User talk:Shyamal/archive8

Madras Treeshrew

What's the point of adding so many references to this article, but not add any content? I'm pairing it down a bit.... - UtherSRG (talk) 10:44, 16 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Was going to add more material. I do not have access to most of those references. So if you can find any content from those it would be great. If not, feel free to take out the references. I would keep the Chorazyna reference, since it is one of the few that has information on behaviour and ecology. cheers Shyamal 10:48, 16 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Yeah, it's generally accepted to list references in order to support the exiting text, not to say "I'm going to add material from these sources when I can find them." But thanks for the list, it will come in handyif I ever get around to doing the research. :) - UtherSRG (talk) 11:06, 16 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Yariguies Brush Finch

Would you consider making a free use image of this bird? You did such a good job on the Bugun Liocichla. Judgesurreal777 22:54, 17 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Image:Yariguies-Brush-Finch.jpg - Here was the image that was used until a day or so ago of the finch, in case this helps. Looks great right now! Feel free to put it as the picture, there is currently no image there. Judgesurreal777 01:39, 18 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Maybe ask around, I am not a bird specialist or anything, but I think a few have been hanging around that article lately, perhaps consult them :) Judgesurreal777 01:55, 18 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

The lighted path

I wish you All The Best on the ocasion of the Indian festival of light, Diwali. I am sure that the light of hope, confidence, and all positive attributes shall always remain inside you – lighting your path and guiding you to attain higher and higher levels of excellence in all your endevours! All the best! --Bhadani 16:40, 21 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Amazing panoramic view of the Biligirirangans

Congrats on the great photo of BR Hills! Are you sure that is Malki tho? And where is this taken from? Honnametti?? Prashanthns 14:14, 25 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Then it is fine! I thought this was taken from Jyothi betta and was wondering how it is possible. It definitly looks like Malki also! Beautiful shot...Is Kalam's visit notable enuf to be added?Prashanthns 17:10, 26 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Invitation to join WikiProject Environment

Hi there, I notice your background and interests. I am seeking to expand the membership of Wikipedia:WikiProject Environment to create a more informed vibrant environmental community on wikipedia. Would you be interested in joining? If so please put your name down on the project page Alex 15:31, 31 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Interested, but at the moment I have my hands full. Shyamal 15:37, 31 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks!

Just noticed the barnstar. The gesture is appreciated. Peace, Dyanega 21:51, 1 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Good Work!

Hi there. I noticed you've been adding lots of good articles recently--keep up the good work! --Alan Au 09:13, 4 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Indian Wildlife photos @ “INDIA NATURE WATCH”

A website for budding Indian wildlife photographers: http://www.indianaturewatch.net/index.php;

Atulsnischal 08:13, 11 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks Atul. I do know it. Shyamal 08:20, 11 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Eagle Taxonomy

Hi. I've only got a hard copy of the BB I'm afraid and I don't have it handy at the moment. It's a great article but I stopped making updates using it as making changes to bird pages seems to tread on a lot of toes (I prefer insects - I get left in peace as nobody else reads the articles:)). I may pluck up courage and start using it again but theres tons of other stuff I want to do as well! Richard Barlow 12:27, 16 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Hi. I'll dig out the article and give you the details of the source article. I disagree with you about BB though - I have always found it an excellent source of scientifically verified data. Richard Barlow 13:11, 16 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Hi. I have found the article which includes a link to some free content from the source article here. The eagle taxonomy section cites 8 separate phylogenetic studies which suggest the species traditionally included in Aquila and Hieraaetus actually form a monophyletic group. Hope this is useful. Richard Barlow 09:05, 18 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Very good question! The wording on the above link seems to indicate a complete merge of Hieraaetus into Aquila but the BOU is really only interested in Western Palaearctic species so its not made entirely clear. One to ponder Richard Barlow 12:39, 6 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

My Bot

Thanks for the info I will fix that. (I know very little in reguards to this topic) Im just helping with the tagging for the projects. If you want something else done let me know. Betacommand ^{(talk • contribs • Bot)} 03:59, 22 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

RE: Help

Hi,

I added the comments section from the arthropod template, and it seems to work now. I couldn't understand why the arthropod template and the Lepidoptera template fused together, but that problem seems to be resolved too. I noticed that in order for the template to work in pages where you already put it, you might need to edit the page and save it again (with no modifications). I figured this out because when I got fed up with the template not working despite my changes, I edited the talk page, and when I did a preview it worked fine. Keep me updated if you run into any more problems. IronC hris | (talk) 17:41, 26 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Weaver ant

Hi Shyamal, I already have a thumb nail at weaver ant, Oecophylla smaragdina seems to have very little text, and so adding an image there might not look very good. But is it Oecophylla smaragdina? Since the weaver ant I posted is a red ant as we call it here, the page you mention has an image of an ant that doesn't look like a red ant. And ah if you want to remove it from the gallery you may do so.--PremKudva^Talk 11:09, 4 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Alternation of generations

Noticed your discussions on the talk page. Are you happy with the current article intro ? I am not. A well established definition should be quoted as is instead of the current intro. I would do that if I was more confident with my knowledge of botany. Shyamal 12:17, 4 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

No, I'm not happy with it at all. The last time I was seriously working on the article, another editor was dead-set against using any of the standard published definitions, and kept reverting to something personally acceptable, but technically incorrect. I'm currently much more active as an Admin on Wiktionary, though I keep an eye on my Watchlist from time to time. If you want to make edits, go for it, and I'll tweak anything that looks more than a little odd. However, I don't expect to do serious original writing on Wikipedia in the immediate future. --EncycloPetey 01:57, 6 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Kallima inachus

Very nice! I think the third image might be redundant. Even so, the article looks great! Rklawton 15:32, 8 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Prater and Millard

Thanks for the compliment! Fowler&fowler «Talk» 06:21, 9 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Hi

Please check my contributions and give me feedback on the same! I have created two new pages as well

Sindhu —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Sindhu ramchandran (talk • contribs) 13:55, 9 December 2006 (UTC).[reply]

Troides helena

It is good for you to add this part to the article. It seems that the "Description" is not easily understood by other Wikipedians, however. I tries to summerize your points but I don't want to remove your points from the article. Would you mind kindly have a look on the article and modify it? Thx.Shrimp wong 04:52, 11 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Archives