User talk:Sminthopsis84/Archive 1

Welcome!
Hello, Sminthopsis84, and welcome to Wikipedia! Thank you for your contributions. I hope you like the place and decide to stay. Here are some pages that you might find helpful: I hope you enjoy editing here and being a Wikipedian! Please sign your messages on talk pages using four tildes ( ~ ); this will automatically insert your username and the date. If you need help, check out Questions, ask me on my talk page, or ask your question on this page and then place  before the question. Again, welcome! mgiganteus1 (talk) 01:30, 21 May 2012 (UTC)
 * The five pillars of Wikipedia
 * Tutorial
 * How to edit a page and How to develop articles
 * How to create your first article (using the Article Wizard if you wish)
 * Manual of Style

"Fixing" wikilinks
I appreciate that you made the changes to the links to Nomen illegitimum with good intentions, but please read WP:NOTBROKEN. This explains that you should not change wikilinks to redirects. These work perfectly well (i.e. are not broken) and should be left. Don't let this small mistake put you off editing Wikipedia! There's a bit of a learning curve, but help is available. WT:PLANTS is a good place to ask about plant-related issues.Peter coxhead (talk) 22:00, 21 May 2012 (UTC)
 * Oh! Thanks. That would have been much easier. Should those changes be undone (the ones that didn't involve double redirects)? Sminthopsis84 (talk) 22:03, 21 May 2012 (UTC)
 * Now everything has been reverted, so it seems that all I can do is to tell the nomenclature specialist who complained that it can't be fixed. Sminthopsis84 (talk) 01:21, 22 May 2012 (UTC)
 * What was the complaint exactly? Peter coxhead (talk) 06:33, 22 May 2012 (UTC)
 * Four-fold, I think, I would have asked the expert to check it after editing. The first problem was fixed by User:Circeus. A second requires some modifications and the page move, that Nomen Illegitimum is not an official term, Illegitimate Name is. A third is that the examples are copied from the Code, and this might be a copyright violation. A fourth problem (quoting from email) is "There is a phrase "(as represented by the type specimen)", while the intent is "(as represented by the type)" which is significantly different." Sminthopsis84 (talk) 12:57, 22 May 2012 (UTC)
 * We have discussed this term before (at WT:PLANTS I think but I can't find the thread just now). Although it's true that the exact term "nomen illegitimum" is not in the Code, as you note, "nom. illeg." is widely used – in lists of names I think I've never seen the English term. A Google search gave me 243,000 hits for "nom. illeg." and only 34,700 for "illegitimate name". So although it may not be the official term, I think it's clearly the best title for the article.
 * The examples are in quote marks and referenced, so I don't think this is a copyright violation but a legitimate use of direct quotation.
 * Where is the "(as represented by the type specimen)" phrase? Peter coxhead (talk) 19:14, 22 May 2012 (UTC)
 * Thanks for that. It is nice to have support about the quotes being okay.
 * What about rewriting the page as I did here to explain the use of "illegitimate name"?
 * The contentious phrase about the type is in "The name could be illegitimate because: it was superfluous at its time of publication, i.e., the taxon (as represented by the type specimen) already has a name, or ..."
 * Should we copy this discussion to the article's talk page? Sminthopsis84 (talk) 19:27, 22 May 2012 (UTC)
 * (Rewriting) Actually I did add something to the article about the use of the English term in the Code. See what you think.
 * ("type specimen") Yes, I would change this to just "type". Some species names are tied to a type specimen, but others only to illustrations (or even just verbal descriptions). Names above the species level can also be illegitimate but aren't typified by specimens.
 * (copy discussion) I did repeat what I said above about the name of the article on the talk page. If you have any further comments on what I added to the article or its name, perhaps reply there. Peter coxhead (talk) 19:41, 22 May 2012 (UTC)
 * Thanks, I'll ask him what he thinks of it now. Sminthopsis84 (talk) 19:56, 22 May 2012 (UTC)

Knowledge of Dipterocarpaceae
Hello, How are you? I need your help. I ask you if you could enlarge Dipterocarpaceae article making better known this group of trees in Wikipedia, adding links to "Dipterocarpaceae" and information about  "Dipterocarpaceae" existence on topics as trees articles in tropical articles or botanical or biodiversity articles. Do you know people that could be interested about Dipterocarpaceae article? They are welcome too. Thank you very much.Curritocurrito (talk) 18:55, 23 May 2012 (UTC)
 * Hello, sorry, I do not enlarge articles, I merely correct errors and add small cross-references. There are so many errors in wikipedia that I do not expect to ever finish that task. Sminthopsis84 (talk) 19:13, 23 May 2012 (UTC)

conquistadores
Hola, creo que tus aportaciones al articulo conquistador, estan mal hechas. Deberias aprender español y leer sobre el tema en el cual estas escribiendo. Eres un Vandalo. You are doing vandalism. I hope you will stop.88.19.158.244 (talk) 07:39, 31 May 2012 (UTC)

There is confusion---what?|confusion then or now? la confusión era entonces y ahora. No se sabe donde nacieron estas personas, solo que existieron|date=May 2012}} to distinguish between the origin---what?|"distinguish between" requires two objects, this is just "the origin"|date=May 2012}} of many people in the anonymous ---{what? No entiendo el what. Deberias aprender español. Se desconoce la mayor parte de la tripulacion de los barcos o que tipo de barcos era,. Un mismo barco servía para pescar y para la piratería. la tripulacion podian ser hombres libres pero tambien siervos y criados. |how can an expedition be anonymous? la historia está llena de barcos anonimos, wikipedia mismo es anonima, de personas que se esconden detras de un anonimo y pueden ser ancianos o niñas impuberes |date=May 2012}} mixed expeditions and shipmentswhat?|"shipment" is not an appropriate word to use for people un shipment es una tripulación,|date=May 2012}} of all kinds of sailors, fishers ---dn ¿Cual es la pregunta? Fishermen mostly cod and whales Fishermen|date=May 2012}} and pirates due to the inaccuracy in identifying the languages, even unrelated,___what?cual es la pregunta???|who's unrelated? what's unrelated?|date=May 2012}} 88.19.158.244 (talk) 07:44, 31 May 2012 (UTC)
 * I am trying to correct your English and you are vigorously defending it. It is extremely important that English speakers be permitted to correct what is in the English wikipedia. Now you are saying rude things about me to User:Basqueguy, in Spanish, which is not his language (or English, the language of this encyclopedia); that is not civilized behaviour. Sminthopsis84 (talk) 12:44, 31 May 2012 (UTC)

Meiome
Okay, I've moved the material to User:Sminthopsis84/Meiome. Let me know if you need any more help.--Cúchullain t/ c 21:12, 4 June 2012 (UTC)
 * Thanks. I'll see what I can do with it. Sminthopsis84 (talk) 21:37, 4 June 2012 (UTC)

Tropical Families and tropical genera, I thank you your collaboration.
Hi, I thank you your help in tropical flora. I hope your help again in the future. Best regards Curritocurrito (talk) 09:26, 5 June 2012 (UTC)

A kitten for you!
Tortoiseshell cat

 Fylbecatulous  talk   13:27, 22 June 2012 (UTC) 

Disambiguation link notification for June 28
Hi. When you recently edited Horsfieldia irya, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Otto Warburg (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) 15:19, 28 June 2012 (UTC)

"Sorry, but evolutionary scientists don't share your enthusiasm for that book"
Hi Smithhopsis84,

I think it is up to Ryan to decide if he wants to converse with me, not your good self. However, if you look at what is written, you will see I have thanked him for his explanations and respect his decision not to discuss the matter further.

Sadly, the rather bold title to your last comment to me, is wrong. Some evolutionary scientists do share my enthusiasm for the book, some don't, some have not read it, yet proffer an opinion in line with Neo-Darwinian theory, but the vast majority have not yet even had the chance to read it, and so cannot offer to share their enthusiasm one way or another.

We can all make rash statements, but only rational scientific discussion will expose the value one way or another of the McCarthy work. Simply dismissing a work without rational argument is not the way scientists work. Cheers. DerekSmith (talk) 15:09, 19 July 2012 (UTC)

Beaminster
Many thanks for that, you just beat me to it! PaleCloudedWhite (talk) 00:08, 29 July 2012 (UTC)
 * You're welcome! From what I can find online, it looks as though "still in daily public use" might not be quite accurate, can't find any statement about whether it has been or will be cleared since the collapse! Sminthopsis84 (talk) 00:19, 29 July 2012 (UTC)
 * Haha, "You pedant!", as a certain other editor might say (what a strange tirade that was...!) As to the road, it certainly will be cleared, as it's well-used, but I don't know if they've cleared it yet - that part of the story doesn't tend to get reported in the national news! Actually the tunnel itself didn't collapse - I don't know if you've got to see any pictures online, but if you do, you can see that it was just outside the mouth of the tunnel that the landslide tragedy happened. Ironically the couple who were killed were hurrying home early, because they were worried about the torrential rain. There's a new article about the tunnel now. That part of the UK has had terrific rainfall amounts recently, and many floods and landslides. About a week later a young woman was killed on a beach only about 7 miles away from the tunnel incident - the cliff above her collapsed and fell on the beach. Nature can be brutal. PaleCloudedWhite (talk) 00:38, 29 July 2012 (UTC)
 * Thanks, what shockingly unexpected disasters. The scattered news reports visible here online are patchy in their coverage. Yes, I'm a pedant; it adds amusement sometimes (but unfortunately can produce irritation at other times). Sminthopsis84 (talk) 01:12, 29 July 2012 (UTC)
 * Nothing wrong with being a pedant on Wikipedia - it's a (mostly) happy collecting ground for such souls! (and I'm one of them, apparently!) There are some pictures of the tunnel landslide here; some news reports stated that the tunnel collapsed, but it looks pretty clear from these pics that the tunnel remained intact (except for a bit of brickwork around the entrance), and the landslide happened just outside. PaleCloudedWhite (talk) 01:56, 29 July 2012 (UTC)
 * It's good to hear that the 1832 brickwork, restored of course, didn't fail.
 * That is a very strange tirade, fancy mixing compliments such as "gardener" and "pedant" with those other words!
 * A disturbing aspect is "I never bother again once I have driven it home", which suggests that this person makes quite a habit of abusing others, and they've already moved from one address to another, so perhaps it is all done through anonymous IPs. Dynamic IP addresses are clearly quite a problem in wikipedia; there must not be enough incentives in place to get such people to make signons that can then be banned for abuse, a captcha now and then doesn't slow them down enough. Sminthopsis84 (talk) 02:20, 29 July 2012 (UTC)
 * Yes, unfortunately I think we're all quite familiar with the problem of dynamic IPs (let's hope we don't encounter Zaragoza again....)
 * If you look at Pic 9 of that series of the tunnel, you can very clearly see some quite robust stands of Impatiens glandulifera crowding the edge of the road; it's quite an invasive species here, perhaps in some part due to the activities of an old geography teacher of mine, who liked it and used to collect the seed and spread it around watercourses all over the north of England. Not very eco-friendly of him! PaleCloudedWhite (talk) 02:44, 29 July 2012 (UTC)
 * Fingers crossed indeed!
 * That's a magnificent infestation of I. glandulifera, not a good plant for binding soil. We have it here too, all mixed up with the two native species I. capensis and I. pallida. Your geography teacher resembles Ferdinand von Mueller who so generously dispersed Himalayan blackberries in southeastern Australia in order to feed poor people who he anticipated would later occupy the country. The prickly plants grow extremely well there, filling creek beds, covering old houses, causing people to buy glyphosate, overall not much of an asset. Blackberries might have done better in holding the Beaminster embankment together, though. Sminthopsis84 (talk) 14:44, 29 July 2012 (UTC)

David Copeland
Nice work! I think a lot of the problem is newspapers will round upwards rather than being factual, and so 48 quickly becomes 50 and messes up the article if people don't double check things and read carefully. Thanks ツ Je no va  20  (email) 14:20, 31 July 2012 (UTC)
 * Yes, and the number for the second attack seems to be impossible to track down, 5, 13, 39 all appear in different places. I think that might be rather upsetting to the victims. Sminthopsis84 (talk) 14:28, 31 July 2012 (UTC)
 * If you're going to clean it up and since you're fairly new here, maybe i can be of use if you have any questions on things, like how Wikipedia works or relevant policies? Let me know if you need anything and good luck with this one. Thanks ツ Je no va  20  (email) 15:15, 31 July 2012 (UTC)
 * Thanks. I don't intend to try a major effort to clean it up, since I don't know much about the topic. I mostly edit in other areas. Sminthopsis84 (talk) 15:46, 31 July 2012 (UTC)
 * Well good luck with your botany articles. You know where i am ツ Je no va  20  (email) 18:00, 31 July 2012 (UTC)