Misplaced Pages

This is an old revision of this page, as edited by Scorpio80 (talk | contribs) at 09:49, 2 January 2007 (Changing Images). The present address (URL) is a permanent link to this revision, which may differ significantly from the current revision.

Welcome to my Talk Page. Please use the box above, or manually enter new messages at the end of my page.

de Lange 2005

Hi Peta,
I don't suppose you have access to

de Lange, P. J. et al (2005) "Vascular flora of Norfolk Island: some additions and taxonomic notes" New Zealand Journal of Botany 43: 563–596

I'm putting together a list of vascular plants of Norfolk Island. I've keyboarded the list in Flora of Australia 49, and had some good fun updating its taxonomy (e.g. Cronquist to APG, although most of the problems so far have been in the non-flowering plants). de Lange (2005) is an update to the Flora of Australia treatment that reports 75 new taxa, so it is pretty critical to the article. Unfortunately I can't get access to it. Hesperian 01:29, 30 November 2006 (UTC)

Done and thanks! Hesperian 23:39, 3 December 2006 (UTC)

Received with thanks. Hesperian 00:35, 4 December 2006 (UTC)

Renaming of Mountains

Hi Petaholmes,

I was wondering the reason for renaming the mountain and mountain range articles in Queensland from X, Queensland > X (Queensland). You performed the renaming in August. Can you point me to the guideline. The reason I ask is the mountains are in conflict with locality/suburb naming standards (to name one of many). Almost all other article types use the comma, not brackets. Can you comment? Thanks Rimmeraj 03:16, 30 November 2006 (UTC)

Orphaned fair use image (Image:HelenClark 2006 head shot.jpg)

Thanks for uploading Image:HelenClark 2006 head shot.jpg. I notice the 'image' page currently specifies that the image is unlicensed for use on Misplaced Pages and may only be used on Misplaced Pages under a claim of fair use. However, the image is currently orphaned, meaning that it is not used in any articles on Misplaced Pages. If the image was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that images for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable under fair use (see our fair use policy).

If you have uploaded other unlicensed media, please check whether they're used in any articles or not. You can find a list of 'image' pages you have edited by clicking on the "my contributions" link (it is located at the very top of any Misplaced Pages page when you are logged in), and then selecting "Image" from the dropdown box. Note that any fair use images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. Oden 11:06, 1 December 2006 (UTC)

Science Collaboration of the month

You voted for The current science collaboration of the month article is: Chemistry Please help improve this article to featured article quality standards. Last month's collaboration was European science in the Middle Ages. To propose future collaborations, please contribute here! v t e and this article is now the current Science Collaboration of the Month! Please help to improve it to match the quality of an ideal Misplaced Pages science article.

NCurse _work 17:15, 1 December 2006 (UTC)

This month's winner is RNA interference!

– ClockworkSoul 14:39, 2 December 2006 (UTC)

Robert Ross (CEO) References

I just wanted to let you know that I added several references to the Robert Ross article and removed your verify template. If you feel the article still needs verification, please restore the template. Thanks, Dallben 03:56, 3 December 2006 (UTC)

Submitting recreation/rebuild effort for comment

Some time ago, you were the deletion nominator for this AFD for The Blind Pig (fiction). The article was nominated for deletion because it had "o evidence of notability or encyclopedic merit". I do not contest that assertion, having had the article at the time of deletion restored to my userspace here by Rossami.

I've tried to retool this into something that meets guidelines and is properly cited. I am curious, as the original nominator, what your opinion is of its current sandbox state. Although this certainly wouldn't be "recreation of deleted content" were I to promote it into mainspace at this point, I'd like to avoid doing so against consensus. As an aside, the most commonly occurring title would be Tales From the Blind Pig, as noted in the lede, and so that is where I would promote the article if it earns the right to return to the project.

Thanks for your input! Feel free to respond either here or at my talk, at your option and convenience. Serpent's Choice 09:27, 3 December 2006 (UTC)

Capitalization of species articles

You gave no explanation for moving the species' articles from non-capitalized titles to capitalized titles. Please provide an explanation. Meanwhile, I've reverted the moves. --Nlu (talk) 11:34, 5 December 2006 (UTC)

Lake Pedder

Hi I am trying to drum up interest in doing a better job on Lake Pedder - (hmm I was one of the founding members of the TWS but thats another thread some other time) - as the Franklin Dam article is sort of in some shape - but the Pedder one I seem to be talking to myself - so I have put it on the WP Australia talk - and on the art itself - are you aware of any older (heheh) editors who might either have shown knoledge of or an interest in the controversies of the 60's and 70's rather than the more recent? SatuSuro 13:48, 5 December 2006 (UTC)

Thanks for your reply - the issue about separating is the way that the ad-hoc development of the Franklin Dam and Franklin River articles has occurred - I'll wait and see - just hope there some other 50+ age editors who have good memories or were interested who might come out of the wood-work .... the thing is a good article about the Lake Pedder fiasco would have had good links and be instructive for the Franklin Dam issues - but unfortunately it has happened the other way around - ironically the two issues are still pertinent today - even with the wilderness national park created - there are on-going issues - political and ecological - that stretch long after the events. Anyways - when I start pulling out my materials, I'll no doubt bore yrself or others with various queries anyways, cheers! SatuSuro 03:47, 6 December 2006 (UTC)

Response to notability (?) concerns

It is difficult for me to directly respond to your objections without some idea about what guidelines or policies you feel the potential article does not meet. Insofar as your comment to me was that the "article does not explain" why it is a "useful inclusion", I presume that you feel it does not meet notability standards. If you are able to clarify, I may be able to respond (or improve the article) more directly. With that in mind, since this is (probably -- my research tools of web searches and interlibrary loans do not extend to print-format media created by this subculture) wholly internet-based content, WP:WEB is the guideline in force. I feel that the article asserts its notability under this standard in two ways (... redacted struck discussion for brevity ...) Do you have any more specific concerns I could attempt to address? Serpent's Choice 05:24, 6 December 2006 (UTC)

Struck counter-arguments pending document request that may indicate in-print verifiability and additional independant coverage. Will let you know if that plays out. Serpent's Choice 08:44, 6 December 2006 (UTC)

Your input is requested

Your input would be appreciated at this Request for Comments. Kelly Martin (talk) 15:39, 6 December 2006 (UTC)

SmitFraud AfD

Hello. I removed the Deletion tag on the Smitfraud article. As someone who was once a victim of it, I can attest to it being real. I added some external links as well documenting it and cleaned up the article a little and started an entry on the respective talk page. Please let me know if this addresses your concerns with it. Nisanu 20:55, 7 December 2006 (UTC)

John Paul Mallete

Said article was deleted a few weeks ago, for A-7. However, John Paul Mallete has a high notability in all of ontario, so I must wonder why it was speedy deleted instead of going through the normal process.--AeomMai 22:34, 8 December 2006 (UTC)

Banksia epica

Hi Peta,

Would you mind giving this a pre-FAC review? It is not quite finished, but the two remaining tasks are not likely to change the article very much.

Hesperian 07:18, 19 December 2006 (UTC)

Saw your edits, thanks. Do you think it is appropriate for species article to provide external links to sequencing information? e.g. this, this and this; or better still, just this. If so, what is the most reputable and appropriate site to link to? Hesperian 00:30, 20 December 2006 (UTC)

That would be great. According to this newsletter, they were planted in the mallee eucalypt section (100). BTW, I used to live in Canberra, and have made the walk up the hill from ANU to the botanic gardens many times. Enjoy.

On a related note, in the taxonomic history section I wrote "It was lodged in the herbarium at Canberra"; I couldn't be more specific because I don't know the convoluted history of mergers between the ANU, CSIRO and other herbaria that resulted in the ANBG. In George 1988, Nelson's specimen is said to be lodged at "CANB", but its specimen number starts with "ANU". Does this make sense to you?

Hesperian 00:55, 20 December 2006 (UTC)

No worries; thanks again. Hesperian 00:59, 20 December 2006 (UTC)

Rodney Marks

Hi Peta

User:SandyGeorgia asked me to look at the validity of the references for Rodney Marks, an article that appears to have been suddenly constructed. I don't know for sure. Any intuitions on it?

Tony 13:02, 20 December 2006 (UTC)

It's Rodney Marks (astrophysicist), Peta - thanks for looking. I cleaned it up extensively, but when I first encountered it (via a backlink to Tourette syndrome), it was very weasly, and claiming murder and some sort of US complicity, which doesn't seem supported by the references. I don't know the Australian sources, so don't know how good the refs are. The original author says murder is the most likely scenario, but I didn't find the references saying that. Sandy (Talk) 13:10, 20 December 2006 (UTC)

I left more comments on the talk page, but I'm hoping you will have heard of this case, as there are several areas of concern in the article - statements that don't appear to be supported by the sources. Sandy (Talk) 13:38, 20 December 2006 (UTC)

a request from User: Vaoverland

Hi! I have been busy working on Misplaced Pages: WikiProject Virginia and several other projects with User: No1lakersfan most of this past year, partially in preparation amd supprt of the Jamestown 2007 event. He is now a high school senior hopping to gain admittance to one of Virginia's public university for the Fall 2007 semester. Following advice, he has done maintenance and reference adding work, as well spending time on articles. He is a good collaborator and I believe he would enhance our efforts with WP as an administrator and use the additional tools and powers wisely. Since you know me from our past communications, I wanted to request that you consider entering a vote, hopefully in support, if you agree with my judgment and recommendation at Misplaced Pages:Requests for adminship/No1lakersfan 2.

• Please feel free to communicate with me on my Talk page at User talk: Vaoverland if you have any questions or reservations. Best wishes for a safe and happy holiday season. Thanks, Mark in Historic Triangle of Virginia Vaoverland 23:21, 20 December 2006 (UTC)

dyk

Its backlogged.Bakaman 18:35, 29 December 2006 (UTC)

List of Australian plant species

I noticed that this "article" has been prod'd. It isn't really an article, just a list of merge tags...thought it might interest you. Guettarda 21:46, 29 December 2006 (UTC)

Religious Perspectives on Dinosaurs

Hello, I'm leaving you this message because I notice you've made at least one edit to the Misplaced Pages article Religious perspectives on dinosaurs. The article has recently been nominated for deletion from Misplaced Pages, and there is considerable support for that position.

I'm hoping you'll help me support the continued existence of the Religious perspectives on dinosaurs article by registering a keep vote on the article's request for deletion page. The article contains some good information, and represents an unobtrusive way to present notable minority viewpoints about dinosaurs that cannot be elaborated on in the parent article. It shouldn't be deleted simply because it isn't "scientific."

Thanks! Killdevil 03:37, 30 December 2006 (UTC)

DYK

Backlogged.Bakaman 22:49, 1 January 2007 (UTC)

Changing Images

Hi, why are you changing my image tags. They are fairinunse, they have a source and rationale and for some reason your deleting them. Why? Scorpio80 09:49, 2 January 2007 (UTC)