User talk:Seascapeza

Moonriddengirl conversation

 * Oh, p.s.: It seems you don't log in that often, so I figure I should tell you that my talk page archives routinely. In fact, I think I'll just go ahead and reproduce my answer here to save you the trouble of looking for it:


 * Happy editing. :) --Moonriddengirl (talk) 13:00, 29 April 2009 (UTC)

Hello and an invitation
It is very nice to see someone contributing articles on marine life, including quite a few articles on marine gastropods. So even though it seems you are not primarily a "gastropod person", I wanted to give you this:

I also wanted to say one more thing, and please do forgive me if this is not relevant, but I don't have access to the (print) references you are using, so I can't check for myself. I just wanted to say that all prose, including the technical descriptions of the animals, has to be re-written in your own words from scratch, not used directly or almost directly from the sources. Sometimes this is quite hard to do, and a lot of us do make the mistake of copying stuff verbatim or almost verbatim when we are first starting out on Wikipedia, not understanding that that is unacceptable. So, as I said, please forgive me if you already know this, but I guess it doesn't hurt to make policy really clear up front. All my very best wishes to you, Invertzoo (talk) 12:56, 20 May 2009 (UTC)

Thanks for your kind reply, and thanks so very much for being so conscientious about your articles, that's really great! (I am working on cleaning up after an editor who copied a lot of stuff verbatim for about 3 years before we caught on to that, so I am trying to remind people as soon as I get a chance.) And yes you are absolutely right that straightforward lists of species are not a problem to copy. Information itself is not copyrighted, only the way it is expressed. Your articles seem to me to be excellent, and it is really terrific that you have given images to illustrate them too. A few years ago at the AMNH I was sorting and identifying a batch of seashells from your part of the world; that's my only exposure to the marine life of that area unfortunately, because it is very interesting, being where the Atlantic and Indian Oceans faunas meet. Best to you, Invertzoo (talk) 12:43, 21 May 2009 (UTC)

Images of marine life
I will do my best to find you a source of clearer info on categorizing your photo files and adding file links. It might be a person you can talk to rather than a page to read though. Best, Invertzoo (talk) 13:42, 22 May 2009 (UTC)

Images, categories and links
Please excuse me if you already worked this out, but I wanted to say that in my experience often the best way on WIkipedia to find out how to do something is not by reading a page that purports to tell you how to do it, many of which are too hard to understand, but by looking for actual examples where editors did that thing, and then looking at the code (the edit page) and then seeing what that person did to make say a category or whatever, and then doing the same thing. It's usually a good beginning anyway. Best to you, Invertzoo (talk) 21:52, 23 May 2009 (UTC)

Thanks for your note. You are lucky, it really does sound like you had a wonderful weekend underwater. I know very little about image questions, and I have done only a little work here on Wikipedia on Categories, but I looked at a few images on Commons, and I worked out a few points.

You add a category to an image page in Wikimedia Commons in exactly the same way you would here on Wikipedia. In other words, on the edit page at the bottom you put:. In order to find which categories already exist that are relevant, take a look at images of related species and see what categories they were put in.

Of course it is possible to create new categories also, but for the time being you may want to just use preexisting categories.

As for the "which pages link here", that is something that is done automatically by software, you don't have to fill it in at all. You will find that your images don't have any links on Wikimedia Commons, but they do have links on Wikipedia.

For example, this image of mine has 5 links on the English Wikipedia:

but has no links at all on Wikimedia Commons:

I didn't do any of that, it was filled in (or not) automatically.

Hope this is useful, as I said, I don't know much about images and Commons. Actually I really wish I knew more than I do, but I have never put the legwork/brainwork in to find out more!

best, Invertzoo (talk) 13:43, 25 May 2009 (UTC)

Uploading images
Hi again,

About your friends' images, once you are comfortable with uploading images, they could of course email images to you, and then you could upload them. But if you would prefer that they learn to upload them themselves, let me say a few things, bearing in mind I know almost as little as you do about this:

Brand-new users can upload images themselves once they have signed in, made 10 edits and 4 days have passed, at which point they are autoconfirmed as a legitimate user. However before that point they can upload images with the help of a more experienced editor. Take a look at this page:

That page also points out that a confirmed editor like you can get help with how to upload images at the Wikipedia Help Desk, which is here:

This page has a pretty good account of how to upload any file to Wikimedia Commons, including photo files: Once an image is on Commons it can be accessed to illustrate Wikipedia or anything else.

There is also some info at:.

Just remind your friends that by donating images to Wikipedia or Wikimedia Commons they are giving them out to everyone in the world for free use. Hopefully this will not be a problem for them.

Hope something here is useful. Best to you, Invertzoo (talk) 14:38, 26 May 2009 (UTC)

Tree of Life
As for the Tree of Life Project, I just now added my name to it, but guess I have been sort of involved for a long time automatically because of being so active in WikiProject Gastropods which is a subproject of the Tree of Life. However the taxonomy of the gastropods has been changing very radically over the last 10 years. Some of gastropod project members have recently been struggling to find the best way to set up our taxoboxes for the latest taxonomy system of gastropods, which involves unranked clades. We have thousands of gastropod taxoboxes that need updating based on this current taxonomy, which you can see at. So far I have been removing out of date taxonomy as I come across it, but have not yet done hardly any updating of the taxoboxes based on this new taxonomy, because I am not good at routine tasks which are complex and varying but also extremely repetitive. I find that currently I cannot focus my concentration unless I am really engaged by what I am doing.

Actually I am thinking that at some point Wikipedia may have to abandon taxoboxes altogether in favor of something else, since taxoboxes are suited to rigid Linnaean taxonomy, and will not work so well with modern cladistics.

Best, Invertzoo (talk) 12:56, 27 May 2009 (UTC)

Yes, as humans we do love to label and classify. I was really thrilled as a child to learn the names for all the various plants and animals. Where would Wikipedia in general be, not to mention the Tree of Life project, without that tendency? As for taxoboxes, yes it's hard to know what could replace them, but still I imagine something will replace them before too long. By the way, if you want to, you can delete any non-B&R taxonomy in gastropod articles you come across, in the same way that I do. ALl good wishes, Invertzoo (talk) 22:47, 2 June 2009 (UTC)

Your service award badge!
I just now awarded you a service badge, which you are entitled to. I placed it near the top of this page. If you want to, you can move it anywhere else you want, for example onto your user page. The code for it looks like this:. If you like the service awards, you can see the whole range of them here:

And if you want to, you can update yours as the months and number of edits go by! All good wishes to you, Invertzoo (talk) 20:17, 4 June 2009 (UTC)

Thanks so much for your nice new articles!
It's great to see them appear! I am about to go away for 2 and a half weeks and I just wanted to ask you about two or three things that would make the articles totally set and ready to go:
 * Could you put {{italictitle}] above the taxobox on any new articles you make from now on that are genus or species articles?
 * Also if you want to copy the taxobox from a related article, if the first one you come to does not have any clades in it, perhaps you can go up the ranks, checking and looking: if the genus level and is no good, go up to the article at family level, and even to superfamily level, until you find an article that does have clades in the taxobox and copy that? Thanks if you could, that would be great. If it's too complicated, don't bother.
 * Also I think it would be OK if on the talk page of each new article you can put:

or obviously you can change the last item to yes if there is already a photo?

Many thanks and good wishes! Invertzoo (talk) 01:05, 20 August 2009 (UTC)

Hi again Seascapeza, I am writing to you from Southern California. I am sorry I did not explain carefully enough, I was in a bit of a rush when I wrote that and because your articles are so good I tend to forget how new you are! Here is, I hope, a bit better explanation:


 * Yes you are right, I meant any article you might make where you would use the Latin name for the species or the genus rather than the common name, please put in the italic title code. Maybe you won't be doing any of those, I dunno.


 * I hate to suggest that you check every taxobox you do against the Bouchet and Rocroi taxonomy, because that can really be quite difficult to do. (Unless you would actually like to do that, which would be great of course). However, basically if you look at the taxobox you are using for an article, and it has no taxa in it that are listed as being a clade (only taxa such as subclass, superorder, suborder, infraorder) then it is out of date. If you copy a taxobox that is out of date, please delete any levels that may be in it between class Gastropoda and the superfamily, or if it has not got a superfamily listed, then delete down to the family name.


 * The other thing I said about this was, if you do want to actually update the taxonomy yourself, often the easiest way, rather than going to the B&R article itself, is to one-by-one click up through the ranks in the taxobox you are using, looking first at the genus article, then at the family article, then at the superfamily article and so on, until you find a higher level article that does have clades included, and then copy the missing section from that and paste it in.


 * If all this taxobox stuff is simply too hard to understand or too hard to do, please don't worry about it at all. Just ignore what I said and I (or maybe someone else) can fix whatever needs fixing.


 * And yes, you are quite right, if the article has a photo you can add:


 * but without the little pieces of code that say nowiki. Just the double curly brackets and what they have in them. (The nowiki thing is just so that I can put the code on this page without the server thinking I want it to execute that command right now here on this page.)

I do apologize if I swamped you with advanced wikispeak, it was inconsiderate of me. Best wishes to you, Invertzoo (talk) 20:07, 24 August 2009 (UTC)

The articles you have started are very good, it is really true. They are excellent additions to WikiProject Gastropods. Thanks for any extra help with the little bits and pieces of things, and sorry I left you a hurried note half of which didn't really even apply to your contributions. (Duh!) Best to you, Invertzoo (talk) 15:45, 25 August 2009 (UTC)

Trivia millardi
Hello, I am unfamiliar with Trivia millardi. I hope that the image is indeed that species. --Snek01 (talk) 22:51, 29 August 2009 (UTC)

Hi Snek01, since I am unsure how to send you a message, I will reply here and on your talk page. Yes, the image is indeed that species, or at least as certainly as it can be identified at an image level. I took the photograph myself, the animal was within the given distribution range and it conforms with the published description of the species. Is that good enough? Seascapeza (talk) 10:35, 4 September 2009 (UTC)

Thanks! Thanks very much! Seascapeza (talk) 13:11, 14 September 2009 (UTC)

Melibe_rosea
Hello. You created a broken redirect here. I cannot figure out whether this is meant to be Crowned nudibanch or clown nudibranch to fix it myself. Could you please fix it?--TParis00ap (talk) 12:19, 16 September 2009 (UTC)

hello. I'm busy writing the article as we speak so PLEASE don't fix it! Seascapeza (talk) 12:23, 16 September 2009 (UTC)

Portal
Hello, you are writing fascinating articles so I have added some of your nudibranch articles to the Portal:Gastropods. Fell free to add your new interesting articles to to portal also, if you like. Thank you. Have a nice day. --Snek01 (talk) 10:08, 10 November 2009 (UTC)

Well, thank you very much! Seascapeza (talk) 10:10, 10 November 2009 (UTC)

Those silvertip nudibranchs
Wow Seascapeza, It's great to see all these new nudibranch articles! Well done! I just wanted to say that I certainly understand your logic in using the same image to illustrate two different species, since they cannot be visually discriminated by looking at the whole animal, but I think you should use the caption line in the taxobox to explain that the image is "either Janolus capensis or Janolus longidentatus".

I also wanted to say one more thing: when you call an unnamed species "species 1" or whatever, you need to say which author referred to it as that.

Anyway, well done, and keep up the good work! Best wishes Invertzoo (talk) 21:10, 11 November 2009 (UTC)


 * Thanks Invertzoo, I will change the sp. 1 etc to show which author -- it's a bit of a tricky one because there they are as sp.1 in a reference book and the taxonomic guys are still not getting their acts together to describe the animals, but my thinking was, the animals exist, we're pretty certain they are new species, we're waiting for the descriptions to be published, so rather put them into to Wiki than leave them out.
 * As for the silvertips -- very unfortunately the pictures I have of the two species with their egg ribbons were not taken by me, so I can't use them.... but I will change the captions, very good point.
 * best wishes to you Seascapeza (talk) 06:17, 12 November 2009 (UTC)

Yes, I personally think it's OK to include (in the Wiki) species that are mentioned in a publication but are as yet unnamed, especially when we have a good image of the animal. However, when we use the "species 1" thing, which is I think fine, we do need to say in the intro text something like "species 1 as designated in Gosliner, 2007" or whatever the correct reference is, so we know who talked about it, and that they referred to it as "species 1" or whatever they called it.


 * will do that for all of the sp.1/2 today!

It's also good to say something like that "as of 2007, it was unnamed" (based on when the publication came out) rather than saying it is "currently unnamed", in case one of us does not get around  to updating the article when the type description does finally come out in a science journal.


 * good idea! I will get onto that as well -- I plan on updating as soon as I get the papers, but you're right, rather don't assume. Seascapeza (talk) 07:12, 16 November 2009 (UTC)

Replying to messages and other formatting questions
As for how to reply to messages, it doesn't really matter whether you reply on your own talk page, or on the talk page of the person who left you a message, or both. It is really your choice how you do it. If you chose to reply on your talk page, if you would like to let the person know you did that, there is a template you can leave on the talk page of the person saying  Take a look at the edit page here to see the extremely simple code I used to produce that automatic message. You can use that same piece of code, just putting your user name in instead of mine in order to let someone know you replied to their message on your talk page.

Not everyone uses that template though. When I leave a message for someone on their talk page, if I don't get a reply on my page after a couple of days, I try to remember to check their page. It's a bit haphazard but it usually works.Invertzoo (talk) 14:18, 12 November 2009 (UTC)


 * so, just checking, that means there's no automatic way of responding and notifying the person you're talking to? In other words, if I were just to reply to you on my page and not leave a talkback template on your talk page, then the only way you'd know I'd replied would be to actually go and look?

I hope I have made all this intelligible. If you have any questions at all about the "species 1" thing or anything else, please feel free to ask. Best, Invertzoo (talk) 14:18, 12 November 2009 (UTC)


 * Thanks again for all your help! Seascapeza (talk) 07:12, 16 November 2009 (UTC)

Hi again, Yes, that is correct, there is no automatic way for a person to know that you replied to a question of theirs on their talk page. With a lot of people I leave notes for, especially new people, I have to try to remember to go back and take a look to see if they replied. I myself am usually too lazy to use the template, but it is a nice courtesy in situations where the person is unlikely to be constantly checking your talk page. Oh and I guess I should point out that some people display, at the top of their talk page, a little note that says something like: "If you leave a message here on my talk page I will reply here, if you leave a message on your talk page, I will reply there", just so that you know what that particular person has decided to do in terms of how to handle this.

What I do, is that I usually reply to a note that is left on my talk page by writing a response on the other person's talk page, so they cannot miss it and so that they are notified that they have a message. If it is something important, and I want to have a copy of what I wrote, then I also put a copy of my response under their question on my talk page as well. Of course, that's just what I do, I'm not saying that that is the best method or anything... It's entirely your choice. Best wishes, Invertzoo (talk) 14:12, 16 November 2009 (UTC)

You are very welcome Seascapeza! It's my pleasure. When I was new here on Wikipedia I didn't have anyone to help me out with understanding things, and I really wished that I had. I know how valuable that can be: it makes everything easier and more comfortable much earlier on in the process.

Oh by the way, a very small thing about formatting replies in a conversation: when two people are talking back and forth on one page, it is often good to have one person (the second person) indent their replies so that it is clear at a glance who is talking. You indent by putting a regular colon at the beginning of each paragraph you write. If a new person comes in and adds something to the conversation, that person can use 2 colons to make a deeper indentation, and so on. Sometimes on a long discussion with many people involved you will see the conversation get indented all the way across the page. Again this is not a strict rule, but it is often useful to use indents one way or the other in order to try to make things a bit clearer, in terms of overall layout.

This is with no colons.


 * This is with one.


 * This is with two.


 * With three... and so on.

Best, Invertzoo (talk) 13:46, 17 November 2009 (UTC)


 * Another great piece of advice -- I used an asterisk in another reply to you earlier because I have seen that used in species lists: this is much more elegant.
 * regards Seascapeza (talk) 03:02, 18 November 2009 (UTC)

Glaucidae vs Facelinidae
Hello, I will check Glaucidae vs Facelinidae out in next few days. --Snek01 (talk) 17:13, 23 November 2009 (UTC)

This is difficult for me. I have moved some genera to Facelinidae already. I have added notes into Glaucidae article and it seems that many of them should be in Facelinidae. Only few genera will stay in Glaucidae probably. I think, that we can consider these marked genera as belonging to Facelinidae. I will have no time/literature/knowledge to verify all of them to be 100% sure probably. --Snek01 (talk) 00:15, 25 November 2009 (UTC)

I have added a note into the Glaucidae: the "Nudibranch Systematic Index" (2006 and 2009 version) used and uses taxonomy based on Frank (1968), and thus is not good for taxonomic placement of genera. (But can be useful for other purposes.) Then we must look for other sources. --Snek01 (talk) 21:21, 19 December 2009 (UTC)

About nuisance edits
Yes, you can certainly do something about this kind of thing. First off the user needs to be given a warning. There is a whole set of warning templates here: When it is a new user, the warning should be not too severe at first, in case the person is just experimenting rather than being deliberately disruptive. However if they persist after the first warning, then they get a more severe warning, etc, and then ultimately they can be blocked altogether. If you look here: you will see that the user has been warned 4 times and will be blocked the next time anything like this happens. Hopefully this will be enough to discourage them. Any question about this kind of stuff please ask me. Best to you, Invertzoo (talk) 15:08, 25 November 2009 (UTC)

You are welcome Seascapeza. I also wanted to say that it sometimes happens that an IP address is a computer in a school or college that a lot of different people use, on again and off again. However you can often be pretty sure by the type of nuisance edits and the pattern of them if they appear to be all coming from one person. Best, Invertzoo (talk) 13:59, 26 November 2009 (UTC)

Hi again Seascapeza, well, there are several different kinds of people who make themselves a nuisance with these kinds of edits. A common kind is someone new who is just experimenting, either someone who just wants to learn how to use Wikipedia and doesn't know to use a sandbox, or someone who is temporarily intrigued or intoxicated by the idea that anyone can post anything here. Those people don't expect anyone to notice what they are doing, so welcoming them and or warning them often does discourage them from those activities and sometimes nudges at least some of them over into making constructive edits.

Another kind is someone who hopes to be able to implant some weird little personal note of their own that doesn't belong, and will check back every 3 or 6 months to see if it is still there, for kicks, and to show their friends how "clever" they are.

People who deliberately do disruptive stuff are vandals, and most of them just enjoy the destruction for its own sake and the thrill of being "wicked". A subsection of vandals however, the ones that your friend was talking about, are somewhat weirder, and they are known as internet trolls. if you can't understand the appeal of vandalism in general, then you certainly won't be able to understand the appeal of trolling. Trolling is a deliberate but anonymous attempt to manipulate people into an angry response, so that the troller can see (and enjoy) that angry reaction, the more furious the response and the more disruptive of the status quo, the better they like it. Yes it's perverse and twisted, and no, not many people are like that at all, but for the few who get their kicks that way then any anonymous open forum or open wiki on the internet is one big playground. For some more info see the essay here:. And as your friend says, when you are dealing with trolling, the best response is consistently reverting fast with no other comments at all because trolls find that very boring and so they will eventually get discouraged and go elsewhere. However treating every single nuisance edit as if it is trolling, may or may not be the best way to handle these kinds of things. I suppose sometimes you are missing out on a chance to recruit someone useful when you use that technique.

Anyway, more than you ever wanted to know about nuisance edits! Best to you, Invertzoo (talk) 13:58, 27 November 2009 (UTC)

Sandbox
See also About the Sandbox or click here to create your own.User:Seascapeza/Sandbox.

Using the generic name means the page is re-usable for other projects later and you dont need to have it deleted when the article is ready to move into main article space. The article is editable by anyone while in your user space, but it is considered polite to get permission or an invitation before doing this. The rules are relaxed in user space and you can leave things in a state which would look unprofessional and excite comments from busybodies in main article space.

I suggest the basic construction is done in the sandbox, as you could copy the whole Fauna of Scotland article and cull the inappropriate details until the useful structure remains, then edit and cut and paste in the new text without interference from nitpickers and others who shouldn't see unfinished work. Move it into main space once this is done and enough citations are included, so the full menagerie can do their Wiki thing, and complete it there. -- Peter (Southwood) (talk): 07:36, 29 November 2009 (UTC)

Service badge
I hope you don't mind, I went ahead and updated your service badge, which was a couple months overdue at least! Congratulations and thanks for all of your excellent nudibranch articles! Best, Invertzoo (talk) 22:09, 8 December 2009 (UTC)

Better late than never!
Since you have contributed so much already to our Project, I decided to list you as an "adjunct member". If you would prefer that I list you as a regular member, please just let me know.

Marine gastropods of South Africa
Hello Seascapeza, feel free to start end expand List of marine molluscs of South Africa. Do it similar to List of marine molluscs of Brazil or List of marine molluscs of New Zealand or other lists at Category:Lists of molluscs by country. I am sure you have the ability to make the first marine list like this. (There are at least 5 complete for non-marine already.) When the Category:Molluscs of South Africa will be empty, then it should be deleted in the future. No need to hurry, but add species to the list instead of the category. Thank you. (I missed your edits, but now I discovered that there is something great in your sandbox! Wow!) --Snek01 (talk) 23:50, 9 December 2009 (UTC)
 * Hi, I have started List of marine molluscs of South Africa based on structure of List of marine molluscs of Brazil. Moderately large job, but going OK. Chip in as you like, enough work for two. I am putting in what is listed in Two Oceans first. Cheers, Peter (Southwood) (talk): 18:26, 10 December 2009 (UTC)
 * Do you have a list of the Nudibranchs of South Africa that can be pasted in? Peter (Southwood) (talk): 19:36, 10 December 2009 (UTC)
 * Done already. Please check for obvious errors. List is complete for Two Oceans, Nudibranchs of Southern Africa and Cowries and their relatives of southern Africa. List is getting large. Cheers, Peter (Southwood) (talk): 17:31, 14 December 2009 (UTC)
 * List of marine molluscs of S.A. pretty much as far as I can go with available references. Cheers, Peter (Southwood) (talk): 16:39, 24 December 2009 (UTC)


 * I have put the suggestion to split on the talk page and a notice on the gastropods project to see if any useful comment comes in. Peter (Southwood) (talk): 17:05, 4 January 2010 (UTC)

You are logged out
Hi Seascapeza, You didn't get an automatic signature when you left the message for me because you are currently logged out of Wikipedia. Next time you access Wikipedia you will need to log back in again (using your screen name and your password). Click on the tab on the upper left of your page. This happens to all of us every few months on a regular basis, automatically. It is slightly irritating at first but you will get used to it. Best, Invertzoo (talk) 15:06, 10 December 2009 (UTC)

Well I guess it was some kind of glitch then. I hope next time it is OK. Invertzoo (talk) 22:43, 15 December 2009 (UTC)

It's that time of year again...


Invertzoo (talk) is wishing you Seasons Greetings! Whether you celebrate your hemisphere's Solstice or Xmas, Eid, Diwali, Hogmanay, Hannukah, Lenaia, Festivus or even the Saturnalia, this is a special time of year for almost everyone!

Spread the holiday cheer by adding to your friends' talk pages.

All my best wishes, Invertzoo (talk) 22:43, 15 December 2009 (UTC)

Parentheses in scientific attributions: new section
Hi Seascapeza, my apologies. I wasn't aware of the significance of parentheses in authorship. I am a scientist (physics), but not a biologist by training so didn't realise. I will attempt to reverse where I have incorrectly added parentheses, (quite some number). I would ask though if you do reverse changes that I made to be careful not to blanket reverse other useful changes as well, and to just change the incorrect parentheses. I have just now completed adding all genera for the super-family Doridoidea, so we now have a record of every species (accepting some synonyms) for that superfamily. I will be doing this for all nudibranchs in due course. If you were to just blanket reverse everything I did that included parentheses we would lose most of that work. Best wishes Antarctic-adventurer  (talk)  19:30, 19 December 2009 (UTC)
 * OK, took a while but I have gone through all the articles I edited and removed the inappropriate parentheses. I looked at earlier revisions before I started editing to maintain parentheses where they had been before, so I didn't just blanket remove everything. Thanks for the heads-up and the polite message. I see you are mainly editing South African species. Do you also dive yourself to see them firsthand? Antarctic-adventurer  (talk)  21:08, 19 December 2009 (UTC)
 * I see you're based in Japan -- do you also dive? And if I may be indulged in curiosity: your user name -- have you been there?
 * Yes I do dive. Sometimes in Japan but mainly in Indonesia and the Philippines. I worked for a while in Indonesia as a Divemaster and saw quite a few nudis that weren't even described yet which was pretty cool. Training up for TDI Decompression Procedures and Extended Range at the moment so I can dive Truk Lagoon. As for Antarctica, yes I have been there. A couple years ago briefly along the Ross Ice Shelf. I am a climber too, so currently planning an expedition to the Vinson Massif, team members and funds permitting. Amazing place. I would love to dive there sometime. I wonder if there are any nudis there... Antarctic-adventurer (talk)  10:59, 21 December 2009 (UTC)

Your beautiful sea star card!
Your card is really excellent, well done! You seem to be a very talented individual with many different interests and skills. Best wishes, Invertzoo (talk) 20:56, 20 December 2009 (UTC)

Truk Lagoon Pictures
Thanks for your link to your friend's Truk Lagoon pictures. His images are really excellent. I enjoyed checking them out.

Indeed Indonesia is a special place to both dive and explore above the sea. So much diversity amongst its 18500 islands. Good luck getting back to Antarctica. Visiting Tristan on the way should be interesting too. A very strange isolated outpost. Onwards and upwards, more adventure! Make 2010 count. Antarctic-adventurer (talk)  09:18, 30 December 2009 (UTC)


 * Hi, appreciations for the New Year's card. The same to you. I am rather envious that you are in summer right now. It is freezing where I am! I haven't been to Tristan no. I was curious a few years ago to see where the remaining "pink bits" (British territories) were and became interested in St. Helena and Tristan. I would like to call by one day. I am for some reason attracted very much to isolated, somewhat desolate places far from society. Perhaps escapism. Have you been there? What is it like? Antarctic-adventurer  (talk)  20:05, 5 January 2010 (UTC)

Happy New Year
Dear Seascapeza,

Our vision for Wikipedia is one of beauty, natural symmetry and light.

I wish you a Happy New Year, everything good for your family, your loved ones and yourself, peace and joy for all the people of the world. I also wish a joyful and peaceful expansion for Wikipedia, may it bring helpful, generous, and peaceful information to everyone in the world. All the very best from Invertzoo (talk) 19:03, 1 January 2010 (UTC)

List of marine fishes of South Africa
Hoo boy, what a job! I have reached page 246 out of 908 in Smiths - about 25%. Thousands of the buggers. Taxonomy probably mostly good, but significant revisions since publishing according to whatever is used by Wikispecies and WoRMS etc. Have to check every genus, and probably most of the species. Hopefully not too many typos slipping through. Longish term project, as I will probably go mad and have to stop and do something else for a while. Cheers, -- Peter (Southwood) (talk): 08:30, 4 January 2010 (UTC)

I have reached the halfway mark in Smiths by page count. Another weekend with no dives due to sea state and wind. Long way still to go. Cheers, Peter (Southwood) (talk): 08:36, 17 January 2010 (UTC)

Two thirds down by page count. Diving tomorrow with any luck. South Penisula (Atlantic side) wreck search I think. If lucky a new site to put up on WT. Peter (Southwood) (talk): 20:10, 22 January 2010 (UTC)

No wreck found, but only 200 pages to go in Smiths! The end is in sight. Peter (Southwood) (talk): 11:10, 25 January 2010 (UTC)

Now only 100 pages to go. Peter (Southwood) (talk): 11:11, 28 January 2010 (UTC)

Just finished Smiths. Will be a bit busy with Class IV and Supervisor training course and inventing paperwork for DoL audit for a while. Peter (Southwood) (talk): 08:52, 5 February 2010 (UTC)

Autoreviewer
Hi, after seeing one of your articles at newpage patrol, I was surprised to see that an editor who has contributed quite so many articles as you hadn't already been approved as an wp:Autoreviewer. So I've taken the liberty of rectifying that.  Ϣere Spiel  Chequers  13:25, 5 January 2010 (UTC)

New Categories or List Articles instead?
Hi Seascapeza, thanks for all your very good work. I did want to say one thing however. Way down on the Gastropod project page we have a section on Categories which says:

"Although we already have three categories of gastropods by country: of Australia, of New Zealand and of the Philippines, we would like to strongly discourage people from creating any more categories of gastropods or mollusks by country, especially in the case of marine species, which are usually very widely distributed and which will eventually produced categories that run into the thousands. List articles are a much more helpful way of including this kind of information in the encyclopedia. Categories are not organized by family, only alphabetically, and overall they are a poor way of storing information because in the long run they are not very useful or helpful to a user and they cannot be worked with and organized at a later date. Instead in general please start an article List of marine molluscs of South Africa or List of non-marine molluscs of South Africa. This article can be extremely simple and stubby to start off with, that is perfectly OK; eventually it will be much fuller and well-organized and easy to use."

"Please do not create more categories by country, and please do not add to pre-existing ones. Whenever it is appropriate, please create a list article instead. Thanks."

I am sorry that this info was hard to find on the project page, perhaps we should move it up into a more prominent position.

Best wishes, Invertzoo (talk) 21:38, 5 January 2010 (UTC)

Oh I am glad to see we do now have a list article for List of marine molluscs of South Africa. I am sure you can see how this will end up being vastly more useful than a simple category. Anyway, best wishes, Invertzoo (talk) 21:42, 5 January 2010 (UTC)

New Year Card
Your card is fantastic. Your scanner make such a beautiful mistake! Invertzoo (talk) 15:27, 6 January 2010 (UTC)

List of marine molluscs of South Africa
Yes this is a problem that I have anticipated for quite a while would come up. Let me think and see if I can work out what might be the best way to handle this. Invertzoo (talk) 15:27, 6 January 2010 (UTC)

Taxonomicon
Possibly useful site: Taxonomicon Cheers, Peter (Southwood) (talk): 21:03, 11 January 2010 (UTC)

Nudibranchs and predation
Hi Seascapeza, that's a very good point. Really, thank you very much for pointing it out to me! I wrote that last night when I was sleepy and was not thinking carefully enough. Yes almost all nudibranchs are predators. I must change this for Melibe. I guess perhaps I can say that although the majority of nudibranchs are predatory, grazing on sessile animals such as bryozoans, sponges, tunicates and so on, these nudibranchs actually capture their prey, which is active, free-swimming animals, small crustaceans. Is that OK do you think? Do you maybe have a suggestion for how to say this? You know a lot more about nudibranchs than I do. Best wishes, Invertzoo (talk) 13:47, 27 February 2010 (UTC)

From my narrow perspective I would think that the word grazing is primarily applied to feeding on plants in a non-destructive manner (such that the plants are able to re-grow) but can also be applied to feeding on sessile animals, when the animal is not entirely consumed or killed, but can regrow. Perhaps when used in the second sense it should be used in quote marks. I agree with you that predation seems like a really weird word to apply to plants, although maybe I am old fashioned! Invertzoo (talk) 14:38, 27 February 2010 (UTC)

Yes I do see what you mean. And imagining that all sessile marine organisms are "plants" is a common problem. As for predation, grazing etc, it seems that all of these familiar terms are perhaps now being redefined, but if the editors of the articles in question do not leave citations to back up these new usages then we should apply the citation-needed tag, and explain why on the talk page. Best, Invertzoo (talk) 19:11, 28 February 2010 (UTC)


 * And you can certainly win the battle if there are no reliable sources to back up these new usages. Invertzoo (talk) 19:11, 28 February 2010 (UTC)

Not reverting far enough
Just a heads up that you've missed a couple of bits of vandalism lately (on Black dog (ghost) and Kevin Mulvey), where an IP editor has edited the article twice, and you've only reverted the second edit, leaving the first one in place. I can heartily recommend WP:TWINKLE to catch this sort of problem - it gives you a "revert as vandalism" button that automatically checks whether you're actually just reverting the last in a string of bad edits, and reverts all the edits by that user. --McGeddon (talk) 15:20, 2 March 2010 (UTC)

Not good enough huh? Ok. I have to confess to checking recent changes in a shameful current bout of Work Avoidance Behaviour... and haven't really concentrated when the recent edit has seemed... okay-ish. Thanks for the heads up. Will check it out. Seascapeza (talk) 15:25, 2 March 2010 (UTC)

Lophopleurella capensis
Hello, I have used all available online resources for Lophopleurella capensis, but is still looks nearly like mystical creature. Fell free to add few details if you like. Thank you. Have a nice day. (I have no 1946 Zilch's work available.) --Snek01 (talk) 15:19, 6 March 2010 (UTC)
 * Hello, thank you for your help. Notes added at Talk page of the article. --Snek01 (talk) 13:59, 8 March 2010 (UTC)

Subgenera
Hello Seascapeza, I have added (moved) subgenus into taxobox with code |subgenus=. I think that it is enough for information about subgenus in articles about species. I also use only binomial name in lists by country, especially where the blue wikilink exist. But it can still be useful to mention subgenus in lists for species, that have no article yet. I do not know guideline for this, but as far as I know it is used binomial name in taxoboxes consisting of two words.

Other examples. Possibilities are like this:
 * short and easier:
 * http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Bithynia_%28gastropod%29&oldid=346968796
 * http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Deroceras&oldid=353928825

I think, that example with Deroceras looks better (but probably bot ways are OK), but I have also used listed subgenera in Valvata, but notice, that wikilinks from "Valvata (Cincinna) piscinalis" are like this Valvata piscinalis, not like this (this is red link) Valvata (Cincinna) piscinalis. It it also better for the reason, that Article titles in wikipedia are like this: Deroceras juranum, not like this: (red link) Deroceras (Plathystimulus) juranum. Usually are subgenera mentioned only in taxobox as written above and in Taxonomy section, if this is in the article, but I am sure that you will find also other additional examples, because your valuable articles covers very large topics. --Snek01 (talk) 10:32, 8 April 2010 (UTC)
 * longer
 * http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Valvata&oldid=303099042

WikiProject Gastropods in the Signpost
"WikiProject Report" would like to focus on WikiProject Gastropods for a Signpost article to be published in early May. This is an excellent opportunity to draw attention to your efforts and attract new members to the project. Would you be willing to participate in an interview? If so, here are the questions for the interview. Feel free to skip any questions that you don't feel comfortable answering. Also, if you know anyone else who would like to participate in the interview, please share this with them. Have a great day. -Mabeenot (talk) 19:24, 22 April 2010 (UTC)

One authority check
Hello, could you check authority of Phenacovolva recurva at List of marine gastropods of South Africa, please? --Snek01 (talk) 13:52, 19 May 2010 (UTC) solved --Snek01 (talk) 13:58, 19 May 2010 (UTC)

You are now a Reviewer
Hello. Your account has been granted the "reviewer" userright, allowing you to review other users' edits on certain flagged pages. Pending changes, also known as flagged protection, will be commencing a two-month trial at approximately 23:00, 2010 June 15 (UTC).

Reviewers can review edits made by users who are not autoconfirmed to articles placed under flagged protection. Flagged protection is applied to only a small number of articles, similarly to how semi-protection is applied but in a more controlled way for the trial.

When reviewing, edits should be accepted if they are not obvious vandalism or BLP violations, and not clearly problematic in light of the reason given for protection (see Reviewing process). More detailed documentation and guidelines can be found here.

If you do not want this userright, you may ask any administrator to remove it for you at any time. Courcelles (talk) 21:39, 15 June 2010 (UTC)

Whale shark weight
Do you have a page number for that reference on the whale shark weight? I quickly browsed through the book, but could not find that weight you cite. Also, could you include the page number in the cite for future reference as well? Thanks. It caught my attention because I was just recently north of Isla Mujera in Mexico, and had a chance to swim with 8 of these, ranging from 20-30 feet, and while the 30 ft one seemed enormous, I think that weight seems a bit high, 59,000 lbs (75% of your listed weight, given it was about 75% the length, rough math I realize) is a heck of a lot! That's almost 2000 lbs per foot in length. If it's right, it's right I guess, but that doesn't seem to fit with what I saw. Anyways, thanks for your time. -Des pay re ( talk ) 05:39, 1 July 2010 (UTC)

Macropodia falcifera
Hello,

I may have been a little hasty removing M. falcifera from the list at Macropodia. I am, however, still confused by the situation. M. falcifera seems to be a real species, seems to really belong in Macropodia, and has been discussed by many authors. Nonetheless, the specific epithet falcifera does not appear anywhere in the 2008 list by Ng et al., and I have not come across any other species missing from that work. Do you know of any works that give a synonymy for M. falcifera? I have looked around, but I haven't been able to find anything. I also haven't managed to get hold of Stimpson's original description, although that probably wouldn't be very informative. I'm struggling to believe that Ng et al. could have overlooked the species (Stimpson, 1857, is after all, a well known work, and they include other species from it), but it's looking more and more like the only opition. I'd appreciate any input you can give. --Stemonitis (talk) 10:37, 20 July 2010 (UTC)

Red encrusting sponge
This is an automated message from CorenSearchBot. I have performed a web search with the contents of Red encrusting sponge, and it appears to be a substantial copy of http://content.cdlib.org/xtf/view?docId=kt2x0n9933&amp;doc.view=frames&amp;chunk.id=d0e426&amp;toc.depth=1&amp;toc.id=d0e426&amp;brand=calisphere.

It is possible that the bot is confused and found similarity where none actually exists. If that is the case, you can remove the tag from the article. The article will be reviewed to determine if there are any copyright issues.

If substantial content is duplicated and it is not public domain or available under a compatible license, it will be deleted. For legal reasons, we cannot accept copyrighted text or images borrowed from other web sites or printed material. You may use such publications as a source of information, but not as a source of sentences. See our copyright policy for further details. (If you own the copyright to the previously published content and wish to donate it, see Donating copyrighted materials for the procedure.) CorenSearchBot (talk) 09:06, 15 November 2010 (UTC)

You are now a Journeyman editor!
Hi Seascapeza, how goes it? I just thought I would let you know that you have gone up in "rank" now that you are over 2000 edits and can display this badge. Hope all is well in nudibranch land. Best wishes Antarctic-adventurer  (talk)  12:36, 8 June 2011 (UTC)

It's World Ocean Day today, so, since the sea is on its head (we have a very unseasonal southeast howling here at present), I have spent it creating articles on.. anemones. Taking a break from nudibranchs because after all, they're pretty well in hand and oh my. There's precious little info on anemones. So I'm pretty busy.
 * Hi Antarctic-adventurer  (talk), and thanks so much for the badge. Lots of fun.

How are your Antarctic plans coming together? Mine keep having to be sidelined, either by a lack of projects to support the trip or an abject lack of funds.

Best wishes to you Seascapeza (talk) 13:13, 8 June 2011 (UTC)


 * World Ocean Day? I had no idea. Perhaps I should create a nudi article to celebrate, ;). As you say, I am on the nudibranchs, gradually I will get around to them all. Anenomes? Wow, I know very little about them. I'll go away and have a read of some of your material.


 * My Antarctica plans are on hold for the moment. I just got back from a while diving in the Philippines actually on some coral reefs which was amazing. Sometime in 2012 I am thinking of organising a diving expedition to Antarctica though. Strictly drysuit diving though! Antarctic-adventurer  (talk)  15:18, 8 June 2011 (UTC)


 * I just had a look at some of your new articles. You have been busy! I didn't realise that there were so many different types of anenome. (Under the page Sea anenome it says there are 46 families; not sure how many species that translates to, it doesn't say). One thing to bear in mind, it is always wise to put a non-breaking 'hard' space between a number and it's unit, i.e. 26&nbsp ; m (renders as 26 m), or 35 &nbsp ; cm (35 cm), so that it doesn't get broken up on a line break. (There shouldn't be a space between the 'p' and the semi-colon, but I had to write it like that to show you). You can find more in the WP MOS style here. I look forward to reading more about your anenomes. How many to go before you cover all species with their own articles? Antarctic-adventurer  (talk)  15:39, 8 June 2011 (UTC)

Greetings! and thanks for the formatting advice – I tend to just do the most basic stuff and forget the good bits because I'm a bit sporadic in my editing – when there's other work to do, then I concentrate on that.

Ah. Antarctica. I was reading the brochure for a (tourist) trip down there and they specify advanced divers with cold water diving experience, so what I wonder is: does that mean sub ten? or sub five? Because sub ten we manage here in the summers quite easily but not sub five. Still, at least for me, Cape Town is drysuit diving all the way. Well, except for shore diving when I venture out in my semi-dry.

Just back from a liveaboard in the Maldives. All those wonderful fishes and hard corals. But I missed the inverts and diversity here so, though I definitely miss the 30 m viz and the 30 degree water!

best wishes Seascapeza (talk) 04:06, 9 June 2011 (UTC)


 * oh and by the way, apparently there are about 800 species of anemones in 41 families, so.. not such a massive job to get them all listed and described after all.

best wishes Seascapeza (talk) 07:37, 10 June 2011 (UTC)
 * 800 species?! Well a page for each might take a while... ;) Very jealous of your dive trip to the Maldives. It's on my list though! Happy editing Antarctic-adventurer  (talk)  20:04, 23 June 2011 (UTC)

Invitation to help assess WikiProject Gastropods
Hi. I am inviting members of some WikiProjects to take part in evaluating their projects in order to help the Wikimedia Foundation better understand such projects from the inside, to encourage reflection on best practices, and to compile a list of best practices as recommended by a number of projects. I am contacting you because you are listed as an active member of WikiProject Gastropods. Having witnessed that project's work in the past in my volunteer capacity, I'd very much like to include it. I hope that you will have time and interest in participating. As much or as little as you would like to supply would be gratefully received. The assessment questions are posted at WikiProject Gastropods/Self-assessment. I will myself steer clear of the page until after any discussion seems to have become dormant, at which point I will ask questions to make sure that I am developing a good overview of opinions. Thanks. --Maggie Dennis (WMF) (talk) 13:00, 7 September 2011 (UTC)

Interview with Wikimedia Foundation
Hi Seascapeza, I hope this finds you well. My name is Matthew Roth and I'm a Storyteller working on the 2011 fundraiser with the Wikimedia Foundation in San Francisco. In past years, we've relied on Jimbo to carry the bulk of the fundraising weight and he's done very well helping us hit our yearly funding targets. This year, however, we're broadening the scope and reach of the fundraiser by incorporating more voices and different people on the funding banners and appeals that will start running full-time on November 7th. We're testing new messages and finding some really great results with editors and staff members of the Foundation. You can see the current progress of the tests here. I'm curious if you would want to participate in an interview with me as part of this process? The interviews usually last 60 minutes and involve a number of questions about your personal editing experiences, as well as general questions about Wikipedia and its impact in the world. In case you were curious, Invertzoo spoke highly of working with you and recommended I write this inquiry. Please let me know your thoughts by emailing mroth (at) wikimedia.org. Thanks! Matthew (WMF) 18:50, 6 October 2011 (UTC)

Proposal on Meta about a Travel Guide project
You might be interested in this development on meta and the associated discussion. Peter (Southwood) (talk): 10:25, 13 July 2012 (UTC)

Tethya aurantium
Hi,

Are you sure of this sentence « It is found from southern Namibia round the southern African coast to KwaZulu-Natal, usually on shallow reefs » in Tethya aurantium. I'd rather said this species is found in Europe (in Bretagne and in the Mediterranean sea as said in br:Kouign-rouanez).

Cdlt, V IGNERON * discut. 07:46, 9 August 2012 (UTC)


 * I can confirm that the cited reference (Two Oceans) gives that as its range in southern Africa. I can not speak for the range in Europe as the :br article gives no references, but is there any reason why the range should not include both areas? &bull; &bull; &bull; Peter (Southwood) (talk): 09:06, 9 August 2012 (UTC)

Yes I am sure. Two Oceans (cited reference) gives this as the distribution but since it is a publication concerning the marine fauna and flora of southern Africa, it does not cover distribution in the rest of the world. As Pbsouthwood says, why can it not be present in both ranges?

Seascapeza (talk) 13:42, 9 August 2012 (UTC)
 * Ok, sorry for the distrubance.
 * I was just checking what seems to be illogical but I read too fast so I didn’t see Two Oceans is for southern Africa only. Cdlt, V IGNERON * discut. 14:39, 15 August 2012 (UTC)

Marine animals of the Cape Peninsula
Hi Seascapeza, When do you think the article in your sandbox2 will be ready for moving to mainspace? I see you have a temporary marker "Continue from here" partway down the page. Cheers, &bull; &bull; &bull; Peter (Southwood) (talk): 13:22, 20 April 2013 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for August 13
Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that you've added some links pointing to disambiguation pages. 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.


 * Grey fan hydroid (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver)
 * added a link pointing to Capitata


 * Solanderiidae (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver)
 * added a link pointing to Capitata

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 16:00, 13 August 2013 (UTC)

August 2013
Hello, I'm BracketBot. I have automatically detected that [//en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?diff=568379673 your edit] to Grey fan hydroid may have broken the syntax by modifying 1 ""s. If you have, don't worry, just [ edit the page] again to fix it. If I misunderstood what happened, or if you have any questions, you can leave a message on [//en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?action=edit&preload=User:A930913/BBpreload&editintro=User:A930913/BBeditintro&minor=&title=User_talk:A930913&preloadtitle=BracketBot%20-%20&section=new my operator's talk page].
 * List of unpaired brackets remaining on the page:

Thanks, BracketBot (talk) 16:44, 13 August 2013 (UTC)
 * | subordo = Capitata

Hello, I'm BracketBot. I have automatically detected that [//en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?diff=568379764 your edit] to Solanderiidae may have broken the syntax by modifying 1 ""s. If you have, don't worry, just [ edit the page] again to fix it. If I misunderstood what happened, or if you have any questions, you can leave a message on [//en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?action=edit&preload=User:A930913/BBpreload&editintro=User:A930913/BBeditintro&minor=&title=User_talk:A930913&preloadtitle=BracketBot%20-%20&section=new my operator's talk page].
 * List of unpaired brackets remaining on the page:

Thanks, BracketBot (talk) 16:44, 13 August 2013 (UTC)
 * | subordo = Capitata

Hello, I'm BracketBot. I have automatically detected that [//en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?diff=568612100 your edit] to Amphiprion nigripes may have broken the syntax by modifying 1 "[]"s. If you have, don't worry, just [ edit the page] again to fix it. If I misunderstood what happened, or if you have any questions, you can leave a message on [//en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?action=edit&preload=User:A930913/BBpreload&editintro=User:A930913/BBeditintro&minor=&title=User_talk:A930913&preloadtitle=BracketBot%20-%20&section=new my operator's talk page].
 * List of unpaired brackets remaining on the page:

Thanks, BracketBot (talk) 05:37, 15 August 2013 (UTC)
 * It has also aggressively defends its [Territory (animal)|territory] and it's completely dependent on its sea anemone which represents its "life insurance" as a

Disambiguation link notification for October 30
Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Sabella spallanzanii, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Sabella (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) 14:21, 30 October 2013 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for November 1
Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Sabella spallanzanii, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Sabella (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) 20:36, 1 November 2013 (UTC)

Re Leptomedusa etc

 * WoRMS basically uses different names for the same clades (orders in this case):

and hence Leptolinae --> Hydroidolina.
 * Leptomedusae --> Leptothecata
 * Anthomedusae --> Anthoathecata
 * Siphonophorae are Siphonophorae.

In general we cannot just so use junior synonyms because some source does. It's technically legitimate in this case but it's not standard nomenclature. In this case the confusion goes back to this paper. At least according to Google Scholar, the last years' authors still preferred Anthomedusae, but were split roughly evenly on the leptos. Any case it's clear there is still dispute which name is appropriate.

If you need to adjust the internal systematics of the orders, go ahead. I would need to check on the literaturefor details, but there are some changes, eg Tubulariida are not Capitata but the new Aplanulata. Dysmorodrepanis (talk) 02:41, 15 February 2014 (UTC)

ArbCom elections are now open!
Hi, You appear to be eligible to vote in the current Arbitration Committee election. The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to enact binding solutions for disputes between editors, primarily related to serious behavioural issues that the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the ability 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, you are welcome to review the candidates' statements and submit your choices on the voting page. For the Election committee, MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 14:02, 24 November 2015 (UTC)

ArbCom elections are now open!
Hi, You appear to be eligible to vote in the current Arbitration Committee election. The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to enact binding solutions for disputes between editors, primarily related to serious behavioural issues that the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the ability 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, you are welcome to review the candidates' statements and submit your choices on the voting page. For the Election committee, MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 14:08, 24 November 2015 (UTC)

Coriocella nigra cooperation invitation
Hello Seascapeza, I started Coriocella nigra article. Can we expand it for Did you know section on the Main page? Have a nice day, --Snek01 (talk) 08:40, 3 October 2017 (UTC)

Proposed deletion of Anthothelidae


The article Anthothelidae has been proposed for deletion&#32;because of the following concern: "Per the world register of marine species (https://www.marinespecies.org/aphia.php?p=taxdetails&id=125269), this article's current source, the name has been synonymized with Alcyoniidae and this article is no longer needed. All that could be merged is the list of genera (already in the other article) & the image, which will not be deleted with the page"

While all constructive contributions to Wikipedia are appreciated, pages may be deleted for any of several reasons.

You may prevent the proposed deletion by removing the notice, but please explain why in your edit summary or on the article's talk page.

Please consider improving the page to address the issues raised. Removing will stop the proposed deletion process, but other deletion processes exist. In particular, the speedy deletion process can result in deletion without discussion, and articles for deletion allows discussion to reach consensus for deletion.

''' This bot DID NOT nominate any of your contributions for deletion; please refer to the history of each individual page for details. ''' Thanks, FastilyBot (talk) 10:00, 15 July 2024 (UTC)