User talk:Wirykuta

Welcome
Hello, Wirykuta, and welcome to Wikipedia! Thank you for your contributions. I hope you like the place and decide to stay. Unfortunately, one or more of your edits have not conformed to Wikipedia's verifiability policy, and have been reverted. Wikipedia articles should refer only to facts and interpretations that have been stated in print or on reputable websites or other forms of media. Always remember to provide a reliable source for quotations and for any material that is likely to be challenged, or it may be removed. Wikipedia also has a related policy against including original research in articles.

There is a page about the verifiability policy that explains the policy in greater detail, and another that offers tips on the proper ways of citing sources. If you are stuck and looking for help, please come to the New contributors' help page, where experienced Wikipedians can answer any queries you have! Or, you can just type   on your user page, and someone will show up shortly to answer your questions. Here are a few other good links for newcomers: I hope you enjoy editing here and being a Wikipedian! Please sign your name on talk pages using four tildes ( ~ ); this will automatically produce your name and the date. If you have any questions, check out Where to ask a question or ask me on. Again, welcome! Tanthalas39 (talk) 00:22, 22 January 2008 (UTC)
 * The five pillars of Wikipedia
 * How to edit a page
 * Help pages
 * Tutorial
 * How to write a great article
 * Manual of Style

January 2008
Please do not add content without citing reliable sources. Before making potentially controversial edits, it is recommended that you discuss them first on the article's talk page. If you are familiar with Citing sources please take this opportunity to add your reference to the article. Contact me if you need assistance adding references. Tanthalas39 (talk) 05:32, 22 January 2008 (UTC)

Greetings
Hi there. I don't have any connection with that group you mentioned; I am not so much interested in the hallucinogenic properties of the Colorado River Toad (read: not interested at all) as I am Arizona wildlife in general. Now, I am frequently on vandal patrol, and although I try very hard to maintain an attitude of good faith, sometimes I don't hold enough faith as I apparently should. You are a perfect case in point. I agree with everything you mentioned on my talk page, and as long as we can source these things, I have NO problem changing as much about the drug properties of the toad as we should. Your recent additions were uncited (and, as I mentioned, sounded like they were taken verbatim from an Arizona Fish and Game handbook), but if you want to change the factual nature while adhering to Wikipedia's policies of verifiability, I'm all for it. Tomorrow I'll take a look at the websites you mentioned, and maybe post some ideas on the article's talk page for you to look at (and you should feel free to do the same). Glad to have you on board, you should think about joining the Arizona Wikiproject. Talk later - Tanthalas39 (talk) 06:24, 23 January 2008 (UTC)
 * Hey, added some information to the Colorado River Toad page based on the references you provided; see what you think. Some questions that have arisen in my mind:
 * The media reference you gave (and I cited) stating the illegality of the toad is from the Kansas City area... do the same laws apply here in Arizona? Is the drug (and/or toad itself) federally illegal?
 * We cited the AZF&G laws about the possession, sale, etc... the toad isn't found just in AZ, do the same basic law principles apply in other states?
 * Some research for us to do, I guess. Tanthalas39 (talk) 01:06, 24 January 2008 (UTC)
 * Hey there. Been watching your recent edits to Colorado River Toad a bit - they seem good, but I haven't really had time to go into detail (most of my recent Wiki-ing has been while dozing through meetings). Anyways, you might want to think about putting edit summaries on your edits, and making some use of the show preview button. I don't mean to criticize at all, it just makes the page history a lot tidier by not having quite as many edits, and letting people know what you were up to without having to actually view the diff. Just a thought. I'll check out the edits more in detail shortly. Tanthalas39 (talk) 00:51, 30 January 2008 (UTC)

Points well taken...
I guess I was rushing a bit and got a little sloppy.

More natural history information would certainly be in order. The absolute authority has always been Fouquette, M.J., Jr. 1970. Bufo alvarius. Catalogue of American Amphibians and Reptiles, edited by William J. Riemer, American Society of Ichthyologists and Herpetologists, 93.1-93.4.

However, the information provided here is more recent and brilliantly presented: http://amphibiaweb.org/cgi/amphib_query?where-genus=Bufo&where-species=alvarius&account=lannoo

Not sure how to get it any better than that!

Two more things (technicalities):

1) This toad is never found in streams. I forget who said it first, but it's been repeated often. It's not true. They are drawn to ponds and temporary pools to breed, but not flowing water.

2) The law in CA that makes possession of the B. alvarius illegal is:

California Administrative Code Title 14, § 40(a):

TITLE 14. NATURAL RESOURCES DIVISION 1. FISH AND GAME COMMISSION -DEPARTMENT OF FISH AND GAME SUBDIVISION 1. FISH, AMPHIBIANS AND REPTILES CHAPTER 5. NATIVE REPTILES AND AMPHIBIANS 40. General Provisions Relating to Native Reptiles and Amphibians. (a) General Prohibition It is unlawful to capture, collect, intentionally kill or injure, possess, purchase, propagate, sell, transport, import or export any native reptile or amphibian, or part thereof...

The problem is I don't know how to cite it where we have cites #7 and #8.

I can't link to it because it doesn't have a static link. You start here: http://www.fgc.ca.gov/html/regs.html and select "California Code of Regulations (Including Title 14)" and start drilling down from there with the "List of CCR Titles".