This is an archive of past discussions. Do not edit the contents of this page. If you wish to start a new discussion or revive an old one, please do so on the current talk page.
COVID-19 Barnstar
Thanks for all your consistent work updating the Michigan article!
Good work! --evrik(talk) 23:52, 19 April 2020 (UTC)
Hi there, I'm pleased to inform you that I've begun reviewing the article National Union of Freedom Fighters you nominated for GA-status according to the criteria. This process may take up to 7 days. Feel free to contact me with any questions or comments you might have during this period. Message delivered by Legobot, on behalf of Vanamonde93 -- Vanamonde93 (talk) 03:40, 20 April 2020 (UTC)
I just received a notice from Mr. Ollie that he has labeled Dr. Robert T. Lackey's biography page as perhaps being influenced by contributors who have a have a "close personal connection" to the subject. In fact, I know Dr. Lackey's work very well, but I read the contribution in question and it is factually accurate and written from a neutral point of view. Mr. Ollie's suggestion is to request an uninvolved editor to verify that this is true and, if so, to remove the template. Your professional interests seem to overlap with mine, therefore, I have contacted you with this request. Any help you may be able to provide would be greatly appreciated. I am just getting started on contributing to Wikipedia so I am still not sure of all the procedures and protocols.
The second round of the 2020 WikiCup has now finished. It was a high-scoring round and contestants needed 75 points to advance to round 3. There were some very impressive efforts in round 2, with the top ten contestants all scoring more than 500 points. A large number of the points came from the 12 featured articles and the 186 good articles achieved in total by contestants, and the 355 good article reviews they performed; the GAN backlog drive and the stay-at-home imperative during the COVID-19 pandemic may have been partially responsible for these impressive figures.
Our top scorers in round 2 were:
Epicgenius, with 2333 points from one featured article, forty-five good articles, fourteen DYKs and plenty of bonus points
Gog the Mild, with 1784 points from three featured articles, eight good articles, a substantial number of featured article and good article reviews and lots of bonus points
The Rambling Man, with 1262 points from two featured articles, eight good articles and a hundred good article reviews
Harrias, with 1141 points from two featured articles, three featured lists, ten good articles, nine DYKs and a substantial number of featured article and good article reviews
The rules for featured article reviews have been adjusted; reviews may cover three aspects of the article, content, images and sources, and contestants may receive points for each of these three types of review. Please also remember the requirement to mention the WikiCup when undertaking an FAR for which you intend to claim points. Remember also that DYKs cannot be claimed until they have appeared on the main page. As we enter the third round, any content promoted after the end of round 2 but before the start of round 3 can be claimed now, and anything you forgot to claim in round 2 cannot! Remember too, that you must claim your points within 14 days of "earning" them. When doing GARs, please make sure that you check that all the GA criteria are fully met.
More information Featured Article Category as of, Feb 23, 2008 ...
Tree of Life's growing featured content
Inspired by a March 2020 post at WikiProject Medicine detailing the growth of Featured Articles over time, we decided to reproduce that table here, adding a second table showing the growth of Good Articles. Tree of Life articles are placed in the "Biology" category for FAs, which has seen a growth of 381% since 2008. Only two other subjects had a greater growth than Biology: Business, economics, and finance; and Warfare.
Percentage Growth in FA Categories, 2008–2019, Legend: Considerably above average, Above average, AverageBelow average , Considerably below average, Poor
Note A: Total is off by one; not worth looking for the error.
Note B Three food biographies moved per discussion at WT:FAC
Note: The very odd dates used in earlier years result from pulling old data from the talk page at WP:FAS.
Good Article Category as of
Feb 23, 2008
Sep 16, 2008
Sep 16, 2010
Dec 1, 2011
Jan 1, 2015
Jan 1, 2020
Pct chg Feb 2008 to 2011
Pct chg Feb 2008 to 2020
Agriculture, food and drink
27
34
37
55
113
226
104%
737%
Art and architecture
134
188
321
450
683
1022
236%
663%
Engineering and technology
256
396
882
1198
1828
2407
368%
840%
Geography and places
191
248
424
523
716
1052
174%
451%
History
261
312
651
825
1219
1894
216%
626%
Language and literature
173
215
377
462
686
982
167%
468%
Mathematics
19
22
27
30
36
67
58%
253%
Media and drama
403
658
1352
1300
3070
3961
223%
883%
Music
357
527
997
1437
2532
3892
303%
990%
Natural sciences
544
686
1275
1717
2404
3426
216%
530%
Philosophy and religion
134
174
244
294
365
557
119%
316%
Social sciences and society
468
549
790
998
1430
1854
113%
296%
Sports and recreation
384
546
1074
1402
2350
3802
265%
890%
Video games
168
220
373
443
684
1349
164%
703%
Warfare
155
241
989
1654
2544
3996
967%
2478%
Total
3674
5016
9813
12788
20660
30487
248%
730%
Organisms*
119
130
402
528
685
1017
344%
755%
*subset of natural sciences
Unsurprisingly, the number of GAs has increased more rapidly than the number of FAs. Organisms, which is a subcategory of Natural sciences, has seen a GA growth of 755% since 2008, besting the Natural sciences overall growth of 530%. While Warfare had far and away the most significant growth of GAs, it's a clear outlier relative to other categories.
WikiProject Birds gained a new task force. A discussion determined that WikiProject Poultry might be more successful as a task force, with the move completed 15 April.
Round 2 of the WikiCup wrapped up this month. Several editors moved on to Round 3 by scoring points in biodiversity-related areas, including Sainsf, Casliber, Dunkleosteus77, CaptainEek, Guettarda, and Enwebb. Dunkleosteus77 finished at the top of the Tree of Life pack with 608 points, finishing 9th overall in the round.
After a relatively quiet February and March, with only 11 total articles nominated for GA and none for FAC, April brought a shower of nominations. In total, 5 articles were nominated for FAC, 1 for FLC, and 11 for GA.
... that although the alpine bartsia has a wide range in Europe and North America, it is known in the British Isles only from a few locations in northern England and the central Scottish Highlands? (19 April)
... that the orange-band surgeonfish(pictured) can change colour from dark to light almost instantaneously? (21 April)
The Wikimedia Foundation announced that they will develop a universal code of conduct for all WMF projects. There is an open local discussion regarding the same.
Arbitration
A motion was passed to enact a 500/30 restriction on articles related to the history of Jews and antisemitism in Poland during World War II (1933–45), including the Holocaust in Poland. Article talk pages where disruption occurs may also be managed with the stated restriction.
This month saw two Tree of Life editors gain the mop: CaptainEek (WikiProjects Birds and Plants) and Cwmhiraeth (familiar name at DYK, WikiProjects Plants, Animals, and Insects)
The April – May GAN backlog drive finished up, clearing the queue from nearly 700 outstanding nominations to about 350.
Interview with Jts1882
This month we're joined by Jts1882, who is active in depicting evolutionary relationship of taxa via cladograms. Part of this includes responding to cladogram requests, where interested editors can have cladograms made without using the templates themselves.
How did you come to be interested in systematics? Are you interested in systematics broadly, or is there a particular group you're most fond of?
As long as I can remember I’ve been interested in nature, starting with the animals and plants in the garden, school grounds, and local wood, and then more general wildlife worldwide. An interest in how things are classified grew from this. I like things to be organised and understanding the relationships between things and systems (not just living things) is a big part of that. Biology was always my favourite subject in school and took up a disproportionate part of my time. My interest in systematics is broad as I’d like to comprehend the whole tree of life, but the cat family is my favourite group.
What's the background behind cladogram requests? I see that it isn't a very old part of the Tree of Life
Well I can’t take any credit for the cladogram requests page, although I help out there sometimes. It was created by IJReid and there are several people who have helped there more than me. I think the motivation is that creating cladograms requires a knowledge of the templates that is daunting for many editors. It was one way of helping people who want to focus on content creation.
My main contribution to the cladograms is converting the {{clade}} template to use a Lua module. The template code was extremely difficult to follow and had to be repetitive (I can only admire the efforts of those who got the thing to work in the first place). The conversion to Lua made it more efficient, allowed larger and deeper cladograms, plus facilitating the introduction of new features. The cladogram request page was recently the venue for discussion on making time calibrated cladograms, which is now possible, if not particularly user friendly.
What advice do you have for an editor who wants to learn how to make cladograms?
The same advice I would give to someone facing any computer problem, just try it out. Start by taking existing code for a cladogram and make changes yourself. The main advice would be to format it properly so indents match the brackets vertically. Of course, not everyone wants to learn and if someone prefers to focus on article content there is the cladogram request page.
Examples of cladograms Jts1882 has created, showing different proposed clades for Neoaves
Do you have any personal projects or goals you're working towards on Wikipedia?
As I said I like organisation and systems. So I find efforts like the automated taxobox system and {{taxonbar}} appealing. I would like to see more reuse of the major phylogenetic trees on Wikipedia with more use of consensus trees on the higher taxa. Too often they get edited based on one recent report and/or without proper citation. Animals and bilateria are examples where this is a problem.
Towards this I have been working on a system of phylogeny templates that can be reused flexibly. The {{Clade transclude}} template allows selective transclusion, so the phylogenetic trees on one page can be reused with modifications, i.e. can be pruned and grafted, used with or without images, with or without collapsible elements, etc. I have an example for the Angiosperm Phylogeny Group classification (see {{Phylogeny/APG IV}}) and one for squamates that also includes collapsible elements (see {{Phylogeny/Squamata}}).
A second project is to have a modular reference system for taxonomic resources. I have made some progress along this lines with the {{BioRef}} template. This started off simply as a way of hardlinking to Catalog of Fishes pages and I’ve gradually expanded it to cover other groups (e..g. FishBase, AmphibiaWeb and Amphibian Species of the World, Reptile Database, the Mammalian Diversity Database). The modular nature is still rudimentary and needs a rewrite before it is ready for wider use.
What would surprise your fellow editors to learn about your life off-Wikipedia?
I don’t think there is anything particularly surprising or interesting about my life. I’ve had an academic career as a research scientist but I don't think anyone could guess the area from my Wikipedia edits. I prefer to work on areas where I am learning at the same time. This why I spend more time with neglected topics (e.g. mosses at the moment). I start reading and then find that I’m not getting the information I want.
Anything else you'd like us to know?
My interest in the classification of things goes beyond biology. I am fascinated by mediaeval attempts to classify knowledge, such as Bacon in his The Advancement of Learning and Diderot and d’Alembert in their Encyclopédie. They were trying to come up with a universal scheme of knowledge just as the printing press was allowing greater dissemination of knowledge.
With the internet we are seeing a new revolution in knowledge dissemination. Just look at how we could read research papers on the COVID virus within weeks of its discovery. With an open internet, everyone has access, not just those with the luxury of books at home or good libraries. Sites like the Biodiversity Heritage Library allow you to read old scientific works without having to visit dusty university library stack rooms, while the taxonomic and checklist databases provide instant information on millions of living species. In principle, the whole world can now find out about anything, even if Douglas Adams warned we might be disinclined to do so.
This is why I like Wikipedia, with all its warts, it’s a means of organising the knowledge on the internet. In just two decades it’s become a first stop for knowledge and hopefully a gateway to more specialised sources. Perhaps developing this latter aspect, beyond providing good sources for what we say, is the next challenge for Wikipedia.
... that Tetraponera penzigi is one of several species of ant that protect whistling thorn trees in East Africa from grazing giraffes and rhinoceroses? (3 May)
... that the Vietnam mouse-deer, which had been feared to have gone extinct nearly 30years ago, was sighted again in 2019? (4 May)
... that most branchiobdellids use crayfish as hosts, living on their heads, carapaces, or claws, but in some instances inside their gill cavities? (5 May)
... that the northern plains gray langur monkey (example pictured) is killed in India for food and to prevent crop raiding, despite being considered sacred by Hindus? (12 May)
... that the leech Limnatis nilotica can affect humans and livestock, entering hosts through the mouth, nose, or other orifices? (12 May)
... that the tree Barteria fistulosa is associated with Tetraponera aethiops, an aggressive species of ant that lives in its hollow branches and twigs? (15 May)
... that Miller's langur, one of the rarest primates in Borneo, was feared to be extinct until a 2012 study rediscovered it in an area where it was previously unknown? (16 May)
... that most of the known Gigantopithecus fossils are of teeth because the other bones are likely to have been eaten by porcupines? (17 May)
... that Tetraponera tessmanni, a very aggressive ant, is able to establish dominance over the whole of the liana in which it lives, which may be 50m (164ft) long? (17 May)
... that the Arizona dampwood termite exclusively colonizes dead parts of standing trees? (22 May)
... that Megaceroides algericus is one of only two deer species known to have been native to Africa, alongside the Barbary stag? (23 May)
... that besides eating ants and termites, the waved woodpecker feeds on fruits, berries, and seeds? (24 May)
... that populations of the Canada lynx(pictured) undergo cyclic rises and falls in line with those of the snowshoe hare? (25 May)
... that despite being known as the Mexican hydrangea, Clerodendrum bungei is neither from Mexico nor a species of hydrangea? (25 May)
... that meerkats(examples pictured) use alarm calls that can identify the type of predator posing the risk, the level of danger, and the caller itself? (27 May)
... that the frog Boophis fayi can be identified by its unusual green-and-turquoise eyes? (30 May)
... that members of the fly family Apystomyiidae(example depicted) have been found in Late Jurassic sediments in Kazakhstan? (30 May)
... that the sun bear(pictured) is the smallest of all bear species? (31 May)
The Medicine case was closed, with a remedy authorizing standard discretionary sanctions for all discussions about pharmaceutical drug prices and pricing and for edits adding, changing, or removing pharmaceutical drug prices or pricing from articles.
The third round of the 2020 WikiCup has now come to an end. The 16 users who made it into the fourth round each had at least 353 points (compared to 68 in 2019). It was a highly competitive round, and a number of contestants were eliminated who would have moved on in earlier years. Our top scorers in round 3 were:
Epicgenius, with one featured article, 28 good articles and 17 DYKs, amassing 1836 points
The Rambling Man , with 1672 points gained from four featured articles and seventeen good articles, plus reviews of a large number of FACs and GAs
Gog the Mild, a first time contestant, with 1540 points, a tally built largely on 4 featured articles and related bonus points.
Between them, contestants managed 14 featured articles, 9 featured lists, 3 featured pictures, 152 good articles, 136 DYK entries, 55 ITN entries, 65 featured article candidate reviews and 221 good article reviews. Additionally, MPJ-DK added 3 items to featured topics and 44 to good topics. Over the course of the competition, contestants have completed 710 good article reviews, in comparison to 387 good articles submitted for review and promoted. These large numbers are probably linked to a GAN backlog drive in April and May, and the changed patterns of editing during the COVID-19 pandemic. As we enter the fourth round, remember that any content promoted after the end of round 3 but before the start of round 4 can be claimed in round 4. Please also remember that you must claim your points within 14 days of "earning" them. When doing GARs, please make sure that you check that all the GA criteria are fully met. Please also remember that all submissions must meet core Wikipedia policies, regardless of the review process.
This issue is a double issue, but the plan is to return to monthly henceforth.
A discussion at WikiProject Palaeontology about internal peer review processes led to the creation of a peer review space. In contrast to the more formal Peer Review, PalaeoPR focuses on short "fact checks", emphasizing content over style. Reviews are meant to be low commitment, with "drive-by reviews" encouraged. Since its inception on 8 July, seven articles have been submitted to PalaeoPR.
After a highly competitive third round, two Tree of Life editors advanced to the fourth round of the WikiCup: Dunkleosteus77 and Sainsf
A February 2020 paper published in PLOS noted that Mammalian Species is one of the most over-cited journals on Wikipedia relative to how frequently it is cited in other academic works.
Categorizing life with DexDor
DexDor is a WikiGnome with a particular interest in article categorization, including how organisms are categorized.
How did you become interested in editing biodiversity topics on Wikipedia?
I'm a wikignome who tries to remove unnecessary complexity and confusion in Wikipedia. I specialise in categorization. I've worked on categorization of several topic areas (e.g. military equipment) - anywhere where I see things like category tags on articles that the category text doesn't support. Categorization of organisms is one area I'm currently looking at (my essay on this).
You seem to be particularly interested in geographic categorization of organisms. What are some issues in this area?
One issue is that there are several possible relationships between an organism and a region (i.e. what the "of" in a "Xs of Y" means) - the organism may be found throughout the region, somewhere in the region, only in the region (i.e. endemic to that region) - there are categories for each of these (and others) and some categories have been unclear about their exact meaning. Then there's introductions by man, locally extinct species, occasional visitors...
Another issue is that some editors have thought it's appropriate to create categories for very small areas ("Spiders of Vatican City" is only a slight exaggeration) and put a few articles in them, thus creating a category that is both massively incomplete and non-defining for the articles in it.
There have been several (now blocked) editors who have been disruptive in this area, but a confusing and sprawling categorization scheme is also partly due to editors from a particular background categorizing a particular article in a way that appears to make sense, but doesn't really make sense in the wider categorization scheme - for example, if an article mentions the countries at the extremes of an animal's distribution, the animal is categorized just for those countries.
What potential solutions do you see for categorizing organisms by geography? How can other editors help address this issue, or at least, not make it worse?
We should have some guidelines that tell editors how to categorize any article about an organism (including any geographical categorization). I've started drafting guidelines at User:DexDor/BioCat. The guidelines are also a good way to ensure that the categorization of articles about organisms is aligned with categorization of other articles and may help us to identify where there are problems, inconsistencies etc in the categorization. I welcome suggestions for improvement of the guidelines (which should at some point be moved into WP:TOL).
Regarding geographical categorization of animals the main advice for editors would be to not create categories for any new areas and to only create a new category if you intend to populate it.
What have you learned from being a Wikipedia editor?
That lots of people (from varied backgrounds) each making (mostly) small improvements (like ants in an ants nest?) and only understanding some parts of Wikipedia can produce such a wonderful resource. But also, how that tends to result in ever-increasing complexity which negatively affects editors and readers.
Is there anything about your life outside Wikipedia that would surprise us?
... that despite being a member of the cat family, the jaguarundi has several features in common with mustelids such as otters and weasels? (2 June)
... that scientists were unsure whether the blue calamintha bee(pictured) still existed until it was observed again in March2020? (2 June)
... that many of the animals regarded as pests have co-evolved with humans, adapting to the warm, sheltered conditions that a building provides? (3 June)
... that the banteng is the second endangered species to be successfully cloned, and the first clone to survive beyond infancy? (5 June)
... that cattle and deer sometimes stand under trees where southern plains gray langurs are feeding in order to consume the edible pieces that the monkeys drop? (10 June)
... that when boiled in milk, black coral(example pictured) emits a faint scent of myrrh? (21 June)
... that one of the factors affecting the future of the Huanchaca mouse is the increased cultivation of biofuels? (22 June)
... that the Strawberries and Cream Tree(pictured) is noted for producing pink blossoms on one side of the tree and white on the other, when it blooms every spring? (23 June)
... that the Chilean seaside cinclodes bobs its tail while it walks and flares its wings while it sings? (24 June)
... that Boie's frog(pictured) and the Banhado frog both resemble dead leaves on the floor of the forest? (25 June)
... that Markham's storm petrel, which nests in Peru and northern Chile, has been described as "one of the least known seabirds in the world"? (7 July)
... that the frog Corythomantis greeningi retreats into a hole, blocks the entrance with its spiny head, and injects venom into anything that tries to dislodge it? (18 July)
... that the reef box crab uses its powerful pincers to break open the shells of snails? (21 July)
... that the genus Pterodactylus(species depicted), the scientific name for a pterodactyl, had been considered a "wastebasket taxon" as many species were assigned to it and later reassigned? (23 July)
... that the sea urchin Abatus cordatus broods its young for nine months in pockets on its upper surface? (24 July)
... that Harold Clyde Bingham trailed a troop of gorillas for 100hours in 1929? (25 July)
@CAPTAIN RAJU: Thank you! Sixteen years feels like a lifetime. Guettarda (talk) 13:21, 26 August 2020 (UTC)
The fourth round of the competition has finished, with 865 points being required to qualify for the final round, nearly twice as many points as last year. It was a hotly competitive round with two contestants with 598 and 605 points being eliminated, and all but two of the contestants who reached the final round having achieved an FA during the round. The highest scorers were
Bloom6132, with 1478 points gained mainly from 5 featured lists, 12 DYKs and 63 in the news items;
HaEr48 with 1318 points gained mainly from 2 featured articles, 5 good articles and 8 DYKs;
Lee Vilenski with 1201 points mainly gained from 2 featured articles and 10 good articles.
Between them, contestants achieved 14 featured articles, 14 featured lists, 2 featured pictures, 87 good articles, 90 DYK entries, 75 ITN entries, 95 featured article candidate reviews and 81 good article reviews. Congratulations to all who participated! It was a generally high-scoring and productive round and I think we can expect a highly competitive finish to the competition.
Remember that any content promoted after the end of round 4 but before the start of round 5 can be claimed in round 5. Remember too that you must claim your points within 10 days of "earning" them. If you are concerned that your nomination will not receive the necessary reviews, please list it on Wikipedia:WikiCup/Reviews. It would be helpful if this list could be cleared of any items no longer relevant. If you want to help out with the WikiCup, please do your bit to keep down the review backlogs! Questions are welcome on Wikipedia talk:WikiCup, and the judges are reachable on their talk pages or by email. If you wish to start or stop receiving this newsletter, please feel free to add or remove yourself from Wikipedia:WikiCup/Newsletter/Send. Godot13 (talk), Sturmvogel 66 (talk), Vanamonde (talk), Cwmhiraeth (talk) MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 19:52, 1 September 2020 (UTC)
On August 7, WikiProject Palaeontology member Rextron discovered a suspicious taxon article, Mustelodon, which was created in November 2005. The article lacked references and the subsequent discussion on WikiProject Palaeontology found that the alleged type locality (where the fossil was first discovered) of Lago Nandarajo "near the northern border of Panama" was nonexistent. In fact, Panama does not even really have a northern border, as it is bounded along the north by the Caribbean Sea. No other publications or databases mentioned Mustelodon, save a fleeting mention in a 2019 book that presumably followed Wikipedia, Felines of the World.
The article also appeared in four other languages, Catalan, Spanish, Dutch, and Serbian. In Serbian Wikipedia, a note at the bottom of the page warned: "It is important to note here that there is no data on this genus in the official scientific literature, and all attached data on the genus Mustelodon on this page are taken from the English Wikipedia and are the only known data on this genus of mammals, so the validity of this genus is questionable."
Editors took action to alert our counterparts on other projects, and these versions were removed also. As the editor who reached out to Spanish and Catalan Wikipedia, it was somewhat challenging to navigate these mostly foreign languages (I have a limited grasp of Spanish). I doubted that the article had very many watchers, so I knew I had to find some WikiProjects where I could post a machine translation advising of the hoax, and asking that users follow local protocols to remove the article. I was surprised to find, however, that Catalan Wikipedia does not tag articles for WikiProjects on talk pages, meaning I had to fumble around to find what I needed (turns out that WikiProjects are Viquiprojectes in Catalan!) Mustelodon remains on Wikidata, where its "instance of" property was swapped from "taxon" to "fictional taxon".
How did this article have such a long lifespan? Early intervention is critical for removing hoaxes. A 2016 report found that a hoax article that survives its first day has an 18% chance of lasting a year.[1] Additionally, hoax articles tend to have longer lifespans if they are in inconspicuous parts of Wikipedia, where they do not receive many views. Mustelodon was only viewed a couple times a day, on average.
Mustelodon survived a brush with death three years into its lifespan. The article was proposed for deletion in September 2008, with a deletion rationale of "No references given; cannot find any evidence in peer-reviewed journals that this alleged genus actually exists". Unfortunately, the proposed deletion was contested and the template removed, though the declining editor did not give a rationale. Upon its rediscovery in August 2020, Mustelodon was tagged for speedy deletion under CSD G3 as a "blatant hoax". This was challenged, and an Articles for Deletion discussion followed. On 12 August, the AfD was closed as a SNOW delete. WikiProject Palaeontology members ensured that any trace of it was scrubbed from legitimate articles. The fictional mammal was finally, truly extinct.
At the ripe old age of 14 years, 9 months, this is the longest-lived documented hoax on Wikipedia, topping the previous documented record of 14 years, 5 months, set by The Gates of Saturn, a fictitious television show, which was incidentally also discovered in August 2020. How do we discover other hoax taxa? Could we use Wikidata to discover taxa are not linked to databases like ITIS, Fossilworks, and others?
Apororhynchus hemignathi, a spiny-headed worm with the distinction of being one of the first named animal taxa when organized alphabetically
This month's spotlight is with Mattximus, author of two Featured Articles and 29 Featured Lists at current count.
How did you become involved with editing biodiversity articles?
I think I have a compulsion to make lists, it doesn't show up in my real life, but online I secretly get a lot of satisfaction making orderly lists and tables. It's a bit of a secret of mine, because it doesn't manifest in any other part of my life. My background is in biology, so this was a natural (haha) fit.
You have an impressive number of FAs under your belt. Two of your more recent ones, Apororhynchus and Gigantorhynchus, are part of what you referred to as an "experiment". How did you choose these articles, and what's next for you in this experiment?
This experiment was just to see if I could get any random article to FA status, so I picked the very first alphabetical animal species according to the taxonomy and made that attempt. Technically, there isn't enough information for a species page so I just merged the species into a genus and went from there. It was a fun exercise, but doing it alone is not the most fun so it's probably on pause for the foreseeable future.
Note: Aporhynchus is the first alphabetical taxon as follows: Animalia, Acanthocephala, Archiacanthocephala, Apororhynchida, Apororhynchidae, Apororhynchus
What advice would you give to someone who wants to nominate their first FAC?
I would recommend getting a good article nominated, then a featured list up before tackling the FA. Lists are a bit more forgiving but give you a taste of what standards to expect from FA. The most time consuming thing is proper citations so make sure that is in order before starting either.
Is there anything that would surprise us to learn about your life off-Wikipedia?
My personality in real life does not match my wikipedia persona. I'm not a very organized, or orderly in real life, but the wikipedia pages I brought to FL or FA are all very organized. Maybe it's my outlet for a more free-flowing life as a scientist/teacher.
Anything else you'd like us to know?
The fact that wikipedia exists free of profit motive and free for everyone really is something special and I encourage everyone to donate a few dollars to the cause.
... that the flower buds of the woolly thistle(pictured) can be eaten in a similar way to artichokes? (8 August)
... that the French peanut is native to Brazil? (10 August)
... that the 800-year-old Minchenden Oak is one of the oldest trees in London? (14 August)
... that the forward-facing incisors of the extinct dolphin Ankylorhiza(restoration pictured) may have been used for ramming their prey, similar to a hunting method used by modern orcas? (16 August)
... that scientists accidentally created a hybrid of two endangered fish species, called the sturddlefish? (17 August)
... that despite having the widest distribution in the United States, the arid-land subterranean termite causes less structural damage than other members of its genus? (19 August)
... that in 2021, the dwarf periodical cicada(pictured) is due to emerge in parts of eastern North America, not having been seen for 17 years? (24 August)
Join us in this exciting venture, by helping to create or expand contents in Wikimedia projects which are connected to this scope. Kindly list your username under the participants section to indicate your interest in participating in this contest.
We would be awarding prizes to different categories of winners:
Overall winner
1st - $500
2nd - $200
3rd - $100
Diversity winner - $100
Gender-gap fillers - $100
Language Winners - up to $100*
We would be adding additional categories as the contest progresses, along with local prizes from affiliates in your countries. For further information about the contest, the prizes and how to participate, please visit the contest page here. For further inquiries, please leave comments on the contest talkpage or on the main project talkpage. Looking forward to your participation.--Jamie Tubers (talk) 19:22, 22nd September 2020 (UTC)
Ýou can opt-out of this annual reminder from The Afrocine Project by removing your username from this list
Sysops will once again be able to view the deleted history of JS/CSS pages; this was restricted to interface administrators when that group was introduced.
Twinkle's block module now includes the ability to note the specific case when applying a discretionary sanctions block and/or template.
The 2020 WikiCup has come to an end, with the final round going down to the wire. Our new Champion is Lee Vilenski (submissions), the runner-up last year, who was closely followed by Gog the Mild (submissions). In the final round, Lee achieved 4 FAs and 30 GAs, mostly on cue sport topics, while Gog achieved 3 FAs and 15 GAs, mostly on important battles and wars, which earned him a high number of bonus points. The Rambling Man (submissions) was in third place with 4 FAs and 8 GAs on football topics, with Epicgenius (submissions) close behind with 19 GAs and 16 DYK's, his interest being the buildings of New York.
The other finalists were Hog Farm (submissions), HaEr48 (submissions), Harrias (submissions) and Bloom6132 (submissions). The final round was very productive, and besides 15 FAs, contestants achieved 75 FAC reviews, 88 GAs and 108 GAN reviews. Altogether, Wikipedia has benefited greatly from the activities of WikiCup competitors all through the contest. Well done everyone!
All those who reached the final will receive awards and the following special awards will be made, based on high performance in particular areas of content creation. So that the finalists do not have an undue advantage, these prizes are awarded to the competitor who scored the highest in any particular field in a single round, or in the event of a tie, to the overall leader in this field.
Gog the Mild (submissions) wins the featured article prize, for a total of 14 FAs during the course of the competition.
Lee Vilenski (submissions) wins the featured article reviewer prize, for 23 FAC reviews in round 5.
Epicgenius (submissions) wins the good article prize, for 45 GAs in round 2 and 113 overall.
MPJ-DK (submissions) wins the topic prize, for 33 articles in good topics in round 2.
The Rambling Man (submissions) wins the good article reviewer prize, for 100 good article reviews in round 2.
Epicgenius (submissions) wins the DYK prize, for 22 Did you know articles in round 4 and 94 overall.
Bloom6132 (submissions) wins the ITN prize, for 63 In the news articles in round 4 and 136 overall.
Next year's competition will begin on 1 January. You are invited to sign up to participate; the WikiCup is open to all Wikipedians, both novices and experienced editors, and we hope to see you all in the 2021 competition. Until then, it only remains to once again congratulate our worthy winners, and thank all participants for their involvement! If you wish to start or stop receiving this newsletter, please feel free to add or remove yourself from Wikipedia:WikiCup/Newsletter/Send. Godot13, Sturmvogel 66, Vanamonde and CwmhiraethMediaWiki message delivery (talk) 11:37, 3 November 2020 (UTC)
On 7 November 2020, Did you know was updated with a fact from the article James Biggart, which you recently created, substantially expanded, or brought to good article status. The fact was ... that James Biggart's election to the Legislative Council of Trinidad and Tobago was viewed by Tobagonian planters as lowering their social standing, because it meant that they were represented by a person of African descent? The nomination discussion and review may be seen at Template:Did you know nominations/James Biggart. You are welcome to check how many page hits the article got while on the front page (here's how, James Biggart), and it may be added to the statistics page if the total is over 5,000. Finally, if you know of an interesting fact from another recently created article, then please feel free to suggest it on the Did you know talk page.
Thank you very much for participating in the Months of African Cinema global contest/edit-a-thon, and thank you for your contributions so far.
It is already the middle of the contest and a lot have been achieved already! We have been able to get over 1,500 articles created in over fifteen (15) languages! This would not have been possible without your support and we want to thank you. If you have not yet listed your name as a participant in the contest page please do so.
Please make sure to list the articles you have created or improved in the article achievements' section of the contest page, so that they can be easily tracked. To be able to claim prizes, please also ensure to list your articles on the users by articles page. We would be awarding prizes to different categories of winners:
Overall winner
1st - $500
2nd - $200
3rd - $100
Diversity winner - $100
Gender-gap filler - $100
Language Winners - up to $100*
We are very excited about what has been achieved so far, but your contributions are still needed to further exceed all expectations! Let’s create more articles before the end of this contest, which is this November!!!
Thank you once again for being part of this global event! --Jamie Tubers (talk) 10:30, 06 November 2020 (UTC)
You can opt-out of this annual reminder from The Afrocine Project by removing your username from this list
Please see note on your DYK review. Yoninah (talk) 17:09, 14 November 2020 (UTC)
Hello! Voting in the 2020 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23:59 (UTC) on Monday, 7 December 2020. All eligible users are allowed to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once.
The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail.
If you wish to participate in the 2020 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. If you no longer wish to receive these messages, you may add {{NoACEMM}} to your user talk page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 01:18, 24 November 2020 (UTC)
Voting for proposals in the 2021 Community Wishlist Survey, which determines what software the Wikimedia Foundation's Community Tech team will work on next year, will take place from 8 December through 21 December. In particular, there are sections regarding administrators and anti-harassment.
The memorial link on your user page is broken; apparently the newspaper rearranged their website. I think this is the same sad story. I saved it at the Wayback Machine if you'd prefer to use that. I'm sorry you lost them. Take care, BlackcurrantTea (talk) 11:34, 10 December 2020 (UTC)
Hello Guettarda, may you be surrounded by peace, success and happiness on this seasonal occasion. Spread the WikiLove by wishing another user a Merry Christmas and a Happy New Year, whether it be someone you have had disagreements with in the past, a good friend, or just some random person. Sending you heartfelt and warm greetings for Christmas and New Year 2021. Happy editing, ReaderofthePack(formerly Tokyogirl79) (。◕‿◕。) 03:32, 11 December 2020 (UTC)
Hello Guettarda, may you be surrounded by peace, success and happiness on this seasonal occasion. Spread the WikiLove by wishing another user a Merry Christmas and a Happy New Year, whether it be someone you have had disagreements with in the past, a good friend, or just some random person. Sending you heartfelt and warm greetings for Christmas and New Year 2021. Happy editing, ReaderofthePack(formerly Tokyogirl79) (。◕‿◕。) 04:04, 24 December 2020 (UTC)
Thank you so much ReaderofthePack. I miss working with you! Wishing you the best for the new year! Guettarda (talk) 17:12, 15 January 2021 (UTC)
Whether due to climate change or global warming, the good folk of Inverclyde have had to knit their own snow this year.
Wishing you and yours merry festivities, and a happy and healthy New Year! dave souza, talk 20:32, 24 December 2020 (UTC)
Thanks dave souza, and all the best for the New Year to you. I hope things are well with you! Guettarda (talk) 17:09, 15 January 2021 (UTC)
Happy New Year and Happy New WikiCup! The competition begins today and all article creators, expanders, improvers and reviewers are welcome to take part. If you have already signed up, your submissions page can be found here. If you have not yet signed up, you can add your name here and the judges will set up your submissions page. Any questions on the rules or on anything else should be directed to one of the judges, or posted to the WikiCup talk page. Signups will close at the end of January, and the first round will end on 26 February; the 64 highest scorers at that time will move on to round 2. We thank Vanamonde93 and Godot13, who have retired as judges, and we thank them for their past dedication. The judges for the WikiCup this year are Sturmvogel66(talk·contribs·email) and Cwmhiraeth(talk·contribs·email). Good luck! MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 11:11, 1 January 2021 (UTC)
Hello! Your submission of M. P. Alladin at the Did You Know nominations page has been reviewed, and some issues with it may need to be clarified. Please review the comment(s) at your nomination's entry and respond there as soon as possible. Thank you for contributing to Did You Know! Yoninah (talk) 13:35, 1 January 2021 (UTC)
By motion, standard discretionary sanctions have been temporarily authorizedfor all pages relating to the Horn of Africa (defined as including Ethiopia, Somalia, Eritrea, Djibouti, and adjoining areas if involved in related disputes). The effectiveness of the discretionary sanctions can be evaluated on the request by any editor after March 1, 2021 (or sooner if for a good reason).
On 14 January 2021, Did you know was updated with a fact from the article M. P. Alladin, which you recently created, substantially expanded, or brought to good article status. The fact was ... that M. P. Alladin depicted rural Indo-Trinidadian life in his art, and has been credited with giving "a new dignity" to the subject? The nomination discussion and review may be seen at Template:Did you know nominations/M. P. Alladin. You are welcome to check how many pageviews the nominated article or articles got while on the front page (here's how, M. P. Alladin), and if they received a combined total of at least 416.7 views per hour (ie, 5,000 views in 12 hours or 10,000 in 24), the hook may be added to the statistics page. Finally, if you know of an interesting fact from another recently created article, then please feel free to suggest it on the Did you know talk page.
Gerda Arendt, Yoninah and Narutolovehinata5 - thank you so much for saving this nom. Things happened in real life and I never checked back on it. I really appreciate all you've done. Thank you! Guettarda (talk) 17:09, 15 January 2021 (UTC)
Thank you, and best wished for real life. - Happy Wikipedia 20, - proud of a little bit on the Main page today, and 5 years ago, and 10 years ago, look: create a new style - revive - complete! I sang in the revival mentioned. --Gerda Arendt (talk) 17:12, 15 January 2021 (UTC)
On 24 February 2021, Did you know was updated with a fact from the article The Jumbie Bird, which you recently created, substantially expanded, or brought to good article status. The fact was ... that Ismith Khan's novel The Jumbie Bird explores the transformation of immigrants from India into Indo-Trinidadians? The nomination discussion and review may be seen at Template:Did you know nominations/The Jumbie Bird. You are welcome to check how many pageviews the nominated article or articles got while on the front page (here's how, The Jumbie Bird), and if they received a combined total of at least 416.7 views per hour (ie, 5,000 views in 12 hours or 10,000 in 24), the hook may be added to the statistics page. Finally, if you know of an interesting fact from another recently created article, then please feel free to suggest it on the Did you know talk page.
Guettarda, the article should not be called "Black Carib". The change is already discussed and, scientifically, the name "Garifuna (Saint Vincent)" is more appropriate. Please read the discussion and stop reversing my changes. The name "Black Carib" is no longer an appropriate name for the article. Not at present. The name "Garifuna (Saint Vincent)" is one of several options mentioned in the discussion for naming the article. --Isinbill (talk) 19:33, 27 February 2021 (UTC)
Thanks for linking to the discussion but (a) the discussion has not run two days, far less two weeks and has not been closed, and (b) it still isn't ok to keep moving a page without discussion. Guettarda (talk) 00:19, 28 February 2021 (UTC)
A request for comment is open that proposes a process for the community to revoke administrative permissions. This follows a 2019 RfC in favor of creating one such a policy.
A request for comment is in progress to remove F7 (invalid fair-use claim) subcriterion a, which covers immediate deletion of non-free media with invalid fair-use tags.
A request for comment asks if sysops may place the General sanctions/Coronavirus disease 2019 editnotice template on pages in scope that do not have page-specific sanctions?
When blocking an IPv6 address with Twinkle, there is now a checkbox with the option to just block the /64 range. When doing so, you can still leave a block template on the initial, single IP address' talkpage.
When protecting a page with Twinkle, you can now add a note if doing so was in response to a request at WP:RfPP, and even link to the specific revision.
By motion, the discretionary sanctions originally authorized under the GamerGate case are now authorized under a new Gender and sexuality case, with sanctions authorized for all edits about, and all pages related to, any gender-related dispute or controversy and associated people. Sanctions issued under GamerGate are now considered Gender and sexuality sanctions.
Round 1 of the competition has finished; it was a high-scoring round with 21 contestants scoring more than 100 points. Everyone with a positive score moves on to Round 2, with 55 contestants qualifying. You will need to finish among the top thirty-two contestants in Round 2 if you are to qualify for Round 3. Our top scorers in Round 1 were:
Epicgenius led the field with a featured article, nine good articles and an assortment of other submissions, specialising on buildings and locations in New York, for a total of 945 points.
Bloom6132 was close behind with 896 points, largely gained from 71 "In the news" items, mostly recent deaths.
ImaginesTigers, who has been editing Wikipedia for less than a year, was in third place with 711 points, much helped by bringing League of Legends to featured article status, exemplifying how bonus points can boost a contestant's score.
Amakuru came next with 708 points, Kigali being another featured article that scored maximum bonus points.
Ktin, new to the WikiCup, was in fifth place with 523 points, garnered from 15 DYKs and 34 "In the news" items.
The Rambling Man scored 511 points, many from featured article candidate reviews and from football related DYKs.
Gog the Mild, last year's runner-up, came next with 498 points, from a featured article and numerous featured article candidate reviews.
Hog Farm, at 452, scored for a featured article, four good articles and a number of reviews.
Le Panini, another newcomer to the WikiCup, scored 438 for a featured article and three good articles.
Lee Vilenski, last year's champion, scored 332 points, from a featured article and various other sport-related topics.
These contestants, like all the others, now have to start again from scratch. In Round 1, contestants achieved eight featured articles, three featured lists and one featured picture, as well as around two hundred DYKs and twenty-seven ITNs. They completed 97 good article reviews, nearly double the 52 good articles they claimed. Contestants also claimed for 135 featured article and featured list candidate reviews. There is no longer a requirement to mention your WikiCup participation when undertaking these reviews.
Remember that any content promoted after the end of Round 1 but before the start of Round 2 can be claimed in Round 2. Invitations for collaborative writing efforts or any other discussion of potentially interesting work is always welcome on the WikiCup talk page. Remember, if two or more WikiCup competitors have done significant work on an article, all can claim points. If you are concerned that your nomination—whether it is a good article candidate, a featured process, or something else—will not receive the necessary reviews, please list it on Wikipedia:WikiCup/Reviews.
Thanks for uploading File:Rudranath Capildeo.jpg. I noticed that this file is being used under a claim of fair use. However, I think that the way it is being used fails the first non-free content criterion. This criterion states that files used under claims of fair use may have no free equivalent; in other words, if the file could be adequately covered by a freely-licensed file or by text alone, then it may not be used on Wikipedia. If you believe this file is not replaceable, please:
Go to the file description page and add the text {{Di-replaceable fair use disputed|<your reason>}}below the original replaceable fair use template, replacing <your reason> with a short explanation of why the file is not replaceable.
On the file discussion page, write a full explanation of why you believe the file is not replaceable.
If you have uploaded other non-free media, consider checking that you have specified how these media fully satisfy our non-free content criteria. You can find a list of description pages you have edited by clicking on this link. Note that even if you follow steps 1 and 2 above, non-free media which could be replaced by freely licensed alternatives will be deleted 2 days after this notification (7 days if uploaded before 13 July 2006), per the non-free content policy. If you have any questions, please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you. -- Marchjuly (talk) 08:14, 5 March 2021 (UTC)
Hi - I saw your message on my page about Miranda Veljačić article and I understand your fear, but this bio paragraph was submitted by Miranda Veljačić to multiple different events as short bio and is in no way copyrihted by that particular event. It was ill informed to think that short biographic info can be copyrighted - in Croatia for sure now. I also modified text into more generalized encyclopedit text direction. Would you mind reverting deletion, so I can continue doing this? Thank you! -- Zblace (talk) 18:46, 15 March 2021 (UTC)
@Zblace: Under US law, which applies because Wikipedia's servers are in the US - copyright applies at the moment of creation. So the person who created the biography owns the copyright, and it can't be used in Wikipedia without an explicit release. In addition, modifying the text a little still constitutes a copyright infringement - see Wikipedia:Close paraphrasing. If you'd like a second opinion on the Miranda Veljačić article, I'd recommend asking Diannaa or Sphilbrick who both do a lot of work in this area. Guettarda (talk) 19:44, 15 March 2021 (UTC)
@Guettarda: I am informed of how rigid and inadequate USA law is when applied to regular practice, but maybe you can put article into Draft: namespace and remove that part of the text that is copyrighted and I can write in substitute? --Zblace (talk) 20:43, 15 March 2021 (UTC)
On 25 March 2021, Did you know was updated with a fact from the article Port of Spain Gazette, which you recently created, substantially expanded, or brought to good article status. The fact was ... that the Port of Spain Gazette was known for its strongly pro-slavery position in the 1830s, and it was said that it "spat its venom on anyone who spoke of the virtues of emancipation"? The nomination discussion and review may be seen at Template:Did you know nominations/Port of Spain Gazette. You are welcome to check how many pageviews the nominated article or articles got while on the front page (here's how, Port of Spain Gazette), and if they received a combined total of at least 416.7 views per hour (ie, 5,000 views in 12 hours or 10,000 in 24), the hook may be added to the statistics page. Finally, if you know of an interesting fact from another recently created article, then please feel free to suggest it on the Did you know talk page.