This is an archive of past discussions about User:Anna Frodesiak. 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.
Hello, Anna Frodesiak. You have new messages at Boolyme's talk page. You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.
Hymenocera
Hafa Adai Anna,
I noticed there was not information on this subject in Wiki. I gathered some basic information from around the web, added a few pictures and links. Please share any suggestions on how I could make it better!
Hello there. Actually, if you did copy and paste, that's not allowed. It's a copyright violation. You must rephrase the source. I suggest doing that quickly before somebody gets mad.
Also, nice photos you added! Well done. Just to be sure, you actually took those yourself right? They're not from some website, are they?
Finally, at the end of a message to another editor, don't forget to add ~~~~ as that automatically makes your signature.
Thanks Anna,
Between learning the HTML, headers, etc I may not have properly "rephrased" some of those passages :-) Maybe I'll leave that for another day for now. Mainly I would like to have some nice photographs for the readers...and Yes, they are all mine :-) Thanks again, and chime in when you need to. P.S. How long do these conversations stay on the My Talk page?
Chad Ordelheide (talk) 11:56, 7 August 2011 (UTC)
Another editor has already removed the copyvio text. I should have removed it on the spot, and was derelict in my duty by not doing so. In any case, please reinstate the content in your own words, at your leisure.
I'm so pleased to see that you have added images to a number of articles I started. With a blurb and an image, the image provides 99% of the information when it comes to species. I hope more are forthcoming.
Consider joiningWikiProject Gastropods. There's no obligation. But you have to buy a vacuum cleaner. Kidding. You would be most welcome. There are a number of divers who are keenly interested in gastropods, including the wonderful Invertzoo (literally "zoo held upside down"). She's a zoologist and deals with invertebrates. She tried to explain her user name once, but I just couldn't grasp what she meant.
As for your last question, the posts will stay there forever if you choose. However, you can delete posts from your talk page, or as most do, archive them. I do it manually by dumping the old posts into a subpage. Others use automated doo-hickeys. Here are some subpages you can use for working on articles, or archiving talk pages. You can paste these links onto your userpage in order to access them, if you like, or do as you please. The nice thing about a sandbox subpage, is that it's your domain. Nobody will monkey with it, and you can work on stuff there. :)
One last question, it seems they want catagories for my pictures... After reading a few FAQ's it seems a catagory of "Nudibranchia" would be appropriate? My problem is once the photo is uploaded to where to I add the catagory? The Faq mentioned to add the code to the image description? I've found summary but where is the description? Thanks again Chad Ordelheide (talk) 12:32, 7 August 2011 (UTC)
I'm having a bit of trouble accessing Wikicommons. Another editor will answer your question here. FYI to helper editor, here are a couple of images uploaded by this user: [1][2]Anna Frodesiak (talk) 12:53, 7 August 2011 (UTC)
Hi Chad, Anna asked me to give some input here. If you click on the image to go to its page (for example you go to http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Halgerda_terramtuentis.jpg ) you will see a link "its description page there" about half way down. Clicking that will take you to the image's page at Commons (where you uploaded it), which in this case would take you to http://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Halgerda_terramtuentis.jpg - as you can see, at the end of that it says "Media needing categories as of 7 August 2011". If you click Edit right at the top of that page and scroll down to the end, you could add [[Category:Gastropoda]] (if that's what it is) and remove the "Media needing categories" part. --Demiurge1000 (talk) 14:22, 7 August 2011 (UTC)
One last questions about Categories. I've read a bunch and it seems you could go crazy on categories. What would you suggest for a simple Nudibranch Photo Category(s)? For Example: Do I put a category for both Nudibranchia and Nudibranch to appeal to a wider range of people? Or if I put a category for "Marine animals of Maui" would be better to have 2 categories "Maui" as a location then "Marine Animals" as another category? Finally, if a location category was "Zanzibar, Tanzania, Africa" does wiki read each of those differently or do they each need to be separate category?Thanks,
Chad Ordelheide (talk) 12:33, 8 August 2011 (UTC)
Good question my friend. Categories are hierarchical. Add the category (or categories) that is most likely to be at the tip of the root. Use an existing category. Sometimes that's a genus. Sometimes it's a family. See Chromodoris willani for example (look at the bottom of the article). That animal is in the category Chromodorididae, a family. That's the tip of the root, as of now. (Except for stubs, that is, tiny blurb articles, but that's another story.) At some point the genus Chromodoris will branch off to have it's own category.
I'm trying to not to bombard you with info. Look at the article and look at the category. It should become obvious. The best way to learn is not to have a moron like me explain things, but instead to look and figure it out. Ask your next question, and I will be happy to answer. :) Anna Frodesiak (talk) 13:00, 8 August 2011 (UTC)
All of what I just wrote in a nutshell: Use an existing category. Select the one furthest down the heirarchy as possible. (Articles can have more than one category.) Anna Frodesiak (talk) 13:15, 8 August 2011 (UTC)
Koontz House / Green Leaves
Thanks for temporarily removing the hat. Have you any idea why Station1 should have made this edit? That is what has thrown everything out, although there were also various hatnote problems due to the COI issue with Atterion (now blocked for a week after socking and malicious nominating Green Leaves at AfD). - Sitush (talk) 00:37, 8 August 2011 (UTC)
No problem. I have no idea why Station1 made that edit. Odd. I've been following the whole matter. I think he is lucky his block isn't a bit longer considering edit warring, page move with sneaky content removal, and then socking. Naughty stuff. He's also lucky Doncram hasn't responded. Best, Anna Frodesiak (talk) 00:44, 8 August 2011 (UTC)
Doncram cannot respond as he too is blocked <g> I will have a word with Station1 - it does not seem right to me. - Sitush (talk) 00:46, 8 August 2011 (UTC)
Wow. Doncram has quite a rap sheet. Anyway, the path of least resistance might be just to keep making the article the way you think is best, and others will get bored and leave. I'll keep an eye out. :) Anna Frodesiak (talk) 01:21, 8 August 2011 (UTC)
I cannot take the article any further because I could find no other reliable sources (or, at least, none which added anything extra to that which is already included). The problem has been Atterion wanting to get rid of stuff s/he "knew" to be untrue because of the COI. Unfortunately, that included info from the NRHP survey etc. All I can do is keep a watch when they come off their block. There may be better sources in the US to which I have no access, of course. - Sitush (talk) 02:10, 8 August 2011 (UTC)
Hi Anna
I see you categorized Puttu as bread, which I find very surprising. I've never eaten Puttu that resemble anything I would call bread. Puttu are just flavored, steamed rice. Can you explain the classification, please?
Thanks
Guffydrawers (talk) 08:23, 9 August 2011 (UTC)
Hello Guffydrawers. I think you're right. I didn't inspect the article. I added the navbox because it was in the category Indian breads. I will remove the box and the cat. Many thanks for pointing it out. Best, Anna Frodesiak (talk) 15:37, 9 August 2011 (UTC)
Re: Jay Bahadur
I heard this last month and think you might be interested in using it as a reference:
Ewing, Mike. (July 26, 2011). Ontario Morning Podcast. CBC Radio One. "Jay Bahadur talks about his new book called "The Pirates of Somalia: Inside the Hidden World of Modern-Day Sea Bandits." Event occurs from 10:00-19:35.
I was just looking at a page I changed a while back and it looks like you changed it back again. The previous user had an image of a Halgerda batangas instead of the malesso. It looks like you moved my new correct picture of a Halgerda malesso and put the Halgerda batangas back on the page :-) Just checking if you had a reason I was missing or if I can change it back to the correct species:-) Thanks, Chad
Here are a few links to compare the species.
Halgerda malesso: Yellower in color, Lined body with yellow tips. Only reported in a few pacific islands.
2nd Link
I reverted to your version. Sorry about that. I didn't notice. I think the image I added has the wrong description. I'm a bit confused. Could you look at the description and see, and change it to the correct name? Many thanks for catching my mistake. :) Anna Frodesiak (talk) 05:58, 12 August 2011 (UTC)
Hello Susan. Yes, I'm doing fine. Hope you are too. Long time. It was my pleasure to make those. When I see a nudibranch image with no article, I can't resist. Such astonishingly beautiful animals. All the best, Anna Frodesiak (talk) 13:05, 14 August 2011 (UTC)
i want this sod fountains from china
Dear sir,
i want this sod fountains from china plz give me that companey name and email and adress.i have good orders .
waiting for ur reply.
kcreddy — Preceding unsigned comment added by 117.206.235.212 (talk) 05:35, 15 August 2011 (UTC)
Hi kcreddy. Sure. It's the Wong Sod Fountains Company, China. I don't know the email. Try a few different ones at random. Good luck with the orders. Remember, tell your customers they're gonna want to stand well clear when they turn on a sod fountain. Some sort of golf umbrella might be in order. Best, Anna Frodesiak (talk) 05:40, 15 August 2011 (UTC)
FYI
The deadline for submitting the DYK is coming up, at 02:34, 16 August. If you aren't able to do it by then because of the time difference, I'll submit something, but we can always have multiple ALT's. Viriditas (talk) 21:51, 15 August 2011 (UTC)
Could you please submit it? I have very limited time today, and I'd have to review a DKY before I submit another. Any old hook will do. We can, as you say ALT it after it's in. Many thanks, and sorry to dump it in your lap. Anna Frodesiak (talk) 00:19, 16 August 2011 (UTC)
No worries. I'll do it in a moment, then I'll be away for the rest of the day. Just remember in the future, you do not have to review it before you submit it. I won't even have time to review a DYK until much later tonight. Viriditas (talk) 00:24, 16 August 2011 (UTC)
Hi Anna, I've taken the liberty of rewriting and expanding your fascinating article Ratón. It's currently up for consideration for the "Did You Know" slot on the Main Page; I've requested that if it is accepted we both get credit for it. Prioryman (talk) 07:30, 16 August 2011 (UTC)
"My fascinating article?" I started a bit of rubbish. You, my friend, turned it into a great piece. Fantastic! I actually thought I had made a duplicate and somebody had redirected my stub to an existing, polished article. I had to check the history dispite apparent evidence otherwise.
I had terrible trouble with the Spanish sources, but that's no excuse. You were the perfect editor for the job. Superb!! It will make a great DYK. It's a shoe in.
Thanks for the compliments! Not at all impossible that Ratón's daddy or granddaddy was a fighting bull; actually I think you'd expect it. Prioryman (talk) 00:23, 17 August 2011 (UTC)
I actually emailed the diff to friends to show how fast an article can develop. Despite it having issues, I particularly liked this sentence: "...Further gorings occurred in Museros in 2005, when Ratón gored a dozen people, and at Yátova in 2006...". You've gotta love this bull. He must really enjoy his work. Anna Frodesiak (talk) 00:33, 17 August 2011 (UTC)
At some point I'm going to buckle down and do some research on the early days of cattle ranching in Hawaii. There are several sources on the subject that describe what happened when the King let the cows run loose and after time, they went from domesticated cattle to feral. At that point, they began terrorizing the countryside in Hawaii, and apparently, many people were killed. I'm curious if this was because of the bulls. Viriditas (talk) 00:42, 17 August 2011 (UTC)
The name is Indian in origin. Please refer to the article on the etymology of his first name, Jay, as well as the article on his last name, Bahadur. I hope this helps. With regards, AnupamTalk16:03, 18 August 2011 (UTC)
On 19 August 2011, Did you know? was updated with a fact from the article Ratón, which you created or substantially expanded. The fact was ... that a terrible Mouse weighing 500 kg (1,100 lb) has killed three people in Spain in the last five years? The nomination discussion and review may be seen at Template:Did you know nominations/Ratón.You are welcome to check how many hits the article got while on the front page (here's how, quick check) and add it to DYKSTATS if it got over 5,000. If you know of another interesting fact from a recently created article, then please suggest it on the Did you know? talk page.
FYI, it got 19,300 views, making it the second most popular DYK of August 2011 and the 19th most popular non-lead DYK of all time. Not a bad result! Prioryman (talk) 11:32, 20 August 2011 (UTC)
Hello! If you're planning to be an active Online Ambassador for the upcoming academic term, now is the time to join one or more pods. (A pod consists of the instructor, the Campus Ambassadors, and the Online Ambassadors for single class.) The Memorandum of Understanding (MOU) explains the expectations for being part of a pod as an Online Ambassador. (The MOU for pods in Canada is essentially the same.) In short, the role of Online Ambassadors this term consists of:
Working closely with the instructor and Campus Ambassadors, providing advice and perspective as an experienced Wikipedian
Helping students who ask for it (or helping them to find the help they need)
Watching out for the class as a whole
Helping students to get community feedback on their work
This replaces the 1-on-1 mentoring role for Online Ambassadors that we had in previous terms; rather than being responsible for individual students (some of whom don't want or help or are unresponsive), Online Ambassadors will be there to help whichever students in their class(es) ask for help.
You can browse the upcoming courses here: United States; Canada. More are being added as new pods become active and create their course pages.
Once you've found a class that you want to work with—especially if you some interest or expertise in the topic area—you should sign the MOU listing for that class and get in touch with the instructor. We're hoping to have at least two Online Ambassadors per pod, and more for the larger classes.
If you're up for supporting any kind of class and would like me to assign you to a pod in need of more Online Ambassadors, just let me know.
Hello.
Mam the some of the text were referred from a PDF of EPW (Economic and Political Weekly) and I citing it as a PDF or Journal I cited the URL of the result page which I got when I searched for the PDF. I saw your msg now and before i could act and rectify my mistake, the part was deleted. Can you Undo it, so I can cite it properly. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Vastu1706 (talk • contribs) 17:52, 20 August 2011 (UTC)
I see you put the text back in exactly the same as it was before. So, I guess you don't need help undoing it.
Before we talk about how to cite sources, let's address the copyright violation matter: Again, please, it is very important that you do not copy and paste. That is a copyright violation. It's not allowed. You must rephrase the content in your own words. Thank you and have a splendid day. :) Anna Frodesiak (talk) 21:57, 20 August 2011 (UTC)
I understand issues related to Copyright violation. The provided data is rephrased and added to the wiki page. Only the facts nad the figures are not changed. Thank you for pointing out the error on my part related to the citation of the data.
regards :) vastu1706 — Preceding unsigned comment added by Vastu1706 (talk • contribs) 11:57, 21 August 2011 (UTC)
In point form:
I'm not sure you understand issues related to Copyright violation, as you simply restored the exact same content, at least some of which was copy pasted from another website.
You rephrased nothing.
I pointed out nothing related to any error on your part related to citations. You must be thinking of someone else.
In case you haven't noticed, I blanked the entire article.
I do understand issues related to copyright violation, and I simply restored the exact same content because I added the content only after rephrasing it form the source.
In the second point you mentioned that I rephrased nothing, but mam with all due respect, have you read the PDF mentioned in the note section? If you would have then you would have noticed that the content form the PDF is rephrased and I repeat again only the facts were copied.
You may now understand the policy, but you sure didn't yesterday.
You left the confusing edit summary when you restored the new, improved text: "...Undid revision 445669621 by Anna Frodesiak..."
You restored a bunch of content. Some of it was rephrased. However, the third paragraph starting with "...Strengthening primary health centres (PHCs): The mission will..." google matches exactly with a document from http://www.jstor.org/stable/i404650. That's a copyright violation. When I see something like that, I don't pick through the rest. I tend to remove the lot.
Please add ~~~~ at the end of your communications. It automatically adds your signature and the time.
As you are on a school project, and part of that project may be to improve Healthcare in India, then why not get all your friends together and help put Humpty Dumpty back together again. Right now, the whole article is blanked. A good project would be to slowly restore the content after checking the sources. This would give lots of practice to you and others on how to add sourced, non-copyright violation content. I would be happy to help. What do you think?
I'm confused. The map of the location box is the one I uploaded. I added the little yellow square. I don't remember where the original map came from. Maybe it was already at Wikipedia. But it's quite low resolution.
Anyway, it's not a big deal. After all, people just use it to see where the subject is. Let's not worry about it. If you ever need anything, just ask. Best wishes. Anna Frodesiak (talk) 00:42, 24 August 2011 (UTC)
Well thank you! I was very pleased with myself for using "egregious". And it was too! Those IP scoundrels! Da noiv o' dem! Anyway, thanks for the barnstar. It's lovely. Triple smiles to you. Anna Frodesiak (talk) 09:52, 24 August 2011 (UTC)
Hi Anna, Good idea to polish this template up, thanks! Some suggestions: I would add Conch as a category, and also Periwinkles. I would make Snails into "Other snails" and I would separate land snails (currently the three Helix species, but there are more to come) from the few odd miscellaneous sea snails. I would also make Limpet a group. I see we are including species eaten in history and prehistory as well as currently, I think that is OK. I am still struggling with a poor internet connection. I am in California, not Nevis. As for the top and bottom, are you looking for beautiful seafood images? We also have a "Seashell" template, but that one is in reasonable shape I believe. Invertzoo (talk) 22:10, 24 August 2011 (UTC)
I've done most of what you suggested, as you've now seen. I liked the dishes group, but the navbox was so full. Besides, the body looks good containing only mollusk items. Anyway, it was a luxury. If you want it back, fine by me. A possibility would be to move the bottom bar to the top bar, and add dishes to the bottom bar. I can't say I'm crazy about the idea, though.
I think it's fine without the dishes. Thanks so very much Anna, the template is really a whole lot better than it was when you started in on it, and I can't imagine anyone else would have bothered to work on it! I looked around a bit for a good image for it, but I am not sure I really found one that would be suitable and attractive too. Many thanks again and I will keep looking. Invertzoo (talk) 02:52, 25 August 2011 (UTC)
My pleasure. And thanks for your improvements too.
I will subgroup the inkfish. I know it screws up the heirarchy thing, but I don't want a main group "gastropods" because it will eat up a huge amount of the left side. I might try to see how it looks. Best, Anna Frodesiak (talk) 02:58, 25 August 2011 (UTC)
You maybe didn't realize this but the gastropods and the bivalves are now listed mixed up together simply in alphabetical order, and because of that, I don't see why the Inkfish can't also just go in alphabetically, before the Limpets. I imagine that cooks don't care much about the taxonomy of seafood. What do you think? Best, Invertzoo (talk) 03:03, 25 August 2011 (UTC)
Of course I am making the assumption that the template is now more aimed at being useful to cooks and gourmets etc rather than to malacologists, but maybe that is not a good assumption...? I am jet-lagged remember. I also think that "Land snails" should probably be its own list, before "Limpets". And then the remainder of sea snails can be under, what, "Other sea snails"? Invertzoo (talk) 03:16, 25 August 2011 (UTC)
True. Grouping inkfish implies that the rest (bivalves and gastropods) are one group. It's a lesser of two evils here. I'm inclined to leave inkfish together at the top. They are, from a culinary point of view, "those delicious tentacled animals". I think culinary people would tend to casually group bivalves and gastropods. Separating those would cause further problems. What do you think? Anna Frodesiak (talk) 03:20, 25 August 2011 (UTC)
I think you make very reasonable points Anna, go with what seems right to you. It does look OK and getting better and better I think. I have only half a brain right now so don't trust my suggestions too much! By the way, here perhaps is a possible image and here is another possible image . Invertzoo (talk) 03:27, 25 August 2011 (UTC)
Well, I went ahead and subgrouped it. I alphasorted inkfish to the bottom. If it remains at the top, a nice image could fit snugly on the right. Your call. Also, if you like it better the way it was before, it's an easy revert. The grouping only took a few minutes, so no big waste. Anna Frodesiak (talk) 04:43, 25 August 2011 (UTC)
Wow... Thanks for all your work Anna, it's starting to look really good now and is very clear and helpful! And yes I am sure more people will use it. One thing: the "Cockles" section is currently in with the gastropods but it needs to be with the Bivalves. Also, one of the "Cockles" (the Ocean Quahog) should definitely be in with the "Clams". To tell the truth, many of these common names, including "Cockle" are very much grab-bag terms used by seafood dealers, and therefore they have have almost no taxonomic significance on the family level. But, if we decide that the template is aimed primarily at seafood lovers rather than malacologists, then I think these common food names are an OK way to "classify" edible mollusks. Thanks so much, you are are a tremendous asset wherever you work on WP! Invertzoo (talk) 15:15, 25 August 2011 (UTC)
I've lost track. Pls check my diffs. I think I've straightened some of it out. Please tell me what further things need doing. You know me by now. Don't be afraid to instruct. I totally appreciate your direction.
I will look at the template once again, but it seems OK now. How about an image? Here is a dish of freshwater nerites, unfortunately we don't know the species.
I searched the cockles, and they all seem to be bivalves. I just misplaced the subgroup. Which are not bivalves?
You are right, all the cockles are bivalves, it was only the subgroup that needed moving. I did however put one of them into the "clams" subgroup. Invertzoo (talk) 17:27, 25 August 2011 (UTC)
Thanks again for the kind words. I love your comments at the talk. It really says what the template's intent is. Damn straight this is for seafood people! I think chefs will use it while malacologists will cringe. Ha!
Yes, but the malacologists probably don't need this template and anyway, it's good for them to see how other people view their phylum. Invertzoo (talk) 17:27, 25 August 2011 (UTC)
P.S. Now, stay the heck off WP and have a vacation. (By the way, Manhattan will be blown out to sea when you get back. That's good for you because then you can scuba to work.) :) Anna Frodesiak (talk) 16:17, 25 August 2011 (UTC)
This trip is for visiting the in-laws. I can't run around too much because my sprained knee is not all the way better yet, and the other foot is hurting a lot for some reason that I don't understand so I'm using a cane. Manhattan did get a shake from the East Coast earthquake, maybe that shook it loose? Invertzoo (talk) 17:27, 25 August 2011 (UTC)
Sorry to hear about the knee and the foot. Earthquake? Loose? I didn't hear about any earthquake, and I heard Manhattan was already loose. :) Anna Frodesiak (talk) 00:38, 26 August 2011 (UTC)
More more
I changed "Other" to Chitons, and added one more species of chiton. I suppose that the background color for that group should no longer be pink, but blue like the other sections? Invertzoo (talk) 18:16, 25 August 2011 (UTC)
Other --> chilton. Good move. Pink. Hmmmm. It seems an odd colour, but sort of gray. I don't know why. I added "|evenstyle = background:#F4F0EC" to the top to alternate faint bluish. I'll try to fix it. Anna Frodesiak (talk) 00:38, 26 August 2011 (UTC)
NAUGHTYVIR (talk) 12:07, 25 August 2011 (UTC) Thanx a lot Sir.. I am enjoying editing and adding data on wikipedia. I hope that we will continue to enrich this encyclopedia..
My pleasure. Let me know if you need anything. A couple of tips: Please don't bold and italicize stuff so much, and not all CAPITALS either. :) Anna Frodesiak (talk) 12:12, 25 August 2011 (UTC)
NAUGHTYVIR (talk) 16:14, 25 August 2011 (UTC) Thanx..I will keep your tips in mind while editing. One thing to ask. Will i be able to upload photos only after being an autoconfirmed user after four days? or is there any other way to upload photo or any other media file? Can I create a new article as a new user?
Thanks for the lovely barnstar. I really didn't do very much to deserve it.
I think you need to wait for some period of time. If you need help uploading an image, just ask. I can do it for you.
You can prepare the draft of a new article in your sandbox. When ready, if you can't move it into the mainspace, just ask, and I can help.
If you still want to make a gastropod navbox, it sounds perhaps like a good idea... or do you think not? I suppose it could include simply the largest clades:
I think it would be OK to have little images with each clade name, especially if you could find nice clear images of live animals. What do you think? Invertzoo (talk) 00:01, 26 August 2011 (UTC)
I can help you find suitable images if you think the whole thing is worthwhile. Be honest if you don't like the idea. Invertzoo (talk) 00:06, 26 August 2011 (UTC)
(edit conflict)Anna, You seem be thinking of a single template for all gastropods. It should actually be creating seperate navbox templates for each family/genus so that there is horizontal navigation is possible within the species of the family/genus. I will work on creating one for Lobatus. — Ganeshk (talk)00:23, 26 August 2011 (UTC)
Ganeshk: A separate navbox for each family/genus???? Holy cow. That sounds like waaaaaaayyyyy to much work.
Susan: I can't comment on the seashell template because I don't collect them. By the way, I added a little steamed clam image to the edible template. Tweak away or replace it or remove it if you like. Anna Frodesiak (talk) 00:28, 26 August 2011 (UTC)
It's gorgeous. I don't know how you put it together so fast. But, doing this for all families? Years and years of work, followed by years and years of maintenance with changing taxonomy. What I am thinking is some super high overview, like in User:Anna Frodesiak/Violet sandbox Just clades, supers and families. The navbox you just made is nice, but it has a bit of redundancy with the species list in the article, and it's not totally birds-eye. It shows a portion of the story.
A visitor looking at something like User:Anna Frodesiak/Violet sandbox while staring at the taxobox could help give an overview. What do you think? If there's a clever way to put together something like in violet sandbox, maintenance would be peanuts. Plus it would be the only cladogramish thing we have. Speaking of which, do we have a cladogram somewhere that has all the clades? Anna Frodesiak (talk) 01:04, 26 August 2011 (UTC)
Hello again Anna. Ganenesh's Strombidae navbox is lovely, but I agree that ones like that would require an impossible amount of maintenance and updating because the overall taxonomy and names of species change so often. I agree with you that a single overall navbox would be a better idea. I personally don't have a problem with only using the major level of clades, the structure if we try to use all the clades is too complex I think: it does not use standard ranks and therefore cannot easily be tabulated. You can see a complete cladogram right before the list on the B&R page, but it stops right before the superfamily level. Not all of the minor clades even have superfamilies by the way.
I don't see a problem with making a simple navbox using only the largest clades and using only one image to represent each one, as long as the image is chosen carefully.
It's a possibility yes. The only thing is that it would primarily be helpful to malacologists, as the average person who is interested in snails or shells does not know the clades, especially because the revolutionary B&R system of taxonomy is still very recent (2005). Also a question: would the template only be used on the various clade articles? There are 41 of those. If so, the template would be extremely useful in terms of showing/learning how all the clades fit together into the tree of life. I guess however that this kind of template would not be shown on articles about superfamilies, families, genera and species (?). I say that because on articles about lower taxa, the appropriate clade (the one that applies to the article in question) would not be displayed in boldface on the template because the clade would not be the article title...? Do you get what I am saying? The jetlag has mostly worn off but I just got up and have not had breakfast yet so my explanations are still a bit opaque I think! Invertzoo (talk) 15:59, 27 August 2011 (UTC)
Yes, we could add a "See also" to all of the 41 clade articles that need it, and we certainly should do that if we don't make a template to go in them. It's a pity we can't just put the cladogram into the template. Maybe the cladogram could be turned into a jpeg file and go in that way with click for enlarge? Or of course the cladogram itself can be inserted into each of the articles, but then if it was updated it would have to be changed manually. Invertzoo (talk) 19:54, 28 August 2011 (UTC)
OK, that should do the trick for the cladogram! My internet access is still rather pathetic (the free WiFi at this hotel repeated;y drops my connection especialy in the evenings) so if I don;t immediately start using your excellent templates, you will know why! Invertzoo (talk) 17:39, 29 August 2011 (UTC)
VIRESH KASALA 10:12, 26 August 2011 (UTC) I am really glad to have your kind help.. Heartily thanks to you. I will wait for some time for media files to be uploaded. Can I upload images directly from my computer or they need to be uploaded from URL? Have pleasant time ahead... :) :) :) :) :) — Preceding unsigned comment added by NAUGHTYVIR (talk • contribs)
Hello and welcome again. You can upload files from your computer here:
VIRESH KASALA 10:38, 26 August 2011 (UTC) ok.. Now the link you provided will help me to upload images.. I will always be aware about the copyrights of any content. Thanks a lot.. — Preceding unsigned comment added by NAUGHTYVIR (talk • contribs)
A tag has been placed on File:PlateOfFishLg.jpg requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section F2 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because it is an image page for a missing or corrupt image or an empty image description page for a Commons-hosted image.
If you think that this notice was placed here in error, contest the deletion by clicking on the button labelled "Click here to contest this speedy deletion". Doing so will take you to the talk page where you will find a pre-formatted place for you to explain why you believe the page should not be deleted. You can also visit the the page's talk page directly to give your reasons, but be aware that once tagged for speedy deletion, if the page meets the criterion, it may be deleted without delay. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag yourself, but don't hesitate to add information to the page that would render it more in conformance with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. Sfan00 IMG (talk) 09:59, 27 August 2011 (UTC)
"...The floating population of the town an average 1,50,000..." in this edit.
-It is Hundred and fifty thousand and it is written in Indian numbering system. 1,50,000 means that one lakh fifty thousand(1 lakh= 100 thousand)
Thank you for informing about the copyright problems. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Tirupur123451 (talk • contribs) 19:51, 28 August 2011 (UTC)
Pretty please?
Anna, since you are now fluent in template syntax and I am not, having forgotten the little tiny bit I used to know (!), could I ask you (pretty please) if you would do me a big favor and widen the seashell template a little bit? It is currently 100 pixels wide, I believe. I added the word "About" to one subheading and now the template looks a bit cramped. Many thanks. In fact... could I ask you to make the first subheading "Mollusk shells", and to create a second heading where there is currently just a think orange line and make that second subheading "About mollusk shells". The third subheading is fine as it is. Also actually, please again, is there any chance I could ask you to help me in another way by toning down the colors so the template as a whole is less lurid? I don't mind the pinkish orange color, but I feel it should be very much paler. If you don't have the time or the inclination to do these things, I do understand. Best to you, Invertzoo (talk) 20:13, 28 August 2011 (UTC)
Width done. You can alter the width by searching "width". (There's only one occurrence of the word.) I set it as width= 200px, which might not be what you want.
Headings done. Check the links for "Mollusk shells" and "About mollusk shells".
Lightening the colour made it look all "bandage colour". Yuk. I thought yellowish might be nice. I seem to associate that with seashells. See User:Anna Frodesiak/Bronze sandbox and tell me if it's sort of the right thing. I got those colours from the templates listed below.
If you prefer something different, you can shop at the lovely List of colors.
I have observed some pretty remarkable contributions from this account. I am curious, why are you not an administrator. Pardon that you have struck me as the kind of editor who could be a good one, and that you seem qualified by a cursory review. I am working on an essay, and I believe you are of the adman class. I'd like to see you become an admin. This working draft might explain, but you are exactly the kind of editor I had in mind. My76Strat (talk) 06:47, 29 August 2011 (UTC)
Aw schucks! I bet you say that to all the editors. Wait a second, you do! This is a form letter! Haahahahaha. Actually, it's because I can't handle commitments. But thanks for the kind (though impersonal) words. :) Anna Frodesiak (talk) 07:53, 29 August 2011 (UTC)
They are only semi impersonal. The editors I have chosen to send this message are not of a hap hazard list, but contributors I have observed. I still think you would be great. My76Strat (talk) 07:58, 29 August 2011 (UTC)
She would make a fine admin, and I suspect her RfA would break WP:100 records. Hopefully, someone on IRC will mentor her on the RfA process and help cajole her into it. Plus, she could get a lot more work done with the ability to protect and delete articles. Viriditas (talk) 03:06, 30 August 2011 (UTC)
You're a fine salesman. :) You need to put your foot in the door and tell her all about how adminship will take the spots out of her rug. Come on man, step up. :) Viriditas (talk) 03:47, 30 August 2011 (UTC)
My76Strat: Well in that case, thank you. I'm actually flattered, and I appreciate you thinking of me.
Viriditas: Thank you too for the kind words. Probably having some extra tools could help me get more done, and free up admins, but the job comes with responsibilities. People would ask me to get in the middle of arguments. I just have no patience for ANI and such. My idea of dispute resolution is clunking their heads together.
Plus, seeing what Qwyrxian went through makes it plain that even the slightest mistake in the past gets brought up, and seems to be grounds for an oppose. I've made tons of mistakes, and my judgement is highly questionable. In fact, I'm still stuck with that carbon paper company I invested all my money into. Seriously, the tally would be 7 support, 200 oppose for sure. Now you, Viriditas, would be a great admin. Why not you? Hmmm? Anna Frodesiak (talk) 03:46, 30 August 2011 (UTC)
"My idea of dispute resolution is clunking their heads together." Hear, hear! Where the hell is the Clunk heads button?? Viriditas (talk) 03:51, 30 August 2011 (UTC)
Anna Frodesiak, for sure there are no guarantees when it comes to RfA, except this one, I will be in your corner, regardless! Viriditas, Anna is 100% correct to suggest that you should also consider yourself, fully qualified, and just a tad tardy, as it relates to your fitness for the bit. My76Strat (talk) 04:02, 30 August 2011 (UTC)
My76Strat: Thank you. It's nice to have someone in my corner. Again, it's just the dispute resolution sort of thing that I have no interest in. All the other aspects of Wikipedia, I love. Can an admin say "Sorry, that's not an area I deal with. Ask someone else."?
Viriditas: Yes! A "clunk" button would be great! There are a few editors out there I would clunk immediately, then repeatedly. Then, just as they staggered to their feet, more clunkings! And when they say, "Hey. Why are you...." more clunkings! Anna Frodesiak (talk) 04:19, 30 August 2011 (UTC)
Regarding an earlier point, yes, admins can absolutely say "that's not an area I deal with". We're all still volunteers, and none of us are compelled to do anything we don't want to. For example, for right now, I have no interest in learning how to make code templates, even though that's definitely an area where admins are needed (since a lot of templates are fully protected to prevent site-wide vandalism). All you have to do to stay out of the fray is to only do the admin actions you want to; avoiding DR is basically just a matter of avoiding WP:AN and WP:ANI, and there's lots of admins that never go there unless challenged (and many who almost never get challenged). A better question, though, is whether or not the admin tools would help you do what you already do now or want to do in the future. To be fair, you may face opposition from the group at RFA who thinks that admin candidates should have some previous experience on policy/guideline discussions, which I see that you don't. Other !voters, though, will be impressed by your massive amounts of content contributions and especially the new article creations. I doubt you'll face the kind of dramaz that I did; however, at least for me, I never really got stressed by any part of the process. While I certainly watched by vote tally quite closely all week, I never felt like it was the "Hell Week" that others describe, and, in fact, much less stressful much of the other stuff I'm involved on on WP. Overall, though, the issue is really up to you. Recently, there's been talk that there's a lot of people on WP that qualify as admins but simply don't want to deal with the dramaz involved with RFA, and that someone (a committee, the Stewards, Jimbo), should just go around declaring good, long term, uncontroversial editors to be admins by fiat. I think you would definitely fit that bill, but I can also understand the reluctance to go through the process. In any event, I think you're a great editor (although there is something a little bit questionable about someone who spends so much time writing about gastropods...eww...I know, I'm a specie-ist and am rudely prejudiced against small, squishy, vegetable stealing animals) and your contributions to WP are wonderful, whether or not you ever decide to ask for the mop. Qwyrxian (talk) 00:46, 1 September 2011 (UTC)
For the record, Anna does have a great deal of policy/guideline experience on the WikiProject level (which I believe is consistent and equivalent with project space prerequisites). And although she won't admit it, she has actually performed quite a bit of mediation and dispute resolution. Most importantly, she has vastly superior social and interpersonal skills that most admins lack and will in all honesty, probably never attain. And, although she doesn't talk about it very much, from what I can piece together from her comments here and there, she has traveled all over the world and understands diversity in all its cultural forms, including the subtle differences in communication that often comes up on the noticeboards when we are dealing with users from different countries. Unfortunately, most admins haven't seen their way out of their parents' basement, or live like nocturnal creatures in their dorm rooms, so Anna is not just qualified for the position, she's one of the best candidates I've ever seen. Sure, she doesn't have the leet technical skills, but to her advantage, she learns incredibly fast and to her credit, she learns from her mistakes. Wikipedia would benefit from choosing admins with good people skills rather than technical users. You can teach technical skills, but interpersonal skills come from real world experience, and in many ways, are more representative of character and personality. Viriditas (talk) 02:17, 1 September 2011 (UTC)
It's nice to hear that one can stay out of unpleasant areas. But, seeing the unavoidable arbitration thing you've been handling greatly deters me.
I agree that a better question pertains to admin tools, and whether or not they would help. Now, when I need something fixed, I call an admin. Good system.
Having opinions on policy/guidelines is not my thing, and if such participation is crucial, and if I continue to avoid that, then I should not be a candidate.
Your RfA did look like running a gauntlet.
I agree with "admins by fiat". Or maybe better, degrees of entitlement, like getting rollback, etc. Why not other tools? Blur the lines. It feels a lot like cops and little people sometimes. A form of meritocracy might be best.
Writing about squishy stuff is awesome. I guess it's a form of escapism too. In a crazy world, to pay attention to some little slug on the sea floor brings me comfort.
Thank you for the kind words.
V again:
Policy/guideline experience: Well, there is the Wikipedia:WikiProject Animals/Draft capitalization guidelines initiative. A year old, but it will still run its course. I tend to finish what I start. And this one, I hope, will end up in the guidelines, and will help end lots of page moves, reverted edits, and a zillion wasted talk page keystrokes.
If such skills you speak of are actually important in an admin, then maybe I could help smooth out a few rough situations. Sometimes I think a lot of threads are too long due to "horn-locking", where a bit more "seeking understanding" would make everything better.
Considerations:
PROS:
I could help others. And in the real world, people who don't want to be in positions of administration are often better choices than those who seek such positions. So, maybe I would be a good choice.
CONS:
It could spoil my experience here and make it seem like work.
I could get stuck in the middle of two wiki-lawyers and not know which side to take.
I don't like power.
When I need an admin with tools (or "weapons" as some consider them), there are plenty of admins available.
Already too many chiefs, not enough natives.
After living in Holland for a long time, I appreciate how the citizenry can take responsibility, displacing some of the administration and enforcement people.
Q&V again: Thank you all for saying such nice things. I will talk with some admins on IRC to see what they say. For now, it's probably best to stick the whole thing on the back burner and come back to it later. Best to you all. (I think this is the longest post I've ever made) .... :) Anna Frodesiak (talk) 03:26, 6 September 2011 (UTC)
It's good to see you consider this carefully and soberly. Most editors seem to either have the "I will be an admin someday" mentality (I basically did, to be honest), or the "I never want to do that, ever, what a waste of time." You present some very good considerations, both positive and negative. If you ever have any questions, of course you know you're always welcome to ask. One minor correction: the arbitration has nothing to do with me being an admin (even though some users are trying very speciously to connect the issue); I'm just an editor with respect to those articles and users. Let me tell you, sometimes I wish I weren't...but sometimes, helping the encyclopedia isn't all fun and games. Ultimately, arbitration will solve the problem: if I'm right, the major bad actors will be removed from the scene and it will get (a little) better. If I'm partially right, the articles will go under WP:General sanctions and then the bad actors will knock themselves out sooner or later. If I'm totally wrong, and I'm actually a major cause of the problem (like my critics contend), then I'll get topic banned and I can move on myself. Qwyrxian (talk) 05:13, 6 September 2011 (UTC)
Re:Thanks for the edits
No worries. I just stumbled on them while checking new pages and thought I would chip in with some basic info. Keep up the good work! Ruigeroeland (talk) 08:02, 29 August 2011 (UTC)
For your continued efforts in cleaning up 800+ villages, several police forces, an entire alleged region and, well, quite a bit more besides. That one person could create so much dust in such a short time still boggles my mind. Sitush (talk) 22:53, 29 August 2011 (UTC)
Dear Anna,
Many thanks for your help on my recent posts. As you see I'm new - haven't even worked out how to reply on my own talk page yet...
Actually I have very little spare time for this and have just started to improve information on some things I know about - without really having time to digest all the guidance. Sorry, I'll try to be more careful.
JRF66 (talk) 10:40, 30 August 2011 (UTC)
No problem at all. You're making good contributions. We need experts like you.
The thing I worry about is the copy and paste. That's a big no-no here. Other than that, you're doing fine, and please continue. Please don't be offended if I tweak a bit of what you did here and there.
If you did copy paste this edit, just let me know, and I'll revert it. No harm done.
A quickie lesson: Click "watch" at the top of articles you edit. Then click "my watchlist" at the top right of the screen once in a while. That'll show you if anyone's changed what you did.
Hi Anna. I was thinking of (slowly) working through the South China nature reserves I know, which deserve to be better known, but often the only source of objective reliable information (especially in English) is from the reports we wrote (at KFBG) - as in the Dinghushan example. These reports do draw on other sources (often in Chinese) and I don't think there would be copyright concerns from KFBG's side (I can check) or from me as an editor, but there are CoI considerations. Any advice? — Preceding unsigned comment added by JRF66 (talk • contribs) 19:02, 30 August 2011 (UTC)
Hi JRF66. That sounds like a great idea.
There is no copyright issue if the content is paraphrased.
The COI matter is interesting. It is COI by definition. But, if there's no profit motive, that sort of changes things. Is KFBG totally nonprofit?
Yes, totally nonprofit, and generally self-funded so it doesn't need to 'sell' itself to supporters. I guess the thing is to guard against self-promotion. I'll try to meditate first... JRF66 (talk) 10:03, 31 August 2011 (UTC)
I do believe it's important to include a brief description on how to prepare rhubarb in particular as the plant has poisonous parts that should not be used. I saw nothing in the recipe telling about that. I added a small bit about the strawberry as that's another important ingredient in the pie. It's also a way to help fill out the sparse article. I am finding nothing to support the article's current assertions that the pie is Appalachian. I do believe Rhubarb Strawberry pie is eaten throughout the colder areas of the Midwest, Canada and down south. I will continue to look. Thanks! LittleRedWriter (talk) 06:10, 31 August 2011 (UTC)
I see your point.
How about keeping or rewording content about the ingredients so that it relates directly to the pie.
Also, maybe a bit of rephrasing is in order. To avoid the "how-to" style: "...Do not use frostbitten stalks either as they could be poisonous..." could be written as "...The use of frostbitten rhubarb stalks is avoided in the pie, as they may be poisonous..." Would that be okay?
Also, yes, in Canada we eat a lot of this pie with vanilla ice cream. It's really the best ice cream choice for such a pie. But of course, that's original research. :) Anna Frodesiak (talk) 06:26, 31 August 2011 (UTC)
Dear Ms. Frodesiak,
I am an amateur wiki editor, I agree. But I am not a novice English writer; please do excuse typos. I will surely try to avoid such mistakes in punctuation hereafter. Please let me know why when I want to bring to light the other side of Kiran Bedi (after all she is a public figure) some people are bent on removing the facts posted under "Controversies". Wikipedia as I believe is not a forum for self glorification, and why is it being allowed? Would you accept if I paraphrase from printed and published Books and newspaper reports, quoting sources?
Dear Babu Daniel. Don't worry about the typos. You make good contributions, and I think your English is better than mine.
I can see that the controversies section you added to Kiran Bedi remains. Well done. The part about her daughter is absent, though. It was removed in this edit. Restore it if you like, as it was removed without explanation. But, it really must be accompanied by good sources. The only source added to that content was this. The website is not reliable: "...evolved the website into a community blog...". Anna Frodesiak (talk) 01:04, 2 September 2011 (UTC)
I can see you are familiar with article talk pages. If there is a dispute over the controversies section, consider discussing it there.
Dear Ms. Frodesiak,
Thank you! I'm just learning the whole process of being a contributor. I will post only following the norm of providing information based on credible and verifiable sources; and I am looking for such a source regarding the source of her daughter's admission.
All my adult life (30 years) I have fought double standards in public life at a huge personal loss to me; I care not. I have taken on three bigwigs in different instances, challenging them and in one case the matter even reached the Supreme Court, without the other side being able to get a favorable order despite engaging the present Home Minister of India to argue his case. Kiran Bedi is not an exception to the rule that Indians in high places have a self-righteous attitude; I am basing this on her public work during and after her holding the public office. I firmly believe that the general public have a right to know both sides of the bread, not just the buttered one. Sorry to bother you with a long note. Regards, Babu Daniel. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Babudaniel (talk • contribs) 03:01, 2 September 2011 (UTC)
Please, call me Anna. Good luck with the "daughter admission" refs. As there were mass protests, there should be many out there. If there is another side the article's subject, it is good that you add content to represent it. I'm very pleased that there are people in this world shedding light. Your efforts taking on big power has a price, but, there are many who appreciated what you are doing. Best wishes, Anna Frodesiak (talk) 04:05, 2 September 2011 (UTC)
Thank you, Anna. Regrading, "daughter admission" I am still searching for credible sources. My intention again is not to malign her at all, but to present facts and prevent deification. What do you think?
Indian malls
It's been more than a week, I think you're clear to go with whatever criteria seem best to you and start cutting. Then once people start crying bloody murder, you can always revisit the criteria. Qwyrxian (talk) 13:47, 2 September 2011 (UTC)
I suggest digging for a few more. Stealing references from http://fr.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Corre would be a good start, (providing it's the same group). Second, Google News. There ought to be lots.
I stumbled into wrestling articles chasing some disruptive editor. In the sphere, I see a lot of arguments over who should get an article and who should not. A lot of talk over the merits of the people. That means nothing. Please read below. I will probably point others toward the subsection too:
I have added proper referencing and reliable secondary sources for The Corre. Could you take a look and decide whether it should still be considered for deletion? Starship.paint (talk) 08:26, 3 September 2011 (UTC)
Well done. By the way, what I wrote above is pretty solid, but the guidelines about people and athletes are a bit contradictory. If the wrestler/group never performed, but got media coverage, then it could be contested. But, if they did "fight for the title" or whatever they do, then yes, it should be really difficult to challenge. Anna Frodesiak (talk) 23:53, 3 September 2011 (UTC)
Phyllis/
Have I added enough footnotes yet here to be okay with my Wikipedia entry?
(Peter Rodgers Organization).
Do the other sources "...address the subject directly in detail..."? Is there "...more than a trivial mention..." of Peter Rodgers Organization? What do you think?
I just deleted the UCLA film archive one. Do you want me to delete the Grammy one, which solely verifies the fact that was the first album to win Album of The Year, since it does not mention him?
All the rest of these footnotes corroborate (verify) the facts stated where they are placed.
The 1st footnoted article titled "The Insider" is all about Rodgers.
The 2nd footnote is all about Rodgers and his dad.
The 3rd "The Next Generation" is entirely about Rodgers.
The 5th footnote titled "Syndication Briefs" is a short article, and it is entirely about Rodgers being the film distributor that holds catalogue including the John Ford films, and the article says that he restored them, as I mentioned in the Wikipedia article.
The 6th footnote titled "The Brotherhood" is a long article is about the book, and talks about all the film people that contributed to it, and corroborates the fact that Rodgers is one of them.
According to my arithmetic, that leaves 5 good refs. I think that's sufficient. I won't challenge the article's notability, and I doubt anyone else will either. If it is challenged, it might be on the grounds that the refs are about the person, and not the company, per se. Others are welcome to render an opinion here. Anna Frodesiak (talk) 11:58, 3 September 2011 (UTC)
Thank you, Anna!!!!!!!!!!
The referenced articles are about what he is doing (has done) on behalf of the Peter Rodgers Company and his keeping it alive after the death of his father, and the historic films and TV shows it distributes. There are zero mentions about his personal life, nor any other things in his life. The referencing articles center solely in relation to various business affairs done by the film distribution company, except for the one about the book, which focuses on it being published, and focuses on the other Hollywood TV and movie movers and shakers that wrote it, including him. So on those grounds, I think it is okay. Thank you for all your help! I know I have had a whole lot of questions!!!!! If anything does coms up, let me know. I hope you have an totally fantastic Labor Day!!!!!!!!! Thank you so much for all your help, Anna!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! It was great to be able to interact with you for Wikipedia!!!!!!!!!!! — Preceding unsigned comment added by Defgirl666 (talk • contribs) 19:23, 3 September 2011 (UTC)
You are most welcome. You should be very proud of yourself. You've done a great job, and as a first article too! I'll keep an eye on it. It should be fine. :) Best wishes, Anna Frodesiak (talk) 23:03, 3 September 2011 (UTC)
Well, not according to my friends. But, I'm working on a "lightning-on-command" trick that I'm hoping will change their minds. At the very least, it should enable me to boss them around more. :) Anna Frodesiak (talk) 05:21, 4 September 2011 (UTC)
Is it time to look at some sort of protection for List of Ezhavas? I am "sort of" about the situation but not always thinking clearly at the moment - it could be the same person returning while logged out etc. The policies are explicit, there is a mention via your note on the talk page etc and yet the unsourced/unlinked additions & reversions continue. - Sitush (talk) 00:09, 6 September 2011 (UTC)
If you want to ask for protection, feel free.
I'd forgotten about the talk page note. Next time, maybe we should add something like:
What a curious video. Hopefully they're not flea-infested: doing that to a hedgehog would be a considerable sacrifice. Aside from sharing their name with an adjective for slowness, sloths have only two or three toes ... - Sitush (talk) 09:20, 6 September 2011 (UTC)
![[1]](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Halgerda_willeyi_2.jpg){kind=link}
![[2]](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Halgerda_wasinensis.jpg){kind=link}
