User talk:ZooPro/Archive November 2010

Project Update (2010-08)
Sorry, this is a bit wordy. Quite a bit has been going on.

I created a list of stub articles that should be easy to upgrade to start-class, and eventually posted it here along with a list of the criteria I use to determine start-class. I then started through the start-class articles to do the same. This is harder since many articles don't meet my start-class criteria, so I either demote them (if they are really bad), or fix them (which takes time). I have created a section in the article requests page with the "easy start update" list I have so far, and the C-class criteria that I am using. These lists have more specific metrics than the official WP definitions, which to me are very interpretive. While doing this, some activity in a list made me realize that being on a list does not mean an article has a "WPZOO" rating template (duh!). So I went through all zoo lists adding "WPZOO" as needed and rating those articles. This increased the project article count by about 220 (the count is now 936). I have all of the lists watchlisted now so that if there is activity, I can go see if the article has a WPZOO template.

I am going through the AZA list and creating start-class articles to eliminate red links. IMHO, it's a waste of time to create a stub -- when you come back to it later it's more work to "catch up" and go from stub to start than if you just did the work when you first had the information in front of you. I create a stub in my sandbox, then create the article as a stub and immediately expand it to start in-situ. I'm up to "R" now on the AZA list. I will probably tackle the WAZA list after that, but who knows. I keep finding other things that need to be worked on, like an infobox in the India project that needs to be made into a navbox (and then of course propagated properly).

There was a threat to delete your Zoo-stub image based on inadequate documentation. I think this was because the two tiger images were not separately declared and THEN put into the composite image, but I'm not 100% sure. I did create a version of the image that uses a free-image tiger from commons, which (I think, anyway), is a bit cleaner looking (and of course I am not prejudiced on this). This still does not address the original intent of completely redoing that image. Even worse, after spending a bunch of time dealing with this, I'm pretty sure the original image was not deleted. You can see the new image on the [Wikipedia:WikiProject_Zoo|project main page].

I am creating a list of citations for zoo organizations (AZA, WAZA, etc.) that we reference. I think the list should eventually be a common resource, but I haven't found a good place for it on the Zoo project site yet, so it is still sitting in my sandbox here. I have thought of putting these citations in a template so they can be updated centrally, but haven't quite wrapped my brain around how that would work yet. I have also created a dozen articles since May (not all Zoo articles), and upgraded about twice that many from stub to start or start to C (mostly zoo articles).

Nothing has been done for the portal. I think that remains the biggest issue for someone who knows how it works. I could probably figure it out, but I prefer dealing directly with articles so I was waiting for The Arbiter to get back for the portal completion.

On my "personal importance scale," upgrading stub articles to start should be our next push, after which we can start to move them on up the chain. It's not exactly glamorous, but I think it's the most bang for the buck (or Yen, or Euro, or whatever). The current batch of start-class articles are varied. Some are almost C, and some (IMHO) don't qualify as start-class. I will continue re-assessing as I have time. One thing we could do is have a "stub to start" collaboration to see how may stubs we can update in a set amount of time. I have a pretty good "framework" that can be applied and I can coach people if they stumble. The catch, of course, is that we still don't really have a lot of members. To really catch up, we would each need to do almost 40 articles, at 1-2 hours per stub.

For individual articles, there has been quite a bit of activity on Zoo Basel (mostly by one person who is not a project member yet), and I think it is ready for GAN when someone wants to take the time to shepherd it through the process. Lahore Zoo has been considerably expanded. I think it's a B now, but would love to have a second opinion. If someone could do a copy edit pass, that would be even better--I have been a little too involved to be completely impartial. The fight over the new name for the San Diego Zoo Safari Park seems to be over, since the zoo finally had the sense to update their Web site. Someone jumped the gun a bit a month or more ago, and there were some edit wars going on for a while (I mostly kept out of this). The Miami MetroZoo to Zoo Miami name change was well announced and went very smoothly (I was involved in this one). Though we still don't have a new photo of the entrance, the Web site was at least switched on time so there was no controversy about the name change (just a lot of links to go in and update). There is steady but scattered activity elsewhere (mostly by non-project wikipedians). I try to take a look when I see updates (I have about 2/3 of the zoo articles on my watchlist now) and see if a re-assessment is in order. Occasionally it is. I created a template to tie the New York City zoos together, as they are all run by the Wildlife Conservation Society now, and I created Canada province templates at the request of The Arbiter when he was back in for a short time.

I have started adding logos to everything I get involved in now. The process is pretty simple now that I have it figured out, so more and more stub and start zoo articles will have logos going forward.

Enough for now. If you want to see actual article names, you can always go to my list here. If you have specific questions, you can reply right here and I will try to answer as quickly as possible. Donlammers (talk) 15:31, 7 August 2010 (UTC)

I have allreasy answer you in the other places. So, write the same again is innecesary. Sorry that a moderator, like you, don’t act like a wise man. That’s why even when Wikipedia is heavely used, it is not considerated like a seriour source in this themes.

Finally, just one last thing, every time that I put a commentary in the article, that count like a edit? If that is the case, could you tell how can I annwer with out edit comments? Thanks. And yes, I am not an expert in Wikipedia. --AmbaDarla (talk) 16:33, 11 August 2010 (UTC)

Quick Question
Could you please tell me why you undid the edit to Republican Party (United States), a short time ago? I am wondering why you did so as I had just accepted the review of the article and found no vandalism or other issues with the statement, whilst I would agree it required a source I was just about to add a citation needed tag only to find it had been undone. I have no interest in the article, am just wondering about your reasons behind the undo. Regard Zoo  Pro  06:59, 8 August 2010 (UTC)


 * Particularly after the Deepwater Horizon oil spill in the Gulf of Mexico. Not sourced (WP:V) fact (WP:OR). Tb hotch Ta lk C. 07:02, 8 August 2010 (UTC)


 * Thanks, I already re-looked at your comment and found you had answered it, Cheers anyway. Zoo  Pro  07:03, 8 August 2010 (UTC)

About the male tiger interaction with the cub
Sorry ZooPro, but in this occation, you are COMPLETELY wrong.

That picture is of the famous male B2, the dominant tiger in the turist area of the Bandhavgarh NP. You can see ANY picture in the web and compare the stripe patern with this male. Besides, it is a complete lie that the male tigers don’t interact with they cubs, as matter of fact, there are reports of male tigers fiding they youngs when they mothers died, acording with Valmik Thapar, no less.

So, I will change the title of the picture again, and it will be good to erase this myth of the no-interaction of male-cubs.

Greetings. --AmbaDarla (talk) 19:26, 8 August 2010 (UTC)


 * Excuse me, I am not wrong in any way shape or form. You are full of rubbish is the actual answer. Unless you can provide me with a direct source of your "beliefs" then I will continue to revert and warn you for your actions. It is not a complete lie that males don't interact with the cubs its FACT. I will not be searching the web to find confirmation that this is the alleged B2, thats your job. I will revert your action again. Zoo  Pro  00:38, 9 August 2010 (UTC)

How can you say that my post is full of rubbish??? Your words show your ignorance in tiger behavior. Probably, you had only read the child-books about tigers, but surprise, there are scientific references that challenge the OLD clichés. Maybe you still believe that the largest population of tigers is in the Sundarbans, or that white tigers had conservation value or event that tigers don’t share they food with other individuals.

Your negative to search the pictures of B2 in the internet (by the way) is evidence that you had not will to change your beliefs. But, don’t worry, I will put the reference about the parental care of the male tigers AND will put some images of B2 for make a proper comparison with the stripe pattern.

Remember, you insult me first, but like an educated person, I will not do the same. --AmbaDarla (talk) 18:41, 10 August 2010 (UTC)

Hi again. Ok, here is the evidence, check this out:


 * About the male tiger and its cubs:

Dr. Karanth (2003) [quoting Schaller and Thapar]: http://a.imageshack.us/img835/3259/karanth2003.png

Dr Thapar’s book: http://a.imageshack.us/img819/8660/thaparmaletigerscarethe.jpg http://a.imageshack.us/img822/4503/thapparsaystigersaregoo.png http://a.imageshack.us/img715/6694/maletigerfeedtheyyoungs.png

Sadly, that book is not completely available in the web, so I found these images about it: http://www.c-o-n-s-e-r-v-a-t-i-o-n-s.com/Shops/1-1000-0195648102-The_Secret_Life_of_Tigers http://www.booksetsextra.com/Category/Books--3aOutdoors+--26+Nature/C282-1068/Review.aspx http://books.google.com.gt/books?id=gQrgXWxLv2MC&pg=PA82&dq=%22that+male+tiger+fathers+actually+care%22&hl=es&ei=E7FhTJLFCYGclgejkr2QCg&sa=X&oi=book_result&ct=result&resnum=2&ved=0CC8Q6AEwAQ#v=onepage&q&f=false

As you can see, the male Bengal tigers had a high degree of parenthood with they cubs and here is the evidence.

http://www.gettyimages.com/detail/95659605/Flickr http://geography.wincoll.ac.uk/jjcskw/pages/303.05overseasindia08.htm http://www.becci.com/Journal.htm
 * About B2 male, check these pages:

And finally, this image: http://a.imageshack.us/img836/5368/b2marking.jpg

So, as you can see, this tiger is NOT a female, and worst, it’s not just a “simple” male, it is B2 the famous dominant male tiger of Bandhavgarh NP. Every tiger fan knows him!!! By the way, I also have information and pictures of Bohka (A.K.A. Rajbhera), Banda, Madla, Sauraha, Star male, Challenger, Charger, and many other famous tigers. I also have every modern paper about tiger size, and I am always searching for new information about them.

By the way, check this webpage, and know some of these famous males: http://animalvsanimal.yuku.com/reply/4981/t/Re-B2-and-Other-Great-Tiger-Pics-from-India-.html

In conclusion, the male Bengal tigers have an important role in the life of they young and that picture in the Tiger article is of B2, a famous dominant male. By the way, check this image of the same picture: http://a.imageshack.us/img836/4623/maletigerandcubsmslesle.jpg There are two cubs!!!

And here are more images of males with they cubs. http://a.imageshack.us/img261/8281/b2withhiscub.jpg http://a.imageshack.us/img267/8734/b2andsonchallenger.jpg http://a.imageshack.us/img261/848/bokhaandcubs.jpg http://a.imageshack.us/img267/526/malewithcubs.jpg

So, you are served. --AmbaDarla (talk) 23:13, 10 August 2010 (UTC)


 * Nope its not acceptable, its still unsourced and non verified. Zoo  Pro  23:48, 10 August 2010 (UTC)

A last comment
I have allready answer you in the other places. So, write the same again is innecesary. Sorry that a moderator, like you, don’t act like a wise man. That’s why even when Wikipedia is heavely used, it is not considerated like a seriour source in this themes.

Finally, just one last thing, every time that I put a commentary in the article, that count like a edit? If that is the case, could you tell how can I annwer with out edit comments? Thanks. And yes, I am not an expert in Wikipedia.

Maybe that’s why you so mad with me. --AmbaDarla (talk) 16:35, 11 August 2010 (UTC)

WPZOO Navbox colors
Sorry to bother you, but we have a person reverting the navbox colors on the basis that they are "gratuitous". My question and his answer can be found User talk:Jack Merridew. I don't personally give a hoot what colors are used (and would be inclined to change them to the default), but we should be consistent one way or the other. Do you have an opinion on this? Can we justify a "semantic" reason for the color being used? Donlammers (talk) 02:15, 14 August 2010 (UTC)


 * No problem, before I jump in head first to defend the colors (and dont worry i will), could you provide me a link to the changes the user made, i cant seem to find them. cheers Zoo  Pro  03:22, 15 August 2010 (UTC)


 * Found the changes, and have commented on the users talk page. Zoo  Pro

, and if it was a 'revert' I didn't see who did this before. Interesting that Don is inclined to change them to the default; that's the appropriate thing to do. I'm a developer, including web development. I'm also a lighting designer familiar with colour theory. I see from your 'about me' subpage that you're involved with a group of Wikiprojects; Animals, Amphibians and Reptiles, too. I don't know these at all, but assume they do good work. We should have good articles on them all. I've not looked at any of the other templates these projects use, either. But I would like you to consider that you are, in fact, going against site MOS; WP:Deviations. The Skittlepedia Effect is a widely understood issue, and there is a large body of talk, over years, about this sort of thing. I'll grant you that the colour usage in that navbox was far from Cheers, Jack Merridew 04:24, 15 August 2010 (UTC)


 * OK, my bad in usage of terms. JM changed the template, and from the tone of the second edit comment (which sounded to me more like a threat than a comment) I made an assumption that was unwarranted (that my undo had been reverted). For any confusion and bad blood that this may have caused, I apologize -- the template is currently in its original color with some minor corrections made by myself and JM. In terms of the color, I am personally inclined to change to the default for the same reason that JM is (as I stated above). I'm a tech writer. At my day job, we have a bunch of groups that think they should do everything differently. Unless there is a good reason to be different (and there sometimes is), I prefer to keep things consistent. It not only gives a more consistent image to our customers (branding) but it's actually easier to maintain in the long run. In terms of effort, this is not huge (only about 60 templates). On the other side, the color picked is not particularly offensive either, so if there was a good reason, then we should bring this up and keep the color. I can't speak either to why the color was picked (it was before my time) or who else might have an interest in the issue, so I deferred things back here to find out why and if it matters. Donlammers (talk) 13:04, 15 August 2010 (UTC)


 * No bad blood, here. I'm after what's best for the project, and your comments above track pretty well with my take on this. Terima kasih. Note that I replied further on my talk. My was just a reply to yours. I see the discussion that seems to have produced these colours: WT:ZOO/Archive 2#Portal and Project Colours. "Colours of zoo uniforms" is a weak rationale. nb: I just created two shortcuts for you: WT:ZOO and WT:Z ;)
 * ZooPro, I've no issue with anything else that these WikiProjects seem to be up to. The local consensus that produced these colours is quite small, really. I could sign-up and have lot of local-weight per: WT:ZOO/Archive 2#Is anyone still active?. Can we just cut these colours from the navboxes and such? I'll do the work and tidy-up any other details while I'm at it. I'm really good at this stuff. I'm not talking about stuff used on the wikiproject pages, or the portals; local branding is fine in such limited spaces. I'd like to do the same in some of the sister projects, too. This would amount to setting a really good precedent, as this issue *is* widespread.
 * I see you're from Oz; G'day. I know a lot folks from down under, having lived nearby for years. On-wiki, I'm an honorary member of the Aussie-Cabal (inducted by some good mates;), and have even been called such in a pejorative sense (by an appropriately departed bad-actor). Cheers, Jack Merridew 20:33, 15 August 2010 (UTC)


 * Could you please respond to this? Jack Merridew 00:28, 20 August 2010 (UTC)

Welcome to WP:GLAM/SI
Welcome to the Smithsonian collaboration and thank you for volunteering to be an ambassador for WikiProject Zoos. We have a few members of the first workshop, which we will be holding on August 19th which are associated with the Zoo, I will make sure that we put them in contact with you. If you wouldn't mind taking a look at what we currently have in Category:Smithsonian Institution and help us identify content that is missing or needs to be created at GLAM/SI/Articles for creation that would be great. And don't forget to add any new content you create to GLAM/SI/Outcomes, thanks!Sadads (talk) 19:18, 16 August 2010 (UTC)


 * Thanks. Zoo  Pro  11:18, 26 August 2010 (UTC)

Advice
As you seem happy to give me advice I'm sure you won't mind me giving you some in return. Please just take a less aggressive tone, and please don't bite the newbe's. --Michael Johnson (talk) 01:11, 17 August 2010 (UTC)
 * Noted, Thank You Michael. Zoo  Pro  03:29, 17 August 2010 (UTC)

White tiger
Some anon. editor said that the article was terrible (see talk page). He mentioned that the whole article seemed to make the white tiger seem like a seperate species, and criticized the lead specifically. Then he said that the classification box should be removed. I added a bit to the lead sentence to clarify, but I'm not sure what WikiProject Animals normally does with classification boxes on articles like this, where the animal in question is not a seperate sub-species.  Bramble  claw  x   21:01, 30 August 2010 (UTC)


 * Thanks I will head over and have a look. Zoo  Pro  00:53, 31 August 2010 (UTC)

Draft capitalization guidelines subpage: notice to relevant discussion pages
Hello. I would like to post a short "invitation" to the Draft capitalization guidelines subpage, on relevant project pages, etc. I could use a bit of help tweaking it. To avoid a brouhaha, I would like to note, either in the invitation, or the draft page, that the purpose is mainly to clarify and expand the list of uncontroversial rules. Where should I do that?

I intend on sending the invitation to the list of 34 projects in the family tree. Can you think of other relevant parties to notify?


 * = =Guidelines for capitalization of common names of fauna= =


 * Hello project members. Please take a moment to visit the draft for an improved layout of the guidelines for the capitalization of common names of species. Thank you.

Thank you so much. Anna Frodesiak (talk) 10:05, 1 September 2010 (UTC)


 * Give me around 24 hours and I will get a notice organised for you to deliver. I once requested all the projects under wikiproject animals to confirm there activity so perhaps the wikiproject council list will help you discover other projects. Zoo  Pro  10:46, 1 September 2010 (UTC)


 * I'm delighted that you made the brown box. I always wondered who made those. I have no idea how to edit it.


 * The current version states that we want to change the rules for some groups. That would be walking the same path as before. I think a good first step would be to lay out the existing rules. Then, step by step, consistency might be achieved by making one group consistent with another. Here is a slightly different version that reflects that intention:


 * Hello WikiProject members. As part of a recent discussion at WikiProject Animals, a number of users have indicated that the presentation of the current guidelines on the capitalization of common names of species is somewhat unclear.


 * We wish to clarify and confirm existing uncontroversial guidelines and conventions, and present them in a "quick-reference" format, for inclusion into the guidelines for the capitalization of common names of species.


 * Please take a moment to visit the draft. Your input is needed to ensure this is done the best way possible and to ensure consistent consensus. Thank you 


 * I broke it into three short paragraphs for easy reading, and to isolate the paragraph containing the purpose. I'm not sure if that's allowed. What do you think? Many thanks. Best, Anna Frodesiak (talk) 00:33, 2 September 2010 (UTC)

I still await a quick comment or two on the whole species common name convention thing before I proceed. Take your time. No rush. Many thanks. Anna Frodesiak (talk) 02:47, 14 September 2010 (UTC)

Perissodactyls
Hi! I don't spam talk pages trying to gather support - I gather people who may have an opinion about the thing. - Kontos (talk) 12:28, 3 September 2010 (UTC)
 * I think involving neutral participants to a discussion is the correct way. - Kontos (talk) 12:32, 3 September 2010 (UTC)

Cheetah
Hi, I noticed that page is semi-protected so I created an account to manage to edit it, but no results... Im from it.wiki and I'm trying to improve our page, so I needed some references to have a bibliography... how can I do? --GenLodA (talk) 19:39, 5 September 2010 (UTC)
 * You will need autoconfirmed status it usually takes around 4 days and 10 edits, though i don't know why you would need to edit the page to obtain references as they are listed there. Zoo  Pro  00:46, 6 September 2010 (UTC)

Thanks for the vote in the Arkansas Alligator Farm and Petting Zoo AfD
Thanks for your support -   Hydroxonium (talk) 17:20, 9 September 2010 (UTC)


 * How thoughtful thank you very much. Zoo  Pro  22:53, 9 September 2010 (UTC)


 * Much appreciated. Zoo  Pro  03:35, 10 September 2010 (UTC)

WPZOO logo
I like the new logo. I do have one suggestion on usage with the Zoo-stub template. It looks a bit large when used there. Most of the stub template logos I've seen don't include any text, so how about just using the sun with animals without the text in that context? You can probably even make that part just a bit bigger, and I think the text next to it makes the project clear. Donlammers (talk) 16:31, 11 September 2010 (UTC)
 * Consider it done. Zoo  Pro  23:03, 11 September 2010 (UTC)
 * ✅ Zoo  Pro  12:22, 13 September 2010 (UTC)
 * Thanks. I really like the new logo. It's somehow just more "cheerful" than either of the old ones. At first I thought you were only replacing the stub logo, but I really like that you also replaced it on the project pages and the userbox. Donlammers (talk) 01:03, 14 September 2010 (UTC)

Wikiproject template on Painted Turtle
Thanks for putting the template up there. Just one more question, can the page be moved to Painted turtle (lowercase 't') as in Bog turtle and Wood turtle?--NYMFan69-86 (talk) 21:24, 19 September 2010 (UTC)


 * Consider it done. Might take a little bit though as that page is currently a redirect and will need to be deleted to make way for a move. Zoo  Pro  00:22, 20 September 2010 (UTC)
 * Great, thank you. By the way, didn't I see that you had retired a while ago?--NYMFan69-86 (talk) 00:57, 20 September 2010 (UTC)
 * I did indeed leave for around 4 months however have returned after some discussion with others in the zoo industry. Zoo  Pro  10:15, 20 September 2010 (UTC)
 * Well, we're all glad you're back!!--NYMFan69-86 (talk) 00:50, 23 September 2010 (UTC)

Pending changes/Straw poll on interim usage
Hi. As you recently commented in the straw poll regarding the ongoing usage and trial of Pending changes, this is to notify you that there is an interim straw poll with regard to keeping the tool switched on or switching it off while improvements are worked on and due for release on November 9, 2010. This new poll is only in regard to this issue and sets no precedent for any future usage. Your input on this issue is greatly appreciated. Off2riorob (talk) 23:54, 20 September 2010 (UTC)

Hi
Hey ZooPro! I’m back now and will try to edit more frequently. Can you fill me in on what has happened up to now and what I should be doing? The Arbiter  ★★★  14:33, 21 September 2010 (UTC)


 * Welcome back! You can see my summary to ZooPro above (the first item on the talk page). ZooPro can fill you in after that. Donlammers (talk) 17:05, 21 September 2010 (UTC)

Help with images
Hello, can you link me to a page on wiki's policies on image in animal article particulary what to use in the lede? Thank you. 24.180.173.157 (talk) 07:22, 24 September 2010 (UTC)


 * Manual_of_Style
 * Image_use_policy Zoo  Pro  09:22, 24 September 2010 (UTC)

Is there a policy against using multiple images in the lede of one animal species (expect for sexual dimorphism) as in the Cat article? 24.180.173.157 (talk) 19:04, 24 September 2010 (UTC)


 * The images in the Cat article were chosen some time ago by a number of users and consensus approved them, it was recent thing in the last 12 months, The image in the taxobox was decided on because it represented the most common breeds/shapes/sizes or cats in the world, our reason for doing this is because the taxobox image was being changed almost weekly by users who didn't like the former image so as a compromise and consensus multiple images are used to convey what a cat looks like. It wasn't something that was taken lightly and the discussion lasted a very long time in the end it was decided on and most users agreed (hence consensus). Hope this helps Zoo  Pro  23:24, 24 September 2010 (UTC)
 * Talk:Cat/Archive_11 this is the discussion that was held. Zoo  Pro  23:38, 24 September 2010 (UTC)

Kyoto Zoo
I may need some help. I have a guy determined to badmouth the Kyoto Municipal Zoo (I'm not claiming anything about whether he's justified or not), and doing it blatantly in the lead. If you cold just take a look at the history and talk page, and at my talk page (User_talk:Donlammers) and let me know if I'm out of bounds on this, I would appreciate it. I have not run into anyone yet that seems quite so determined to put down an institution in an article without proper citations. Thanks. At this point, I don't think I need intercession yet. Donlammers (talk) 02:19, 5 October 2010 (UTC)

OK, I take it back. I think I need help. If I'm wrong, then I'm happy to let the unbalanced assessment of an IP user stand, but this is beyond what I can handle right now by myself. Sorry. Donlammers (talk) 03:11, 5 October 2010 (UTC)

If you didn't delete the videos, any user could see for themselves, rather than having YOU decide whether someone is "trying to badmouth" the Kyoto Zoo. If you actually LOOKED at the videos, you would see that it is accurate. If you actually READ the article on polar bears you would see that it is an accurate characterization of the article. As the Wikipedia article stands, it is a string of little trivialities that utterly misportray the essential character of the Kyoto Zoo, which is that it is at best a 1950s steel and concrete animal prison, where the animals suffer in inhumane conditions. (Note that I enjoy good zoos--I am not anti-zoo). Please make no further changes to the Kyoto Zoo page until you are actually INFORMED about it. For instance, look at the videos of the zoo. Google statements made by people who have been there (e.g. "I left there crying after 5 minutes," "The polar bear had died. I am glad, because I think he must be happier.") Why do you think that you should be presenting information about something that you not only know absolutely nothing about, but that you are also too lazy to actually look up? If you can't give an ACCURATE PICTURE (rather than just a few quaint details about a lion in 1932) than do the world a favor and give up. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 141.218.154.237 (talk) 15:36, 5 October 2010 (UTC)


 * I dont know if your constant change of IP addresses is because you dont want to be blocked but it does look rather odd. I have no intention of looking at the videos on youtube. The polar bear article is about polar bears at a number of facilities not just one, therefore you cannot use it as a source to cite the whole zoo has inhumane conditions. You might very well be right and more then likely are however that is not the point I am arguing, I have a problem with the way the information is placed in the article without sources. If you provide me with sources I will happily stand by declaring the zoo inhumane and an animal prison but you need SOURCES. I have worked in the zoo industry for a while now and have come across some horrific facilities that needed to close down, some have articles here on wikipedia however I cannot add the information of what I have seen in those zoos because I have no sources to back it up. If someone writes an article on how bad the conditions are at a specific zoo and are reputable (main stream media are always good sources) then I would jump head first into making the world know how shit the zoo is. I may dedicate some time to searching for sources on the Kyoto Municipal Zoo that can without a doubt tell me its a bad facility, however I have cautioned you against re-adding the information, I have held off warning you for personal attacks against other users for now however if in future your msgs continue to be some what abusive I will not hesitate in warning you. Regards Zoo  Pro  01:48, 6 October 2010 (UTC)

Don, you could just admit that you feel so attached to this "wikipedia" process that you are turning it into "donopedia". It took three times for the VERIFIED CITED INFORMATION to pass muster with you, and then Don just put it wherever Don wanted under threat of "EXPULSION". Take a deep breath and think about whether that is what Wikipedia is supposed to be about. And what I said about the problems with citations on the page are absolutely true. I know because I am a professor who publishes in PEER REVIEWED publications that are cited in places as important as WIKIPEDIA, several places on Wikipedia even. So, how about we cooperate to make the page accurate and correct? Fix the bad citations (i.e almost everything is from the Kyoto Zoo official page--that is no good (do you think Kyoto Zoo doesn't have a POV) and let users include accurate information about the zoo, even if you, Don, don't 100% like it. Because the premise of Wikipedia is that any knowledgeable person will contribute.  If you insist on maintaining a rather dictatorial hand on the page, without even reading the sources sometimes it seems, what ever good there might be in Wikipeia is utterly destroyed.  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 24.176.0.82 (talk) 04:54, 7 October 2010 (UTC)


 * Donlammers follows Wikipedia process and guidelines just like the rest of us, maybe you should take a leaf out of his book. I will caution you if you personally attack him again as you have done you WILL be blocked without question. I have an extremely hard time believing you to be a professor at any reputable establishment as I have never met an academic with such disregard for rules and guidelines or such disrespect for others. I only accepted the Polar bear information after I edited to an acceptable standard and moved it into a suitable section. It was not "Third time lucky" it was me deciding that I would verify and add a decent piece of information as opposed to adding stuff willy-nilly. The current information in the article doesn't give any bias POV to the zoo as it is, regardless of what spin the sources might have on it, its up to the wikipedia editor to ensure that doesnt flow into the article. I would like you to discuss any further changes on the Talk page of the article and yes indeed work together to improve the article, I think both myself and Donlammers have wasted far to much of our valuable time on this issue instead of looking after and improving other articles. Zoo  Pro  08:30, 7 October 2010 (UTC)

Semi-Retirement
I've changed my mind. Anyway, I thought YOU were retired! Beluga boy how's my driving? 19:58, 9 October 2010 (UTC)


 * I thought you were retired too. Well anyway, welcome back!Snowleopard100 (talk) 14:59, 19 October 2010 (UTC)

Big long lists of animals
Maybe this is just my own prejudice, but are big long animal lists really appropriate in zoo articles? Shouldn't the animals be listed as part of the narrative describing the exhibits? My impression is that in general WP discourages lists in favor of narrative. Granted it's easier to just slap together a list, but it takes up a huge amount of space for something that we can't possibly keep up to date. Someone just added such a list to Toronto Zoo, and now it's about three miles from the end of the history to anything substantive (this is, of course, a point of view). One that I did convert is Zoo Negara (compare with the article "before" my rework). Anyway, do you have any opinions on this one? Am I doing the wrong thing converting these lists? I seem to be in the minority. Donlammers (talk) 01:24, 10 October 2010 (UTC)


 * Hmm. Looks like someone already answered it for the Toronto zoo, though just reverting with "Wikipedia is not a list" seems like a waste of perfectly good information that could be worked into the narrative. Anyway, I guess my question still stands, though slightly modified. Do we even want unmaintainable lists of animals for every zoo, as opposed to something like "this exhibit includes X, and Y, and Z" (which can be modified at times, but doesn't imply that we have a definitive list at any given moment)? Donlammers (talk) 01:32, 10 October 2010 (UTC)

I have always liked lists however they do sometimes look unsightly, How do you feel about expandable lists instead? Zoo Pro  08:25, 10 October 2010 (UTC)


 * I did that at Perth Zoo. It definitely helps in the looks department, and is not difficult to do. However, by the time I finished the exhibits section, most of the information is in the narrative and therefore duplicated (I have not removed the list, so you can see the results). In Zoo Basel (for which I cannot take credit), the animal list was turned into a separate list article. Also, most of the animal lists I've seen are simply lifted from the zoo site, which is much easier for us to keep up to date (since we only need to point to it). Just thinking about trying to keep up with a list of (for instance) the Denver Zoo, which I go to with my son at least 8-10 time a year, gives me a headache. They put animals on exhibit and off, and move them around, on quite a regular basis -- especially when it comes to birds and fishes (though I guess I can't update anything unless they change the zoo site, since it would be original research). To me it just seems like a bunch of extra and pointless work when we have so much other work to do. The zoo is always going to have better data then we do, so I don't see these lists as adding value. Just for the record, I have yet to just remove a list. I have either left them in place or incorporated them into the narrative. At least in the narrative I always say something like "Animals in this exhibit include..." so I'm not implying (like most of the lists do to me) that is is definitive. Final point: many of the lists I've seen seem to be dumped into stub articles just to make them look bigger. Very little work to start because they usually seem to be copied from the zoo site, but they a mostly probably not accurate after a couple of months. Donlammers (talk) 13:26, 10 October 2010 (UTC)


 * Take a look at Henry Doorly Zoo. Here they include the animals as part of the exhibits, but as a list. Basically they are doing the same as I do (Animals include:) but followed by a bulleted list rather than a narrative list. This at least keeps the article from having a huge list with a lot of white space. Donlammers (talk) 13:50, 10 October 2010 (UTC)

Irwin's Turtle edit
Hi, just wanted to know why you undid the changes I made to the page on Elseya irwini. Thanks. Faendalimas (talk) 04:51, 17 October 2010 (UTC)


 * Per manual of style issues. The correct wording is "External Links". Zoo  Pro  09:23, 19 October 2010 (UTC)


 * Ok fair enough I can change the title to that, had seen others done differently is all.Faendalimas (talk) 16:54, 19 October 2010 (UTC)


 * No worries mate, good to see some more experts on wikipedia. Zoo  Pro  01:38, 20 October 2010 (UTC)

Article review
Hello again,

Where do you request an article for a review of it's quality scale? 24.180.173.157 (talk) 04:32, 5 November 2010 (UTC)


 * What article do you want reviewed? Donlammers (talk) 12:59, 5 November 2010 (UTC)


 * Plains zebra, it's come a long way and surely can no longer be considered a "start" article. 24.180.173.157 (talk) 17:43, 5 November 2010 (UTC)


 * I'm not that familiar with the standards for any of the represented Wiki Projects, so I added mammals to the project banners without rating. If ZooPro doesn't take a look (he's been very silent lately), hopefully someone else from that project will. It's definitely more than a start class now. Donlammers (talk) 04:26, 6 November 2010 (UTC)

Thanks Donlammers, My apologies for not being very active of late, real world zoo issues over rule wikipedia zoo issues i am afraid. I will have a look at the page shortly. Cheers Zoo  Pro  22:57, 6 November 2010 (UTC)


 * No problems. Day jobs and family always takes precedence ;-) I can handle the zoo stuff, but am not very familiar with the mammals project. Donlammers (talk) 23:19, 6 November 2010 (UTC)

✅, I have rated it as "B" class as per wikiproject mammals quality and assessment scale. Zoo Pro  11:15, 9 November 2010 (UTC)

Category in sandbox
I'm talk about EN Wiki and about your Sandbox3. In Category:Famous Turtle I saw your Sandbox3, so I change Category it in yuor Sandbox3. http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User:ZooPro/Sandbox3&action=history I'm sorry for my english. --Bobek 121 (talk) 23:57, 9 November 2010 (UTC)
 * Ah k now I got it. Cheers Zoo  Pro  02:51, 10 November 2010 (UTC)

User:ZooPro/About Me
Hi! Just thought I'd let you know, I can link the add at the top of this page directly to WikiProject Zoo, rather than the image page if you like. Regards, --The High Fin Sperm Whale 05:54, 21 November 2010 (UTC)


 * That would be fantastic thanks!!!! Regards Zoo  Pro  09:31, 21 November 2010 (UTC)


 * ✅ Linked it directly to the project. Happy ZooPro day! --The High Fin Sperm Whale 19:07, 22 November 2010 (UTC)

Expanding articles
I have only recently started editing in Wikipedia and have just put my name down to join the Animal Project. I have expanded the articles on Gunning's Golden Mole, Marley's Golden Mole and Short-tailed Bandicoot Rat and have also created a new [article]. I would be glad of some feedback.

Thank you. Cwmhiraeth (talk) 13:59, 21 November 2010 (UTC)


 * Welcome to WikiProject Animals, thanks for joining. I will happily take a look at some of your edits and will leave feedback on your talk page. Cheers Zoo  Pro  07:26, 22 November 2010 (UTC)

✅ Zoo  Pro  10:08, 22 November 2010 (UTC)

Thank you for your feedback. I have added more references as you suggested for each article and added a Research section and tidied up the External links for my new [article]. The links that were there previously were my working notes which I had forgotten to remove.

It would be nice to have an image for the page. With this in mind, I contacted the Western Australia Department of Fisheries to ask for permission to use a good image they have on their site. Their reply was:


 * Thank you for your inquiry. The Department of Fisheries is happy to provide permission for the use of the image identified below. Permission is granted for education use only and only for use in the specific article for Wikipedia.


 * The following acknowledgement should be used for the image: 
 * National Aquatic Animal Health Technical Working Group Slide of the Quarter - Department of Fisheries, Western Australia - http://www.fish.wa.gov.au 

Would the limitations they set on the use of the image preclude uploading it to Wikimedia Commons and hence its use in a Wikipedia article? Cwmhiraeth (talk) 10:18, 23 November 2010 (UTC)

I have moved the article [Bonamia ostreae] to go live. Cwmhiraeth (talk) 11:58, 26 November 2010 (UTC)

Happy ZooPro's Day!
WOW Thanks Bibliomaniac!!!!! Means a lot thanks a bunch :) Zoo  Pro  08:50, 22 November 2010 (UTC)

Thanks
Anything else I should do right at the start? One other user expressed interest before me, so that's at least two. I posted invitation on talk pages of project members who have edited en.wiki in the past year, and I posted a note to the sign-post. --Kleopatra (talk) 02:33, 27 November 2010 (UTC)
 * I would remove the in-active tag and make sure your project is listed as active on the WikiProject Council page. Try searching for interested users on some vet related articles, its also a good start to update some of the information on the project page and advertise that you are looking for new members. Zoo  Pro  02:37, 27 November 2010 (UTC)
 * one more thing, its also a good idea to archive the talk page leaving only the comments that have been posted in the last month. Zoo  Pro  02:40, 27 November 2010 (UTC)
 * I created the talk page archives, but I don't know how to edit it, so the archive links stay on top, and all discussions below. Any chance you can fix it? --Kleopatra (talk) 03:51, 27 November 2010 (UTC)
 * Done. Zoo  Pro  04:45, 27 November 2010 (UTC)

Favorite animals
I noticed a while back that Cheetah is listed as a zoo article. I realize this gives us an extra B-class article, but if we all put in our favorite animals there would also be at least another GA-class (I can only speak for my favorite). I'm just wondering what the intent was with this -- are we trying to add all articles of animals kept in zoos? If so, we have a lot of tagging to do. Donlammers (talk) 15:21, 27 November 2010 (UTC)
 * That may be a mistake…are you sure that the Cheetah article was actually intended to be a Zoo article? The Arbiter  ★★★  18:29, 27 November 2010 (UTC)
 * I have no way of judging intentions. It's been that way since CheetahKeeper put it there in this edit (2007-04-14). I was just pulling ZooPro's chain because it's his favorite animal, and the original editor is no longer editing (sorry, bad attempt at humor). I just removed it. Donlammers (talk) 19:04, 27 November 2010 (UTC)
 * Ah, ok sounds good. :) The Arbiter  ★★★  20:27, 27 November 2010 (UTC)
 * Hahaha, yes it is my favorite animal, I remember that editor not from Wikipedia though, he was a real life pain in my ass and the zoo industry in general. I would like to think we have some flexibility with the articles we add, after all our project covers everything zoo related :) I am all for adding you favorite animals if it boosts our profile, Having the banner on flagship species articles like Lions Tigers, Bears, Elephants, Rhinos, Giraffes and Cheetahs (hehehe) will ultimately lead to more interest in the project. Zoo  Pro  00:55, 28 November 2010 (UTC)
 * Anyways you have a new message on my page. The Arbiter  ★★★  01:20, 28 November 2010 (UTC)
 * I won't disagree, but if we plan to do this we should do it deliberately and say so on the project page so everyone knows it's on purpose. I can go tag articles if we can agree on an initial list. My favorite is Red panda, but just thinking of zoos I've been at we should probably at least add antelope, deer, monkey, ape, and hippo for starters. Donlammers (talk) 03:11, 28 November 2010 (UTC)
 * So the idea is to put Zoo project tags on zoo animals, especially the ones we like? Sounds like a pretty good idea. The Arbiter  ★★★  17:47, 28 November 2010 (UTC)
 * Allee-gattors and Crokee-dials! --Kleopatra (talk) 18:35, 28 November 2010 (UTC)
 * OK, I have the following which I will go tag (probably not today -- I'm trying to figure out some mess with the Seattle Aquarium): Lions and tigers and bears (oh my!), elephants, rhinos, giraffes, cheetahs, antelope, deer, monkeys, apes, hippos, and red pandas. Extinct in the wild and formerly extinct in the wild should have a place too (since they only exist in zoos), so Przewalski's horse, Arabian oryx, Mexican gray wolf, and anything listed in Extinct in the Wild (shouldn't that be "Extinct in the wild"?), which I just discovered and tagged (unfortunately wrecking all my work to get stubs down to 350). I will think of some wording for the project page to make it official. If you have other animals you want tagged, just add below and I will take care of it (or tag them yourselves). Donlammers (talk) 19:18, 28 November 2010 (UTC)