User talk:Scarabaeoid

Welcome

Welcome!

Hello, Scarabaeoid, and welcome to Wikipedia! Thank you for your contributions, especially what you did for Bycatch. I hope you like the place and decide to stay. Here are some pages that you might find helpful:

The five pillars of Wikipedia
Tutorial
How to edit a page and How to develop articles
How to create your first article (using the Article Wizard if you wish)
Manual of Style

I hope you enjoy editing here and being a Wikipedian! Please sign your messages on discussion pages using 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 {{helpme}} before the question. Again, welcome! Epipelagic (talk) 21:21, 25 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Uploads

Hi! I saw you were not able to upload pictures. This is because, as a new user, you haven't been "autoconfirmed". This is a level of user access that lets you, amongst other things, upload files. To quote from WP:AUTOCONFIRM, accounts that are able to upload files "are more than four days old and have made at least 10 edits". I hope this helps – let me know if you need more help! matt (talk) 17:35, 1 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Hello Matt. To be honest, I didn't even try! Lack of a camera makes that I just don't have any pics on the subject. If you happen to have some available please feel free to add.Scarabaeoid (talk) 18:11, 1 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Bottle trap

Yes, well done, you are off to a running start :). Two points:

Just as the term "discards" is not confined to fish, the term "bottle trap" is not confined to insects. It is commonly used in the context of bathroom plumbing. Bottle traps are also used as fish traps and as a technique for trapping sandflat octopuses.

When you start a new article, it can be helpful to see what is near the top on Google, including the Web, Books, Scholar and News Archives Search.

If you'd like to expand the article a little further, I'll give you a couple more comments about the layout, and it'll be ready to go. It would also be good if you can persuade a camera happy friend to photo one of your traps, suitable festooned with beetles. Or you can often get a good image from the web. Flickr can be a good place to start looking. Some of their pictures already have licences that are acceptable to Wikimedia commons. With others, you'll be surprised if you negotiate with the owner, how often they will release the image to commons (perhaps at a lower resolution). --Epipelagic (talk) 20:30, 1 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

- Thank you for commenting. I knew there are more things that are called 'bottle trap', but how to go by this? A disambiguation doesn't seem an option, since there are no other 'bottle traps' on Wikipedia. So what to do? Should I explain in the intro that this is about one kind of bottle traps while their are more?

- I'll see about the picture. Maybe I'll put the article in mainspace and add some picture later? My traps are way out in the forest, but I got some collecting friends who might be willing to share pics.

- So the article isn't ready to go. But what about the, to my estimate, over 2,500,000 articles on the English part of Wikipedia alone who are not longer than 15 lines at the most? Tiny municipalities in Poland, totally unheard of 25 year old musicians, 6th division football clubs. To me, they more look like pollution than anything else. And the creators of those pages even seem to be proud about it! Compared to those, my article seems pretty exhaustive. Scarabaeoid (talk) 20:59, 1 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Um, I expressed myself badly. Yes of course your article is more than ready to go as it stands, and you should launch it. I was merely talking about refining it further in the direction of a good article. I don't think a disambiguation page is needed. Just handle it like you handled the article on discards. It seems reasonable to keep the main thrust of the article on insect traps, with other uses just mentioned as an aside. And certainly the picture is optional. --Epipelagic (talk) 22:09, 1 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

No harm done! :D I just made some changes, but I'd like to have your opinion as to what is best. I made two options, both of which I put in bottle trap 2. Personally, I prefer the first option. In either case the body text stays the same. Scarabaeoid (talk) 01:02, 2 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I wouldn't worry about it too much. Just start the article with what you think is best. If you like, I'll make some changes I think are useful. If you are not happy with the changes, you can revert them or discuss them on the article talk page. --Epipelagic (talk) 01:52, 2 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I just pushed the button. Have a look at bottle trap to see what it has become. Scarabaeoid (talk) 02:37, 2 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Proposed deletion of Bottle trap

The article Bottle trap has been proposed for deletion because of the following concern:

Wikipedia is not a how to guide.

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 {{dated prod}} 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 {{dated prod}} 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. ttonyb (talk) 02:43, 2 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

For you...

		The Small Barnstar
		This small barnstar is for fixing a typo in the lead of the list of cutaneous conditions article, a typo which had been present for months, and missed during a feature list review. Great work! ---kilbad (talk) 22:14, 9 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks

Thanks again for your help with the list of cutaneous conditions, and I will respond to your questions/comments on the talk page in the next few hours. However, with regard to dermatologic content on Wikipedia, there is still a lot of work to be done, particularly in making sure Wikipedia has at least a stub on every cutaneous condition. Several of us have been working on the Bolognia push, which is an effort to make sure every condition found in that unabridged dermatology text is also found on Wikipedia. We could really use your help, and, if interested, I could send you the login information? ---kilbad (talk) 00:25, 11 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]