User talk:Shrumster

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia


Welcome!

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

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 need help, check out Wikipedia:Questions, ask me on my talk page, or place {{helpme}} on your talk page and someone will show up shortly to answer your questions. Again, welcome! 

Also, welcome to Wikipedia:WikiProject Dinosaurs! Glad to have you aboard! :) Firsfron of Ronchester 02:50, 2 January 2007 (UTC)

Neat, thanks! I'll try to do my best! Shrumster 14:17, 2 January 2007 (UTC)

Contents

[edit] Philippine Mouse Deer

Hi, can you help me concerning Pilandok. I followed the link from the history section and I think you are better in taxonomy than I am. Most Philippine-based sites and my teachers from elementary told me that it its the world's smallest hoofed animal. However, some sites including the one found in Wiki claim that the Lesser Mouse deer is the smallest. If we consider Pilandok as a subspecies of Tragulus napu (Greater Mouse deer) then Lesser Mouse deer wins. If as a separate species (Tragalus nigricans) perhaps it may have a fighting chance for the claim. But I don't know if it still a separate species.

Off topic. Does the Master degree in MSI have field work? I am contemplating on what Master's degree to pursue after graduation, MSI or NIGS. Basically just a choice between the mountains and the seas. ----Lenticel 09:04, 4 February 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Tamaraw GA?

Thanks for the added stub section. I have already filled the required text there with citation. Do you think we could promote this article to GA status? The only criteria that cannot be addressed by me is the use of Images. (I also beleive my manual of style is not that impressive). I'm sorry but I really can't help in this criteria. I already asked in the tambayan and Seav but nobody has acted yet.Lenticel 03:10, 17 March 2007 (UTC)

Impressive work! I hope I'll be that good in time. the picture is really a problem. I think there are no pictures for the baby or in that case, any open-source pictures at all. The only nice pictures that I know are from haribon and ultimateungulate and I believe both has restrictions in picture use. I did saw "kali" here [1] but I don't think this is public domain. I'm quite excited by the evolution of the article in such short notice. However I may not be able to be of help. I must finish my thesis manuscript and its corresponding poster today since my defense/poster presentation will be at wednesday, March 21 (Hey, you could visit NIMBB at that day! One of the poster people would be me). I just stop by at wikipedia every now and then to keep myself sane by focusing on other things. Maybe after I finish my requirements, I will be able to focus more energy to wikipedia. Hey, good luck to your work at MSI as well! --Lenticel 05:24, 18 March 2007 (UTC)

There is an image for the tamaraw in wiki! No wonder nobody replies to my post. Anyways, check out the image in the article (Ok, I know its not ideal but its a start)--Lenticel 03:24, 24 March 2007 (UTC) Hey, I'll request for a peer review for this article. Just a heads up. --Lenticel (talk) 02:07, 1 August 2007 (UTC)

I hope the article gets promoted. I want to edit wiki badly but can only do so after office (when I already want to relax). Besides our office's Internet connection is uber slow--Lenticel (talk) 09:25, 13 September 2007 (UTC)

Tamaraw is GA!--Lenticel (talk) 22:17, 21 February 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Fishes

There is a new proposal on naming conventions for fish being discussed at WikiProject Fishes. As a member of said project your feedback would be appreciated at the WikiProject Fishes talk page here. Cheers, David. MidgleyDJ 07:05, 27 March 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Special Delivery!

The Special Barnstar
This is for all the times you've helped me out with Wiki-related issues/problems, for greeting me on my Wikibirthday, for all those times you've heard me rant about my Wikistress...and for entertaining my queries regarding strange animals/insects I find at home AND for letting me pass Ecology last year even though I was such a slacker. HAHA! Thanks for everything! :D -- SilentAria talk 15:21, 26 August 2007 (UTC)

[edit] WikiPilipinas

Updated DYK query On 1 September 2007, Did you know? was updated with a fact from the article WikiPilipinas, which you created or substantially expanded. If you know of another interesting fact from a recently created article, then please suggest it on the Did you know? talk page.

--GeeJo (t)⁄(c) • 13:33, 1 September 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Did you know...

Updated DYK query On 5 September 2007, Did you know? was updated with a fact from the article turtle excluder device , which you created or substantially expanded. If you know of another interesting fact from a recently created article, then please suggest it on the Did you know? talk page.

--Allen3 talk 23:13, 5 September 2007 (UTC)

Nice article - good work! Verisimilus T 10:27, 6 September 2007 (UTC)

[edit] DYK

Updated DYK query On 6 September 2007, Did you know? was updated with a fact from the article Protostegidae, which you created or substantially expanded. If you know of another interesting fact from a recently created article, then please suggest it on the Did you know? talk page.

--Carabinieri 21:51, 6 September 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Hydrophis

Hi Shrumster! I noticed your edits to Hydrophis. However, I don't think it's necessary to mention this particular taxonomic issue in every single sea snake article. It should be enough to explain it once at length in a single place -- the sea snake article -- and then refer to that in the articles for the specific sea snake taxa. You could call it "leveraging the taxonomic hierarchy." Otherwise, this kind of repetition will breed inconsistency and error. --Jwinius 14:28, 7 September 2007 (UTC)

After taking another look at your edits, I saw that they were inconsistent with the thinking that is reflected in the ITIS database. The latter does not recognize the Hydrophiinae or the Hydrophiidae, and simply lumps all of the sea snake genera in the family Elapidae. This approach is explained in the taxonomy section of the sea snake article. Therefore, I went ahead and undid most of your changes and adding your links to the "Further reading" section below ("bibliography" and "references" mean pretty much the same thing). If you'd like to know more about how ITIS compared to the New Reptile Database, read this discussion. BTW, DFCisneros's opinion carries some weight, since he's an actual herpetologist, although specialized in frogs. --Jwinius 15:10, 7 September 2007 (UTC)

[edit] DYK

Updated DYK query On 8 September 2007, Did you know? was updated with a fact from the article Santanachelys gaffneyi, which you created or substantially expanded. If you know of another interesting fact from a recently created article, then please suggest it on the Did you know? talk page.

--Carabinieri 22:55, 8 September 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Naming issues & synonymy

Hi Shrumster! As a systematist, what is your opinion of the use of scientific names and adding complete synonymies to articles on most plants and animals? I like to use scientific names for article titles for a number of reasons, but mostly because this makes it easier to keep track of such articles, as well as to prevent petty squabbles regarding the title of the article. After the botanical group decided to take this approach (there are way too many vague common name for plants), this practice seems to be growing more acceptable. Another thing I do these days, is use this use this amazing checklist I have to start every article off with proper distribution data and a complete synonymy with redirects. Not only does this prevent duplicate articles from being created that use old names, but it has also led me to find such articles. Ultimately, I hope this will lead to an unabridged working taxonomy for snakes here at Wikipedia. No doubt this will seem a bit complicated and over the top for most editors today, but if Wikipedia is to exist for 100 years or more, I can't imagine that it will eventually become anything less. What do you think? (PS -- You can answer here as I've temporarily added your talk page to my watchlist). --Jwinius 00:05, 9 September 2007 (UTC)

Honestly, that's one issue I have with the current WP:MoS - I'm a sucker for scientific names. :P But seriously, I do think that WP articles on taxa should be named after each taxon's most-official (according to whichever body is the ranking authority on that particular taxon) scientific name. Common names are personally just too unwieldy and are just subject to too much regionalization which can (and probably does) lead to more confusion. Synonymies are quite appropriate as well, especially when those few people who actually do check on that article's references encounter the earlier papers that may have addressed that particular taxon differently. I understand why most lay-people would want the "most common name in English" to be a taxon's article title for ease of use, but I believe that WP has to balance between being easy-to-use and being educational. And naming articles after their specific taxon's official scientific names do go a long way towards the educational end of that spectrum. (Coming from the Philippines where most people know enough English to be able to read and understand contemporary English movies/books but not enough to be able to write with a passable level of grammatical correctness, organisms' common names are a mess here. Red-eared sliders are called "green turtles" in pet shops, practically any cichlid is a "tilapia" and freshwater crayfish are called "fortune lobsters." Frankly, it's a mess. :P) Just my two cents. Shrumster 05:02, 9 September 2007 (UTC)
Then you'll be happy to hear that I recently managed to get a fourth viper article, Daboia, to pass a GA review. There were a number of criticisms, since my articles violate the MoS in various ways, but the fact that it uses a scientific name for the article title was not even mentioned in the review.
Scientific names are being used in another area as well: categories. Not even I was doing this, but then I noticed that a bot, Polbot, was not only using scientific names to create hundreds of new articles, but categories as well. When I was then asked by someone whether I wanted to merge category Vipers into Viperidae and Elapids into Elapidae, I said sure! Subsequently, I rearranged many of the other snake categories too, renaming more than a few articles along the way, and have so far received zero protests. Not that many other people bother themselves with snake articles these days, but still. It's another sign that things are changing. Besides, as the number of articles grows, it's becoming increasingly obvious to a growing number of people that there's no better way to organize them.
If, in general, you share my position, then we should stick together. Discussions regarding the naming issue pop up in Tree of life with some regularity, but unfortunately the opposition has never been that well organized, possibly because the serious people never took WP that seriously! Maybe that's changing now. In addition, like in the botany group, we can also work from the bottom up by first getting out own subprojects to see the light. This way, we might eventually be able to convince the larger Amphibians and Reptiles project to adopt this position as well. Not that I expect any of this to happen overnight, but it is something to work on. --Jwinius 14:27, 9 September 2007 (UTC)
Cool, that's good to hear! Yep, feel free to count on my vote whenever it's needed for the scientific name-vs-common name disputes that'll eventually come up. I'll keep an eye on the WProj:AAR more often now. I'll try to do that categorization as well with the other zoological articles I'm stewarding. So far, WProj:Fishes have been a bit accepting of proper taxon names but I've encountered resistance at WProj:Sharks in the past (which is why I kind of try to stay away from shark articles unless I absolutely have to). :P Shrumster 14:59, 9 September 2007 (UTC)
If I notice any relevant debates going on, I'll be sure to let you know. Likewise, you can count on my support if you think it might come in handy. --Jwinius 15:23, 9 September 2007 (UTC)
Neat, thanks! :) Shrumster 15:24, 9 September 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Category:Ecology by taxon

Thankyou very much. Most Wikipedians would have created Category:Ecology by species or the horribly clumsy Category:Ecology by taxonomic group. The fact that you have no fear of the word "taxon" makes you someone I hope to get a chance to work with. Hesperian 05:55, 15 September 2007 (UTC)

P.S. I'm curious as to whether you plan on tagging Human ecology into it. Hesperian 05:55, 15 September 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Did you know

Updated DYK query On 22 September 2007, Did you know? was updated with a fact from the article Mindoro stripe-faced fruit bat, which you created or substantially expanded. If you know of another interesting fact from a recently created article, then please suggest it on the Did you know? talk page.

--Allen3 talk 12:30, 22 September 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Happy Wikibirthday!

Hope you stay for a long time, despite your love-hate relationship with Wikipedia. :-) --seav 02:00, 26 September 2007 (UTC)

Nice to learn there's another UP faculty member on-board at the tambayan. Good luck with the thesis and happy Wikibirthday. :-D Alternativity 04:33, 28 September 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Belated Happy Wikibirthday!

Augh, I can't believe I forgot to greet you! Belated Happy Wikibirthday! Here, have a birthday cake. XD --SilentAria talk 09:43, 26 September 2007 (UTC)
Augh, I can't believe I forgot to greet you! Belated Happy Wikibirthday! Here, have a birthday cake. XD --SilentAria talk 09:43, 26 September 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Disputed fair use rationale for Image:Space Marine Landing Craft.gif

Thanks for uploading Image:Space Marine Landing Craft.gif. However, there is a concern that the rationale you have provided for using this image under "fair use" may be invalid. Please read the instructions at Wikipedia:Non-free content carefully, then go to the image description page and clarify why you think the image qualifies for fair use. Using one of the templates at Wikipedia:Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to ensure that your image is in compliance with Wikipedia policy, but remember that you must complete the template. Do not simply insert a blank template on an image page.

If it is determined that the image does not qualify under fair use, it will be deleted within a couple of days according to our criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the media copyright questions page. Thank you.BetacommandBot 08:50, 29 September 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Did you know

Updated DYK query On 8 October 2007, Did you know? was updated with a fact from the article Apo Reef , which you created or substantially expanded. If you know of another interesting fact from a recently created article, then please suggest it on the Did you know? talk page.

--Allen3 talk 16:30, 8 October 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Snapping turtle

hey, thanks for your work on the article in july - it badly needed it! i've been terribly scattered this summer Metanoid (talk, email) 19:45, 14 October 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Voting for the Tambayan Philippines Collaboration #1 is ongoing

Hi! The voting for the article to be the first target of Tambayan Philippines Collaboration Department is ongoing. Please vote even if it is abstain. Thanks! --seav 14:07, 15 October 2007 (UTC)


[edit] Images listed for deletion

Some of your images or media files have been listed for deletion. Please see Wikipedia:Images and media for deletion if you are interested in preserving them.

Thank you. -- JediLofty User ¦ Talk 13:39, 26 October 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Orphaned non-free media (Image:WH40k_DoW_IG_Lasguns.jpg)

Thanks for uploading Image:WH40k_DoW_IG_Lasguns.jpg. The media description page currently specifies that it is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, it is currently orphaned, meaning that it is not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the media was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that media for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).

If you have uploaded other unlicensed media, please check whether they're used in any articles or not. You can find a list of 'image' pages you have edited by clicking on the "my contributions" link (it is located at the very top of any Wikipedia page when you are logged in), and then selecting "Image" from the dropdown box. Note that all non-free media not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. -- RG2 12:24, 4 November 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Disputed fair use rationale for Image:WH40k DoW PredatorAnnihilators.jpg

Thanks for uploading Image:WH40k DoW PredatorAnnihilators.jpg. However, there is a concern that the rationale you have provided for using this image under "fair use" may be invalid. Please read the instructions at Wikipedia:Non-free content carefully, then go to the image description page and clarify why you think the image qualifies for fair use. Using one of the templates at Wikipedia:Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to ensure that your image is in compliance with Wikipedia policy, but remember that you must complete the template. Do not simply insert a blank template on an image page.

If it is determined that the image does not qualify under fair use, it will be deleted within a couple of days according to our criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the media copyright questions page. Thank you. -- JediLofty User ¦ Talk 12:05, 6 November 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Disputed fair use rationale for Image:WH40k Land Speeder from DoW.jpg

Thanks for uploading Image:WH40k Land Speeder from DoW.jpg. However, there is a concern that the rationale you have provided for using this image under "fair use" may be invalid. Please read the instructions at Wikipedia:Non-free content carefully, then go to the image description page and clarify why you think the image qualifies for fair use. Using one of the templates at Wikipedia:Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to ensure that your image is in compliance with Wikipedia policy, but remember that you must complete the template. Do not simply insert a blank template on an image page.

If it is determined that the image does not qualify under fair use, it will be deleted within a couple of days according to our criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the media copyright questions page. Thank you. -- JediLofty User ¦ Talk 12:05, 6 November 2007 (UTC)

[edit] The Future of WP:40k

Hello. As a member of WP:40K I ask you to share your thoughts and opinions on a matter that I feel will shape the future of the project. Thanks. --Falcorian (talk) 02:07, 8 November 2007 (UTC)


[edit] Disputed fair use rationale for Image:UP Diliman Marine Science Institute Logo.jpg

Thanks for uploading Image:UP Diliman Marine Science Institute Logo.jpg. However, there is a concern that the rationale you have provided for using this image under "fair use" may be invalid. Please read the instructions at Wikipedia:Non-free content carefully, then go to the image description page and clarify why you think the image qualifies for fair use. Using one of the templates at Wikipedia:Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to ensure that your image is in compliance with Wikipedia policy, but remember that you must complete the template. Do not simply insert a blank template on an image page.

If it is determined that the image does not qualify under fair use, it will be deleted within a couple of days according to our criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the media copyright questions page. Thank you.BetacommandBot 16:51, 3 December 2007 (UTC)

[edit] AfD nomination of Paul Preece

An article that you have been involved in editing, Paul Preece, has been listed for deletion. If you are interested in the deletion discussion, please participate by adding your comments at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Paul Preece. Thank you.

This is a trial of the AfD notification bot. If you found this message helpful, annoying or have anything else to say about it please leave a message at User_talk:BJBot, thanks! --BJBot (talk) 16:06, 24 December 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Support

Hi Shrumster! I was wondering if I could have your support for a merge proposal. It concerns this discussion. I've already tried reasoning with the party responsible for the status quo (and admin), but that conversation went nowhere. I would like to see the previous situation restored, but I don't want to make this into a big fight, so I'm hoping to keep this as civilized as possible. Therefore, assuming your agree with my merge proposal, a short word of support from you will suffice. Cheers, --Jwinius (talk) 19:10, 24 December 2007 (UTC)

Thanks, Shrumster. A question, though, concerning your comment, which is similar to the one Shyamal made. The merge proposal is based on the premise that it's illogical to make separate articles for nominate subspecies, but the the two of you seem to dislike the idea of making articles for subspecies in general. So far, I've consistently been making separate articles for subspecies not only because I've been following a perceived trend, but because it seemed practical for a number of reasons:
  • In snakes the subspecies often have markedly different color patterns (Morelia spilota is a good example).
  • It allows for a place to display the images of the subspecies separately.
  • It allows for a place to redirect the common names separately.
  • It allows for a place to redirect the synonyms separately. I've often found this convenient, as the synonymies for some taxa, such as Vipera berus berus and Vipera berus bosniensis, are long enough as they are.
  • Many well-known books systematically treat snake subspecies separately as well, although I admit that many others do not.
  • Splitting off the subspecies articles can help to keep the size of the species articles down.
Still, not creating separate articles for the subspecies would help to keep the total number of articles down. Considering all this, would you care to elaborate your point of view in this matter? --Jwinius (talk) 00:54, 27 December 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Orphaned non-free media (Image:WH40k LandSpeederTornado v2 02 RisingSons.jpg)

Thanks for uploading Image:WH40k LandSpeederTornado v2 02 RisingSons.jpg. The media description page currently specifies that it is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, it is currently orphaned, meaning that it is not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the media was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that media for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).

If you have uploaded other unlicensed media, please check whether they're used in any articles or not. You can find a list of 'image' pages you have edited by clicking on the "my contributions" link (it is located at the very top of any Wikipedia page when you are logged in), and then selecting "Image" from the dropdown box. Note that all non-free media not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. BJBot (talk) 20:17, 30 December 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Orphaned non-free media (Image:WH40k PredatorAnnihilator v1 01 RisingSons.jpg)

Thanks for uploading Image:WH40k PredatorAnnihilator v1 01 RisingSons.jpg. The media description page currently specifies that it is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, it is currently orphaned, meaning that it is not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the media was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that media for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).

If you have uploaded other unlicensed media, please check whether they're used in any articles or not. You can find a list of 'image' pages you have edited by clicking on the "my contributions" link (it is located at the very top of any Wikipedia page when you are logged in), and then selecting "Image" from the dropdown box. Note that all non-free media not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. BJBot (talk) 20:17, 30 December 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Orphaned non-free media (Image:WH40k Razorback v1 01 RisingSons.jpg)

Thanks for uploading Image:WH40k Razorback v1 01 RisingSons.jpg. The media description page currently specifies that it is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, it is currently orphaned, meaning that it is not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the media was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that media for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).

If you have uploaded other unlicensed media, please check whether they're used in any articles or not. You can find a list of 'image' pages you have edited by clicking on the "my contributions" link (it is located at the very top of any Wikipedia page when you are logged in), and then selecting "Image" from the dropdown box. Note that all non-free media not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. BJBot (talk) 20:18, 30 December 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Taxonomy translation

Can you help the Tagalog Wikipedia here? Thanks--Lenticel (talk) 03:59, 24 January 2008 (UTC)

We managed to get consensus for the Tagalog translation for taxonomy terms. Thanks for your input. --Lenticel (talk) 08:50, 29 January 2008 (UTC)


[edit] Tagalog Wikipedia

Tagalog Wikipedia Campaign March 2008!

Tagalog Wikipedia is campaigning for your participation in writing, editing, assessing and translating articles!
The purpose of this campaign is to expand and improve articles at Tagalog Wikipedia. Your participation will be highly appreciated by the community.

There are over 16,000 articles to view, read, review, edit, and expand, so please visit the Wikipedia Café and the WikiProject Philippines at Tagalog Wikipedia to help out!

The campaign includes seeking your assistance in:

Or just anything you can do to help us just like what you are doing there at the English Wikipedia.

Thank you in advance and regards, Tagalog Wikipedia Community

Finally, Wikipedia is the 7th most visited site in the Philippines. Then why is it that the Tagalog Wikipedia, the Wikipedia in your own language remains unknown to most of the Filipinos? The mission of this campaign is to change that. Will you join us?

[edit] Perna viridis

Can you help me improve this to GA status? thanks!--Lenticel (talk) 23:15, 25 April 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Image copyright problem with Image:AquaTeenPosterColonMovie.jpg

Thanks for uploading Image:AquaTeenPosterColonMovie.jpg. You've indicated that the image is being used under a claim of fair use, but you have not provided an adequate explanation for why it meets Wikipedia's requirements for such images. In particular, for each page the image is used on, the image must have an explanation linking to that page which explains why it needs to be used on that page. Can you please check

  • That there is a non-free use rationale on the image's escription page for each article the image is used in.
  • That every article it is used on is linked to from its description page.

This is an automated notice by FairuseBot. For assistance on the image use policy, see Wikipedia:Media copyright questions. --13:28, 9 May 2008 (UTC)