Talk:Bryosartor

Animals Low‑importance

Bryosartor is within the scope of WikiProject Animals, an attempt to better organize information in articles related to animals and zoology. For more information, visit the project page.AnimalsWikipedia:WikiProject AnimalsTemplate:WikiProject Animalsanimal articles

Low

This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

WikiProject Animals To-do:

Here are some Open Tasks :

Copyedit:
Merge: GLAM/ARKive donated texts into articles about endangered species.
Improve: Photoperiodism, Tool use by non-human animals, Omnivore, Animal suicide, Sphaerium beckmani (a species in family Sphaeriidae),
Requests:
- Mammals:
- Invertebrates: Campocraspedon
- Fishes: Zaniolepis frenata
Merge: GLAM/ARKive donated texts into articles about endangered species.
Expand: Junqueira cow, Atka mackerel
Nominate and vote: Science collaboration of the month, Article Improvement Drive, WikiProject Animals Collaboration

Marine life (inactive)

This article is within the scope of WikiProject Marine life, a project which is currently considered to be inactive.Marine lifeWikipedia:WikiProject Marine lifeTemplate:WikiProject Marine lifeMarine life articles

Contested deletion

This page should not be speedily deleted. It may have been created by a banned or blocked editor, but I have since edited it. The genus and species it covers are in reliable sources. Peter coxhead (talk) 17:11, 27 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]

To clarify again, the article has been nominated for speedy deletion twice, because it was created by a banned/blocked user. However, it has since been edited; it's about a species so is automatically inherently notable; and is supported by reliable sources. Those adding "speedy deletion" notices should check the page history and talk page first. Peter coxhead (talk) 08:08, 28 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]

@Peter coxhead: we can recreate the entire article as soon as it is deleted :) —usernamekiran (talk) 08:09, 28 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Why? Please read the text of the {{db-banned}}. It has the qualification "with no substantial edits by others". Why should I waste my time fixing an article if this is the response? It's irrelevant who created the article; what matters is whether it is acceptable now. Peter coxhead (talk) 08:13, 28 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]

@Peter coxhead: Oh. I sent you the email before seeing this reply. Mostly per Wikipedia:Deny recognition, and especially because I also respect these articles highly. Kindly see Wikipedia:Deny recognition. I would definitely not want to see a banned editor's name as creator for rest of the time. If you do not want go through the trouble, I am willing to do it :) —usernamekiran (talk) 08:30, 28 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]

@Usernamekiran: so you are going to delete and recreate the 8,619 categories created by the banned user Look2See1? And this was only under one of that individual's apparent aliases. It's not a sensible approach. Peter coxhead (talk) 21:21, 28 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]

@Peter coxhead: well thats a lot. Sometimes, it makes sense not to delete and recreate stuff, but we should do the easy-peasey ones like this article. —usernamekiran (talk) 01:30, 29 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]

@Usernamekiran: well, we must agree to differ. I'm not watching this page any more, so I leave it to you. Peter coxhead (talk) 05:59, 29 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]