User talk:Circeus/2005

Past participle followed with infinitive

Hello. I didn't know what to do with your edit on Reforms of French orthography since it doesn't seem to me like there is any "subset" or rule applied when the past participle is followed with an infinitive: the usual avoir rule applies, and those alleged subrules are just in fact "tricks" to determine whether or not the infinitive is the object of the past participle... I think your edit is valuable because obviously this is how they perceived it, but I've NPOVed hopefully you'll agree with that. --[[User:Valmi|Valmi ✒]] 23:00, 4 Oct 2004 (UTC)

En fait, c'est qu'on a dû fort mal t'expliquer les règles d'accord à l'école. ;-)

Permets-moi de t'expliquer, ça me fait toujours plaisir. La réalité, c'est que la règle normale s'applique : le participe s'accorde avec le c.o.d. si celui-ci se trouve avant.

Ce qui est difficile dans le cas des p.p. suivis d'un infinitif, c'est de déterminer qui est le c.o.d. Des fois l'infinitif est le c.o.d., et des fois c'est ce mot étrange, avant le verbe, qui est à la fois le sujet de l'infinitif et le c.o.d. du p.p.

Exemples (tirés du Grevisse) :

Les violonistes que j'ai entendus jouer, j'ai entendu qui/quoi ? Les violonistes jouer. Le c.o.d. est les violonistes, donc accord.

Les mesure qu'il a voulu prendre, il a voulu qui/quoi ? Prendre des mesures, et non pas des mesures prendre. Le c.o.d. est prendre, donc pas accord.

Avec laisser :

Elle s'est laissée mourir, elle a laissé qui/quoi ? Elle mourir. Le c.o.d. est s’ mis pour elle, donc accord.

Elle s'est laissé tuer, elle a laissé qui/quoi ? Tuer elle, et non pas elle tuer. Le c.o.d. est tuer donc pas accord.

Expliqué comme ça, c'est censé être simple. En tout cas, dire que c'est complexe dans l'absolu et pour tout le monde serait POV, et dire qu'il existe une règle spéciale serait mentir.

--[[User:Valmi|Valmi ✒]] 03:22, 6 Oct 2004 (UTC)

User page

You don't have any obligation to adress this, but I think it would be nice to have a user page about you. :-þ --[[User:Valmi|Valmi ✒]] 01:00, 25 Oct 2004 (UTC)

Welsh

I'm not sure what you're referring to. If you mean my change for the symbol for Welsh <ll> from ɭ to ɬ, I'm certain that my change was correct. ɭ is a retroflex l, ɬ is voiceless l, which is the sound in Welsh. If that's not what you mean, please clarify. Nohat 06:01, 31 Dec 2004 (UTC) OK I noticed that the omniglot page described the rh sound as a "voiceless r", whereas on the page previously it was described as an "aspirated r". I changed the text to read "voiceless r" and changed the symbol from that of an aspirated r to a voiceless r. There's probably not much difference in articulation between the two sounds. I will discuss with a couple Welsh experts I know next week and see what they say about the phonetics of rh. Nohat 06:12, 31 Dec 2004 (UTC)

Template:ConvertIPA

Your Template:ConvertIPA is a useful addition, but it belongs on the talk page of articles. - SimonP 22:10, Dec 31, 2004 (UTC)

I'll put this in simple straightforward terms - adding the template to pages you come upon and think should be made to use IPA is rude and no amount of linking to any syndromes from your user page makes it otherwise nor is an excuse. While the uniform use of IPA is a worthy goal this is not the way of achieving it. Sander 19:47, Jan 9 2005 (UTC)

(I guess Sander above was having a bad day.)

Hi Circeus, thanks for your work on the Interwiki links — I didn't know there was a Wiki in some language I have on my watchlist so I promptly registered there. I noticed you are of the opinion that the (useful) ConvertIPA notice should be in the article and not on its talk page. While I know that placing it on the Talk page clutters the corresponding list of articles, this really is a message for editors (as opposed to readers) and should therefore, as per the guidelines at Wikipedia:Template messages, go on Talk pages. Those guidelines are the reason that so many people keep moving your notices to the Talk pages. That particular guideline can be called into question of course, but I would say that it is better to stick to it while it's still in force.

Keep up the good work! Kind regards, — mark ✎ 14:04, 10 Jan 2005 (UTC)

I didn't know of such a finer point in the template conventions and I am glad you told me about. I'll probably do some amount of converting myself in the coming days, so the presence of the template should decrease. --Circeus 16:52, Jan 10, 2005 (UTC)

Could you point me to some relevant discussions on the use of IPA in articles? I'm frequently producing articles that use IPA (e.g. Gbe languages, Nafaanra language), so I'd like to see what's the best thing to do. Is there a central place that I'm just not aware of yet, where decisions like this are made? If there is no such place, it might be a good idea to join Wikiproject:Languages or to define a descendant. By the way, did you change anything except the phoneme tables in Amharic language? I couldn't discover other changes, but it was difficult to see due to the other sections seemingly being dragged around :). Good work, though. Regards, — mark ✎ 21:56, 10 Jan 2005 (UTC)

Actually, there is no complete consensus, although the subject has been discussed before. However, most things tend toward IPA.

• Wikipedia prefer using "Official" transcription schemes (Pinyin, most noticeably) over others.
• IPA is slightly more clear (as far as diacritics goes, among things) and well known: X-SAMPA looks like a bunch of weird orthograph, while IPA transcription is much more likely to be recognized as such by non-expert, IMHO.
• Finally, if we can display odd IPA characters with {{IPA|}}, there is no reason left to favor X-SAMPA.

There is a Phonetics Wikiproject, but it is fairly unrelated to IPA. I do not know if Languages has an IPA consensus, since they don't appear to have discussed the subject(!)

Related discussions and article: 1, 2, 3, 4, 5

Finally, I didn't add anything to Amharic language. The slowness of Wikipedia ATM actually cause edit conflicts with myself ^_^;; and these weird duplicates. However, I do have material to post on the talk page.--Circeus 22:31, Jan 10, 2005 (UTC)

Re: Canadian French moved

Thanks for letting me know, Jean-Sébastien. Take care. --Valmi ✒ 18:29, 13 Jan 2005 (UTC)

Tamil language

You've added an expansion request to Tamil language but I didn't find an explanation of on the article's talk page or on Wikipedia:Requests_for_expansion. If you don't have a specific expansion request, the tag doesn't make much sense, IMHO. --Pjacobi 23:36, 2005 Jan 14 (UTC)

Interwiki Template

Can I know what the real intention was behind this edit? :) link Looks like you don't really seem to like the mention of 'kannada' wikipedia on the 'kannada' page. --H P Nadig 01:12, 23 Jan 2005 (UTC)

If you look, you'll see that I've simply moved the Interwiki box to the "External links" section, which is the location it belongs to according to Interwiki's Talk page --Circeus 01:17, Jan 23, 2005 (UTC)

If you observe carefully, thats just an opinion from one of the wikipedians to put it in external links section. In this context though, I believe, if placed down below, It is as good as not having it on the page. :) But thats not the only thing. You have also seen to it that the link to it in "See also" has vanished. I would recommend leaving a note in the talk page before erasing something... It would make less sense to keep changing back.--H P Nadig 01:33, 23 Jan 2005 (UTC)

I've spent 2 hours putting/moving interwiki templates. The template was proposed for deletion because it was considered inappropriate at the top of pages (among things). There was no reason whatsoever to have both a See also link when the Interwiki box was fairly prominent in the lower parts of the page. If you consider that location for the template inappropriate (after considering the question, i came to conclude it was), you should idscuss it over at its talk page. --Circeus 01:50, Jan 23, 2005 (UTC)

It would be a stupid thing first to remove it, and then ask to participate in a long-lasting discussion about it... I just don't seem to get the idea. There have been such endless talks recently, and I don't fancy getting in one, Thank you. For this language, atleast, can't we leave the template alone and think of some constructive additions rather than just push templates to the bottom? The template is there for a good purpose. Please just make sure you leave a comment in the respective article's talk page before pushing it again to the bottom and removing any links that serve a good purpose. --H P Nadig 02:12, 23 Jan 2005 (UTC)

Oh my. Most evidently I very badly worded my previous comment. The template was proposed for deletion and kept with a complete reformatting and the decision (I believe) not to put it at the top of pages anymore, than the discussion related to it was archived on it's talk page. I kept it at the top only of page that were substubs or didn't have an actual "External links" section. I took the liberty of moving your comment at the talk page in a more appropriate position and deleting the inappropriate parts. Really sorry for any inconvenients. --Circeus 03:14, Jan 23, 2005 (UTC)

This sounds irrational. whats going on? why did you remove my vote off? --H P Nadig 17:15, 23 Jan 2005 (UTC)

Because the vote has closed (It is an archive that is kept at Template_talk:InterWiki) and the template was kept. I mentionned the template was proposed to deletion, I did not say it was currently on the list, which is at Templates for deletion.

But that shouldn't conclude that the interwiki should go to bottom in all the language articles. The issue couldn't possibly close with the poll for deletion. Lets have a new poll and invite all the language wikipedia maintainers this time over, I believe not many even knew about the proposition to move it to the bottom. Please don't take pre-emptive conclusions and make the changes. I see that the interwiki that was moved to top was moved back to bottom again on Kannada. Where is this taking it? --H P Nadig 18:13, 23 Jan 2005 (UTC)

I did not touch to Kannada again and from now on, I will not consider myself concerned with any problem you might have with other editing "your" pages. Joy point out "The only problem, IMHO, is that the author intended for it to be placed at the top of each article, which is definitely spam. I think that we should simply conclude that the notices should be moved off of the tops of pages and keep the template, near the bottom", and if you read the voters comment closely, you'll notice there were several agreers. Further discussion belongs not on my talk page but on InterWiki's. You might want to make a request for comments before going straight to a survey. I will be copying this discussion to Interwiki's talk page so that others can contribute. --Circeus 18:26, Jan 23, 2005 (UTC)

Archiving discussions

I just noticed how you archived Talk:Quebec French, and I ought to tell you it's not the way to go—too much work for you, a hell of a mess for the others. Just moving the talk page to something like "Talk:XXX/ArchiveY" and creating a link from the main talk page is sufficient I think, and simpler to deal with for everybody. Cheers, Valmi ✒ 15:14, 26 Jan 2005 (UTC)

Harold E. Robinson

I notice that you keep deleting the list of selected works. There are more than 650 publications by this botanist. This list of about 20 publications is almost the absolute minimum. They underscore my statements in the text. When I state that Robinson has made a thorough study, overhauling the tribe X, then I also give the publication involved, to substantiate my statement. This list of selected works, instead being too long - as claimed by you -, on the contrary, emphasizes the immense importance of this botanist. I don't like having to fall back on the "three revert rule" and end up in an endless discussion. Furthermore, I'm about to send an email to Mr. Robinson to overview his own biography. It would give a poor impression to Mr. Robinson to see that someone keeps deleting the (short) list of his works. If you don't improve the text and the article, please abstain. JoJan 09:48, 29 Jan 2005 (UTC)

DYK

Well done. 68.81.231.127 13:10, 30 Jan 2005 (UTC)

Stub sorting guidelines

I sincerely believe that we really need to lay down the law in stub sorting, and really provide a guideline. I believe that we should all attempt to reach a general consensus by April 2, 2005 in a set of rules that we can follow. Once we have built a set of guidelines, we can formally create a policy out of those guidelines. We need to define what a specialized topic stub is, how many articles it should cover, when is it appropriate to create it, what defines its need for its creation, what defines its need for deletion, what criteria it should follow, what are the general steps should one take when sorting a stub, whether or not to start using subst: for all templates, whether or not use subst: for all templates created by the meta-templates, and any other matters that may come up in consideration. I thank jag123 for initially creating the subpage for the project at Wikipedia_talk:WikiProject Stub sorting/Guidelines. Even though they have been discussed, I feel that we really need to confirm everything. For that, we should discuss each issue with its own sections, and raise a list of issues that we need to nail down before really continuing on. The English Wikipedia is nearly at 500k articles. Either the MediaWiki software needs to handle stubs such that they can be found with a simple union of categories, or the sorting is done manually by Wikipedians. Personally, I think the latter is less taxing on the server load, especially when we use subst:, which I think would help the Wikipedia out, performance wise. Please make your comments at Wikipedia_talk:WikiProject Stub sorting/Guidelines. I apologize for making this somewhat of a spam notice, but since the project has more members, the project can finally decide on these important issues at hand. -- AllyUnion (talk) 23:23, 15 Feb 2005 (UTC)

vandalism on my talk page

Thanks for reverting the vandalism on my talk page. I'm curious, though: What made you spot it? - DavidWBrooks 17:39, 18 Feb 2005 (UTC)

Talk:Gdansk/Vote diffs

Hi, and thanks for voting on Talk:Gdansk/Vote. I just checked all edits, and the software is sometimes acting funny. Could you check this diff [1] to see if all votes are placed where you wanted them to, or if a vote was removed accidentially. If everything is fine, then never mind, and thanks for voting -- Chris 73 Talk 08:18, Feb 21, 2005 (UTC)

thank you -- Chris 73 Talk 11:58, Feb 21, 2005 (UTC)

Notice board

Thank you for the initiative and invitation. I intended to found a Quebecois notice board, following your suggestion. Thanks for being faster than me. ;) I'll be happy to contribute. I raise my glass to our future collaboration. --Liberlogos 23:46, 23 Feb 2005 (UTC)

Tree for Category:Stub categories

I have created a tree from the last DB dump. If you wanted articles included, it's about 3MB. I'm hoping you just wanted the category tree, no articles? (That will probably be more dynamic anyway.) Let me know. Where would you like this posted, BTW? -- Beland 08:00, 25 Feb 2005 (UTC)

Posted. -- Beland 15:09, 25 Feb 2005 (UTC)

Plant life

I was thinking of making a bot that created articles for all known planet species, scientific and common name. -- AllyUnion (talk) 08:55, 11 Mar 2005 (UTC)

Also, my university has this extensive bionic garden, and I was also wondering if there are any plants missing that need a photo. -- AllyUnion (talk) 08:57, 11 Mar 2005 (UTC)

It's certainly not difficult to browse through category:Plants to find non-illustrated ones, or ones would could use better pitures, however, I think a plant bot should also alter existing articles:

1. by implementing the Taxobox markup, if possible at all.

   I can do this. -- AllyUnion (talk) 09:45, 13 Mar 2005 (UTC)

2. By generating a classification tree whenever there is not already one (again, if at all possible)

   I'm unclear what you want to do with this. -- AllyUnion (talk) 09:45, 13 Mar 2005 (UTC)

3. By sorting individual species into a "plants by classification" category within cat:plant, which would duplicate the species' classification.

   I'm also unclear what you want to do with this. -- AllyUnion (talk) 09:45, 13 Mar 2005 (UTC)

Circeus 15:18, Mar 11, 2005 (UTC)

I am only proposing this for well established species that haven't changed their name classification in the past 25 to 50 years. -- AllyUnion (talk) 09:45, 13 Mar 2005 (UTC)

Livre noir

Hello, my Quebec City friend. Thanks for puttting the nPOV tag with a polite "sorry", that's a lot more gentleman-like than most people! I was pleasantly amused. I'm the founder of the article and I'd simply like to work with you so we can fix this as soon as possible.

I review the section and this is what I see...

• "The books are meant as a response to the Quebec bashing [...]"... *meant* is not POV; this intended nature of the books is even written in the first book and even on the back cover.
• The R. B. Bennett information is in the book and is proven and documented.
• "Its publication resulted in the suspension of Lester by the Société Radio-Canada [...]". The SRC did not hide it; it clearly conected the two. It underlined that the publishing from a SRC journalist of a work like this (displaying an opinion) went against their policy (maybe this could be mentioned; I would have done it soon; this was written as a stub).
• "[...] which was criticized as an attack on free speech" The suspension was criticized as an attack on free speech. Lester said often that the amount of support he received surprised even him. The journalist association of Quebec criticized it as an attack on free expression. He even won a prize for having written this and public people like Bernard Landry supported the book.
• "by an organization suspected by some of a federalist bias." Again, "suspected by some". It never states that the bias is an objective fact. What is objective is that many people, right or wrong, say the bias exists. ...and the link was immediately drawn when Lester was suspended.

If you find that something remains to be changed, please share your ideas with me. If not, let us consider removing the template. Thanks a lot. --Liberlogos 20:58, 19 Mar 2005 (UTC)

• • Hum. I read your response with attention. "Quebec bashing" is a popular (in both meanings) expression (hence the italic characters). Hence, I don't really feel that it is POV to include it, but maybe another phrasing could be considered (it is used in the book... but another "according to the author" might be added, if you insist, although it is clear at that point of the text). About the "propaganda offensive of Ottawa against the Quebec sovereignty movement that would later develop into the Sponsorship scandal"... Where is the POV, really? The Gomery Commission has featured one witness after another stating clearly that a direct governmental operation of Canadian visibility in Quebec was at work after 1995 and that it was a direct response to Sovereigntism. This was repeatedly stated in a casual, explicit, and often even boastful way. The words "we were at war" were even uttered. Therefor, I don't see how this sentence would be troublesome. --Liberlogos 22:51, 19 Mar 2005 (UTC)

DVD

Can you please clarify which of the images you support at Wikipedia:Featured picture candidates/Microwaved DVD, or, if you support them both, please put your order of support (eg support both, but 1st more than 2nd)? Thanks. --brian0918&#153; 15:56, 3 Apr 2005 (UTC)

Translation!

Hello Circeus :-) We need translators to help keep up the Wikimania site, btw; have you thought of coming for the event this summer? See [2].

As for the Nahuatl content, see [3] ; I asked for the main page to be updated with a welcome message and link to that page, but it hasn't been done yet. +sj + 01:07, 14 Apr 2005 (UTC)

FPC

Your Featured picture candidate has been promoted Your nomination for featured picture status, Image:Sahara satellite hires.jpg, gained a consensus of support, and has been promoted. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Wikipedia:Featured picture candidates.

FPC changes

Soon, most of the tasks of promoting an FPC will become automated, but we will be required to put a template tag with specific information on the FPC's vote page. Check out User talk:AllyUnion for the discussion. I'll probably make the template tomorrow sometime, and update the instructions for FPC promotion. --brian0918&#153; 06:35, 5 Apr 2005 (UTC)

duplicate content in articles

Hi - I'm trying to figure out how articles are occasionally ending up with their entire content duplicated. An instance of this happened yesterday from an edit shown in the history as yours, see [4]. Was there perhaps an edit conflict window? If so, do you remember exactly what you did? Thanks. -- Rick Block 13:18, 19 Apr 2005 (UTC)

Actually, I've had trouble with that page for a couple days. I think its amazing lenght might have something to do with it. I'm actually going to perform some archiving. Circeus 14:08, Apr 19, 2005 (UTC)

Do you remember anything about what happened around the time of this edit? In particular, do you remember encountering any edit conflict messages? -- Rick Block 18:41, 19 Apr 2005 (UTC)

Actually, I did, but I though I had solved it by dropping the edit althogether (I don't remember which version had the wrong text, though. I couldn't notice the duplication on myu next edit, because I have preview under the edit box.) Circeus 18:46, Apr 19, 2005 (UTC)

Apology

I am sorry for editing Municipal reorganization in Quebec with the notice up, I thought it was a cleanup message until I read it. Very sorry. -- Earl Andrew - talk 19:36, 19 Apr 2005 (UTC)

Actually, it was a bit stupid of me to get through the work of typing it all by hand in the window when I could have waited and have it done automatically under Textpad. At any rate, I am not touching the article againt today. Circeus 19:42, Apr 19, 2005 (UTC)

Le page c'est tres important pour moi! Je vais modifier maintennant. Pardon mon francais, je n'ai parle pas francais. -- Earl Andrew - talk 19:53, 19 Apr 2005 (UTC)

article Raipur

Recently, I saw your comments about article Raipur - to some extent, I have added some additional information and shall continue to contribute, there is a lot to do there. What are your suggestions? And, how you got interested in Raipur? lol...bye - --Bhadani 12:13, 20 Apr 2005 (UTC)

If I correctly recall, I happened to stumble upon it while doing some RC or NP patrolling. I had taken on the habit of making a few suggestions to other COTW, and so I remembered it and posted it over to WP:INCOTW. Circeus 12:21, Apr 20, 2005 (UTC)

Re:stub cats ready for deletion

Without the stub deletion policy, I can not. They must be listed on TFD and CFD. If Wikipedia:Deletion of useless stub templates and stub categories did pass with consensus, I would able to delete it for you... but since it has no official support... If I deleted them, I'm not following procedure. -- AllyUnion (talk) 06:35, 23 Apr 2005 (UTC)

Note to self: this was in answer to [5] Circeus 15:29, Apr 26, 2005 (UTC)

Bird taxoboxes

I replied on Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Birds, and see my changes to Sungrebe. - UtherSRG 15:16, Apr 26, 2005 (UTC)

COTW Project

You voted for History of Quebec, this week's Collaboration of the week. Please come and help it become a featured-standard article.

Advice on latin vs. english naming of plants

Hi there,
I'm new here, with an interest in plants. I've joined the WikiProject Plants and found your name there. Coincidentally, the other day I was searching for plants, in preparation of making my 'To do' list, and noticed several moves (e.g. Ajuga to Bugle), which indicate a preference here at Wikipedia to use english rather than latin names. I find that rather confusing (perplexing), since when we talk about the larger picture (e.g. genus etc) we use latin. Since I plan to contribute articles/pics in the area of plants, I'd like to get clarification on the latin vs. english nomenclature for page titles. My user page has a list of articles/pics that I plan to contribute. I hope that fits in with what the rest of the team is doing. If I should have posted this on the team Discussion page, please let me know.
Thanks very much, Mia Goff 16:16, May 9, 2005 (UTC)

self-note: answer is here

Sheathbill

I'm not quite sure what you were trying to do with the taxobox, but it didn't come out right, so I've reverted it. I've also corrected and added to the first paragraph. Don't take this as a criticism, I've noticed the good work you've been doing on the taxoboxes. I'm not sure about listing species in taxoboxes. it's fine for Sheathbill, OK (just) for pratincole, but unworkable with parrot or hummingbird. jimfbleak 16:30, 12 May 2005 (UTC)

Higher groups that contain a single direct children (see dromadidae for an example) redirects to it, so I adjusted the article so it related to the genus (Chionis) and not the family (Chionididae).

Aditionnally, it makes little sense to list all the families of Charadrii in all its children families' articles, so I moved the species to their correct location: the subdivion section of the taxobox.

So in resume, I've applied the same adjustment to this article as I've done since I've started Gruiformes, except this time, it also involved a slight regularization to bring it in line with similar articles.

Do that make sense? Circeus 17:55, May 12, 2005 (UTC)

First line "Sheathbills are a genus family" doesn't make sense. Do you mean "genus and family" or "monogeneric family"? As it stands, it is just plain confusing. jimfbleak 18:51, 12 May 2005 (UTC)

WHAT?! *goes to check, don,t see it, check history* Oh, yeah, I forgot to cut the word "family" *sweatdrop*. Thanks for adjusting it . Circeus 18:56, May 12, 2005 (UTC)

Higher groups that contain a single direct children (see dromadidae for an example) redirects to it, so I adjusted the article so it related to the genus (Chionis) and not the family (Chionididae). I'm afraid I don't quite see the logic of what you did for Sheathbill. It's a hierachical thing for me, the sheathbills being a family is more important, and noteworthy, than being a genus. Taxinomically, and quite frankly from a birdwatching position, The sheathbills are a family(Chionididae) of birds confined to Antarctic regions. is more important and impressive than The sheathbills are a genus(Chionis) of birds confined to Antarctic regions Genera are a dime a dozen, unique families more important, especially as the sheathbills are the only family of birds endemic to the Antarctic. Sabine's Sunbird 22:19, 12 May 2005 (UTC)

Plant anatomy

I was thiking physiology would be more for biological processes in plants, such as transpiration, photosynthesis, protein synthesis, etc.; and that anatomy would be for the actual plant parts, or organs, as opposed to processes. We could combine them into one cat though if you think that's needed. --DanielCD 13:35, 16 May 2005 (UTC)

Spelling and grammar

Hi Circeus, can you help me check the grammar and spelling on fr:Image:RP Chine administrative.png? Thanks. :D -- ran (talk) 13:54, May 16, 2005 (UTC)

Merci :) I'm going to make the changes later. -- ran (talk) 15:12, May 16, 2005 (UTC)

Salut Circéus,

Je me suis décidé à ajouter l'Ile Pratas à la carte de la Chine. Malheureusement, il me faut écrire de nouveau le texte au bas de la carte. Pouvez-vous vérifier le texte ci-dessous ?

La République Populaire de Chine et la République de Chine revendiquent à la fois les Îles Paracels et Spratlys, qui n'apparaissent pas sur cette carte.
La RPC contrôle les Paracels, que revendique aussi le Viêt-nam.
Les Spratlys sont disputées parmi plusieurs pays voisins.

Merci beaucoup! :) -- ran (talk) 02:48, May 18, 2005 (UTC)

Taxobox errors

At Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Tree of Life#Taxobox errors you wrote:

Gosh, I forgot to point out this would have to take in account the normal boxes' species entry has the genus abbreviated. Also, the bot seems to threat higher groups (that do not even have a {{taxobox species entry}}) as if they were species... So 90% of these are cases were the bot should not have applied itself or couldn't cope correctly with the regular taxobox syntax. Circeus 23:19, May 19, 2005 (UTC)

I'm afraid don't understand what you are getting at. Can you give some examples of the problems you are seeing? Gdr 23:37, 2005 May 19 (UTC)

It is normal for species to be listed as in Alligator gar, with abbreviated genuses in the {{taxobox species entry}} template.

What I noted about families (Blaberidae,Blattellidae) treated as if they were species was my mistake: these are incorrect taxoboxes that should not use either {{Taxobox species entry}} or {{Taxobox section binomial}}. Since I am currently converting/fixing taxoboxes for all bird species, a daunting task if I ever performed one, I am less than inclined to work on these, but I am sure there are plenty folks at WP:TOL and it's subprojects (which you might want to alert to the problem) to help in this.Circeus 00:41, May 20, 2005 (UTC)

The point about Alligator gar is not that the genus is abbreviated (my code knows about that) but that it is missing {{Taxobox section binomial}} — it seems to me from reading Wikipedia:WikiProject Tree of Life/Taxobox Usage that an article about a species needs to have such a template (or one of its variants such as {{Taxobox section binomial simple}}. If this isn't the case and the taxobox Alligator gar is in fact OK, then please update Wikipedia:WikiProject Tree of Life/Taxobox Usage accordingly.

I wouldn't spend any time fixing the missing binomials by hand because it will be straightforward to write some code to add them automatically (in fact, I'll remove them from the list to stop other editors wasting their time). The other mistakes (typos, misspellings, using {{Taxobox section binomial}} where {{Taxobox section trinomial}} is needed will need to be fixed by hand. Which pages would be good to advertise on? Gdr 08:41, 2005 May 20 (UTC)

Thanks for adding the Sarracenia flava picture to the Yellow pitcher plant article. I couldn't find a nice one in my collection when I wrote it... polypompholyx 08:50, 14 July 2005 (UTC)

English to French translation?

Hello! I found you via Wikibabel. I was asked by a couple of (non-Wikipedian) friends to see if I could find someone to translate at least some of the long Duran Duran article I worked on in English into French. (The French DD article is currently a two-sentence stub.) Would you be interested? If not, I'm sorry to trouble you and will keep looking. Thanks! — Catherine\^talk 08:16, 5 Jun 2005 (UTC)

Geography of India

You might want to note that the Geography of India is up for Featured Status. As the nominator of the article, perhaps you would like to support?  =Nichalp (Talk)= 19:23, Jun 9, 2005 (UTC)

Wikifun Round 9

Is now open to play. See WP:WF. -- AllyUnion (talk) 11:03, 12 Jun 2005 (UTC)

Indo-Pakistani Wars

After the linked discussion below I nominated the article on the, WP:COTWS [6]--Falphin 21:42, 23 Jun 2005 (UTC)

Broken redirects

Your redirects from Eurynorhynchus and Eurynorhynchus pygmeus to Spoon-billed Sandpiper are showing up on the Special:BrokenRedirects report. Are you planning to write an article? Susvolans (pigs can fly) 4 July 2005 12:50 (UTC)

Template:Canada

Thanks for posting the RFC on Template:Canada. I am leaving on vacation for a couple of weeks so I will not be participating for a while. This may well be a good thing as I am finding Astrotrain to be very frustrating to deal with, and I suspect that I may be close to violating the 3RR in spirit, at least. It would be good if you could keep an eye on this issue. Thanks in advance. Ground Zero 20:20, 21 July 2005 (UTC)

(self-note: answer here)

• Why are you vandalising the Template:Canada page? The agreement on the talk page was to keep the small flag version. Your actions are violating the agreement, and will be reverted. Astrotrain 21:19, July 21, 2005 (UTC)

(self-note: answer here)

Silverweed

Hi Circeus - thanks; I didn't do Argentina (genus) though, it is Qwertzy2 who deserves the credit there. I have just done a page for the other species in the genus though (Eged's Silverweed) and may expand the Argentina page. As far as I can find in google searches, there's only two species in Argentina, but it is hard to tell as some useful sources (e.g. the Flora of China online) still keep them in Potentilla making it very hard to tell if there are other species in Asia that would now be referred to Argentina - MPF 14:11, 1 August 2005 (UTC)

Looking at the descriptions in Flora of China, I strongly suspect that Potentilla gombalana, P. taronensis and P. smithiana (and maybe the rest of Potentilla sect. Leptostylae also belong in Argentina, but I can't prove it! - MPF 14:23, 1 August 2005 (UTC)

Thanks; the problem with ITIS is it only gives North American (native and naturalised) taxa, so Asia etc don't get a look in (which makes ITIS a rotten reference in my view!). Just been doing more checking, Argentina anserinoides from New Zealand is published, so that can go in. But this paper on Potentilla sect. Leptostylae doesn't mention Argentina at all, though the pics show plants that look very like Silverweed. I'll move the genus page to Argentina (plant) to avoid conflicting with the fish (that's also how most plant genera are disambigged where there is a name conflict anyway) - MPF 14:46, 1 August 2005 (UTC)

Neptune

Expanded the lead for you on Neptune (planet). Any other objections on the FAC? Toothpaste 10:11, 2 August 2005 (UTC) Note: answer is here

DYK

Did you know? has been updated. A fact from the article Common Milkweed, which you recently created, has been featured in that section on the Main Page. If you know of another interesting fact from a recently-created article, then please suggest it on the "Did you know?" talk page.

Stub notices

I didn't know that. Thanks for the info! Soo 16:25, 15 August 2005 (UTC)

White mana

thanks for you help. do i speak with you about a page that is being non-stop vandalized? Flaunted 17:25, 15 August 2005 (UTC)

• Answer is here

Image width

I think you missed my point on the taxbox image width. Different articles will have different requirements, and I was just saying that a bot should never be enforcing style choices because it cannot accomodate those exceptions. The Morel image (thanks for finding a good replacement) was one such example. -Harmil 01:37, 16 August 2005 (UTC)

Bird Categories

Sorry for the confusion, I thought I'd understood your categorization. I realize now that you are grouping at the Genus level. I would be more than happy to help and very much appreciate the need for consistency. JohnCastle 00:20, August 18, 2005 (UTC)

I've made a to do list for myself to classify those that I moved with consulting you. I'm going to start with Passeriformes. If I've understood correctly the classificaion is by the lowest order where there is more than 1 bird. So Genus unless there is only 1 bird in the Genus, then family unless there is only 1 bird in the family, then order. The first on the list is a fairly large order, so please tell me where I'm going wrong. But I won't start until this evening(18:00 UTC). JohnCastle 11:06, August 18, 2005 (UTC)

Broad-billed Sapayoa creates a bit of an mess. All the taxomony reference I've found on the web can't place it in a family. We have it listed as Tyrranidae but I've seen other. Aenignma is no understatement. I'm unsure what do with it, we have it classified inconsistently and I don't believe the family is know, unless you have a better reference. JohnCastle 22:29, August 18, 2005 (UTC)

Club-winged Manakin was a real mess, could you take a look at this? I've tidied it up, but I'm still not sure about it. The article was full of quotes which I've trimmed to leave a stub.

OK, I want to finish the family I'm working on, or at least the sub-family. After that, I'll keep an eye on the discussion. Passeriformes is a huge order I suspect that most sub-categories below family are redundant. But I'm not convinced by the argument that categories should have 100 articles, I can't remember see many that meet that criterion.

Regarding Magpie-lark there a redirect from Grallina to this bird. However this bird is not monospecific to this genus. I vote for redirect page being deleted since there are only two species and this is not worthy of an article. There is already a redirect for Grallina cyanoleuca, so deleting the page seems appropriate.

Categories: Passeriformes has to be grouped at the family level to be meaninging. Passeri has 60+ families and Tyranni has 13, now to me these are valid categories. Now I can see the argument for not having genus level cats since in general there won't be many articles there, so the question is should I re-categorize what I've already done, or continue using this category. BTW, I think I'm done with Dicrurinae, but I've not grouped the middle sub-family by genus, (I'd done the 1st already and the 3rd was already done!) I'm not going any further until I know what the plan is.

FPC (you know which)

Thank You! I just spent an hour tidying up after the previous round of Grundyism; I might have had to take a break before looking at whatever just happened. — Xiong熊talk* 15:02, 2005 August 18 (UTC)

Pronoms bambaras

Hi, I've added many Bambara entries (1001 :) to the French Wiktionary. I also tried to add some structure in the form of categories, so you might want to check this. Before that I had already started a Wikilivre Bambara... It's not perfectly complete, and if you want I can add some more information, especially if you tell me what you need it for. Guaka 19:15, 30 August 2005 (UTC)

Birthday

User:Jenmoa/birthday --User:Jenmoa 00:56, 15 September 2005 (UTC)

Belated Happy birthday from me too. =Nichalp «Talk»= 05:41, 17 September 2005 (UTC)

Hi from Catalonia

I'm a user of Catalan wikipedia. You collaborate with ECHO project, well I can help you with catalan articles. I'm native in catalan and spanish and i can speak more or less both english and french. We could work together to bring here catalan articles. I'm barcelona there: http://ca.wikipedia.org/wiki/Usuari:Barcelona Please leave me a message! --62.175.92.90 16:16, 25 September 2005 (UTC)

Featured pictures - very late reply

I only just logged in again after a hiatus, and I noticed your request that I put up higher resolution images for Image:Driftwood-2.jpg and Image:Turbulence.jpg. They're now all I got out of my camera. --Andrew 02:41, 7 October 2005 (UTC)

User Categorisation -- In case you're interested

You were listed on the Wikipedia:Wikipedians/Quebec page as living in or being associated with Quebec. As part of the Wikipedia:User categorisation project, these lists are being replaced with user categories. If you would like to add yourself to the category that is replacing the page, please visit Category:Wikipedians in Quebec for instructions.--Rmky87 00:28, 11 October 2005 (UTC)

Image:Verbascum thapsus 1.jpg has been listed for deletion

An image or media file that you uploaded, Image:Verbascum thapsus 1.jpg, has been listed at Wikipedia:Images and media for deletion. Please look there to see why this is (you may have to search for the title of the image to find its entry), if you are interested in it not being deleted. Thank you.

and similarly Image:Verbascum thapsus 2.jpg. Thanks for taking the time to find and upload these images for Common Mullein, but as you are probably aware there are more recent moves to deprecate NonCommercial use only images. As it happens we've now got two quite acceptable alternatives from WikiCommons. -- Solipsist 14:00, 18 October 2005 (UTC)

About Universidad de Sonora

About this change [7] You removed the Category:Universities and colleges in Mexico and kept Category:Universities and colleges in Sonora. However if you notice, all the articles in the subcategories of the first categories are also found in the category. That is, for example Universidad de Sonora will have both categories, because we want Category:Universities and colleges in Mexico to list all universities regardless of what state/city they're in. I understand how this may look ambiguous. But if someone is looking for an institution in Mexico, we don't want them to look in every subcategory to find the article. I will revert the change if you don't mind. Thanks --Vizcarra 17:39, 19 October 2005 (UTC)

Heron

I've made numerous changes which you may or may not be happy with. Heron has its own article, rather than the crazy link to a disamb page, I've hived off bittern again, (deserves own article), but removed the duplicated content from the Heron page. (see Talk:heron.

I've also cleared the links through redirect oddities like [[herons]], [[egrets]] and [[bitterns]]

Ardeidae I've left as a redirect, not sure if it deserves a separate article, since it would just lump the content of Heron and Bittern

jimfbleak 08:04, 27 November 2005 (UTC)

Self note: answered here

Thanks for positive reply, I'm always wary about reversing other peoples' moves. jimfbleak 06:23, 28 November 2005 (UTC)

Wishes

I wish you and your family a Merry Christmas and a happy New Year. --Bhadani 14:42, 25 December 2005 (UTC)