User talk:Dixonsej
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
[edit] Welcome!
Please feel free to discuss me. Do not panic if I fail to answer your queries within a few days as I cannot make it to Wikipedia every day, but I try to make it at least once a week. Come on someone talk to me. Please! I haven't had a message in ages! Dixonsej 09:05, 14 September 2007 (UTC)
[edit] albatross
Just letting you know that I changed back your edits to albatross - the species list on the page represents a compromise between different species lists (21 is the most commonly accepted number; check out the article's peer review and FAC page for more details about the discussion. While I'm here, welcome to Wikipedia and since you like birds please come visit us at Wikipedia:WikiProject Birds. Cheers! Sabine's Sunbird talk 19:30, 30 March 2007 (UTC)
That's fine. Dixonsej
[edit] Zone-tailed Hawk a stub?
Hi. It's great to see yet another person working on bird articles, but why did you label Zone-tailed Hawk a stub? Certainly it can use some work, but it seems too long and too close to complete for the definition at Wikipedia:stub. I wouldn't argue with any of the other possible ratings. —JerryFriedman 17:36, 4 April 2007 (UTC)
Zone-tailed Hawk is probably on the border. I'm not sure about the exact definition of a stub, but I thought that it would fit into that category. Dixonsej
You can see the official though maybe not exact definition at Wikipedia:stub. I'm not going to argue with you about an article that I wrote most of—either someone (maybe me) will expand it, or someone will come along and think about changing the rating. —JerryFriedman 20:35, 5 April 2007 (UTC)
[edit] Genus v Species
Hi James: I wanted to let you know that I removed the category "Genera of Birds" from Marvelous Spatuletail, because that entry is for a SPECIES rather than a genus. I realize it's a monotypic genus, but I still think it's clearer and more correct to have that designation at the genus level (which it is, in the very short article about the genus) rather than at the species level!
I notice (having just checked the "Genera of Birds" page) that there are actually loads of species which have been put into this category in error -- and I wondered if you'd like to join me in keeping an eye on that page and helping to remove species that get put there incorrectly. MeegsC 11:05, 24 April 2007 (UTC)
- Well, now that I've investigated further, I see that the species that are listed are ALL in monotypic genera, so I guess they should be there (at least based on the notes on the WP:BIRD page, it's acceptable that they are}. But quite a few of the species accounts say nothing about them being in monotypic genera -- and if we're putting the category of "Genera of Birds" on those pages (and redirecting the genera to those pages) then they really should! Want to join me in this updating process? MeegsC 12:04, 24 April 2007 (UTC)
I will certainly check through the pages in this category. I spend most of my time editing bird pages and do a lot of categorising and many of the pages in the category were put there myself so I will go through the pages now and check through there every once in a while. Dixonsej 18:35, 24 April 2007 (UTC)
- Sounds good! I'll add it to my watch list too... MeegsC 18:59, 24 April 2007 (UTC)
[edit] Missing species
Thanks for your input to this, I think it's you and me mostly doing this. \I've compacted the list by removing the none groups and I've also amalgamated all the weird new warbler families. Jimfbleak 07:10, 19 September 2007 (UTC)
[edit] Image:Trousers 1937.jpg
Hello Dixonsej, an automated process has found an image or media file tagged as nonfree media, such as fair use. The image (Image:Trousers 1937.jpg) was found at the following location: User:Dixonsej. This image or media will be removed per statement number 9 of our non-free content policy. The image or media will be replaced with Image:NonFreeImageRemoved.svg , so your formatting of your userpage should be fine. The image that was replaced will not be automatically deleted, but it could be deleted at a later date. Articles using the same image should not be affected by my edits. I ask you to please not re-add the image to your userpage and could consider finding a replacement image licensed under either the Creative Commons or GFDL license or released to the public domain. Thanks for your attention and cooperation. User:Gnome (Bot)-talk 04:41, 19 May 2007 (UTC)
OK. I think I understood that and it's fine. Dixonsej 19:09, 21 May 2007
[edit] Bird collaboration of the month
As a member of WP:BIRD you are invited to this month's collaboration
Shyamal 02:12, 5 August 2007 (UTC)
[edit] Hi Dixonsej
Hi James,
Welcome to Wikipedia. I spotted you assessing moth articles. For your info, WikiProject Lepidoptera's template {{LepidopteraTalk}} uses two arguments - one for article quality (stub/start/B etc) and one for importance (low/mid/high etc). We have guidelines on this issue here. Importance of species/genera is based on a two-level classification (high/low). Please see the guidelines in the link. The format is {{tl|LepidopteraTalk|stub|low}}. Before classifying a lepidopteran as high please be very sure that it is a lepidoptera species of high scientific, economic or cultural importance; threatened or endangered species or those having high public recognition for any reason, such as :-
- Monarch, its cultural & scientific importance and iconic status in the Americas.
- Gypsy moth, its economic importance as a pest.
- Silkworm, its economic importance as a resource for silk.
- Palos Verdes Blue, due to its being a highly threatened species.
- Maguey worm, due to its cultural importance to native Australians.
You may consider joining Wikiproject Lepidoptera too! Its got a nice userbox for your collection ;-). Regards,AshLin 11:46, 30 August 2007 (UTC)
[edit] Common Names
Hi James,
There is a controversy going on this point. I have not been able to get consensus, but the majority of the persons who participated in that discussion felt that butterflies & moths should be named after scientific names. Its more scientific and encyclopaedic. They feel that the common name(s) should be redirects. This will not make any difference to finding the article if we redirect it so. One reason for this is because there are many species which do not have prominent or well known common names or have more than one. There are also disagreements regarding which is the 'correct' common name - Cosmopolite or Painted Lady, Zebra butterfly or Zebra Heliconian, Short-tailed Blue or Chapman's Cupid? But some people feel otherwise. They feel the article should be named after its common name so that it becomes easier to locate, though this is not necessarily true. While I feel that scientific name is better, solely because it allows me to index and categorise better, I am presently not pushing any POV. So I would suggest that you let this point lie at the moment. If you start articles, you may choose of course choose to name them by common name or by the scientific name, as you prefer. At this point I would not recommend renaming any articles as it might lead to edit wars.
Regards, AshLin 11:46, 30 August 2007 (UTC)
OK. But I still think an agreement should be reached on this point if at all possible.
[edit] Nominating a page for deletion
Hi. I noticed you recently nominated Bernady for deletion; however, it appears that you did so by copy-and-pasting an afd template from another article and adding the nomination to the nom page for another article. I've corrected this: in the future, please follow the directions found here to properly nominate an article for deletion. Thanks! -- Vary | Talk 17:50, 4 September 2007 (UTC)
OK. Sorry. Dixonsej 14:58, 8 September 2007 (UTC)
[edit] Missing species
Thanks for your input to this, I think it's you and me mostly doing this. \I've compacted the list by removing the none groups and I've also amalgamated all the weird new warbler families. Jimfbleak 07:10, 19 September 2007 (UTC)
OK. I don't really have the info to write these articles past the stub level though. Dixonsej 15:58, 19 September 2007 (UTC)
[edit] Controversial Statement about Mexico
I have undid your change of the school stub for Colegio Arji. Please join the talk if you are interested. I'm not sure why many users, including yourself, keep changing the school stub for this to Central America. Central America is a geopolitical designation that does not consistently include any part of Mexico. A better project would be if you created a stub for "Mexican schools". TeamX 02:10, 8 October 2007 (UTC)
Sorry, geography isn't my best subject and I thought Mexico was in Central America Dixonsej 16:45, 8 October 2007 (UTC)
hhhhmmmmmmm....... since you are interested in geography but not too good at it i could send you a scan of my book on geography via email it's very interesting and helpful
RSPV
[edit] Essex discussion at Wikipedia:WikiProject Council/Proposals
- Description
- A project for the county of Essex, England
- Interested Wikipedians (please add your name)
- Chris 05:39, 12 October 2007 (UTC)
- Comments
Maybe you could try Category:Wikipedians from Essex and also place notices e.g. at Wikipedia:WikiProject England. Simply south (talk) 19:41, 3 January 2008 (UTC)
[edit] Re: Goeldia vs Titanoeca
User_talk:Sarefo#Goeldia_obscura, cheers --Sarefo (talk) 23:37, 20 January 2008 (UTC)
[edit] Speedy deletion of Template:User Riemann was right
A tag has been placed on Template:User Riemann was right requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section T3 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because it is a deprecated or orphaned template. After seven days, if it is still unused and the speedy deletion tag has not been removed, the template will be deleted.
If the template is intended to be substituted, please feel free to remove the speedy deletion tag and please consider putting a note on the template's page indicating that it is substituted so as to avoid any future mistakes (<noinclude>{{transclusionless}}</noinclude>).
Thanks. --MZMcBride (talk) 19:25, 20 February 2008 (UTC)
[edit] Needs Photo?
Hi James, I'm a bit of a newcomer to Wikipedia so I'm just a bit confused, I recently added an image to [[1]] and removed the 'needs image' tag and just found that you've reinstated it....could you let me know why? There are at least 2 images on the article. Aviceda talk 04:32, 28 February 2008 (UTC)
[edit] WikiProject Birds March 2008 Newsletter
The March 2008 issue of the Bird WikiProject newsletter has been published. You may read the newsletter, change the format in which future issues will be delivered to you, or unsubscribe from this notification by following the link. Thank you.
This has been an automated delivery by BrownBot (talk) 18:38, 1 March 2008 (UTC)
[edit] :-)
Hi. I just wanted to say hi, because I haven't seen many teenage or preteen wikipedians (except for User:Rimas Letap.)--Listen to your Princess, dear Wikipedians. (talk) 19:05, 25 March 2008 (UTC)
Hi. Dixonsej (talk) 16:52, 26 March 2008 (UTC)
[edit] Ok. Thanks!
I'll be sure to ask you any questions. I'm not new, though. I've edited quite a few articles. :-)--Listen to your Princess, dear Wikipedians. (talk) 14:06, 28 March 2008 (UTC)
[edit] WikiProject Birds April 2008 Newsletter
The April 2008 issue of the Bird WikiProject newsletter has been published. You may read the newsletter, change the format in which future issues will be delivered to you, or unsubscribe from this notification by following the link. Thank you.
This has been an automated delivery by BrownBot (talk) 00:50, 2 April 2008 (UTC)
[edit] Herbert Kraus
Hi. I am curious to know why you have rated the above article, when it lacks any sources (bar a snippet in the one external link provided). I've tagged the article as such.
I do not believe that unreferenced articles should be rated above stub until concerns like that are addressed. I'd appreciate some guidance on this if you could spare a couple of minutes. Thanks. Ref (chew)(do) 18:37, 8 April 2008 (UTC)
- Hi again. To quote the second requirement under Start-Class Criteria at WP:ASSESS:
-
multiple links that help explain or illustrate the topic
-
- I have always taken this to include, of course, any references and external links which prove the validity of the information provided and claims made therein. If an article has, say, one external link to cover all that is being written about, that hardly satisfies the Criteria, in my opinion. If an article has no external links at all, it is clearly in breach of Start-Class Criteria. It is why I never advance un- or poorly referenced articles. I am awaiting the opinion of a very experienced assessor, and will let you know his thoughts also. Thanks for getting back to me. Best wishes. Ref (chew)(do) 20:13, 9 April 2008 (UTC)
[edit] WP:Biography Assessment Boxes
I'm sorry about that. I was using the outriggr script and it kept adding more than WP:BIO boxes to some of the pages I assessed. I'll be more careful to make sure there is only one box in the future. Oneworld25 (talk) 14:32, 26 April 2008 (UTC)
[edit] WikiProjet Birds May 2008 Newsletter
The May 2008 issue of the Bird WikiProject newsletter has been published. You may read the newsletter, change the format in which future issues will be delivered to you, or unsubscribe from this notification by following the link. Thank you.
This has been an automated delivery by BrownBot (talk) 00:34, 1 May 2008 (UTC)
[edit] New accounts
Hi. Why are you creating vandal accounts such as Cheesebob999 (talk · contribs) ? --jpgordon∇∆∇∆ 17:55, 22 May 2008 (UTC)
- First and last warning: No more vandal accounts, or sub-accounts of vandal accounts. We have found and blocked them all. Any more and this account will be blocked as well. NawlinWiki (talk) 19:14, 22 May 2008 (UTC)
Sorry, created accounts for friends at school, as school network is blocked. Won't do so again.
[edit] WikiProject Birds June 2008 Newsletter
The June 2008 issue of the Bird WikiProject newsletter has been published. You may read the newsletter, change the format in which future issues will be delivered to you, or unsubscribe from this notification by following the link. Thank you.
This has been an automated delivery by BrownBot (talk) 13:06, 1 June 2008 (UTC)
