Hi, and thank you for your contributions to Wikipedia. It appears that you tried to give a page a different title by copying its content and pasting either the same content, or an edited version of it, into another page with a different name. This is known as a "cut-and-paste move", and it is undesirable because it splits the page history, which is legally required for attribution. Instead, the software used by Wikipedia has a feature that allows pages to be moved to a new title together with their edit history.
In most cases, once your account is four days old and has ten edits, you should be able to move an article yourself using the "Move" tab at the top of the page (the tab may be hidden in a dropdown menu for you). This both preserves the page history intact and automatically creates a redirect from the old title to the new. If you cannot perform a particular page move yourself this way (e.g. because a page already exists at the target title), please follow the instructions at requested moves to have it moved by someone else. Also, if there are any other pages that you moved by copying and pasting, even if it was a long time ago, please list them at Wikipedia:Cut-and-paste-move repair holding pen. Thank you. Nthep (talk) 17:51, 10 May 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Hello, Planonasus, and welcome to Wikipedia! Thank you for your contributions. I hope you like the place and decide to stay. Here are a few links to pages you might find helpful:
Please remember to sign your messages on talk pages by typing four tildes (~~~~); this will automatically insert your username and the date. If you need help, check out Wikipedia:Questions, ask me on my talk page, or ask your question on this page and then place {{Help me}} before the question. Again, welcome!
In addition, please read Wikipedia's policies on copy-paste and close paraphrasing. Wiki articles must be written in your own words to avoid plagiarism, copyright violation, and/or speedy deletion of the article. Your contributions are welcome, as long as they are not plagiarized. You might also be interested in WikiProject Fish and WikiProject Sharks for more resources and opportunities to contribute.--Animalparty-- (talk) 21:47, 10 May 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Hi Planonasus! Thanks for contributing to Wikipedia. Be our guest at the Teahouse! The Teahouse is a friendly space where new editors can ask questions about contributing to Wikipedia and get help from peers and experienced editors. I hope to see you there! Writ Keeper (I'm a Teahouse host)
Hi, I'm Akifumii. Planonasus, thanks for creating Taiwan spurdog!
I've just tagged the page, using our page curation tools, as having some issues to fix. Lead is a little short. I prefer to see more references and categories ass well to help the reader find this article.
The tags can be removed by you or another editor once the issues they mention are addressed. If you have questions, you can leave a comment on my talk page. Or, for more editing help, talk to the volunteers at the Teahouse. AkifumiiTalk21:20, 11 May 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that you've added some links pointing to disambiguation pages. Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.
Hi, and thank you for your contributions to Wikipedia. It appears that you tried to give a page a different title by copying its content and pasting either the same content, or an edited version of it, into another page with a different name. This is known as a "cut-and-paste move", and it is undesirable because it splits the page history, which is legally required for attribution. Instead, the software used by Wikipedia has a feature that allows pages to be moved to a new title together with their edit history.
In most cases, once your account is four days old and has ten edits, you should be able to move an article yourself using the "Move" tab at the top of the page (the tab may be hidden in a dropdown menu for you). This both preserves the page history intact and automatically creates a redirect from the old title to the new. If you cannot perform a particular page move yourself this way (e.g. because a page already exists at the target title), please follow the instructions at requested moves to have it moved by someone else. Also, if there are any other pages that you moved by copying and pasting, even if it was a long time ago, please list them at Wikipedia:Cut-and-paste-move repair holding pen. Thank you. Excirial (Contact me,Contribs)21:45, 28 May 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Carcharhinus humani, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Specimen (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver). Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.
Thank you for your work creating new articles on sharks, but please read WP:COPYVIO before making any further articles. Copying the entire abstract of an article describing a new species, as you did for Carcharhinus humani is a violation of copyright, and wholesale reproduction of copyrighted text is not permitted on Wikipedia. You may rewrite the material in your own words, while citing the source article, but you can't just copy and paste large blocks of text from copyrighted sources. Plantdrew (talk) 21:06, 20 June 2014 (UTC)[reply]
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) 20:27, 27 September 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Paratanakia himantegus, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Carl Smith. Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.
Wikipedia editor Animalparty just reviewed your page, and wrote this note for you:
no need to link to Rutilus, when you say roach genus, because this species is no longer in that genus and it would create confusion for readers clicking the link.
To reply, leave a comment on Animalparty's talk page.
Please stop removing references from articles like Rasbora. Your recent behavior closely mirrors behavior being performed by 109.29.22.222(talk·contribs·WHOIS) and SuperPayara123 (talk·contribs). Please stop this disruptive behavior. Wikipedia editors are generally expected to edit using only one (preferably registered) account. Using a single account maintains editing continuity, improves accountability, and increases community trust, which helps to build long-term stability for the encyclopedia. While there are some valid reasons for maintaining multiple accounts on the project, the improper use of multiple accounts is not allowed. Neil916 (Talk) 19:00, 20 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Please move articles to change species name. Second warning
Second warning Hi, and thank you for your contributions to Wikipedia. It appears that you tried to give a page a different title by copying its content and pasting either the same content, or an edited version of it, into another page with a different name. This is known as a "cut-and-paste move", and it is undesirable because it splits the page history, which is legally required for attribution. Instead, the software used by Wikipedia has a feature that allows pages to be moved to a new title together with their edit history.
In most cases, once your account is four days old and has ten edits, you should be able to move an article yourself using the "Move" tab at the top of the page (the tab may be hidden in a dropdown menu for you). This both preserves the page history intact and automatically creates a redirect from the old title to the new. If you cannot perform a particular page move yourself this way (e.g. because a page already exists at the target title), please follow the instructions at requested moves to have it moved by someone else. Also, if there are any other pages that you moved by copying and pasting, even if it was a long time ago, please list them at Wikipedia:Cut-and-paste-move repair holding pen. Thank you.
Another reason copy-pasting is an undesirable way to move is that it disrupts the links to other language Wikis, Commons, and Wikidata. Just a heads up, since you appear to be unresponsive to previous warnings, and continue to copy-paste (as with Totoaba) you may be subject to sanctions including temporary blocks on editing. If you have questions, there are resources, including the Wikipedia:Teahouse and WikiProject Fishes. We're all trying to help make a good set of articles here, and could use your help in doing it the best way possible. Again, if you have questions or are unclear on procedure, ask! --Animalparty-- (talk) 03:06, 23 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]
On 22 October 2014, Did you know was updated with a fact from the article Ozichthys, which you recently created or substantially expanded. The fact was ... that the cream-spotted cardinalfish is the sole member of the new genus Ozichthys? You are welcome to check how many page hits the article got while on the front page (here's how, live views, daily totals), and it may be added to the statistics page if the total is over 5,000. Finally, if you know of an interesting fact from another recently created article, then please feel free to suggest it on the Did you know talk page.
Hello, please do not remove the parentheses around the authority of scientific names when they should be used — seeBinomial nomenclature#Writing binomial names. For example Zoramia fragilis was first described as Apogon fragilis by Smith in 1961, hence we now write Zoramia fragilis (Smith 1961). Please put the parentheses back as necessary — check FishBase or the Catalog of Fishes if in doubt. Micromesistius (talk) 06:44, 23 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Parentheses are not an optional matter of style. When present, they indicate that a species has been moved to a genus other than the one in which it was originally described. Do not remove them (as you did at Elacatinus, and make sure you're following the presence or absence of parentheses in your source if you're creating new pages; Tigrigobius has no parentheses around authors at all, even in cases where they clearly needed (species described prior to the 1931 description of Tigrigobius logically can NOT have been placed in Tigrigobius when first described). Plantdrew (talk) 16:07, 24 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]
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) 14:37, 24 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]
If you had moved the article using the move button, as you've been asked to do repeatedly, CorenSearchBot wouldn't have seen the article as new text that needed to be checked for a copyright violation. Yet another reason to stop doing cut and paste moves and use the move button (if you're not seeing the Move button, hover over "More" to the right of "View history" at the top of page). Plantdrew (talk) 15:56, 24 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Do not remove the parentheses around scientific authorities. You have been warned about this in the past, but you continue to do so. They are in no way optional, instead indicating that the species was originally described in a different genus. In this edit, you removed the parentheses around "Osbeck, 1765", even though the species now called Monacanthus chinensiscannot have been originally described in the genus Monacanthus, which was erected more than 50 years later. If you cannot work within these requirements, and refuse to engage with the rest of the community, then you will be blocked to prevent further damage to the encyclopaedia. --Stemonitis (talk) 19:25, 15 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Artrolepis filicauda, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Victoria. Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.
Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Ruby seadragon, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Seadragon. Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.
Hi, and thank you for your contributions to Wikipedia. It appears that you tried to give a page a different title by copying its content and pasting either the same content, or an edited version of it, into another page with a different name. This is known as a "cut-and-paste move", and it is undesirable because it splits the page history, which is legally required for attribution. Instead, the software used by Wikipedia has a feature that allows pages to be moved to a new title together with their edit history.
In most cases, once your account is four days old and has ten edits, you should be able to move an article yourself using the "Move" tab at the top of the page (the tab may be hidden in a dropdown menu for you). This both preserves the page history intact and automatically creates a redirect from the old title to the new. If you cannot perform a particular page move yourself this way (e.g. because a page already exists at the target title), please follow the instructions at requested moves to have it moved by someone else. Also, if there are any other pages that you moved by copying and pasting, even if it was a long time ago, please list them at Wikipedia:Cut-and-paste-move repair holding pen. Thank you. --Animalparty-- (talk) 22:01, 4 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Tetronarce, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Size. Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.
Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Dark freckled catshark, you added links pointing to the disambiguation pages Cranial and Coloration. Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.
Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Pacific nurse shark, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Morphology. Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.
Do not remove parentheses that belong around the authorities of scientific names. You have been asked repeatedly to stop doing this, and have been blocked before for this behaviour. You must be in no doubt, therefore, that you will be blocked the next time you make such an edit. Most of what you do is excellent, so it would be a shame to jeopardise it in this silly way. Please take this advice on board and leave the parentheses alone. --Stemonitis (talk) 16:32, 14 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Pristolepis pentacantha, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Spine. Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.
Wikipedia editor Animalparty just reviewed your page, and wrote this note for you:
Better to be a little bit vague than exact with species numbers. "59 species" is wrong the second a new species is described, lumped, or reassigned, while the statement "around 60" remains true for longer. Cheers.
To reply, leave a comment on Animalparty's talk page.
I am happy to introduce you to the new WikiProject Evolutionary biology! The newly designed WikiProject features automatically updated work lists, article quality class predictions, and a feed that tracks discussions on the 663 talk pages tagged by the WikiProject. Our hope is that these new tools will help you as a Wikipedia editor interested in evolutionary biology.
Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Plectorhinchus, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Salt water. Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.
Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Alburnoides rossicus, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Don river. Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.
Hi, and thank you for your contributions to Wikipedia. It appears that you tried to give Chela cachius a different title by copying its content and pasting either the same content, or an edited version of it, into a new page with a different name: Chela atpar. This is known as a "cut-and-paste move", and it is undesirable because it splits the page history, which is legally required for attribution. Instead, the software used by Wikipedia has a feature that allows pages to be moved to a new title together with their edit history.
In most cases, once your account is four days old and has ten edits, you should be able to move an article yourself using the "Move" tab at the top of the page (the tab may be hidden in a dropdown menu for you). This both preserves the page history intact and automatically creates a redirect from the old title to the new. If you cannot perform a particular page move yourself this way (e.g. because a page already exists at the target title), please follow the instructions at requested moves to have it moved by someone else. Also, if there are any other pages that you moved by copying and pasting, even if it was a long time ago, please list them at Wikipedia:Requests for history merge.
This is the SEVENTH time you have been warned about this. I don't get it... you clearly have a scientific knowledge that can be valuable to Wikipedia. And yet, you steadfastly refuse to acknowledge that there is a right way and a wrong way to accomplish what might appear to you to have the same end result, but which is in reality quite a different thing. You are creating a LOT of extra work, both for yourself and for other editors. That's called "a pattern of disruptive editing", which could result in you being blocked. The fact that you refuse to communicate with other editors about such issues diminishes – if not eliminates – the value of your otherwise valuable contributions. Just today alone, in addition to Chela cachius, you also did this to:
PLEASE, take five minutes to read Help:Moving a page to learn the proper way to do this. You will find that the "proper way" is much, much simpler and easier than the "copy cut and paste" approach that you are using! If there's a reason that you disagree with me, please respond below. Thank you. —grolltech(talk)02:37, 20 August 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Laubuka dadiburjori, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Barbel. Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.
Please cease making cut and paste moves immediately, as they violate our copyright policy. You can move pages appropriately to new titles without cut and pasting. I see you have already been warned, so if this continues I will have to block you from editing, despite the fact that your scientific knowledge would be very useful to the project if applied within our policies. Rlendog (talk) 01:16, 22 August 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Mesoheros, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Río San Juan. Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.
Hi there. You don't need to reply to this message but I hope you will read it. Normally, articles on monotypic taxa should be at the genus name, not the binomial. Thus, Amamiichthys matsubarai should redirect to Amamiichthys, not the other way around. We have naming conventions on this very topic at WP:MONOTYPICFAUNA, and if you wish to proceed otherwise you should explain your reasoning, gain consensus or at least initiate discussion first. All the best, --Animalparty! (talk) 19:35, 27 August 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that you've added some links pointing to disambiguation pages. Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.
Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that you've added some links pointing to disambiguation pages. Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.
You have been blocked from editing for a period of 3 months for Disruptive editing; persistent cut and paste moves which violate attribution policy despite multiple warnings to cease, for example [1] and [2]. Once the block has expired, you are welcome to make useful contributions. If you think there are good reasons why you should be unblocked, you may appeal this block by first reading the guide to appealing blocks, then adding the following text below this notice: {{unblock|reason=Your reason here ~~~~}}. Rlendog (talk) 18:07, 13 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Thalassenchelys foliaceus, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Range. Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.
Hello. I am Diannaa and I am an administrator on this wiki. Prose you find online is almost always copyright, and cannot be copied here; it's against the law to do so. All prose must be written in your own words. There's more information about copyrights and how it applies to Wikipedia at Wikipedia:FAQ/Copyright. Copyright law and its application are complex matters, and you should not edit any more until you have taken the time to read and understand our copyright policies. Further copyright violations will result in you being blocked from editing. -- Diannaa🍁 (talk) 15:57, 24 December 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Ninja lanternshark has been nominated for Did You Know
Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that you've added some links pointing to disambiguation pages. Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.
Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Schilbeidae, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Spine. Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.
Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Carlastyanax aurocaudatus, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Morphology. Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.
Greetings. At least one of your recent edits, such as the edit you made to Pterois, did not appear to be constructive and has been or will be reverted or removed. Although everyone is welcome to contribute to Wikipedia, please take some time to familiarise yourself with our policies and guidelines. You can find information about these at our welcome page which also provides further information about contributing constructively to this encyclopedia. If you only meant to make some test edits, please use the sandbox for that. If you think I made a mistake, or if you have any questions, you may leave a message on my talk page. Thank you. Tarl.Neustaedter (talk) 23:09, 6 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Please refrain from making unconstructive edits to Wikipedia, as you did at Pterois. Your edits appear to be disruptive and have been or will be reverted or removed.
If you are engaged in an article content dispute with another editor then please discuss the matter with the editor at their talk page, or the article's talk page. Alternatively you can read Wikipedia's dispute resolution page, and ask for independent help at one of the relevant notice boards.
If you are engaged in any other form of dispute that is not covered on the dispute resolution page, please seek assistance at Wikipedia's Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents.
I noticed your recent edit to List of sharks does not have an edit summary. Please be sure to provide a summary of every edit you make, even if you write only the briefest of summaries. The summaries are very helpful to people browsing an article's history.
I'm not convinced Planonasus is even aware of this talk page. Has never edited this page, and looking at the past several hundred edits, comments seem to be either automated or only when something requires a comment (like a move page). My previous interaction with the user was unsatisfactory - unexplained nonsensical and often actively harmful edits - were repeated and no explanation forthcoming in either edit comments or talk pages. Tarl.Neustaedter (talk) 15:53, 1 March 2016 (UTC)[reply]
@EncMstr:Planonasus's summary usage for recent major edits is 37%. They did not provide any explanation for their edit on Etmopterus that undid content changes I made, including a clearly valid copyedit to the lead. Removing content that I had reinstated following their last edit violated WP:BRD. Unexplained removal of a reference, strange reformatting of a section that Elmidae created, and removal of the See also section. I have no doubt that this user's edits are generally helpful to the project in this niche area, but I doubt voicing my concerns on this talk page will amount to changes in their behavior. (After a quick glance through their contribs, I can't find where this content went...) – Rhinopias (talk) 22:30, 28 September 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Rhinogobius aporus, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Body. Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.
Seconding Micromesistius's comment: making taxonomic changes based on bleeding edge research (e.g. a single study that proposes a new classification) may be premature: it's generally best to wait until such changes are accepted and adopted by secondary sources, e.g. FishBase, Catalog of Fishes, IUCN Red List, or other sources that indicate a consensus view. This is elaborated in the policy on Primary, secondary, and tertiary sources. Prior to such acceptance, it may be appropriate to add something to the effect of "this species was long placed in genus X, but a recent study reclassified it in genus Y". On Wikipedia, we go by consensus of experts and due weight in reliable sources: changing article titles may be seen as implicitly promoting ideas on classification that are out of step with other sources. Note that we don't necessarily care which classification is "wrong" or "right", per Neutrality, only in accurately and proportionately portraying different views without bias. See also WP:RECENTISM. --Animalparty! (talk) 22:54, 8 March 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Bathyclupeidae, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Marine. Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.
Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Mayaheros urophthalmus, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Body. Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.
Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that you've added some links pointing to disambiguation pages. Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.
Hello, thanks for your many constructive edits. However, please refrain from non-constructive editing. Your latest edits on Hypostomus included useful edits as well as non-constructive removal of digital object identifiers (doi's), adding commas to cite templates in place where they do not belong (raise this on the talk page of the template, if you want commas included in the citation style), and one removal of a cite template. Such editing causes lots of extra work for other editors and will quickly lead to blocking, given your past history of non-constructive edits. Micromesistius (talk) 13:52, 18 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that you've added some links pointing to disambiguation pages. Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.
Please do not move a page to a title that is harder to follow, or move it unilaterally against naming conventions or consensus, as you did to Bryconadenos. This includes making page moves while a discussion remains under way. We have some guidelines to help with deciding what title is best for a subject. If you would like to experiment with page titles and moving, please use the test Wikipedia. Thank you. TJH2018talk16:07, 26 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]
I'm not convinced this editor even knows that talk pages exist. The only edits I see they have ever performed on talk pages involve page moves and creation, which come for free with the parallel main space article. I suspect the only way we're going to get this editor's attention is with a significant editing block. Tarl.Neustaedter (talk) 17:15, 26 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Potamotrygon, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Captivity. Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.
Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Hyphessobrycon, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Guandu River. Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.
Dear Planonasus, please stop the non-constructive edits, like here for Hyphessobrycon. I really don't see what you achieve by removing DOIs. And a lesser evil, adding commas to journal names within templates. Micromesistius (talk) 21:00, 12 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Valenciennea, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Substrate. Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.
Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Cirrhilabrus, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Marine. Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.
Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Grenadiers (fish), you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Tail fin. Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.
Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Glyptothorax, you added links pointing to the disambiguation pages Spine and Apparatus. Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.
Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Hypostomus, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Native. Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.
Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that you've added some links pointing to disambiguation pages. Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.
Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Odontanthias, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Deep-water. Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.
Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Priolepis, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Cosmopolite. Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.
Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that you've added some links pointing to disambiguation pages. Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.
Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Acropomatidae, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Deep-water. Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.
Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Sillago, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Shallow water. Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.
Hello, Planonasus. 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.
Please do not remove content or templates from pages on Wikipedia, as you did to Brycon, without giving a valid reason for the removal in the edit summary. Your content removal does not appear to be constructive and has been reverted. You have been doing this in other articles too and it is part of a long-standing problem that you have been warned about before (also User talk:109.29.22.222). I strongly urge you to stop or you may risk a block (both this and the IP). Finally, and this has also been said to you before, please follow WP:REFPUNCT. That means no space between text and citation. RN1970 (talk) 12:34, 12 March 2017 (UTC)[reply]
A page you started (Atractoscion) has been reviewed!
Wikipedia editor Blythwood just reviewed your page, and wrote this note for you:
I have to admit I'm a bit concerned about this article. Every other article in other languages of Wikipedia calls this species Lophogobius bleekeri, its former name and so do all book sources I can find. Can you provide some sources that this name is widely used and internationally accepted, not just that someone somewhere proposed a name change? In any case, if a species is well-known under a past name we must state that clearly in the article so there is no confusion.
To reply, leave a comment on Blythwood's talk page.
Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Etmopterus, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Deep-water (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver). Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.
You have been blocked temporarily from editing for for not editing collaboratively, as you did at Etmopterus. Once the block has expired, you are welcome to make useful contributions.
If you think there are good reasons for being unblocked, please read the guide to appealing blocks, then add the following text below the block notice on your talk page: {{unblock|reason=Your reason here ~~~~}}.
Planonasus, as per this discussion of your behaviour at Administrator's Noticeboard/Incidents, I have blocked you indefinitely. This block can and will be lifted as soon as you reply to me here on this talk page.
Wikipedia is a collaborative project which requires cooperation between users. You have been repeatedly running roughshod over your fellow editors without seeking consensus first. Everyone with knowledge of your contributions at ANI has spoken highly about your subject matter expertise, so it is a shame that you're not willing to be more cooperative. You're an asset to Wikipedia and we want you here, but you've got to learn to play nicely with everybody else.
If you will agree to start using article talk pages to get consensus for your edits from the community, I will immediately unblock you. Please reply that you understand this. ATraintalk19:52, 11 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Outstanding. Here's lesson No. 1: sign your talk page posts (by using four tildes, like this ~~~~) so that people can keep track of who you are and when you posted. I think a good next step would be to visit Talk:Etmopterus and come to an agreement with the editors there about the changes that you want to make.
Hello, Planonasus. 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.
Hello, Planonasus. 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.
Hi, and thank you for your contributions to Wikipedia. It appears that you tried to give a page a different title by copying its content and pasting either the same content, or an edited version of it, into another page with a different name. This is known as a "cut-and-paste move", and it is undesirable because it splits the page history, which is legally required for attribution. Instead, the software used by Wikipedia has a feature that allows pages to be moved to a new title together with their edit history.
You may be blocked from editing without further warning the next time you vandalize Wikipedia. --Stemonitis (talk) 19:34, 15 November 2014 (UTC)
This is the SEVENTH time you have been warned about this. I don't get it... you clearly have a scientific knowledge that can be valuable to Wikipedia. And yet, you steadfastly refuse to acknowledge that there is a right way and a wrong way to accomplish what might appear to you to have the same end result, but which is in reality quite a different thing. You are creating a LOT of extra work, both for yourself and for other editors. That's called "a pattern of disruptive editing", which could result in you being blocked. The fact that you refuse to communicate with other editors about such issues diminishes – if not eliminates – the value of your otherwise valuable contributions. Just today alone, in addition to Chela cachius, you also did this to:
. You can see the hook and the discussion here. You are welcome to participate! Thank you. APersonBot (talk!) 02:52, 28 December 2015 (UTC)
Please refrain from making unconstructive edits to Wikipedia, as you did at Pterois. Your edits appear to be disruptive and have been or will be reverted or removed.
Please stop your disruptive editing. If you continue to vandalize Wikipedia, as you did at Astroblepus, you may be blocked from editing. Micromesistius (talk) 20:07, 26 February 2016 (UTC)
Hi there! Thank you for your contributions to Wikipedia.
There is currently a discussion at Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents regarding an issue with which you may have been involved. See here. – Rhinopias (talk) 17:25, 11 October 2017 (UTC)