User talk:Michael Goodyear
Personal and Contact Information[edit]
Michael Goodyear, Dalhousie University, Halifax, Nova Scotia, Canada
email[edit]
mgoodyear@dal.ca
Edit Count: English[edit]
- 2014
Outcrossing and allogamy[edit]
Hi, I saw your linking together of the outcrossing and allogamy pages. Those terms are certainly synonyms, but the outcrossing page is almost exclusively about a particular technique. I don't know what page title would be considered appropriate, perhaps it wouldn't change, but rather than merging the pages, I think it would be good to disambiguate that sense of the term. Perhaps it could start with a hatnote that says something like "This page is about a technique used in animal and plant breeding. For naturally occurring outcrossing see allogamy". Sminthopsis84 (talk) 14:06, 20 September 2014 (UTC)
- Good point - actually I also included Self-incompatibility - they all overlap. Another solution would be an overarching page with hats to various subtopics.--Michael Goodyear (talk) 03:03, 21 September 2014 (UTC)
- What would you call such a page? (My imagination seems to be at a low ebb today.) Sminthopsis84 (talk) 16:22, 21 September 2014 (UTC)
- Another good question and one which I anticipated you would ask. as you may have gathered too many people create free standing pages without any thought of where they are positioned in the overall hierarchy of a discipline. In contrast I look for unifying concepts and hierarchical order. So I have gone back to the top, Biology and am working my way down, and have been dismayed by the mess. So potential parent pages might include sexual reproduction and fertilisation. This is where WP falls down compared to a planned work like EB--Michael Goodyear (talk) 03:20, 22 September 2014 (UTC)
- I couldn't agree more with this view. There are far too many biology articles about individual terms which can only be understood in the context of the overall topic in which the terms are used. I've tried before to get some of them merged, with no success. Part of the problem seems to be that editors dislike linking to a section, so the norm has become "one link, one article", regardless of the duplication of explanation this causes. Peter coxhead (talk) 21:54, 22 September 2014 (UTC)
- Well I will have a go at this particular glitch, but the issue in general should be taken upstairs. Otherwise we have a Tower of Babel--Michael Goodyear (talk) 02:05, 23 September 2014 (UTC)
- Ah, but that's the point of the comparison with the EB: there is no "upstairs" here, just editors. Peter coxhead (talk) 08:47, 23 September 2014 (UTC)
- I'm not totally convinced of that, but have no direct experience. Another project to explore. 'Editor' is a misnomer here anyway, which suggests an executive position, users might be better. The first level are the project and task forces, then one can contact administrators, and there are fora for general topics. Anyway this extreme democracy or laissez-faire, promotes anarchy! --Michael Goodyear (talk) 11:09, 23 September 2014 (UTC)
- Well I will have a go at this particular glitch, but the issue in general should be taken upstairs. Otherwise we have a Tower of Babel--Michael Goodyear (talk) 02:05, 23 September 2014 (UTC)
- I couldn't agree more with this view. There are far too many biology articles about individual terms which can only be understood in the context of the overall topic in which the terms are used. I've tried before to get some of them merged, with no success. Part of the problem seems to be that editors dislike linking to a section, so the norm has become "one link, one article", regardless of the duplication of explanation this causes. Peter coxhead (talk) 21:54, 22 September 2014 (UTC)
- Another good question and one which I anticipated you would ask. as you may have gathered too many people create free standing pages without any thought of where they are positioned in the overall hierarchy of a discipline. In contrast I look for unifying concepts and hierarchical order. So I have gone back to the top, Biology and am working my way down, and have been dismayed by the mess. So potential parent pages might include sexual reproduction and fertilisation. This is where WP falls down compared to a planned work like EB--Michael Goodyear (talk) 03:20, 22 September 2014 (UTC)
- What would you call such a page? (My imagination seems to be at a low ebb today.) Sminthopsis84 (talk) 16:22, 21 September 2014 (UTC)
So I've made some changes at Outcrossing, to reduce the overlap with Allogamy. Sminthopsis84 (talk) 14:39, 23 September 2014 (UTC)
- 2016
APG IV[edit]
Globe-trotting over? I've done some work on updating to the APG IV system, including using "Asphodelaceae" rather than "Xanthorrhoeaceae" (hooray!) as APG IV does, in anticipation of its conservation in 2017. I haven't properly dealt with articles like Asparagales, so do please have a look when you have time. Peter coxhead (talk) 08:07, 11 June 2016 (UTC)
- To revise all relevant pages would be Herculean. I think each person should address their own area of experise. I have staerted by revising the APG page, which you started doing. --Michael Goodyear (talk) 12:19, 12 June 2016 (UTC)
- Well, not quite as "Herculean" as some of the earlier revisions, but still quite a large task. Unfortunately, there seem very few active plant editors around at present.
- The APG poster in Cole & Hilger (2016) is nice. I created the cladogram from the APG IV paper; did you check whether the poster is exactly the same? There are some uncertainties noted in the paper.
- I'm currently working on the list of orders and families, so we don't duplicate work. Peter coxhead (talk) 19:27, 12 June 2016 (UTC)
- It looks ok to me and they have been a reliable source to date - but no I did not check every single line! As we get further into this some of these issues can be tackled in more detail. The revisions fall into two general groups - those pages refering to APG to ensure they reference the latest version, and the taxonomic pages affected by recent changes. --Michael Goodyear (talk) 19:33, 12 June 2016 (UTC)
- Looked at APG, APG IV, Angiosperms, Monocots and now working through monocot orders --Michael Goodyear (talk) 11:48, 13 June 2016 (UTC)
- As you've probably seen, I've added the short and full lists to the APG IV system article in the style of the APG III system one. I need to check them and the cladogram – very easy to make a mistake (indeed there's a typo in line 2 of the abstract of the APG IV paper!). Peter coxhead (talk) 13:32, 13 June 2016 (UTC)
- I missed that! I did wonder if the cladograms could be simplified. The published literature often breaks them up into sections. Even where there are no changes, eg Dioscoreales it is important to document why. I added the list in Word format to the bibliography as suggested by Byng. --Michael Goodyear (talk) 14:17, 13 June 2016 (UTC)
- As you've probably seen, I've added the short and full lists to the APG IV system article in the style of the APG III system one. I need to check them and the cladogram – very easy to make a mistake (indeed there's a typo in line 2 of the abstract of the APG IV paper!). Peter coxhead (talk) 13:32, 13 June 2016 (UTC)
Wikiversity Journal of Medicine, an open access peer reviewed journal with no charges, invites you to participate[edit]
Hi
Did you know about Wikiversity Journal of Medicine? It is an open access, peer reviewed medical journal, with no publication charges. You can find more about it by reading the article on The Signpost featuring this journal.
We welcome you to have a look the journal. Feel free to participate.
You can participate in any one or more of the following ways:
- Publish an article to the journal.
- Sign up as a peer reviewer of potential upcoming articles. If you do not have expertise in these subjects, you can help in finding peer reviewers for current submissions.
- Sign up as an editor, and help out in open tasks.
- Outreach to potential contributors, with can include (but is not limited to) scholars and health professionals. In any mention of Wikiversity Journal of Medicine, there may be a reference to this Contribute-page. Example presentation about the journal.
- Add a post-publication review of an existing publication. If errors are found, there are guidelines for editing published works.
- Apply to become the treasurer of the journal
- Join the editorial board.
- Share your ideas of what the journal would be like in the future as separate Wikimedia project.
- Donate to Wikimedia Foundation.
- Translate journal pages into other languages. Wikiversity currently exists in the following other languages
- Technical work like template designing for the journal.
- Sign up to get emails related to the journal, which are sent to updates
wijoumed.org. If you want to receive these emails too, state your interest at the talk page, or contact the Editor-in-chief at haggstrom.mikaelwikiversityjournal.org. - Spread the word to anyone who could be interested or could benefit from it.
The future of this journal as a separate Wikimedia project is under discussion and the name can be changed suitably. Currently a voting for the same is underway. Please cast your vote in the name you find most suitable. We would be glad to receive further suggestions from you. It is also acceptable to mention your votes in the wide-reach
wikiversityjournal.org email list. Please note that the voting closes on 16th August, 2016, unless protracted by consensus, due to any reason.
DiptanshuTalk 14:22, 11 August 2016 (UTC) -on behalf of the Editorial Board, Wikiversity Journal of Medicine.
William T. Stearn scheduled for TFA[edit]
This is to let you know that the William T. Stearn article has been scheduled as today's featured article for April 16, 2018. Please check the article needs no amendments. If you're interested in editing the main page text, you're welcome to do so at Wikipedia:Today's featured article/April 16, 2018, but note that a coordinator will trim the lead to around 1100 characters anyway, so you aren't obliged to do so. Thanks Jimfbleak - talk to me? 14:40, 20 March 2018 (UTC)
- Thanks, I knew it was in the works and have been keeping a close eye on the article - see the Talk page. --Michael Goodyear ✐ ✉ 15:40, 20 March 2018 (UTC)
- Thank you for the "distinguished British botanist" (who even looks distinguished), your close eye, and your ambition for Virginia Woolf! --Gerda Arendt (talk) 06:46, 16 April 2018 (UTC)
- There is however a downside, as I just discovered. Dozens of people trying to rewrite the article and fighting over it with edits and reverts. --Michael Goodyear ✐ ✉ 12:45, 16 April 2018 (UTC)
- And thank you for the nomination! Ah, yes, Virginia - that's a challenging task :) --Michael Goodyear ✐ ✉ 12:08, 16 April 2018 (UTC)
Clarification of wording of Barbara's topic ban[edit]
Sandstein has closed the User:Barbara (WVS) ANI discussion with a topic ban worded "is topic-banned (WP:TBAN) from medical articles". Following discussion with Sandstein regarding the scope of that topic ban (User_talk:Sandstein#What_the_topic_ban_covers), it is felt that further wording is required. Therefore it is proposed that the wording of the topic ban is amended to read:
"By consensus of the community, Barbara (WVS) (talk · contribs), also editing as Bfpage (talk · contribs), is topic-banned (WP:TBAN) from health and medical topics, including anatomy and sexuality, broadly construed, and is also banned from interacting with Flyer22 (talk · contribs) (WP:IBAN)."
As you took place in the discussion, please visit Wikipedia:Administrators'_noticeboard/Incidents#Proposal_for_clarification_of_scope_of_topic_ban to give your views. SilkTork (talk) 08:38, 26 March 2018 (UTC)
April 2018 at Women in Red[edit]
| ||
|
To subscribe: Women in Red/English language mailing list or
Women in Red/international list. To unsubscribe: Women in Red/Opt-out list. Follow us on Twitter: |
I want to thank you for the work you did on Woolf's page. It pained me to see how disorganized it was, but every time I tried something, there were always issue. Is Woolf your only interested? also Vita Sackville-West needs work according to me. --Elisa.rolle (talk) 08:33, 6 April 2018 (UTC)
- Elisa, I felt the same way. I had brought Virginia's mother, Julia Stephen up to GA, and on Virginia's birthday this year, and found it embarrassing, particularly since German WP had it as a GA. However cleaning it up is an enormous task. And no it is not my only interest! But I am interested in Bloomsbury, as I suspect you are. Interestingly you are the second person who has contacted me about Vita recently, but I fear that is a task for another day! And thank you, for your enormous contribution on women, here.
- Michael --Michael Goodyear ✐ ✉ 18:37, 6 April 2018 (UTC)
Thank you for being one of Wikipedia's top medical contributors![edit]
- please help translate this message into your local language via meta
|
The 2017 Cure Award |
| In 2017 you were one of the top ~250 medical editors across any language of Wikipedia. Thank you from Wiki Project Med Foundation for helping bring free, complete, accurate, up-to-date health information to the public. We really appreciate you and the vital work you do! Wiki Project Med Foundation is a user group whose mission is to improve our health content. Consider joining here, there are no associated costs. |
Thanks again :-) -- Doc James along with the rest of the team at Wiki Project Med Foundation
May 2018 at Women in Red[edit]
  
| ||
|
(To subscribe: Women in Red/English language mailing list and Women in Red/international list. Unsubscribe: Women in Red/Opt-out list) --Rosiestep (talk) 23:11, 29 April 2018 (UTC) via MassMessaging |
Wiki Loves Food[edit]
Hello! After the successful pilot program by Wikimedia India in 2015, Wiki Loves Food (WLF) is happening again in 2018 and this year, it's going International. To make this event a grand success, your direction is key. Please sign up here as a volunteer to bring all the world's food to Wikimedia. Danidamiobi (talk) 22:09, 6 May 2018 (UTC)
Women in Red June Editathons[edit]
| ||
|
(To subscribe: Women in Red/English language mailing list and Women in Red/international list. Unsubscribe: Women in Red/Opt-out list) |
--Megalibrarygirl (talk) 17:15, 29 May 2018 (UTC) via MassMessaging
Invitation to participate in study[edit]
Hello,
I am E. Whittaker, an intern at Wikimedia with the Scoring Team to create a labeled dataset, and potentially a tool, to help editors deal with incivility when they encounter it on talk pages. A full write-up of the study can be found here: m:Research:Civil_Behavior_Interviews. We are currently recruiting editors to be interviewed about their experiences with incivility on talk pages. Would you be interested in being interviewed? I am contacting you because of your involvement in Wikipedia’s Women in Red project. The interviews should take ~1 hour, and will be conducted over BlueJeans (which does allow interviews to be recorded). If, so, please email me at ewhit@umich.edu in order to schedule an interview.
Thank you Ewitch51 (talk) 21:31, 18 June 2018 (UTC)
July 2018 at Women in Red[edit]
| ||
|
(To subscribe: Women in Red/English language mailing list and Women in Red/international list. Unsubscribe: Women in Red/Opt-out list) --Rosiestep (talk) 14:04, 28 June 2018 (UTC) via MassMessaging |
File:Pye Beaulieu 1910.jpeg listed for discussion[edit]
A file that you uploaded or altered, File:Pye Beaulieu 1910.jpeg, has been listed at Wikipedia:Files for discussion. Please see the discussion to see why it has been listed (you may have to search for the title of the image to find its entry). Feel free to add your opinion on the matter below the nomination. Thank you. ShakespeareFan00 (talk) 11:10, 9 July 2018 (UTC)
August 2018 at Women in Red[edit]
| ||
|
Latest headlines, news, and views on the Women in Red talkpage (Join the conversation!): (To subscribe: Women in Red/English language mailing list and Women in Red/international list. Unsubscribe: Women in Red/Opt-out list) --Rosiestep (talk) 11:22, 23 July 2018 (UTC) via MassMessaging |
Eichmann in Jerusalem article video link same as on Hannah Arendt[edit]
Before:
- *[http://www.yadvashem.org/holocaust/video-lectures/arendt-eichmann Hannah Arendt, Adolf Eichmann, and how Evil Isn't Banal] online lecture by Dr. [[Yaacov Lozowick]] former Director of the [[Yad Vashem]] Archives
Update (User:Alexf decided he did not want me to fix linkrot, and reverted this):
- *[https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wv824mDn5X0<!-- http://www.yadvashem.org/holocaust/video-lectures/arendt-eichmann link-rot--> Hannah Arendt, Adolf Eichmann, and how Evil Isn't Banal] by [[Yaacov Lozowick]], former Director of the [[Yad Vashem]] Archives, video lecture, [[youtube]]<!-- https://www.youtube.com/user/YadVashem -->
from Hannah Arendt:
- *{{cite AV media|last= Lozowick|first=Yaacov|authorlink=Yaacov Lozowick|title=Hannah Arendt, Adolf Eichmann, and how Evil Isn't Banal|url=https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wv824mDn5X0|medium=video|date=Apr 5, 2011|website=The Holocaust Resource Center|publisher=[[Yad Vashem]]. The World Holocaust Remembrance Center|location=Jerusalem|ref=harv}}
- is a better citation. would you update Eichmann in Jerusalem with this version?
69.181.23.220 (talk) 22:44, 13 August 2018 (UTC)
- I cant imagine why - fixed. --Michael Goodyear ✐ ✉ 22:58, 13 August 2018 (UTC)
Your GA nomination of Hannah Arendt[edit]
Hi there, I'm pleased to inform you that I've begun reviewing the article Hannah Arendt you nominated for GA-status according to the criteria. 
This process may take up to 7 days. Feel free to contact me with any questions or comments you might have during this period. Message delivered by Legobot, on behalf of J Milburn -- J Milburn (talk) 17:01, 23 August 2018 (UTC)
September 2018 at Women in Red[edit]
| ||
|
Latest headlines, news, and views on the Women in Red talkpage (Join the conversation!):
(To subscribe: Women in Red/English language mailing list and Women in Red/international list. Unsubscribe: Women in Red/Opt-out list) --Rosiestep (talk) 01:55, 26 August 2018 (UTC) via MassMessaging |
Orphaned non-free image File:Hannah Arendt.png[edit]
Thanks for uploading File:Hannah Arendt.png. The image description page currently specifies that the image is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, the image is currently not used in any articles on Wikipedia. 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 for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).
Note that any non-free images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described in section F5 of the criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. --B-bot (talk) 17:16, 27 August 2018 (UTC)
October 2018 at Women in Red[edit]
| ||
|
(To subscribe: Women in Red/English language mailing list and Women in Red/international list. Unsubscribe: Women in Red/Opt-out list) --Rosiestep (talk) 14:46, 28 September 2018 (UTC) via MassMessaging |
Get ready for November with Women in Red![edit]
Continuing: | ||
|
Latest headlines, news, and views on the Women in Red talkpage (Join the conversation!): (To subscribe: Women in Red/English language mailing list and Women in Red/international list. Unsubscribe: Women in Red/Opt-out list) |
--Megalibrarygirl (talk) 18:40, 14 October 2018 (UTC) via MassMessaging
Better source request for File:Honora Sneyd by Flaxman.jpg[edit]
Thanks for your upload to Wikipedia:
You provided a source, but it is difficult for other users to examine the copyright status of the image because the source is incomplete. Please consider clarifying the exact source so that the copyright status may be checked more easily. It is best to specify the exact Web page where you found the image, rather than only giving the source domain, search engine, pinboard, aggregator, or the URL of the image file itself. Please update the image description with a URL that will be more helpful to other users in determining the copyright status.
If you have uploaded other files, consider checking that you have specified their source in a complete manner. You can find a list of files you have uploaded by following this link. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page or me at my talk page. Thank you. ShakespeareFan00 (talk) 10:08, 24 October 2018 (UTC)
- It was all in the File description line and comment - file edited to clarify this --Michael Goodyear ✐ ✉ 21:33, 24 October 2018 (UTC)
File source problem with File:RHSAGM.png[edit]
Thank you for uploading File:RHSAGM.png. I noticed that the file's description page currently doesn't specify who created the content, so the copyright status is unclear. If you did not create this file yourself, you will need to specify the owner of the copyright. If you obtained it from a website, please add a link to the page from which it was taken, together with a brief restatement of the website's terms of use of its content. If the original copyright holder is a party unaffiliated with the website, that author should also be credited. Please add this information by editing the image description page.
If the necessary information is not added within the next days, the image will be deleted. If the file is already gone, you can still make a request for undeletion and ask for a chance to fix the problem.
Please refer to the image use policy to learn what images you can or cannot upload on Wikipedia. Please also check any other files you have uploaded to make sure they are correctly tagged. Here is a list of your uploads. If you have any questions or are in need of assistance please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you. ShakespeareFan00 (talk) 19:46, 24 October 2018 (UTC)
- As stated in file description - file edited to clarify this --Michael Goodyear ✐ ✉ 21:44, 24 October 2018 (UTC)
ArbCom 2018 election voter message[edit]
Hello, Michael Goodyear. Voting in the 2018 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23.59 on Sunday, 3 December. All users who registered an account before Sunday, 28 October 2018, made at least 150 mainspace edits before Thursday, 1 November 2018 and are not currently blocked are eligible 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 2018 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 18:42, 19 November 2018 (UTC)
December 2018 at Women in Red[edit]
Continuing: | ||
|
Latest headlines, news, and views on the Women in Red talkpage (Join the conversation!): (To subscribe: Women in Red/English language mailing list and Women in Red/international list. Unsubscribe: Women in Red/Opt-out list) |
January 2019 at Women in Red[edit]
 January events:
|
2019[edit]
 |
Die Zeit, die Tag und Jahre macht
--Gerda Arendt (talk) 22:12, 1 January 2019 (UTC)
 | |
| Four years! |
|---|
--Gerda Arendt (talk) 09:12, 7 January 2019 (UTC)
Please check out "Happy" once more, for a smile, and sharing (a Nobel Peace Prize), and resolutions. I wanted that for 1 January, but then wasn't sad about having our music pictured instead. Not too late for resolutions, New Year or not. DYK that he probably kept me on Wikipedia, back in 2012? By the line (which brought him to my attention, and earned the first precious in br'erly style) that I added to my editnotice, in fond memory? --Gerda Arendt (talk) 14:33, 12 January 2019 (UTC)
- Liebe Gerda, you are truly amazing. Thank you for the belated introduction and for sharing memories. No, I did not know about the episode you mention in 2012. Schöne Grüße, Michael
--Michael Goodyear ✐ ✉ 00:46, 13 January 2019 (UTC)
February 2019 at Women in Red[edit]
 February events:
|
March 2019 at Women in Red[edit]
   Please join us for these virtual events:
| ||
|
|
Your GA nomination of Hannah Arendt[edit]
The article Hannah Arendt you nominated as a good article has been placed on hold 
. The article is close to meeting the good article criteria, but there are some minor changes or clarifications needing to be addressed. If these are fixed within 7 days, the article will pass; otherwise it may fail. See Talk:Hannah Arendt for issues which need to be addressed. Message delivered by Legobot, on behalf of J Milburn -- J Milburn (talk) 01:20, 9 March 2019 (UTC)
Your GA nomination of Hannah Arendt[edit]
The article Hannah Arendt you nominated as a good article has passed 
; see Talk:Hannah Arendt for comments about the article. Well done! If the article has not already been on the main page as an "In the news" or "Did you know" item, you can nominate it to appear in Did you know. Message delivered by Legobot, on behalf of J Milburn -- J Milburn (talk) 19:21, 9 March 2019 (UTC)
 | |
| ... with thanks from QAI |
That's excellent, thank you so much for all you put in. --Gerda Arendt (talk) 20:24, 9 March 2019 (UTC)
- Thank you! It is starting to look like Spring! So I can add photography to all your other talents :) Michael Goodyear ✐ ✉ 22:59, 9 March 2019 (UTC)
April editathons at Women in Red[edit]
April 2019[edit]
|
--Megalibrarygirl (talk) 16:00, 25 March 2019 (UTC) via MassMessaging
(Please excuse this post if it is a duplicate!)
May you join this month's editathons from WiR![edit]
|
--Megalibrarygirl (talk) 16:17, 27 April 2019 (UTC) via MassMessaging
June events with WIR[edit]
|
--Megalibrarygirl (talk) 17:42, 22 May 2019 (UTC) via MassMessaging
Thank you so much for improving the article and adding so much depth! -- Michael Scott Cuthbert (talk) 14:47, 21 June 2019 (UTC)
- Thanks! A familiar story - listening to a performance of Salvatoris hodie, I wondered what WP said about it - not mentioned! Then I realised the page had major issues, and so ....--Michael Goodyear ✐ ✉ 20:06, 22 June 2019 (UTC)
Your GA nomination of Brynhild Olivier[edit]
Hi there, I'm pleased to inform you that I've begun reviewing the article Brynhild Olivier you nominated for GA-status according to the criteria. This process may take up to 7 days. Feel free to contact me with any questions or comments you might have during this period. Message delivered by Legobot, on behalf of Caeciliusinhorto -- Caeciliusinhorto (talk) 17:21, 24 June 2019 (UTC)
Your GA nomination of Brynhild Olivier[edit]
The article Brynhild Olivier you nominated as a good article has been placed on hold . The article is close to meeting the good article criteria, but there are some minor changes or clarifications needing to be addressed. If these are fixed within 7 days, the article will pass; otherwise it may fail. See Talk:Brynhild Olivier for issues which need to be addressed. Message delivered by Legobot, on behalf of Caeciliusinhorto -- Caeciliusinhorto (talk) 20:21, 24 June 2019 (UTC)
July events from Women in Red![edit]
|
--Megalibrarygirl (talk) 16:40, 25 June 2019 (UTC) via MassMessaging
Your GA nomination of Brynhild Olivier[edit]
The article Brynhild Olivier you nominated as a good article has failed 
; see Talk:Brynhild Olivier for reasons why the nomination failed. If or when these points have been taken care of, you may apply for a new nomination of the article. Message delivered by Legobot, on behalf of Caeciliusinhorto -- Caeciliusinhorto (talk) 21:21, 1 July 2019 (UTC)
Your GA nomination of Ornithogalum umbellatum[edit]
Hi there, I'm pleased to inform you that I've begun reviewing the article Ornithogalum umbellatum you nominated for GA-status according to the criteria. This process may take up to 7 days. Feel free to contact me with any questions or comments you might have during this period. Message delivered by Legobot, on behalf of Jens Lallensack -- Jens Lallensack (talk) 22:00, 4 July 2019 (UTC)
Your GA nomination of Ornithogalum umbellatum[edit]
The article Ornithogalum umbellatum you nominated as a good article has passed ; see Talk:Ornithogalum umbellatum for comments about the article. Well done! If the article has not already been on the main page as an "In the news" or "Did you know" item, you can nominate it to appear in Did you know. Message delivered by Legobot, on behalf of Jens Lallensack -- Jens Lallensack (talk) 17:41, 11 July 2019 (UTC)
August 2019 at Women in Red[edit]
|
--Rosiestep (talk) 06:45, 29 July 2019 (UTC) via MassMessaging
Habsburg Empire/Habsburg Monarchy[edit]
We have a HUGE problem on the page Habsburg Monarchy. It seems to be a page about Habsburg control of Hungary and Croatia. As far as I know Austria was Habsburg Monarchy since 1282, way before Hungary and Croatia.
But worst of all, Habsburg Empire redirects to that page. So the empire of Charles V and Austria-Hungary do not currently count as Habsburg Empires, when literally all books and encyclopedias define such empires as Habsburg empire.
Barjimoa (talk) 00:01, 23 August 2019 (UTC)
- Thanks for the information. I will take a look at it. --Michael Goodyear ✐ ✉ 02:24, 26 August 2019 (UTC)
Nevermind[edit]
It seems that I solved the issue above with another user. Barjimoa (talk) 10:31, 23 August 2019 (UTC)
Telephieae[edit]
Hello Thanks for your input on WS and WP regarding Crassulaceae and I somewhat agree with your approach. I am trying to match it with WS, but this taxonomy and classification largely. I have a major query regarding the tribal classification of Sempervivoideae. Telephieae is circumscribed in Caryophyllaceae, by Rabeler & Bittrich 1993. Suprageneric nomenclature in the Caryophyllaceae. PDF, as Telephieae DC., Prodr. 3: 366. (1828) with the type genus Telephium L. (1753). It is therefore unavailable for use in Crassulaceae, as a tribe in Sempervivoideae, as cited by yourself as Telephiae 't Hart, Ohba and Thied ed ined. I have a few ideas where this error may have come from, but can not read Russian and Plants of the World is very odd. I assume it is a clade based upon Sedum telephium Hope you can help. Andyboorman (talk) 20:29, 24 August 2019 (UTC)
- Thanks. I’m on the road and don’t have access to usual resources. Finding invalid names is not uncommon and people like James Reveal were expert in tracking them down. Then it comes down to priority. See for instance Ohba’s discussion as to how Hyelotelphium came about. You are right, the tribe was named from the clade which in turn was named from S. telephium. I will look into it further when I’m back. --Michael Goodyear ✐ ✉ 02:31, 26 August 2019 (UTC)
- You are correct Reveal (2012) notes that Telephieae is equivalent to Caryophyllaceae -- Andyboorman (talk) 17:48, 26 August 2019 (UTC)
- I believe it originated with the use by Hart (1995) of Telephiinae as a subtribe, and consequently elevated to the tribe Telephieae by Thiede and Eggli (2007). --Michael Goodyear ✐ ✉ 02:36, 27 August 2019 (UTC)
- Indeed, it which case Telephieae Thiede & Eggli (2007) is nom. illeg. hom. Also IPNI lodge this tribe as Telephieae Bartl., Beitr. Bot. [Bartling & H. L. Wendland] 2: 157 (1825), with Telephium L. (1753) noted under Molluginaceae, but this genus has most definitely been transferred to Corrigioleae Caryophyllaceae! However, you should be OK on WP, as you can use the clade name in its place. WS is not happy with clade names when applied below the level of order preferring a strictly Linnean approach. Telephieae Thiede & Eggli (2007) could be available, but it would need an application for nom. cons. before hand.
- In addition, you use Aeonieae Thiede ined., as opposed to Aeonieae Thiede ex Reveal, Phytoneuron 2012-37: 215. (2012), is this correctable error on WP? Andyboorman (talk) 08:34, 27 August 2019 (UTC)
- I appreciate the difference between WS and WP, but citing an authoritative source on WP is not an error, otherwise one veers into OR. At the moment, Kubitzky's The Families and Genera of Vascular Plants is like the bible in systematics, and Thiede and Eggli's treatment of Crassulaceae is the most recent complete treatment of the family (previously it was Berger 1930), and that is what is cited on WP. I have not found a reliable source to date that directly corrects it, but when I get home, I will take a closer look. --Michael Goodyear ✐ ✉ 14:42, 27 August 2019 (UTC)
- As far as I can find, all subsequent authors have either simply accepted the Thiede & Eggli nomenclature, or ignored any reference to nomenclature, since it is not necessarily a priority for phylogeneticists. For the reasons given above I have not corrected the "errors" but added a note on the issues you raise, including Caryophyllaceae. --Michael Goodyear ✐ ✉ 03:14, 28 August 2019 (UTC)
- I appreciate the difference between WS and WP, but citing an authoritative source on WP is not an error, otherwise one veers into OR. At the moment, Kubitzky's The Families and Genera of Vascular Plants is like the bible in systematics, and Thiede and Eggli's treatment of Crassulaceae is the most recent complete treatment of the family (previously it was Berger 1930), and that is what is cited on WP. I have not found a reliable source to date that directly corrects it, but when I get home, I will take a closer look. --Michael Goodyear ✐ ✉ 14:42, 27 August 2019 (UTC)
- I believe it originated with the use by Hart (1995) of Telephiinae as a subtribe, and consequently elevated to the tribe Telephieae by Thiede and Eggli (2007). --Michael Goodyear ✐ ✉ 02:36, 27 August 2019 (UTC)
- You are correct Reveal (2012) notes that Telephieae is equivalent to Caryophyllaceae -- Andyboorman (talk) 17:48, 26 August 2019 (UTC)
I have made an attempt to follow Kubitzky on WS. All will be fine until I get to Telephieae and as WS is primarily a taxonomic database we hit a problem with ined. I will edit Sedeae to more or less follow Kubitzky and those that have followed. I will omit the clades, but add a note explaining they are being worked on - it looks like the outcome could be an eventual single Sedum s.l. for this tribe. I will use his definition of Umbiliceae Meisn. and get rid of Umbilicinae and Sedinae as subtribes on WS. To be consistent Telephieae ('t Hart) Ohba and Thiede ined. will then have to be added as a tribe with a note that taxonomically this definition is provisional only. That is the best I can do and hope fellow WS editors are not too annoyed. Seem OK with you? Andyboorman (talk) 08:48, 28 August 2019 (UTC)
- I have decided to omit Telephieae ('t Hart) Ohba and Thiede ined. for now and incorporate the genera in Umbiliceae Meisn. (Reveal, 2012). Do have a look WS Crassulaceae and comment here and/or on WS Pump. I will leave it for now. Andyboorman (talk) 14:03, 28 August 2019 (UTC)
- Opinions are sharply divided on the status of Sedum. There is not really enough evidence to support either s.s. or s.l.. However the genus is being progressively reduced. At present species outside of Sedeae are being reallocated, but within Sedeae it is still an artificial paraphyletic genus. --Michael Goodyear ✐ ✉ 15:02, 28 August 2019 (UTC)
September 2019 at Women in Red[edit]
|
--Rosiestep (talk) 16:24, 27 August 2019 (UTC) via MassMessaging
Your GA nomination of Fritillaria[edit]
Hi there, I'm pleased to inform you that I've begun reviewing the article Fritillaria you nominated for GA-status according to the criteria. This process may take up to 7 days. Feel free to contact me with any questions or comments you might have during this period. Message delivered by Legobot, on behalf of Chiswick Chap -- Chiswick Chap (talk) 11:40, 6 September 2019 (UTC)
- Goodness, that was fast, I was thinking in months. We are under a hurricane watch, so it is possible I may be out of contact for a while if we have a prolonged power outage. --Michael Goodyear ✐ ✉ 17:12, 6 September 2019 (UTC)
Your GA nomination of Fritillaria[edit]
The article Fritillaria you nominated as a good article has passed ; see Talk:Fritillaria for comments about the article. Well done! If the article has not already been on the main page as an "In the news" or "Did you know" item, you can nominate it to appear in Did you know. Message delivered by Legobot, on behalf of Chiswick Chap -- Chiswick Chap (talk) 14:42, 9 September 2019 (UTC)
October Events from Women in Red[edit]
|
--Megalibrarygirl (talk) 17:35, 23 September 2019 (UTC) via MassMessaging
November 2019 at Women in Red[edit]
|
--Rosiestep (talk) 22:58, 29 October 2019 (UTC) via MassMessaging
ArbCom 2019 election voter message[edit]
| Hello! Voting in the 2019 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23:59 on Monday, 2 December 2019. 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 2019 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 |
Fern classification[edit]
The Schuettpelz et al. (2018) Taxon article doi:10.12705/673.1 and the subsequent reply by Christenhusz & Chase (2018) doi:10.12705/673.2 make entertaining reading for those enjoying academic spats, but leave us with a problem here. Instinctively, I would prefer to follow Christenhusz & Chase's "lumped" system for article titles and taxoboxes, since it causes least changes to article titles based on early systems of classification. However, the only taxonomic database that has a fully consistent system down to the level of species, which is necessary here to make the species names and articles consistent, is the Checklist of Ferns and Lycophytes of the World which uses PPG I. Plants of the World Online currently doesn't use any consistent system, and as of 22 November 2019, has errors like listing Sphenomeris as an accepted genus but then placing all its species in Odontosoria. It's definitely the case that fern classification is a total mess! I regret starting on trying to sort out our articles, because I just keep finding more problems. Peter coxhead (talk) 11:13, 22 November 2019 (UTC)
- I've attempted to summarize the argument over the number of fern genera at Pteridophyte Phylogeny Group#Number of genera. There's a lot more that could be said, but this may be enough for now given that these are primary sources. Feel free to add/edit, as always. It will be interesting to see which way PoWO goes. Peter coxhead (talk) 12:14, 22 November 2019 (UTC)
- This is part of a larger issue that effects classification. The phylogeny may be clear but translating it into taxonomic revision is more philosophical. Actually it is less of a mess than when we had to learn Cronquist and Thorne and Dahlgren etc etc! Michael Goodyear ✐ ✉ 13:37, 22 November 2019 (UTC)
It does seem important to refer to both the PPG I and the Christenhusz & Chase systems in articles. If it's of any use to you, I've drawn up a comparison table for my own use at User:Peter coxhead/Work/PPG#Comparison. The √ marks in the end column show the (few) articles I've checked/changed so far. Thyrsopteris is an example of the minimum I think is needed in a stub article. Peter coxhead (talk) 09:01, 25 November 2019 (UTC)
December events with WIR[edit]
|
--Megalibrarygirl (talk) 18:43, 25 November 2019 (UTC) via MassMessaging
January 2020 at Women in Red[edit]
|
Your GA nomination of Saxifragales[edit]
Hi there, I'm pleased to inform you that I've begun reviewing the article Saxifragales you nominated for GA-status according to the criteria. This process may take up to 7 days. Feel free to contact me with any questions or comments you might have during this period. Message delivered by Legobot, on behalf of Starsandwhales -- Starsandwhales (talk) 02:20, 7 January 2020 (UTC)
Your GA nomination of Saxifragales[edit]
The article Saxifragales you nominated as a good article has passed ; see Talk:Saxifragales for comments about the article. Well done! If the article has not already been on the main page as an "In the news" or "Did you know" item, you can nominate it to appear in Did you know. Message delivered by Legobot, on behalf of Starsandwhales -- Starsandwhales (talk) 02:41, 10 January 2020 (UTC)
February with Women in Red[edit]
.jpg)
|
--Megalibrarygirl (talk) 19:31, 28 January 2020 (UTC) via MassMessaging
March 2020 at Women in Red[edit]
  Online events:
|
--Rosiestep (talk) 19:33, 23 February 2020 (UTC) via MassMessaging
Hi Michael, I'm Dan. I'm quite impressed by your list of botanical GAs. Your Coronariae is up at GAN, and I'll be happy to review it, if we can find another reviewer to spotcheck the Latin sources (I can spotcheck the German ones), and if you're amenable to adding some text to the article. Some reviewers would look at this article and say that it's too list-y for GAN ... I don't agree, I think the most impressive thing about the article is the sourcing, and a GA is perfectly acceptable scaffolding for that sourcing. OTOH, there's not a lot of text below the lead that isn't list-y. It's not a fatal flaw, but it's a concern, for me anyway. There are several options for what to add ... what do you think of adding some images and text descriptions that will help the general reader get up to speed on what species we're talking about here? I think most readers will need some help understanding what Liliales covers. - Dank (push to talk) 23:16, 11 March 2020 (UTC)
Thanks. I look forward to working with you. Michael Goodyear ✐ ✉ 23:30, 11 March 2020 (UTC)
Your GA nomination of Coronariae[edit]
Hi there, I'm pleased to inform you that I've begun reviewing the article Coronariae you nominated for GA-status according to the criteria. This process may take up to 7 days. Feel free to contact me with any questions or comments you might have during this period. Message delivered by Legobot, on behalf of Dank -- Dank (talk) 04:01, 12 March 2020 (UTC)
Your GA nomination of Coronariae[edit]
The article Coronariae you nominated as a good article has passed ; see Talk:Coronariae for comments about the article. Well done! If the article has not already been on the main page as an "In the news" or "Did you know" item, you can nominate it to appear in Did you know. Message delivered by Legobot, on behalf of Dank -- Dank (talk) 20:42, 12 March 2020 (UTC)
Nomination for merging of Template:Late Anatolian Roman provinces[edit]
Template:Late Anatolian Roman provinces has been nominated for merging with Template:Late Roman provinces. You are invited to comment on the discussion at the template's entry on the Templates for discussion page. Thank you. PPEMES (talk) 18:24, 22 March 2020 (UTC)
Nomination for merging of Template:Provinces of Roman Anatolia[edit]
Template:Provinces of Roman Anatolia has been nominated for merging with Template:Roman provinces AD 117. You are invited to comment on the discussion at the template's entry on the Templates for discussion page. Thank you. PPEMES (talk) 19:11, 22 March 2020 (UTC)
April 2020 at Women in Red[edit]
Online events:
|
--Rosiestep (talk) 14:59, 23 March 2020 (UTC) via MassMessaging
May 2020 at Women in Red[edit]
Online events:
|
--Rosiestep (talk) 20:59, 29 April 2020 (UTC) via MassMessaging
June 2020 at Women in Red[edit]
June 2020, Volume 6, Issue 6, Numbers 150, 151, 167, 168, 169
Online events:
|
--Rosiestep (talk) 17:11, 25 May 2020 (UTC) via MassMessaging
July 2020 at Women in Red[edit]
|
--Rosiestep (talk) 16:11, 28 June 2020 (UTC) via MassMessaging
August 2020 at Women in Red[edit]
|
--Rosiestep (talk) 18:50, 26 July 2020 (UTC) via MassMessaging
September Women in Red edithons[edit]
|
--Megalibrarygirl (talk) 17:51, 29 August 2020 (UTC) via MassMessaging
Books to buy[edit]
Hi Michael, I'm looking for recommendations on books to buy as sources for stub- and start-class articles. I see you've been citing The Flowering Plants Handbook (Byng) and Plants of the World (Christenhusz et al.) in some of your genus articles. Can you recommend those (with the caveat that the first one is pre-APG IV)? What do you think of the latest two volumes (14 and 15) of The Families and Genera of Vascular Plants (Kubitzki)? - Dank (push to talk) 17:59, 29 August 2020 (UTC)
- Well, there wasn’t a huge difference between APG III and IV, and if it affects the article it can be referenced. Kubitzki is probably the most comprehensive taxonomic text but now much older, although each volume is from a different date. —-Michael Goodyear ✐ ✉ 11:14, 30 August 2020 (UTC)
- Thanks ... volumes 14 and 15 ordered (and vol 7, so that I have more or less complete coverage of the lamiids). I'll try to snag any of the books on superasterids as soon as the prices come down. - Dank (push to talk) 16:42, 30 August 2020 (UTC)
It is not necessarily a good and up to date taxonomic source (scholarly articles are) but one of the most comprehensive sources in almost every other aspect of taxa. Michael Goodyear ✐ ✉ 13:29, 31 August 2020 (UTC)
October editathons from Women in Red[edit]
|
--Megalibrarygirl (talk) 15:10, 21 September 2020 (UTC) via MassMessaging
Nomination for deletion of Template:Valentinian dynasty[edit]
Template:Valentinian dynasty has been nominated for deletion. You are invited to comment on the discussion at the entry on the Templates for discussion page. Avis11 (talk) 17:09, 17 October 2020 (UTC)
November edit-a-thons from Women in Red[edit]
|
--Megalibrarygirl (talk) 18:51, 28 October 2020 (UTC) via MassMessaging
Edit conflict[edit]
I'm sorry, I think I wiped out all your edits in the past half hour or so with an edit conflict on Valentinianic dynasty. GPinkerton (talk) 22:29, 30 October 2020 (UTC)
- Oops - will check - I was worried that might happen! --Michael Goodyear ✐ ✉ 22:32, 30 October 2020 (UTC)
- Looks fine, an argument for small edits at a time --Michael Goodyear ✐ ✉ 22:42, 30 October 2020 (UTC)
ArbCom 2020 Elections voter message[edit]
| Hello! Voting in the 2020 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23:59 (UTC) on Monday, 7 December 2020. 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 2020 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 |
December with Women in Red[edit]
|
--Megalibrarygirl (talk) 16:42, 26 November 2020 (UTC) via MassMessaging
A New Year With Women in Red![edit]
|
--Megalibrarygirl (talk) 03:02, 29 December 2020 (UTC) via MassMessaging
Featured article plans?[edit]
Michael, you are certainly an exceptionally prolific and admirable editor. I wonder if you have ever considered putting an article through the WP:FAC process? I recently did so with Portrait of a Musician, and found a plethora of feedback, resulting in the gold star – which felt like an almost "seal of approval" – and eligibility for the article to be featured on the main page. WP:PR has recently become more active so I'm sure you could find much ideas for FAC preparation there, especially if you put it in the Template:FA sidebar. Just some ideas and (hopefully) words of encouragement. Regards, Aza24 (talk) 03:56, 5 January 2021 (UTC)
See William T. Stearn Michael Goodyear ✐ ✉ 13:00, 5 January 2021 (UTC)
- Lovely to see. I only asked because I stumbled across User:Michael Goodyear/Projects and only saw GAs. Anyways, I'm sure FAC would welcome any of your future submissions with open arms. Best - Aza24 (talk) 20:09, 5 January 2021 (UTC)
- I should update! --Michael Goodyear ✐ ✉ 20:13, 5 January 2021 (UTC)
Precious anniversary 6[edit]
| |
| Six years! |
|---|
--Gerda Arendt (talk) 10:46, 17 January 2021 (UTC)
- So fast! And Wikipedia turns 20 - of which I have been active for fourteen and a half years!! Thanks :) --Michael Goodyear ✐ ✉ 16:34, 17 January 2021 (UTC)
February 2021 at Women in Red[edit]
|
--Rosiestep (talk) 14:59, 27 January 2021 (UTC) via MassMessaging
March 2021 at Women in Red[edit]
|
--Rosiestep (talk) 18:48, 26 February 2021 (UTC) via MassMessaging
Invitation to comment on Julia Margaret Cameron article[edit]
As someone who has contributed substantially to this article, I invite your input on an RfC asking: Should the infobox use the original photograph of Cameron or a version modified by a Wikipedia editor?
Thanks in advance for your input. Qono (talk) 22:19, 17 March 2021 (UTC)
April editathons from Women in Red[edit]
|
--Megalibrarygirl (talk) 20:16, 22 March 2021 (UTC) via MassMessaging
May 2021 at Women in Red[edit]
|
--Rosiestep (talk) 21:36, 28 April 2021 (UTC) via MassMessaging
June 2021 at Women in Red[edit]
|
--Rosiestep (talk) 18:50, 28 May 2021 (UTC) via MassMessaging
July 2021 at Women in Red[edit]
|
--Rosiestep (talk) 16:05, 22 June 2021 (UTC) via MassMessaging
Validity of A. piscivorus piscivorus photo[edit]
The validity of the species identification for File:Agkistrodon piscivorus piscivorus dark.JPG has been questioned. Please see the comments in the edit history of Agkistrodon piscivorus piscivorus and in the edit history of Commons:File:Agkistrodon piscivorus piscivorus dark.JPG. It is suggested that the photo is actually a specimen of Nerodia erythrogaster (or at least some Nerodia – perhaps Nerodia fasciata or Nerodia sipedon). Those species are frequently confused. See, for example, File:Watersnake.jpg. The head of the snake is unfortunately obscured in your photo. The identification of the snake would be easier if the head was more visible. — BarrelProof (talk) 23:30, 10 July 2021 (UTC)
- My identification was based on the illustrated guide provided by the Forest staff and by a staff member. As you can see, the Forest fauna includes species of both Nerodia and Agkistrodon. As far as the head goes, I wasn’t inclined to get any closer! Michael Goodyear ✐ ✉ 14:24, 11 July 2021 (UTC)
Gentian flower ?[edit]
Hi Mr. Goodyear, i need some help to find specimen of this flower. So far Google said it is Gentian. Diameter of flower in focus is around 8-9 mm (milimeters), that is fully grown. It is almost all blue, just leafs at corner got some part of red-violet. But that middle is nice white middle-which i can find of Google Gentians. regards, --Petar Milošević (talk) 20:04, 13 July 2021 (UTC)
- It appears that you uploaded this to Wikipedia Commons, without any other information. You really should not do that unless you are sure of your information. I am not sure what you mean by Gentian? Gentian is a herbal remedy derived from the roots of plants of the genus Gentiana. This is a very large genus, with hundreds of species, so even if it is a species of Gentiana, that is not very helpful. Many of the species have blue flowers, it is true, but not all. One cannot simply identify a plant from a view of its flowers. One needs far more information, including where and when it it was found. One needs all the plant parts. However your picture suggests a pentamerous flower, so it could be a member of this genus.
- Take a look at the information on Gentiana in Plants of the World Online. --Michael Goodyear ✐ ✉ 22:55, 15 July 2021 (UTC)
It is under question mark, till i find specimen. After i change name. Found in Ljubljana, Europe in June. Gentiana is "google choice" but i dont seem that middle (white) is similar to them. Will try whith that links. Thanx. --Petar Milošević (talk) 11:03, 17 July 2021 (UTC)
- I think you can see that uploading an unidentified photo is not really helping Wikipedia. Do you have other photos of this plant? You need to add as much information as you can - where was it found, what sort of habitat, date you saw it etc. I think you are referring to the style when you say "that middle (white)". In Gentiana, the stigma is usually two lobed as in this specimen of Gentiana acaulis, while yours appears to have 5. With so many species, you would need a genus key to accurately identify a single specimen. --Michael Goodyear ✐ ✉ 02:41, 18 July 2021 (UTC)
I have done some other photos from distance, if any help. Also aksed at botanic garden. --Petar Milošević (talk) 13:41, 20 July 2021 (UTC)
Commelina is similar, leafs, but stigma not. They grow on grass, beside train station, sunny spot. 1st photo is pictures end of May, and other today. --Petar Milošević (talk) 14:01, 20 July 2021 (UTC)
We found it, probably is Anchusa. Anchusa officinalis maybe ? --Petar Milošević (talk) 18:42, 20 July 2021 (UTC)
- Thank you for going to all that trouble. That seems a better fit. Unless you are absolutely sure of the species, it would be better to just label it as Anchusa sp. --Michael Goodyear ✐ ✉ 18:58, 20 July 2021 (UTC)
Proposed Women in Green Editathon[edit]
Hello Michael -- With the goal of helping to progress the WikiProject Women in Green (WiG) women’s rights-themed GA nomination goal for 2021, I’m proposing that WiG hold a special editathon event in the fall (maybe October/November?). I can assist with logistics, but I need to know how much interest/support there might be from WiG participants first. Please let me know what you think in the talk page conversation! All the best, Alanna the Brave (talk) 02:11, 20 July 2021 (UTC)
August Editathons from Women in Red[edit]
|
--Megalibrarygirl (talk) 22:26, 23 July 2021 (UTC) via MassMessaging
September 2021 at Women in Red[edit]
|
--Rosiestep (talk) 22:30, 26 August 2021 (UTC) via MassMessaging
October 2021 at Women in Red[edit]
Special event:
|
--Rosiestep (talk) 01:36, 29 September 2021 (UTC) via MassMessaging
Dictionary of Botanical Epithets[edit]
Michael, I'd love to have one or two more etymological sources for species epithets that I can pull from. One of the most popular among plant editors (with 40 hits) is Chuck Griffith's Dictionary of Botanical Epithets. But I'm not sure if I could get it through WP:GAN or WP:FLC ... do you know if that, or anything Griffith has written, has ever been vetted by any publisher? If not, do you have any recommendations? - Dank (push to talk) 04:56, 13 October 2021 (UTC)
- That is a very interesting question. I'm not sure that there is anything wrong with this source, but I agree it would not be considered an authoritative source. At first I thought he meant he got the information from the NARGS - but having perused their site, I think he meant lists of the terms, not their meanings. In that case his work is substandard without proper citations.
- There are many reliable sources. The Gold Standard is Stearn's Botanical Latin : history, grammar, syntax, terminology and vocabulary.
- Have a look at my list at User:Michael_Goodyear/Botany_resources#Plant_names_and_epithets - and yes as you will see I have used Griffith for convenience --Michael Goodyear ✐ ✉ 17:12, 13 October 2021 (UTC)
- Botanical Latin is perfect, just what I needed. Thanks. - Dank (push to talk) 19:52, 13 October 2021 (UTC)
- If you know ... who would I contact to get a file with all of POWO's 350k accepted species (just the scientific names)? I'd want it sorted on species epithet, ideally, but I can do the sorting and filtering myself if I can get the list. It will be much less tedious if I can compare that list with my sources, rather than typing each species epithet into POWO to see if I can get a hit. - Dank (push to talk) 15:05, 31 October 2021 (UTC)
- I’m not aware of anything like that, but I will look into it. What are you hoping to do with such a list? Michael Goodyear ✐ ✉ 12:17, 1 November 2021 (UTC)
- Thanks kindly. I'm open to suggestions, but the plan is for the new list series to be nothing more than a reasonable expansion of List of descriptive plant species epithets (A–H) and I–Z. In the previous lists, I've covered all the seed plant families listed at POWO and all the genera that had etymologies listed in my sources; now it's time to do something more with species, I think. I agree 100% that pulling more from Botanical Latin is a reasonable next step; so far, it looks like this may approximately double the total number of rows of species epithets. I'm also looking for pages in the new series to have fewer entries per page than the other lists (I'm having trouble attracting reviewers), which is probably necessary anyway since I want to pull more images from Commons. Thoughts? - Dank (push to talk) 13:44, 1 November 2021 (UTC)
- Oh, to answer your question, the plan is to use a list of species epithets from POWO in the same way I've used POWO in the other lists: I'd eliminate any epithet from the first column in my tables that's not currently accepted at POWO. - Dank (push to talk) 13:59, 1 November 2021 (UTC)
- The contact address is bi@kew.org Michael Goodyear ✐ ✉ 23:04, 1 November 2021 (UTC)
- Thanks much. - Dank (push to talk) 23:10, 1 November 2021 (UTC)
- I don't see that contact email on their website so they might wonder where I got it ... is it okay if I say I got this from you? Feel free to say no, of course. - Dank (push to talk) 14:10, 2 November 2021 (UTC)
- It is under the Contacts tab! --Michael Goodyear ✐ ✉ 14:15, 2 November 2021 (UTC)
- Thanks, they gave me a url with archives that should give me everything I need. - Dank (push to talk) 18:03, 2 November 2021 (UTC)
- It is under the Contacts tab! --Michael Goodyear ✐ ✉ 14:15, 2 November 2021 (UTC)
- The contact address is bi@kew.org Michael Goodyear ✐ ✉ 23:04, 1 November 2021 (UTC)
- I’m not aware of anything like that, but I will look into it. What are you hoping to do with such a list? Michael Goodyear ✐ ✉ 12:17, 1 November 2021 (UTC)
November 2021 at Women in Red[edit]
|
--Innisfree987 (talk) 21:30, 24 October 2021 (UTC) via MassMessaging
ArbCom 2021 Elections voter message[edit]
| 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 |
December 2021 at Women in Red[edit]
|
--Innisfree987 (talk) 00:12, 27 November 2021 (UTC) via MassMessaging
Invitation to take part in a survey about medical topics on Wikipedia[edit]
Dear fellow editor,
I am Piotr Konieczny, a sociologist of new media at Hanyang University (and User:Piotrus on Wikipedia). I would like to better understand Wikipedia's volunteers who edit medical topics, many associated with the WikiProject Medicine, and known to create some of the highest quality content on Wikipedia. I hope that the lessons I can learn from you that I will present to the academic audience will benefit both the WikiProject Medicine (improving your understanding of yourself and helping to promote it and attract new volunteers) and the wider world of medical volunteering and academia. Open access copy of the resulting research will be made available at WikiProject's Medicine upon the completion of the project.
All questions are optional. The survey is divided into 4 parts: 1 - Brief description of yourself; 2 - Questions about your volunteering; 3 - Questions about WikiProject Medicine and 4 - Questions about Wikipedia's coverage of medical topics.
Please note that by filling out this questionnaire, you consent to participate in this research. The survey is anonymous and all personal details relevant to your experience will be kept private and will not be transferred to any third party.
I appreciate your support of this research and thank you in advance for taking the time to participate and share your experiences! If you have any questions at all, please feel free to contact me at my Wikipedia user page or through my email listed on the survey page (or by Wikipedia email this user function).
The survey is accessible through the LINK HERE.
Piotr Konieczny
Associate Professor
Hanyang University
If you wish to opt-out of future mailings, please remove yourself from the mailing list. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 22:24, 13 December 2021 (UTC)
January 2022 with Women in Red[edit]
|
--Megalibrarygirl (talk) 16:03, 28 December 2021 (UTC) via MassMessaging
in friendship[edit]
 | |
| in friendship |
|---|
Happy new year! - Today I show yesterday's snow (if you click on "songs") and today's music in memory of Jerome Kohl, a friend --Gerda Arendt (talk) 18:19, 9 January 2022 (UTC)
- Danke! Ja, In Freundschaft - Alles Gute zum neuen Jahr! --Michael Goodyear ✐ ✉ 20:04, 9 January 2022 (UTC)
- Thank you! 2022 began happily with vacation. I uploaded images but stopped at 22 January - click on songs. 30 January means 10 years of Precious. It's also the birthday of a friend, - I'm so happy I mentioned his DYK on his 90th birthday when he was still alive. I have a great singer on DYK whom I heard, Elena Guseva, and wait for a Recent death appearance of Georg Christoph Biller whom I saw in action. --Gerda Arendt (talk) 21:59, 30 January 2022 (UTC)
- Danke! Ja, In Freundschaft - Alles Gute zum neuen Jahr! --Michael Goodyear ✐ ✉ 20:04, 9 January 2022 (UTC)
Precious anniversary[edit]
| |
| Seven years! |
|---|
--Gerda Arendt (talk) 09:18, 17 January 2022 (UTC)
 | |
| frozen |
|---|
my joy - more on my talk --Gerda Arendt (talk) 18:57, 7 February 2022 (UTC)
Valentine's Day edition, with spring flowers and plenty of music --Gerda Arendt (talk) 19:56, 14 February 2022 (UTC)
stand and sing --Gerda Arendt (talk) 23:24, 25 February 2022 (UTC)
 |
I took the pic in 2009, and it was on the German MP yesterday, with the song from 1885, in English Prayer for Ukraine. --Gerda Arendt (talk) 11:49, 6 March 2022 (UTC)
February with Women in Red[edit]
|
--Megalibrarygirl (talk) 15:10, 31 January 2022 (UTC) via MassMessaging
"Desirability" listed at Redirects for discussion[edit]
An editor has identified a potential problem with the redirect Desirability and has thus listed it for discussion. This discussion will occur at Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2022 February 19#Desirability until a consensus is reached, and anyone, including you, is welcome to contribute to the discussion. {{u|Sdkb}} talk 06:35, 19 February 2022 (UTC)
March editathons[edit]
|
--Megalibrarygirl (talk) 16:38, 27 February 2022 (UTC) via MassMessaging
April Editathons from Women in Red[edit]
|
--Megalibrarygirl (talk) 22:45, 22 March 2022 (UTC) via MassMessaging
Hippeastreae[edit]
Hi, in 2016 you developed the articles Hippeastreae and Hippeastrinae. They've become rather out-of-date since then; according to APweb, only 6 genera remain in Hippeastreae (see Hippeastreae#Genera), although two more are retained by PoWO – somewhat oddly perhaps, since Sprekelia is given only one species Sprekelia formosissima, and Rhodolirium only two. I've done a bit of work on the article, but it needs more to make it clear that much of the taxonomy is now historical. So if you have any time, you might like to look at it. Peter coxhead (talk) 09:06, 30 March 2022 (UTC)
- Nature of the beast I'm afraid - continual recircumscription. I recall you persuading me to take Hippeastrum to GA - thanks! I ended up looking at Amaryllidoideae as a whole, which was horribly out of date, and here we are again! I have not looked at it since - there are so many other problem pages - most recently tackled Crocus which was also woeful, and still needs a lot of work. Alan Meerow and his colleagues have continued to be been very active in this area. I'm adding some recent phylogeny articles. Michael Goodyear ✐ ✉ 21:42, 30 March 2022 (UTC)
- A close read of Garcia et al 2019, reveals that a large number of changes need to be made to many WP pages. Generally I think our policy has been to deal with only one level of subdivision in taxonomy where daughter pages exist for those subdivisions. Therefore discussion of genera is best left to the subtribe pages. I think the best solution is what you have done and treat the genera as a historical note, and the problem devolves to the subtribes. Therefore I removed the tag from Hippeastrae after updating it.--Michael Goodyear ✐ ✉ 03:04, 31 March 2022 (UTC)
- Tribe and subtribes, and some genera (Traubiinae) have now been brought up to date (at least taxonomically) as per Garcia et al 2019, as revised 2020. I have stuck with their classification, since it is data based, presumably APWeb and PoWO will catch up! I will get around to the specific genera of Hippeastrinae later. --Michael Goodyear ✐ ✉ 20:24, 31 March 2022 (UTC)
- Genus pages all updated - but that leaves the tricky question as to what to do with the legacy pages of extinguished genera - for now i have just out them in past tense, with an internal redirection to new placement. QEF --Michael Goodyear ✐ ✉ 20:46, 1 April 2022 (UTC)
- Yes, it's always difficult to know what to do with legacy genera. My general approach (but probably not followed consistently) has been to convert stubs or near stubs to redirects and put longer articles into past tense. Anyway, definitely an improvement – thanks for your work as always! Peter coxhead (talk) 10:15, 2 April 2022 (UTC)
- I agree, I will add a note on the project template to that effect --Michael Goodyear ✐ ✉ 19:33, 2 April 2022 (UTC)
- Yes, it's always difficult to know what to do with legacy genera. My general approach (but probably not followed consistently) has been to convert stubs or near stubs to redirects and put longer articles into past tense. Anyway, definitely an improvement – thanks for your work as always! Peter coxhead (talk) 10:15, 2 April 2022 (UTC)
- Genus pages all updated - but that leaves the tricky question as to what to do with the legacy pages of extinguished genera - for now i have just out them in past tense, with an internal redirection to new placement. QEF --Michael Goodyear ✐ ✉ 20:46, 1 April 2022 (UTC)
- Tribe and subtribes, and some genera (Traubiinae) have now been brought up to date (at least taxonomically) as per Garcia et al 2019, as revised 2020. I have stuck with their classification, since it is data based, presumably APWeb and PoWO will catch up! I will get around to the specific genera of Hippeastrinae later. --Michael Goodyear ✐ ✉ 20:24, 31 March 2022 (UTC)
- A close read of Garcia et al 2019, reveals that a large number of changes need to be made to many WP pages. Generally I think our policy has been to deal with only one level of subdivision in taxonomy where daughter pages exist for those subdivisions. Therefore discussion of genera is best left to the subtribe pages. I think the best solution is what you have done and treat the genera as a historical note, and the problem devolves to the subtribes. Therefore I removed the tag from Hippeastrae after updating it.--Michael Goodyear ✐ ✉ 03:04, 31 March 2022 (UTC)
"Sexually receptive" listed at Redirects for discussion[edit]
An editor has identified a potential problem with the redirect Sexually receptive and has thus listed it for discussion. This discussion will occur at Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2022 April 7#Sexually receptive until a consensus is reached, and anyone, including you, is welcome to contribute to the discussion. Mdewman6 (talk) 01:54, 7 April 2022 (UTC)
May Women in Red events[edit]
|
--Megalibrarygirl (talk) 16:53, 30 April 2022 (UTC) via MassMessaging
June events from Women in Red[edit]
|
--Megalibrarygirl (talk) 09:21, 31 May 2022 (UTC) via MassMessaging
| Wednesday June 8, 11am-5pm: New York Botanical Garden - Environment of the Bronx - Editing Wikipedia for Beginners | |
|---|---|
 Hello @Michael Goodyear! The LuEsther T. Mertz Library of the New York Botanical Garden and the Environment of New York City Task Force invite you to come to the Mertz Library in person and write about the environment of the Bronx!! All skill levels welcome at the event! Experienced Wikipedia editors from the Wikimedia New York City chapter will be in attendance and available to help. A one hour training session will be offered at the start of this event covering introductory topics. Attendees familiar with editing Wikipedia can edit off of a worklist focused on the environment of New York City; as well as, a sub-list focused on the environment of the Bronx. The Mertz Library will pull topical media from their collection to assist the editing. --Wikimedia New York City Team via Wil540 art (talk) 02:41, 7 June 2022 (UTC) | |
Women in Green - July GA Editathon[edit]
Hello Michael Goodyear:
WikiProject Women in Green is holding a month-long Good Article Editathon event in July 2022!
Running from July 1 to 31, 2022, WikiProject Women in Green (WiG) is hosting a Good Article (GA) editathon event focused on the topic of women and the environment. Participants are invited to work on nominating and/or reviewing GA submissions related to women and women's works during the event period (with an emphasis on environmental links and topics). GA resources and one-on-one support will be provided by experienced GA editors, and participants will have the opportunity to receive a special WiG barnstar for their efforts.
We hope to see you there!
Alanna the Brave (talk) 13:27, 24 June 2022 (UTC)Women in Red in July 2022[edit]
|
--Lajmmoore (talk) 15:48, 27 June 2022 (UTC) via MassMessaging
Women in Red August 2022[edit]
|
--Lajmmoore (talk) 10:59, 29 July 2022 (UTC) via MassMessaging
Women in Red in September 2022[edit]
|
--Lajmmoore (talk) 15:36, 31 August 2022 (UTC) via MassMessaging
WikiProject Women in Green October 2022 Good Article Editathon[edit]
Hello Michael Goodyear:
WikiProject Women in Green is holding a month-long Good Article Editathon event in October 2022!
Running from October 1 to 31, 2022, WikiProject Women in Green (WiG) is hosting a Good Article (GA) editathon event – Wildcard Edition! Participants are invited to work on nominating and/or reviewing GA submissions related to any and all women and women's works during the event period. Want to improve an article about a Bollywood actress? Go for it. A pioneering female scientist? Absolutely. An award-winning autobiography by a woman? Yes! GA resources and one-on-one support will be provided by experienced GA editors, and participants will have the opportunity to receive a special WiG barnstar for their efforts.
We hope to see you there!
Alanna the Brave (talk) & Goldsztajn (talk) 23 September 2022
You are receiving this message as a member of the WikiProject Women in Green. You can remove yourself from receiving notifications here.
MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 05:35, 25 September 2022 (UTC)
Women in Red October 2022[edit]
|
--Lajmmoore (talk) 15:00, 29 September 2022 (UTC) via MassMessaging
Here's a heads-up on this work-in-progress on the alismatid monocots, in case you want to set me on the right path! As is often the case with lists, the idea is to condense and illustrate the material, to make it less overwhelming for, say, younger readers. I've been relying heavily on Plants of the World so far, and comparing that with our existing articles on monocot families. Any thoughts would be appreciated. - Dank (push to talk) 12:54, 23 October 2022 (UTC)
- Thanks for this - once I figured out where you had put it, I linked the Alismatid monocots page to it. Michael Goodyear ✐ ✉ 22:16, 27 October 2022 (UTC)
- Ah, sorry about that. I'll take that as a vote of confidence (either in me or in the process that will whip it into shape). - Dank (push to talk) 22:20, 27 October 2022 (UTC)
Women in Red November 2022[edit]
|
--Lajmmoore (talk) 17:34, 26 October 2022 (UTC) via MassMessaging
Women in Red in December 2022[edit]
See also:
Tip of the month:
Other ways to participate:
|
--Lajmmoore (talk) 20:55, 26 November 2022 (UTC) via MassMessaging
ArbCom 2022 Elections voter message[edit]
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) 00:36, 29 November 2022 (UTC)
Women in Red January 2023[edit]
See also:
Tip of the month:
Other ways to participate:
|
--Lajmmoore (talk) 18:02, 27 December 2022 (UTC) via MassMessaging
Women in Red in February 2023[edit]
Tip of the month:
Other ways to participate:
|
--Lajmmoore (talk) 07:28, 30 January 2023 (UTC) via MassMessaging
Good article reassessment for Hannah Arendt[edit]
Hannah Arendt has been nominated for a good article reassessment. If you are interested in the discussion, please participate by adding your comments to the reassessment page. If concerns are not addressed during the review period, the good article status may be removed from the article. - car chasm (talk) 02:55, 19 February 2023 (UTC)
Women in Red March 2023[edit]
See also:
Tip of the month:
Other ways to participate:
|
--Lajmmoore (talk) 12:54, 26 February 2023 (UTC) via MassMessaging
An article that you have edited or that may interest you, (Clitoris), has content that I have proposed to be removed and moved to another article, (Human clitoris). If you are interested, please visit the discussion. Thank you. Peaceray (talk) 05:40, 21 March 2023 (UTC)
Women in Red April 2023[edit]
See also:
Tip of the month:
Other ways to participate:
|
--Lajmmoore (talk) MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 07:53, 27 March 2023 (UTC) via MassMessaging
Women in Red May 2023[edit]
See also:
Tip of the month:
Other ways to participate:
|
--Lajmmoore (talk) 18:28, 27 April 2023 (UTC) via MassMessaging
WikiProject Women in Green June 2023 Good Article Editathon notification[edit]
Hello Michael Goodyear:
WikiProject Women in Green is holding a month-long Good Article Editathon event in June 2023!
Running from June 1 to 30, 2023, WikiProject Women in Green (WiG) is hosting a Good Article (GA) editathon event – another Wildcard Edition! Participants are invited to work on nominating and/or reviewing GA submissions related to any and all women and women's works during the event period. Want to improve an article about a Bollywood actress? Go for it. A pioneering female climate scientist? Absolutely. An award-winning book or film by a woman? Yes! GA resources and one-on-one support will be provided by experienced GA editors, and participants will have the opportunity to receive a special WiG barnstar for their efforts.
We hope to see you there!
You are receiving this message as a member of the WikiProject Women in Green. You can remove yourself from receiving notifications here.
Sent by MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 00:27, 25 May 2023 (UTC)
Women in Red - June 2023[edit]
See also:
Tip of the month:
Other ways to participate:
|
--Lajmmoore (talk) 09:16, 28 May 2023 (UTC) via MassMessaging
Nomination for deletion of Template:Tetrarchy[edit]
Template:Tetrarchy has been nominated for deletion. You are invited to comment on the discussion at the entry on the Templates for discussion page. Izno (talk) 02:12, 18 June 2023 (UTC)
Women in Red July 2023[edit]
Tip of the month:
Other ways to participate:
|
--Lajmmoore (talk) 07:43, 27 June 2023 (UTC) via MassMessaging
Women in Red 8th Anniversary[edit]
|
|
Women in Red 8th Anniversary |
| In July 2015 around 15.5% of the English Wikipedia's biographies were about women. As of July 2023, 19.61% of the English Wikipedia's biographies are about women. That's a lot of biographies created in the effort to close the gender gap. Happy 8th Anniversary! Join us for some virtual cake and add comments or memories and please keep on editing to close the gap! |
--Lajmmoore (talk) 11:01, 18 July 2023 (UTC) via MassMessaging
Women in Red August 2023[edit]
See also:
Tip of the month:
Other ways to participate:
|
--Lajmmoore (talk) 19:25, 28 July 2023 (UTC) via MassMessaging
September 2023 at Women in Red[edit]
Tip of the month:
Other ways to participate:
|
--Victuallers (talk) 16:54, 25 August 2023 (UTC) via MassMessaging
Women in Green GA Editathon October 2023 - Around the World in 31 Days[edit]
Hello Michael Goodyear:
WikiProject Women in Green is holding a month-long Good Article Edit-a-thon event in October 2023!
Running from October 1 to 31, 2023, WikiProject Women in Green (WiG) is hosting a Good Article (GA) edit-a-thon event with the theme Around the World in 31 Days! All experience levels welcome. Never worked on a GA project before? We'll teach you how to get started. Or maybe you're an old hand at GAs – we'd love to have you involved! Participants are invited to work on nominating and/or reviewing GA submissions related to women and women's works (e.g., books, films) during the event period. We hope to collectively cover article subjects from at least 31 countries (or broader international articles) by month's end. GA resources and one-on-one support will be provided by experienced GA editors, and participants will have the opportunity to earn a special WiG barnstar for their efforts.
We hope to see you there!
Alanna the Brave (talk) 00:53, 22 September 2023 (UTC)
You are receiving this message as a member of the WikiProject Women in Green. You can remove yourself from receiving notifications here.
Women in Red October 2023[edit]
See also
Tip of the month:
Other ways to participate:
|
--Lajmmoore (talk) 10:53, 29 September 2023 (UTC) via MassMessaging
Women in Red - November 2023[edit]
See also Tip of the month:
Other ways to participate:
|
--Lajmmoore (talk) 08:22, 26 October 2023 (UTC) via MassMessaging
Women in Red December 2023[edit]
Tip of the month:
Other ways to participate:
|
--Lajmmoore (talk) 20:24, 27 November 2023 (UTC) via MassMessaging
ArbCom 2023 Elections voter message[edit]
Hello! Voting in the 2023 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23:59 (UTC) on Monday, 11 December 2023. 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 2023 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) 00:30, 28 November 2023 (UTC)
Women in Red January 2024[edit]
Announcement
Tip of the month:
Other ways to participate:
|
--Lajmmoore (talk) 20:17, 28 December 2023 (UTC) via MassMessaging
2024[edit]
Like 2019, see above -- Gerda Arendt (talk) 21:47, 1 January 2024 (UTC)
On the Main page: the person who made the pictured festival possible --Gerda Arendt (talk) 20:01, 16 January 2024 (UTC)
Precious anniversary[edit]
| |
| Nine years! |
|---|
--Gerda Arendt (talk) 09:20, 17 January 2024 (UTC)
 | |
| story · music · places |
|---|
Today a friend's birthday, with related music and new vacation pics --Gerda Arendt (talk) 23:00, 30 January 2024 (UTC)
Women in Red February 2024[edit]
Announcement
Tip of the month:
Other ways to participate:
|
--Lajmmoore (talk 20:09, 28 January 2024 (UTC) via MassMessaging
TFA re-run for William T. Stearn[edit]
Hi Michael. William T. Stearn has been at WP:Today's featured article before, but all FAs are eligible to run twice (after 5 years or more), and I'd like to get this up at TFA again, this time on April 16, if that's okay with you. The article appears to be in good shape, as always. - Dank (push to talk) 00:34, 11 February 2024 (UTC)
- Btw, one of the sentences got separated from its citation at some point. It's the sentence "The second task imposed on him at this time involved the RHS role in maintaining revision of the Code of Botanical Nomenclature (see Botanical taxonomy).", which appears in a different spot in this version. - Dank (push to talk) 00:45, 11 February 2024 (UTC)
- Can't see why not Michael Goodyear ✐ ✉ 02:23, 12 February 2024 (UTC)
story · music · places - Thank you today for the article, introduced (in 2017) as "about a distinguished British botanist. This is the most complete biography of this scientist available to date."! --Gerda Arendt (talk) 10:54, 16 April 2024 (UTC)
Women in Red March 2024[edit]
Announcements
Tip of the month:
Other ways to participate:
|
--Lajmmoore (talk 20:23, 25 February 2024 (UTC) via MassMessaging
Women in Red April 2024[edit]
Announcements
Tip of the month:
Other ways to participate:
|
--Lajmmoore (talk 19:42, 30 March 2024 (UTC) via MassMessaging