User talk:Tjunier

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Greetings! I hope you like the place and decide to stay. If you have questions or doubts of any sort, do not hesitate to post them on the Village Pump, somebody will respond ASAP. Other helpful pages include:

Have fun! --Jiang 12:05 17 Jul 2003 (UTC)

Nice to see another bird article. The convention agreed for Wikipedia is that individual species are capitalised, but there is a lower case redirect to the capitalised main article. I've done that for Harpy Eagle. jimfbleak 17:10, 6 Nov 2003 (UTC)

Oops, sorry, wasn't aware of the convention. In fact I just chanced upon the WikiProject Birds after starting the article... Tjunier 08:36, 7 Nov 2003 (UTC)
No probs. Pandion Haliaetus is the Osprey, which although sometimes called Fish Eagle isn't an eagle at all, but the binomial name would predate that knowledge. Haliaeetus albicilla is the White-tailed Eagle, a true eagle, and impressively massive at that.
I guess that the double e results from the old transliteration of Greek words, which has been largely lost in NAm, but still hangs on in scientific names and some British English spellings. For example, hemoglobin (US), haemoglobin (UK). In this instance, presumably the ae was followed by another e. (just guessing really) Jim

Thanks for adding Quercus humboldti, I'd missed this one. From checking up on it, it seems the spelling is Quercus humboldtii (two 'i's at the end) - can you confirm if this is or isn't right? - MPF 00:45, 11 Feb 2004 (UTC)

Well, a quick Google search seems to indicate humboldtii, so I think you're right. Tjunier 15:16, 12 Feb 2004 (UTC)

HI. With regard to heron and other birds, it is normal practice to list genera and species taxonomically, to show relationships, rather than alphabetically, thanks, jimfbleak 16:01, 4 Aug 2004 (UTC)

I see. But I fail to grasp how a list can convey information about relationships, or at least how it can do so better than a tree does. And since tree-formatted taxonomical information is also provided, I just don't see the utility of list forms. For example, consider a group of taxa A, B, C, D, and E; suppose further that their relationships is given by the tree ((C,A)(E(D,B))) - How is one to infer this from the mere list C, A, E, D, B ? This might as well stand for, say, ((C(A,E))(D,B)), which is a totally different structure. Tjunier 16:20, 2004 Aug 4 (UTC)

Contents

[edit] Article Licensing

Hi, I've started a drive to get users to multi-license all of their contributions that they've made to either (1) all U.S. state, county, and city articles or (2) all articles, using the Creative Commons Attribution-Share Alike (CC-by-sa) v1.0 and v2.0 Licenses or into the public domain if they prefer. The CC-by-sa license is a true free documentation license that is similar to Wikipedia's license, the GFDL, but it allows other projects, such as WikiTravel, to use our articles. Since you are among the top 2000 Wikipedians by edits, I was wondering if you would be willing to multi-license all of your contributions or at minimum those on the geographic articles. Over 90% of people asked have agreed. For More Information:

To allow us to track those users who muli-license their contributions, many users copy and paste the "{{DualLicenseWithCC-BySA-Dual}}" template into their user page, but there are other options at Template messages/User namespace. The following examples could also copied and pasted into your user page:

Option 1
I agree to [[Wikipedia:Multi-licensing|multi-license]] all my contributions, with the exception of my user pages, as described below:
{{DualLicenseWithCC-BySA-Dual}}

OR

Option 2
I agree to [[Wikipedia:Multi-licensing|multi-license]] all my contributions to any [[U.S. state]], county, or city article as described below:
{{DualLicenseWithCC-BySA-Dual}}

Or if you wanted to place your work into the public domain, you could replace "{{DualLicenseWithCC-BySA-Dual}}" with "{{MultiLicensePD}}". If you only prefer using the GFDL, I would like to know that too. Please let me know what you think at my talk page. It's important to know either way so no one keeps asking. -- Ram-Man (comment| talk)

[edit] User categorisation

You were listed on the Wikipedia:Wikipedians/Switzerland page as living in or being associated with Switzerland. As part of the Wikipedia:User categorisation project, these lists are being replaced with user categories. If you would like to add yourself to the category that is replacing the page, please visit Category:Wikipedians in Switzerland for instructions. --Army1987 12:32, 2 September 2005 (UTC)

[edit] Wikipedia:Polistinae

This article should be entitled "Polistinae", not "Wikipedia:Polistinae". Did you put it under Wikipedia namespace as a test? This prefix is used normally for articles about Wikipedia, not encyclopedic articles. Use the Sandbox for tests. NTK 17:59, 1 January 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Dummy

Ops?

[edit] Oceanic whitetip shark for FA

Hi! I have seen that you have contributed to the Oceanic whitetip shark article, we are trying to make it WP:FA, please review and update, if you have comments please comment on its talk page. Thanks! Stefan 03:04, 29 July 2006 (UTC)


[edit] Condor

I started a split of the article, but I do need more help. As you worked an the article you might be able to make it better.--Mfranck 16:24, 3 September 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Test

Another test.


[edit] Nested parentheses and Arthur Cayley

Hi (Salut!), I noticed your edit to Tree structure regarding nested parentheses. Very interesting! Do you have a reference for how/where/when Cayley noted the correspondence? Knuth (1968) mentions nested parentheses as a representation for trees, but I don't recall him mentionning Cayley as the originator. MichaelMcGuffin 20:42, 2 April 2007 (UTC)