User talk:Hesperian/Archive 51

The following text is preserved as an archive of discussions at User talk:Hesperian. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on User talk:Hesperian. No further edits should be made to this page.

DYK for Bellendena

Panyd^{The muffin is not subtle} 07:17, 10 April 2013 (UTC)

DYK for Banksia saxicola

The DYK project (nominate) 16:02, 27 April 2013 (UTC)

DYK for Banksia elegans

The DYK project (nominate) 00:02, 28 April 2013 (UTC)

So... you've been busy then Cas? Hesperian 00:26, 28 April 2013 (UTC)

Yup. Need to learn how to graft - nothing western lives over here :(((( Casliber (talk · contribs) 05:22, 1 May 2013 (UTC)

Incidentally - do we have a book/article source for "The first botanical collection of this species may well have been Claude Riche, naturalist to Bruni d'Entrecasteaux's 1791 expedition in search of the lost ships of Jean-François de Galaup, comte de La Pérouse. During a visit to Esperance Bay, Riche explored an area in which B. speciosa is extremely common. However, he got lost and was forced to abandon his collections." I wanna graft this so am buffing it up for fun....Casliber (talk · contribs) 12:45, 2 May 2013 (UTC)

Possibly; I'll have a dig over the weekend. Hesperian 23:59, 2 May 2013 (UTC)

Great. Any other speciosa tidbits appreciated too...I was trying to see if there were dieback updates wirtten about somewhere..... :) Casliber (talk · contribs) 01:36, 3 May 2013 (UTC)

"... His strength failing, he was forced to discard his weighty collection of 'plants and stones'. It is very possible that among the plants he abandoned was a specimen of the impressive Banksia speciosa, which Labillardiere did not collect and which still grows very prominently in the area Riche traversed; it was later collected and described by Robert Brown. Labillardiere himself wrote in his account that Riche was 'obliged to abandon his whole collection, not being able to reserve even the most precious articles'."

—Duyker, Edward (2003; paperback reprint 2004). Citizen Labillardière: A Naturalist's Life in Revolution and Exploration (1755—1834). Melbourne: Miegunyah/Melbourne University Press. p. 135. ISBN 0-522-85160-6. {{cite book}}: Check date values in: |year= (help)CS1 maint: year (link)

Enjoy. Hesperian 10:55, 13 May 2013 (UTC)

Cool, thanks! Casliber (talk · contribs) 12:48, 13 May 2013 (UTC)

DYK for Banksia speciosa

The DYK project (nominate) 00:02, 5 May 2013 (UTC)

DYK for Banksia baueri

The DYK project (nominate) 08:02, 8 May 2013 (UTC)

DYK for Banksia pteridifolia

The DYK project (nominate) 16:03, 8 May 2013 (UTC)

Nomination of George Sadler for deletion

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article George Sadler is suitable for inclusion in Wikipedia according to Wikipedia's policies and guidelines or whether it should be deleted.

The article will be discussed at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/George Sadler until a consensus is reached, and anyone is welcome to contribute to the discussion. The nomination will explain the policies and guidelines which are of concern. The discussion focuses on high-quality evidence and our policies and guidelines.

Users may edit the article during the discussion, including to improve the article to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the article-for-deletion notice from the top of the article. Bazonka (talk) 18:28, 16 May 2013 (UTC)

Nomination of Thomas Bushell for deletion

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Thomas Bushell is suitable for inclusion in Wikipedia according to Wikipedia's policies and guidelines or whether it should be deleted.

The article will be discussed at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Thomas Bushell until a consensus is reached, and anyone is welcome to contribute to the discussion. The nomination will explain the policies and guidelines which are of concern. The discussion focuses on high-quality evidence and our policies and guidelines.

Users may edit the article during the discussion, including to improve the article to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the article-for-deletion notice from the top of the article. Bazonka (talk) 18:30, 16 May 2013 (UTC)

Administrators' noticeboard discussion

There is a discussion at Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard#Ecolon in which a block you made is mentioned. On the face of it, you seem to have made a mistake, but if there are relevant circumstances which you know of that change the situation, can you comment there? JamesBWatson (talk) 13:58, 30 May 2013 (UTC)

Author citation dates in plant taxoboxes (above genera)

I have been adding dates to taxobox authorities for plant families and orders. I had seen this done in a few taxoboxes, and I am working on citing all of the authorities for plant families and orders. A discussion had taken place about this before, here, although the focus of this discussion was on all taxa, inlcuding genera and species. As you participated in a past discussion, and are actively editing Wikipedia now, I am posting this link in case you wish to comment.

Thanks. --AfadsBad (talk) 23:51, 26 June 2013 (UTC)

Request to take part in a survey

I am Piotr Konieczny, a fellow Wikipedian (User:Piotrus) and a researcher of Wikipedia (http://scholar.google.com/citations?user=gdV8_AEAAAAJ). I am currently (in collaboration with WMF) embarking on a project trying to understand why the most active Wikipedia contributors (such as yourself) may reduce their activity, or retire. We have a growing understanding of why an average editor may do so (see http://strategy.wikimedia.org/wiki/Former_Contributors_Survey_Results), but we have a very limited understanding of why the top editors would limit their contributions. Yet it is the top editors like yourself who contribute most of Wikiepdia's content, thus understanding this is of vital concern to Wikipedia's project future.

I am contacting you because you are among the top Wikipediana by number of edits, yet your editing activity shows a decline. I would very much appreciate if you would take a minute and answer the following four short questions. Please note this is not a mass email; I am contacting only few dozen of editors like yourself, and each response is extremely valuable. Your response will not be made public, and your privacy will be fully respected.

If you would like to help out in this project and take part in a very short survey, please send me a wikiemail, so that I can send you an email with the survey questions. --_{Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| reply here} 00:47, 17 July 2013 (UTC)

Speedy deletion nomination of Andrew Slattery

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 Andrew Slattery, requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section G4 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because the article appears to be a repost of material that was previously deleted following a deletion debate, such as at articles for deletion. Under the specified criteria, where an article has substantially identical content to that of an article deleted after debate, and any changes in the content do not address the reasons for which the material was previously deleted, it may be deleted at any time.

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 "Click here to 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 removed 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, you can place a request here. Triplestop (talk) 05:37, 19 September 2013 (UTC)

Template:Heritage Council of Western Australia

Your input (as the creator of this template) is requested at Template talk:Heritage Council of Western Australia#Needs updating?. Mitch Ames (talk) 13:37, 24 September 2013 (UTC)

OTRS is outside of regular Wikipedia editing channels and typically trumps published sources

The Volunteer Response Team handles emailed inquiries outside of normal editing channels. From WP:VRT: "The OTRS software provides an organized way for multiple people to categorize and respond to third party e-mails, so the team can be interpreted as a kind of Wikimedia-wide customer service e-mail team. Volunteers must have an exceptionally good track record on Wikimedia projects, and may be required to provide personal identification to the Wikimedia Foundation." Because of the qualifications required their judgment is generally trusted completely; when an edit is made based on an OTRS ticket, that almost always overrides anything else found in the article—it's assumed that whatever source the team member received via email outweighs the published sources.

WP:OTRS has more information, including what to do when you disagree with an edit made by a VRT member as a result of an OTRS ticket. In the case of the Andrew Slattery (poet), that may mean you want to contact User:Ronhjones directly, since he's the OTRS member who handled the case. —C.Fred (talk) 01:42, 9 October 2013 (UTC)

This is completely ridiculous; we can't possibly be writing an encyclopedia made up of unavailable or secret sources. If it says it in a reliable source, and this source is wrong, then the source should be corrected, not Wikipedia. --(AfadsBad (talk) 02:24, 9 October 2013 (UTC))

This. Hesperian 02:26, 9 October 2013 (UTC)

Speedy deletion nomination of Category:Obsolete plant orders

A tag has been placed on Category:Obsolete plant orders, requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done for the following reason:

The category is redundant to "Historically recognized plant orders". There have never been any pages categorized here. The title "Obsolete ..." is inconsistent with the hierarchy in which it was placed, which has titles of the form "Historically recognized ..."

Under the criteria for speedy deletion, articles that do not meet basic Wikipedia criteria may be deleted at any time.

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 "Click here to 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 removed 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, you can place a request here.

User:Plantdrew and I have been tidying up the categories for "obsolete" / "historically recognized" taxa. You created this one, but it's never been used; for consistency it should be at Category:Historically recognized plant orders. Peter coxhead (talk) 09:57, 29 October 2013 (UTC)

Hi Peter. I contest "it's never been used"; it was certainly in use a couple of years ago. But that aside, I'm happy to see maintenance happening in this space and have no objection to you doing whatever you need to do with any categories that I might have created in the past. Hesperian 04:41, 30 October 2013 (UTC)

Ah, I realize now that looking at previous versions in category space doesn't work; you see any old explanatory text but the pages listed as in that category are always the current ones. So doubtless the category was in use.

Actually it's Plantdrew who's been driving the maintenance of plant-related categories; I'm just following along. Peter coxhead (talk) 17:22, 30 October 2013 (UTC)

It was being used until a couple days ago when I moved everything out (either to "Historically recognzied plant orders" for those that were definitely orders, or "Historically recognized plant taxa" for those names/taxa available at multiple ranks). Plantdrew (talk) 17:29, 30 October 2013 (UTC)

Precious again

Banksia
Thank you for quality contibutions to articles for Project Banksia such as Banksia ilicifolia - repeating: you are an awesome Wikipedian (9 January 2010)!

--Gerda Arendt (talk) 06:52, 7 November 2012 (UTC)

A year ago, you were the 297th recipient of my PumpkinSky Prize, repeated in br'erly style, --Gerda Arendt (talk) 20:40, 7 November 2013 (UTC)

Category:Banksia brownii redirects

Category:Banksia brownii redirects, which you created, has been nominated for possible deletion, merging, or renaming. If you would like to participate in the discussion, you are invited to add your comments at the category's entry on the Categories for discussion page. Thank you. — This, that and the other (talk) 01:17, 9 November 2013 (UTC)

Nomination of Andrew Slattery (poet) for deletion

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Andrew Slattery (poet) is suitable for inclusion in Wikipedia according to Wikipedia's policies and guidelines or whether it should be deleted.

The article will be discussed at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Andrew Slattery (poet) until a consensus is reached, and anyone is welcome to contribute to the discussion. The nomination will explain the policies and guidelines which are of concern. The discussion focuses on high-quality evidence and our policies and guidelines.

Users may edit the article during the discussion, including to improve the article to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the article-for-deletion notice from the top of the article. Guy (Help!) 20:17, 13 December 2013 (UTC)

Category:Indigenous Australians from Western Australia

Category:Indigenous Australians from Western Australia, which you created, has been nominated for renaming or merging. If you would like to participate in the discussion, you are invited to add your comments at the category's entry on the Categories for discussion page. Thank you. -- Black Falcon ^(talk) 05:21, 16 December 2013 (UTC)

Main Page appearance: Banksia epica

This is a note to let the main editors of Banksia epica know that the article will be appearing as today's featured article on December 24, 2013. If this article needs any attention or maintenance, it would be preferable if that could be done before its appearance on the Main Page. If you prefer that the article appear as TFA on a different date, or not at all, please ask Bencherlite (talk · contribs). You can view the TFA blurb at Wikipedia:Today's featured article/December 24, 2013. If it needs tweaking, or if it needs rewording to match improvements to the article between now and its main page appearance, please edit it, following the instructions at Wikipedia:Today's featured article/requests/instructions. The blurb as it stands now is below:

Banksia epica is a shrub that grows on the south coast of Western Australia. A spreading bush with wedge-shaped serrated leaves and large creamy-yellow flower spikes, it grows as a spreading bushy shrub with many branches, from 30 centimetres to 3½ metres (1–11½ ft) tall. It has grey, fissured bark, and dark green, wedge-shaped leaves, 1½ to 5 centimetres (½–2 in) long. Flowers occur in Banksia's characteristic "flower spike", an inflorescence made up of hundreds of pairs of flowers densely packed in a spiral round a woody axis. B. epica's flower spike is yellow or cream-yellow in colour, cylindrical, 9 to 17 centimetres (3½–6½ inches) tall and around 6 centimetres (2½ inches) in diameter. It is known only from two isolated populations in the remote south east of the state, near the western edge of the Great Australian Bight. Both populations occur amongst coastal heath on cliff-top dunes of siliceous sand. One of the most recently described Banksia species, it was probably seen by Edward John Eyre in 1841, but was not collected until 1973, and was only recognised as a distinct species in 1988. There has been very little research on the species since. (Full article...)

UcuchaBot (talk) 23:01, 16 December 2013 (UTC)

Happy holiday season....

	Cheers, pina coladas all round!
	Damn need a few of these after a frenetic year and Xmas. Hope yours is a good one....Cheers, Cas Liber (talk · contribs) 09:45, 25 December 2013 (UTC)

Proposed deletion of Calzada

The article Calzada has been proposed for deletion because of the following concern:

Non-notable film

While all constructive contributions to Wikipedia are appreciated, content or articles may be deleted for any of several reasons.

You may prevent the proposed deletion by removing the {{proposed deletion/dated}} notice, but please explain why in your edit summary or on the article's talk page.

Please consider improving the article to address the issues raised. Removing {{proposed deletion/dated}} will stop the proposed deletion process, but other deletion processes exist. In particular, the speedy deletion process can result in deletion without discussion, and articles for deletion allows discussion to reach consensus for deletion. BOVINEBOY2008 02:05, 23 February 2014 (UTC)

I didn't create this. Someone has overwritten the redirect that I created to a botanist. I hope twinkle's auto notifications are clever enough to ensure the actual creator of this article is notified. Hesperian 03:12, 23 February 2014 (UTC)

Category:Banksia redirects

Category:Banksia redirects, which you created, has been nominated for possible deletion, merging, or renaming. If you would like to participate in the discussion, you are invited to add your comments at the category's entry on the Categories for discussion page. Thank you. Obi-Wan Kenobi (talk) 17:37, 24 February 2014 (UTC)

Please see Wikipedia:Categories_for_discussion/Log/2014_February_24#Category:Banksia_redirects which I am minded to close as "no action" unless someone takes it forward. – Fayenatic London 10:30, 7 April 2014 (UTC)

Meh. Hesperian 11:29, 7 April 2014 (UTC)

I closed it as Delete, but listed it at WP:CFDWM for the talk pages to be tagged first. – Fayenatic London 09:51, 8 April 2014 (UTC)

Banksia stenoprion

Hello. You might be interested in this: Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Banksia stenoprion.--Exasperation115 (talk) 20:50, 6 April 2014 (UTC)

Banksia vincentia

new species....also am buffing Banksia coccinea for FAC - you put alot of early input into it. Also, see [1] this - note where rosserae is (!) and Banksia subulata - amazing stuff. Cas Liber (talk · contribs) 22:08, 12 April 2014 (UTC)

Yeah, amazing. Thanks for keeping me in the loop, this is awesome. Hesperian 02:04, 13 April 2014 (UTC)

Just looking at the new phylogeny, curious to see how it compares with Mast's. Hesperian 02:09, 13 April 2014 (UTC)

There are some branches now which are resolved that weren't with Mast's - which is good. Some shifts - look at attenuata, which has jumped trees. I talked to Peter Weston who said that sometimes species close together geographically can share chloroplasts. dolichostyla and violacea are nearby each other...made me wonder a bit about them. I intend contacting Marcel Cardillo as there are both species of leptophylla...and a leptophylla listed separately (typo? what...) Cas Liber (talk · contribs) 04:35, 13 April 2014 (UTC)

For the record....

Wikipedia:Featured article candidates/Banksia coccinea/archive1 - 'nuff said. Cas Liber (talk · contribs) 05:31, 18 May 2014 (UTC)

Thanks mate :-) Hesperian 06:35, 18 May 2014 (UTC)

Request for comment

Hello there, a proposal regarding pre-adminship review has been raised at Village pump by Anna Frodesiak. Your comments here is very much appreciated. Many thanks. Jim Carter through MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 06:47, 28 May 2014 (UTC)

I am this close to blocking so-called 'MediaWiki message delivery' as a spambot. Hesperian 13:01, 28 May 2014 (UTC)

I say go for it. All I can find is a Village Pump proposal that approved the user right for admins but no WP:BRFA for the bot. It doesn't even seem to comply with {{nobots}} (it's not included in Category:Wikipedia bots which are exclusion compliant). Rkitko ^(talk) 02:42, 29 May 2014 (UTC)

Apparently the fact that it is deployed as part of mediawiki:Extension:MassMessage exempts it from such formalities.... Hesperian 03:08, 29 May 2014 (UTC)

sigh

it had to happen - https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=WAY_79&diff=611591868&oldid=611589514 - do you still have any of the mementos of the time easily at hand, I hope to library check the ubiquitous' cn tags in about 3 weeks, sigh... satusuro 00:21, 5 June 2014 (UTC)

Drive-by taggers piss me off. I was premptively annoyed... but on examination, these edits seem to be very thorough and considered. A good copyedit, careful neutralisation of tone, and identification of the statements that ought not to be allowed to stand without citation. I wish all drive-by tagging was done so well! Not that I agree with everything that has been changed/tagged....

I still have plenty of WAY 79 stuff and will look at providing citations when I have the time.

Cheers mate, Hesperian 00:46, 5 June 2014 (UTC)

I see what you mean - nah as I said 'it had to happen'... I can see the points - not sure I will get reasonable refs before the time I said = cheers for the mo satusuro 15:21, 5 June 2014 (UTC)

Proposed deletion of Grazing pressure

The article Grazing pressure has been proposed for deletion because of the following concern:

5 years without a source and several years without any development.

While all constructive contributions to Wikipedia are appreciated, content or articles may be deleted for any of several reasons.

You may prevent the proposed deletion by removing the {{proposed deletion/dated}} notice, but please explain why in your edit summary or on the article's talk page.

Please consider improving the article to address the issues raised. Removing {{proposed deletion/dated}} will stop the proposed deletion process, but other deletion processes exist. In particular, the speedy deletion process can result in deletion without discussion, and articles for deletion allows discussion to reach consensus for deletion. Why should I have a User Name? (talk) 15:26, 2 August 2014 (UTC)

The above text is preserved as an archive of discussions at User talk:Hesperian. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on User talk:Hesperian. No further edits should be made to this page.