User talk:IvanTortuga/Archive 1

JJ Alberhasky

If this person's notable, can you create an article about him before creating articles about his CDs? Otherwise the articles about his CDs will probably be deleted eventually. Of course if he isn't notable then you shouldn't create any more articles about him or his music. --P4k 23:22, 23 June 2007 (UTC)

Notability of JJ Alberhasky

A tag has been placed on JJ Alberhasky, requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done because the article appears to be about a person, group of people, band, club, company, or web content, but it does not indicate how or why the subject is notable: that is, why an article about that subject should be included in an encyclopedia. Under the criteria for speedy deletion, articles that do not assert the subject's importance or significance may be deleted at any time. Please see the guidelines for what is generally accepted as notable.

If you think that you can assert the notability of the subject, you may contest the deletion. To do this, add {{hangon}} on the top of the page (just below the existing speedy deletion or "db" tag) and leave a note on the article's talk page explaining your position. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag yourself, but don't hesitate to add information to the article that would confirm the subject's notability under Wikipedia guidelines.

For guidelines on specific types of articles, you may want to check out our criteria for biographies, for web sites, for bands, or for companies. Feel free to leave a note on my talk page if you have any questions about this. FunPika 23:57, 23 June 2007 (UTC)

Conservation status

Hi IvanTortuga! I noticed you've been adding Conservation Status = Least Concern to the taxoboxes of many snake articles. However, I have a problem with this. Where did you get this information? I performed searches on the IUCN website, but they don't mention any of the species that you modified the articles for. If you have no references for your edits (example: Vipera aspis), then what you're doing is not correct. When species are listed by the IUCN as being Least Concern, it means that at least some research has been performed, the conclusions of which are stated by the IUCN. Least Concern is not a default status that can be applied to any species or subspecies. --Jwinius 10:49, 27 June 2007 (UTC)

Hi I used a Smithsonian Ins. Book my friends making up the citation when he gets a chance. I know you can't just go around putting w/e up. Im curently in school to become a zoologist. When its up ill send you a message.

Writing articles like these is all about being very careful about what you read and write, and then always adding a reference so that everyone can see where you got the information from. You have to be tough on yourself and not cut any corners. If you are, you'll not only be making positive contributions, but you'll learn the truth about what you're researching. If you're not, others will be tough on you, and maybe all your work will be for nothing. Understand this, and you'll be on you way to becoming a real scientist. Good luck with your studies! --Jwinius 23:07, 28 June 2007 (UTC)

The Amphibians and Reptiles Portal (P:AAR)

The Amphibians and Reptiles Portal I'm glad to announce that The Amphibians and reptiles portal (P:AAR) has been created and is ready for you to use. This portal covers any subjects related to amphibians, reptiles, herpetology, as well as WikiProject Amphibians and Reptiles. Purposes of the portal to act as the "main page" for editors interested in amphibians and reptiles. The portal page should contain all the common and useful links to relevant articles, lists, categories, as well as the project tasklist. As this portal is your tool, please feel free to organize, modify, or expand the Topics, Categories, Lists, and Tasklist sections of the portal as you see fit. to lead potential AAR editors to WikiProject Amphibians and Reptiles as well as to educate general readers. Feel free to add more items for the "Did you know..." section. Thank you for reading. If you have any questions, please leave them on the portal talk page or my user talk page. --Melanochromis

--Melanochromis 21:27, 7 July 2007 (UTC)

Swallowtail picture

The swallowtail picture that you put on the Pipevine Swallowtail page is not a pipevine swallowtail, I'm pretty sure that's a black swallowtail (Papilio polyxenes). This page http://www.dallasbutterflies.com/Butterflies/html/black.html has info on how to tell them apart.

Oh good call thanks for showing me that site. Your right it was a Papilio polyxenes not a pipevine. Im off to change that right now. Thanks again.--IvanTortuga 01:54, 9 July 2007 (UTC)

Thanks for the barnstar

Thanks for the barnstar. Your talk page is awesome. I've never seen one like this before. I tried not to mess it up, but you'll probably have to fix it. Maddie was here 03:41, 19 July 2007 (UTC)

Chapman's Zebra

A tag has been placed on Chapman's Zebra, requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under the criteria for speedy deletion, because it is a very short article providing little or no context to the reader. Please see Wikipedia:Stub for our minimum information standards for short articles. Also please note that articles must be on notable subjects and should provide references to reliable sources that verify their content.

Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag yourself. If you plan to expand the article, you can request that administrators wait a while for you to add contextual material. To do this, affix the template {{hangon}} to the page and state your intention on the article's talk page. Feel free to leave a note on my talk page if you have any questions about this. 172.129.86.209 12:27, 25 July 2007 (UTC)

Peafowl, not peacock

The large bird in Image:Peacock and Chick.jpg appears to be a peahen rather than a peacock, judging from its lack of gaudy plumage. Peacocks (male) and peahens (female) collectively make up peafowl. You may wish to adjust the image caption, not to mention the title. --Teratornis 01:21, 27 July 2007 (UTC)

Welcome to WikiProject Lepidoptera

Hi Ivan, Welcome to WikiProject Lepidoptera. This wikiproject is fairly new and active participation of all members is solicited. The project aims to help you to create quality articles about Lepidoptera. Do visit all the project subpages and we would be very happy to answer any queries. All you need to do is post a message on the project talk page. Regards, AshLin 13:48, 26 August 2007 (UTC)

Monitoring your edits

Hi Ivan,

Yes, I see your edits regularly because a large number of them are on my watchlist. Should there be something to bring to your notice, I shall do that. Regards, AshLin 11:50, 30 August 2007 (UTC)

Heath Fritillary

Sorry, have to disagree on importance rating, as species is equivalent of "red listed" in UK—OK? —GRM 18:33, 9 September 2007 (UTC)

• Thanks for response. No problem...I was waiting for an opportunity to put the importance rating in place, you just got there first. Sorry for delay, not much time for Wikipedia-ing for me these days—GRM 19:00, 19 September 2007 (UTC)

• Greetings once more. I assume you were responsible for the content rating of the article...? Just to let you know that I have "finished" it for now, so please take another look and let me know what you think. Thanks a lot—GRM 21:02, 4 October 2007 (UTC)

• Hello, Ivan. I have done some more work on the article and have exhausted the references I can lay my hands on easily. If you get the chance, please review and advise further improvements. Many thanks—GRM (talk) 18:04, 18 November 2007 (UTC)

• Very many thanks :-)) —GRM (talk) 17:21, 21 November 2007 (UTC)

Notability of Tumblehome (album)

A tag has been placed on Tumblehome (album), requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done for the following reason:

Unnecessary song/album page of a deleted/non-notable artist.

Under the criteria for speedy deletion, articles that do not meet very basic Wikipedia criteria may be deleted at any time. Please see the guidelines for what is generally accepted as an appropriate article, and if you can indicate why the subject of this article is appropriate, you may contest the tagging. To do this, add {{hangon}} on the top of the page and leave a note on the article's talk page explaining your position. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag yourself, but don't hesitate to add information to the article that would confirm its subject's notability under the guidelines.

For guidelines on specific types of articles, you may want to check out our criteria for biographies, for web sites, for bands, or for companies. Feel free to leave a note on my talk page if you have any questions about this. tomasz. 17:29, 28 October 2007 (UTC)

Notability of Only the Bony

A tag has been placed on Only the Bony, requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done for the following reason:

Unnecessary song/album page of a deleted/non-notable artist.

Under the criteria for speedy deletion, articles that do not meet very basic Wikipedia criteria may be deleted at any time. Please see the guidelines for what is generally accepted as an appropriate article, and if you can indicate why the subject of this article is appropriate, you may contest the tagging. To do this, add {{hangon}} on the top of the page and leave a note on the article's talk page explaining your position. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag yourself, but don't hesitate to add information to the article that would confirm its subject's notability under the guidelines.

For guidelines on specific types of articles, you may want to check out our criteria for biographies, for web sites, for bands, or for companies. Feel free to leave a note on my talk page if you have any questions about this. tomasz. 17:31, 28 October 2007 (UTC)

Only the Bony

A {{prod}} template has been added to the article Only the Bony, suggesting that it be deleted according to the proposed deletion process. All contributions are appreciated, but this article may not satisfy Wikipedia's criteria for inclusion, and the deletion notice explains why (see also "What Wikipedia is not" and Wikipedia's deletion policy). You may contest the proposed deletion by removing the {{dated prod}} notice, but please explain why you disagree with the proposed deletion in your edit summary or on its talk page. Also, please consider improving the article to address the issues raised. Even though removing the deletion notice will prevent deletion through the proposed deletion process, the article may still be deleted if it matches any of the speedy deletion criteria or it can be sent to Articles for Deletion, where it may be deleted if consensus to delete is reached. If you endorse deletion of the article, and you are the only person who has made substantial edits to the page, please add {{db-author}} to the top of the page. Carlosguitar 19:14, 28 October 2007 (UTC)

Welcome to WikiProject Plants!

Hi, and welcome to WikiProject Plants! Our scope includes any and all taxa of plants, botanists, and botany topics. We're glad to have you working with us on our project!

A few features that you might find helpful:

• Our navigation box points to most of the useful pages within the project.
• We discuss our project frequently at Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Plants. You can watchlist it to keep up with the conversations.

Here are some easy ways you can contribute:

• Images: There are articles that need images. You can search Wikimedia Commons for images. When you find one, add it to the Wikipedia article in the taxobox and remove the "needs-photo=yes" parameter from the project banner on the talk page of the article. You could also help identify plant photos on Commons.
• Taxobox: We also have articles that need taxoboxes. See the taxobox usage guide for information on how to add a taxobox. When complete, don't forget to remove the "needs-taxobox=yes" parameter from the talk page banner.
• Stubs: Consider expanding one of our stubs or create one of our requested articles.
• Assessment: You could also help assess our unassessed articles.

If you have any questions, please don't hesitate to ask me on my talk page or the project at Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Plants. Again, welcome! We look forward to seeing you around! Rkitko ^(talk) 23:15, 17 November 2007 (UTC)

Edits (Wikispecies)

Please do not add empty sections. They may confuse bots, and will be added later anyway with contents. Thanks Lycaon 21:46, 11 July 2007 (UTC)

o, ok. Thank you -- IvanTortuga 23:50, 11 July 2007 (UTC)

Me again. When 'filling in' species pages, could you also fill in the ==Name== and ==Reference== sections (e.g. as in Hypocuma dentatum? Thanks Lycaon 23:59, 14 July 2007 (UTC)

I was just filling them in because I didn't want people to be discouraged to work on them because they weren't there. You know what I mean? But if its that big of a problem, which I don't know if it is or isn't. I can try it will make the "work" load bigger. -- IvanTortuga 00:10, 15 July 2007 (UTC)

When the name/reference sections are not complete, the lemma has little value, but on the generic level it would show a blue link, which gives the impression that the species level is done. You catch my drift? Lycaon 00:21, 15 July 2007 (UTC)

Yeah, kind of. But did you get what I meant though? I was hoping people would fill that in after it was started, so that they wouldn't have to do it all. But if thats more damage than help I can stop. -- IvanTortuga 00:30, 15 July 2007 (UTC)

Yep, I understood. Be assured, you are not doing any damage, but you may use the time you invest here in a better way if you would look up name and reference sections and add them when creating a species level entry. I know, it's slow going and it means a lot of looking up and researching (even for biologists), but you create much more valuable contents. Regards. Lycaon 12:37, 15 July 2007 (UTC)

Ok, I was just making sure it wasn't any harm. I will also start doing a quick look for the name to see if I can find a realistic name and ref. I also hope you didn't think I was being mean I was just trying to figure things out. Yea looking up stuff does take alot of time. My classes require me to do alot of categorizing for insects and such. But at the end its all worth it. -- IvanTortuga 16:43, 15 July 2007 (UTC)

Re:Kodak Easyshare

I just checked the bag I used on that day, and it is still sitting in there, surprise! I loaded it with new batteries, and I'll try to remember to get it to you tomorrow. --Jacob ^Talk 03:04, 5 February 2008 (UTC)

Not a problem, I will ideally get it back by the FMGardens expedition. Do you have a travel..."partner" for that? --Jacob ^Talk 03:10, 5 February 2008 (UTC)

Poulsen insists that one should bring their own food... maybe she had an unfortunate experience or something. You're going to have to sneak some rare butterflies out with your insect attraction skills–accidentally of course. --Jacob ^Talk 03:15, 5 February 2008 (UTC)

Re:Hitler

Hey, I think we just need a list of facts (at least, that's what Colin had). I have a fair list of things (all taken from the Adolf Hitler article, but I can't print from this computer. If you can print stuff that'd be cool, but if not, I'm going to hand write some stuff (hoping Moon will not mind that). Get back to me if you decide to print any information. --Jacob ^Talk 03:02, 14 February 2008 (UTC)

Image:Unknown Pine.JPG

Hi Ivan, I am almost sure that this picture represents the fruit of the Douglas fir (Pseudotsuga menziesii) —Preceding unsigned comment added by 81.57.54.146 (talk) 21:05, 16 March 2008 (UTC)

Thank you, I forgot to edit it this. I found that it was a Douglas fir awhile back on Flickr. But thank you for the help and bringing this to my attention.

Note on A-class articles

Hi, I've just donwgraded two articles from A to B. See Template_talk:A-Class#How_do_you_get_an_article_rated_A-Class, and Template:Grading scheme, according to the grading scheme A articles "could at least be considered for featured article status" (whose criteria is Wikipedia:WIAFA). I've just learned about that and thought you should know. Pro bug catcher (talk • contribs). 20:46, 26 March 2008 (UTC)

Chrysiridia rhipheus

Hi. Your image Image:Chrysiridia madagascarensis.JPG was (as Shyamal put it [1]) "rather sadly cropped". As is it's a great addition to the article, but if you have a little time, I'd be grateful if you could try to take another one (since, as I understand, the moth is part of your collection). Thank you in advance. Pro bug catcher (talk • contribs). 16:19, 19 June 2008 (UTC)

No problem! IvanTortuga (talk) 20:30, 19 June 2008 (UTC)

Many thanks! Pro bug catcher (talk • contribs). 00:10, 20 June 2008 (UTC)

Heath Fritillary

Hi, Ivan.

I couldn't agree more, but I haven't had (and don't have) the time to learn how to do it... :-) —GRM (talk) 20:05, 7 August 2008 (UTC)

See "Distribution maps" on my Talk page :-) —GRM (talk) 19:51, 11 August 2008 (UTC)

Leps of Michigan

Hi. If I knew, for certain, which species were not native to Michigan, I'd have gone through and deleted the template on those particular pages; but leps are not my specialty, and it'll take someone with greater familiarity to spot all of them - I just happened to notice two of the ones I know for a fact don't breed anywhere north of Texas. That's why I put the message on the Project page: to hopefully get a little help from people who know better than I do which ones do or do not belong on that faunal list. I have to be honest, though, that I can see a problem with this approach, which can be best summed up this way: what will those articles all look like if someone goes through for all 50 US states, all the Canadian and Mexican provinces, and adds a template to cover each one? For a great many widespread species, such as the Monarch, the article will become a massive compilation of 30-60 templates. That is not going to be cosmetically appealing in the long run. You might want to try discussing with the people on the Project page what sort of long-term plan might best deal with the desire to compile faunistic lists, but my impression (from observing how other Wikiprojects deal with such matters) is that the person desiring a well-defined geographic faunal list simply creates a single article page (e.g., Lepidoptera of Michigan and wikilinks the checklist, so there is nothing actually added to the individual articles being cross-referenced. I suspect you're likely to find that people will prefer that sort of method. Peace, Dyanega (talk) 00:36, 6 September 2008 (UTC)

IUCN edits

Hi Ivan, Unfortunately, I've felt it necessary to revert and number of your recent edits in which you added IUCN information to a number of snake articles. There are untold numbers of species in the world and the IUCN deals with only a tiny subset of them, so it's pointless to start mentioning when species are not on the list. --Jwinius (talk) 19:20, 6 September 2008 (UTC)

I think it is good knowledge for people to know that the IUCN has not yet evaluated the species though. Also they may in the future in which case someone could have reverted the species page from there. I will not revert your revisions though because I will trust that you know what you're talking about on the subject. Thank you for leaving me a message. --IvanTortuga (talk) 22:34, 6 September 2008 (UTC)

It's one thing to fill an article with information that can be said to be true about a subject. This not only keeps the information in the article relevant, but also ensures that the article does not become too large. Most articles at Wikipedia are written like this.

Of course, there are exceptions. When it comes to snakes, for example, most of our articles mention whether the species is venomous or not. A few people have pointed out that this is a silly thing to say about boas and pythons, but many of us believe that it is still relevant: firstly because most people simply have no idea about which species pose any threat, and secondly because it's so easy to fit a term like "venomous", non-venomous", or "harmless" into an article's introduction.

On the other hand, this cannot be said for IUCN information. Except for, say, reptile collectors, very few people will be interested to find out whether a species is not mentioned on the Red List. In virtually all cases, this information will be the same anyway: not listed. In addition, adding a link to a negative IUCN database search result is not a useful reference: how can people know that it's not a mistake, or that an entry for the taxon simple exists under a different name? Such things happen.

Finally, there little chance that species such as Bothrops atrox and Ramphotyphlops braminus will be listed on the IUCN Red List in our lifetimes, because they are so numerous and widespread. As an organization, the IUCN won't have the money to assess every species in the world: only the ones of which it is suspected that they may be threatened.

I'm sure that you meant well, but if you really want to help with these articles, try buying a few decent book on the subject and using those as source. Most of of the information I've contributed comes from books. If you want to make a real difference, buy some books on boas and pythons: I don't have any of those yet (most of mine are on vipers), so I've not been able to add much of any real value in that department aside from taxonomic and geographic range information. (PS -- Please answer here, as I've temporarily added your talk page to my watchlist). Cheers, --Jwinius (talk) 00:15, 7 September 2008 (UTC)

Sorry but I wasn't really working on the snake articles so much as the IUCN templates. --IvanTortuga (talk) 17:27, 7 September 2008 (UTC)

Well, in that case I already have this area covered where the snake articles are concerned, except maybe for the colubrids and elapids (which I don't work on systematically). Last year I downloaded a complete list of all Red List squamata as raw HTML (expert mode, page by page), and then used a script to parse it and produce a text file with a list of species and their current status. I currently have the lists for 2006 and 2007. I'll bet they've already added updates for 2008, in which case I'll soon have to download a new list and see what changed. I use this information in another more complicated script to produce skeleton articles for Wikipedia based on the ITIS taxonomic ID number; that's why the basic article formats are always the same. :-) --Jwinius (talk) 20:56, 7 September 2008 (UTC)

IUCN Red List templates

Hi. Actually, neither incompleteness nor limited use were among my reasons for nominating the templates for deletion. You can find my deletion rationale (and the deletion discussion) at Wikipedia:Templates for deletion/Log/2008 September 3#IUCN Red List templates. Cheers, –Black Falcon ^(Talk) 15:43, 8 September 2008 (UTC)

thanks for the note

and good luck next year at northern! Edward Vielmetti (talk) 19:36, 19 September 2008 (UTC)

Speedy deletion of Vallonia gracilicosta

A tag has been placed on Vallonia gracilicosta requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done because the article consists of a dictionary definition or other article that has been transwikied to another project and the author information recorded.

If you think that this notice was placed here in error, you may contest the deletion by adding {{hangon}} to the top of the page that has been nominated for deletion (just below the existing speedy deletion or "db" tag), coupled with adding a note on the talk page explaining your position, but be aware that once tagged for speedy deletion, if the article meets the criterion it may be deleted without delay. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag yourself, but don't hesitate to add information to the article that would would render it more in conformance with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. Lastly, please note that if the article does get deleted, you can contact one of these admins to request that a copy be emailed to you. Ravichandar_{My coffee shop} 03:12, 20 September 2008 (UTC)

WikiProject Amphibians and Reptiles: Rollcall

At WikiProject Amphibians and Reptiles, we recently did a purge of the members list, which your name was on. Please re-add your username as well as your area of expertise at our list of participants if you plan to stay active in this Wikiproject. Also, a discussion is going on regarding the standardization of taxonomy in lizard articles, located in this section. We'd like to have some more voices in this matter. Thanks everyone! bibliomaniac15 23:18, 24 September 2008 (UTC)

Template:Butterflies of Michigan

I'm very sorry I didn't respond sooner. Generally, the edits I made were removing the butterfly species that are not found in Michigan (like the Gulf Fritillary, Agraulis vanillae). Hope this helps. Meganmccarty (talk)14 October 2008

Re: Polygonia comma Range

Thanks for asking. Actually, Wikipedia had a problem with the map I used. I am working on another type of range map that I hope will be acceptable to Wikipedia, and if so, I will post it when complete to the location you specified. Hope this answers your question. Meganmccarty (talk) 16:38, 5 November 2008 (UTC)

Elm leaf beetle

Many thanks for adding the excellent photo to my piece on the beetle. My interest in elm stems from our concerns here in the UK for a Lycaenid, the White-letter Hairstreak, whose larvae feed exclusively on the tree. For reasons unknown to me, the butterfly occurs throughout Eurasia but not North America, despite its millions of elms. Regards, Ptelea (talk) 09:27, 13 November 2008 (UTC)

TfD nomination of Template:Butterflies of Michigan

Template:Butterflies of Michigan has been nominated for deletion. You are invited to comment on the discussion at the template's entry on the Templates for Deletion page. Thank you. Colchicum (talk) 01:47, 20 November 2008 (UTC)

Re: Michigan/Indiana Butterflies

Thank you very much. I appreciate that. Same goes here. Meganmccarty (talk) 23:00, 22 November 2008 (UTC)