User talk:Gerardgiraud

Black hole gif

Hi, do you know the source of this file, BlackHole_Lensing_2.gif, does'snt exist anymore? Sincerely. Gerardgiraud (talk) 16:14, 28 August 2017 (UTC)[reply]

I can't shed any light on the location of "BlackHole Lensing 2.gif". I didn't delete the file "BlackHole Lensing 2.gif", I just downloaded https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:BlackHole_Lensing.gif and compressed it to optimise it for web use (the original was needlessly large at 12MB). Sorry, I can't help. Have you messaged the user who deleted it? ▫ Urbane Legend ^chinwag 00:14, 29 August 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Welcome!

Hello, Gerardgiraud, and welcome to Wikipedia! Thank you for your contributions. I hope you like the place and decide to stay. Here are a few links to pages you might find helpful:

You may also want to take the Wikipedia Adventure, an interactive tour that will help you learn the basics of editing Wikipedia. You can visit The Teahouse to ask questions or seek help.

Please remember to sign your messages on talk pages by typing four tildes (~~~~); this will automatically insert your username and the date. If you need help, check out Wikipedia:Questions, ask me on my talk page, or ask for help on your talk page, and a volunteer should respond shortly. Again, welcome! Quinton Feldberg (talk) 16:06, 20 August 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you for your contributions on Aquarium Fishes

Hi Gerardgiraud, We’ve noticed that you edited articles related to Aquarium Fishes. Thank you for your great contributions. Keep it up! Bobo.03 (talk) 02:49, 5 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Speedy deletion nomination of CICAR (disambiguation)

If this is the first article that you have created, you may want to read the guide to writing your first article.
You may want to consider using the Article Wizard to help you create articles.

A tag has been placed on CICAR (disambiguation) requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section G14 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because it is an orphaned disambiguation page which either

disambiguates only one extant Wikipedia page and whose title ends in "(disambiguation)" (i.e., there is a primary topic);
disambiguates zero extant Wikipedia pages, regardless of its title; or
is a redirect with a title ending in "(disambiguation)" that does not target a disambiguation page or page that has a disambiguation-like function.

Under the criteria for speedy deletion, such pages may be deleted at any time. Please see the disambiguation page guidelines for more information.

If you think this page should not be deleted for this reason, you may contest the nomination by visiting the page and clicking the button labelled "Contest this speedy deletion". This will give you the opportunity to explain why you believe the page should not be deleted. However, be aware that once a page is tagged for speedy deletion, it may be deleted without delay. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag from the page yourself, but do not hesitate to add information in line with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. If the page is deleted, and you wish to retrieve the deleted material for future reference or improvement, then please contact the deleting administrator. Mcampany (talk) 02:39, 28 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Italics in scientific names

Hi, see MOS:LIFE. It's a different convention from some publications, I know. Peter coxhead (talk) 15:08, 6 June 2021 (UTC)[reply]

ArbCom 2021 Elections voter message

Hello! Voting in the 2021 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23:59 (UTC) on Monday, 6 December 2021. 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 2021 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 {{NoACEMM}} to your user talk page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 00:33, 23 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Derepyxis

Are you sure you want to place this in Derepyxidaceae rather than Stylococcaceae, where AlgaeBase places it? DCDuring (talk) 01:01, 25 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

@DCDuring: as I considered (wrongly or rightly) AlgaeBase as my reference in terms of algae, I base myself on this site to put the Derepyxis genus in the Derepyxidaceae family (family created in 1957 with only Derepyxis genus). Do you have any other references? Gerardgiraud (talk) 07:55, 25 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

I used WoRMS (which uses AlgaeBase), and Algaebase. See Derepyxis at Algaebase (toward the end of the Description), or see wikt:Derepyxis for all the links. DCDuring (talk) 17:09, 25 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Searching Google Scholar I found Derepyxis and Derepyxidaceae occuring together only in articles before 1990, whereas Derepyxis and Stylococcaceae co-occur more often and more recently. DCDuring (talk) 17:23, 25 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

1/ Wiktionary is only a dictionnary not a reference for Algae, idem for Google Scholar, 2/ WoRMS don't know Derepyxis 3/ I'll add a "Taxonomic" section to take into account algaebase's hesitation between Derepyxidaceae and Stylococcaceae. Do you think that will make us okay? Gerardgiraud (talk) 19:56, 25 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

I advanced my entry at Wiktionary simply because it contains links, not because it (me!!!) is a taxonomic authority. On the placement of Derepyxis, I would take seriously that recent articles that mention Derepyxis don't mention Derepyxidaceae, but do refer to Stylococcaceae. Together with the Algaebase Derepyxis article, NOT their Derepyxidaceae article. DCDuring (talk) 20:27, 25 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

I understand your concern about Derepyxidaceae versus Stylococcaceae. I sent an email to AlgaeBase for some clarification. I'll keep you informed. Gerardgiraud (talk) 09:38, 26 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

@DCDuring: here is my question to Michael Guiry from AlgaeBase:

In your description of the genus Derepyxis => Algaebase #6276 Derepyxis

1/ you relate this genus to the Stylococcaceae. So what is the current status of Derepyxidaceae? Indeed the most recent articles classify Derepyxis in the Stylococcaceae and seem to ignore Derepyxidaceae family?

2/ you mention Chrysamoeba (Chrysamoebales), but Chrysamoebales order don't exists in your database, since you classify Chrysamoeba in Chromulinales. Is this a transcription error?

and his reply:

The classification I adopted is that of Kawai, H. & Nakayama, T. (2015). Introduction (Heterokontobionta p.p.), Cryptophyta, Dinophyta, Haptophyta, Heterokontophyta (except Coscinodiscophyceae, Mediophyceae, Fragilariophyceae, Bacillariophyceae, Phaeophyceae, Eustigmatophyceae), Chlorarachniophyta, Euglenophyta. In: Syllabus of plant families. Adolf Engler's Syllabus der Pflanzenfamilien. Ed. 13. Phototrophic eukaryotic Algae. Glaucocystophyta, Cryptophyta, Dinophyta/Dinozoa, Haptophyta, Heterokontophyta/Ochrophyta, Chlorarachnniophyta/Cercozoa, Chlorophyta, Streptophyta p.p. (Frey, W. Eds), pp. 11-64, 103-139. Stuttgart: Borntraeger Science Publishers.

This work includes the Derepyxidaceae in the Stylococcaceae.

The description (in AlgaeBase) was by Hans Preising and dates to about 1996. I have modified it to remove the erroneous reference to the Stylococcaceae. Takes 24 hrs to update.

When AlgeaBase will be updated, I will modify my page Derepyxis to assign genus in the Stylococcaceae. The Derepyxidaceae family page will remain but I will declare it obsolete. Gerardgiraud (talk) 13:07, 26 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

@DCDuring: as you can see here AlgaeBase - Derepyxis, following my email, Algaebase deleted everything about Stylococcaceae in its description of Derepyxis and, in spite of the recent paper Kawai et al. (2015), persists in keeping the family Derepyxidaceae and its type genus Derepyxis. I will update my Wikipedia page accordingly. Gerardgiraud (talk) 07:58, 27 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Some people have expressed reservations about AlgaeBase, but there is no better comprehensive source for algae. I have been using Ruggiero et al. (2015) "A Higher Level Classification of All Living Organisms" (Guiry was one of the authors) for all taxa of all kingdoms of rank order and above and also families. They didn't have Derepyxidaceae in their list of families. As Wiktionary is descriptive, not proscriptive, and as there is more usage at Google Scholar of the Stylococcaceae placement, I will keep Stylococcaceae in our definition of Derepyxis, but upgrade Derepyxidaceae to an alternative. I wish there were some way I could realistically keep up with all the changes in names, placements, and circumscriptions, even in the tiny subset of taxa enwikt covers. I was hoping that the Ruggiero authors would produce another edition of their classification by now, in accordance with their expressed intention. DCDuring (talk) 15:45, 27 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

@DCDuring: > Some people have expressed reservations about AlgaeBase...

I regularly report errors to them and they are very quick to correct them. For French-speaking WP, it remains our reference. You have to choose one, don't you?

But it seems pointless to have so many living lists: BioLib, GBIF, NCBI, WoRMS, AlgaeBase...

> I wish there was a realistic way to track all name changes...

This is where the crux of WP's problem lies. Currently I am creating a lot of missing pages on algae taxa. But after? How to keep them up to date? Would it be better to go through Wikidata as some suggest? But Wikidata is harder to use than WP. Have you any idea about that? Gerardgiraud (talk) 16:28, 27 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

I believe that, in principle, it would be better to use WikiData, but I am not satisfied that they have an adequate model for taxa, let alone for words in general. I had hopes that Wikispecies would provide comprehensive, updated coverage of taxa, but they have a lot of redlinks and many, many taxa not even appearing at all in their entries. I don't know how active they are any more.

At enwikt I have been trying to focus on taxa that are the "most needed". I measure "need" as follows:

Has someone prepared a stub entry?
How many links are there to the term?

I count the links by having a template that encloses taxonomic names. Most regular contributors that use taxonomic names in definitions use the templates. The incentive is that using the template increases the likelihood that someone, usually me, will create a good taxonomic name entry. I upgrade stub entries to a minimum standard. I add or upgrade other taxonomic name entries to a higher standard based on the number of templated links.

The links come from entries for vernacular names (all languages)), from lists of descendants of Latin words, and from other taxonomic name entries, which contains lists of taxa under Hypernyms and Hyponyms headings and sometimes under Coordinate terms and Etymology headings.

Wikidata must do something similar (using inbound links from other projects) to prioritize their efforts, but I haven't tried to confirm that. DCDuring (talk) 16:56, 27 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

ArbCom 2022 Elections voter message

Hello! Voting in the 2022 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23:59 (UTC) on Monday, 12 December 2022. 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 {{NoACEMM}} to your user talk page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 01:09, 29 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]