User talk:FunkMonk/Archive 26
 | This page is an archive of past discussions. Do not edit the contents of this page. If you wish to start a new discussion or revive an old one, please do so on the current talk page. |
Promotion of Cimoliopterus
The Four Award
|
Four Award | |
| Congratulations! You have been awarded the Four Award for your work from beginning to end on Cimoliopterus. Blue Pumpkin Pie (talk) 21:35, 19 August 2021 (UTC) |
Cimoliopterus
A query: would this be best listed under Featured Articles under dinosaurs or under reptiles? Thanks. Gog the Mild (talk) 10:13, 17 August 2021 (UTC)
- Under reptiles (where the two only other pterosaur FAs are). Pterosaurs were related to dinosaurs, but outside that group, so the next most inclusive group at FA is just reptiles. FunkMonk (talk) 10:14, 17 August 2021 (UTC)
- Cheers. That was my best guess, but not something I wanted to rely on my shaky taxonomy for. Gog the Mild (talk) 10:25, 17 August 2021 (UTC)
- On this note, Gog the Mild, I just noticed that we've run out of dinosaurs to feature on the mainpage... Once Bajadasaurus is on, they have all been TFAs. So I hope we can get some more in the works soon, though my next nomination will be a duck, so technically a dinosaur, but not quite what people would expect... FunkMonk (talk) 00:26, 24 August 2021 (UTC)
- Cheers. That was my best guess, but not something I wanted to rely on my shaky taxonomy for. Gog the Mild (talk) 10:25, 17 August 2021 (UTC)
Disambiguation link notification for August 25
An automated process has detected that when you recently edited White swamphen, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Morphology.
(Opt-out instructions.) --DPL bot (talk) 05:55, 25 August 2021 (UTC)
Your GA nomination of Mauritius shelduck
Hi there, I'm pleased to inform you that I've begun reviewing the article Mauritius shelduck 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 Simongraham -- Simongraham (talk) 06:20, 25 August 2021 (UTC)
Don't trust Yun's papers
Changyu Yun made Dynamoterror "invalid" and put Thanatotheristes within Daspletosaurus just months after Thanatotheristes is named. but are these studies just like the Teihivenator paper which is published in Researchgate but actually isn't formal?
- You'd have to look at the individual papers to see what journal they were originally published in. Researchgate isn't used for publishing new papers, just for uploading already published papers. FunkMonk (talk) 07:27, 27 August 2021 (UTC)
but the Dynamoterror paper is also stated here.
- In that case, Researchgate doesn't have anything to do with it. It's just a place to make published papers available. FunkMonk (talk) 09:52, 27 August 2021 (UTC)
Your GA nomination of Mauritius shelduck
The article Mauritius shelduck you nominated as a good article has passed 
; see Talk:Mauritius shelduck for comments about the article. Well done! If the article has not already appeared on the main page as a "Did you know" item, or as a bold link under "In the News" or in the "On This Day" prose section, you can nominate it within the next seven days to appear in DYK. Bolded names with dates listed at the bottom of the "On This Day" column do not affect DYK eligibility. Message delivered by Legobot, on behalf of Simongraham -- Simongraham (talk) 21:21, 27 August 2021 (UTC)
piauhytherium
Piauhytherium is a Toxodont known from well preserved elements, but it has been synonym i zed with Trigonodonops, another not well known Toxodont. I wonder if it was okay to either merge Piauhytherium or leave the page distinct since I found many subsequent papers still treating Piauhytherium distinct?
- Oh, I'm certainly no an expert in those, perhaps Rextron has something to say? FunkMonk (talk) 14:53, 28 August 2021 (UTC)
- Well, I was casually working in a restoration of Trigodonops [1] based in a recent thesis that proposes that Piauhytherium and even Mixotoxodon are synonyms of Trigodonops. To my knowledge it has been not published in a scientific journal, son I'm not sure to merge the articles now.--Rextron (talk) 09:59, 29 August 2021 (UTC)
This template must be substituted. -- Emperor of Oz's New Clothes (talk) 20:36, 29 August 2021 (UTC)
Could you help me through a FAC for black-and-red broadbill?
Hey, I'm planning to start a FAC for the article black-and-red broadbill, which recently passed GA. Since it's my first one, could you help me through it? AryKun (talk) 06:56, 30 August 2021 (UTC)
- Yep, I'd recommend sending it to WP:peer review next, where I and others can comment further before you send it to FAC. FunkMonk (talk) 07:19, 30 August 2021 (UTC)
Image source and publication history of File:Gallirallus pacificus.jpg
Hi FunkMonk, I was wondering whether you could help me out here. I was trying to use this image to illustrate A Voyage Round the World, an article about Georg Forster's report on James Cook's voyage. At the FAC, I was asked to explain its publication history to prove that it is correctly licensed, and I can't. It could have been one of the pictures that Johann Reinhold Forster sold to Joseph Banks to alleviate his debts and that later made its way into the collections of the Natural History Museum, but I couldn't trace it. It's not the end of the world if I can't use it (I could use a plant engraving from Characteres generum plantarum to illustrate Forster's skills instead), but I'd like to have an animal if possible. So could you comment a the FAC one way or another? —Kusma (talk) 09:39, 10 September 2021 (UTC)
- As stated in the Tahiti rail article, the plate is No. 128 (out of 271) in the collection of the NHM London. A scan of the picture is available from the NHM here. The background and a list is here. - Aa77zz (talk) 10:07, 10 September 2021 (UTC)
- The 1844 description of Rallus pacificus has "Fig. pict. G" under the title - I don't know what this means - I haven't come across any plates in the volume. See here. - Aa77zz (talk) 10:37, 10 September 2021 (UTC)
- In 1925 Tom Iredale wrote: "No reproductions of that series as a whole have been published, but two appeared in the Penny Cyclopaedia Vol. XVIII., 1840. On p. 40 'T. urinatrix Gm. (Forst., Draw., t. 88— from which our cut is taken," and P. vittata Gm. from B.M., No. 87, p. 47." (See top of p. 50 here). - Aa77zz (talk) 10:51, 10 September 2021 (UTC)
- Well, since I also used it in a featured article, it would be good to find out what the proper licence is, but the entire history of the image isn't needed for that, we just need to figure out when it was first published. I'll dig around. FunkMonk (talk) 11:10, 10 September 2021 (UTC)
- It was at least published in a 1989 book, which means we could use the same licences as in:[2] I'll note it at the FAC. FunkMonk (talk) 11:47, 10 September 2021 (UTC)
- Thank you! And thanks also to @Aa77zz for the links -- amazing resources! —Kusma (talk) 12:31, 10 September 2021 (UTC)
- Maybe we could even use the high res versions of the images in those links, if anyone could figure out how to extract them... But nice article, I might review once I'm done with the reviews I already began. FunkMonk (talk) 12:55, 10 September 2021 (UTC)
- Download link is in bottom left corner. —Kusma (talk) 13:55, 10 September 2021 (UTC)
- Nice, I've replaced my old scan and updated the source info accordingly. FunkMonk (talk) 14:07, 10 September 2021 (UTC)
- If there are other bird images you want to use from there, I can try to figure out when they were published, or well, the extinct ones I have sources for at least. FunkMonk (talk) 14:17, 10 September 2021 (UTC)
- Thanks for the offer! Currently, these are mostly used as pretty pictures, so for this article I'm quite happy to have one with an attached FA. Georg Forster (which I will update to avoid FAR when I get around to it, see the talk page, only one section done so far) uses plate 139 File:TannaGroundDove.jpg at the moment, which could benefit from a higher res image. Most of the more developed pictures (like plate 80) that would look pretty as illustrations and show off Forster's skills better seem to be of non-extinct animals. Some of them were published in 2007 (I own that book and can check which ones, but it doesn't help with PD-US tags). —Kusma (talk) 14:50, 10 September 2021 (UTC)
- I was just looking up the Tanna dove before you wrote, and I have a 1987 book where the image is used, so that should be fine, and I'll upload it soon. According to EU laws, as long as a previously unpublished image was published more than 25 years ago, it's public domain, which we found out during my current FAC. FunkMonk (talk) 14:53, 10 September 2021 (UTC)
- Thanks for the offer! Currently, these are mostly used as pretty pictures, so for this article I'm quite happy to have one with an attached FA. Georg Forster (which I will update to avoid FAR when I get around to it, see the talk page, only one section done so far) uses plate 139 File:TannaGroundDove.jpg at the moment, which could benefit from a higher res image. Most of the more developed pictures (like plate 80) that would look pretty as illustrations and show off Forster's skills better seem to be of non-extinct animals. Some of them were published in 2007 (I own that book and can check which ones, but it doesn't help with PD-US tags). —Kusma (talk) 14:50, 10 September 2021 (UTC)
- If there are other bird images you want to use from there, I can try to figure out when they were published, or well, the extinct ones I have sources for at least. FunkMonk (talk) 14:17, 10 September 2021 (UTC)
- Nice, I've replaced my old scan and updated the source info accordingly. FunkMonk (talk) 14:07, 10 September 2021 (UTC)
- Download link is in bottom left corner. —Kusma (talk) 13:55, 10 September 2021 (UTC)
- Maybe we could even use the high res versions of the images in those links, if anyone could figure out how to extract them... But nice article, I might review once I'm done with the reviews I already began. FunkMonk (talk) 12:55, 10 September 2021 (UTC)
- Thank you! And thanks also to @Aa77zz for the links -- amazing resources! —Kusma (talk) 12:31, 10 September 2021 (UTC)
- It was at least published in a 1989 book, which means we could use the same licences as in:[2] I'll note it at the FAC. FunkMonk (talk) 11:47, 10 September 2021 (UTC)
- Well, since I also used it in a featured article, it would be good to find out what the proper licence is, but the entire history of the image isn't needed for that, we just need to figure out when it was first published. I'll dig around. FunkMonk (talk) 11:10, 10 September 2021 (UTC)
- In 1925 Tom Iredale wrote: "No reproductions of that series as a whole have been published, but two appeared in the Penny Cyclopaedia Vol. XVIII., 1840. On p. 40 'T. urinatrix Gm. (Forst., Draw., t. 88— from which our cut is taken," and P. vittata Gm. from B.M., No. 87, p. 47." (See top of p. 50 here). - Aa77zz (talk) 10:51, 10 September 2021 (UTC)
- The 1844 description of Rallus pacificus has "Fig. pict. G" under the title - I don't know what this means - I haven't come across any plates in the volume. See here. - Aa77zz (talk) 10:37, 10 September 2021 (UTC)
The new high res Tanna dove image is certainly a big improvement. The NHM does well in making their holdings available. Some of the scans on the BHL site are from books owned by the NHM library. - Aa77zz (talk) 15:44, 10 September 2021 (UTC)
- Yeah, many thanks for making me aware! It might be more difficult to find out when some of the other images were first published. FunkMonk (talk) 15:50, 10 September 2021 (UTC)
- FunkMonk: Why have you chosen a licence template for the Tanna dove image that produces "This work was never published prior to January 1, 2003, ... " when you state above that it was used in a 1987 book? - Aa77zz (talk) 15:57, 10 September 2021 (UTC)
- That's because we have no template that comes closer when it comes to unpublished works in the US, that tag was used for a similar image after approval on Commons here:[3] FunkMonk (talk) 16:01, 10 September 2021 (UTC)
- I find the copyright rules tricky to understand. The NHM page that I pointed to above - here has near the bottom: "Copyright Usage terms: Public Domain". With a link to https://creativecommons.org/publicdomain/mark/1.0/ This seems to suggest that the NHM waives the UK 2039 copyright rule for these unpublished pictures. Can this be true? -Aa77zz (talk) 20:01, 10 September 2021 (UTC)
- While the NHM owns the physical plates, the intellectual copyright would in theory have belonged to Forster, and if the pictures remained unpublished until for example today, there would be added 25 years of copyright to them from this date... Not sure what the purpose would be, perhaps that eventual descendants could profit from it... FunkMonk (talk) 20:20, 10 September 2021 (UTC)
- I find the copyright rules tricky to understand. The NHM page that I pointed to above - here has near the bottom: "Copyright Usage terms: Public Domain". With a link to https://creativecommons.org/publicdomain/mark/1.0/ This seems to suggest that the NHM waives the UK 2039 copyright rule for these unpublished pictures. Can this be true? -Aa77zz (talk) 20:01, 10 September 2021 (UTC)
- That's because we have no template that comes closer when it comes to unpublished works in the US, that tag was used for a similar image after approval on Commons here:[3] FunkMonk (talk) 16:01, 10 September 2021 (UTC)
- FunkMonk: Why have you chosen a licence template for the Tanna dove image that produces "This work was never published prior to January 1, 2003, ... " when you state above that it was used in a 1987 book? - Aa77zz (talk) 15:57, 10 September 2021 (UTC)
Hoopoe starling scheduled for TFA
This is to let you know that the Hoopoe starling article has been scheduled as today's featured article for October 26, 2021. 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/October 26, 2021, but note that a coordinator will trim the lead to around 1000 characters anyway, so you aren't obliged to do so.
For Featured Articles promoted recently, there will be an existing blurb linked from the FAC talk page, which is likely to be transferred to the TFA page by a coordinator at some point.
We suggest that you watchlist Wikipedia:Main Page/Errors from the day before this appears on Main Page. Thanks! Jimfbleak - talk to me? 09:13, 14 September 2021 (UTC)
Disambiguation link notification for September 18
An automated process has detected that when you recently edited Viatkogorgon, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Basal.
(Opt-out instructions.) --DPL bot (talk) 05:57, 18 September 2021 (UTC)
TFA
Thank you and the team today for Acamptonectes, introduced: "This article is the first "official" WP:WikiProject Palaeontology collaboration, and the first FAC about an ichthyosaur, a group of prehistoric marine reptiles which were convergently similar to dolphins. Having been named relatively recently, not much has been published on it (not even a size estimate), so most info available about it is summarised here."! - Modest DYK contribution on the same page Protestant Church, Borgholzhausen, a place of memories - more on my talk. --Gerda Arendt (talk) 08:17, 18 September 2021 (UTC)
Promotion of Mauritius shelduck
Your GA nomination of Viatkogorgon
Hi there, I'm pleased to inform you that I've begun reviewing the article Viatkogorgon 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 Jaguar -- Jaguar (talk) 22:01, 29 September 2021 (UTC)
THE SIERRACERATOPS IS SO COOL!
The Sierraceratops paper is making me so excited for the following reasons!
1-It marks another first dinosaur from a formation 2-It forms a clade with Coahuilaceratops and Bravoceratops, although we know that the Navajoceratops and Terminocavus paper last year said that Bravoceratops is a nomen dubium and Titanoceratops is a large Pentaceratops. I can't get access to the paper but the paper did not treat Bravoceratops dubious and treats Titanoceratops distinct. So is it safe that I can say Bravoceratops is not a nomen dubium because of the new paper? Although Navajoceratops and Terminocavus is mentioned in this study.
- Well, considering some of the same authors are involved that described those genera, it isn't really surprising. But I haven't had the chance to see the paper yet. FunkMonk (talk) 12:50, 30 September 2021 (UTC)
Turtle FA
The turtle article is back at FAC, would you like to continue? LittleJerry (talk) 21:21, 30 September 2021 (UTC)
- Yep, I'll be back when I'm done with a couple of GA reviews. FunkMonk (talk) 21:50, 30 September 2021 (UTC)
Your GA nomination of Viatkogorgon
The article Viatkogorgon you nominated as a good article has passed ; see Talk:Viatkogorgon for comments about the article. Well done! If the article has not already appeared on the main page as a "Did you know" item, or as a bold link under "In the News" or in the "On This Day" prose section, you can nominate it within the next seven days to appear in DYK. Bolded names with dates listed at the bottom of the "On This Day" column do not affect DYK eligibility. Message delivered by Legobot, on behalf of Jaguar -- Jaguar (talk) 10:41, 2 October 2021 (UTC)
Viatkogorgon
Hello:
The copy edit you requested from the Guild of Copy Editors of the article [[]] has been completed.
Please let me know if you have any questions or concerns. I found a number of times when "extend" appeared making no sense. I changed these to "extent". If "extend" was the intended word, the sentences will need a drastic rewrite. I masked one sentence of repetitive text. "Hindwards" was used repeatedly. I could not find this in either Websters or the Cambridge Dictionaries so have changed these instances to "hindward", which is in both.
Best of luck with the FA process.
Regards,
Twofingered Typist (talk) 19:06, 9 October 2021 (UTC)
About those "synonyms"
There is a paper on Chinlechelys in this year, but a 2017 review by Joyce places the taxa as a synonym. The authors of the Chinlechelys this year retains the taxa as distinct. But there are some questions I had about synonyms:
Guarinisuchus is made as a synonym by Jouve in 2019 and 2020, but other authors did not support this , such as the Brachiosuchus paper this year. Although it has been mentioned by the same authors twice but I can say it's not a definite synonym.
Berruchelus was placed into Compsemys by Joyce (2019)'s review, I saw many of the fossil turtle reviews by Joyce and Vlachos placing Notoemys again in Caribemys and some taxa such as Rhinoclemmys nicoyana, Emydoidea hutchisoni, Trachemys inflata and Pseudemys hibbardi to be nomen dubium, although the diagnostic traits is published in their original papers. A user merged Berruchelus and Caribemys. I think I cannot surely believe those reviews so I can say that Caribemys and Berruchelus is not definite synonyms although Joyce puts Berruchelus into Compsemys twice, as well as I can split back those pages. And I can also say that the above Emydidae taxa that is disputed by Vlachos' reviews is not sure, that we can still say that the above taxa is valid for now.
- In any case, such proposed merges should alwats be discussed on talk pages first. FunkMonk (talk) 13:05, 8 October 2021 (UTC)
Berruchelus has been mentioned as a species of Compsemys three times already, but all only by Joyce. Peckemys has been treated as a species of Cedrobaena by Joyce many times, but the new species of Palatobaena this year regards Peckemys as its own genus because the study did not include Joyce. Go and find Vlachos' and Joyce's "review of fossil turtles of", they did place many species and genus as nomen dubium in those reviews but for me they weren't, so we can still treat Eodortoka, Rhinoclemmys nicoyana, Pseudemys hibbardi, Trachemys inflata and Emydoidea hutchisoni valid. Also Guarinisuchus, which the synonymy has been proposed by Jouve. although she mentioned many times but in the Brachiosuchus study this year found Guarinisuchus sister to Atlantosuchus, meaning Guarinisuchus is a distinct genus by the authors of Brachiosuchus. So I think it is more reasonable that Guarinisuchus, Caribemys and Berruchelus is distinct genus for now. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Huinculsaurus (talk • contribs) 06:41, 10 October 2021 (UTC)
- I agree it's always important to notice the authorship of such studies, because three studies by the same person shouldn't hold more weight than three by different people who agree, for example. FunkMonk (talk) 13:20, 10 October 2021 (UTC)
TFA
 |
Thank you today for Hoopoe starling, introduced: "This extinct bird is interesting but rather obscure, and a thorough review of its scattered literature has only been published this year." (2014)! - A sad record: three people in the Recent deaths section, and one to care about. On a brighter side: fall colours, and reflection. --Gerda Arendt (talk) 07:18, 26 October 2021 (UTC)
- Thanks! Yeah, many unnecessary deaths the last week... FunkMonk (talk) 08:44, 26 October 2021 (UTC)
- Thanks. Today: memories in friendship, of Jerome Kohl who began an article which we brought to GA, and many more, dead or banned. --Gerda Arendt (talk) 13:45, 28 October 2021 (UTC)
Styracosaurus
Could we work on updating the article based on the 2020 papers you posted? LittleJerry (talk) 22:17, 31 October 2021 (UTC)
- I have a lot of other stuff I need to do on Wiki, but feel free to improve it. As for old FACs, my main priority is dinosaur, which is still in danger. FunkMonk (talk) 22:34, 31 October 2021 (UTC)
Palaeornis
@FunkMonk: About the Palaeornis thing, what should we do about the Epauletted parakeets page that someone created? As I said, the common name seems to be made up, maybe they were trying to work around the same problem of Palaeornis already existing, but that's of course OR. Hiroizmeh (talk) 19:21, 3 November 2021 (UTC)
- Probably bring it up at the bird project. We follow various authorities regarding bird taxonomy, and should wait until they accept such revisions. FunkMonk (talk) 19:24, 3 November 2021 (UTC)
Cimoliopterus scheduled for TFA
This is to let you know that the above article has been scheduled as today's featured article for 11 November 2021. Please check that the article needs no amendments. Feel free to comment on the draft blurb at TFA. I suggest that you watchlist Wikipedia:Main Page/Errors from the day before this appears on Main Page. Thanks and congratulations on your work. Gog the Mild (talk) 21:17, 15 October 2021 (UTC)
- Nice! FunkMonk (talk) 13:34, 16 October 2021 (UTC)
- Thank you today for the article "about a pterosaur only definitely known from jaw fragments, but which has been historically important for the understanding of the group. It was one of the largest pterosaurs known when it was named in 1851, and one of the first members of the group to be depicted in sculpture, but its appearance was unclear until more complete relatives were discovered in the 1980s."! --Gerda Arendt (talk) 08:54, 11 November 2021 (UTC)
Promotion of Viatkogorgon
My thoughts of Sebecus species
There are something going on in Sebecus, many Sebecus species is referred in the past, but they had been assigned to other genera (S. huilensis and S.querejazus). I do see some other papers after the new genus for the two still treating them in Sebecus, and I do see an other using Fossilworks to add the two species again. Fossilworks still treats the two within Sebecus, the reference is the 2015 paper on Caipirasuchus stenognathus. There is no way that we take unnecessary pains to study an insignificant or insoluble problem, and the placement of Langstonia and Zulmasuchus all within Sebecus is not an major point of view, similar with the studies regarding Tarbosaurus as a species of Tyrannosaurus.
Also, in my view, the new species Sebecus ayrampu needs as new genus as well. 42.2.67.4 (talk) 15:30, 13 November 2021 (UTC)
- Well, we'll just have to see what gets published, not much else we can do about it here than follow the literature. FunkMonk (talk) 19:12, 13 November 2021 (UTC)
Cueva de las Manos Pre-FAC comments
All Pre-FAC comments at Talk:Cueva de las Manos have been replied to. I apologize if my pinging has been too frequent, and if you have been getting notifications on the subject. Best, Tyrone Madera (talk) 21:26, 16 November 2021 (UTC)
Wikipedia:WikiProject Palaeontology/Paleoart review
Responding to the edit summary in this revert. Oops -- my error. I probably did this from WP:Huggle without looking at the wikified page directly and without noticing that it was a discussion subpage of a mainspace page. I probably glanced at the page ID window expecting to see that talk was being done in Talk space. Wtmitchell (talk) (earlier Boracay Bill) 14:45, 17 November 2021 (UTC)
- Oh yeah, it's of course a bit unusual to have discussions on a mainspace page, no worries. FunkMonk (talk) 14:48, 17 November 2021 (UTC)
Disambiguation link notification for November 21
An automated process has detected that when you recently edited Duriavenator, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Morphology.
(Opt-out instructions.) --DPL bot (talk) 05:58, 21 November 2021 (UTC)
Your GA nomination of Duriavenator
Hi there, I'm pleased to inform you that I've begun reviewing the article Duriavenator 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) 20:20, 21 November 2021 (UTC)
ArbCom 2021 Elections voter message
 | Hello! Voting in the 2021 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23:59 (UTC) on Monday, 6 December 2021. All eligible users are allowed to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once.
The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail. If you wish to participate in the 2021 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. If you no longer wish to receive these messages, you may add |
Your GA nomination of Duriavenator
The article Duriavenator you nominated as a good article has passed ; see Talk:Duriavenator for comments about the article. Well done! If the article has not already appeared on the main page as a "Did you know" item, or as a bold link under "In the News" or in the "On This Day" prose section, you can nominate it within the next seven days to appear in DYK. Bolded names with dates listed at the bottom of the "On This Day" column do not affect DYK eligibility. Message delivered by Legobot, on behalf of Jens Lallensack -- Jens Lallensack (talk) 22:21, 23 November 2021 (UTC)
You've got mail
It may take a few minutes from the time the email is sent for it to show up in your inbox. You can at any time by removing the {{You've got mail}} or {{ygm}} template.Wanderingpotato (talk) 00:39, 1 December 2021 (UTC)
New reply feature
Have you tried the new reply feature? It's pretty handy. Best, Tyrone Madera (talk) 03:01, 30 November 2021 (UTC) Tyrone Madera (talk) 03:05, 30 November 2021 (UTC)
- Nope, but thanks for the heads up! FunkMonk (talk) 09:35, 30 November 2021 (UTC)
- Anytime :) Tyrone Madera (talk) 03:43, 1 December 2021 (UTC)
Duplinks
Hi! At Wikipedia:Featured article candidates/1937 Brazilian coup d'état/archive1, the first comment you made was that WWII was duplinked. I wanted to know if this was either you looking at all the links during your initial read of the article or if you had some special program or whatever that told you what was duplinked. If it's the latter, may I know whatever this is? I'm currently conducting a GA review and this would be really helpful. Thanks! FredModulars (talk) 02:01, 5 December 2021 (UTC)
- @FredModulars There actually is a script of the sort, used by FunkMonk. They can be highlighted with this script. Tyrone Madera (talk) 02:14, 5 December 2021 (UTC)
- @Tyrone Madera: This will help a lot. Thank you so much for this! FredModulars (talk) 02:17, 5 December 2021 (UTC)
- Of course! Tyrone Madera (talk) 02:35, 5 December 2021 (UTC)
- @Tyrone Madera: This will help a lot. Thank you so much for this! FredModulars (talk) 02:17, 5 December 2021 (UTC)
Mini scule
Hey, I've submitted Mini scule, which you reviewed for GA, at FAC, so maybe you could drop by and comment? AryKun (talk) 11:30, 13 December 2021 (UTC)
- Hi, usually when I've GA reviewed an article, I leave it to others for FAC review so it will get fresh eyes. Don't worry, I'm sure more reviewers will come along. I might drop by if it gets into trouble. FunkMonk (talk) 12:55, 13 December 2021 (UTC)
About the blog post you keep referring to...
I don't read blogs. They're not valid sources of information. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Cabrochu (talk • contribs) 19:18, 16 December 2021 (UTC)
- The people commenting on the blog post[4] are palaeontologists intimately familiar with the ICZN (Christian Kammerer and David Marjanović). In any case, the point remains (blog or not), there is no consensus yet, and we're not supposed to make our own original interpretations of the rules, we leave that for the authorities, which are currently not determined. FunkMonk (talk) 19:22, 16 December 2021 (UTC)
Pali-Aike volcanic field
Greetings, I have nominated Wikipedia:Featured article candidates/Pali-Aike volcanic field/archive1 for a featured article candidacy but so far it's languishing without much input. Do you have time to review the article? Thanks in advance. Jo-Jo Eumerus (talk) 10:44, 16 December 2021 (UTC)
- Hi, yeah, I'll add it to the next batch of FACs I review soonish. FunkMonk (talk) 12:58, 16 December 2021 (UTC)
Merry Christmas
|
Merry Christmas |
| Apologize if I couldn't cite the ref properly. Btw, Merry Christmas! 2001:4455:1A9:E100:65E0:38A5:3CB9:488 (talk) 11:57, 31 December 2021 (UTC) |
- Thanks, no problem, and merry Christmas and happy New Year back! FunkMonk (talk) 14:09, 31 December 2021 (UTC)
GAN Backlog Drive – January 2022
| Good article nominations | January 2022 Backlog Drive |  |
January 2022 Backlog Drive:
| |
| Other ways to participate: | |
| You're receiving this message because you have conducted 10+ good article reviews or participated in the March backlog drive.
Click here and remove your username from the mailing list to opt out of any future messages. | |
Sent by MediaWiki message delivery (talk) on behalf of Wikipedia:WikiProject Good articles at 21:18, 31 December 2021 (UTC).
Your GA nomination of Seychelles parakeet
Hi there, I'm pleased to inform you that I've begun reviewing the article Seychelles parakeet 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) 23:20, 31 December 2021 (UTC)
Precious anniversary
 | |
| Nine years! |
|---|
--Gerda Arendt (talk) 08:06, 2 January 2022 (UTC)
Your GA nomination of Seychelles parakeet
The article Seychelles parakeet you nominated as a good article has passed ; see Talk:Seychelles parakeet for comments about the article. Well done! If the article has not already appeared on the main page as a "Did you know" item, or as a bold link under "In the News" or in the "On This Day" prose section, you can nominate it within the next seven days to appear in DYK. Bolded names with dates listed at the bottom of the "On This Day" column do not affect DYK eligibility. Message delivered by Legobot, on behalf of Jens Lallensack -- Jens Lallensack (talk) 23:01, 3 January 2022 (UTC)
Promotion of Duriavenator
- Congrats from me too. It's likely to be a TFA some time in February, so I've drafted a blurb here. Please feel free to amend as you see fit, maximum length 1025 character inc spaces Jimfbleak - talk to me? 11:52, 8 January 2022 (UTC)
Antarctica featured article review
I have nominated Antarctica for a featured article review here. Please join the discussion on whether this article meets featured article criteria. Articles are typically reviewed for two weeks. If substantial concerns are not addressed during the review period, the article will be moved to the Featured Article Removal Candidates list for a further period, where editors may declare "Keep" or "Delist" the article's featured status. The instructions for the review process are here. Chidgk1 (talk) 16:20, 9 January 2022 (UTC)
About some taxonomic changes
The page of Amsterdam wigeon in Wikipedia is classified as Mareca marecula, this was done on IOC bird list's taxonomic updates on following Gonzalez's study of ducks classifying Anas as paraphyletic, with the wigeons classified in Mareca along with the Amsterdam wigeon on the bird list. But IOC transferred the genus without a study, and Wikipedia bird taxonomy on birds listed on IOC always updates with taxonomic updates, and we cannot say no to IOC because IOC is the boss.
Wikipedia's page Aratinga vorohuensis is originally named as Nandayus vorohuensis, but the page was moved to Aratinga vorohuensis without a study too. The reason why the movement was made is because Nandayus is found to be a synonym of Aratinga, although there are some papers after the study of Nandayus being found as a synonym still classifying Nandayus as distinct. If we change the page again the taxonomy will be a mess again. Huinculsaurus (talk) 15:59, 13 January 2022 (UTC)
But they do not include pre-late Quaternary species. so the taxonomic status of Aratinga (syn: Nandayus) vorohuensis is seems more harsh, because it was a Pliocene species. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Huinculsaurus (talk • contribs) 04:38, 14 January 2022 (UTC)
We can still classifying it as A. vorohuensis as Nandayus is a synonym of Aratinga. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Huinculsaurus (talk • contribs) 06:27, 15 January 2022 (UTC)
- So what's the problem, isn't that how it is now, according to your description above? FunkMonk (talk) 08:35, 15 January 2022 (UTC)
The move was done without an scientific author says that it is Aratinga, if fact all papers i'very found says it was Nandayus vorohuensis. I am still weird of why they continued to classifying Nandayus after this genus was found to be a synonym. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Huinculsaurus (talk • contribs) 23:44, 15 January 2022 (UTC)
Duriavenator scheduled for TFA
This is to let you know that the above article has been scheduled as today's featured article for 23 February 2022. Please check that the article needs no amendments. Feel free to amend the draft blurb, which can be found at Wikipedia:Today's featured article/February 2022, or to make more comments on other matters concerning the scheduling of this article at Wikipedia talk:Today's featured article/February 2022. I suggest that you watchlist Wikipedia:Main Page/Errors from the day before this appears on Main Page. Thanks and congratulations on your work. Gog the Mild (talk) 13:11, 17 January 2022 (UTC)
- Cool, yeah, I did a little tweak, hope it didn't add too many characters... FunkMonk (talk) 13:18, 17 January 2022 (UTC)
- Thank you for the article, introduced: "This is the first FAC about a megalosaurid, one of the few major groups of carnivorous dinosaurs that have not yet been represented at FAC. This particular animal was long thought to be the same as Megalosaurus itself (the first named dinosaur, and historically very important), though was much later recognised as distinct, and that's the gist of the story here. The entire literature has been summarised, and there were some nice free images available."! --
Promotion of Seychelles parakeet
Queen angelfish
Would you be able to review queen angelfish at FAC? Thanks. LittleJerry (talk) 15:06, 16 February 2022 (UTC)
- Probably, I have been thinking about it, but haven't had so much time lately. I'll have a look soonish if it doesn't get the needed supports yet. FunkMonk (talk) 15:39, 16 February 2022 (UTC)
Problem about Sebecus
Therefore, we consider for the moment this is an unnecessary nomenclatorial change and we regard Zulmasuchus querejazus and Langstonia huilensis as junior synonyms.
This is what has said on the paper of Sebecus ayrampu from last year, but S.huilensis and S.querejazus were transferred to other genera. But there is still some taxonomists still regard the original classification, similar to how some taxonomists still regard Tarbosaurus as Tyrannosaurus bataar.In my point of view, it's not a major consensus so we can still regard Langstonia and Zulmasuchus as seperate genera. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Huinculsaurus (talk • contribs) 23:44, 17 February 2022 (UTC)
- I think it's best to keep discussions like these on the talk pages of the taxa involved so all editors can see them and join. FunkMonk (talk)
Cryopterygius merged?
It has been proposed as a synonym since 2019, but I think if merging is rational because there is subsequent studies still regard it distinct. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Huinculsaurus (talk • contribs) 23:55, 17 February 2022 (UTC)
- Hi, again, these discussions should be kept on the taxon's talk pages, not those of individual editors. FunkMonk (talk) 09:24, 23 February 2022 (UTC)
WikiProject Tree of Life Newsletter – 018
- February 2022—Issue 018
- Tree of Life
- Welcome to the Tree of Life newsletter!
|
|
|
|
News at a glance
|
|
February DYKs
|
 Dudleya cymosa subsp. pumila  A Golden Retriever retrieving a shot game bird .jpg) Seagrass in La Ciotat, France
|
You are receiving this because you added your name to the subscribers list of the WikiProject Tree of Life. If you no longer wish to receive the newsletter, please remove your name.
MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 14:45, 1 March 2022 (UTC)
GA Reassessment
Staffordshire Bull Terrier has been nominated for a community 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. Justlettersandnumbers (talk) 21:57, 3 March 2022 (UTC)
Viatkogorgon scheduled for TFA
This is to let you know that the Viatkogorgon article has been scheduled as today's featured article for April 9, 2022. 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 9, 2022. If you are still happy to do the blurb, just replace the place-holder text (the entire lead) I've dumped on the TFA page.
We suggest that you watchlist Wikipedia:Main Page/Errors from the day before this appears on Main Page. Thanks! Jimfbleak - talk to me? 11:53, 5 March 2022 (UTC)
I'm planning to run this at TFA in April, I just wondered if you fancy writing a blurb for it? If you do, write it at Wikipedia talk:Featured article candidates/Viatkogorgon/archive1.
We use one paragraph only, with no reference tags or alternative names; the only thing bolded is the first link to the article title. The length when previewed is between 925 and 1025 characters including spaces and the " (Full article...)", or more when no free-use image can be found. Fair use images are not allowed.
If you don't want to do it, just let me know as soon as possible, there's no obligation, but experienced editors often like some input to the process, thanks Jimfbleak - talk to me? 16:05, 3 March 2022 (UTC)
- Alright, I usually don't too much thought in it, I just use the intro and chop it down. Will try to have a look. FunkMonk (talk) 21:20, 3 March 2022 (UTC)
- Don't worry about this, I'll do the blurb Jimfbleak - talk to me? 16:36, 7 March 2022 (UTC)
"Dunghill fowl" listed at Redirects for discussion
An editor has identified a potential problem with the redirect Dunghill fowl and has thus listed it for discussion. This discussion will occur at Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2022 March 21#Dunghill fowl until a consensus is reached, and anyone, including you, is welcome to contribute to the discussion. Steel1943 (talk) 22:07, 21 March 2022 (UTC)
Red panda FAC
Would you like to take a look at red panda? LittleJerry (talk) 22:49, 10 March 2022 (UTC)
- I'll try to have a look if it doesn't get the necessary supports in time. FunkMonk (talk) 08:56, 11 March 2022 (UTC)
- I think we just need one more review. We have two reviews and both an image and source pass. LittleJerry (talk) 16:55, 19 March 2022 (UTC)
Kharijites FAC
Hi Funk,
I've taken Kharijites to FAC, and due to lack of reviews, it may be archived. Since you've knowledge in Islamic history, would you mind giving it a go? Thanks. AhmadLX-(Wikiposta) 16:54, 26 March 2022 (UTC)
Sorry
Sorry for being a total ass Savage Almond (talk) 15:49, 27 March 2022 (UTC)
- Hi, I'm not sure why? FunkMonk (talk) 16:00, 27 March 2022 (UTC)
- In the Kronosaurus talk page Savage Almond (talk) 00:43, 28 March 2022 (UTC)
WikiProject Tree of Life/Newsletter/019
- March 2022—Issue 019
- Tree of Life
- Welcome to the Tree of Life newsletter!
|
|
|
|
News at a glance
|
|
March DYKs
|
_cropped.jpg) Elysia timida  Humbertium covidum  Door Tree
|
You are receiving this because you added your name to the subscribers list of the WikiProject Tree of Life. If you no longer wish to receive the newsletter, please remove your name.
MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 13:46, 1 April 2022 (UTC)
Request for FA Review
You are listed as an FA mentor. Would you be so kind as to assist in reviewing the article Texas A&M University? Buffs (talk) 23:01, 29 March 2022 (UTC)
- Hi, yeah, such institutions are not really my speciality, though, I think there are others on the mentor list that would be better at instructions you. FunkMonk (talk) 07:29, 30 March 2022 (UTC)
TFA
Thank you today for Viatkogorgon, introduced: "This is the first FAC about a stem-mammal (formerly known as "mammal-like reptiles"), specifically a gorgonopsian, the first group of animals that evolved saber-teeth. This is a pretty inconspicuous member of the group, and since it was only named in 1999, it doesn't have the same kind of heavy taxonomic baggage as other, more famous gorgonopsians, and was therefore easier to write about, so most if not all the relevant literature is covered here."! - music on my talk --Gerda Arendt (talk) 06:45, 9 April 2022 (UTC)
Edit request for Sultan Al Jaber
Hi FunkMonk, I work for ADNOC and I recently posted an edit request on Talk:Sultan Al Jaber. I noticed that you are a member of WP:Arab world, so I was hoping you would have an interest in implementing those straightforward edits. Thanks so much. CB at ADNOC (talk) 09:03, 11 April 2022 (UTC)
- Hi, this is not really something I'm familiar with, so it's probably best to see if someone with more knowledge in the field comes around. FunkMonk (talk) 20:27, 11 April 2022 (UTC)
Sifrhippus synonymy
Dear FunkMonk, in this 10 year old edit you stated that Arenahippus was found to be synonymous with Sifrhippus. I questioned this on the talk page of the article. Any contribution from you to that discussion would be welcome. Wikiklaas 12:01, 13 April 2022 (UTC)
WikiProject Tree of Life Newsletter – 020
- April 2022—Issue 020
- Tree of Life
- Welcome to the Tree of Life newsletter!
|
|
News at a glance
|
|
April DYKs
|
|
_(8-9-12)_78_circulo_montana,_patagonia_lake_ranch_estates,_scc,_az_-05_copy_(7750165642).jpg)
![[2]](https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:The_Farm_at_Foul_Bay.jpg){kind=link}
You are receiving this because you added your name to the subscribers list of the WikiProject Tree of Life. If you no longer wish to receive the newsletter, please remove your name.
MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 14:57, 3 May 2022 (UTC)
This is to let you know that the above article has been scheduled as today's featured article for 8 June 2022. Please check that the article needs no amendments. Feel free to amend the draft blurb, which can be found at Wikipedia:Today's featured article/June 2022, or to make comments on other matters concerning the scheduling of this article at Wikipedia talk:Today's featured article/June 2022. I suggest that you watchlist Wikipedia:Main Page/Errors from two days before it appears on the Main Page. Thanks and congratulations on your work!—Wehwalt (talk) 14:04, 3 May 2022 (UTC)