It vaults over such luminaries as Erectopus and Gasosaurus to join Homo erectus at the top of the Paleontological Double-Entendre Hall of Fame. — J. Spencer, on the new dinosaur genus, Pantydraco. 29 March 2007.

Welcome to Firsfron's talk page

on Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia that anyone can edit

Guidelines

Please post your messages in accordance with these suggested guidelines:

Please post new messages to the bottom of my talk page -- click here to do this automatically.
Please use headlines when starting new talk topics.
Please sign and date your entries by inserting --~~~~ at the end.
As a general rule, expect responses on your talk page.

Thank you for your cooperation.

Messages

Messages here

YGM ;^)

Hello, Firsfron. Please check your email; 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 remove this notice at any time by removing the {{You've got mail}} or {{ygm}} template.

jp×g 22:46, 24 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Messages here

hey

Hey, thanks for fixing up Arwala a bit. I appreciate the effort. Often I make stubs of little known places that I read about in the economist. I'm just curious, how exactly did you stumble across Arwala, it's pretty obscure. TotallyTempo 06:00, 23 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Amusing?

Just checked my edit count randomly & found I was at 7777 edits - just thought you might find that vaguely amusing... Archie FAC seems to be going well - hopefully you'll be able to support soon; that section Sabine's whipping up looks great! Well I've got some new articles to created. It's a shame they're not about dinosaurs as I'd plaster them all over the project talk for everyone to see - I'm so proud. :) Gosh, I sound like a five year old. Anyway, see you around... Spawn Man 07:30, 24 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Pissing Off Annoying Creationists

I guess we could combine the wikiproject birds and dinos as wikiproject dinos (ancient and modern), hee hee hee. cheers, Casliber | talk | contribs 07:54, 24 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I think we have a spammer on our hands - take him away... ;) Spawn Man 08:24, 24 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Archie copyright problems:

No need to panic my friend - I've given an explaination of the situation & a simple bit about the law regarding the reproduction of work in museums. Hence why you can't take pictures of oil paintings, but you can of the museum's own sculptures... Grrr! If you had told me the article wasn't ready for your support, I wouldn't have nom'd. One less vote & the FAC has very little feedback so far.... Ah well... Spawn Man 04:56, 25 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

ah ha! see I knew I was right about the copyright! And you doubted me... ;) Anyway, I just realized that out of the 12 FAs (including Archie) the Dino team have, I've done 5! Not to be big headed, but I just thought it was amasing because I'm not even a professional paleonotologist nor do I have nay training in science at all... And I've only seen a dinosaur skeleton once. I'm so happy! :) Thanks for helping me along the way though. I couldn't have done it without you or the team... :) Spawn Man 00:04, 26 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

No dinosurs in NZ?! We have a leading paleontologist in the south island!! We don't have many, but we have a few. Mainly sauropods & herbivores I think though. Um, a dinosaur exhibition came to the Wellington Mueseum, & had Yanchuangnosaurus & a few sauropods. Other than that, I've only seen a giant sloth skeleton & that's about it in regards to my dinosaur viewing experiences. I doubt Archie should have too many opposes. Lately I've noticed a decline in the contributors to the FAC process & more to the RfA process. Anyway, we'll get it through easily & thansk for finally supporting... :) Spawn Man 01:45, 26 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

journal articles

I have access to electronic journals (yay university), are there specific ones you need? No promises, my uni doesn't have a subscription to every journal, but I can try. Sabine's Sunbird talk 03:16, 26 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I have the first two you want. What addy do you want them sent to? Sabine's Sunbird talk 03:59, 26 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Welcome ;)

Thank you for welcoming me, but as you can see I'm not such a newbe on Wikipedia - I've made about 5200 edits on pl.wiki and about 300 on en.wiki ;) Nevertheless, it's always nice to find out that someone finally found my talk page and put there a proper template. Regards, Galileo01 19:45, 26 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Hay, thanks for the welcome to DinoProject, i'm jealous of your talk page, its like a proper one :) Steveoc 86 17:35, 13 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Mayr et al 2007

Sure, send it along when you've got a few minutes. Thank you! J. Spencer 14:13, 27 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

RFA Thanks

Thanks for your support on my Request for adminship, which was successful, with votes of 49/0/0. Lemme know if you need help on something I might know a little something about....(check my userpage).
cheers, Casliber \| talk \| contribs 14:03, 28 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Congrats!

Congrats on reaching 30000 edits. This is such a big milestone. OhanaUnited 19:52, 28 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Adminship

Hi Firs, thanks for asking, but no, I do not wish to become an admin yet. Too much work, I think, and I do not feel knowledgeable enough about all the intricacies of wiki policy. Besides, I am still a "newbie" having started editing on August 2006 with just a bit over 3000 edits (you have 10 times more). Cheers. ArthurWeasley 20:56, 28 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Hey, my 3000 edits more helpful than your 30000? You are much too modest. With Spawn, Cas, Dinoguy and JSpencer, you form the backbone of the Dinosaur Wikiproject, which has become within a year or two, one of the most comprehensive source on dinosaurs available on the web. That's some kind of an achievement! Cheers. ArthurWeasley 22:01, 28 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Requests

Hi there! As you may know I'm working on an exciting new developement for the Dino project & thoguht I'd enlist your help for a small/medium task. I desperately need some stuff done that is summarised in the next few points -

1) I need any dino articles which need serious cleaning up or have any clean up templates on them already (IE - Articles related to dinos that need wikifying, POV reviewing & cleaning up etc etc)

2) I need redlinks. (IE - Dino related links that need creating - Please keep this short as we could end up with a huge list if we wanted to...)

3) Would you be able to quickly make the Wikipedia:WikiProject_Dinosaurs/formations page into an actual article list such as List of dinosaur-bearing Formations or something like it? All you'd need to do is copy what's there to the article.

4) Really good dino-related images...

This is all a surprise so try not to go around my edit contribs to find out. You'll see soon enough if this stuff can be finished... Thanks, Spawn Man 03:36, 29 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Geez! I didn't say dump the whole dinosaur list on me lol! grrr... now I have to go through & find the bad ones... *Sigh*... :) Spawn Man 04:24, 29 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Oh, I was only joking lol! But if you could give me a list of the absolute worst dino articles & the ones you mentioned that were too technical, that would help a lot. Also, any articles needing pictures. I should have mentioned that I only want about 10 or so at a time - we can always add more later... Thanks, Spawn Man 04:34, 29 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Pantydraco as impending vandal magnet

Yeah, I was hoping somebody else would write it. It vaults over such luminaries as Erectopus and Gasosaurus to join Homo erectus at the top of the Paleontological Double-Entrende Hall of Fame. J. Spencer 04:08, 29 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I do what I can. :) J. Spencer 04:29, 29 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Wasn't much; stub changing is pretty quick, and all I did was go to the Reptile Stub page and pick out the paleo reptiles for alteration. J. Spencer 02:31, 30 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Titanic achievements

Np. Since you've made admin since the last time we interacted, you could even merge titanosaur and Titanosauridae(redirect bypass) if you feel the urge to clean up that old messy cut & paste move ;). | Pat 13:45, 29 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

recently unprotected articles

In an attempt to keep this the encyclopedia everyone can edit, I've recently unprotected several high-profile articles. Could you help me monitor them for vandalism?

Iraq (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views)
England (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views)
Anime (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views)
Ayn Rand (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views)
Buddhism (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views)
Baibars (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views)
Amish (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views)
Bill Cosby (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views)
History of Croatia (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views)
Europe (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views)

Thanks very much. I imagine a few of these might need re-protection, but let's see if we can stop that from happening. :) --Fang Aili ^talk 18:41, 29 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

You can use this recent changes link, which links to User:Fang_Aili/sandbox2, a list of pages I have recently unprotected. Thanks again, Fang Aili ^talk 19:08, 29 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you very much. So far it looks like the vandalism is under control. Moon has been reprotected, but I think that's the only casulty so far. --Fang Aili ^talk 18:30, 30 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for all the reverts lately. Looks like several articles have been re-protected, and maybe we all just have to accept that some articles will always either be heavily vandalized or semi-protected (or both). Le sigh. --Fang Aili ^talk 19:25, 4 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

'tsalright...

I'm planning on getting through "a" tonight - but seriously, I'm beginning to question reality as you do when a mind numbing repettitive task arrises on here... Ahh well... at least I got Archie featured, of which hardly anyone has congratulated me for... *hint hint* ;) See you around... Thanks for the offer though, but this many edits towards my name is an oppurtunity I can't pass up... :) Thanks, Spawn Man 09:25, 30 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

You don't haaave to, but you never can have enough.. I was planning on getting one for each FA I got, but you don't have to... How about giving me one once I've finished this portal template placement? Gives me something to keep going for... :) (Sorry if this message seems a bit wierd - brain fried lol...) Spawn Man 09:39, 30 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Yeah, I' sure Il rember tha t one after the 1000's ogf dinos betwen that & this one loll... Just dont touch any more lol, I'm going for a recordf... Spawn Man 09:47, 30 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I give up lol! the 'a's have been done, but they've defeated me... no more no more!!! I'm completely mad, my arm's gone numb & I'm so tired, so very tired.... Please, take this curse away from me... I got about 100-200 edits anyway - that's enough. Don't want everyone thinking all I do is WikiGnome work eh? Thanks, :) Spawn Man 10:23, 30 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you

Thank you, and I love the timing :). More seriously, I'm really impressed how much the general coverage of dinosaurs has improved in my absence. That's a lot of work by a lot of people. | Pat 19:39, 1 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you again. I've cleaned up all the redirects, of course. | Pat 00:05, 2 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Not the first time:

I'm informing you of my intentions ([1]). This is not the first time this has happened to me at a Dino FAC, probably because you all think I'm going to let a 90% article go through. I know how to write FAs & how to vote on them. For some reason you al think that my oppsoe is inactionable. Have you even read Wikipedia:The perfect article? "...is nearly self-contained; it includes essential information and terminology, and is comprehensible by itself, without requiring significant reading of other articles..." You have to admit, the article contains way too many links to other articles, which is completely different to what this page says. "is comprehensible by itself, without requiring significant reading of other articles" is what I'm opposing for. And I'm rueful that people I thought were my friends are attacking me & saying I'm wrong simply because they don't know a simple guideline of FAC. Gees.. Spawn Man 03:06, 4 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Dinosaur - bullet lists

Firsfron of Ronchester, your response at [2] does not resolve the problem. The whole of my edit of dinosaur was reverted in one piece, not just the parts that contained bullet lists. I see no justification for that and can only attribute it to laziness or carelessness on the part of the person responsible. WP:MOS#Bulleted_lists says "Do not use bullets if the passage reads easily using plain paragraphs or indented paragraphs," i.e. there is no categorical ban on the use of lists. As I pointed out in [3], my use of bullet lists conformed to the guidance and examples given in Wikipedia:Embedded_lists. If the FAC reviewers do not follow published guidelines, Wikipedia has an internal problem which needs to be resolved either by changing the published guidelines or by instructing the FAC reviewers to follow them. If this is not done, other contributors will find their contributions being removed arbitrarily and will stop contributing.Philcha 10:40, 4 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Prenocephale

Thanks for fixing Prenocephale for me, I've no idea why most of what I wrote never appeared. I greatly appreciate it. Nubula 14:13, 4 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for explaining where I'd gone wrong. Best wishes, Nubula 14:00, 5 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Request for an admin-type action

Hey there; I have a request that would need the use of admin abilities. I saw that Extinct animals in popular culture had been deleted, and I was wondering if you could copy the contents of that page to a J. Spencer user page so I could see if there was anything worth reintroducing to articles. Thanks! J. Spencer 16:27, 4 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks! I'm not expecting much to be useful, as it was really falling into the "there was an x glimpsed for five seconds" category of article. J. Spencer 19:09, 4 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

KAMR-TV (again)

Hey, FoF... the KAMR-TV article is still being reverted back to the addition of the station's producing staff... at least 2 or 3 times since the topic was brought up the last time. I think what annoys me more at this point is that there's not a willingness to discuss the matter -- the pages are simply being reverted without talking about it anywhere. I don't think the lists belong there (as per policy), but I'm willing to listen -- the problem is, nobody there is willing to talk. What can be done now? Amnewsboy 07:23, 5 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Dinosaur - bullet points

Firsfron of Ronchester, you said, "I personally don't like submitting articles to FAC at all, as I feel the process is often arbitrary, with FAC reviewers ignoring guidelines or applying their own personal interpretations to guidelines which are only meant to be guidelines." Need I say more?Philcha 12:52, 6 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Project page comments

Wikipedia:Requests for adminship/Danny is not a talk page, and the comment could easily confuse participants by pointing to a spurious guideline. Of the people who have looked at the comment, you and the author clearly believe that it belongs there, while I clearly don't. Given that, I'm not going to revert your revert, but I do hope that this pointing to spurious guidelines in RfAs does not become a fad. Jkelly 21:31, 6 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Let me put it this way... if I paste "B'crats, please ignore any votes that do not adhere to Wikipedia:Neutral point of view" on top of someone's requests for adminship, would you really argue that this suddenly becomes immune to the normal wiki process because I signed it? What if I put it into a pastel box and transcluded it into the RfA template? Would that be irreversible if I signed it? You seem to want things to either be okay or not okay, but writing and following rules is much less important than using good judgement, and common sense. In short, yes I absolutely am saying that there are times when people's signed comments should be removed, and we will never compile an exhaustive list of those times, and, further, it is not worth bothering to try to do such a thing. It is important for users to respect consensus, and of the three people who apparantly have any interest in this, I'm in the minority. Jkelly 22:03, 6 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I have to agree with Jkelly here: you placed your "comment" up at the top as part of the process data/instructions, and you wrote it as though it were an official instruction rather than a mere opinion. Although I doubt anyone of consequence would have been mislead by your actions, the action was inappropriate and it gave your comment an undeserved level of prominence. I hope that you will reconsider the placement of your comment and move it to the talkpage and I and others are not forced to do it for you. Cheers. --Gmaxwell 00:08, 7 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Huh? Can you explain what you're talking about? I didn't place any of my comments anywhere. Firsfron of Ronchester 00:13, 7 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Ah indeed, I saw your revert but missed that you weren't the original author a few edits before. The point still remains, since you restored the text you have taken responsibility for its continued existence in the page. --Gmaxwell 00:18, 7 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

HUH? Gmaxwell, what are you talking about?!?! There isn't one bit of your message that makes any sense. The comments were not made by me, there were not placed at the top, and I certainly did not write it as though it were an instruction. Please clarify to me which diff you're even talking about. Firsfron of Ronchester 00:23, 7 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I am confused that you are confused. This is the diff. The 'comment' you restored was left in the section normally reserved for the nominee to write comments about the RFA, it's not a comment in the mainline RFA (which generally get moved to the talkpage in anycase, especially comments about the process like this one). --Gmaxwell 00:28, 7 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Removing tool

On ur userpage, you still listed Essjay's edit counter. We all know what happened, he took down all his bots. Since he's not coming back, I think you can just remove it. OhanaUnited 23:51, 9 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Stego antorbital

OK, I replied and gave the references, although I mistakenly put these under a separate section under Discussion. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Anky-man (talk • contribs) 19:22, 11 April 2007 (UTC).[reply]

Thanks for moving my previous contribution to the antorbital discussion section. I am still learning the tricks of this place. Would you also move my other two comments on Stegosaurus names to their appropriate sections? Thanks, Anky-man 21:22, 11 April 2007 (UTC)Anky-man

Neck frill

Is Neck frill of any relation to the frill seen on the frill-necked lizard? Currently, the article only refers to the frill being on dinosaurs, but many current animals have the neck frill. Does the neck frill article actually mean the parietal, or does it include all aspects of neck frill? If so, then I can write about many other animals which have neck frills. Please advise as I'd like to start work straight away. :) Thansk, Spawn Man 07:48, 12 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

How does the article look now? Much better eh? :) Spawn Man 04:15, 13 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Southern Hemisphere dinosaurs

(big inhale).......actually I was thinking....oh heck, I'll moev this onto Dino collab talk page (so everyone can join in) :)cheers, Casliber | talk | contribs 12:24, 12 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Nomina dubia in List of dinosaurs

I missed reading in the article that the designation nomen dubium wouldn't be used in the list, so I'm sorry for the inconvenience. However, the designations were based solely upon what the articles said. If an article reported the genus as nomen dubium, then I indicated it on the list. So my sources were the articles themselves, and so there would be no point sourcing them. However, I agree that the articles should have a source when such a claim is made. Ninjatacoshell 21:35, 13 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Jurassic Park FAC

Thank you very much for copyediting the article. Do you think stuff on scientists rejecting Deinonychus as a big Velociraptor as well as the small therapod dinos being feathered can go uncited? Alientraveller 17:57, 14 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Well an article on a film is a lot easier to do than an animal that's been dead for 65 million years, I must say. Jurassic Park is something I've just worked with confidently, with a book that's actually useful, from the time before DVDs. Alientraveller 20:32, 14 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Dinosaur Size Serial Disgruntled Editor?

I'm reasonably certain that the recent anon IPs 65.8.7.101, 72.153.248.105, and 68.223.145.201, all out of West Palm Beach, and the recently blocked user Goodguy667 are the same person: Goodguy667 introduced a 4-8 ton Tyrannotitan and a pattern of vandalizing user pages, 72 reintroduced the material and became rather excitable when it was removed again while essentially admitting s/he was the same person (and vandalized Nescio's user page), and 68 went after Dinosaur Size, several prominent editors of Dinosaur Size, and made identical vandalisms to Nescio's page. 65 was not used long enough for me to be sure, but it's in the same time frame and from the same place, with the same interest in dinosaur size. Just something to keep an eye on, I guess. J. Spencer 02:01, 15 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks Firs

Thanks, but I think I'll still go ahead with my break - wouldn't want to seem like I don't go ahead with things eh? Anywa, I'm sure I'll come back when I find something I really want to write about & then find out that there's already an article. But by that time, I'd be hooked again, so we'd start from the begining again lol. Hope you get the article to GA status. Will be back in a few days - 1 month at most. Besides, it's a good excuse to get some "alone" time with my new fiance without feeling obliged to edit Wikipedia. You married Firs? I'll look forward to your answer when I get back... My money's on divorced with 3 kids & a love child? ;) JK. Cheers mate... :) Spawn Man 08:13, 16 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Now if you'd done another DYK apart from Europasaurus...

There - done the next level crown.....cheers, Casliber | talk | contribs 05:04, 17 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Righty-ho. Done. I stumbled over the page somehow and mused that a few of my wikichums must qualify for these and then couldn't find ant DYKs on yer page so checked archives. I haven't done any GAs so I better get cracking....cheers, Casliber | talk | contribs 10:18, 17 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

PS: That (above) was my 10000th edit :)cheers, Casliber | talk | contribs 10:21, 17 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Thescelosaurus

Looks like I missed on this FAC. Too bad. Still giving it a good look, though, since it happens to be short (Copyediting short stuff is always easier!), and I spotted one problem I can't anything about: The ISBN for Dinosaurs of the Science Museum of Minnesota is incorrect. It's missing a digit, probably 0, but I can't find an independent ISBN to confirm. It's in WorldCat, but doesn't have an ISBN registered there. Circeus 15:58, 17 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Actually, I wouldn't mind looking at anything you want me to. Right now, original writing, expansion or rewrite is too complicated for me todo, but I always like copyediting the work of WP:DIGI, since, I guess, I never really lost my little kid's fascination with dino's (even though I never grew into an actual dino nerd. My nerdy fields are language and greek mythology.)

I'm finding Thescelosaurus much shorter than the mastodons that Triceratops and Iguanodon ere. In term of "content screenspace," it's nearly twice shorter than them. The space used by that cladogram (tsk tsk! I'd have hoped you people not to repeat the horror that was in Iguanodon...) and the references is for much there. The cladogram alone is 300 words of "article space". Circeus 17:55, 17 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Actually, now thatI think of it, I think one of the reason I like these articles so much is that I really like taxonomic issues, and these articles tend to be very detailed o that front, compared to just about any TOL article in WP.Circeus 19:37, 17 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

The cladogram in thescelosaurus itself is not issue. What I am concerned about (and it worries me with the "brackets" of many sports articles, too), is the fact that these tables are utterly inaccessible for, e.g. blind people. Tables should be reserved as much as possible for tabular data. It's not really possible to offer a legible cladogram without an image of some sort, anyway, IMHO. Maybe an extension like m:EasyTimeline can be developed for cladograms (and various similar histograms such as family tree)? (see also [4]) Circeus 15:12, 19 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Don't mind me, but I've had a look at the timelines, and I've got a proof-of-concept in the works at User:J. Spencer/timeline (the bottom one), mocked up from Curry-Rogers's titanosaur paper. Ideally, it would have cladogram lines, a period/stage scale, scale label, italics (which weren't working for some reason), and a legend to explain what the colors mean (they correspond to continents/other landmasses), but I'm tired after coding. :) J. Spencer 04:15, 20 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

No problem. I'm sure there is a way to do it, but I wouldn't know, yet. J. Spencer 13:19, 20 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I've got a full timeline mocked up at User:J. Spencer/timeline#Mesozoic timeline, although including links for the stages means I have to make the figure quite large for the links to correspond to the proper sections. We could probably get along without the names of the stages, if need be, which would allow us to shrink the width quite a bit. The colors are dummies at this point. I can get EasyTimeline to do just about everything needed for a strato-geographic cladogram, except genera that are sisters; the line-generating function doesn't appear to do verticals between just two rows, although I could certainly be missing something. The main drawback is all the coding, and it helps to draw your cladogram first to see how you want the genera to be placed. J. Spencer 05:11, 21 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Actually, I just figured out a good way to fake that vertical line. J. Spencer 05:42, 21 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Actually, it's not complete; Erik Zachte and I are trying out a variety of different ways to make it do what we need. The numbers are something he inserted, which could be used with a caption to tell someone where a clade is, for example. The colors correspond to different landmasses, and would have a legend explaining them in a finished version. The different line colors come from different experiments, trying to figure out what we can and can't do. J. Spencer 22:00, 21 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

On Centrosaurinae: I don't know who Somedude is, but no one has ever contacted me for use of material elsewhere, so then it has to be a copyvio, right? The material itself is correct, and is about what you would find in The Dinosauria, or The Horned Dinosaurs, or, by and large, one of the old '80s "field guides" (although there are a couple of dead giveaways that it's me, because I'm one of the few who adhere to the "technically correct" spelling of "Ceratopinae" and use the Judithian, Edmontonian, and Lancian land mammal ages). J. Spencer 14:47, 22 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Re: OCLC numbers. The idea is that they provide a useful/powerful alternative to ISBNs for books that are too old (especially useful for books from the 50s or 60s that are still relatively easy to come by in libraries), or weird, to have them. Circeus 14:59, 22 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Okay: This is much closer to what I envision. The branching points are arbitrary, of course, and I'd add that note in for a finished product. Also, even though many of them are known from smaller time slices, like late Maastrichtian for Thescelosaurus, such division become arbitrary, so I think just using stage is a reasonable compromise. Another idea I had is to just have a diagram of ages and locations, without phylogeny, as more of a general table. It would be arranged by landmass and geographic location, for example. I could combine both kinds of chart by just making a divider and putting all the hypsilophodonts that aren't on the tree, for example, below the divider and without classification. J. Spencer 16:57, 22 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for the explanation about the copyvio. I've got a timeline version now with unclassified hypsilophodonts here, and one with a change in the way polytomies are presented here (I think it's more accurate, but less aesthetic). J. Spencer 20:44, 22 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Request for article restoration

Hello, I'd like to request the restoration of the article for Black Phoenix Alchemy Lab, which was deleted 04/06/07. I'd like the chance to edit the article to rectify the cause of deletion (article didn't show importance or significance). There are several items that were missing from that article that should be added and would fix the issue. Thanks for your consideration. Jeko 19:11, 20 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for the reply and the temporary restore. Would you mind taking a look at the revised entry and let me know if it is enough to satisfy the criteria? I think (fingers crossed) that it is. A lot of things were changed/added. Thanks again! Jeko 14:47, 23 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Styracosaurus

Um..haven't looked closely. I think you have all the stuff I have and google seaching came up with little. My computer's being repaired and I'm doing stuff by laptop (as well as trying to limit time doing all this sutff as it is pretty diversionary :). Give me another day or so; if I haven't come up with anything then I doubt I will. cheers, Casliber | talk | contribs 02:51, 23 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Believe me so do I.....cheers, Casliber | talk | contribs 02:58, 23 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

(PS: I gave circeus a banrstar - the guy's attention to detail is amazing...)

Huh. I didn't add the Tanke stuff, but I cited the bonebed info. I think that since it's not a big part of the article, you can cite it with the DML and Paleoblog and see if you get away with it (Iguanodon had a couple of DML cites, in the taxonomy section). Since it's from 2006, it wouldn't be out yet, really. I suppose it could be in the Styracosaurus skeletal atlas put out last year at SVP, but it was too rich for my tastes. Where is the Palaeoblog post, by the way?

I don't know of any large sections or references to add to this article, so it's certainly close to comprehensiveness. One thing I'd add is the opinion of another ceratopid worker on the Centrosaurus/Monoclonius/Styracosaurus stuff, since Dodson's in the minority at this point on his assessment of Monoclonius. Some of the prose could use buffing, which should get attention if you get a good GA reviewer. I don't think it's quite at FA yet, though. J. Spencer 03:03, 29 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Anyone got Horns & Beaks yet? Anything on Styracosaurus in that? I don't recall that much in Dinosauria but will have another look. cheers, Cas Liber | talk | contribs 03:43, 29 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Well, bear in mind that I'm a lousy reviewer, but some of the writing feels a bit "off". So as not to leave that too vague, I'll have a look at it tomorrow; right now, I'm going to finish up a section at Saurolophus and call it a night. There's nothing in H&B specifically on Styracosaurus, but it does contain the paper describing how various ceratopid pathologies don't appear to be horn thrusts and other dynamic things, but bone resorption pits and other unexciting things. :) By the way, congrats on "Unicerosaurus"! J. Spencer 04:41, 29 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

The thing about Saurolophus is I usually catch that kind of stuff in preview, but I saved it without noticing, and then my popups told me it was an 8.6 kb stub. Oops. Styracosaurus is definitely closer than Deinonychus, which needs a Classification paragraph, a quick description of "claws as crampons", and discussion of the non-"pack hunting" viewpoint, but I'm hoping to look over both in the next couple of days. J. Spencer 14:24, 29 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Baryonyx

You sent me a message that said I was messing around. Baryonx did eat other dinosaurs but not ofen. thank you. P.S I admire the site . —Preceding unsigned comment added by 81.110.240.61 (talk • contribs)

Admin Coaching

Hi, I found you on the Admin Coaching status page and, though I know you currently have a student, I was wondering if you'd like to have another? It's fine if you're too busy (being an admin and all), but from my quick glance through the list you seemed the most interesting. I don't know how the whole Admin coaching system works "officially," so I will await your reply. If you're not okay with having two students, then it's fine, I don't mind. Coaching can wait... maybe I can be placed in some sort of holding list? =P Thanks in advance! --Razor ICE 14:12, 25 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Hey Firsfrom, mind taking me in as well? I'm intersted as well. Oh yeah... getting close to my first 1000th edit. OhanaUnited 22:27, 25 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Sry for the typo... "M" and "N' were right beside each other and too easy to overlook. So what do I to the blank page? I can't save a blank page. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by OhanaUnited (talk • contribs) 06:48, 26 April 2007 (UTC).[reply]

Done. I may/may not be able to respond to your next message since it's almost 3am in the morning. (Man, I think I will score high on Wikipedia:Wikipediholic test if I take the test now lol) OhanaUnited 06:58, 26 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Haha, I did score a really high (addict) score about a month into my serious editing. And Firsfron, I also made my coaching page. Hope you have time for both of us. If you don't, I can wait for another coach, that's fine. :) --Razor ICE 07:05, 26 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

American History X

hey bud bro, that link on the american history x page is to the wrong guy —Preceding unsigned comment added by 74.138.162.255 (talk • contribs)

thanks, man, just tryin to keep it real

I've met Jimbo

For the record I can now say I've met Jimbo :) cheers, Cas Liber | talk | contribs 01:49, 29 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Dakosaurus

Hi Firs, thx for removing that extraneous "'"! It's a bit of a personal bugbear of mine, too. I can only plead that I had gotten sidetracked there and wanted to quickly fix up the unwieldy wording and get back to what I was doing. Mea culpa. Secret Squïrrel 08:56, 29 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Ok

I understand about the dinosaur articles. There did seem to be alot. Thanks for reverting them back. Cheers. Chicken7 10:51, 29 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Evolution

Hi, and thanks for your concern. It now appears that there's actually some movement on the issue. Samsara (talk • contribs) 21:38, 29 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

And it's always nice to know that some people are paying attention to one's contributions, so thanks for all that! :) Samsara (talk • contribs) 17:44, 30 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks!

Thanks for the welcome! Callum J. Stewart 09:21, 30 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

question about a 1915 e-book

While scanning for Saurolophus images, I ran across a 1915 e-book on Project Gutenberg, by William Diller Matthew, that has a number of early skeletal photos and restorations presented as separate files. These would fall under our purview, right? I was thinking of the Saurolophus panel mount right now, just to get something up there, but there may be other figures of interest. J. Spencer 14:34, 30 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Kickball / Adult Kickball

Hey, F... I don't see any legitimate reason why these two articles shouldn't be merged together, given that the game is the same, no matter who is playing. I know this was split by a user, but that user also hasn't edited anything since and hasn't commented on the split since I brought it up 2 months ago. Can I go ahead and merge them? Amnewsboy 10:35, 3 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Jaiku.com

Hello ... you did the CSD of Jaiku ... would you please zap Jaiku.com as well? Please note User talk:Laaabaseball for further background ... note the time stamps ... see the history for their attempt to hide their previously deleted contributions in a "cleanup" edit between these postings. Thnx! —72.75.73.158 (talk · contribs) 12:27, 3 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Hi again ... I got this, and replied on User talk:Laaabaseball#WP:BITE, where the conversation continues ... would you care to add your 2¢ worth? Happy Editing! —68.239.79.82 21:08, 10 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

User:OhanaUnited/Admin coaching

I left what I thought was helpful advice at the above page, and it was certainly in good faith. The user reverted my message. He's also achieved a level of notability at the AWB page due to his attitude. Are you sure you have an admin candidate here and aren't wasting your time? --kingboyk 19:11, 3 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Xuanhanosaurus

Firs, you've added that dinosaur on the illustration to-do list. I could not find any decent reconstruction on the web. Do you happen to have the original description by Dong or some other source that shows the known skeletal elements (forelimbs and vertebrae)? All I got is this and this, two very dissimilar representations. This discussion] provides some help but not much. Thanks. ArthurWeasley 05:23, 4 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

No problem. I'll leave the genus alone then. Should we leave the drawing in quadrupedal pose in the taxobox since this representation is not widely accepted? ArthurWeasley 21:27, 4 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Milestones

Yeah, I sorta went over without realising as there's been a recently published official bird name list which gave me the authority to rename all the psittacines of the genus Amazona Amazons, which the AOU call Parrots, so had to rename all the speceis and try to fix double redirects. My other thing is to rename the headings Appearance, Physical Description and Characteristics, as they are often all used for Description so I go off wading through random zoology pages to fix and also get heirarchical headings. Just discovered some deer pages....lots of edits there and all in a good cause (a minicleanup here, a minicleanup there...)cheers, Cas Liber | talk | contribs 07:21, 5 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

i.e. the Physical in Physical Description is redundant. :) cheers, Cas Liber | talk | contribs 07:22, 5 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Petition on Spawny's page

I've put up a petition on Spawny's Talk Page to cheer him up/make him come back. cheers, Cas Liber | talk | contribs 09:24, 5 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you, dear Firsfron!

I didn't want to go on without thanking you for the beautiful message you left me on my talk page, and telling you it's great to see you again, dear Firsfron. I apologize for taking a couple of days to reply - I'm kinda swamped with messages, but I feel so uneasy if I don't get back, that I always try and reply! ;) Especially coming from a good old friend like you. I see you've been quite busy these months, and I congratulate your the awesome work you've been doing - bravo! :) And it's even nicer that we now have a new mutual friend like Casliber. I just hope Spawny and Blnguyen reconsider and return, so the old gang can be together once again ;) Anyway, thanks again, sweetie, and I'm delighted to see you're doing well. We'll be seeing each other again soon, I'm sure. Have a great weekend! Love, Phaedriel - 14:57, 5 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

User:RMc

It was only through reading one of the many comments he deleted from his talk page that I found you had had issues with him as well. Now I am. He's showing the same behavior patterns: treating editing as a matter of conflict rather than consensus, unprovoked personal attacks, refusing to admit that he ever does anything wrong, blaming everyone else for his problems, and generally being antisocial and oppositional. He was blocked for it before; can you or someone else review the present circumstances and consider whether that needs to be done again? It appears he has learned nothing. Daniel Case 17:27, 6 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Firsfron

Thank you for your kind words. The amazing thing about this is the overwhelming support that I have received from those who know me and those who don't. It makes up for the disrespectful comments made by User: Tony Sideways and has showed me that my work has not been in vain. Thank you once more. Tony the Marine 20:21, 9 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Re: Herrerasaurus collaboration

I'd be happy to help. This weekend I'll start pulling sources and get crackin'. Have a good day, David Fuchs^{(talk / frog blast the vent core!)} 15:13, 10 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Now you guys know what yer supposed to do...I've added teh nom to the collab page. Great idea and has loads of potential. cheers, Cas Liber | talk | contribs 20:25, 10 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

The happy world of basal ceratopian systematics and taxonomy

You could probably get by with the Basal Ceratopia chapter in the Dinosauria II, which will at least give you a feel for what is going on, but the most recent taxon in it is 2001. Unfortunately, around 10 taxa have been named since then that have an important bearing on the situation. For your chunk of the tree, we've had three families tossed around in recent years: Leptoceratopidae, Bagaceratopidae, and Protoceratopidae. Bagaceratopidae is the trickiest one, because all bagaceratopids could just be variants on Bagaceratops.

The most recent word (which is also free) is the description of Yamaceratops:
P. J. Makovicky and M. A. Norell. 2006. Yamaceratops dorngobiensis, a new primitive ceratopsian (Dinosauria: Ornithischia) from the Cretaceous of Mongolia. American Museum Novitates 3530:1-42.
It sinks several new genera into Bagaceratops and Protoceratops, and finds the two in a monophyletic clade, which also appears in the Dinosauria II article. (note that Makovicky and Norell discuss using Graciliceratops, but forget and use Microceratops in their diagrams). J. Spencer 21:35, 10 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Am I being unreasonable?

I have commented here on Guinea Pig FAC - I am keen for others input, either to support if they think I'm nitpicking or to comment/help out etc. cheers, Cas Liber | talk | contribs 23:14, 11 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Never mind, it's now promoted. cheers, Cas Liber | talk | contribs 00:49, 12 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

WNBC-TV logo picture

It's been a while, but I request your help once again.

With all the garbage that's been going on regarding fair-use images in television station articles, the last thing we need is a fight over the size of a picture in the infobox. But that is what may happen with Image:NBC 4.png. Aido2002 uploaded the image, and placed it within the infobox at WNBC-TV at 200 pixels. I reduced it to 150 pixels, which is smaller but still large enough to be seen. Aido2002 enlarged it back. This was around the same time he was fighting to keep two identical WNBC logos (the other being Image:WNBC alt logo.png) in the article, a battle he wisely gave up.

But recently, while doing a random cleanup of some mess left by one of BenH's sockpuppets, I noticed the image was back at 200 pixels. I made it small again, and left a message on Aido2002's talk page explaining (once again) my reasons why. He left me a response accusing me "Personal Attacks", and declaring that "this is something that I will not budge on"'.

Your intervention in this dispute is welcomed. Thanks in advance. Rollosmokes 04:04, 13 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I feel that to not give my input on this would not be fair to you, as I'm sure you want to be able to make an unbiased decision. I agree with much of what Rollosmokes said, but he seems to think he can make the final decision on this article, as he has been, for a while now, reverting my edits here without discussion. aido2002 05:11, 13 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Honestly, it's not about the size, it is that Rollosmokes is reverting my edits and was for a while refusing to discuss. All I wish is for Rollosmokes to be willing to compromise (something I have attempted with him, yet he refused). aido2002 05:22, 13 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

GA reviews

That sounds like a fair solution. J. Spencer 12:28, 14 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

The dino articles look GA quality to me. TimVickers 22:50, 15 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Someone's considering me for an RFA

Snowolf is considering nominating me for an RFA. Since you've been helpful to me in the past, particularly in regard to a couple of editing conflicts, I'd like to get your opinion on whether these conflicts would cause a problem. I haven't had any major conflicts with users since last November (although I did have a bit of a dustup recently with Kelly Martin regarding her high standards for RFAs), but I'm wondering if you think any of these past problems are insurmountable. I'd like your honest opinion on this. This isn't canvassing -- I'm just tire-kicking at this point. Let me know what you think. --Elkman ^(Elkspeak) 22:52, 14 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Many Thanks:

Thanks for signing the petition for me to return from my Wikibreak/Retirement. It was unexpected & I appreciate your kind words. I'm planning to stay away from conflict for a bit, so don't expect to see me around any talk pages etc. I know I'm not the most liked person around here. I don't know why, but I know that many people would be happy to see me go. However, I'm glad to know that at least 15 people want me to stay & that's all I need. :) You're a good Wikifriend... Anyway, thanks again for being there. :) Spawn Man 23:47, 15 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

No, I'm not getting married for ages yet. Like you said though, I saw Sheepy on the other side & look, he came back. ;) Other than that, haven't done much at all really... Well, see you around. :) Spawn Man 02:10, 16 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Just a word of advice

Threat removed by administrator Firsfron 68.162.7.45 07:30, 16 May 2007 (UTC) (aka User:They call me Mr. Pibb)[reply]

Lol! You should see his rantings on his user talk - just hilarious! Don't get too wound up by this guy; look on the funny side... :) Spawn Man 09:53, 16 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I was about to write the same thing. This guy's got some serious issues ( :) ). Rollosmokes 15:13, 16 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Aw... Who removed the post? It was the most hilarious thing I've read in ages! It was amusing to imagine a computer berd with 30 years experience roaming through the streets with a shot gun... :) Spawn Man 22:13, 16 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Personal attacks removed by Firsfron

I'm confused. Who's going off the deep end? Who's unable to calm down? --Elkman ^(Elkspeak) 04:33, 18 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

More Dino Fun

Hi, I've been away a long while, but I noticed some shenanigans with the main Dinosaur article. You are much better at expressing things factually and appropriately, so I hope you'll join the discussion. Doc Tropics 22:11, 16 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you!

Thank you for the kind words and the info, dear Firsfron! We at WP:IPNA have a few things to learn about you guys, it seems... and regarding my daughter, well, what can I say... I'm her mother! ;) Thank you so much! Love you, and see you around! - Phaedriel - 04:31, 17 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Help?

Sorry to bother you, but I seem to have gotten caught in the collateral damage from an autoblock. As near as I can tell, an admin blocked another editor whose IP range includes my address (I'm not positive; this hasn't come up before). I've posted an unblock request on my talkpage as well as the blocking admin's, but I'm rather impatient to be editing and wonder if you can help. After all, this kind of thing is what they pay you "the big bucks" for, right? Thanks : ) Doc Tropics 22:07, 17 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Update: It appears that a number of editors got caught up in the autoblock. I know this area isn't one of your specialties, but any help will be greatly appreciated. If it's not something you know how to deal with, perhaps you could bring it to the attention of others? Thanks again! Doc Tropics 22:18, 17 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Final Note: With so many editors affected, someone jumped in right away and took care of the autoblock. Thanks anyway...I'll see you in the trenches : ) Doc Tropics 22:26, 17 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Trying to thinks differently about dinosaurs

I hear you're the expert on dinosaurs around here. If you have a second for a pathetic Apple user, I've been unable to find any information on something that's been driving me crazy for many years. I cannot for a moment believe that the K-T event executed 100% of the dinosaur species in existence at that time. It seem unconceivable, because at every extinction event, some percentage of species (and even genera) survived. Mammals survived K-T, which must have been an adequate food source for at least smaller dinosaurs. Is there any evidence that dinosaurs survived the K-T even for a few million years. Please exclude birds, because they evolved prior to the K-T event. Or maybe the Flood is right? :) Orangemarlin 00:53, 18 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I'm not Firsfron (who is?), but I can say that the number of places that preserve the K-T boundary in terrestrial sediments in the world is essentially one: western North America. So we actually have no idea about anywhere else in the world but there. However, dinosaur fossils are not found in later Paleocene sediments anywhere in the world, so if they didn't all disappear immediately one day, they were gone not too long after (certainly less than 1Ma). There's also quite a bit of evidence that dinosaur diversity (if not absolute numbers) was on the decline well before K-T, at least in the one place we have sampled (W. North America). In Montana, you go from dozens of different species existing in the late Campanian and early Maastrichtian, to a fauna which is 70% Triceratops in the late Maastrichtian. There could of course be a preservational or even a collection bias, though.

Also, you can't just exclude birds, that's like saying "How come no dinosaurs survived the K-T event, not counting the ones that did?" Sheep81 10:45, 18 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I want to grow up to be Firsfron. How many of us wanted to be paleontologists when we were kids. Anyways, I appreciate your answer. I thought that the Alvarez first studied the K-T boundary (and found evidence of a meteor) in Italy? And good point on the birds, except, I was thinking maybe a T. Rex walking down the street. Orangemarlin 00:49, 20 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Little help

If you can fit it into your busy schedule (:D), could you just read over Sauropelta and let me know if it's okay? I want to add in a bit about the Cloverly environment but I'll have to do a bit more research first as I'm not that familiar with the Early Cretaceous (give me the Hell Creek or the Morrison any day!). Dinoguy seems to think it is good but I am feeling a bit insecure, probably because of my absence. Everything I write just seems super boring. Maybe that can't be helped though. *shrug* Sheep81 11:01, 18 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for your suggestions! I un-italicized the anatomical terms and added a bit about Peltosaurus, and also did a bit of housekeeping. I couldn't find anything on Wikispecies or any other website that didn't duplicate what was already there, so I didn't add any external links. Let me know if you think of anything else. Sheep81 12:04, 19 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Looks like I found some external links after all! Sheep81 12:32, 19 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I can work on those things. If you think there is a relevant paleobiology section to copy and paste from another article, feel free to point it out to me or add it in. It's a decent stopgap measure but I'd much rather write something unique before sending it to GA. *shrug* I'll leave it up to the Project to decide when to submit it there. Sheep81 05:26, 20 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Re: RFA

I'm still thinking about the RFA, and I've pretty much decided that I'm going to go ahead with it. I should get back in touch with Snowolf since he made the initial suggestion. I've been a little bit busy lately (and, in fact, I'll probably still be busy through this weekend), so that's why I haven't put the process into motion yet. --Elkman ^(Elkspeak) 21:48, 18 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Othnielosaurus

No big deal on Othy; I hadn't looked at it since the end of January, and I'd written it before I'd gotten a format down (back in early December), so it sticks out like a sore thumb against more recent work. Besides, I'd been leery about promoting it, since it may be that the article gets merged back to Othnielia before long. However, I'll look at reformatting it soon. J. Spencer 03:25, 19 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Well, Othnielosaurus only came out last fall, in a Lagosuchus/Marasuchus scenario, and no one has really commented on it yet in print except for Galton; it's a similar situation for Mantellisaurus, although word is there's going to be a more detailed article on iguanodonts in the near future, and the idea of two genera had at least been discussed previously. I honestly don't know how Othnielia/Othnielosaurus/Drinker/Nanosaurus/Laosaurus will turn out. J. Spencer 04:29, 19 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Do feel free to have a look at Othnielosaurus; it does need a fair bit of honing but it's well on its way! Verisimilus T 08:54, 19 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Re: GAC and conflict of Interest

For the message you left on the GAC talk page regarding the review of the WikiProject Dinosaur articles, I recommend requesting a GA review for each article. The review team will read them and either endorse listing or delist. Be sure to note in the nomination that you are only looking to legitimize the promotions. If the reviewers missed minor issues, we will list those and give the article editor(s) a chance to address them. Regards, LaraLove ^T/_C 16:35, 19 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Just don't do it while I'm drinking coffee

The Barnstar of Good Humor

There are lots of reasons you deserve a Barnstar, but making me laugh is as good as any of them. Just don't do it while I'm drinking coffee. Doc Tropics 20:37, 19 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Just so you know

Hey Firs, just so you know, I'm still alive! I'll replied on my coach page. Making sure you didn't forget about me. ;) --Razor ICE 07:17, 20 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Personal attacks on my talk page

Would you mind executing this person User:70.108.92.189 out in front of the building? It has been vandalizing my page for a week. Humorous responses from Doc tropics and me aside, and they are funny, it's getting personal. Thanks. Orangemarlin 15:38, 20 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Parasaurolophus

Hi, Firs;

There's been a persistent creationist appending "(in theroy)" to Parasaurolophus, and, while it's not a pure 3RR because the user is too inexperienced to know about reverting, it's certainly an edit war between me and s/he. Cas suggested putting it up in 3RR, but after reading it I wasn't certain if that was the best way to go about things (also, Cas is going off-line now). I haven't been using vandal warnings because it's not technically vandalism, but POV-pushing. I definitely agree with Cas that a non-dino admin should be involved. Any suggestions? J. Spencer 00:18, 22 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Vandalism button

I wasn't issued one of these when I joined - do only admins get them? J. Spencer 02:34, 22 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Talk:Flood geology#Fossilization

I know you don't like these creationist articles so much, but smart people have to watch over them, or they become so POV, that a casual reader could think that there's a lot of proof for Noah's flood. Anyways, one of the editors is really make a stink about the soft tissues of the T. Rex fossils in the Hells Creek formation prove the flood. I cut and pasted TalkOrigin's counter, but it's not really well written. Maybe you've got a couple of ideas, since I've already nominated you as the resident paleontologist around here. :) Orangemarlin 05:09, 22 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Re: Hey

Nothing much... enjoying my 3-month vacation at Hong Kong. Today ends the 4th day of me not going online... Man, I think I'm addicted to internet. Today I opened my email, and I got 20ish new unread email <_<

I'm just waiting for my turn to play PS2 Gundam games so that's why I go on. Keep in touch, ok?

OhanaUnited 09:32, 22 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

T-Rex

Hello, You reverted my edit which I thought was quite innocent. I agree that in Wikipedia we shouldn't have an article about "nucular science".

However, this is a different matter (and quite small at that, so I was hoping we didn't have to discuss it). It is true that if you want to quote the scientific name of the dinosaur species, you should write Tyrannosaurus rex or, if you're lazy, T. rex. But if you want to talk about the magnificient creature in non-scientific discussion, often it's not that important that you quote the specific name accurately. Instead, it might be OK if you use the shortened specific name with a slash (and capital R) as a popular name for the species, like people say "dog" and not always "Canis lupus familiaris". I suspect that there are many people who know the specific name should be in scientific discourse shortened as T. rex, but still write "T-Rex" in informal conversation. In that case, it wouldn't be a mistake but a deliberate straying from the scientific nomenclature.

I'm not even saying that we should encourage people to talk about "T-Rex", All I'm saying is that in order to present in Wikipedia knowledge about how things are, we should be able to say that "T-Rex is a popular spelling", and leave it at that with no further judgement. In my opinion, it's a (small) violation (but still a violation) of POV to say that one shouldn't say "T-Rex", just as it would be to say that one should be able to say "T-Rex". I'd just be content if we could neutrally mention the "T-Rex" spelling even though people who are interested in paleontology wouldn't all like it.

I'm a student of linguistics, not of paleontology (even though I'm very interested in that area, too), so I might have a different view on how we should in Wikipedia present the way people talk about prehistoric animals. In case you're interested, see the article about descriptive linguistics, especially what is said about descriptivism in comparison to prescriptivism. As I understand it (it might be that I just hope so?), Wikipedia is about descriptivism, in a wider sense. In any case, I hope this wasn't too 'philosophical' and we can agree that it's not necessarily a mistake to call T. rex "T-Rex". Oghmoir 17:11, 22 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks

...for the Barnstar; coming from you it really means a lot. I'm in the process of adding over a hundred items from the List of dinosaurs to my watchlist (2 random picks from each letter grouping, plus whatever names happen to look interesting). Let me know if there are any others that need extra attention. Also, not that I'm wikistalking you, but I have been keeping an eye on your contribs and watching how you do (and don't) respond to some of the crazy things that come up. Of the many Admins I've seen handling difficult situations, you're one of the best at remaining civil and reasonable, while maintaining a firm no-nonsense approach. Thanks again for the Barnstar, you really made my night! Doc Tropics 07:29, 23 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Response

Thanks for the heads-up, I have dropped the editor in question a note, hopefully in terms he/she understands and can accept. I will keep my eyes on his/her contributions for a few days. And thanks for being so kind to such users - who can often seem quite disruptive. It can be difficult for persons of faith (especially a certain sort of faith) to learn to speak about matters of faith in a nuetral and even critical way, when the only place they have ever spoken about such things is in church and other such arenas (I've seen similar reactions in academic courses on religion). Again, thanks -- Pastordavid 19:12, 23 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Herrerasaurus

First the flattery, then he asks for something. I should have known. :) Anyway I just emailed you a buttload of papers, some of them have more to do with *H* than others, so skim through them. Sereno in particular has done quite a lot with *H*, might want to make sure to go through those thoroughly. See if there are any papers in the various reference sections that get your attention. And of course you have the chapter in The Dinosauria. Ask J as well, if you haven't already. Any more help, just ask! Sheep81 03:38, 24 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Busted through 500 PDFs today (513 total) after I got back from the library. I don't even usually download Novitates or Acta Palaeontologica Polonica papers because they are free online, which might increase my library by 50% or so if I did! As far as hard copies, I have about 100 papers sitting in a box in my closet, a few years of JVP, some issues of Science and Nature, and maybe two dozen books, including both editions of The Dinosauria, the 1997 Encyclopedia of Dinosaurs, and all five volumes of Glut's HUGELY useful Dinosaurs: The Encyclopedia. So yeah, there's a lot, but even still J has things I don't have (well I have some of them now, thanks to him). I don't mind emailing things at all, it takes two seconds and it's good for the Project. Sheep81 05:03, 24 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Wikify picture description?

I find that many pictures didn't wikify some terms in the description. Is it a good idea to start wikify them? If yes, is there a way to run a bot so that it can detect and produce a list of pages that requires attention to this aspect?

P.S. I kept forgeting to sign my name many times after I come back XD OhanaUnited 09:48, 24 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

It's not a problem. It's just that I see almost all picture description do not have some sort of square brackets [[ ]] that helps others to understand more related to the topic. OhanaUnited 04:26, 25 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

GAC backlog elimination drive

This form message is being sent to you either due to your membership with WikiProject Good Articles and/or your inclusion on the Wikipedia:Good article candidates/List of reviewers. A new drive has been started requesting that all members review at least one article (or more, if you wish!) within the next two weeks at GAC to help in removing the large backlog. This message is being sent to all members, and even members who have been recently reviewing articles. There are almost 130 members in this project and about 180 articles that currently need to be reviewed. If each member helps to review just one or two articles, the majority of the backlog will be cleared. Since the potential amount of reviewers may significantly increase, please make sure to add :{{GAReview}} underneath the article you are reviewing to ensure that only one person is reviewing each article. Additionally, the GA criteria may have been modified since your last review, so look over the criteria again to help you to determine if a candidate is GA-worthy. If you have any questions about this drive or the review process, leave a message on the GAC talk page. --Nehrams2020 01:05, 25 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Help at WPIX, ¿por favor?

The image Wpixcw11-1.jpg, from the WPIX article (which, BTW has both the proper tag and use rationale), was replaced by Liradio to a image (Image:Wpix2007.png) that was incorrect from the one WPIX uses on its website and on its air. He/she claims that it is the official WPIX logo, but the station has never used a green color ever in its version of CW 11. This change was made initially with no explanation by Liradio, and when I tried reverting back, explaining my reasons for doing so, Liradio disregarded and re-reverted back again. The previous version of the image is now back on the page, put I feel that Liradio will change it back again, so I'm requesting...you guessed it...assistance? Rollosmokes 16:09, 25 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Happy Firsfron's day!

Firsfron has been identified as an Awesome Wikipedian,
and therefore, I've officially declared today as Firsfron's day!
For being such a beautiful person and great Wikipedian,
enjoy being the Star of the day, dear Firsfron!

Love,
Phaedriel
00:11, 26 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

A record of your Day will always be kept here.

I'm doing this on behalf of Sharon, I hope she won't mind Will ^{(We're flying the flag all over the world)} 02:42, 26 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

One word, wow... OhanaUnited 04:40, 26 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Dear Firsfron, tho I was "deprived" (j/k Will!) of the pleasure of notifying you of your Day myself, it is a delight to see your happiness at my modest recognition of your hard work. The enthusiasm and effort you dedicate to make this a truly excellent encyclopedia, combined with your kindness and niceness are inspiring, and frankly, you deserve years, instead of just one Day. So today, I wish you all the joy in the world; be happy today, and enjoy, for you are our Today's Star! :) Love you, Phaedriel - 15:23, 26 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Less stressed

Oh yeah, I'm less stressed after 1 month of vacation and 3 more months to go. Everyday all I do is play games and go online. Pretty sure this is the life when I retire at age 60 lol. OhanaUnited 04:54, 26 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Well, that's what I hope the Earth is still blue and green when I'm 60. Otherwise I will be working my butt off as environmentalist till the day I die XD

If you are a type of person that likes to invent things, I can tell you that if you invent high storage power solar panel, you're going to strike rich and earn nobel peace prize award. Every nation will be desperate to buy it off you and stops nations from fighting over each other (e.g. US and Iraq) for energy resources like oil. OhanaUnited 05:04, 26 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Deinonychus GA on hold

GA on hold — Notes left on talk page. Nehrams2020 05:06, 26 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Living dinosaurs

Not to bring up a sore subject, but this article is just ticking me off more and more. Why is it even in the Wikiproject for dinosaurs? It's cryptozoology pseudoscience that is probably less interesting and definitely less referenced than Nessie. Can you remove it from the Dinosaur project? Please???? Orangemarlin 07:11, 26 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I saw what you wrote when you removed the category. ROFLMAO. Good one. Orangemarlin 05:37, 27 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks

...for fixing my userpage. You must have seen my (unrelated) warning on the IP's talkpage since you posted directly under it. I didn't use a boilerplate because I wanted to address the issue of that particular image deletion specifically. I tried to strike a balance between being welcomeing, and being firmly clear about the potentially vandalistic nature of continued deletions. How do you think I did? Doc Tropics 22:58, 26 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

No problem. I get suspicious when I see IPs editing userpages, and then I have to take a look. As far as your message goes: when there's a delicate situation like that, where it doesn't appear to be true vandalism, just a case of a newbie not aware of Wikipedia's guidelines, you better believe a personalized message is better than a boilerplate message! Keeping things positive and constructive is a great way to get your point across without angering the other user, and creating an unrepentant, angry vandal.

I would, however, watch out for inaccuracies like "You have recently deleted this article's image 4 times". IPs, even regular users, cannot delete images, only remove them from articles: removing an image isn't the same thing as deleting it; these are quite different things, at least on Wikipedia, and I would phrase it differently. Just my opinion, as always. Sorry to hear about the GA failure of Minoan eruption. What seem to be the cause of the repeated failures? Needs better sourcing, or...? Firsfron of Ronchester 00:04, 27 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for your advice Firs, that was exactly the kind of input I was hoping for. I certainly understand your point about things not normally being deleted, just removed. I'll be more mindful of such fine distinctions in the future. As for the Minoan eruption, the sources are actually fine; the real problem is a couple of sections which are overly dense and convoluted. We've tried to refine them several times, but we need to give them a major overhaul instead. BTW - I didn't actually bother to check the history, but I certainly assume you were involved in editing Diplodocus, so congrats on making the Main page with it! Doc Tropics 00:15, 27 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Too many cooks :)

Hey Arthur!

You have been working on Herrerasaurus all day! I don't know how you pull these all-day editing sessions. Hey, the article is looking great, thanks to your efforts. I started adding material while you were editing, and now it appears there's a goof: I mentioned Frenguellisaurus and Ischisaurus were junior synonymsin the taxonomy section, and a few minutes later, you added synonomy of Ischisaurus in the history section. It seems redundant to mention this fact twice, but either way, Frenguellisaurus should be mentioned. I'll step out of the kitchen for a while and let you do your thing, but I did want to alert you to the problem. Also, I changed the date on one reference to Novas (1994), as this is the date the Paleobiology database gives for that paper, though it could be wrong. Happy editing, Firsfron of Ronchester 05:27, 27 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Noticed that too and I changed the text accordingly while you were typing...Thanks for correcting the Novas ref. Btw congrats for all the Dino GAs passed recently! Cheers. ArthurWeasley 05:37, 27 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I've finished for tonight...Not much more to add on Herrerasaurus I think. I still have a few more ref to check but expect further contributions to be minor. The text still has some redundancies to be dealt with. Feel free to make changes when you see fit. Cheers ArthurWeasley 06:13, 27 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

12 hours? No way. I took many breaks ;) What's bothering me is that there are many red links now in the article. I was a little surprised to see that such important formations as the Ischigualasto and the Los Colorados ones do not have their own article (the description of the Ischigualasto one's is contained within the Ischigualasto article, but should really have a separate article). Is there any "geological formation guru" at the Dinosaur wikiproject who can do something about the Triassic formations? ArthurWeasley 14:58, 27 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

No problem, I'll let you work on Herrerasaurus and will add things later if I see something's missing. Btw, it looks as if the new dinosaur wikiproject is now to bring as many article to GA status instead of FA status. Shouldn't we try continue to push for FA status (at least for the biggest ones, such as Deinonychus), as I do not see much differences between the two processes. GA seems easier because there is only one reviewer but the comments to be addressed are generally in the same mold. ArthurWeasley 20:11, 27 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Bot finished

The bot you requested has been finished and approved. I found that the Birds category and the Jurassic park category are nested somewhere within the Dinosaurs category. I have excluded those along with the Fictional dinosaurs category. After excluding those there are about 3,000 articles within the category. I didn't check if all of them are directly related to the dinosaur project or not. A sample output of the bot can be found here. If there are no modifications or any other categories you'd like me to exclude I'll redirect the bot to edit the page you pointed out earlier. --Android Mouse 23:13, 27 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

>>Is it too late to request that the results be sorted somehow (preferably largest to smallest)?

Not at all, I'll alter it to sort it from largest to smallest.

>>is it possible for the bot to ignore the GA-inline and FA-inline tags so that they can be kept, as shown on Wikipedia:WikiProject Dinosaurs/dinosaur articles by size

I don't quite understand what you mean by this. Would you like the bot to exclude these articles from the list? Or did you mean you'd like the bot to place those icons beside them? Or something else?

>>Can the text at the top be kept and/or modified? / >If a user updates the page manually, what happens when the bot tries to update the page?

Yes and no. The page the bot actually edits, it disregards any previous edits. What I was thinking is just having the page the bot edits transcluded onto the bottom of the original page.

>>How often does the bot run?

Right now I haven't got it scheduled to run yet. But any interval is fine with me. I also wouldn't giving you the source and the bot's account and letting you run it whenever needed, if that would be more convient for you, else I don't mind running it.

>>Does it run automatically, or do you run it?

I'm not sure what you mean. It is non-interactive, so once it is started (either automatically or manually) it needs no more input.

>>How long does the updating take?

When I ran the test run on all the articles, it took much longer than I expected. I didn't keep an eye on the time too much but it took at least 15 to 30 minutes.

>>Article #3053 and some others are blank; what causes this?

No idea, I'll have to check into that.

>>Is it possible to exclude Category:Dinosaurs in fiction?

Yes, it should now be excluded when it is run again.

>>Sorry for the long list of questions. Thank you again for all of your work.

No problem. --Android Mouse 03:12, 28 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

The bot now places the icons to the side of the article names and they should now be sorted from largest to least. If there are no more modifications you'd like, feel free to transclude User:DinoSizedBot/sandbox and tell me so I'll schedule it to run daily. --Android Mouse 17:09, 28 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I forgot to note that the sizes may be several bytes off for the articles. I'm not sure why this is, but the numbers don't seem to be too terribly off base. I'm guessing it is because of the different sizes of the html encoding and the normal text encoding. If you'd like I can try and fix this. --Android Mouse 17:12, 28 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

It detects GA and FA articles automatically. If an article has "featured article", it is listed as a featured article. If an article's talk page has "currentstatus=GA" it is listed as a good article. No modifications should be necessarily if an article loses or gains that status. The bot is now scheduled to run nightly. --Android Mouse 19:26, 28 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Apostrophe abuse on Equijubus

Oops. I did it again! Thx for fixing that and other little bits. I didn't wl type species because type was already. However, type went to a disamb page which I have now corrected to Biological type. I've left type species as is.

I don't have anywhere near as much time as I'd like to have available for Wiki Work (so I tend to be a gnome) but I might see if any of the other dino stubs can be improved. Secret Squïrrel 05:09, 28 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

No worries; I fix apostrophes all the time. :) I know what you mean about not having enough time for Wiki. However, if you do get time, there are nearly a thousand articles which could use some clean-up/expanding/etc. Best wishes, Firsfron of Ronchester 05:21, 28 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

You read my mind! I was on the Project page looking for something to do. I'll start at the bottom of thousand articles and slowly work my way up. Quick Q - a lot of the talk pages for the smaller articles are empty. If I have a Q about an article would I be better off posting it on the Project talk page instead? Cheers, Secret Squirrel approx 05:43, 28 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Dinosaur FAs

What I mean is that I do not see that great a gap between criteria to meet GA status and those to meet FA status. Looking through the review process for dinosaur FA articles and GA ones (such as Othnielosaurus and Deinonychus), comments and criticisms are basically similar, i.e: MoS, explain technical words, grammar, rewording of a few sentences, ...so I was wondering why we should not go directly to FA nomination for some of the articles. FA seems to require a little bit more efforts in basic formatting (such as the infamous "full stop" in image captions), but overall I think any article which is comprehensive enough with at least 20 in-line citations should be considered as potential FA material (also remember comprehensiveness does not always go with article size, especially for the lesser known dinosaurs with no pop culture section). Also, I do not see fundamental differences in number of people involved in FA and GA articles, as at the end, major contributions seem to always come from 1 to 3 people from the same group of editors in both types of article, JS, Cas, DG, Sheep, Spawn, you and a few others. Well, these are only my thoughts of the moment so don't take them too seriously ;) I'll see if I can find new materials to add to the Styracosaurus article and also on Spinosaurus, which is supposedly the collaboration of the month. Cheers. ArthurWeasley 17:09, 28 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Good list, Good picture?

How come there's good article but not good list or picture? But all of them have featured section. OhanaUnited 18:19, 28 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

This time I want to ask about assessment rating. I know that any article can move up to GA or FA status regardless of their previous ratings as long as they meet the criteria. When a GA article is downgraded, it's pretty obvious that this article belongs to B class. However, when a FA article downgrades, which class does it go back to? A class? GA class? Or B class? A good example is Gene. There doesn't seem to have a "safety net" to "catch" these articles when they are demoted. OhanaUnited 16:16, 29 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

So where would be a good place to ask? OhanaUnited 03:11, 30 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Triassic feeding frenzy

We're having a party:

http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Tuatara&diff=134161299&oldid=132795514

Join us, the barbequeue is almost ready.

Samsara (talk • contribs) 21:12, 28 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Maastrichtian stage

I guess the parenthesis were confusing and it was unclear if the time period given refered to Maastrichtian (spanning from 70.6 to 65.5 Mya) or the last 3 millions year (thus 68.5 - 65.5). I've corrected this, have a look. Cheers. ArthurWeasley 17:37, 30 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

You were wrong

Sorry to break the news, but I guess there are non-avian dinosaurs alive today. You need to fly to Loch Ness and change everything you've ever edited on Wikipedia. Bad news for evolution, the K-T extinction event, and your credibility. Orangemarlin 01:31, 1 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Need your support

I just started User:OhanaUnited/Local Events and Culture and I need some support to help kick start the page. See if you can help. OhanaUnited 04:15, 1 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Creation Museum

I think this belongs under Category:Dinosaur, because you know that everything in the museum is accurate and useful to the education of all of us. I saw your edits there, and obviously you agree. Orangemarlin 20:08, 1 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Ahem...

The origin of life according to Creationism and the Bible Sheep81 21:41, 1 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Redirected to Creation according to Genesis. WLU 21:46, 1 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Albertosaurus

So I have this funny feeling you won't be able to describe Albertosaurus as our shortest featured article anymore. :) Sheep81 03:51, 2 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Yikes, I hadn't even thought about all the dubious species out there. I was mainly thinking of the ones in the articles, but yeah that makes sense.

And I promise that next time I'll expand one of the stubs and it will not start with "A" Sheep81 06:00, 2 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

As promised: Daspletosaurus Sheep81 03:03, 9 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Splitting television pages

Can I borrow your opinion on the viability of several articles:

I feel that these pages constitue as fancruft, as the placement of this information appeals only to a small group and not a broad audience. The information belongs within the main article, but recently a new user, B49, has been splitting off the Personalities section from the main station articles and creating these aforementioned pages with the exception of the WNBC page. Perhaps, WP:NOT and WP:NN may be the only Wikipedia guidelines I can think of where these pages are in violation of. I have nominated each of these pages for deletion, and have placed merge into tags on three of them. Your opinion, please?

BTW, B49 may also be using another alias, Bx31, and an at least two IP addresses (68.237.111.217 and 68.237.108.7) to make edits on these topics and related pages. Rollosmokes 22:07, 3 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Good luck onStyracosaurus

I see that you've put it forward - good luck! :) J. Spencer 00:12, 4 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

YES Network

Rollosmokes and I are having a disagrement over the YES Network article. I belive that the pages New York Yankees Pre-Game Show, New York Yankees Post-Game Show, and Yankees Baseball on YES on the article page under the Original Programing section. They are progrmas on the network and the new articles give more information than the main page. He thinks that it is obvious information, but my argument with that is what if someone has no idea about the YES Network they should be able to find out information on the various shows. I might argue that Yankeeography is an article that is to obvious and should be deleted but I belive that it is a good article. I am still working on the three articles in question and I would like the time to finish them. Could you please give me your opinion so we can settle this. Thank You very much.NYYankee2684 21:24, 3 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Having an article on Yankeeography, a program similar to Biography (TV series), is one thing. But there's no need for separate articles on the game broadcasts or the pre- and post-game shows. That's just ridiculous. It's not on the same level in both current or historical relevance as, say, national pre-game programs like The NFL Today, Fox NFL Sunday, NFL Primetime, or The NFL on NBC Pregame Show. If you look at the pre- and post-games, the information in the text isn't that much different. And where's the logic behind writing an article on the broadcast of a GAME?

The pages are fancruft, they offer little to nothing new in the way of original research, and they are examples of what Wikipedia is not. I thought of requesting a merge of the three, but then realized this topic is better served in the main YES Network article. Rollosmokes 01:53, 4 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Can we merge the pre-game and post-game insted of deleting them beucase I feel they add more to the overall YES Network Coverage.NYYankee2684 00:37, 4 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

UPDATE: NYYankee2684 blanked the AfD page for Yankees Baseball on YES, and removed the AfD tag from Yankees Batting Practice Today. Both changes have been reverted by other users. Just thought I'd let you know he's starting to hang himself. Rollosmokes 04:56, 4 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

UPDATE FURTHER: Since he can't get his way, NYYankee has decided to add the YES Network article to the group AfD. ~~Is there some way to remove it from the AfD, because it seems as though NYY has made this personal?~~ The YES Network article was removed from the AfD by Ilmari Karonen. Rollosmokes 05:44, 4 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Wundering why you deleted my page T.O.M which is a genuine system which we use where I come from to discuss women. Is this not to your approval?

Thanks

- Luke Coulton (username: Jiblob)

Wikipedia, We Have a Problem

User:A Man In Black is about to go back to his old tricks and is planning to delete all TV Newscast schedules from all pages. No consensus has been reached nor has this even been discussed. These are not in violation as far as I can read and User:A Man In Black needs to be stopped before all TV station sections are completely wiped out. First logos, now this....help? - NeutralHomer ^T:C 01:54, 7 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Neutralhomer has solicited input here. You may want to wiegh in there. --Calton | Talk 03:02, 7 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Fris, I have been as civil as I can with AIMB...and don't even get my started with Calton. Love how he appears. - NeutralHomer ^T:C 04:03, 7 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

95% of all TV station pages (that have newscasts) have newscast schedules. Newscasts are (99% of the time) live programs that are produced by and broadcast on their respective stations. The schedules of these newscasts most of the time include the news anchors, meteorologists, and sports anchors that are on that particular newscast at that particular time. These are very well updated and WP:TVS members do a very good job of making sure that these don't break any rules.

If admins were to remove all local newscast schedules while siteing WP:NOT#TVGuide and not remove the national schedules (NBC, CBS, etc), it would be hypocrisy. You can't do one thing to one section and not do it to the other.

But since the newscast sections are ONLY about the newscast that are broadcast on the respective stations and not about any other programming (Dr. Phil, etc) or any national news programming (GMA, Today, World News Now, etc), nor any national primetime programming (House, NCIS, etc), and since they, in most cases, include the anchors, etc., who are employees of the station, they do not fall under WP:NOT#TVGuide.

Also, if you read WP:NOT#DIR, it is a very vague and contradictory rule. One that should and needs to be updated with language that would make problems like this easier to figure out. - NeutralHomer ^T:C 04:20, 7 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Actually, I past the KXGN-TV grid. I am talking about newscast schedules for like WRC, WAVY, WABC, WLS, KCNC, etc.

I am beyond the CBS/NBC schedule from KXGN, that is weeks ago. - NeutralHomer ^T:C 05:14, 7 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Fris, you can't have one and not the other. If you have national schedules, you have to have local schedules. If you don't have locals, you can't have nationals. This is a one way street. It's allowed or it's not, across the board. - NeutralHomer T:C 04:11, 7 June 2007 (UTC)

Actually, McNeil (1996), Brooks and Marsh (1964), and Brooks (2003) all include national program grids in their encyclopedias. I haven't seen one yet which includes a local newscast schedule. Sorry, NH. I just don't think local schedules are encyclopedic. Firsfron of Ronchester 05:52, 7 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

But since they are produced by the station, they should be noted. Best way, unless you want to write a whole paragraph, is a short schedule. - NeutralHomer ^T:C 05:55, 7 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Newscasts

OK, it's not the world's greatest proposal, but it'll do. If you want to add some legal, technical mumbo-jumbo, go ahead. Don't think it will do much good, but it is worth a shot. - NeutralHomer ^T:C 05:55, 7 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Why I don't edit psychiatry pages...

I broke my own rule but have had fun editing schizophrenia and am in the process of saving it at FAR. Problem is I then started sprucing up chlorpromazine but a few of us have come into problems with Dr CareBear. If you check his contribs and the history of chlorpormazine plus Wikipedia_talk:WikiProject_Clinical_medicine#Akathisia_as_cause_low_compliance_for_exceptionally_toxic_neuroleptics and User_talk:Davidruben#You_are_Clearly_Attempting_to_Protect_Corporate_Interests. you'll get the idea. What do you think we should do next? cheers, Cas Liber | talk | contribs 07:52, 7 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Sorry to hear about it....What would be really cool is if you could read teh schizophrenia page and see if it makes sense and let us know anything which sounds funny..cheers, Cas Liber | talk | contribs 10:19, 7 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks muchly. cheers, Cas Liber | talk | contribs 11:10, 7 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Upset

I am slightly insulted that you also think I was causing harrassment by mass messaging a couple WP:TVS members. Next time I write more than 1 person something, I guess I will have to type different messages. The ol' cut and paste method obviously upsets some people and is obviously confused as harrassment, which is not what I was going for.

I am also slightly offended that you commend ridicule and threats from another admin to an editor. This is upsetting and in a way concerning.

But, I am saving you, JzG, and AMIB some work and am wiping the schedules out myself.

I would ask that in the future, you let admins know not to ridicule and threaten other editors and they may get a better response. - NeutralHomer ^T:C 23:15, 7 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Trust me, no matter what, the people who are "sworn" to stop threats and ridicule, will continue to do it themselves. Some admins are drunk with their power and since no one can stop them (not even other admins) they can pretty much do what they want, say what they want, and threaten and ridicule whoever they want with no real consequences.

I tried, with zero help from WP:TVS to propose a change in the rules, and I was threated and ridiculed...and laughed at by an admin. I will let you find which one. But in WP:TVS's own "Article Structure", it states...

"A television station article should include:

what kind of programming the station airs

are there any original shows that the station shows?"

....so, something that is part of WP:TVS's "Article Structure" is being removed (yeah, by me...big deal) at the behest of admins and no one in WP:TVS does anything. Hell, one of them was one that decided it would be a good idea to laugh.

When the admins and other editors can finally face the consequences of their actions, then maybe I will consider Wikipedia a good place again, but while admins turn a blind eye to some editors and even some admins actions and punish others instead, Wikipedia is not a place I want to be a part of. - NeutralHomer ^T:C 04:44, 8 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Also, would you mind letting User:Calton know they if he is going to quote WP:NOT#DIR for newscast schedules and the rule says all schedules, they the NBC, ABC, CBS, etc ones have to go too. User:A Man In Black is going to take them out, I am just saving him time. We can't have one and not the other. - NeutralHomer ^T:C 09:01, 8 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Sauropelta

I think I can get it tonight. Mainly expand the lead, switch passive voice to active, and tinker with the environment section. Some of his other suggestions aren't doable or are in direct contradiction of what we've been told in FAC before. I'll explain what I don't change, he'll understand. Would you mind running through it once I finish though? Sheep81 03:11, 8 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

OK I ran through it and moved a bunch of stuff around. The reviewer was right, a lot of that interesting Cloverly environment stuff was kind of a tangent and would probably be better off in the actual Cloverly article. I pared it down a lot along with some of his other changes. I don't see how we can use present tense in the description section. Some of that info is directly describing the bones while other info describes non-bony structures or bones that weren't preserved. Sometimes even in the same sentence. We got advice in an FAC to leave the description in past tense so I think it should stay that way. I use present tense in the discovery section where it makes sense. Would you mind looking things over? Thanks a lot! Sheep81 11:03, 8 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I do think it's kind of cluttered up there actually. I'll move stuff around a bit. Personally I think "late Aptian to early Albian" is a little specific for the lead and I would rather just have the numbers 115-110 mya. If you think it would be better to have the names of the stages though, add them back in. Unfortunately there isn't a direct source on shoulder height. Carpenter provides a complete skeletal reconstruction but sadly it has no scale bar so we can't get it from there. Sheep81 22:20, 8 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I did keep the dates, I thought that was a good idea. The EK was a long, long time so it's good to narrow it down. Sheep81 22:38, 8 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Mediation at WNBC?

Aido2002 insists that this line remains in the WNBC article. From the subsection "Helicopter Crashes," describing the crash of a WNBC-TV news helicopter in 2004:

"WABC-TV's news helicopter was covering the same news story when they saw the WNBC helicopter clearly having trouble. They called for help and also got exclusive footage of the actual crash, for which they won an Emmy Award."

Mentioning that WABC-TV -- another rival station -- won an Emmy for covering the crash of a competing station's helicopter is not all that notable. And since WABC-TV, **NOT** WNBC-TV won the award, this info has no place in the WNBC article. Aido2002 doesn't see things that way, and he insists that it remain in the article. It's there now. Help, please? Rollosmokes 04:00, 8 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Flood geology

Here's a good one for you. LOL. Can you help out? An anon sockpuppet (different IP addresses, all from the same place) keeps writing the same old POV edits, poorly written and sourced edits, over and over and over again. I'm afraid I can only 3RR someone so many times before I get hit with it. Can you protect the article from anon editing for awhile? Orangemarlin 23:41, 8 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

My RFA

Hello, Firsfron/Archive 9, and thank you so much for your support in my recent RFA, which passed 59/0/0! I will try very hard to live up to your expectations – please let me know if I can help you in any way, but first take your cookie! Thanks again! KrakatoaKatie 00:29, 9 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

NOTE: I'm not very creative, so I adopted this from RyanGerbil10 who swiped it from Misza13, from whom I have swiped many, many things. Chocolate chip cookies sold separately. Batteries not included. Offer not valid with other coupons or promotions. May contain peanuts, strawberries, or eggs. Keep out of the reach of small children, may present a choking hazard to children under the age of 3 and an electrical hazard to small farm animals. Do not take with alcohol or grapefruit juice. This notice has a blue background and may disappear into thin air. The recipient of this message, hereafter referred to as "Barnum's latest sucker", relinquishes all rights and abilities to file a lawsuit, to jump on a pogostick while standing on his head, and to leap out in front of moving trains. KrakatoaKatie, Jimbo Wales, and the states of Arkansas, Wisconsin, and Oklahoma are not liable for any lost or stolen items or damage from errant shopping carts or unlicensed drivers such as Paris Hilton.

Another questionable image

"Image:Citipati.jpg" is another image that is probably a copyright vio... : ( Sheep81 06:40, 9 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Check out the pages for Eoraptor and Syntarsus (taxobox) as well... Sheep81 06:47, 9 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Not to mention Byronosaurus! All of these were uploaded by this user at Commons. You might want to check others on that list, most of them seem OK though. Sheep81 06:51, 9 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Ah ha. So you are just a worthless peon on Commons like the rest of us, I see. :) I'll list them myself. I wasn't really sure how to do it. Sheep81 07:02, 9 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Check your email. Sheep81 08:48, 12 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Barnstar

On a happier note, thank you for the barnstar! Sheep81 06:54, 9 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Re:Edit War

I'm not trying to start an edit war. I am merely trying to follow the precedent for the type of situation we are in with the WNBC article. Rollosmokes wanted to remove a part of the article, and I disputed it. So, it is precedent to replace the section, and discuss to reach a consensus. The only one trying to start an edit war her is Rollosmokes, and I see you have posted the same message on his page. However, I do not see what would cause you to think I am trying to start an edit war. Thanks, aido2002 20:39, 9 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Not to pile on, but I made an addition to an article about a Maryland television station (WMAR-TV)about two weeks ago. The edit was unilaterally reverted by Rollosmokes within a short period of time. I gave an explanation as to why the edit was important on two more occasions and both times it was reverted by Rollosmokes, with the only explanation being he thought the information was trivial. I am a part time contributor and usually edit only with regard to Maryland related articles so it is a bit discouraging when someone like him continues to subvert the creative process.Marylandstater 15:31, 10 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Anonymous vandals

Uh, remember that offer you made about my talk page. You don't have to protect it, but I have an immature anon editor going a bit over the top. Orangemarlin 01:08, 10 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Hmmm....

Sure, I'll help, but I'm not sure how much help I'll be. On another matter, I thought TOL weren't enforecing their dictat measures on the talk page wikiproject templates (As mentioned earlier on the WPDINO talk page & here). However, I found that they had placed their new template on Talk:Dinosaur. Now on the most important dinosaur article ever, our logo isn't even seen without pressing the show button. Now how are we to get new members? I thought we said no to the new proposal? Will they put this template on all talk pages now? Anyway, I'm probably going to be contributing to my own animal anatomy article soon, so may not be able to edit many dinosaur articles. Cheers, Spawn Man 05:19, 11 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Template:Schedule

Hi there

I noticed that you made a lengthy comment on the inclusion of schedules within Wikipedia at Template talk:Schedule. There is a current discussion on the merit of including schedules and programme lists within Wikipedia at Wikipedia talk:What Wikipedia is not. Please feel free (and I would strongly advise) that you repeat your concerns you noted at the aforementioned talk page there. Regards. --tgheretford (talk) 11:26, 11 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Re: DuMont disambiguation merge

Ack. Thanks for catching (and correcting) that omission.—Ketil Trout (^<><!) 20:29, 12 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Working Man's Barnstar

Awarded to Firsfron for his recent efforts on Styracosaurus. My 4.5 year old daughter is absolutely obsessed with all frilled horned *Ceratopsidae*, and she loves it when I read her all the excellent Wikipedia articles which you helped write. You rock! -- **Y not?** 03:38, 13 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Her favorite ones are Triceratops, Pentaceratops, and Protoceratops. In fact, we went to the AMNH just this past Sunday to see them again. She doesn't know about Styracosaurus yet - but now she will. Thx. -- Y not? 11:19, 13 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for the compliment. She's really something else. But she argues like a lawyer! -- Y not? 00:42, 14 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Barnstar

Thanks for the barnstar Firsfron. Alas, I'm probably not deserving of it. Thanks all the same though. Sheep's been driving me nuts over the Daspletosaurus article - I probably wasn't the clearest, but it made things worse when he went off in a huff. Nevermind, hopefully he'll come back today & we can sort out the one last issue I had with the article. Anyway, thanks again, Spawn Man 04:16, 13 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Erm, yeah... I mean, I'm sure glad I didn't call him childish or anything.... *Shuffles feet*... Spawn Man 04:26, 13 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Or we could not work anything else & he could resort to namecalling. I mean, do people really think that about me? That I have the knowledge of a first grader? I might as well leave if I'm that bloody stupid. I wish to have nothing more to do with Sheep. Ever. Spawn Man 08:20, 13 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Meh, that was close enough to an insult about me being a first grader. We don't even have first grade in New Zealand. Anyway, I wasn't going to leave, I just said that if I was that dumb I'd leave (Everyone but Sheep knows I'm not dumb... I hope...) & I never knew we were even having an argument until he said that stuff. In any case, it was my opinion about the whole sentence thing & I didn't expect to come up against such venomous opposition. I feel it adds nothing to the article, but if my help is not wanted there, then it's not my place to implement any changes. You're too kind anyway Firsfron, I'm glad we're (Wiki)friends... You don't have to be if you don't want to be; I'm aware I don't always conform with other's expectations & if I'm putting too much strain on you by doing so, feel free to not be my friend any more, if it will make you happier. Anyway, I'm going to call it a night thank God... :) Spawn Man 09:56, 13 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Eocursor??

Good lord you are quick, this hasn't even hit the DML yet. I'm really excited to read about this actually, but I can't find it on the Royal Society site anywhere, not even an abstract. Sheep81 07:41, 13 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Yeah I got the paper off the DML...surprisingly short for such an important find! I'm waiting on the supplementary info, apparently there are nice pictures. :) Sheep81 01:44, 14 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Edit war at KMSP-TV, could certainly use your help to try and settle this

I made a few modifications to KMSP-TV yesterday, only to have them quickly reverted by User:Rollosmokes. Seeking a compromise, I took some of his suggestions, though reverted to what I had written, which clarified some facts, corrected some bad grammar and spelling, and made a bit more readable. Rollosmokes reverted again. I have tried to meet this user halfway and compromise, but no can do. Rollosmokes reverts anything I put up there. I warned this person I would get a moderator involved, and he/she/it claims I was being threatening.

It should be noted that Rollosmokes has a long history of edit wars, bannings and otherwise uncivil behavior.

Needless to say, I'm at a loss. I think it's time to get a third party involved. Interested? --Fightingirish 20:16, 13 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I explained all my reasons for my edits to Fightingirish on the KMSP-TV talk page twice. However, he chooses to revert completely to his/her preferred version without explaining his reasons or using invalid reasons in his/her edit summaries. On my recent revision to Talk:KMSP-TV, I have taken each paragraph and sentence that needed maintenance and explained what should be changed -- something I shouldn't have to do. Rollosmokes 06:49, 14 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Eocursor

Just came across the Eocursor paper and start editing the article while reading the paper (you have the paper right?), but then realized you, as the creator of the article, might want to do the editing. Sorry for that. Please feel free to continue, I have to leave anyway. Just thinking of drawing a pic for it. Cheers. ArthurWeasley 00:20, 14 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Well, Firefox just wrote an one line sentence, making you the major contributor to the article so far. Have fun with the paper. I agree this is very exciting. Have to go. TTFN. ArthurWeasley 00:41, 14 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Welcome to Firsfron's talk page

Guidelines

Archives

Messages

Messages here

YGM ;^)

Messages here

hey

Amusing?

Pissing Off Annoying Creationists

Archie copyright problems:

journal articles

Welcome ;)

Mayr et al 2007

RFA Thanks

Congrats!

Adminship

Requests

Pantydraco as impending vandal magnet

Titanic achievements

recently unprotected articles

'tsalright...

Thank you

Not the first time:

Dinosaur - bullet lists

Prenocephale

Request for an admin-type action

KAMR-TV (again)

Dinosaur - bullet points

Project page comments

Removing tool

Stego antorbital

Southern Hemisphere dinosaurs

Nomina dubia in List of dinosaurs

Jurassic Park FAC

Dinosaur Size Serial Disgruntled Editor?

Thanks Firs

Now if you'd done another DYK apart from Europasaurus...

Request for article restoration

Styracosaurus

Baryonyx

Admin Coaching

American History X

I've met Jimbo

Dakosaurus

Ok

Evolution

Thanks!

question about a 1915 e-book

Kickball / Adult Kickball

Milestones

Petition on Spawny's page

Thank you, dear Firsfron!

User:RMc

Firsfron

Re: Herrerasaurus collaboration

The happy world of basal ceratopian systematics and taxonomy

Am I being unreasonable?

WNBC-TV logo picture

GA reviews

Someone's considering me for an RFA

Many Thanks:

Just a word of advice

More Dino Fun

Thank you!

Help?

Trying to thinks differently about dinosaurs

Little help

Re: RFA

Re: GAC and conflict of Interest

Just don't do it while I'm drinking coffee

Just so you know

Personal attacks on my talk page

Vandalism button

Re: Hey

T-Rex

Thanks

Response

Herrerasaurus

Wikify picture description?