User talk:Troodon58

Welcome!

Hello, Troodon58, and welcome to Wikipedia! Thank you for your contributions. I hope you like the place and decide to stay. Unfortunately, one or more of the pages you created, like Giant dromaeosaurids, may not conform to some of Wikipedia's guidelines for page creation, and may soon be deleted.

You may also wish to consider using a Wizard to help you create articles. See the Article Wizard. Thank you.

There's a page about creating articles you may want to read called Your first article. If you are stuck, and looking for help, please come to the New contributors' help page, where experienced Wikipedians can answer any queries you have! Or, you can just type {{helpme}} on this page, and someone will show up shortly to answer your questions. Here are a few other good links for newcomers:

I hope you enjoy editing here and being a Wikipedian! Please sign your name on talk pages using four tildes (~~~~); this will automatically produce your name and the date. If you have any questions, check out Wikipedia:Where to ask a question or ask me on my talk page. Again, welcome! Eeekster (talk) 22:23, 11 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Your contributed article, Giant dromaeosaurids

Hello, I notice that you recently created a new page, Giant dromaeosaurids. First, thank you for your contribution; Wikipedia relies solely on the efforts of volunteers such as yourself. Unfortunately, the page you created covers a topic on which we already have a page - Dromaeosauridae. Because of the duplication, your article has been tagged for speedy deletion. Please note that this is not a comment on you personally and we hope you will to continue helping improve Wikipedia. If the topic of the article you created is one that interests you, then perhaps you would like to help out at Dromaeosauridae - you might like to discuss new information at the article's talk page.

If you think that the article you created should remain separate, you may contest the deletion by adding {{hangon}} to the top of the page that has been nominated for deletion (just below the existing speedy deletion or "db" tag), coupled with adding a note on the talk page explaining your position, but be aware that once tagged for speedy deletion, if the page meets the criterion, it may be deleted without delay. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag yourself, but don't hesitate to add information to the page that would render it more in conformance with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. Lastly, please note that if the page does get deleted, you can contact one of these admins to request that they userfy the page or have a copy emailed to you. Additionally if you would like to have someone review articles you create before they go live so they are not nominated for deletion shortly after you post them, allow me to suggest the article creation process and using our search feature to find related information we already have in the encyclopedia. Try not to be discouraged. Wikipedia looks forward to your future contributions. Eeekster (talk) 22:23, 11 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]

April 2010

Please refrain from making unconstructive edits to Wikipedia, as you did at Utahraptor. Your edits appear to constitute vandalism and have been reverted or removed. If you would like to experiment, please use the sandbox. Please do not change cited information, as this is dishonest. J. Spencer (talk) 02:47, 23 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Troodon,

When you enlarge the size of a dinosaur on Wikipedia, you are simply causing more work for other editors, who have to remove what you've done. The size information in Utahraptor is based on scientific studies, specifically Kirkland, J.I., Burge, D., and Gaston, R. (1993). "A large dromaeosaur [Theropoda] from the Lower Cretaceous of Utah." Hunteria, 2(10): 1-16. That citation is included in the article. When you change it to your made-up number, you make it look as if those scientists support an incorrect size. Please don't do that. If you continue to remove correct content and replace it with incorrect content, your account may wind up getting blocked. Best, Firsfron of Ronchester 04:42, 23 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]

May 2010

Please don't remove material, as you did here at Achillobator. The text discusses the fact that Achillobator may be chimeric, composed of material from more than one animal, and includes a source for the claim. That's a valid reason to include the word "probably" when discussing where it lies on the dinosaur evolutionary tree. When you remove content like this, you create internal inconsistencies in the article. Firsfron of Ronchester 13:49, 1 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Edit summaries

I have noticed that you often edit without an edit summary. Please do your best to always fill in the summary field. This is considered an important guideline in Wikipedia. Even a short summary is better than no summary. An edit summary is even more important if you delete any text; otherwise, people may think you're being sneaky. Also, mentioning one change but not another one can be misleading to someone who finds the other one more important; add "and misc." to cover the other change(s). Thanks! mgiganteus1 (talk) 22:50, 31 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Award

		The Minor Barnstar
		Thanks for catching my error regarding Saurornithoides and Saurornitholestes at Aguja Formation. If not for your sharp eye, that could have gone unfixed for years. Abyssal (talk) 01:12, 15 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]

August 2010

The talkpages are not for expressing your personal opinions of the article subjects: they are for discussion of improving the articles. So, unless you can demonstrate how your being angry over Thylacosmilus' extinction, and how you're blaming Smilodon for lousing everything up will somehow improve the article, please stop it, or I will report you for vandalism.--Mr Fink (talk) 23:58, 10 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Welcome to Wikipedia. If you are affiliated with some of the people, places or things you have written about on Wikipedia, you may have a conflict of interest. In keeping with Wikipedia's neutral point of view policy, edits where there is a conflict of interest, or where such a conflict might reasonably be inferred, are strongly discouraged. If you have a conflict of interest, you should avoid or exercise great caution when:

editing or creating articles related to you, your organization, or its competitors, as well as projects and products they are involved with;
participating in deletion discussions about articles related to your organization or its competitors; and
linking to the Wikipedia article or website of your organization in other articles (see Wikipedia:Spam).

Please familiarize yourself with relevant policies and guidelines, especially those pertaining to neutral point of view, verifiability of information, and autobiographies.

For information on how to contribute to Wikipedia when you have a conflict of interest, please see our frequently asked questions for organizations. Thank you. — $Jeff G. ツ$ 02:47, 22 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Copyright problems with File:Troodon3.jpg

Hello. Concerning your contribution, File:Troodon3.jpg, please note that Wikipedia cannot accept copyrighted text or images obtained from other web sites or printed material, without the permission of the author(s). As a copyright violation, File:Troodon3.jpg appears to qualify for deletion under the speedy deletion criteria. File:Troodon3.jpg has been tagged for deletion, and may have been deleted by the time you see this message.

If you believe that the article or image is not a copyright violation, or if you have permission from the copyright holder to release the content freely under the Creative Commons Attribution/Share-Alike License (CC-BY-SA) then you should do one of the following:

If you have permission from the author, leave a message explaining the details at File talk:Troodon3.jpg and send an email with the message to permissions-enwikimedia.org. See Wikipedia:Requesting copyright permission for instructions.
If a note on the original website states that it is licensed under the CC-BY-SA license, leave a note at File talk:Troodon3.jpg with a link to where we can find that note.
If you hold the copyright to the material: send an e-mail from an address associated with the original publication to permissions-enwikimedia.org or a postal message to the Wikimedia Foundation permitting re-use under the CC-BY-SA and GFDL, and note that you have done so on File talk:Troodon3.jpg.

However, for textual content, you may simply consider rewriting the content in your own words. While we appreciate contributions, we must require all contributors to understand and comply with our copyright policy. Wikipedia takes copyright concerns very seriously, and persistent violators will be blocked from editing. Thank you. Bob the Wikipedian ^{(talk • contribs)} 03:42, 22 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Elaphrosaurus

Can you please find a source for your addition stating that it was initially mistaken for an ornithomimmosaur? Thanks. Abyssal (talk) 00:43, 14 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Taxobox

Hi Troodon58, please discuss major changes to the taxobox before implementing them, as you did on Archaeopteryx and Iberomesornis. Placing either in the "Class Reptilia" is patently ridiculous. "Clade Reptilia", sure, but that's not what it says. MMartyniuk (talk) 01:02, 15 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Reminder about edit summaries

I have noticed that you often edit without an edit summary. Please do your best to always fill in the summary field. This is considered an important guideline in Wikipedia. Even a short summary is better than no summary. An edit summary is even more important if you delete any text; otherwise, people may think you're being sneaky. Also, mentioning one change but not another one can be misleading to someone who finds the other one more important; add "and misc." to cover the other change(s). Thanks! mgiganteus1 (talk) 03:44, 15 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]

recent page moves

Please don't move your user page into article space, it doesn't belong there. I have moved it back to where it does belong. Thanks --Versa geek 00:21, 16 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Again, your user page does NOT belong in article space. If you move it there again, I will block you. If you wish to change your user name, please visit WP:CHU. --Versa geek 04:58, 21 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]

If you would like your userpage back and you don't have the text saved, we can bring it back, because I don't believe anyone ever said it was an inappropriate userpage. But you must promise to not ever try to push it back into article space, or to create any other page about yourself in article space. —Soap— 15:46, 28 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]

September 2010

Please do not add or change content without citing verifiable and reliable sources, as you did to Velociraptor. Before making any potentially controversial edits, it is recommended that you discuss them first on the article's talk page. Please review the guidelines at Wikipedia:Citing sources and take this opportunity to add references to the article. Thank you. The information you added ("bobcat") seems completely out of place. Please discuss on Talk page before replacing this page. — UncleBubba ^{( T @ C )} 18:34, 26 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Troodon, please stop adding and changing categories without discussing them first. Re-organizing or adding to the well-established category structure listed on the WP:Dino home page without discussing this or seeking input from the group can be considered rude. Thanks. MMartyniuk (talk) 02:12, 28 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Please do not add unsourced or original content, as you did to Human. Doing so violates Wikipedia's verifiability policy. If you continue to do so, you may be blocked from editing Wikipedia. Dougweller (talk) 10:47, 28 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]

You have the potential to be a good editor, but it looks to me you're making a lot of impulsive edits. You should think about whehter a particular edit is really helpful or not before you press Submit. For example, the bobcat thing may be true, but it isn't really relevant to an article about Velociraptors. There are lots of other animals that are also about that size, and most likely, anyone reading the article will be able to make sense of the measurement "49 pounds" without an example of another animal that's about the same size. With regards to humans originating in North America, it isn't true unless all primates are considered humans, which they're not. So even though you were making a claim based on a true statement, the claim itself isn't true. —Soap— 16:13, 28 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Troodon in Asia

Hi Troodon58, just wanted to explain about the Troodon in Asia thing. Greg Paul, a notorious lumper, at one time considered Troodon and Saurornithoides to be the same animal. As far as I know he was pretty much alone in this opinion and nobody else ever accepted it. But some popular books which used his as a source didn't quite understand the situation and listed Troodon as an Asian species. Troodon only lived in Asia if you believe Saurornithoides is not a real dinosaur. You can see a complete list of Troodon fossil remains here: [1]. None are from Asia. The only possible exceptions are some isolated teeth similar to Troodon from Siberia, which may have been Troodon because it lived in Alaska, and the two were connected at the time. But they have not been formally referred to Troodon or compared to Saurornithoides, so they could be anything. Even the Alaskan "troodonts" haven't been properly described or named yet, and they might end up being a new genus anyway. MMartyniuk (talk) 00:35, 29 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Dinosaurs

I think you need some help and advice, and I've started a discussion at the talk page above. Dougweller (talk) 12:47, 29 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Categories for discussion nomination of Category:Dinosaur redirects

Category:Dinosaur redirects, which you created, has been nominated for deletion, merging, or renaming. If you would like to participate in the discussion, you are invited to add your comments at the category's entry on the Categories for discussion page. Thank you. J. Spencer (talk) 03:37, 30 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]

October 2010

Please refrain from making unconstructive edits to Wikipedia, as you did at Troodon. Your edits appear to constitute vandalism and have been reverted or removed. If you would like to experiment, please use the sandbox. Thank you. MMartyniuk (talk) 23:35, 30 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]

It's really unfair to call Troodon58's edits vandalism. However, Troodon58, by trying to insert your opinion on Troodon classification you are violating a core policy, No Original Research, or WP:OR. This policy forbids us from using Wikipedia to publish novel opinions or discoveries. You can insert your opinions on dinosaur classification only if you can get a book or paper published that can be cited in the article as the source of the opinion. Abyssal (talk) 23:46, 30 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Troodon58, pleeeeease try to be more careful, and put more thought into your edits. I don't want to see you get blocked from the site. If you think someone is going to undo your edit, you shouldn't do it in the first place. If you're not sure, use the talk page. And it would also be nice if you'd edit your own talk page more often, so that we can see that you're listening. And even if you disagree it'd be nice to hear that you disagree. —Soap— 00:00, 1 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Move

Why did you move Appalachia? The article that was there was the more notable article. Also you replaced it with an article with no sources. --Guerillero | My Talk 19:30, 2 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Actually, the article about dinosaurs is more notable than the article about the region. Troodon58 14:34, 2 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Where are the sources? --Guerillero | My Talk 19:39, 2 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Troodon58: This is the second time you have unilaterally moved these pages. After the last time you did this, the moves were discussed and the strong WP:Consensus was against your moves. If you persist in this type of behavior, your editing access may be blocked. --Orlady (talk) 19:43, 2 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Appalachia

This is an automated message from CorenSearchBot. I have performed a search with the contents of Appalachia, and it appears to be very similar to another Wikipedia page: Appalachia (Mesozoic). It is possible that you have accidentally duplicated contents, or made an error while creating the page— you might want to look at the pages and see if that is the case. If you are intentionally trying to rename an article, please see Help:Moving a page for instructions on how to do this without copying and pasting. If you are trying to move or copy content from one article to a different one, please see Wikipedia:Copying within Wikipedia and be sure you have acknowledged the duplication of material in an edit summary to preserve attribution history.

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. CorenSearchBot (talk) 19:48, 2 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Block notification

You have been blocked from editing for a period of 24 hours for page-move vandalism. Once the block has expired, you are welcome to make useful contributions. If you would like to be unblocked, you may appeal this block by adding below this notice the text {{unblock|Your reason here}}, but you should read the guide to appealing blocks first. Orlady (talk) 20:00, 2 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Blocked as a sock puppet

You have been blocked indefinitely as a sock puppet. (blocked by –MuZemike 00:44, 15 October 2010 (UTC))[reply]
You may contest this block by adding the text {{unblock|Your reason here}} below, but please read our guide to appealing blocks first.

As Confirmed by CheckUser. –MuZemike 00:44, 15 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Category:Dinosaurs of Appalachia

Category:Dinosaurs of Appalachia, which you created, has been nominated for possible deletion, merging, or renaming. If you would like to participate in the discussion, you are invited to add your comments at the category's entry on the Categories for discussion page. Thank you. Kumioko (talk) 00:52, 4 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]