User talk:Millifolium

Fat choy

Thanks for help at the esoteric subject of fat choy. Should it be called "bacteria" or "bacterium"? Badagnani 16:27, 9 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Hi, it's true song-i-beo-seot is expensive in Korea, but song-i-beo-seot is matsutake, not rock tripe. In Korea, I think rock tripe is used in Sino-Korean cuisine. (Examples of Sino-Korean cuisine include jajangmyeon and tangsuyuk. I'm not sure if jajangmyeon uses rock tripe.) --Kjoonlee 04:21, 2 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Oops, sorry, my mistake. I thought rock tripe was mog-i-beo-seot, but it's seog-i-beo-seot, like you said. It does seem to be expensive (200 grams of North Korean mogibeoseot is sold at around 13 USD), and the amount found in tangsuyuk does seem to be low if my memory is correct. --Kjoonlee 04:40, 2 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Lichens

Thanks for the lichen work, and the most excellent picture of Cryptothecia rubrocincta. I think I may try for a FA push on that article now. I hope you don't mind if I expand your new genera additions and submit them to DYK for some main-page exposure. Sasata (talk) 18:19, 7 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I'm glad you liked the photo, it was an exceptionally striking lichen. I would be delighted if any lichen got FA status, and DYKs would be great. I have access to a variety of lichen resources, let me know if there is anything I can help with.Millifolium (talk) 01:34, 9 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Lichen would be great to get to featured status–high traffic article and top-importance for the fungi WikiProject. I've been chipping away at it every now and then, but it will be quite a bit of work. C. rubrocincta isn't too far off, I just have to put in a few hours of library time and ensure everything's up to code. Anyway, your new lichen articles are excellent, and I'm very happy to see them added to the encyclopedia! Sasata (talk) 15:59, 10 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Leptofoenus pittfieldae

I saw the comment on the my DYK nomination for Leptofoenus pittfieldae. Im not certain what information you think is not relevant to the article, could you give examples? I didnt include the other genera in this article as it is not something generally done with species level articles that I have seen. I will create a genus level article at Leptofoenus to encompass the general information of 5 living species and the extinct L. pittfieldae. --Kevmin (talk) 05:01, 10 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Wikipedia is an encyclopedia, and should be written for a general (although educated) public. Things like the accession number of the one specimen, and a detailed description of the exact wing venation aren't particularly useful. Given that almost nothing is known about the species, some background on the genera is necessary, otherwise you are not really saying anything about this species except that it exists. For instance, I can't tell from the article if Leptofoenus pittfieldae is the only species of Leptofoenus, or merely the only species that there is a fossil record for. This makes the article very confusing. I found the article very confusing and tried to make it more clear, but you reverted my edits. You have since corrected a couple errors, but it still needs work to be understandable. I have tried again to edit it, see what you think. Millifolium (talk) 06:23, 10 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I will task a look and I would ask in return that you look through some of the articles on taxa known only from the fossil record as these are what I have been basing my article creation on. Accession numbers, especially for species known from a single specimen are notable and thus should be included. I would suggest we take the issues to the article talk page and see if we can reach some compromises. The lack of general information is to be expected since there is only the type description to work with.--Kevmin (talk) 06:32, 10 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Sounds good. I think that there is more information in the paper you are citing that could be included. How about a little bit of background on the extant species? Even one sentence would be great. I've got to go to bed, but I'll look at this again tomorrow. Millifolium (talk) 06:47, 10 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Sorry, I couldn't help to butt in when I read this to give some examples of taxa known only from fossils (or partial fosssils): try Noronhomys and Hadropithecus :-) Sasata (talk) 06:49, 10 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks Sasata, those are awesome articles! Although perhaps not a fair comparison, as I'm sure there's a lot more information available on those taxa, more people seem to care about vertebrates, unfortunately... I think that the newest incarnation of the L. pittfieldae article is a vast improvement, it includes a species description and the relevance of those characters instead of just seemingly random and very confusing wing details. Good work Kevmin! If you have time, could either of you review my submissions for DYKs from March 6? They are Dictyonema and Pseudocyphellaria. I've never submitted before, so I'm not sure how it works, but I'm thinking that if they don't get reviewed by day 5 they get dropped off the list? I suspect that I can't review the Nephroma DYK for March 6, conflict of interest and all, but that's a great hook that you found Sasata. Millifolium (talk) 07:27, 10 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Don't worry about the DYKs, once they have been submitted, they are "safe"; someone will review them eventually. The 5-day thing refers to the article age: articles have to be submitted or expanded within 5 days of creation or expansion. Sasata (talk) 15:47, 10 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

DYK for Dictyonema

On March 14, 2010, Did you know? was updated with a fact from the article Dictyonema, which you created or substantially expanded. You are welcome to check how many hits your article got while on the front page (here's how, quick check ) and add it to DYKSTATS if it got over 5,000. If you know of another interesting fact from a recently created article, then please suggest it on the Did you know? talk page.

Calmer Waters 00:05, 14 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

DYK for Nephroma

On March 15, 2010, Did you know? was updated with a fact from the article Nephroma, which you created or substantially expanded. You are welcome to check how many hits your article got while on the front page (here's how, quick check ) and add it to DYKSTATS if it got over 5,000. If you know of another interesting fact from a recently created article, then please suggest it on the Did you know? talk page.

Materialscientist (talk) 00:04, 15 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

DYK for Pseudocyphellaria

On March 17, 2010, Did you know? was updated with a fact from the article Pseudocyphellaria, which you created or substantially expanded. You are welcome to check how many hits your article got while on the front page (here's how, quick check ) and add it to DYKSTATS if it got over 5,000. If you know of another interesting fact from a recently created article, then please suggest it on the Did you know? talk page.

Materialscientist (talk) 18:03, 17 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

DYK for Erioderma pedicellatum

On March 25, 2010, Did you know? was updated with a fact from the article Erioderma pedicellatum, which you created or substantially expanded. You are welcome to check how many hits your article got while on the front page (here's how, quick check ) and add it to DYKSTATS if it got over 5,000. If you know of another interesting fact from a recently created article, then please suggest it on the Did you know? talk page.

-- Cirt (talk) 08:22, 25 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

DYK for Frullania asagrayana

On March 25, 2010, Did you know? was updated with a fact from the article Frullania asagrayana, which you created or substantially expanded. You are welcome to check how many hits your article got while on the front page (here's how, quick check ) and add it to DYKSTATS if it got over 5,000. If you know of another interesting fact from a recently created article, then please suggest it on the Did you know? talk page.

-- Cirt (talk) 08:22, 25 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

DYK for Gowardia

On March 28, 2010, Did you know? was updated with a fact from the article Gowardia, which you created or substantially expanded. You are welcome to check how many hits your article got while on the front page (here's how, quick check ) and add it to DYKSTATS if it got over 5,000. If you know of another interesting fact from a recently created article, then please suggest it on the Did you know? talk page.

-- Cirt (talk) 22:10, 28 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

DYK nomination of Ancient Forest Alliance

Hello! Your submission of Ancient Forest Alliance at the Did You Know nominations page has been reviewed, and there still are some issues that may need to be clarified. Please review the comment(s) underneath your nomination's entry and respond there as soon as possible. Thank you for contributing to Did You Know! Yoninah (talk) 22:03, 30 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

DYK for Ancient Forest Alliance

On June 1, 2010, Did you know? was updated with a fact from the article Ancient Forest Alliance, which you created or substantially expanded. You are welcome to check how many hits the article got while on the front page (here's how, quick check ) and add it to DYKSTATS if it got over 5,000. If you know of another interesting fact from a recently created article, then please suggest it on the Did you know? talk page.

— Rlevse • Talk • 12:04, 1 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Your account will be renamed

Hello,

The developer team at Wikimedia is making some changes to how accounts work, as part of our on-going efforts to provide new and better tools for our users like cross-wiki notifications. These changes will mean you have the same account name everywhere. This will let us give you new features that will help you edit and discuss better, and allow more flexible user permissions for tools. One of the side-effects of this is that user accounts will now have to be unique across all 900 Wikimedia wikis. See the announcement for more information.

Unfortunately, your account clashes with another account also called Millifolium. To make sure that both of you can use all Wikimedia projects in future, we have reserved the name Millifolium~enwiki that only you will have. If you like it, you don't have to do anything. If you do not like it, you can pick out a different name. If you think you might own all of the accounts with this name and this message is in error, please visit Special:MergeAccount to check and attach all of your accounts to prevent them from being renamed.

Your account will still work as before, and you will be credited for all your edits made so far, but you will have to use the new account name when you log in.

Sorry for the inconvenience.

Yours,
Keegan Peterzell
Community Liaison, Wikimedia Foundation

01:49, 20 March 2015 (UTC)

Assistance with Dibaeis baeomyces article

Hi there. I recently created the article Dibaeis baeomyces about the pink earth lichen. I used several cited sources for basic information about the lichen, but I was stymied when it came to paraphrasing some of the details of the plant's appearance and growth habit. I can't paraphrase words I don't fully understand, and there are a lot of technical terms used to describe the anatomy of lichen. I was hoping you might be willing to flesh out the Appearance section of the article.

In the interest of full disclosure, I am hoping to nominate this article for DYK, something I see you do also. If you do contribute to the article I would of course credit you in the nomination. Thanks in advance for any help you can offer this science-loving non-scientist. —GrammarFascist _contribs ^talk 21:59, 9 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]

ArbCom elections are now open!

Hi,
You appear to be eligible to vote in the current Arbitration Committee election. The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to enact binding solutions for disputes between editors, primarily related to serious behavioural issues that the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the ability to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail. If you wish to participate, you are welcome to review the candidates' statements and submit your choices on the voting page. For the Election committee, MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 13:55, 23 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]

ArbCom Elections 2016: Voting now open!

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

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

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

ArbCom 2017 election voter message

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

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

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

ArbCom 2018 election voter message

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

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

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

Nomination for deletion of Template:Lichen genera taxonomy

Template:Lichen genera taxonomy has been nominated for deletion. You are invited to comment on the discussion at the template's entry on the Templates for discussion page. Zackmann (^{Talk to me}/_{What I been doing}) 21:41, 19 March 2019 (UTC)[reply]

ArbCom 2021 Elections voter message

Hello! Voting in the 2021 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23:59 (UTC) on Monday, 6 December 2021. All eligible users are allowed 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 2021 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. If you no longer wish to receive these messages, you may add {{NoACEMM}} to your user talk page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 00:14, 23 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Lichen task force

Hi Millifolium: I don't know if you ever check in here any more, but in case you do, I'd like to invite you to join the lichen task force – a new subgroup of WP:FUNGI. We're aiming to improve coverage of all aspects of lichenology, and are keen to attract knowledgeable contributors like yourself. Feel free to drop by the task force pages, or to ping me with any questions. MeegsC (talk) 16:35, 23 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]