User talk:Smith609/Archive 1

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

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.

Contents 1 Dole Effect 2 Vendian Info Query 3 Jura 4 Ediacara Biota 5 Ediacaran biota 6 Coral GA 7 Speedy Delete Tag placed on Ediacaran biota 8 Template 9 Template 10 DYK 11 Thank you 12 DYK 13 Snowball Earth 14 Dropstone 15 Image from Nature 16 Geology 17 Orphaned fair use image (Image:Dropstone cropped.jpg) 18 Evolution 19 DYK 20 Namacalathus picture 21 Can you clarify a couple of points? 22 Query 23 Minoan eruption 24 GAC backlog elimination drive 25 Re: Key (company) 26 Failed GA Nom- Heinrich event 27 Ediacaran classification 28 Oil shale 29 Evolution FAC 30 Plant defense against herbivory 31 Ediacaran biota 32 Now For Something Different 33 Timeline 34 Articles you might like to edit, from SuggestBot 35 Ediacaran biota 36 The Pit and the Pendulum (1961 film)

Dole Effect

It's always nice while out on New Page Patrol to come across a new article which is intelligent and well thought out, so very well done. Please consider having a look at Wikipedia:categorization and pick the appropriate category so that this page can be viewed on the encyclopedia's indices. A1octopus 18:33, 8 March 2007 (UTC)

Vendian Info Query

Do you happen to have any information for Praecambridium, Vendia or Onega?--Mr Fink 17:34, 12 March 2007 (UTC)

I was just wondering, as I've been trying to find more information to spruce up the articles Wikipedia has on them so far.--Mr Fink 17:49, 12 March 2007 (UTC)

Jura

Hi there - re your recent edit to Jura, Scotland, I can't access the on-line reference and I am not sure what you meant in the first clause. "The deer prevent the island from tumbling back down to woodland". This is an unusual use of 'tumbling' - is it intended to have the sense: "The deer prevent the re-growth of woodland"? Ben MacDui (Talk) 12:29, 24 March 2007 (UTC)

---

I use the word tumbling in the 'ecological succession' sense of 'Tumbling down to woodland' championed by Oliver Rackham; I agree it's probably not my best worded edit! I hadn't realised the online reference demanded a log-in; I'll see if I can cite it properly. I could probably send you the scanned page if you're interested - I'm not sure of the copyright implications of posting that on Wikipedia! Whilst the publication is from over 100 years ago, its marked © of Glasgow & Edinburgh Universities...

Verisimilus 12:43, 24 March 2007 (UTC)

Ediacara Biota

I'll get right on it. I have a picture done of the Ediacaran-type, I might redraw that, though, as well as do some more of the Nama and Avalon types.--Mr Fink 14:51, 8 April 2007 (UTC)

Also, do you have any information on Vendoconularia, especially if it was a member of the Ediacaran-type fauna? The only information I have on it was that it had a long, six-sided shell, and that it was found in the White Sea.--Mr Fink 16:34, 8 April 2007 (UTC)

I read the proposed "Did you Know" for Ediacara Biota and it grabbed me (I didn't know anything about them!); too bad that the article was already too developed for a DYK. I wonder if it could be a GA or even FA instead? --Myke Cuthbert 06:27, 15 April 2007 (UTC)

Ediacaran biota

Excellent work. Love the references, though it doesn't meet the DYK criteria (12.4 KB isn't usually considered a stub and it's three- to four-fold increase, not a five-fold increase in size). After Wikipedia:Peer review/Ediacaran biota, you might want to consider nominating it as a good and then eventually as a featured article. (I'd recommend doing it slowly... while the content is excellent, it would be torn to shreds in FA; it needs a significant amount of copyediting and wikification to meet their standards — things like ref format, date format, stronger lead, use of exclamation points, too many short sentences, etc). I'll try to help.

I also recommend requesting that your work page and the article itself be merged; retaining the full history is valuable.

I can sympathize. Working out the formatting was driving me crazy for a bit at Benjamin Franklin Mudge. The current solution is a vast improvement over a couple year ago when we didn't have the <ref> tags, but it's still imperfect. The full inline citations make editing a pain, and the alternative (short Harvard-like notes followed by the full citations/templates in a separate reference section, which I used over at BFM), doesn't show the full ref automatically and increases the amount of screen real estate the section(s) take up (and multiple columns only work in Firefox at the moment). | Pat | 19:25, 10 April 2007 (UTC)

This article is a pleasure to read, Verisimilus. I'd recommend it for a Featured Article, except that the vetting process might sour you on Wikipedia. Good editing is its own reward: consider this a Barnstar. --Wetman 00:46, 23 May 2007 (UTC)

Coral GA

Hi Versimilus, thanks for your comments on Coral. I think I have addressed the points you have raised, so when you get a chance I would much appreciate you taking another look. Thanks, |→ Spaully^₪† 17:15, 10 April 2007 (GMT)

Thanks for the comment again. I have trimmed a very little bit more from the lead, and TimVickers has changed the grammar somewhat. I am not keen on removing more info as I think it would start to lose value as a summary of the article.

The 'however' usage is something I'm guilty of often, but as is the way I don't usually notice it. When you do get the chance to look perhaps this is something you could look out for as fresh eyes and a clearer sense of grammar would be good. |→ Spaully^₪† 22:02, 10 April 2007 (GMT)

Just a quick note to let you know I've made a new image which has no problems on this front. Let me know any further comments when you can. |→ Spaully^₪† 17:37, 11 April 2007 (GMT)

The 'sandwiching' issue is now dealt with. When you get back please do take a look. |→ Spaully^₪† 10:57, 15 April 2007 (GMT)

Speedy Delete Tag placed on Ediacaran biota

Please go to the article Edicara to note that there is a request suggestion of Speedy Delete placed on that article in relation (it seems to a user name sub-page you have created). Could you please check the content on that sub-page etc--VS ^talk 22:12, 11 April 2007 (UTC)

• Well actually I suggest you blank the page you used as a sandbox and then let me know immediately and I will put a different speedy tag on it for you...--VS ^talk 22:23, 11 April 2007 (UTC)
• Sorry to be clearer - this page User:Verisimilus/Ediacara looks like a page that you used just as a sandbox to create the article - it looks like you were the only editor - if so then you can delete the content as it is all up on the actual Ediacaran biota. Once you do we can delete the sandbox page. Cheers!--VS ^talk 22:29, 11 April 2007 (UTC)

Thank you - I'll make a direct request on your behalf. Enjoy your editing!--VS ^talk 22:32, 11 April 2007 (UTC)

No that is correct - your edit history will be moved.--VS ^talk 22:34, 11 April 2007 (UTC)

Template

Unfortunately I cannot discover a way read a queries tacked on to the end of a URL using wiki software. I've figured out how to dynamically make the links but extracting the query from the URL appears to not be feasible .. which presents quite a problem for you. I cannot think of a feasible solution. My assumption is that you want to make links that reference a certain time in history, and when one clicks on the link, they are taken to a page showing where they are in the geological timeline? The only proposal I can come up with is to create the template so that when someone writes it in coding, they use the specific number, but the template itself rounds that number for linking. That way you can create like one for 100 million years.. 200 million years... etc. If you want to do that, I can help you. Otherwise, I'd suggest bringing this up at the Village Pump. Best of luck. -- drumguy8800 C T 04:20, 12 April 2007 (UTC)

Template

Just use Template:Ma/599.9 Comperr 00:33, 13 April 2007 (UTC)

Yeah but only for 599.9 million years ago. Trying to go to Template:Ma/599.2 for example will give you nothing. You'll still have to create a page for every single year interval. -- drumguy8800 C T 05:50, 13 April 2007 (UTC)

DYK

On 16 April 2007, Did you know? was updated with a fact from the article Ediacaran biota, 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 11:48, 16 April 2007 (UTC)

And a brilliant rewrite, too! --Wetman 16:54, 16 April 2007 (UTC)

Thank you

I appreciate the nomination of Data sharing (Science) to the DYK section of the Main Page. RonCram 02:08, 25 April 2007 (UTC)

DYK

Did you know? was updated. On 25 April 2007, a fact from the article Data sharing, which you recently nominated, has been featured in that section on the Main Page. If you know of another interesting fact from a recently created article, then please suggest it on the "Did you know?" talk page.

--ALoan (Talk) 13:21, 25 April 2007 (UTC)

Snowball Earth

Yes, that was me offering to turn it into a Good article, possibly even a featured article. I'll take a look at the criteria you've gien for how to make it so, and i'll get to work with it. :) RingtailedFox • Talk • Stalk 17:45, 27 April 2007 (UTC)

Hi Verisimilus, thanks for your recent activity on the Snowball Earth article. I'd be happy to help out where I can. See you there... --Zamphuor 01:50, 29 April 2007 (UTC)

Hello, Verisimilus. Right at the moment I don’t feel I have much to contribute to Snowball earth. However, I’ll keep my eyes open, and if I run across anything I think might be of value to the article I'll be sure to drop by talk with it. I very much appreciate your asking though. Delta x 16:06, 3 May 2007 (UTC)

Dropstone

On 1 May 2007, Did you know? was updated with a fact from the article Dropstone, 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.

--howcheng {chat} 21:04, 1 May 2007 (UTC)

Image from Nature

Wikipedia does not use images that are only licensed for educational, non-commercial, or Wikipedia only. For purposes of Wikipedia, "free" means that the copyright holder explicitly releases the image under a license that permits anyone to use the image for any purpose, including commercial reuse and derivative works. See The foundation's resolution on images and http://freedomdefined.org/Definition for more information.

If you have an interest in pursuing it, Wikipedia:Requesting copyright permission discusses how to request a copyright release from the copyright holder, but to be perfectly honest, I don't know that there is much chance of a major entity like Nature magazine being willing to do so. --BigDT 15:14, 5 May 2007 (UTC)

Geology

Thanks for the assessment of geology articles. That kind of spam in my watch list was a pleasant one. Solarapex 03:38, 10 May 2007 (UTC)

Orphaned fair use image (Image:Dropstone cropped.jpg)

Thanks for uploading Image:Dropstone cropped.jpg. The image description page currently specifies that the image is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, the image is currently orphaned, meaning that it is not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the image 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 images for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable under fair use (see our fair use policy).

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 any fair use images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. BetacommandBot 20:46, 10 May 2007 (UTC)

Evolution

Hi there, Verisimilus. I'm trying to get this page back up to FA standard again. Any suggestions or comments at Wikipedia:Peer review/Evolution/archive1 would be very welcome. Thanks! TimVickers 03:38, 13 May 2007 (UTC)

Thanks for all your comments, your suggestions have greatly improved the article. TimVickers 23:28, 13 May 2007 (UTC)

DYK

On 14 May 2007, Did you know? was updated with a fact from the article 100,000-year problem, 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.

--BigHaz - Schreit mich an 06:01, 14 May 2007 (UTC)

Namacalathus picture

My picture is a hand drawn line drawing, that I will have to scan. I will put in an effort to do it, but it will be at least a week away from happening!

GB 06:52, 14 May 2007 (UTC)

I still haven't scanned the image yet. I think we need a picture for Cloudina as well!GB 03:18, 5 June 2007 (UTC)

Can you clarify a couple of points?

On Othnielosaurus, I don't know of any spelling errors, and the references are supposed to be superscript; we're using the ref templates, after all. J. Spencer 19:25, 18 May 2007 (UTC)

Thank you! I found the sentence at the same time, so between the both of us that section should be fixed. J. Spencer 19:35, 18 May 2007 (UTC)

If it's a problem with the prose, maybe I can help out? Thanks for reviewing the article, BTW. Firsfron of Ronchester 21:10, 18 May 2007 (UTC)

Yes, thank you for the reviews, both of Othy and of Hypacrosaurus. J. Spencer 00:00, 19 May 2007 (UTC)

Query

Do you happen to know where I could get ahold of some good photos or reconstructions of Marywadea?--Mr Fink 00:24, 21 May 2007 (UTC)

I tried to access that journal, too, but, I think it needs money...--Mr Fink 12:26, 21 May 2007 (UTC)

Actually, that will do perfectly! It's much better than this picture here.--Mr Fink 12:44, 21 May 2007 (UTC)

Also, you don't suppose you could repost those two pdfs and the picture references of the Ediacaran ecosystems again? Now that I've found the time to begin working on them, I can't find where I saved them on my computer.--Mr Fink 15:10, 21 May 2007 (UTC)

Minoan eruption

I noticed that you made this edit to the article. For the life of me, I can't see what it did to the references, but in your summary you said it would look smarter. I'm not saying it doesn't, I'm trying to find little tricks to improve articles, so I'd like to see what happened. Maybe it didn't work for some reason? Orangemarlin 20:26, 22 May 2007 (UTC)

GAC backlog elimination drive

This form message is being sent to you either due to your membership with WikiProject Good Articles and/or your inclusion on the Wikipedia:Good article candidates/List of reviewers. A new drive has been started requesting that all members review at least one article (or more, if you wish!) within the next two weeks at GAC to help in removing the large backlog. This message is being sent to all members, and even members who have been recently reviewing articles. There are almost 130 members in this project and about 180 articles that currently need to be reviewed. If each member helps to review just one or two articles, the majority of the backlog will be cleared. Since the potential amount of reviewers may significantly increase, please make sure to add :{{GAReview}} underneath the article you are reviewing to ensure that only one person is reviewing each article. Additionally, the GA criteria may have been modified since your last review, so look over the criteria again to help you to determine if a candidate is GA-worthy. If you have any questions about this drive or the review process, leave a message on the GAC talk page. --Nehrams2020 01:01, 25 May 2007 (UTC)

Re: Key (company)

I suppose I do agree about the lists. I'll work on turning the two small lists of main and former staff into prose and transfer the tabled lists into their respective articles as prose in Production sections.

As for what you meant by "choppy", I can see why you'd say this, but it's still slightly unclear as to what you meant by the article "reading more like a list of facts and events than anything else". I'm assuming you mean the History section than anything else. The company has only been around for 9 years and produced 6 products; there really isn't much history beyond what they have produced in that time. How would I make it not a 'list of fact and events' like you stated?--十八 10:08, 25 May 2007 (UTC)

Failed GA Nom- Heinrich event

On May 7 you nominated this article for Good Article and I revently reviewed it and failed it for reasons on the article talk page. This article is close to being a good article and I hope you will resubmit it once some things are fixed. Cheers! --Banana 02:30, 26 May 2007 (UTC)

You're doing great work at Wikipedia. Don't get sidetracked by the processes attendant on "Good Article" and "Featured Article" status, which have soured some excellent contributors. --Wetman 12:39, 26 May 2007 (UTC)

Ediacaran classification

Hello Verisimilus,

You removed some classifications I added to several articles about Ediacarian organisms, namely Arkarua, Ausia and Charnia. The source I used for these classifications was the Paleobiology Database, which is contributed to by geology and paleontology universities and museums. Don't you think that is a reliable enough source? If anyone knows the facts, these people do. Jerkov 14:22, 29 May 2007 (UTC)

Oil shale

Hi. You are listed as a participant in WikiProject Geology. Maybe you to please consider helping to improve the oil shale article. This article has developed quite well, but some more expert assistance is needed. Thank you in advance. Beagel 17:32, 31 May 2007 (UTC)

Evolution FAC

Hi there, Verisimilus. I've nominated Evolution as a featured article candidate, the discussion page is here. Any further comments and suggestions would be appreciated. TimVickers 15:45, 1 June 2007 (UTC)

I thought that might be a problem, looked OK on my giant screen! TimVickers 16:18, 1 June 2007 (UTC)

I've reworded the section on extinction, I hope this addresses your concern. TimVickers 18:18, 1 June 2007 (UTC)

Thanks for your comments, I've tried for a wording that addresses your point and I've also added a reference on the causes of the early extinctions. TimVickers 00:17, 2 June 2007 (UTC)

Hi again. Sorry to bug you, but were the changes OK? TimVickers 05:09, 3 June 2007 (UTC)

Hi Verisimilus, I was totaling up the votes on the FAC, but I wasn't sure if I should count your comment as a support or not. Is there anything else you think needs fixed here? Sorry to keep hassling you. TimVickers 00:20, 5 June 2007 (UTC)

Plant defense against herbivory

Hi there, You recently failed this GAC due to lack of stability. I think that the article has been much improved and is stable now. If you wanted to take a look, that would be great. I have not relisted it at GAC yet, I thought that I would ask you first since you offered to re-review it. If you don't have time for a review I totally understand. Please let me know... thanks--DO11.10 17:03, 4 June 2007 (UTC)

Thank you for your speedy reply. I will do that. Thanks again--DO11.10 18:34, 4 June 2007 (UTC)

Ediacaran biota

Think it'd be possible to get this ready for WP:FAC in the next month? It is looking pretty good... Vanished user ^talk 09:23, 8 June 2007 (UTC)

Now For Something Different

You ever see pictures of those Selenopeltis trilobites that are covered in edrioasters? If you have, do you happen to know what species they are?--Mr Fink 21:28, 11 June 2007 (UTC)

Just wondering... I'm certain I'll find it in one of my books.--Mr Fink 21:31, 11 June 2007 (UTC)

Timeline

Sure, I'll have a go! Vanished user ^talk 15:21, 12 June 2007 (UTC)

Just to note, It'll be a little bit: the current one is a mess of unreadability, so I'm going to have to research a bit to make sure I get the dates right. Vanished user ^talk 21:12, 12 June 2007 (UTC)

Ediacaran_biota/Timeline2 Here's what I've done so far. Pretty easy to work with, although I think bar4's broken - it's giving weird results if I use that number. Vanished user ^talk 22:11, 15 June 2007 (UTC) Bar4 fixed.

Also, the top of the Cryogenian is too high for no apparent reason. Could you have a look at that?

I must say, though, this was very easy to use. Vanished user ^talk 23:08, 15 June 2007 (UTC)

"note1-remove-arrow=yes" doesn't work Vanished user ^talk 00:54, 16 June 2007 (UTC) Does now! Vanished user ^talk 15:01, 16 June 2007 (UTC)

Right. I've fixed everything but the too-high Cryogenian. I don't know what's doing that. Rounding error? Vanished user ^talk 15:01, 16 June 2007 (UTC)

Looking at it, I think it might be the scale markers. Because I set the scale to go down to -655, but the bars disappear below -650... Vanished user ^talk 19:52, 16 June 2007 (UTC)

It's nearly right now, but the bars seem exactly 2 years too low compared to the notes and scale. (E.g. the "Last global glaciation" bar lines up with the Cryogenian border at -637, but both should be at -635. Likewise, the "Last Ediacaran communities" is slightly above the Cambrian/Ediacaran border. Vanished user ^talk 14:32, 17 June 2007 (UTC)

By the way, I've left a couple final notes on Talk:Ediacaran biota. If my latest revisions are alright, and if the citation needed tag can be removed, I say let's try FA. Vanished user ^talk 14:36, 17 June 2007 (UTC)

...Um... you know the timeline's currently broken, right? Vanished user ^talk 18:32, 17 June 2007 (UTC)

'Salright. Just didn't know if you knew or not. Vanished user ^talk 20:16, 17 June 2007 (UTC)

By the way, if you were wondering: I simplified the Cambrian events so much because the old timeline seemed to be putting more emphasis on the Cambrian than the Ediacaran, for no readily apparent reason. Vanished user ^talk 21:31, 17 June 2007 (UTC)

Articles you might like to edit, from SuggestBot

SuggestBot predicts that you will enjoy editing some of these articles. Have fun!

Stubs Ediacaran Paleoecology 3467 Bernheim Tonian Lemonade Cladoselache List of transitional fossils Paleozoic Orogeny Biota (ecology) Ectasian Little Wattlebird Dolostone Calymmian Biota (taxonomy) List of sieges Statherian Ediacara Hills Bridesmaid

Cleanup Lost Kingdoms II Living fossil Rho factor Merge Oceanic trench Geodetic system Asexual reproduction Add Sources Stan Marsh Cyclomedusa Faint young sun paradox Wikify Earth and water The Quiet Earth Phantom Pyromusical Expand Pliocene Eumetazoa Cambrian-Ordovician extinction events

SuggestBot picks articles in a number of ways based on other articles you've edited, including straight text similarity, following wikilinks, and matching your editing patterns against those of other Wikipedians. It tries to recommend only articles that other Wikipedians have marked as needing work. Your contributions make Wikipedia better -- thanks for helping.

If you have feedback on how to make SuggestBot better, please tell me on SuggestBot's talk page. Thanks from ForteTuba, SuggestBot's caretaker.

P.S. You received these suggestions because your name was listed on the SuggestBot request page. If this was in error, sorry about the confusion. -- SuggestBot 16:16, 19 June 2007 (UTC)

Ediacaran biota

So, what d'ye think? Is it time to offer it for FA? Probably get some changes needed that come out during the FA, though. Vanished user ^talk 09:32, 20 June 2007 (UTC)

Heh! Right, would you care to do the honours of writing up the nomination? Vanished user ^talk 18:18, 20 June 2007 (UTC)

The Pit and the Pendulum (1961 film)

Thanks for taking a look at the Pit and the Pendulum article. Your comment was not really naive, as many articles on wikipedia do seem to contain spoiler tags. However, according to wikipedia's spoiler guidelines, "it is unusual for scholarly reference works (of the sort that Wikipedia aspires to be) to warn for spoilers when discussing fictional works. If they do, they often avoid terms such as 'spoiler'. Because of this, spoiler warnings should generally be avoided." The general consensus appears to be that if an article on a fictional work contains a synopsis section, the reader should simply assume that plot details (i.e., "spoilers") are included.-Hal Raglan 20:00, 22 June 2007 (UTC)