User talk:Zigongosaurus1138

Disambiguation link notification for September 9
Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. An automated process has detected that when you recently edited Tambatitanis, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Basal ([//dispenser.info.tm/~dispenser/cgi-bin/dablinks.py/Tambatitanis check to confirm] | [//dispenser.info.tm/~dispenser/cgi-bin/dab_solver.py/Tambatitanis?client=notify fix with Dab solver]). Such links are usually incorrect, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of unrelated topics with similar 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) 09:20, 9 September 2018 (UTC)

October 2018
Hello, I'm Zackmann08. Thank you for your recent contributions to Template:Monofenestrata. When you were adding content to the page, you added duplicate arguments to a template which can cause issues with how the template is rendered. In the future, please use the preview button before you save your edit; this helps you find these errors as they will display in red at the top of the page. Thanks!  Zack mann  (Talk to me/What I been doing) 05:40, 24 October 2018 (UTC)

Pages for new dinosaurs
Can you create new pages from Mnyamawamtuka and Sektensaurus? I tried to make one of Pareisactus, but it wasn't very good, so that's why I'm asking you to do it.

Atlantis536 (talk) 21:52, 14 February 2019 (UTC)


 * Nevermind, I'll just do them myself. Atlantis536 (talk) 04:16, 15 February 2019 (UTC)


 * Apologies, been busy the past couple of days. Zigongosaurus1138 (talk) 09:51, 15 February 2019 (UTC)

A page you started (Bajadasaurus) has been reviewed!
Thanks for creating Bajadasaurus.

I have just reviewed the page, as a part of our page curation process and note that:

To reply, leave a comment here and prepend it with. And, don't forget to sign your reply with.

Message delivered via the Page Curation tool, on behalf of the reviewer.

Elmidae (talk · contribs) 21:42, 20 February 2019 (UTC)

DYK for Bajadasaurus
&mdash; Amakuru (talk) 00:01, 4 March 2019 (UTC)

What do you think of this?
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Draft:Adratiklit

Any thoughts? Atlantis536 (talk) 03:29, 18 August 2019 (UTC)

Thanks I'll check it out. Zigongosaurus1138 (talk) 19:13, 18 August 2019 (UTC)

What do you think of this new draft I found?
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Draft:Fukuipteryx

Any thoughts? Atlantis536 (talk) 04:13, 18 November 2019 (UTC)

Nomination for deletion of Template:Alvarezsauroidea
Template:Alvarezsauroidea has been nominated for deletion. You are invited to comment on the discussion at the template's entry on the Templates for discussion page. Pkbwcgs (talk) 11:05, 31 December 2019 (UTC)

April 2020
Hi I think your reasons for removing the plot synopsis for the Lego Star Wars video games were unjustified for some of them. I will revert them, and I ask for you to instead make a request to remove the summaries first before you remove them again. I understand your point, but at the time, it was way too much content to remove without a consensus. If there was a consensus to remove the plots, please remove the plots again, and respond to me with a link. Ocelot Creeper ( ta lk ) 19:44, 6 April 2020 (UTC)

Where can I make this request? My logic was that they all appeared to have been added by a single person each, and in such a small amount of time, so it seemed suspicious. It was perhaps with good intentions, but clearly inappropriate and inconsistent with other articles. This isn't a Lego Star Wars wiki. Perhaps abridged versions could be kept, but they were all perfectly competent enough articles before they were added, so I felt it most sensible to just remove it all because it was so clearly excessive. Zigongosaurus1138 (talk) 22:21, 6 April 2020 (UTC)
 * Yeah I recommend we first try and see if we could remove as much stuff as possible. If we can't, we should delete the plots. Getting a consensus for this stuff usually takes a week so we have time to try and trim things down. Ocelot Creeper  ( ta lk ) 23:20, 6 April 2020 (UTC)
 * Zigongosaurus1138 used a thorough edit summary in those deletions (Removed extraneous plot synopsis that was added recently. If you want to include some of this information, it must be heavily condensed. This synopsis is disproportionately large compared to the rest of the article. This is not a Lego Star Wars wiki, and so this much detail is inappropriate and inconsistent with typical video game articles on Wikipedia. Not to mention none of it is referenced!) and all of which are valid reasons to delete the sections (MOS:PLOT, WP:SUMMARY/WP:DETAIL, and WP:TOOMUCH also come to mind). There is no need for an information/warning icon in this instance. However, you are absolutely within your rights to revert the deletion per WP:BRD. Zigongosaurus1138: I would recommend keeping the discussion in one place, such as the frequently used Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Video games, but not at multiple places as the conversations should be kept to one place so that a proper WP:CONSENSUS can be made. You may place notices of a WP:RfC on other possibly involved projects directing the discussion though. Hope that all helps, Yosemiter (talk) 23:14, 6 April 2020 (UTC)

I just thought of something. Maybe instead of a summary of the plot for Video game-Complete Saga, the articles will say that the plots are based off of the films and then list the biggest differences from the films and the games (for example, the attempt to assassinate Padme in Episode 2 and Anakin destroying the Trade Federation ship in Episode 1 do not appear in the game). Ocelot Creeper ( ta lk ) 00:44, 7 April 2020 (UTC)

June 2020
Thank you for your contributions to Wikipedia. It appears that you copied or moved text from draft:Navajoceratops into another page. While you are welcome to re-use Wikipedia's content, here or elsewhere, Wikipedia's licensing does require that you provide attribution to the original contributor(s). When copying within Wikipedia, this is supplied at minimum in an edit summary at the page into which you've copied content, disclosing the copying and linking to the copied page, e.g.,. It is good practice, especially if copying is extensive, to also place a properly formatted copied template on the talk pages of the source and destination. Please provide attribution for this duplication if it has not already been supplied by another editor, and if you have copied material between pages before, even if it was a long time ago, you should provide attribution for that also. You can read more about the procedure and the reasons at Copying within Wikipedia. The draft appears to have been copy-pasted into article space. Robert McClenon (talk) 15:58, 5 June 2020 (UTC)


 * Sorry, but I didn't actually see that there was a pre-existing draft article. The article is a small stub based on information from a single recently published source, and these kinds of dinosaur articles have a well-established general formatting style, so there will inevitably be coincidental similarities. But thank you for the heads up. Zigongosaurus1138 (talk) 17:27, 5 June 2020 (UTC)

What do you think of these?
Draft:Aratasaurus

Draft:Lusovenator

Atlantis536 (talk) 00:50, 12 July 2020 (UTC)


 * I don't see anything objectionable. Why isn't the Lusovenator one up and running yet? Zigongosaurus1138 (talk) 14:22, 13 July 2020 (UTC)


 * Dunno. Atlantis536 (talk) 13:39, 14 July 2020 (UTC)

See the talk page
Informally named means an informal name, not a proposed formal name that has yet to be published., Wikipedia is not for breaking news, so this is not a thing we should be including yet, and would not belong on that page anyway. Guy (help! - typo?) 11:43, 12 August 2020 (UTC)
 * From the article list of informally named dinosaurs:
 * "Nomen manuscriptum, Latin for "manuscript name": A name that appears in manuscript but was not formally published. A nomen manuscriptum is equivalent to a nomen nudum for everything except the method of publication, and description."
 * The name has been coined in a manuscript that has not been published. It meets the definition of nomen manuscriptum according to the one given in this article.
 * Also from the same article:
 * "Nicknames or descriptive names given to specimens or taxa by researchers or the press"
 * Even if the name doesn't meet the criteria for nomen manuscriptum, it certainly fits the criteria here. The two articles I cited demonstrate that both researchers from the University of Portsmouth and the press have used this name.
 * Zigongosaurus1138 (talk) 11:49, 12 August 2020 (UTC)
 * , it is not an "informally named dinosaur". It is a proposed newly discovered dinosaur that is described in an as yet unpublished paper. This is not a "nickname or descriptive name given by researchers", it's a proposed formal name. it does not belong on that list, please remove it immediately. Per WP:BRD, the onus is on you to gain consensus for inclusion. Guy (help! - typo?) 13:21, 12 August 2020 (UTC)
 * You are incorrect, as it is a name that has not been formally coined. If it is not formal then, logically, it must be informal. This is not a controversial change to make. There is also little point trying to gain a consensus as the time that takes would likely be longer than the amount of time until this taxon is formally published anyway and it obviously needs removing from the list. Zigongosaurus1138 (talk) 14:03, 12 August 2020 (UTC)
 * A consensus in favour of keeping it in the list has now become apparent. Zigongosaurus1138 (talk) 09:56, 13 August 2020 (UTC)

Flea
Hello, I saw your latest Edit Summary. If you are sure, then this is what you seek: Sockpuppetry/Notes for the accuser - happy hunting!  William Harris talk  22:10, 14 August 2020 (UTC)
 * Thank you! I made enough noise that others noticed and the individual has been dealt with. I tried to find info on how to deal with sockpuppets but it was all quite difficult to understand as an editor not savvy on the technicalities on Wikipedia. This looks very helpful for future reference. Zigongosaurus1138 (talk) 22:20, 14 August 2020 (UTC)
 * Thank you for cleaning all that up! When I looked through the IPs' edit histories just now, it was good to see someone had got there first. On the topic of the same editor's work, please join this discussion at WikiProject Tree of Life about whether any of it should be kept. Cheers, BlackcurrantTea (talk) 06:05, 15 August 2020 (UTC)

IP edits
Hey, I noticed you've also been dealing with IP user 77.99.156.192. His/her edits seem to have "ended" on November 10 last year. However, I've encountered a new IP (82.41.151.124) when editing several pterosaur pages. This IP's edit history starts the day after 77.99.156.192's edits, it also seems that this IP is the same person as 77.99.156.192, just by looking at their talk page, they have a massive amount of AfC submissions, just like 77.99.156.192. As you already know, they've been adding a lot of unhelpful edits, and they're doing it in a very fast pace. So what I'm saying is that perhaps I could help you track their edits or something like that? Jurassic Classic 767 (talk &#124; contribs) 09:12, 23 January 2021 (UTC)

ArbCom 2022 Elections voter message
 Hello! Voting in the 2022 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23:59 (UTC) on. All eligible users are allowed to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once.

The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority 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 in the 2022 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. If you no longer wish to receive these messages, you may add to your user talk page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 01:40, 29 November 2022 (UTC)