User talk:John Troodon

Kem Kem Beds

I had to undo your recent edit because you attributed information to a source I added a long time ago that I can verify does not actually contain that information. That said, your contributions sounded plausible, so if you want to source them properly I'm not against them being re-added. You can access your previous contributions in the article's history tab. Abyssal (talk) 15:30, 21 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Proposed deletion of Miocene fauna of north - eastern Paratethys

The article Miocene fauna of north - eastern Paratethys has been proposed for deletion because of the following concern:

The article is just a brief list of fossils found in an area and doesn't indicate their significance or notability.

While all contributions to Wikipedia are appreciated, content or articles may be deleted for any of several reasons.

You may prevent the proposed deletion by removing the {{proposed deletion/dated}} notice, but please explain why in your edit summary or on the article's talk page.

Please consider improving the article to address the issues raised. Removing {{proposed deletion/dated}} will stop the proposed deletion process, but other deletion processes exist. The speedy deletion process can result in deletion without discussion, and articles for deletion allows discussion to reach consensus for deletion. Inks.LWC (talk) 07:36, 24 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Nomination of Miocene fauna of north - eastern Paratethys for deletion

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Miocene fauna of north - eastern Paratethys is suitable for inclusion in Wikipedia according to Wikipedia's policies and guidelines or whether it should be deleted.

The article will be discussed at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Miocene fauna of north - eastern Paratethys until a consensus is reached, and anyone is welcome to contribute to the discussion. The nomination will explain the policies and guidelines which are of concern. The discussion focuses on good quality evidence, and our policies and guidelines.

Users may edit the article during the discussion, including to improve the article to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the article-for-deletion template from the top of the article. Inks.LWC (talk) 23:37, 24 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Speedy deletion nomination of Ophioptera

If this is the first article that you have created, you may want to read the guide to writing your first article.
You may want to consider using the Article Wizard to help you create articles.

Thank you for experimenting with Wikipedia. Your test worked, and the page that you created has been or soon will be deleted. Please use the sandbox for any other tests you want to do. Take a look at the welcome page if you would like to learn more about contributing to our encyclopedia.

If you think that this notice was placed here in error, contest the deletion by clicking on the button labelled "Click here to contest this speedy deletion," which appears inside of the speedy deletion ({{db-...}}) tag (if no such tag exists, the page is no longer a speedy delete candidate). Doing so will take you to the talk page where you will find a pre-formatted place for you to explain why you believe the page should not be deleted. You can also visit the the page's talk page directly to give your reasons, but be aware that once tagged for speedy deletion, if the page meets the criterion, it may be deleted without delay. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag yourself, but don't hesitate to add information to the page that would render it more in conformance with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. If the page is deleted, you can contact one of these administrators to request that the administrator userfy the page or email a copy to you. SwisterTwister talk 06:16, 25 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]

African dromaeosaur

Hi John, please note that we've already got an article about these dinousaurs, dromaeosauridae. It states the same as your source website, namely that they are commonly called "raptors". But Dromaeosaurus "raptor" is not a species. So I've redirected your page to dromaeosauridae. Regards, De728631 (talk) 13:51, 26 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Welcome!

Hi, and welcome to the Birds WikiProject! As you've probably guessed, we're a group of editors working to improve Wikipedia's coverage of bird-related topics.

A few features that you may find helpful:

Our navigation box points to most of the useful pages within the project.
Most important discussions take place on the project's main discussion page; it is highly recommended that you watchlist it.
The project has several departments, which handle article quality assessment, detailed article and content review, outreach, and other tasks.
If you're looking for something to work on, there are many articles that need attention.
Read our current newsletter, and sign up for (or opt out) of future issues.

If you have any questions, please don't hesitate to ask any experienced member of the project; we'll be happy to help you. Again, welcome! We look forward to seeing you around! MeegsC | Talk 12:31, 30 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Prehistoric birds

Absolutely! Just be sure you've got good references for what you add; we've had some hoaxers in the past add all sorts of fake prehistoric birds, so project members tend to watch carefully for those. I look forward to learning about some new "old" birds! MeegsC | Talk 12:47, 30 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Therapods

Hi John: Thanks for inviting me to join your new project. Right now, I don't have the time to commit, but perhaps at some point in the future I will! Good luck with it... MeegsC | Talk 18:17, 1 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Templates: Wikipedia:WikiProject Theropods

I'm assuming you meant to create these as templates. You need to create two separate templates as (for example) Template:Wikipedia:WikiProject Theropods 1 and Template:Wikipedia:WikiProject Theropods 2. You accidentally created this as an article, so you'll just have to recreate them as separate templates. Don't worry about it; you'd be surprised how often this happens, even with fairly experienced users. The Blade of the Northern Lights (話して下さい) 04:17, 2 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Barnstar

Hi John,

Thanks for the barnstar on my talk page. :) Good luck on your efforts to improve paleo-articles. Best wishes and happy editing, Firsfron of Ronchester 06:45, 4 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Subfamily Velociraptorinae

This is an automated message from CorenSearchBot. I have performed a web search with the contents of Subfamily Velociraptorinae, and it appears to include material copied directly from http://www.dailyweekee.com/daily/Dromaeosauridae.

It is possible that the bot is confused and found similarity where none actually exists. If that is the case, you can remove the tag from the article. The article will be reviewed to determine if there are any copyright issues.

If substantial content is duplicated and it is not public domain or available under a compatible license, it will be deleted. For legal reasons, we cannot accept copyrighted text or images borrowed from other web sites or printed material. You may use such publications as a source of information, but not as a source of sentences. See our copyright policy for further details. (If you own the copyright to the previously published content and wish to donate it, see Wikipedia:Donating copyrighted materials for the procedure.) CorenSearchBot (talk) 07:28, 7 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Talkback

Hello, John Troodon. You have new messages at The Blade of the Northern Lights's talk page.
Message added 05:00, 10 July 2011 (UTC). You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.[reply]

Scelidosauridae

Hello, John Troodon;

Let me explain. It seems that you're relying on references that have become outdated. Scelidosauridae is a holdover from the very early days of dinosaur paleontology. It consists more or less of Scelidosaurus, and most researchers these days no longer use families with only one genus. If there's only one genus in a family, there's not much need to write an article for the family either, because the two articles would be almost the same. It is true that Bienosaurus has been assigned to Scelidosauridae, and it has never been reevaluated, so if you can write an article on Scelidosauridae using only Bienosaurus and Scelidosaurus, that would be ideal.

Outside of the Internet, it appears that Scutellosauridae has only ever been used in The Dinosaur Data Book, a semitechnical book from 1991 based in part on A Field Guide to Dinosaurs from 1983. I've got copies of both, and they're old favorites. That's the problem: they're based on research from twenty years ago, which is not necessarily bad, but several of the members have been reevaluated. Echinodon is probably a heterodontosaurid, Trimucrodon is known only from teeth that belong to some sort of unknown primitive ornithischian, and Tatisaurus is a primitive thyreophoran that is probably more similar to Scelidosaurus (in fact, Spencer G. Lucas suggested that the two belonged to the same genus in 1996, but this was never widely accepted).

If you'd like the most recent overview of dinosaur relationships, the best place to go is Thomas R. Holtz's pages for the Holtz-Rey dinosaur encyclopedia. The main page is at http://www.geol.umd.edu/~tholtz/dinoappendix/, and the most recent genus list (from January 2011) can be downloaded as a pdf at http://www.geol.umd.edu/~tholtz/dinoappendix/appendix.html.

You should definitely keep working. Like I said before, you could write an article on Scelidosauridae using Scelidosaurus and Bienosaurus as the members. Also, try to avoid speculation, unless you've got a source for it.

(Also, you might want to consider removing some of your personal information from your user page, for privacy reasons)

I hope this helps explain what I was doing. If you have any questions, please ask! J. Spencer (talk) 18:38, 16 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Hello again;

Even if you don't have Holtz's book, I think you would find the appendix very useful. This is the direct link to the pdf file, if you decide to check it out: http://www.geol.umd.edu/~tholtz/dinoappendix/HoltzappendixWinter2010.pdf

No, I have not heard much about Crimean dinosaurs. I knew of Orthomerus weberi, but I had to look it up. There are many areas with few to no dinosaur fossils, so I am happy when new areas are added. Just be careful not to over-identify things (obviously I don't have it in front of me, but the Alectrosaurus tooth in your photo looks rather like a water-worn stone, which I have seen frequently on the North Shore).

Thank you for the invitations, but I no longer am an official member of any WikiProject. I had been a member of several, but I left them this winter because I felt like I was making promises I couldn't keep. I am happy to help in other ways, though, as I have been a steady contributor to Wikipedia since late 2006 and I know my way around the site. J. Spencer (talk) 00:19, 20 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Crimean mammals

In reference to this edit—I wrote the article about Ambondro mahabo and currently work in mammalian paleontology, so I'd be interested to learn more about this fossil. However, it seems that it's inappropriate for a listing in Wikipedia according to our policy on no original research: you'll first need to get the find published in some reliable source, most likely a peer-reviewed journal. Ucucha 12:25, 22 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]

July 2011

Thank you for your contributions to Wikipedia. Before saving your changes to an article, please provide an edit summary for your edits. Doing so helps everyone understand the intention of your edit (and prevents legitimate edits from being mistaken for vandalism). It is also helpful to users reading the edit history of the page. Thank you. mgiganteus1 (talk) 15:41, 22 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Note

Hi, John Troodon, you'll likely not be pleased about this but I have suppressed a number of edits to your userspace which reveal too much personally identifiable information about yourself. I've done this per policy and for your own protection and safety on-line as you are a self-declared minor. I'm really sorry about that and I know it's annoying, but it's for the best. Please don't re-add it. For some useful information on privacy and safety, take a look at Wikipedia:Guidance for younger editors. Thanks, and sorry for messing about with your pages - Courcelles 15:49, 22 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Userpages

John, you'll have no doubt noticed that you no longer have access to the history of your userpage. This is for your own good, and for Wikipedia's legal protection. I know that you removed your birthdate from the page when J. Spencer suggested it, but then you added a big notice saying how old you are anyway. That's not good. The content has been removed (and so has the userbox).

Sorry for the inconvenience. DS (talk) 15:53, 22 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Image problems

John, I noticed those images you uploaded to Commons. There are some serious problems with those.

It's about what "copyright" means.

One of the files you uploaded was a photo of a TV screen that was showing "Jurassic Fight Club".

"Jurassic Fight Club" belongs to the History Channel. It is copyright to them. I know English isn't your first language, so I'll explain: "Copyright" is "the legal right to make copies of an (image/story/etc), and to control what happens to them".

What you did with your camera is, you made a copy of the picture on the screen. It might be your camera, and your TV screen, but that image of the Nanotyrannosaur still belongs to the History Channel. It's like that with books, too: you pay for a copy of the book, for pieces of paper that have pictures printed on them -- but those pictures still belong to the guy who made them (or to the book company, or... it's complicated).

The picture from the museum... that's scan of a postcard. It even says "(C) www.mykiiv.info" on it. That means that they are the ones who own the copyright. You own that one copy of the postcard, but the people who run the website are the ones who own the copyright to the image. Commons cannot accept images that are copyright to other people. We have images that are copyright to other people, yes, but that's by mistake. And when we find them, we delete them.

The pictures you scanned from your copy of the Dinosaur Atlas - those aren't yours. They belong to either John Malam (who wrote the book), or Dorling Kinderley (the company that sells the book). You own a copy of the book. They own the copyright. Those images have to go also. The same goes for the picture of the fossil shark tooth. You own a copy, but the copyright belongs to Joe Cocke. Cocke can't take away your copy, but you're not allowed to make more copies and sell them or give them away.

The pictures you took of the fossils from your collection - those are fine. They can stay. And the picture you drew of the khersonotherium - it can stay also. You owned the copyrights to that drawing and those photos, and you released them. But you can't release copyrights that you don't own.

Copyrights aren't forever - we have lots of pictures that come from books whose copyrights have expired. But in most countries, copyright lasts until (a long time after the copyright owner dies; the exact number of years depends on the country you live in).

I hope you understand that this is not a criticism of you as a person; you were trying to do the right thing and to help Wikipedia. DS (talk) 19:56, 23 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]

template dinobox

Hi JT - what kinds of problems are you having with the template? de Bivort 21:15, 23 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]

OK - I looked it over a bit. It's hard to know where to start. So can you clearly explain to me what variables you want to include, for now, and what you want to have displayed when the value of the variable is specified. In fact, let's start simple. Why don't you strip out all but the first variable, whatever it is, and we can work on that one? de Bivort 22:43, 24 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Blocked indefinitely as a sock puppet

You have been blocked indefinitely as a sock puppet that was created to violate Wikipedia policy. Note that multiple accounts are allowed, but using them for illegitimate reasons is not.

If you are not a sock puppet, and would like to be unblocked, you may appeal this block by adding the text {{unblock|Your reason here ~~~~}} below, but you should read the guide to appealing blocks first. The Cavalry (Message me) 02:58, 30 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Nomination for deletion of Template:Dinobox

Template:Dinobox has been nominated for deletion. You are invited to comment on the discussion at the template's entry on the Templates for discussion page. Bulwersator (talk) 09:42, 18 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Love history & culture? Get involved in WikiProject World Digital Library!

World Digital Library Wikipedia Partnership - We need you!

Hi John Troodon! I'm the Wikipedian In Residence at the World Digital Library, a project of the Library of Congress and UNESCO. I'm recruiting Wikipedians who are passionate about history & culture to participate in improving Wikipedia using the WDL's vast free online resources. Participants can earn our awesome WDL barnstar and help to disseminate free knowledge from over 100 libraries in 7 different languages. Multilingual editing encouraged!!! But being multilingual is not a necessity to make this project a success. Please sign up to participate here. Thanks for editing Wikipedia and I look forward to working with you! EdwardsBot (talk) 14:32, 25 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Subfamily Velociraptorinae listed at Redirects for discussion

An editor has asked for a discussion to address the redirect Subfamily Velociraptorinae. Since you had some involvement with the Subfamily Velociraptorinae redirect, you might want to participate in the redirect discussion if you have not already done so. --Animalparty-- (talk) 08:38, 15 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Subfamily Velociraptorini listed at Redirects for discussion

An editor has asked for a discussion to address the redirect Subfamily Velociraptorini. Since you had some involvement with the Subfamily Velociraptorini redirect, you might want to participate in the redirect discussion if you have not already done so. --Animalparty-- (talk) 18:45, 16 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Dromiceiomimus(or Ornithomimus synonym listed at Redirects for discussion

An editor has asked for a discussion to address the redirect Dromiceiomimus(or Ornithomimus synonym. Since you had some involvement with the Dromiceiomimus(or Ornithomimus synonym redirect, you might want to participate in the redirect discussion if you have not already done so. Sam Sailor ^Talk! 15:02, 5 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Invite to the African Destubathon

Hi. You may be interested in participating in the African Destubathon which starts on October 15. Africa currently has over 37,000 stubs and badly needs a quality improvement editathon/contest to flesh out basic stubs. There are proposed substantial prizes to give to editors who do the most geography, wildlife and women articles, and planned smaller prizes for doing to most destubs for each of the 55 African countries, so should be enjoyable! Even if contests aren't your thing we would be grateful if you could consider destubbing a few African wildlife articles during the drive to help the cause and help reduce the massive 37,000 + stub count, of which many are rated high importance. If you're interested in competing or just loosely contributing any article related to a topic you often work on, please add your name to the Contestants/participants section. Might be a good way to work on fleshing out articles you've long been meaning to target and get rewarded for it! Diversity of work from a lot of people will make this that bit more special. Thanks. --Ser Amantio di Nicolao^{Che dicono a Signa?}_{Lo dicono a Signa.} 04:55, 13 October 2016 (UTC)[reply]

List of feathered dinosaurs listed at Redirects for discussion

An editor has asked for a discussion to address the redirect List of feathered dinosaurs. Since you had some involvement with the List of feathered dinosaurs redirect, you might want to participate in the redirect discussion if you have not already done so. AngusWOOF (bark • sniff) 23:05, 11 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Proposed deletion of Ordovician fauna of Putilovo village

The article Ordovician fauna of Putilovo village has been proposed for deletion because of the following concern:

Not notable. This is a very narrow topic. Wikipedia has articles on prehistoric life of broader areas (e.g. US states, not villages) and on particular fossil-bearing stratigraphic units. A (partial) list of taxa from one excavation site is too narrow

While all constructive contributions to Wikipedia are appreciated, pages may be deleted for any of several reasons.

You may prevent the proposed deletion by removing the {{proposed deletion/dated}} notice, but please explain why in your edit summary or on the article's talk page.

Please consider improving the page to address the issues raised. Removing {{proposed deletion/dated}} will stop the proposed deletion process, but other deletion processes exist. In particular, the speedy deletion process can result in deletion without discussion, and articles for deletion allows discussion to reach consensus for deletion. Plantdrew (talk) 20:17, 4 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Proposed deletion of Coprinellus niveus

The article Coprinellus niveus has been proposed for deletion because of the following concern:

Species does not exist. The correct name of the species is Coprinopsis nivea and the old synonym is Coprinus niveus. Neither Coprinellus niveus or Coprinus nivea as used here are recognised synonyms and do not appear in the cited reference so it doesn't seem like the page should be redirected to the correct species page. I've take the one reference that has a link here and put it on the proper page so I don't think anything else here is necessary to keep. I'll leave it up to more experienced users.

While all constructive contributions to Wikipedia are appreciated, pages may be deleted for any of several reasons.

You may prevent the proposed deletion by removing the {{proposed deletion/dated}} notice, but please explain why in your edit summary or on the article's talk page.

Please consider improving the page to address the issues raised. Removing {{proposed deletion/dated}} will stop the proposed deletion process, but other deletion processes exist. In particular, the speedy deletion process can result in deletion without discussion, and articles for deletion allows discussion to reach consensus for deletion.

This bot DID NOT nominate any of your contributions for deletion; please refer to the history of each individual page for details. Thanks, FastilyBot (talk) 09:00, 21 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]