User talk:Archaeopsittacus

Archaeopsittacus, you are invited to the Teahouse!

Hi Archaeopsittacus! Thanks for contributing to Wikipedia. Come join experienced editors at the Teahouse! The Teahouse is a space where new editors can get help from experienced editors. These editors have been around for a long time and have extensive knowledge about how Wikipedia works. Come share your experiences, ask questions, and get advice from experts. I hope to see you there! Doctree (I'm a Teahouse host)

Visit the Teahouse

This message was delivered automatically by your robot friend, HostBot (talk) 16:08, 29 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Baselrallus intermedius

to --Macrochelys (talk) 18:32, 1 August 2014 (UTC) Hello,

The article containing the description of Baselrallus intermedius was indeed on the website of the Journal of Zoological Systematics and Evolutionary Research for a while, but for some reason it was eventually removed, meaning that the original source describing the taxon is no longer available.

Well, I can think of a reason: the paper mentions a new name: Baselrallus intermedius De Pietri et Mayr, 2014. At this moment a Nomen Nudum, because it is not published, only on line first, but I have the paper. It happens more often, Trevor Worthy had a paper on Coenocorypha last year, it was on line, but taken of the site because a new species was mentioned: The entry has been deleted on Thursday. Here is the reason (told me by e-mail by Dr. Worthy): "Because it is a taxonomic article it should not have gone online early as the online early version in EMU does not have pagination or volume numbers - and a page number and volume number is of paramount importance for a paper describing a taxon. So it will appear with the rest of the issue (now online) in the December version when that issue is actually published properly." I don't think I do any harm in mentioning a name that was already made a Nomen Nudum by their own publisher. The only thing you can criticize is the fact that I did not mention that it is a Nomen Nudum. I did not mention the fact it is a Nomen Nudum because I expect the paper will be published this year, so I will not change the entry. By the way, I have updated this site "xxxx in paleontology" for the years 2000 to 2014 (2000 under construction)

Sorry for the delay, I did not know how this worked.

Regards, --Archaeopsittacus (talk) 2:35, 2 August 2014 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for August 4

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited 2000 in paleontology, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page MP 8. Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 09:34, 4 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]

August 2014

Hello, I'm BracketBot. I have automatically detected that your edit to 1825 in paleontology may have broken the syntax by modifying 2 "{}"s. If you have, don't worry: just edit the page again to fix it. If I misunderstood what happened, or if you have any questions, you can leave a message on my operator's talk page.

List of unpaired brackets remaining on the page:

{| class="wikitable sortable" align="center" width="100%"
''[[Larus toliapicus]]'' <ref name=Larus11>{{cite journal |authors=E. Koenig |year=1825 |title= |journal=Icones fossilium sectilis |volume= |

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, BracketBot (talk) 23:11, 25 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, I'm BracketBot. I have automatically detected that your edit to 1984 in paleontology may have broken the syntax by modifying 1 "()"s. If you have, don't worry: just edit the page again to fix it. If I misunderstood what happened, or if you have any questions, you can leave a message on my operator's talk page.

List of unpaired brackets remaining on the page:

(Rancholabrean
(Rancholabrean

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, BracketBot (talk) 20:52, 28 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]

September 2014

Hello, I'm BracketBot. I have automatically detected that your edit to 1978 in paleontology may have broken the syntax by modifying 1 "()"s. If you have, don't worry: just edit the page again to fix it. If I misunderstood what happened, or if you have any questions, you can leave a message on my operator's talk page.

List of unpaired brackets remaining on the page:

(Monterey Formation

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, BracketBot (talk) 20:32, 11 September 2014 (UTC)[reply]

October 2014

Hello, I'm BracketBot. I have automatically detected that your edit to 1973 in paleontology may have broken the syntax by modifying 2 "{}"s. If you have, don't worry: just edit the page again to fix it. If I misunderstood what happened, or if you have any questions, you can leave a message on my operator's talk page.

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, BracketBot (talk) 17:04, 11 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, I'm BracketBot. I have automatically detected that your edit to 1974 in paleontology may have broken the syntax by modifying 2 "[]"s. If you have, don't worry: just edit the page again to fix it. If I misunderstood what happened, or if you have any questions, you can leave a message on my operator's talk page.

List of unpaired brackets remaining on the page:

Late Eocene]]

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, BracketBot (talk) 11:35, 13 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, I'm BracketBot. I have automatically detected that your edit to 1971 in paleontology may have broken the syntax by modifying 2 "[]"s. If you have, don't worry: just edit the page again to fix it. If I misunderstood what happened, or if you have any questions, you can leave a message on my operator's talk page.

List of unpaired brackets remaining on the page:

An [[Struthionidae.

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, BracketBot (talk) 12:18, 25 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Disambiguation link notification for October 14

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited 1976 in paleontology, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Zavhan. Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 09:17, 14 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Disambiguation link notification for October 21

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that you've added some links pointing to disambiguation pages. Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.

1982 in paleontology

added a link pointing to MP 8

1985 in paleontology

added a link pointing to Sharga

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 09:09, 21 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Disambiguation link notification for October 28

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that you've added some links pointing to disambiguation pages. Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.

2005 in paleontology

added links pointing to Jura, Michel Brunet, Terry Harrison and MP 8

2010 in paleontology

added links pointing to Li Li, Michael Archer and Xu Xing

2011 in paleontology

added links pointing to Li Li, Daniel Thomas and Xu Xing

2004 in paleontology

added links pointing to MN 1 and MP 30

2007 in paleontology

added links pointing to Li Li and MP 28

2008 in paleontology

added links pointing to Ma and Michel Brunet

2013 in archosaur paleontology

added links pointing to Ma and Mya

1999 in paleontology

added a link pointing to MP 8

2000 in paleontology

added a link pointing to Richard Walter

2001 in paleontology

added a link pointing to Richard Smith

2002 in paleontology

added a link pointing to Richard Smith

2014 in paleontology

added a link pointing to Wang Yan

2015 in paleontology

added a link pointing to Mya

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 11:26, 28 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Disambiguation link notification for November 4

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that you've added some links pointing to disambiguation pages. Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.

1970 in paleontology

added a link pointing to Miramar

1971 in paleontology

added a link pointing to Sheppey

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 15:20, 4 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Disambiguation link notification for December 2

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited 2014 in paleontology, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Li Qiang. Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 10:06, 2 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]

**** in Paleontology

I have to ask, do you understand the changes that I have been making to the avian entries on the lists?--Kev min § 12:26, 5 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Yes I do, but I do not like them. I try to give as much information as possible, I like to give full names of authors, I like to place species in their latin named families, not in their English names, that have no standing in biology or paleontology, you took out flags of States of the USA and the USSR, that are very big countries, those flags give a more precise place to where the fossil was found, so I think useful information. I don't mind if you place references under a shortened name or put breaks in or correct typo's, but I do mind if you think you have to change the contents of my work, even without consulting me first. If you want to change it the way you want, please, there are a lot of years left to do.

Sincerely,

Archaeopsittacus

The formatting I am using is the formatting that the whole year in paleontology article series uses, and the inconsistancy within the avies section is notable. Authors in biology are Farley if ever shown as a full name, and the links are still to the same spot so the formatting should be followed. The flag section is simply to denot the country of discovery, and has never been used for subunits. The article links for taxon's should be as clear as possible, thus monotypic taxa and extinct should be linked to the genus page, not species per wp paleontology guidelines. I always

So suggest you read wp:own, once added to Wikipedia, an edit or a page is not yours and anyone is free to edit it further without consulting the original author.--Kev min § 14:23, 5 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Dear Kevmin,

I think you do not get the point. I gave the reasons why I edited the bird section as I did. I think that they are good and reasonable reasons. The fact that other people do things differently is up to them. All I do is give data and present that in the way I think is best. As you stated I do not own the data, but I have it, you do not. So edit what you want, but leave the data alone. I do not have the time or want to change it all over again.

Archaeopsittacus

I do understand your points, however it seems you do not understand my points, especially regarding ownership of contributions. The fine detail is material that should be included in articles on the taxa and not in the lists, and the style of citations, authors, locations should follow standard wp and scientific practices.--Kev min § 01:38, 6 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Dear Kevmin,

You talk to me about ownership, may I remind you that you don't own wp either, nobody does. I do understand your point: you want me to stick to the rules and standards that you want to push. Well, I am a free man, I have nothing with your rules and I present my data the way I want to. If I'm am not allowed to do so I will not present my data at all and leave your pretty little toy to rule makers who don't have the data so no one will benefit from the knowledge I have. Your standard is a very low one, my standard gives more information to everybody. I started this project because I thought the efforts made by contributers were very incomplete, only 50% of the species described in a year or less were mentioned what makes the while lemna **** year in paleontology very unreliable and I thought it could be better, but if the "rules makers" want me to stop, i'll stop, I am not in the habit to throw pearls before swines.

Archaepsittacus

Well Kevmin,

I see you still feel the need to throw away all the information I give on the ****year in palentology site just to satisfy your own needs. It already makes me feel not wanting to share my data on the net, as I told you some time ago.

If you want to make corrections, please consult me. But do not loose information.

Archaeopsittacus

Disambiguation link notification for December 9

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that you've added some links pointing to disambiguation pages. Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.

1969 in paleontology

added a link pointing to Strix

2014 in paleontology

added a link pointing to Rail

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 08:59, 9 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Your experience with Wikipedia so far

Hello Archaeopsittacus,

I am conducting research about newcomers to Wikipedia and I was hoping to ask you some questions. I’ve noticed you’ve had some good activity recently. Is there any chance you have time in the next month to speak with me? If you are interested or have any questions, please email me at gmugar [at] syr.edu or leave a message on my talk page.

I hope to be in touch soon,

Gabrielm199 (talk) 22:20, 6 January 2015 (UTC)[reply]

2015 in paleontology

Hello, Archaeopsittacus

Is there any particular reason why the way of displaying new taxa in the bird table should not be consistent with the rest of the article?

If there is such reason - then the rest of the page should be changed too - but having two ways to display new taxa in a single article is just plain confusing.

Rnnsh (talk) 06:43, 13 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]

@Rnnsh: The display on the rest of the page is consistent with taxonomic and nomenclatural formatting, and consistent with the all other (year) in paleontology articles and subarticles, while the Aves section deviates from that notably. I have pointed this out to Archaeopsittacus before, and noted the correct formatting, this has gone unheeded though. see my thread about this a just a few posts above this one.--Kev min § 23:01, 13 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Hello Rnnsh, As you might have noticed I hardly did anything to the birds in 2015. And for your criticism, I gave my arguments. I don't like the "Wikipedia police" (you and kevmin) who think thay have to watch the uniformity of topics.

If you want to change my data, consult me first.

Archaopsittacus

Heres the problem, its not your data. Per the licencing of wikipedia, as soon as you hit the save button on an edit, it is no longer yours. Asserting "your data" has no meaning at all. As I have explained already. The edits that have been made bring the data provided into proper formatting for WIKI policies, guidelines, and also into line with taxonomic nomenclature formatting. --Kev min § 20:16, 19 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Well, the fact that you keep deleting important information, you keep talking nonsence (for instance, you state Archaeornithura is a new genus and species, it is not, it is a new genus, Archaeornithura meemannae is a new genus and new species; you give family names in English, a nice language, but it has no status in biology nor paleontology, those names should be in Latin, you just give globel locations, while it is very easy to be more precise), you make the subject a farce. I have additions for 1996, 2011 and 2015 and for 1825-1963 but you make me sick, I will not share them with people who are really interested.

Archaeopsittacus.— Preceding unsigned comment added by Archaeopsittacus (talk • contribs)

The information is rarely deleted, and the occasions it is, it should be covered in an actual article. The notes section on Archaeornithura specifies the new species, so it is not nonsense. This is a general encyclopedia, aimed at a general, non-ornithology audience hence the English name usage The links are piped to the correct article anyways, so the reader is taken to the article in question anyways. It may be "easy", but its not how the lists are constructed, based on the premise that countries/states/towns did not even exist when the taxa were alive. Stop having a fit over the fact that you are editing contrary to what general consensus is. Part of the collaborative nature of the project is actually understanding that you don't get you own way by default at times.--Kev min § 01:18, 20 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]

ArbCom elections are now open!

Hi,
You appear to be eligible to vote in the current Arbitration Committee election. The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to enact binding solutions for disputes between editors, primarily related to serious behavioural issues that the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the ability 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, you are welcome to review the candidates' statements and submit your choices on the voting page. For the Election committee, MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 17:07, 24 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]

ArbCom Elections 2016: Voting now open!

Hello, Archaeopsittacus. Voting in the 2016 Arbitration Committee elections is open from Monday, 00:00, 21 November through Sunday, 23:59, 4 December to all unblocked users who have registered an account before Wednesday, 00:00, 28 October 2016 and have made at least 150 mainspace edits before Sunday, 00:00, 1 November 2016.

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 2016 election, please review the candidates' statements and submit your choices on the voting page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 22:08, 21 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]

ArbCom 2017 election voter message

Hello, Archaeopsittacus. Voting in the 2017 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23.59 on Sunday, 10 December. All users who registered an account before Saturday, 28 October 2017, made at least 150 mainspace edits before Wednesday, 1 November 2017 and are not currently blocked are eligible to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once.

The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail.

If you wish to participate in the 2017 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 18:42, 3 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]

ArbCom 2018 election voter message

Hello, Archaeopsittacus. Voting in the 2018 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23.59 on Sunday, 2 December. All users who registered an account before Sunday, 28 October 2018, made at least 150 mainspace edits before Thursday, 1 November 2018 and are not currently blocked are eligible to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once.

The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail.

If you wish to participate in the 2018 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 18:42, 19 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]

ArbCom 2018 election voter message

Hello, Archaeopsittacus. Voting in the 2018 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23.59 on Sunday, 3 December. All users who registered an account before Sunday, 28 October 2018, made at least 150 mainspace edits before Thursday, 1 November 2018 and are not currently blocked are eligible to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once.

The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail.

If you wish to participate in the 2018 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 18:42, 19 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]