Misplaced Pages

User talk:Look2See1: Difference between revisions

Article snapshot taken from[REDACTED] with creative commons attribution-sharealike license. Give it a read and then ask your questions in the chat. We can research this topic together.
Browse history interactively← Previous editContent deleted Content addedVisualWikitext
Revision as of 11:19, 9 July 2016 editSminthopsis84 (talk | contribs)Autopatrolled, Extended confirmed users, Pending changes reviewers37,897 edits →Seriously, where are you getting this information about botanical authorities from?: new section← Previous edit Latest revision as of 21:14, 11 November 2024 edit undoHouseBlaster (talk | contribs)Edit filter managers, Administrators61,051 edits Notification: speedy deletion nomination of Category:1804 disestablishments in Nueva California.Tag: Twinkle 
(440 intermediate revisions by 98 users not shown)
Line 1: Line 1:
{{User page}} {{User page}}

'''Today is {{CURRENTDAYNAME}}, ], ]; it is now '' {{CURRENTTIME}} (]/]'' ) '''</big> </div> '''Today is {{CURRENTDAYNAME}}, ], ]; it is now '' {{CURRENTTIME}} (]/]'' ) '''</big> </div>
*'' '''Please assume mutual good faith when communicating here'''. '' *'' '''Please assume mutual good faith when communicating here'''. ''
{{Usertalkheader}} {{Usertalkheader}}
{{Banned|link=]|time=indef|by={{User|Cyberpower678}} on behalf of the community}}
] ]
<!---]---> <!---]--->

<!-- Auto archiving set up here, by ] --><!---THANK YOU CHZZ---> <!-- You're welcome :-) --> <!-- Auto archiving set up here, by ] --><!---THANK YOU CHZZ---> <!-- You're welcome :-) -->
{{User:MiszaBot/config {{User:MiszaBot/config
|archiveheader = {{talkarchivenav}} |archiveheader = {{talkarchivenav}}
|maxarchivesize = 100K |maxarchivesize = 100K
|counter = 8 |counter = 10
|algo = old(30d) |algo = old(30d)
|archive = User talk:Look2See1/Archive %(counter)d |archive = User talk:Look2See1/Archive %(counter)d
Line 48: Line 47:
{{-}} {{-}}


==] has been nominated for merging==
== ] ==

You added smth to the article which breaks the markup, and I can not figure out what it should have been. Could you please have a look. Thanks.--] (]) 08:44, 28 May 2016 (UTC)

:Sorry, I do not understand your question. The ] article appears correct to me. — ]&nbsp;] 09:29, 29 May 2016 (UTC)

::The markup was corrected by another editor. ] (]) 13:58, 26 June 2016 (UTC)

== Melaleucas not trees ==

Hello Look2See1,

Thanks for your edit to ]. You appear to know more about categories than I do - however, it does not seem correct to include ] in a "List of Trees". You originally added that category in September 2010 when few of the ''Melaleuca'' articles were written. I removed it a few weeks ago because only a (fairly small) percentage of melaleucas can be classified as "trees". Perhaps the ones you're familiar with (maybe the U.S. or Canada?) are trees but most are actually shrubs - some very low shrubs at that. '']'', for example, grows to a height of 2 inches (4cm) max! As I said, perhaps you know more about categories than I do - maybe if one in a list of 500 plants is a tree then it's okay to include all in a list of trees. Seems strange to me though. ] (]) 08:16, 17 June 2016 (UTC)

== Botanical authorities do not follow the pattern used in zoology ==

Hi, you have been adding categories such as ], ] when that is not considered to be the case in botanical nomenclature. For example, '']'' DC. ex Poir. was named by Poiret in 1816, and although De Candolle named it again in an 1818 publication, his name is ]. There was an earlier manuscript of De Candolle's which Poiret used as a basis, but that is not a ]. '']'' (Torr.) Henrickson was called ''Cowania stansburyana'' by John Torrey. In zoology there is a pattern similar to what you have done, that the person who first gave a name, any name, to a taxon, is listed ever after, even if they blundered badly on the taxonomy, but that is not how botanical nomenclature works. If the species name is wrong, then the taxon assignment is wrong, so it cannot be said that the person named the taxon. ] (]) 12:39, 17 June 2016 (UTC)
:I endorse Sminthopsis84's point. Actually, I'm not sure of the value of these categories; is the idea to have one for every person who named a taxon? Or just the "major" people? If so, how are they selected?
:If these categories are to be used, it would be better to name them as per the "Taxa described in" categories. Firstly, "first scientifically described by", which seems to be the meaning of a category like ], works for both the botanical and zoological codes, which treat names somewhat differently; secondly, it's better to separate names under different codes, as per "Animals described in ..." and "Plants described in ..." ] (]) 13:34, 17 June 2016 (UTC)
::Just a comment that if only "major people" are to be so treated, the notion that certain people's opinions count more than those of others is inflammatory in botanical nomenclature, which has fought long and hard against it in, for example, overturning the ]. I would oppose such an approach to categorization. ] (]) 14:36, 17 June 2016 (UTC)

'''Please stop'''. Wherever you are getting this information from, it is way off the mark. I can't even begin to imagine a source that could produce . ] (]) 13:39, 18 June 2016 (UTC)
:And after looking at the genus '']'' generally, I conclude that you are tossing all the species in that genus into ]. No, George Bentham did not name all of the species in the genus!! Please remind yourself of what ] means. (Bentham also didn't claim that he himself was a taxon, as suggests; in fact, I'm quite sure that he would have been horrified by the suggestion.) ] (]) 14:19, 18 June 2016 (UTC) Neither did ] name ] after himself as suggested . ] (])

== Final warning ==

As you've been warned numerous times before, this is your '''final warning''': if you persist in edits like , both adding irrelevant categories and replacing English descriptions with bulleted bits lacking article links, you will be blocked. ] (]) 13:49, 26 June 2016 (UTC)

== A barnstar for you! ==

{| style="border: 1px solid gray; background-color: #fdffe7;"
|rowspan="2" style="vertical-align:middle;" | ]
|rowspan="2" |
|style="font-size: x-large; padding: 0; vertical-align: middle; height: 1.1em;" | '''The Category Barnstar'''
|-
|style="vertical-align: middle; border-top: 1px solid gray;" | Thanks for your tireless work with categories, particularly your awesome development of the {{cat|Outdoor recreation by country}} branch I just recently introduced, but without filling it with life! Now this previously missing aspect is getting tangible. Thanks! --] (]) 09:06, 27 June 2016 (UTC)
|}

== Mindanao island group ==

Hi. Just so you know, Mindanao is NOT a region. As there is no separate article on ], and there will never be, those will be undone as we dont have Luzon (region) and Visayas (region) either.--] (]) 22:52, 30 June 2016 (UTC)


::: The ] island group IS a valid administrative designation, per the[REDACTED] article ] and parent ]. The Mindanao island group is 1 of the 3 administrative ], for those islands located in the southern ], including its main one, ].
::: The other 2 other ] are ] (northern Philippines) and ] (central Philippines).
::: The history of the 'Mindanao island group' has notable distinctions from the rest of the country in the Luzon & Visayas island groups, including successfully resisting incorporation into the colonial era ], and having strong and meaningful Islamic influences within its historical traditions and contemporary politics.
::: Please see more information, my thoughts on this, and possible category renaming options at ]. Please assume good faith — ]&nbsp;] 07:14, 1 July 2016 (UTC)


:::: ]? You are wrong from the get go. We only have regions, provinces, cities, municipalities, barangays and sitios/puroks as administrative divisions. Island groups are just geographic divisions. The problem is you dont consult, and you dont pay attention to edit summaries, or to your talk page. Its just only now.--] (]) 07:20, 1 July 2016 (UTC)
::::: So it is clear:
::::: ]: ]
::::: ]: ] and ]
::::: ]: ]
::::: The ] actually are more geographic than actual administrative (except for the ] (ARMM). The island groups certainly are no administrative jurisdictions.--] (]) 07:33, 1 July 2016 (UTC)
::::: Add: So if you wish to carry out your categories: it should be per province (1st level) or at most per region (especially for ARMM). Island group-wide categories are very superficial and pointless.--] (]) 07:43, 1 July 2016 (UTC)


::::::Sorry, you are mistaken RioHondo, Island group-wide categories can be very meaningful and useful to[REDACTED] users not residing on the country's islands nor experts in Philippine subdivisions and nomenclature. On other continents we hear the 'region name' used, as news reports on the inauguration of President ] today have always included "he is the first president from from the country's southern region of ]." Perhaps superficially imprecise for you, but a very meaningful heritage placemaking phrase for some of us elsewhere. Alas, ] and its 182 barangays are placeless from abroad. This is an international online encyclopedia, and users who are interested in the ], but will probably never become adept (such as myself) at first/second/third-level administrative country subdivisions, in my opinion deserve a 'workable on ramp' to begin exploring the country beyond Manilla.
:::::: Respectfully — ]&nbsp;] 08:29, 1 July 2016 (UTC)

== July 2016 ==
] You may be '''] without further warning''' the next time you ] Misplaced Pages. <!-- Template:uw-generic4 --> <font face="#" color="#35b794">]</font><font color="#3558b7"><sup>]</sup>]</font> 06:49, 1 July 2016 (UTC)

::Hi Dschslava, my posting/reply at the Misplaced Pages:Administrator intervention against vandalism page:
:::"{{Vandal|RioHondo}} Vandalism on ] Philippine history-related categories and subcategories.
:::They repeatedly removed original ] and 'focused' ] from the same relevant articles and categories repeatedly, and then proposing to speedily delete it because it was empty has neither integrity nor validity. ] removed over 20 categories from it 1-3 times between ~22:20, 30 June 2016 and ~23:07, 30 June 2016 (so far) ( & ‎; and a third time ~an hour later.
:::The ] island group/region is a valid administrative designation, per the[REDACTED] article ] and parent ]. The Mindanao island group/region is 1 of the 3 administrative ], for those islands located in the southern ], including its main one, ]. The other 2 other ] are ] (northern Philippines) and ] (central Philippines). :::The history of the 'Mindanao island group' has notable distinctions from the rest of the country in the Luzon & Visayas island groups, including successfully resisting incorporation into the colonial era ], and having strong and meaningful Islamic influences within its historical traditions and contemporary politics.
:::Please see more information at ], including category's original naming (]), current name (]), and potential renaming (e.g. ] or ]), & other options. — ]&nbsp;] 07:44, 1 July 2016 (UTC)"


:::It was replaced there by you with:
:::"Note: both parties appear to be involved in multiple edit wars. Will try to resolve. <font face="#" color="#35b794">]</font><font color="#3558b7"><sup>]</sup>]</font> 06:56, 1 July 2016 (UTC)"



<div class="floatleft" style="margin-bottom:0">]</div>] has been nominated for merging. A discussion is taking place to decide whether it complies with the ] guidelines. If you would like to participate in the discussion, you are invited to add your comments at ''']''' on the ] page.<!-- Template:Cfd-notify--> Thank you. ] (]) 19:23, 29 September 2024 (UTC)
:::Thank you for that post Dschslava. I have no investment in the category's final name, but do find the history of that "whole" (administrative) 'island group' and (casual) geographic 'region' very interesting and complex. With the Philippines' new President ] being the first ever from the Mindanao island group, and with his own complex local political history on the island of Mindanao,[REDACTED] users may become more interested/curious about the area's history & politics. I am distressed that ] appears to need to destroy and 'disappear' good will efforts, instead of working to improve the categorization nomenclature. The intention of my reverts was to keep interim placemarkers on the articles/subcategories until there is a new revision consensus. — ]&nbsp;] 07:44, 1 July 2016 (UTC)
==] has been nominated for merging==


<div class="floatleft" style="margin-bottom:0">]</div>] has been nominated for merging. A discussion is taking place to decide whether it complies with the ] guidelines. If you would like to participate in the discussion, you are invited to add your comments at ''']''' on the ] page.<!-- Template:Cfd-notify--> Thank you. ] (]) 19:39, 29 September 2024 (UTC)
::::That is because you insist that ] is an administrative region. And that ] and ] belong to ]. Thats pure vandalism but you still kept on reverting.--] (]) 07:47, 1 July 2016 (UTC)
==] has been nominated for merging==


<div class="floatleft" style="margin-bottom:0">]</div>] has been nominated for merging. A discussion is taking place to decide whether it complies with the ] guidelines. If you would like to participate in the discussion, you are invited to add your comments at ''']''' on the ] page.<!-- Template:Cfd-notify--> Thank you. ] (]) 19:44, 29 September 2024 (UTC)
:::::You are very wrong and quite ignorant about my thoughts and motivations RioHondo. I am insisting nothing. There's no vandalism, just protecting information categorization until this situation is resolved. Please stop deleting ] until the editing community reaches consensus. — ]&nbsp;] 09:25, 1 July 2016 (UTC)
==] nomination of ]==
]


A tag has been placed on ] indicating that it is currently empty, and is not a ], a ], under discussion at ], or a project category that by its nature may become empty on occasion. If it remains empty for seven days or more, it may be deleted under ].
== Seriously, where are you getting this information about botanical authorities from? ==


If you think this page should not be deleted for this reason you may '''contest the nomination''' by ] and removing the speedy deletion tag. <!-- Template:Db-catempty-notice --> <!-- Template:Db-csd-notice-custom --> <b>]]</b>&nbsp;(]&nbsp;•&nbsp;he/they) 21:14, 11 November 2024 (UTC)
Please tell me how you come up with edits such as that ascribe a taxon named by Frits Johansen to Reid Venable Moran? If there is a database somewhere that has such tangled information in it, then the administrators need to be made aware of the problem, or the database should be listed here as one to avoid. ] (]) 11:19, 9 July 2016 (UTC)

Latest revision as of 21:14, 11 November 2024

This is a Misplaced Pages user talk page.
This is not an encyclopedia article or the talk page for an encyclopedia article. If you find this page on any site other than Misplaced Pages, you are viewing a mirror site. Be aware that the page may be outdated and that the user whom this page is about may have no personal affiliation with any site other than Misplaced Pages. The original talk page is located at https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User_talk:Look2See1.

Today is Thursday, January 23, 2025; it is now 03:33 (UTC/GMT )

  • Please assume mutual good faith when communicating here.
This is Look2See1's talk page, where you can send them messages and comments.
Archives: Index, 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10Auto-archiving period: 30 days 
This user has been banned indefinitely from editing the English Misplaced Pages by Cyberpower678 (talk · contribs) on behalf of the community. Administrators, please review the banning policy before unblocking.
(block log · contributions · community consensus)

Archiving icon
Archives

Index 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10


This page has archives. Sections older than 30 days may be automatically archived by Lowercase sigmabot III.
This user has been awarded with the 100000 Edits award.
Subpages for this user
Subpages for this user:
Notes to self   
Commencing Note Box-Look2See1 t a l k → 23:32, 29 April 2010 (UTC)


REFERENCES and CITATIONS — {{help}}

{{helpme}}

How references work     

Simple references

These require two parts;

a)
Chzz is 98 years old.<ref> "The book of Chzz", Aardvark Books, 2009. </ref>
He likes tea. <ref>  </ref>
b) A section called "References" with the special code "{{reflist}}";
== References ==
{{reflist}}

(an existing article is likely to already have one of these sections)

To see the result of that, please look at user:chzz/demo/simpleref. Edit it, and check the code; perhaps make a test page of your own, such as user:Look2See1/reftest and try it out.

Named references

Chzz was born in 1837, <ref name="MyBook">
"The book of Chzz", Aardvark Books, 2009. 
</ref> in Footown.<ref name="MyBook"/>

Note that the second usage has a / (and no closing ref tag). This needs a reference section as above; please see user:chzz/demo/namedref to see the result.

Citation templates

You can put anything you like between <ref> and </ref>, but using citation templates makes for a neat, consistent look; 

Chzz has 37 Olympic medals. <ref> {{Citation
 | last = Smith
 | first = John
 | title = Olympic medal winners of the 20th century
 | publication-date = 2001
 | publisher = ]
 | page = 125
 | isbn = 0-521-37169-4
}}
</ref>

Please see user:chzz/demo/citeref to see the result.

For more help and tips on that subject, see user:chzz/help/refs.

Thanks

Thanks for the edit on the recent merge, will help
--George2001hi (talk) 19:13, 4 June 2010 (UTC)

Excellent Contributions

Barnstar

Thank you for correcting my misunderstanding about the layout of Tahrir Square. Looking at your contributions, it looks like you're doing a great job of editing articles about Egypt at a time when many of us want to learn more. 98.246.191.164 (talk) 19:48, 3 February 2011 (UTC)

Category:Cenozoic bears has been nominated for merging

Category:Cenozoic bears has been nominated for merging. A discussion is taking place to decide whether it complies with the categorization guidelines. If you would like to participate in the discussion, you are invited to add your comments at the category's entry on the categories for discussion page. Thank you. jlwoodwa (talk) 19:23, 29 September 2024 (UTC)

Category:Cenozoic horses has been nominated for merging

Category:Cenozoic horses has been nominated for merging. A discussion is taking place to decide whether it complies with the categorization guidelines. If you would like to participate in the discussion, you are invited to add your comments at the category's entry on the categories for discussion page. Thank you. jlwoodwa (talk) 19:39, 29 September 2024 (UTC)

Category:Cenozoic pinnipeds has been nominated for merging

Category:Cenozoic pinnipeds has been nominated for merging. A discussion is taking place to decide whether it complies with the categorization guidelines. If you would like to participate in the discussion, you are invited to add your comments at the category's entry on the categories for discussion page. Thank you. jlwoodwa (talk) 19:44, 29 September 2024 (UTC)

Speedy deletion nomination of Category:1804 disestablishments in Nueva California

A tag has been placed on Category:1804 disestablishments in Nueva California indicating that it is currently empty, and is not a disambiguation category, a category redirect, under discussion at Categories for discussion, or a project category that by its nature may become empty on occasion. If it remains empty for seven days or more, it may be deleted under section C1 of the criteria for speedy deletion.

If you think this page should not be deleted for this reason you may contest the nomination by visiting the page and removing the speedy deletion tag. HouseBlaster (talk • he/they) 21:14, 11 November 2024 (UTC)

User talk:Look2See1: Difference between revisions Add topic