2015 (UTC)
 * I got it. Here you go. –  Maky  « talk » 19:06, 14 January 2015 (UTC)
 * The power of collaborative editing ... thanks, Maky. Sasata (talk) 21:46, 14 January 2015 (UTC)
 * Thanks! 155.138.243.108 (talk) 22:47, 14 January 2015 (UTC)

Long time!
Just thought I'd say hi. I've been too miserably busy with college to do more than tinker on Wikipedia...lol, but still here. The cool news: I will graduate from the University of Massachusetts Lowell with a BA in Psychology in December! Anyway, drive-by hi, Sasata. And Happy New to you n' yours!! :-D --  Rcej (Robert) –  talk  16:38, 15 January 2015 (UTC)
 * Hi Rcej! I knew you were upgrading, but did not know how close you were to finishing. So ... Jung or Freud? Sasata (talk) 17:13, 15 January 2015 (UTC)


 * Erickson, with Freud to keep things interesting. I think Jung was assimilated by the Borg! lol --  Rcej (Robert) –  talk  06:53, 16 January 2015 (UTC)
 * Isn't Freud largely discredited? Though I do admit his analyses of dreams keeps things interesting!   HalfGig   talk  19:03, 22 January 2015 (UTC)

Your GA nomination of Leccinum holopus
Hi there, I'm pleased to inform you that I've begun reviewing the article Leccinum holopus you nominated for GA-status according to the criteria. This process may take up to 7 days. Feel free to contact me with any questions or comments you might have during this period. Message delivered by Legobot, on behalf of J Milburn -- J Milburn (talk) 18:01, 22 January 2015 (UTC)

Your GA nomination of Leccinum holopus
The article Leccinum holopus you nominated as a good article has passed ; see Talk:Leccinum holopus for comments about the article. Well done! If the article has not already been on the main page as an "In the news" or "Did you know" item, you can nominate it to appear in Did you know. Message delivered by Legobot, on behalf of J Milburn -- J Milburn (talk) 17:01, 26 January 2015 (UTC)

Cucurbita FAC status
Hi. I know you're busy with WikiCup, but I was wondering if you could take a look at the Cucurbita article now and let us know at the FAC page what you think now. We've had two Supports since your last visit, but we still need image, source, and copyvio checks. We truly appreciate all the help you've given so far and enjoy working with you. HalfGig  talk  22:23, 28 January 2015 (UTC)

Greetings
FYI, Marasmius siccus now exists, in case you wanted to fix any potential clumsiness of mine. Best. Biosthmors (talk) pls notify me (i.e. &#123;&#123;U&#125;&#125;) while signing a reply, thx 17:14, 16 February 2015 (UTC)
 * I added a tiny bit to this, plus the taxobox. Hope that's okay.   HalfGig   talk  00:39, 17 February 2015 (UTC)
 * Thanks! I like to display images prominently, kind of how this featured article does, so I did that, for what it's worth. Best. Biosthmors (talk) pls notify me (i.e. &#123;&#123;U&#125;&#125;) while signing a reply, thx 17:32, 17 February 2015 (UTC)

Today's featured article/March 12, 2015
Cas and Sasata: a summary of a Featured Article you nominated at WP:FAC will appear on the Main Page soon. Does the article need more work before its day on the Main Page? I had to squeeze the summary down to about 1200 characters; was there anything I left out you'd like to see put back in? - Dank (push to talk) 03:29, 21 February 2015 (UTC)

GA review of Robert Ridgway
I have two questions about your reviewer's comments on Robert Ridgway: (1) "there’s a "chapter ignored" parameter error in ref #43" -- I don't see the error message, and I don't see any cite that uses a chapter= parameter, so I'm not sure what needs to be fixed. I think we are talking about this cite, which I admit is a little odd: \{\{cite conference|booktitle=Proceedings of the High School Conference of November 23, 24 and 25, 1922|date=March 1923|publisher=University of Illinois|location=Urbana, Illinois|pages=112–117|url=http://books.google.com/books?id=wjMZAQAAIAAJ&dq=robert%20ridgway%20at%20home&pg=RA1-PA112#v=onepage&q=robert%20ridgway%20at%20home&f=false%7Cfirst=Ella R.|last=Dean|title=Robert Ridgway at Home|editor=High School Visitor's Office, ed|accessdate=4 March 2013\}\} (2) "accessdates are not required for links to printed publications" -- are we saying that accessdate= parameters should be removed for such cites, or that they're optional, i.e., not strictly necessary? Dgorsline (talk) 01:09, 22 February 2015 (UTC)
 * Replied on GAR page. Sasata (talk) 18:08, 22 February 2015 (UTC)
 * Thank you! Dgorsline (talk) 21:05, 22 February 2015 (UTC)

Your GA nomination of Leccinum rugosiceps
Hi there, I'm pleased to inform you that I've begun reviewing the article Leccinum rugosiceps you nominated for GA-status according to the criteria. This process may take up to 7 days. Feel free to contact me with any questions or comments you might have during this period. Message delivered by Legobot, on behalf of Caponer -- Caponer (talk) 16:21, 22 February 2015 (UTC)

Your GA nomination of Leccinum rugosiceps
The article Leccinum rugosiceps you nominated as a good article has been placed on hold. The article is close to meeting the good article criteria, but there are some minor changes or clarifications needing to be addressed. If these are fixed within 7 days, the article will pass; otherwise it may fail. See Talk:Leccinum rugosiceps for things which need to be addressed. Message delivered by Legobot, on behalf of Caponer -- Caponer (talk) 16:41, 22 February 2015 (UTC)

Your GA nomination of Leccinum rugosiceps
The article Leccinum rugosiceps you nominated as a good article has passed ; see Talk:Leccinum rugosiceps for comments about the article. Well done! If the article has not already been on the main page as an "In the news" or "Did you know" item, you can nominate it to appear in Did you know. Message delivered by Legobot, on behalf of Caponer -- Caponer (talk) 19:21, 22 February 2015 (UTC)

Today's featured article/March 12, 2015, part 2
Hi Sasata, I'm getting some pressure to conform lead sections to TFA paragraphs, at least on important points. I hope you'll allow me to be a little bit professorial here. Your version seems ambiguous to me:
 * your version: "before it was transferred into the new genus Tylopilus on account of its pink spores."
 * my (wrong) version: "before it was transferred along with other pink-spore fungi into the new genus Tylopilus."

The presence of ambiguous cause-and-effect phrases (I'm looking at "on account of") was one of the 10 or so things we asked people to check for when preparing for Milhist's A-class, and it may be time to work up a similar checklist for TFA. Standing on its own, the most common meaning of your version is the one I gave ... that is, a pink-spore fungus should be classified with other pink-spore fungi ... but apparently that's wrong. Other common meanings of "on account of" in this context are:
 * tylopilus means "pink spores" in Greek (it doesn't)
 * for no particular reason, that is, they said "it has pink spores so let's put it in tylopilus" the same way one might say "it's tuesday, i think i'll put it in tylopilus"
 * the person who put it in the new genus had some very definite reason for thinking that a change in coloration ought to imply a different genus (but we're left wondering what that reason could be)
 * on account of something about its spores (which happened to be pink)

So, I'm asking for feedback on the idea of asking people to check their lead sections against something like WP:Checklist when the article is headed to TFA (in this case, the first point, on cause-and-effect words). Do you agree with my point that ambiguity is possible here? Can you rephrase? What do you think of something like WP:Checklist for TFA? - Dank (push to talk) 23:14, 24 February 2015 (UTC)
 * I didn't realize the potential ambiguity introduced by the phrase "on account of its pink spores". The reason is your 3rd; differently colored spores was sufficient justification for a new genus back then. How about we just leave that phrase out? It's explained sufficiently later in the article. Sasata (talk) 02:31, 25 February 2015 (UTC)
 * Leaving it out sounds great, thanks. - Dank (push to talk) 02:50, 25 February 2015 (UTC)

Your GA nomination of Glutinoglossum glutinosum
Hi there, I'm pleased to inform you that I've begun reviewing the article Glutinoglossum glutinosum you nominated for GA-status according to the criteria. This process may take up to 7 days. Feel free to contact me with any questions or comments you might have during this period. Message delivered by Legobot, on behalf of J Milburn -- J Milburn (talk) 11:00, 8 March 2015 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for March 10
Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Shiitake, you added links pointing to the disambiguation pages Shii and Chinquapin. 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) 08:58, 10 March 2015 (UTC)

Your GA nomination of Glutinoglossum glutinosum
The article Glutinoglossum glutinosum you nominated as a good article has passed ; see Talk:Glutinoglossum glutinosum for comments about the article. Well done! If the article has not already been on the main page as an "In the news" or "Did you know" item, you can nominate it to appear in Did you know. Message delivered by Legobot, on behalf of J Milburn -- J Milburn (talk) 21:41, 12 March 2015 (UTC)

Today's featured article/April 20, 2015
A summary of a Featured Article you nominated at WP:FAC will appear on the Main Page soon. Was there anything I left out of the summary that you'd like to see put back in? (In particular, "eastern North America, northern Africa, Europe, and Asia" seemed to cover "circumboreal", more or less, but tweak that if necessary.) I'd appreciate it if you could you check the article one more time before its day on the Main Page. - Dank (push to talk) 00:24, 31 March 2015 (UTC)


 * "... the most thorough and up-to-date source of information on this mushroom genus/species that is available on the web or in print", + pretty, thank you! --Gerda Arendt (talk) 15:13, 20 April 2015 (UTC)

POTD notification
Hi Sasata,

Just to let you know, the Featured Picture File:Mycena overholtsii 333331.jpg is due to make an appearance as Picture of the Day on April 19, 2015. If you get a chance, you can check and improve the caption at Template:POTD/2015-04-19. Thank you for all of your contributions! — Crisco 1492 (talk) 01:56, 1 April 2015 (UTC)

Talk:Holliday junction/GA1
Sasata, you opened this review on March 7 and never returned, and have been away from Wikipedia editing for nearly three weeks at this point. With the concurrence of the nominator, I've put the nomination back into the reviewing pool in the hopes of finding someone who has more time for it, but I wanted to let you know that this had been done. I hope all is well. BlueMoonset (talk) 22:09, 17 April 2015 (UTC)

You've got mail!
Nikkimaria (talk) 21:16, 27 April 2015 (UTC)

Hello from the team at Featured article review!


We are preparing to take a closer look at Featured articles promoted in 2004–2010 that may need a review. We started with a script-compiled list of older FAs that have not had a recent formal review. The next step is to prune the list by removing articles that are still actively maintained, up-to-date, and believed to meet current standards. We know that many of you personally maintain articles that you nominated, so we'd appreciate your help in winnowing the list where appropriate.

Please take a look at the sandbox list, check over the FAs listed by your name, and indicate on the sandbox talk page your assessment of their current status. Likewise, if you have taken on the maintenance of any listed FAs that were originally nominated by a departed editor, please indicate their status. BLPs should be given especially careful consideration.

Thanks for your help! Sandy Georgia (Talk) 19:40, 30 April 2015 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for May 2
Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Tubaria rufofulva, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Cleland. 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) 09:52, 2 May 2015 (UTC)

TFAR
Today's featured article/requests/Psilocybe semilanceata --Gerda Arendt (talk) 20:30, 4 May 2015 (UTC)

POTD notification
Hi Sasata,

Just to let you know, the Featured Picture File:Amanita caesarea 54730.jpg is due to make an appearance as Picture of the Day on May 26, 2015. If you get a chance, you can check and improve the caption at Template:POTD/2015-05-26. Thank you for all of your contributions! — Crisco 1492 (talk) 23:43, 7 May 2015 (UTC)


 * Hey, could you remove this from the POTD list? This image was nominated before it was known that this species does not occur in North America north of Mexico. The species pictured has a provisional name, Amanita banningiana, but this has not yet been formally published and so we don't yet have an article on it. As such, the image is caught in a taxonomic limbo … Sasata (talk) 00:06, 8 May 2015 (UTC)
 * Sure, I'll remove it and add it to WP:POTD/Unused. If you want, feel free to nominate the image for delisting at WP:FPC (or we can wait until the taxonomic status is clear). — Crisco 1492 (talk) 01:17, 8 May 2015 (UTC)

Today's featured article/June 3, 2015
Hey, I'm not sure if you saw this one that recently went through TFAR. I played around with the summary; was there anything I left out you'd like to see put back in? I'd appreciate it if you could check the article one more time before its day on the Main Page. - Dank (push to talk) 23:48, 22 May 2015 (UTC)
 * Hi I've made a few small alterations. Sasata (talk) 16:55, 26 May 2015 (UTC)
 * Looks great, except ... how about stem (or some other word the readers will already know)? - Dank (push to talk) 19:04, 26 May 2015 (UTC)
 * Technically, a "stem" refers to a plant structure and is incorrect usage of the term when referring to mushrooms (I've been changing stem to stipe whenever I come across them in mushroom articles, many of these instances written by me years ago...). However, it's in common usage and more laymen would understand it. Is it more important to promote correct usage or to use the more common but incorrect term? Would we call a tomato a vegetable on the front page? I'm not sure which is ideal in this case, but will leave it to your judgement. Sasata (talk) 19:25, 26 May 2015 (UTC)
 * I have no problem with avoiding "stem" if it looks wrong to you; what I'm wondering is whether we should say "stipe" at TFA. (I agree with you that "stipe" is preferable in the article text, in the right context.) "Mushroom stipes" gets only 2K ghits, so roughly speaking, no one says that, and very few readers will know what it means. For the moment, I'll delete it, until we can come up with a better word. (Also, I want to mention that possession and sale are illegal in much of the world; I'm doing some research before I settle on suggested text for the lead and for the TFA. So pulling "stipe" will give me a little more room to work with.) - Dank (push to talk) 20:26, 26 May 2015 (UTC)
 * That sounds like a good idea ... the stipe isn't a remarkable feature of this particular mushroom and doesn't need to be in the blurb. Sasata (talk) 21:46, 26 May 2015 (UTC)
 * Done ... I added "The possession or sale of psilocybin mushrooms is illegal in many countries." That article seems to be the most specific and well-sourced of the bunch (though I can't attest to accuracy). - Dank (push to talk) 00:27, 27 May 2015 (UTC)

TFAR again
Today's featured article/requests/Pinniped - had a request on my talk,--Gerda Arendt (talk) 09:02, 27 May 2015 (UTC)


 * Looks good, precious again, - a service of WP:QAI ;) --Gerda Arendt (talk) 08:27, 3 July 2015 (UTC)

DYK nomination of Penicillium psychrosexualis
Hello! Your submission of Penicillium psychrosexualis 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) underneath your nomination's entry and respond there as soon as possible. Thank you for contributing to Did You Know! Seattle (talk) 18:08, 28 May 2015 (UTC)

I have unreviewed a page you curated
Hi, I'm Arcticgriffin. I wanted to let you know that I saw the page you reviewed, Meliola zangii, and have un-reviewed it again. If you have any questions, please ask them on my talk page. Thank you. Arcticgriffin (talk) 22:39, 5 June 2015 (UTC)

DYK for Penicillium psychrosexualis
The DYK project (nominate) 19:32, 6 June 2015 (UTC)

DYK for Cortinarius australiensis
Cas Liber (talk · contribs) 15:45, 22 June 2015 (UTC)

The new genus for Boletus torosus has arrived
It got published in Index Fungorum 243. Circéus (talk) 02:53, 24 June 2015 (UTC)
 * Imperator?! ...(groan) ...oh well....let's hop to it....Cas Liber (talk · contribs) 03:10, 24 June 2015 (UTC)
 * actually...might be worth running through FAC with some tidying up. Cas Liber (talk · contribs) 15:17, 28 June 2015 (UTC)
 * I'd be up for that ... will need a few days to get organized and look through my sources to see if there's anything to add. Sasata (talk) 06:23, 29 June 2015 (UTC)
 * Oooh ... check out this paper. Could be some good stuff to add, once we get past the Italian. Sasata (talk) 02:50, 30 June 2015 (UTC)
 * Cool - will see what I can do. No hurry, days are fine. Cas Liber (talk · contribs) 09:01, 30 June 2015 (UTC)
 * I am beginning to wrestle with the italian with the help of google translate...it's a damn convoluted history.....Cas Liber (talk · contribs) 08:32, 17 July 2015 (UTC)
 * I'm back from vacation ... will have a look soon. Sasata (talk) 01:10, 23 July 2015 (UTC)
 * Google translate ain't too bad - have a look at para 2 in the Taxonomy section, which is me translating the Italian paper. Have a look and see what you think of the original/translated...cheers, Cas Liber (talk · contribs) 14:06, 26 July 2015 (UTC)
 * Looks good to me. So what's left? I think "Similar species" is thin; Assyov mentions similarities with Imperator luteocupreus and Caloboletus radicans, so we could expand that subsection a bit with these lookalikes. Also, the article needs a once-over for flow (e.g., too many sentences starting with "The"). Other than that, looks pretty close to me. Sasata (talk) 21:04, 26 July 2015 (UTC)
 * Yeah, slotted in the similar species stuff, rewrote a few sentences. I've read over this a few times and I think it has gelled together pretty nicely actually, so I went ahead and conommed it. I don't envisage this one being too tricky...what next...Suillus luteus or Xerocomus subtomentosus or Tapinella atrotomentosa or....? Cas Liber (talk · contribs) 03:33, 27 July 2015 (UTC)
 * S. luteus it is! I have a small stack of books beside me with which to expand the article ... after I've finished updating taxonomy changes from the most recent Mycotaxon. Sasata (talk) 03:38, 27 July 2015 (UTC)

The Wikipedia Library needs you!
We hope The Wikipedia Library has been a useful resource for your work. TWL is expanding rapidly and we need your help!

With only a couple hours per week, you can make a big difference for sharing knowledge. Please sign up and help us in one of these ways: Sign up now Send on behalf of The Wikipedia Library using MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 04:31, 7 July 2015 (UTC)
 * Account coordinators: help distribute free research access
 * Partner coordinators: seek new donations from partners
 * Communications coordinators: share updates in blogs, social media, newsletters and notices
 * Technical coordinators: advise on building tools to support the library's work
 * Outreach coordinators: connect to university libraries, archives, and other GLAMs
 * Research coordinators: run reference services

Precious again
  This user has been identified as an Awesome Wikipedian again on 8 July 2012. --Gerda Arendt (talk) 06:33, 8 July 2015 (UTC)

DYK for Rubroboletus rubrosanguineus
Thanks for your help Victuallers (talk) 12:01, 12 July 2015 (UTC)

DYK for Austroboletus
Thank you Victuallers (talk) 00:06, 22 July 2015 (UTC)

Other taxa worth buffing....
Suillus luteus I am warming to the idea of buffing. Interesting ecology etc. I was thinking about Suillus granulatus but the molecular studies indicate it should be split into at least three taxa...(groan).....we must ask M.E. Nuhn about all the new genera...Cas Liber (talk · contribs) 07:36, 24 July 2015 (UTC)
 * It just so happens that yesterday I ordered three bolete books (,, and ), so I'm up for improving any Boletaceae articles; I also have the 1964 Smith & Thiers Suillus monograph. I think we're doing pretty good on keeping up with the Boletaceae changes ... was also thinking that List of Boletaceae genera is becoming increasingly relevant as a stand-alone article. Sasata (talk) 20:43, 24 July 2015 (UTC)
 * Yeah, been looking at the list of genera on Boletaceae...important to also get what became what when. Even trickier as mnay migrated out of the family too...Cas Liber (talk · contribs) 20:54, 24 July 2015 (UTC)
 * I'm soon leaving for another mushroom-hunting expedition for about a week, and will leave the S. luteus expansion in your capable hands until I get back. I noticed that Miller (North American Mushrooms, 2006) says that the species was introduced to North America in Scotch pine and Austrian pine plantations, a statement corroborated by this source and this paper, so the text will have to be amended. Sasata (talk) 17:37, 29 July 2015 (UTC)
 * Make sure you take lots of photos - yes I had started to see sources discussing it was intruduced in North America and was planning to overhaul that... Cas Liber (talk · contribs) 20:11, 29 July 2015 (UTC)