User talk:Kugamazog

I don't understand

what you said here..

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Talk:Moth

Can I use an image off of that site or not? I'd like to add a picture to the Imperial Moth page I just made. Kugamazog

Hello, I've copied this from my talk page, to help keep the dialogue together.

Well the short answer is "no you can't use images from that site". The reason is that the copyright holder only allows "non-profit" use. The goal of wikipedia is to create an "any use" encyclopedia. So images that can't be used commercially hurt that goal. As a result admins can delete any such images without warning.

There are only three classes of images allowed here - Public domain and "free for any use" images, your own images that you release under the wikipedia GFDL licence, and copyrighted images used under fair use provisions. The images at that site don't fall into those categories.

However - it may be possible that the copyright owner will allow use of one or all of his images. Feel free to write to him and for permission. Be sure to explain that you are asking for him to grant permission for any use, and offer a link back to his site from wikipedia and full credit. If he grants such permission be sure to give full details of the permission in the image description. Also upload the image to wikipedia commons, so others can use it more easily.

Let me repeat the short answer. No you can't use images from that site.

Thanks for the nice little article on the Imperial moth. I hope to see you around the 'pedia more in the future.

Zeimusu | Talk page 16:06, 29 September 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Authorities

For animals, it's conventional to include the date, for example Paratrea plebeja (Fabricius, 1777).. And you should only put the authority in parentheses if the species has been moved to different genus. For example, there are no parentheses in Sphinx asella Rothschild & Jordan, 1903. Gdr 18:54, 6 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I understand that part, the link to Moths of North America had the authority in parentheses, so I followed. It's also why I didn't include the date. Do you know of a fast method to apply the correct authority? Your description of the change mentioned nominalbot.--Kugamazog 18:59, 6 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I could very easily be wrong about Sphinx asella. (Unfortunately not everyone respects this convention, even though it's recommended by the ICZN.) I use a python script that I wrote myself to quickly add or update authorities. See User:Gdr/authority.py for the source code. Gdr 19:07, 6 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Lapara coniferarum

An article that you have recently created, Lapara coniferarum, only has a classification infobox, an image, and an external link. Please expand it to have a few lines of actual content. Thank you, and happy editing! -- King of Hearts ^talk 23:24, 15 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Wikify please

Thank you for your contributions to moth related articles. An image and a taxobox may speak the proverbial thousand words, but it would look better if you would add just one lead-in line for each of the stubs (example of what i mean:Sphinx vashti). It gives a somewhat unprofessional impression in its incompleteness. Thank you, Jens Nielsen 14:14, 19 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you for adding context to Sphinx vashti according to my suggestions. Can you do it to the rest too? Jens Nielsen 15:08, 14 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I'm working on it but my free time has become significantly shorter due to all my tests and all that jazz. They will be done soon. --Kugamazog 21:21, 14 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Re: Talk:Death's-head Hawkmoth

By all means - please go ahead and replace the pictures. (You may want to upload them to the Commons to make them useable by other language mutations of Wikipedia as well.) Regards, Mike Rosoft 21:47, 13 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Announcing WikiProject Lepidoptera

This is inform you that Wikipedia:WikiProject Lepidoptera is up and about. The aim is to support article creation on Lepidoptera and accordingly make a collective contribution to the global community in this field.

Since I am a 'butterfly person', I feel acutely conscious of my lack of knowledge of such a large part of the same order. I request the support of all moth-ers in Wikipedia for making the Lepidoptera knowledgebase on Wikipedia a success.

Hoping for a creative, cooperative, innovative and enriching experience for all concerned.

Regards, AshLin 03:37, 26 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Welcome to the project, you have the privilege of being the first moth-er to join the WikiProject. Your queries - you simply add your name to the list on the project page. Yup, we do need to develop a WikiProject Lepidoptera tag to indicate membership. And you know what I think? A small sphingid moth outline (with wings extended(?)) would be just right. I would prefer a moth since it represents vast majority of Lepidoptera. Got any good images you can propose? If you do, put them up on the project talk page for the wikipedians to look at.

Glad to have you on board. Regards, AshLin 05:59, 26 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Comments on Imperial Moth

Please see the article talk page. AshLin 10:05, 27 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Realised later that my 'tone' sounds condescending. Was in haste and wanted to do a lot of things in very little time. Sorry if I hurt your feelings. AshLin 03:30, 30 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Moth needs a better gallery

How about reorganising the gallery of moth photos as I have done for butterflies on a family-basis. Shyamal also has a concept in mind. See his comment on WikiProject Lepidoptera talk. Bye, offline probably till 31st. AshLin 10:16, 27 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I noticed Sphingidae has a red link vine-hawk moth listed in well known species with a photo in the gallery. May I request a stub from you please? Regards, AshLin 15:21, 9 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

ironclads are now a subfamily

This has been pretty widely recognized for some time, and in the latest Arnett et al. "American Insects" in 2002, the colydiids, monommatids, and zopherids were all lumped together. I've talked to Mike Ivie recently and he confirms that this is still the way things appear, and it's likely to remain stable for a while. The only difference in how I'm wikifying things is that the Arnett book does not recognize ANY subfamilies in Zopheridae - everything is treated as a tribe, which is pretty unsatisfactory for a classification that's supposed to be Linnaean, so I'm taking a minor liberty with that. Peace,, Dyanega 02:56, 7 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Okay, cool. Be sure to update the Zopheridae page to reflect that :) --Kugamazog 03:00, 7 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Adding value to Sphingidae List

K, you can get author info from NMNH by using their LEPINDEX facility. You may like to embellish the list by adding author/year info after the names. Regards, AshLin 17:21, 27 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Rearing info page

Hi Kugamazog, Been away for a long time relocating to the North East in India. Just saw your message regarding useful information arising from your raising cats. Shyamal had told me quite sometime ago how to go about such sits. Make a user page. Add the info, develop it. Tell people about it so that they can pitch in with ideas. When you feel its right, move it to a wikipage if necessary creating one or more of them. If WP does not have approppriate space or policies, it can always be kept as a WikiProject Lepidoptera project page. Regards, AshLin 05:23, 6 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Question

I don't know if this is the place to add a question. but here goes. Take a look at the luna moth talk, query there from me. --Dumarest 12:07, 26 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Your report to WP:AIV

I blocked User:209.189.245.113 for 99 hours for vandalism. However, I didn't block User:68.48.81.246, because no warnings were left, and the one edit is inconclusive. If 68 does start to vandalize, go on and leave the necessary warnings before reporting to AIV again.

As for personal attacks, if you need to report those, head over to WP:PAIN. Hope this helps. :) --Core des at 22:53, 24 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you --Kugamazog 22:53, 24 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Luna moth renaming on commons

Hi there. Saw your message on the commons. Feel free to rename the file. I have trouble with doing it myself, it probably means reuploading under a new name, marking the old one for deletion. Identifying where the old one is linked - (with the toolserver down). I normally do not give too much to the filenames themselves. Wish there was an easy way to rename files though that would automatically fix links. Shyamal 04:20, 17 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I am reshuffling a lot of my images around on commons right now anyway. I could reupload it under a different name and nominate that one for deletion if you are cool with it. It would mean it would be under my name, but I would mention that you are the real uploader.--Kugamazog 04:46, 17 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Feel free. All fair play under Creative Commons, you really need only to credit the copyright owner, not the uploader. Shyamal 04:51, 17 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Lepidoptera

I wonder if you might like to overhaul this article sometime. It really needs a lot more on phylogenetics (but not like the long lists of families it had), ecology, life history etcetera in its structure. I do not have good literature access, but would be happy to pitch in in other ways. Shyamal 04:56, 17 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Sure, I would be glad to help over the winter break. I do have ready access to a lot of journals, so if you find something you want, just ask. I am still pretty much a beginner at writing entire articles, however. So I probably will need some guidance.--Kugamazog 05:04, 17 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks

I am most grateful to you for uploading the Euchloron megaera image. Now I can use it in my Russian article. The only problem now is absence of an article in English or other langauge for a valid interwiki. :( —Michael Romanov 18:11, 1 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Lucanidae

Regarding your request on WP:RM to move stag beetle to Lucanidae. Is this because "stag beetle" is also used to refer, specifically, to Lucanus cervus? If so, it is your intention that a disambiguation page be created at stag beetle, or would you have it redirect to one or other article? Are you prepared to go through the incoming links and work out which refer to the family and which to the species? I don't mind making the move, but doing all the follow-up work as well is probably a bit much. --Stemonitis 06:48, 17 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Stag beetle is rather generic and can refer to both the species Lucanus cervus and the entire family. Since the page is about the Family, I wanted to it to the correct title and have stag beetle redirect to it. The article talks about L. cervus so I wouldn't do a disambiguation. And yes, I will follow through with all the redirects and make sure all links to stag beetle are changed to Lucanidae. I did that with several other species in my recent contributions history.--Kugamazog 07:03, 17 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Such a move should be discussed on the talk page, first. I note that you've made several similar moves, recently. This is not the way Wikipeida names pages; kindly refrain from making similar moves without first discussing them. Thank you. See also Controversial page moves Andy Mabbett 07:19, 17 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

My point is that several of the links currently leading to stag beetle will be intended to lead to Lucanus cervus, not Lucanidae, so they must be examined individually. Following the comment by Pigsonthewing, it would be best to hold a discussion in advance (although there is also a lot to be said for being bold). --Stemonitis 07:22, 17 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Not in being bold against current consensus Andy Mabbett 07:24, 17 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Don't be too harsh, Pigsonthewing — I'm sure Kugamazog meant well, and I'm sure he/she now understands your concerns. It's not too hard to undo a few moves. --Stemonitis 07:29, 17 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Please don't use uncontroversial moves for moves that have not been discussed with the projects, and please post links to your discussing with the project if you have done so, on the talk pages of articles you are planning to move. KP Botany 14:09, 17 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

You're knowledge of bugs impresses me oh man of the mullet.

Hey

I know who you are, you know who i am. I was in your biotechnology for crop improvement class. I just don't like revealing my name on this site. the Texas A&M University site is up for FA review. wanted to know your input. Thanks and gig em Oldag07 04:07, 25 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

We got it! Texas A&M University is a FAOldag07 03:39, 5 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Howdy! As a current or past contributor to a related article, I thought I'd let you know about WikiProject Texas A&M, a collaborative effort to improve Wikipedia's coverage of Texas A&M University. If you would like to participate, you can visit the project page, where you can join the project and see a list of open tasks and related articles. Thanks and Gig 'em! Oldag07 12:38, 18 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

WikiProject Lepidoptera policy - Assessment of importance of articles

Hi Kugamazog,

I've brought up a policy issue for discussion on WikiProject Lepidopterahere . May I request your valuable contribution and counsel, as a member of WikiProject Lepidoptera, in this regard. AshLin 22:00, 26 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

WikiProject Lepidoptera policy - Draft categorisation guidelines & Common vs scientific names

Hi Kugamazog,

I've brought up two policy issues for discussion on WikiProject Lepidoptera here . May I request your valuable contribution and counsel, as a member of WikiProject Lepidoptera, in this regard. AshLin 18:08, 7 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

trogidae etc. pics

hi kugamazog,

i just noticed the pictures you uploaded. some of them are really nice, all of them are very helpful, but some (only checked the Trogidae) are in need of further refinement. i cropped one of them (Omorgus_carinatus_sjh.cropped.jpg) to roughly show you what i'm thinking about. these pictures are best if you can see the details immediately, and not have to click the image twice to get the full (1+meg) picture. also, if possible, a measure would be nice, so somebody can see how big the specimen is. i'm right now spending (for my level of wealth) a lot of money to get good photo equipment to capture insect collections for wiki, so it's good to see somebody else has begun this major task too :) maybe we and all the other people (are there any?) participating in this should get together and work out some quality guidelines, so the pictures will be more or less of a certain standard? also, tell me if you want me to edit the existing raw (uncropped) pictures of yours to the best of my ability and re-upload them under the same name. cheers :) --Sarefo 23:48, 23 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I take so many pictures of so many species that it is just easier for me to include the species name in the image (it also cuts down on errors). Since many of the beetle species (especially Trogidae) look very morphologically similar, it would probably be best to leave species name in the image just to confirm that it is the correct species. I don't currently have a ruler that would measure specimens that small, but that is a good idea. I am currently going to be very busy since college classes have started up, but if you manage to develop an insect collection photography group, I'd be more than happy to contribute.--Kugamazog 00:43, 24 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I forgot to mention, when I started out on Sphingidae, I had repeated problems with misspelling the species name because I didn't include it in the picture.--Kugamazog 08:40, 24 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

i would suggest to take a picture of the name first, then the specimen, or to take the picture with the name, then crop it before uploading. the way it is now, it's a 1.x megabyte picture that's hard to use vs. a 40kbyte picture that's immediately visible. btw, you ruined my night ;) Trox, Omorgus, Trogidae... cheers :) --Sarefo 19:27, 24 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

question

Are your initials, SH? If not, let me know please. Spevw 22:24, 20 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Zopherids

Hi. I moved a number of Zopherids yesterday, as they were - as far as I was able to determine - misclassified (placed in genera which were formally sunk back in 2006). Only when I made the last species move did I see that you had placed a species described in 2006 (Nosoderma sylvaticum) into a genus which has not been considered a genus since 1979. Unless there's something in print that I'm unaware of, that sort of thing (resurrecting synonyms and moving species between genera) constitutes original research, and explicitly cannot be used as the basis for articles in WP (WP:NOR). I checked to see authorship, and you're evidently the person who created all the articles involved - so the question remains: what reliable source newer than the 2006 revision were you using for your classification? If there is indeed such a source, then please give the citation, and things can be put back essentially as they were - if not, then please, in the future make CERTAIN that you are basing articles upon authoritative sources. Peace, Dyanega 22:52, 8 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

All images you refer to were taken in the Texas A&M University Insect Collection. If there are any errors, you will need to contact them so they may correct their identification. Please correct any images or pages I have uploaded that are now considered synonyms.----Kugamazog (talk) 03:09, 23 August 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Unknown Cerambycid

Dear Kugamazog, I've seen you have posted an unknown cerambycid taken in Texas. I hope you have conserved such specimen since it's very interesting. If you like to know more details, please contact me privately at vitalfranz@yahoo.de or give me please your mail. --Vitalfranz (talk) 13:03, 2 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Odontolabis castelnaudi

I noticed the tags on your page, linked to it from Parry and gave a ref.Hope you approve. Please keep uploading the Lucanidae pics from the Texas A and M collection.They are really appreciated and we mustn't let the French keep stags to themselves. Must we? Best regards from Ireland Notafly (talk) 09:17, 23 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

==Phalacrognathus muelleri

Hope you don't mind but I put a Category:Lucanidae tag on your image of this stag.Can you fix the others please so that all the Lucanidae appear on the Commons page.Robert Notafly (talk) 09:32, 24 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Is there a bot lurking nearby?

A bot seems to have left an image caption as Genus species in a taxobox you created for Passalus punctatostriatus. I took the liberty of filling in these fields. I am, in fact, in search of a bot to turn my flatfile database of Brazilian butterflies into the hundreds of WP articles that will need taxoboxes and ledes. Are you the bot owner I have been looking for? Best wishes, --Wloveral (talk) 21:05, 19 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Whoops, no, that was me. I created a template to make the pages by hand. I would also love to have this bot. I looked a year or so ago to no luck. Source of template--Kugamazog (talk) 21:11, 19 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

final 16

hey,

i've been working on bringing c.g. calwer's beetle book from 1876 to wiki, and tried to update the c. 1,000 species to today's taxonomy. there are sixteen species that i and a colleague of mine cannot determine for the love of god, so i'm trying to find experts that would like to try if they can solve these. pictures of the sixteen species are here, let me know what you think :) these are european species btw. cheers! --Sarefo (talk) 00:38, 26 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Commons upload

The old upload form is at http://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/Special:Upload?uploadformstyle=plain.[1] You can change it permanently at preferences/gadgets. Best wishes, Walter Siegmund (talk) 17:56, 28 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Oh, thank you! This is much better--Kugamazog (talk) 22:05, 1 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

You are welcome. Walter Siegmund (talk) 22:14, 1 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Hemaris diffinis

I don't think I would say all of the images that were taken off should be put back but I agree about collect specimens photo. I will leave it up to your judgement. IvanTortuga (talk) 03:41, 24 April 2009 (UTC)--[reply]

ID

Hi Kugamazog, you seem to have access to many specimens of this genus. This photograph is from the Western Ghats of India and appears close to maenas but I do not see a good enough pattern match. I have photos of some pinned specimens from the same location which also have the same appearance. Any idea if there are any geographic races in maenas ? Shyamal (talk) 12:31, 14 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Sorry, I don't know of anything that would be helpful. I haven't seen a specimen with that much red. It looks spectacular, though. ----Kugamazog (talk) 22:28, 15 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]

A really really well-deserved barnstar!

		The Wikiproject Lepidoptera Barnstar
		For your amazing work on Sphingids and Saturniids over the years. AshLin (talk) 19:18, 13 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Pupal mating

Any chance you could get a shot of pupal mating with your home-bred saturniids or sphingids? AshLin (talk) 19:20, 13 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Apart from the occasional twitching, the pupae are rather inert. Only adults mate. I've tried to take a few good photos of any I convince to mate. However, they tend to be skittish if bothered while mating. ----Kugamazog (talk) 09:11, 8 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Science lovers wanted!

Hi! I'm serving as the wikipedian-in-residence at the Smithsonian Institution Archives until June! One of my goals as resident, is to work with Wikipedians and staff to improve content on Wikipedia about people who have collections held in the Archives - most of these are scientists who held roles within the Smithsonian and/or federal government. I thought you might like to participate since you are interested in the sciences! Sign up to participate here and dive into articles needing expansion and creation on our to-do list. Feel free to make a request for images or materials at the request page, and of course, if you share your successes at the outcomes page you will receive the SIA barnstar! Thanks for your interest, and I look forward to your participation! Sarah (talk) 20:07, 16 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]

ArbCom elections are now open!

Hi,
You appear to be eligible to vote in the current Arbitration Committee election. The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to enact binding solutions for disputes between editors, primarily related to serious behavioural issues that the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the ability to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail. If you wish to participate, you are welcome to review the candidates' statements and submit your choices on the voting page. For the Election committee, MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 12:58, 23 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Hi,Kugamazog

Hi, Kugamazog.

    I am a researcher in University of Queensland. I want to get your permission to have the right to use this image you created. I want to use this image in my paper that will be published in "Nature Communications". Thanks very much!

Xianfeng ----Xianfeng (talk) 15:05, 28 Janurary 2017

Hi,Xianfeng.

   You can use this image for your purpose.

Kugamazog ----Kugamazog (talk) 18:21, 30 Janurary 2017(UTC)

ArbCom 2017 election voter message

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

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

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