User talk:Casliber/Archive 6

The DYK Medal

		The DYK Medal
		I, Smee, hereby present Casliber with The DYK Medal. For your (18) most interesting contributions to Did you know?. Thank you. Yours, Smee 11:20, 3 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Fauna

Yes, Bobcat is next. Another editor already had book refs in place, so I'm just tweaking and supplementing. If I gave it a real heave, I could have it on FAC quickly, but I'll wait for Cougar to go. Plus I was becoming a little robotic editing in one area so much. The other problem is I don't have access to books myself, so I have to focus on low-hanging fruit (e.g., big mammals), as lots of abstracts will turn up. You'll notice I've added some Australian birds, for instance, but I need someone to add a print compendium to the references (nudge, nudge).

Where exactly did you add the list of mammal articles that are already in good shape? Marskell 13:03, 3 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

In the same way that editors have gone through the planets to bring almost all of them through FAC, I think top-hit animal categories (e.g. Panthera) should be gone through. The trouble is, with the absolutely top-hit articles (e.g. Lion and Tiger) there's almost too much out there and a single amateur won't know what to start with. I choose Jaguar first not just because it's my favourite cat, but because I guessed the material wouldn't be overwhelming. In the same vein, Leopard seems most appealing to do next. (But that raises relative emphasis and priority issues.) While on the subject, can you imagine walking through a forest and seeing one of these beasts? Marskell 13:59, 3 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

You're the second person that's linked me to flickr. The UAE censors it, unfortunately. Marskell 14:02, 3 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

The Australian Museum web-source: "Brown Songlarks are much larger than the Rufous Songlark and lack the rufous rump." I don't know much about rufous rumps, so maybe you could double-check. Marskell 14:15, 3 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Note

As you'd sort of asked on my Talk page, I'm letting you know my RfA is indeed up and running. (diff added to avoid WP:CANVASS concerns) Fvasconcellos (t·c) 17:26, 3 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Evolution FAC

Thank you for your comment. I have made some changes to the article in response and hope this addresses your concern. TimVickers 21:02, 3 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Dear Cas!

Dear Cas, fortunately Spebi solved the problem while I wasn't around - but I've taken the liberty to make a minor rearrangement to fit your awards better. Please, feel free to revert if you don't like it! ;) Hope you've had a wonderful weekend, sweetie. Love, Phaedriel - 22:43, 3 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Oh... so you prefer Sebi before me... I'm jealous... ;) Phaedriel - 06:38, 5 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

oooh boy (copied from archive)

Will look at Bird when I'm done dealing with this. Should I also consider looking over Banksia telmatiaea while I'm at it? Circeus 04:14, 3 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

(excuse my butting in) Circeus: yes please, if you wouldn't mind. Hesperian 04:53, 3 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Yes please :)cheers, Cas Liber | talk | contribs 05:02, 3 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Will do. And screw WP:FURAT, hurrah for Boilerplate rationales! I just hope they don,t get creative and sic the image source bots on us. For the most part, these old character art are swapped over fansites, but impossible to track down to an official source. The fact Wikimon, from which quite a few were taken, has recently vanished in a server issue is not helping >.<. Circeus 23:20, 3 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Banksia telmatiaea reviewed. What an unwieldy specific... I swear I haven't been able to type it right on the first try yet XD. Circeus 02:43, 4 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

In the end I gave up and created a redirect from "telmatieae". Hesperian 04:54, 4 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Tee hee *giggles*. Circeus 05:31, 4 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Wikipedia:Featured article candidates/Derry City F.C./archive2

Hey there. Would you have any interest in contributing a suggestion or adding your support to the nomination of Derry City F.C. for featured article status? Cheers. Danny Invincible^Talk|Edits 02:41, 4 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Brown Gerygone taxa

"it is not closely related to either true Old World Warblers nor the New World Warblers, but belong rather to a corvid superfamily comprising many tropcial and australian passerines as well as crows." Which corvid superfamily? Per Passerine#Suborder_Passeri should that be Corvida?

Watch either/or, neither/nor and verb agreement. Marskell 07:18, 4 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Well, I think it should be "parvorder" rather than superfamily and should be left simply as Corvida rather than dabbed as corvid, which might confuse people.[1]

Thanks for fixing the taxbox on that Robin. I had started filling it in as a Robin-chat and then changed midstream when I realized it was two species, and forgot to redit the box. Marskell 07:51, 5 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Splendid fairy-wren

Great work on this article! :) - Mark 01:33, 5 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Akathisia on neuroleptic articles

You toned down some of User:Dr_CareBear's edits, and I revert several of these as POV pushing. Information been reverted back with accusations that User_talk:Davidruben#You_are_Clearly_Attempting_to_Protect_Corporate_Interests.. I generally try to follow WP:1RR, so I thought I should let you know that I have responded (politely I hope) to that post on my talk page and raised a thread at the ClinMed Wikiproject to have others comment on these points - see Wikipedia_talk:WikiProject_Clinical_medicine#Akathisia_as_cause_low_compliance_for_exceptionally_toxic_neuroleptics David Ruben ^Talk 02:35, 6 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Another

Yellow-throated Scrubwren. Note I have a cut-and-paste from requested articles at User:Marskell/birds, so you might check it occasionally for new bluelinks. Is there any particular spot for PD bird pics you regularly go to? Marskell 09:18, 6 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Little help?

Can we borrow your brain for a sec? Hesperian 00:17, 7 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks mate. Hesperian 02:26, 7 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Why I don't edit psychiatry pages...

I broke my own rule but have had fun editing schizophrenia and am in the process of saving it at FAR. Problem is I then started sprucing up chlorpromazine but a few of us have come into problems with Dr CareBear. If you check his contribs and the history of chlorpormazine plus Wikipedia_talk:WikiProject_Clinical_medicine#Akathisia_as_cause_low_compliance_for_exceptionally_toxic_neuroleptics and User_talk:Davidruben#You_are_Clearly_Attempting_to_Protect_Corporate_Interests. you'll get the idea. What do you think we should do next? cheers, Cas Liber | talk | contribs 07:52, 7 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Oh Cas!

I guess there's not much I can advise in this sort of situation, unfortunately. The article edits look fine to someone who know absolutely farking nothing about medicine or brain... stuff. Clearly, he's a Wiki newbie but he's learning. It's also just as clear that he's made some waves with some claims that have upset you all. The sock account will obviously have to be blocked, and I see MastCell has left 3RR warnings. If the amount of reverts by both accounts exceeds 3 on any article, he really should be blocked for 24 hours. Firsfron of Ronchester 09:46, 7 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Also: good on you regarding schizophrenia. One of my stepbrothers recently developed the condition, and I've never really understood it. Here's hoping you'll be able to get the article back up to FA quality. Cheers! Firsfron of Ronchester 09:56, 7 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Yeah, I could give it a look. Firsfron of Ronchester 10:28, 7 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Having come off an extended 1 week block (sockpuppetry evading a block), used anon IP to again just revert without discussion back to his position on Promazine - I think this counts as further disruption, but am unsure how policies apply here, so have raised WP:AN/I#Resumption of sockpuppetry & disruption by Dr CareBear. Guidence on this would be appreciated :-) David Ruben ^Talk 03:08, 16 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

DYK pic

It looks like the right bird is up on Next Update currently. Is that correct? Smee 20:19, 7 June 2007 (UTC).[reply]

DYK

On 7 June, 2007, Did you know? was updated with a fact from the article Scarlet Honeyeater, which you created or substantially expanded. If you know of another interesting fact from a recently created article, then please suggest it on the Did you know? talk page.

I had to change the hook as the licensing applies to Australia according to the article. --Yomangani ^talk 00:01, 8 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Did you know? was updated. On 8 June, 2007, a fact from the article Red-capped Robin, which you recently nominated, was featured in that section on the Main Page. If you know of another interesting fact from a recently created article, then please suggest it on the Did you know? talk page.

--Smee 08:02, 8 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

My RfA

Dear Casliber, thanks for your support in my recent RfA, it was, however, unsuccessful. I am not the type of editor to be disheartened by such a result, and have gained much experience. If you have anything to contribute by way of improvements or comments, please don’t hesitate to tell me.

I will run again. Until then, Cheers, Dfrg.msc 08:30, 8 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

flickr again

I have just added South Andean Deer to DYK with the note that "...that males of the endangered South Andean Deer have a distinctive black "face mask" that forms an elongated heart-shape?" Do you mind doing a flickr check for me? It would obviously be ideal to have a pic to go with the note. (Don't worry, I haven't forgotten about the birds; good job taking the robin to DYK.) Marskell 17:18, 8 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

More identification :)

Hi, can you please have a look at the pics at [2] (the ones numbered 5xxx) and see if you can identify them? They're from the near-northern limits of the Perth metro area and I don't think I've ever seen the white one before! (The first two are the same flower on the same tree btw) Orderinchaos 10:23, 9 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

My RfA :)

Thank you, Cas Liber, for commenting on my RfA, which closed successfully with a tally of 76/0/1! I hope I will meet your expectations, and be sure I will continue trying to be a good editor as well as a good administrator :) If I may be of any assistance to you in the future (or if you see me commit some grievous error :), please drop me a line on my Talk page.

Again, thank you, and happy editing! Fvasconcellos (t·c) 17:27, 10 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you for your support, your assistance and your excellent work. Good luck on A. phalloides, by the way! Best, Fvasconcellos (t·c) 17:27, 10 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Too many places to reply

I've replied to a number of your comments on a number of different talk pages, so you might want to go and check them (Mainly about your "Gawd Spawny..." comment which I didn't understand...). I'll check out the schizo article, but I'm not very knowledgable in the area. For a moment I thought someone was insulting me when I saw my talk page's TOC... ;) Spawn Man 07:48, 11 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

B. s. var collina

Just created B. s. var. collina. Still a bit to do yet but I need to get to bed. Any chance you've got a pic? Hesperian 13:35, 11 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Gosh, I realised all the ones I've uploaded are var. spinulosa (or cunninghamii). EAsily rectified.cheers, Cas Liber | talk | contribs 14:33, 11 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

'Grats on the mop!

Didn't realize you'd been promoted until now. It's well deserved. congrats. Debivort 03:25, 12 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Zuclopenthixol

On 13 June, 2007, Did you know? was updated with a fact from the article Zuclopenthixol, which you created or substantially expanded. If you know of another interesting fact from a recently created article, then please suggest it on the Did you know? talk page.

--howcheng {chat} 00:14, 13 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Blue Whale

I'd be glad to see where I can help. Hopefully, the result turns out to be similar to the Humpback Whale Review. And thanks for your comment about the Rfa. I've looked at the opposer's comments, plan to work on the issues posed, and try again in a few months time when I am more experienced. Thanks, and hoping that I can be of some use in the Blue Whale FAR, Anonymous Dissident ^Utter 06:57, 13 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Hardy har har...

I'm glad you find my arguments amusing. ;) Not normally. And it wasn't really an argument. More of a disagreement... I mean, honestly... Is keyhole really a scientific word to describe orbits? I never knew nature made keyhole shapes... Anyway, your comments about my amusing arguments always amuse me for some reason, so thanks for cheering me up... Spawn Man 09:51, 13 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Boletus calopus

hey! i gotta question about that mashroom, or actually all mashrooms ;/ I myself edit polish wiktionary and currently im adding names of mashrooms, but im a little lost ;/ see im not sure about the names, because some of the mashrooms here have two names like Russula emetica - Vomiting russula, but some only one like Boletus calopus.
Now from what I know Russula emetica or Boletus calopus is a scientific name and its not really in english but in latin, so when Im translating names from polish to english I use Vomiting russula - not the scientific name, but when I got to Boletus calopus it doesnt have a english name, so thats when I get lost and I dont know what am I supposed to translate it to. Other thing - in Boletus there is a table with the picture, but its not named Boletus, but Bolete, so is that the same thing?? or is boletus a scientific latin name and bolete a english translation? This is really confusing, why cant you just name the articles english names, and make the latin scientific names just redirects, not the other way around...
If you could please write back in my Wikislownik discussion here. thanks Frizabela 16:39, 13 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

dinosaur categories

Hey Cas,

They've all been switched over to Dinosaurs of XXXX; please revert your last ten or so edits. Sorry. Firsfron of Ronchester 20:37, 13 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Ailanthus

I've finished up making the changes. I altered the lead quite significantly as it admittedly wasn't very well suited to its purpose. Have a look through and see what you think (and make sure I didn't leave any blaring errors). Thanks for your comments and I hope it will suffice now. Djlayton4 | talk | contribs 01:07, 14 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

P.S. - If you are at all involved with what becomes a DYK, I've created several short articles on species in the genus Eurybia that may be of interest. One species was particularly interesting as it is critically endangered and only present along a 5 km stretch of river bank (Eurybia saxicastelli). They may not be long enough, but some were fascinating as I was compiling the information. Thanks!

Your comments on Talk:Geological history of Earth

Ummhhh... do you wish me to mention about Ordovician and Silurian also. you said that tertiary and quaternary are renamed. may i know the source which specifies it. thanks, Sushant gupta (talk · contribs) 04:24, 15 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

It just looked odd that the in-between periods were omitted. If there is a reason for this then specify it. The article looks pretty good anyway. As far as the others, I can't recall the particular sources but google tehm and something shoudl arise. cheers, Cas Liber | talk | contribs 04:27, 15 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

should i specify about Pre-cambrian, Phanerozoic and Cenozoic only instead of all those i have mention there in the article. Sushant gupta (talk · contribs) 04:30, 15 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

The article is pretty long. If you do you'll be ok as long as you explain why you included only a few. Good luck.cheers, Cas Liber | talk | contribs 04:34, 15 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

sorry i didn't get this reply well. what did you mean- will i be ok or the article be ok. please don't mind i am just kidding though i didn't got your reply. ok should i sum up the section- yes or no. Sushant gupta (talk · contribs) 04:37, 15 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

That's fine - if you have only some periods, then you (or the article) will be ok as long as you explain why some have sections and some don't. cheers, Casliber (talk · contribs) 04:39, 15 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

okay, i have the reason- those i have mentioned are quite significant. major changes took place during these periods as compared to others. if i will sit and mention each and every period then dear friend i'll go mad. then it won't look encyclopedic. it would look like a textbook. if you wish i can sum up that section. what do you say. Try to get the point dude. Sushant gupta (talk · contribs) 04:43, 15 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I agree 0 that sounds like a very good idea.cheers, Casliber (talk · contribs) 04:46, 15 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

now just what for for few minutes and then if you wish then you can definetly review the page for GAC. it was nice talking to you. Sushant gupta (talk · contribs) 04:48, 15 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

i have restructured the page. happy!- now you can review the page for GAC. also leave your expert comments too. if possible kindly reply on my talkpage so it is convinient for me also. Sushant gupta (talk · contribs) 05:01, 15 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Re:For the future

Looks like a good list comprised of soome good articles. Lets hope all of them can make it to FA one day - I'd be glad to do my bit to get them there. Thanks for the note. -- Anonymous Dissident ^Talk _{dated 10:35, 15 June 2007 (UTC)}[reply]

This is a good idea; thanks. I'm focussing on breadth rather than depth at the moment, but wil bear this in mind when I'm ready to drill down into a subject again. Hesperian 12:02, 15 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

An Interesting concept, anytime you need a fresh set of eyes on an article just call out Gnan garra 12:20, 15 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for the message mate. I've left a comment there. Interesting discussion that i hope can be soon resolved. -- Anonymous Dissident ^Talk -- (dated 00:38, 16 June 2007 UTC)

Critters

Cas, thx for all your work noting TOL subjects for working on. I think I ought to give Bobcat that last shove before looking for something else. As for taxa classification, talk to User:UtherSRG as I suggested on the thread you provided. Marskell 18:49, 16 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

FARs

Hey again. From about Belgrade on down, the FARC section has a bunch with no comments. Do you mind evaluating for kp/rm on a couple? Cheers, Marskell 08:42, 17 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

The List

Hey, if you were interested - you now easily qualify for the list of wikipedians by number of DYKs, if you want to add yourself. Just to let you know. Regards, -- Anonymous Dissident ^Talk -- (dated 10:03, 17 June 2007 UTC)

Kewl.cheers, Casliber (talk · contribs) 14:13, 17 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

The other list

Want to weigh in at Talk:Grevillea cultivars? Hesperian 12:08, 18 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

American Goldfinch to FA

I think I've covered all of Circeus' suggestions except the lead and the conservation status. I'm not sure whether the conservation status section is really necessary, since the American Goldfinch is a common bird. Oh, and should I change from the singular to the plural("The American Goldfinch is...." to "American Goldfinches are....)? --Jude 22:50, 18 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I prefer singular, but I'll be happy either way. I'll move the conservation in with the relationship with humans/feeding section. cheers. --Jude 23:22, 18 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Do you think that it's ready for nomination now? --Jude 01:41, 22 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Commas and parenthesis

Thanks for the heads-up. I don't feel the need to !vote on the birds discussion, but I'll inject my 2c if a proposal comes up for plants or biota in general. W.r.t. plants, I do like my way of doing things, but will roll with the consensus, as it's not really worth arguing over. Hesperian 00:14, 19 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I don't think any dinosaurs have common names do they? Sheep81 05:06, 19 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Umm...about 9000 of living ones do ;) cheers, Casliber (talk · contribs) 05:10, 19 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Range maps

Do you know which helpful Wikipedians take care of these? I started one for Bobcat, but I have no idea what I'm doing in photoshop. Marskell 10:21, 19 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Collaberation

"Games or mythological or mid-eastern geography" sound good to me. Sorry it's taken some time to reply. Sumerian is the oldest recorded language, and we have a lot of texts of their pantheon. It is pertinent to my postgrad work ... I am not an expert, but should become one. I'd love you to help. Oxford University have many primary sources in translation at a web-site ETCSL (Electronic Text Corpus of Sumerian Literature). You may like to browse and see if it catches your fancy. Alternatively, I'm also curious about hominid evolution ... not exactly dinosaurs, but perhaps our interests may overlap somewhat there. I'm also curious about placing the Holocene epoch in context ... Looking forward to hearing what you think. Cheers. Alastair Haines 18:37, 19 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

WikiProject Rugby league
THIS IS A ROLL CALL In an attempt to find active or inactive members on this WikiProject, I (SpecialWindler) am calling a roll call for all users. If you are an active/semi-active contributor add this userbox to your page {{User WikiProject Rugby league}} to your page If you do not use userboxes, then add the category Category:WikiProject Rugby league members to your page. Then go to this page and add your name to the list

**** This lets take all 3 to FAC

Right - triple whammy - lets take Banksia spinulosa, Banksia ericifolia and Banksia telmatiaea to FAC (well the first two need quite a bit of tidying and reffing) - how much you wanna do to no. 3? cheers, Casliber (talk · contribs) 07:29, 20 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I admire your enthusiasm, and I accept your call to arms. :-)

There really is no excuse for my not having knocked off B. telmatiaea before now. I shall finish addressing Circeus' comments by the end of the weekend, or may I be eaten alive by cabbage moths. And we shall take it to FAC next week.

I'll then turn my attention to these other two.

You'll have to humour me for the rest of tonight but: I'm trying to turn Banksia ser. Banksia into a work of art. Just don't ask why I chose such an obscure article to invest so much time in. :-(

Hesperian 11:37, 20 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Somehow I managed to write 14kB on B. ser. Banksia without waffling. It is amazing how much can be said about even the most obscure taxon, if you're thorough/stubborn enough. :-) Hesperian 12:47, 20 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks, that much better! :-) Hesperian 12:54, 20 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Clozapine

Hey again. I notice you've done some work on Clozapine—I left a note on the Talk page a couple of days ago about removing the dosage section (too prescriptive, discouraged by MEDMOS) but haven't had any response. Do you have any thoughts? Best, Fvasconcellos (t·c) 12:38, 21 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

What to do?

See this guys user page. He both shunts wikipedia and claims to "take vandalising very seriously", not to mention having several rude and offensive userboxes on his page. He has a record of vandalising. Yet I dont feel right reporting him to AIV. Can you take a look? Thanks, Anonymous Dissident ^Talk 11:01, 24 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

If you look at the user contributions (see toolbox list at bottom left of screen) you'll see that he's done some good work too but obviously something's really annoyed him. I wouldn't worry too much. I think most userboxes are fairly inconsequential and wouldn't worry about it at this stage. They don't bother me. cheers, Casliber (talk · contribs) 11:52, 24 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]