hi, i've been working on spider systematics for a while, although at the moment i'm not very active. I created the page Spider families as a (temporary?) entry point, and worked on getting the 111 families up to a certain standard. My favorites are jumping spiders, where I created a page for every described recent genus. I also created and maintain Category:Lists of spider species to help people get an overview of what's still to do ;)
Info
 |
This user has been a member of Wikipedia since August 14, 2005 (UTC). |
 |
This user contributes using Linux. |
|
Todo
- list of fossil spiders (from joel hallan's biology catalog)
- list of termite species, + pages
- mine Psyche for texts and pictures.
- done: Araneae 1957-1967
- todo: Araneae up to 1956, 1968-2000, other animals ;)
- upload pictures from Lindsey + Starr.
- add contact info to lindsey pics up to lichen.
- suggestions for range maps
- hard edges -> easier to re-color
- pages needed
- pages needing extension
- created/ significantly expanded pages
 |
|
The Fauna Barnstar |
| There you go. Greater love for spiders hath no man... except Marshal Hedin maybe. Dysmorodrepanis 04:34, 7 January 2007 (UTC) |
 |
|
The Special Barnstar |
| Thanks for answering my question on where to find spider information. VegitaU 19:51, 8 June 2007 (UTC) |
Hi Sarefo. You were suggested as someone to contact regarding the I'm a fellow contributor to WikiProjects Arthropods. I was wondering if it would be possible to modify the statistics script so that the statistics table includes links within cells, allowing one to select articles of a given quality and importance (to make it easier to prioritise articles to work on). Asking around elsewhere pointed me to the Geology version. It seems they have additional categories - so an article wouldn't be "Category:FA-Quality Arthropods articles" and "Category: Low-Importance Arthropods arcticles", but rather (or as well) be "Category:FA-Quality Low-Importance Arthropods arcticles".
I don't want to create too much work, but this seems to me to possibly be a better approach, allowing users to go straight to high importance stubs to work on, for example, rather than getting a list of all the stubs and manually looking for high importance ones of them (based on a view that importance should prioritise activity).
Grateful for your thoughts. Heds (talk) 03:49, 16 October 2008 (UTC)
_Alt.png)
