Misplaced Pages

User talk:Mishae

Article snapshot taken from Wikipedia with creative commons attribution-sharealike license. Give it a read and then ask your questions in the chat. We can research this topic together.

This is an old revision of this page, as edited by Mishae (talk | contribs) at 21:35, 18 September 2012 (→A few comments). The present address (URL) is a permanent link to this revision, which may differ significantly from the current revision.

Revision as of 21:35, 18 September 2012 by Mishae (talk | contribs) (→A few comments)(diff) ← Previous revision | Latest revision (diff) | Newer revision → (diff)

Welcome!

Hello, Mishae, and welcome to Misplaced Pages! Thank you for your contributions. I hope you like the place and decide to stay. Unfortunately, one or more of the pages you created, like 4X4: Hummer, may not conform to some of Misplaced Pages's guidelines for page creation, and may soon be deleted.

You may also wish to consider using a Wizard to help you create articles. See the Article Wizard.

Thank you.

There's a page about creating articles you may want to read called Your first article. If you are stuck, and looking for help, please come to the New contributors' help page, where experienced Wikipedians can answer any queries you have! Or, you can just type {{helpme}} on this page, and someone will show up shortly to answer your questions. Here are a few other good links for newcomers:

I hope you enjoy editing here and being a Wikipedian! Please sign your name on talk pages using four tildes (~~~~); this will automatically produce your name and the date. If you have any questions, check out Misplaced Pages:Where to ask a question or ask me on my talk page. Again, welcome! ConcernedVancouverite (talk) 01:52, 20 September 2009 (UTC)

New pages

I note that you are creating a number of pages about invertebrates. Can you ensure that they conform to the Misplaced Pages Manual of Style. Also, makes sure the the stub templates and categories are not red-linked. Thanks. -- Alan Liefting (talk) - 05:19, 26 January 2012 (UTC)

They are red-linked because the current kind of invertebrate doesn't exist in English Misplaced Pages. I'm currently working on those articles with SuperHamster--Mishae (talk) 05:30, 26 January 2012 (UTC)
If you create an article with a redlinked category it is best to create the category at the same time. -- Alan Liefting (talk) - 23:13, 26 January 2012 (UTC)
I can't translate well, so I translate only a small stub articles. The category was too big for my translation skills. I hope its O.K. with you?--Mishae (talk) 23:17, 26 January 2012 (UTC)
There is no translation needed to create a category since they can be set up without any text. Note that I have set up Category:Clytrini. That is the genus you seem to be working on at present. -- Alan Liefting (talk) - 23:22, 26 January 2012 (UTC)

Italics

Can you please use italics for the species names as I did in the Clytra novempunctata article? Thanks. -- Alan Liefting (talk) - 23:14, 26 January 2012 (UTC)

One more point

Place the stub message template below the categories as I did with the Clytra novempunctata article. -- Alan Liefting (talk) - 23:25, 26 January 2012 (UTC)

No need. I am doing that too now.--Mishae (talk) 23:26, 26 January 2012 (UTC)
Welcome, and thanks for taking up the task of creating beetle articles! I have taken the liberty of copy editing your created articles. Could you have a look at what I have done? It might help when creating new articles. I for instance removed tribe and subfamily authorities from the articles about species (a species authority only needs the authority for the species itself and synonyms, subspecies, etc.). Furthermore, if the species has no common name, the latin name should always be in italics (also in the text, not only in the taxobox). Please check the taxobox contains the fields: species, binomial and binomial_authority. You had that for most, but some only had species and species_authority. I think that was about it. Please continue writing articles, you are doing a great job! Ruigeroeland (talk) 09:17, 27 January 2012 (UTC)
I removed tribe and subgenus from all my articles.--Mishae (talk) 23:32, 27 January 2012 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification

Hi. In your recent article edits, you've added some links pointing to disambiguation pages. Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.

Phytoecia virgula (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver)
added links pointing to Wormwood and Nard
Clytra quadripunctata (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver)
added a link pointing to Hawthorn
Dorcadion pusillum (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver)
added a link pointing to Suture
Longitarsus suturellus (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver)
added a link pointing to Sage

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 12:15, 27 January 2012 (UTC)

Перевод

Здравствуйте. Заметил с позавчера, что Вы переводите стабы о насекомых с ру.ВП, поскольку боты проставляют кучу новых интервик на мои статьи. Чего я хочу сказать. Заметил я, что в этих статьях не хватает тех ссылок в ен.ВП, которые проставлены в оригинальной статье в ру.ВП. Вопрос: почему?Afro-Braz-Ilian 08:27, 29 January 2012 (UTC)

Хороший ворос. Не знаю. А когда я переводил с русского на украинский было тоже самое? Кстати, меня на РуВП заблокировали чуть меньше года назад, но АК может меня разблокировать если будет наставник. Можете ли вы им быть, пожалуйста?--Mishae (talk) 15:07, 29 January 2012 (UTC)
По какой причине Вас блокировали? /// Наставником, я, не буду. Да и какой лично Вам нужен наставник? Чем он Вам мог бы помочь? /// Ну а источники нужно все проставлять. Я приблизительно догадываюсь почему Вы не расставляете референсы, наверное из-за того, что всех их нельзя просто скопировать и вставить в ен.ВП, а нужно ещё изменить шаблон на англоязычный, и тд. Но, есть простой выход.. можно просто со статьи из ру.ВП, когда Вы её только открыли - то есть читательное, а не редакционное окошко, и скопировать источник - просто выделив от автора до конца названия книги или статьи и вставить новый референс в ен.ВП под удобным Вам названием, и раскидав как раскидано по переведённой статье.

Приведу пример:

Вот атлас-определитель агиртидов, реферанс, который правильно подогнан под шаблон "Книга" в ру.ВП: 

<ref name="NikolaevKozminykh2002">{{книга|автор = Николаев Г. В. и Козьминых В. О.|часть = |заглавие = Жуки-мертвоеды (Coleoptera: Agrytidae, Siplhidae) Казахстана, России и ряда сопредельных стран. Определитель|оригинал = |ссылка = |ответственный = |издание = |место = Алматы|издательство = «Ќазаќ университеті»|год = 2002|том = |страницы = 36|страниц = 159|серия = |isbn = 9965-12-134-6|тираж = }}</ref>

Может показаться, что нужно брать английский шаблон и подгонять под него, вставляя авторов в топик aut, название статьи в name и т.д. Но совсем не обязательно так делать, да и переводить, это лично мне кажется, нелепостью, можно просто выделить со статьи → 

Николаев Г. В. и Козьминых В. О. Жуки-мертвоеды (Coleoptera: Agrytidae, Siplhidae) Казахстана, России и ряда сопредельных стран. Определитель — Алматы: «Ќазаќ университеті», 2002. — С. 36. — 159 с. — ISBN 9965-12-134-6.

и вставить в 

<ref name="NikolaevKozminykh2002"></ref>

под этим же названием, либо под другим, Вам придуманным. А название статьи, книги выделить наклонным шрифтом.

На этом моё наставничество заканчивается. Afro-Braz-Ilian 18:33, 29 January 2012 (UTC)

Странно, вы отказываетесь быть моим наставником, но инетересуетесь за что меня заблокировали? Ладно, история будет длинная: Дело в том что из за своей болезни я могу быть очень резким человеком, поэтому не удержался и ляпнул чего не надо. Все началось с того что я решил по редактировать весь кинематограф, может быть я это делал не так как "они хотели". Дело в том, что мне какой-то участник сказал что года в статьях про людей можно и не викифицировать. При том при всем, это был администратор, а не просто "участник"! Я послушался и начал девикифицировать года. После чего, посыпались сообщения на моё СО впредь до предупреждений. Не говоря уже о том что я терпеть не могу когда кто-то "врываеться" в моё СО, с "криком" Остановитесь. Я решил это "предупреждение" удалить через полгода, но администратор поставил его на место. Однако, ведь можно все сообщения просматривать через "просмотр истории"? Ибо по ихним правилам было сказано что "предупреждения потерявшые актуальность могут быть удалены не ранее чем через неделю". Дальше идёт другая "петрушка": Дело в том, что первые 4 мои статьи про кинематограф, были нарушением авторских прав, что в прочем не самое лучшее, но как первые статьи это простительно. Так шёл месяц, другой, мои статьи стали получаться лучше, притензий не у кого не было. Вдруг, я решил по редактировать и началось. Моё СО было завалено предупреждениями, даже сравнением меня с одним из заблокированых участников, что меня в обще взбесило. Чем люди были не довольны ума не прилажу. Вроде бы в РуВики есть правило "правьте смело", которое я взял на вооружение. Но как мне пояснили, "вы занимаетесь разпатрулированием статей", т.е, я накручиваю счётчик правок. А как мне делать правки без этого? После этого я решил: "Ладно, мои правки им не нравяться, я напишу новую статью, плюс, меня уже давно просили об этом". Что я и сделал. За весь год я создал 124 статьи в РуВики, что в сумме стаж участника, а не вандала, которым они меня называли там. Я создал очередную статью, и опять у меня вышел, к сожалению, плагиат. Меня выдали предупреждение, типа: "ещё раз увижу, зблокирую". Я решил это предупреждение удалить, заметив что моё СО уже кишит всякими предупреждениями, и другими репликами. Потом мне объяснили что "участник не имеет право удалять сообщения за искючением вандальных или пустых реплик". Мне казалось, что большинство реплик на моей СО были пустыми, поэтому я удалил предупреждение ещё раз, на сей раз другое. После этого, мне было выдано последнее предупреждение которое патрулирующий назвал "китайским". Не понимаю при чём тут это, и в обще не зная шутки такой я удалил его "китайское предупреждение", после чего настала блокировка. Озверевший на всю ситуацию я выяснил что патрулирующий работает над проектом "Израиль", а значит еврей. Я, со злобы, послал следующее сообщение заблокировавшему меня администратору, Андрею Романенко (знаете такого?): "Мало вас немцы били!" "Чтоб вы сдохли!", и всё такое. Сообразив что я слишком "горячо" высказался, я послал ему извинения, но было уже поздно. Вся "административная орава" уже кричала "в бессрочку его!", которую я потом и получил. И не одну, а две сразу. Одну, за удаление предупреждения, а второе, за оскорбление, за которые я правда извинился. После этого, я подал иск в АК. Но наглые администраторы включили автоблокировку, о которой я не знал. А арбитры отказали мне в разблокировке, из за её обхода. В настоящий момент я жду, что бы подать ещё раз, через 3 месяца. АК сказал что он может меня разблокировать только если у меня будет наставник, ибо так решила эта "тройка". В прочем, зря я вам это говорю, вы моим наставником все равно там не будете... Если я чего-то сказанул что являеться "оскорблением" в той или иной форме, прошу прощения.--Mishae (talk) 22:48, 29 January 2012 (UTC)
А, ясно. Ну, что я могу сказать... не надо было девикифицировать то, о чём сказано - "...не обязательно викифицировать...". С оскорблениями и выведением из себя, я и сам попадал, и даже два раза был блокирован... причина я молод и латыш, то есть не русский, и русским не владею, не то чтобы совсем, а не в совершенстве. Но как Вы могли заметить, по моему с Вами диалогу, это не совсем так. Да, и это не значит если участник участник какому-нибудь национального или этнического проекта сам такой. Но иногда... . Я думаю, что Вам больше повезёт в этом проекте, нежели в ру.ВП. Afro-Braz-Ilian 16:55, 30 January 2012 (UTC)
Спасибо за моральную поддержку, вы настоящий друг. Не то что эти на руВики которым любой "пук", выше нормы! Вот и я об этом. Если хотите, можете взглянуть на мою статью. Вас блокировали на максимум три дня, меня бессрочно. Две разные вещи. В русской Википедии плохо понимают юмор. Вам повезло а они могли вам за шутку тоже впаять, они же в руВики очень обидчивые. Советую вам перейти в Традицию, там все равны.--Mishae (talk) 02:41, 31 January 2012 (UTC)
О Традиции знаю, один участник предлагал взять участие в данном проекте, но я скажу Вам, что мне не по душе данный проект. Причина тому - мне нужны подтверждённые данные и конкретика, с указанием всех источников, которые использовались при написании, там тоже можно, но только можно, и нет правила ОРИСС как в ВП. /// Дабы меня не блокировали навечно - бессрочно я старался обходить грубость и обзывания. ||| Я могу Вам предлагать создавать, то есть давать ссылки на те тексты, которые Вы можете переводить на энглиш проставляя в них все мною проставленные ссылки и Вы будете здесь в почёте. Afro-Braz-Ilian 15:40, 31 January 2012 (UTC)
Договорились! Я бы мог обойтись без грубостей и обзываней, но прочитайте мую страницу участника, и вы поймете почему не в силах иногга это сделать, особенно если меня критикуют, и правацируют. Я очень плохо воспренимаю критику, просто хочу предупредить, что бы не было как в РуВики. Что косаеться ссылок в Традиции, вы имеете полное право перевести любую статью из РуВики в Традицию, и ни кто вам ни чего не скажет. Единственное что нужно будет сделать это поставить шаблон Википедия, и вставить ссылку на википедийскую статью.--Mishae (talk) 21:50, 31 January 2012 (UTC)
Про то, что и как в Традиции можно править я знаю, уже участвовал. /// Читал. /// Я постепенно правлю свои старые статьи в ру.ВП и выписываю исправленные в отдельную собственнуюстраничку, тоже самое я делаю с хорошими новыми статьями. Эти списки постоянно обновляю, по ним Вы можете ссылаться на те статьи в которых оптимальная (о количестве информации) и подтверждённая информация, и переводить на английский. Желаю удачи. Если какие вопросы будут возникать в процессе, то пишите мне в СО в ен.ВП, я часто хожу сюда статьи читать. Afro-Braz-Ilian 04:31, 1 February 2012 (UTC)

Re:Images

I dont understand.. These images are copyrighted as far as I can see.. We cannot use them on wikipedia. Ruigeroeland (talk) 07:54, 14 February 2012 (UTC)

O', didn't knew that, sorry. But can you find me some that don't? Plus, how come putting a game or DVD cover is not considered to be a copyright violation, while putting a picture of a bug is? Like, how did you put the images in your articles (I hope I am not accusing you?)--Mishae (talk) 19:35, 14 February 2012 (UTC)
Read this to understand what images you can use: http://commons.wikimedia.org/Special:UploadWizard Ruigeroeland (talk) 23:55, 14 February 2012 (UTC)
So, I read it. Are you implying that the photos you have on your articles, are the ones you take yourself. I doudt that some of this animals live anywhere in this nation?--Mishae (talk) 00:47, 15 February 2012 (UTC)
no, they were made by someone else, but they released them under a free licence. If you edit an article on wikipedia you also release your text under a free licence. People can also do this with pictures, music, etc. Ruigeroeland (talk) 07:48, 15 February 2012 (UTC)
Oh, and to clarify: a dvd or cd cover is copyrighted, but using these is considered "Fair use". This is because there is no free alternative for a cover (a dvd has only one cover). This is not the case for a picture of an animal. You can also read more about uploading images here Misplaced Pages:Uploading images. Ruigeroeland (talk) 13:16, 15 February 2012 (UTC)
Thanks, that clears everything, sorry if it took me that long to get the point! So, can you find me a non copyrighted images? Another thing, the reason why I sent the images to you, wasn't my idea to scare you, like forcing you into illegal activity. I sent because I tought you will find a way how to make them not copyrighted, like free use, or contacting the site administrator (that sometimes they do on the Russian wikipedia). Again, if you tought that I forced you to do something wqrong, I am deeply sorry about it.--Mishae (talk) 21:03, 15 February 2012 (UTC)
No worries. I would like to help you out, but I really dont have the time for that. I usually dont include a picture if I cannot find a free one. If you are looking for pictures, first try Wikimedia commons. If there are no pictures there, you could try Flickr. Please note that most pictures on Flickr are copyrighted though! But you may find some free ones to use.

Another thing though: I noticed you started making a some one sentence stubs on species. This is generally not ok. You should at least put in distribution data (where it lives) and a reference. Furthermore: the source you are using to create them is out of date. I found two who are no longer in the genus Agonum anymore. See: Agonum arizonensis, which is now in another genus. I suggest you use a good source to find the current Taxonomy. A good place to start might be: http://carabidae.pro/carabidae.html. And please: add all synonyms if you make an article. This is very important for insect articles to prevent making several pages about the same species. Ruigeroeland (talk) 09:30, 16 February 2012 (UTC)

Ok, I now see you made A LOT of these one sentence articles without a reference. Please stop doing this. Most of these are not even valid species anymore. They are either synonyms or placed in another genus. Please use a good source like the website I mentioned: http://carabidae.pro/carabidae.html Ruigeroeland (talk) 09:54, 16 February 2012 (UTC)
Yeah, I wanted to tell you earlier, but since I already fill you up with questions, I decided not too. I now put references in majority of my articles, thanks to your site!--Mishae (talk) 05:43, 17 February 2012 (UTC)

Parentheses

Not too long ago, I asked you to be careful about adding and removing parentheses from taxonomic authorities. I notice that you have again been adding misinformation to Misplaced Pages in this way. Please stop. --Stemonitis (talk) 20:28, 21 February 2012 (UTC)

Spelling of synonym

Hello Mishae. I have a short remark: I noticed you are adding synonyms to the taxoboxes now. Great! One thing though: you spell synonym as synonim. This is incorrect. As a result the synonyms are not visible in the taxobox. Please check if you spelled it right from now on and the problem should be fixed. Thanks. Ruigeroeland (talk) 07:59, 23 February 2012 (UTC)

Authorities

And please make sure you add the right authority for a species. In Neocrepidodera ferruginea, you added Heikertinger 1911 as the species authority. This is not correct. This is the author of the GENUS. The author of the species is Scopoli 1763. See . It is really important to get this right. Ruigeroeland (talk) 08:08, 23 February 2012 (UTC)

I'm soooo sorry! Some sites listed it as that so I added as that. But, you know better, I wont argue. Again, I am sorry for the incorrection. Another thing to point out: Just recently I learned where I need to put the prentecies and where not. So, I am learning slowly. I'm sorry if it took me 2 months to learn it! You see, different Wikipedias have different way to write the word synonyms. Some Wikipedias like Russian for example, will have | Syn =, and then synonyms will be written in Russian. In Ukranian though, its different, you write the same thing as above, and it will automatically give the Ukranian word for it! English on the other hand, is requering you to write the whole word, which I didn't knew about. Just to let you know, I have CP and autism, so it will take me a bit longer to get the point. So, yeah, I am appologizing for the third time, and I would like to thank you for having patience with me. O' and if its not hard, you can call me just Misha, I don't mind if people call me by my user name, but then again, you can drop the e and you will get my name.--Mishae (talk) 18:51, 23 February 2012 (UTC)

No worries, I had the same sort of problems when starting out. You just need to find some sites you can trust. A good tip might be to use Fauna Europaea for European species. See: http://www.faunaeur.org/ It lists distribution, authority and some synonyms (not all of them most of the time though). Cheers and keep it up! Ruigeroeland (talk) 07:49, 24 February 2012 (UTC)

New Biology-related articles

The Tireless Contributor Barnstar
Thanks for your recent run of new Biology-related articles. Your efforts to improve Misplaced Pages are appreciated! Northamerica1000 07:25, 24 February 2012 (UTC)

Arab Institute for the Holocaust Research and Education

A couple of things. One, does this institute meet our guidelines for notability at WP:ORG? The answer is yes, but you haven't shown it. You need to find sources discussing it, which is easy. I've added an external link to a German newspaper which is recent - use Chrome to translate it easily. I've also moved it to its correct title, which is Arab Institute for Holocaust Research and Education. Dougweller (talk) 10:28, 2 March 2012 (UTC)

Thanks! About The Egyptian Peasant and your link: I hope you have noticed that I tried to minimize plegiarism as possible. You see, I was banned from editing on the Russian Misplaced Pages, for the same reason. So, I am sheepish to do anything bad.--Mishae (talk) 14:37, 2 March 2012 (UTC)

How to avoid copyvio text

As I've said, your text needs to look substantial different in organisation and language. See Misplaced Pages:Close paraphrasing for more guidance. Dougweller (talk) 10:29, 2 March 2012 (UTC)

Nomination of Al-Manara Square for deletion

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Al-Manara Square is suitable for inclusion in Misplaced Pages according to Misplaced Pages's policies and guidelines or whether it should be deleted.

The article will be discussed at Misplaced Pages:Articles for deletion/Al-Manara Square until a consensus is reached, and anyone is welcome to contribute to the discussion. The nomination will explain the policies and guidelines which are of concern. The discussion focuses on good quality evidence, and our policies and guidelines.

Users may edit the article during the discussion, including to improve the article to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the article-for-deletion template from the top of the article. RichardMills65 (talk) 03:53, 5 March 2012 (UTC)

Hi, Misha - Sam

Hi, Misha. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Urness.sam (talk • contribs) 22:19, 5 March 2012 (UTC)

A cup of tea for you!

Здравствуйте. Прочёл Вашу просьбу и не понял, почему Вы полагаете, что в Википедии бессрочно не блокируют участников, над которыми ставят наставников? Ваша вера в то, что наставник сможет наставить Вас на правильные действия при редактировании Вами статей и защитить Вас от блокировок и недоразумений, безосновательна. Psychiatrick (talk) 23:57, 29 March 2012 (UTC)

Misplaced Pages Stories Project

Привет!

Меня зовут Виктор, и я рассказчик с Wikimedia Foundation, некоммерческая организация, которая поддерживает Википедию. Я хронику вдохновляющие истории общины Википедии по всему миру, в том числе и от читателей, редакторов и доноров. Истории совершенно необходимы для любой некоммерческой, чтобы убедить людей, чтобы поддержать дело, и мы знаем, обширная сеть людей, которые делают и используют Википедии так много акций.

Я чистящих страниц пользователей ищет вдохновлять, мотивировать и интересных историй о том, как Википедия влияют на жизнь людей. Я задавал вопросы вроде "Как Википедия изменила вашу жизнь?", "Какая самая интересная история у вас есть о Википедии?" и "Википедии ли когда-нибудь вас удивило?"

В прошлом году мы использовали ежегодный сбор средств как способ показать миру, кто есть кто на самом деле пишет Википедия. Мы признакам редакторов из Бразилии, Украины, Аргентины, Саудовской Аравии, Кении, Индии, США и Англии. Эта кампания имела огромный успех, в результате чего наиболее финансово успешных кампании по сбору средств никогда. Кроме того, было кампании, остался верен духу Википедии, просвещение общественности, что это бесплатно ТОП-5 Сайт создан добровольцами, как ты и я

В этом году мы хотим выделить еще русский язык Википедии редакторов, так что я нахожусь в процессе планирования поездки в Россию в интервью редакторам.

Если вы или кто-то из ваших знакомых (или слышали о) была положительно сказалось на Misplaced Pages, или есть что-то интересное, чтобы сказать о Википедии я бы очень хотел бы услышать об этом!

Пожалуйста, дайте мне знать, если вы склонны к участию в проекте Википедия истории, или если вы знаете кого-то еще, с кем я должен говорить.

Конечно, если у вас есть какие-либо вопросы или сомнения, пожалуйста, обращайтесь! Я отвечу, как только смогу. Я приношу извинения за любые плохой перевод этого письма, я использую Google-перевод. Я надеюсь, что заставляет вас смеяться :)

Спасибо за ваше время,

Victor Grigas

http://en.wikipedia.org/User:Victorgrigas

vgrigas@wikimedia.org

__________________________________

Hi!

My name is Victor and I'm a storyteller with the Wikimedia Foundation, the non-profit organization that supports Misplaced Pages. I'm chronicling the inspiring stories of the Misplaced Pages community around the world, including those from readers, editors, and donors. Stories are absolutely essential for any non-profit to persuade people to support the cause, and we know the vast network of people who make and use Misplaced Pages have so much to share.

I'm scouring user pages looking for inspiring, motivating and interesting stories of how Misplaced Pages has affected the lives of people. I'm asking questions like "How has Misplaced Pages changed your life?", "What's the most interesting story you have about Misplaced Pages?" and "Has Misplaced Pages ever surprised you?"

Last year, we used the annual fundraiser as a way to show the world who it is who actually writes Misplaced Pages. We featured editors from Brazil, Ukraine, Argentina, Saudi Arabia, Kenya, India, United States and England. This campaign was a huge success, resulting in the most financially successful fundraising campaign ever. It was also a campaign that stayed true to the spirit of Misplaced Pages, educating the public that this free top-5 website is created by volunteers like you and I.

This year we want to highlight more Russian-language Misplaced Pages editors, so I am in the process of planning a trip to Russia to interview editors.

If you or someone you know (or have heard about) has been positively affected by Misplaced Pages, or have something interesting to say about Misplaced Pages I'd very much like to hear about it!

Please let me know if you're inclined to take part in the Misplaced Pages Stories Project, or if you know someone else with whom I should speak.

Of course, if you have any questions or concerns, please ask! I will answer as soon as I can. I apologize for any poor translation of this letter, I am using Google-translate. I hope it makes you laugh :)

Thank you for your time,

Victor Grigas

http://en.wikipedia.org/User:Victorgrigas

vgrigas@wikimedia.org

Victor Grigas (talk) 00:33, 6 April 2012 (UTC)

Science lovers wanted!

Science lovers wanted!
Hi! I'm serving as the wikipedian-in-residence at the Smithsonian Institution Archives until June! One of my goals as resident, is to work with Wikipedians and staff to improve content on Misplaced Pages about people who have collections held in the Archives - most of these are scientists who held roles within the Smithsonian and/or federal government. I thought you might like to participate since you are interested in the sciences! Sign up to participate here and dive into articles needing expansion and creation on our to-do list. Feel free to make a request for images or materials at the request page, and of course, if you share your successes at the outcomes page you will receive the SIA barnstar! Thanks for your interest, and I look forward to your participation! Sarah (talk) 18:32, 16 April 2012 (UTC)

SIA project!

Hey Misha! So happy that you came by the Smithsonian Institution Archives project and signed up to participate! We've got a great list of subjects that need to be improved upon or written about. I do hope you'll visit the to-do list and dive in - do let me know if you need anything. And of course, your contributions can earn you the official oh so fancy SIA barnstar :) Thanks again! So happy to have you on board! SarahStierch (talk) 23:08, 19 April 2012 (UTC)

Thanks!

Thanks Mishae, for starting a new article on Truncatella californica, a species of gastropod! The folks at WikiProject Gastropods are grateful for a new stub to improve our coverage. Invertzoo (talk) 13:39, 28 April 2012 (UTC)

You are so wellcome! I will try to find some more, and maybe expand on the genus.--Mishae (talk) 14:51, 28 April 2012 (UTC)
Thanks, you are kind. Also thanks for the two Bullina articles. Invertzoo (talk) 10:38, 29 April 2012 (UTC)
Again, you are so welcome. I hope not only the folks, but the gastropods themselves are grateful too! Hey, its the articles about us, weeeee!! :)

Sincerely,

Gastropods.--Mishae (talk) 15:59, 29 April 2012 (UTC)

Your post on my talk page

Sorry, I was taking a break. Not sure I have time to help right now in any case, but if it's an emergency, of course. Dougweller (talk) 14:32, 18 May 2012 (UTC)

You may try. I was warned once more for copyvio, this time it was close paraphrasing. I'm just afraid that I might get blocked if I will do it one more time! And you know, I don't have intention to violate any policies on Misplaced Pages, including copyvio.--Mishae (talk) 20:50, 18 May 2012 (UTC)

Edward MacDowell infobox and your recent article tagging

Hi, I see that you recently dared to put an infobox on a classical music biography! The classical music Wikiprojects are very insular and have their own specific standards for articles that the rest of the community is supposed to adhere to. They are very protective of these standards, one of which is that no infoboxes are supposed to be on any of their articles. Yes, its absurd as well-done infoboxes will give thousands of articles a more professional appearance and make finding key bits of information much easier. But who are we to question their wisdom?

But, rant aside, by adding all those "do not add an infobox per the classical wikiproject" tags to articles you are spreading misinformation about the way project-wide consensus works. If you could stop that I'd be appreciative. ThemFromSpace 17:05, 20 May 2012 (UTC)

User Jerome Kohl was in support of it. That way people will know that they are not suppose to add the infobox. Won't you agree?--Mishae (talk) 17:30, 20 May 2012 (UTC)
And indeed a lot of classical composer articles have them already. I honestly never have and probably never will understand the collective hate toward them in that one specific area but the want to try and keep "other" editor's hands off "their" articles is far from limited to infoboxes (such as the recent discussion on Talk:Wolfgang Amadeus Mozart. ♫ Melodia Chaconne ♫ (talk) 17:59, 20 May 2012 (UTC)
O.K. Then maybe you can explain why such infobox is placed in this article?: Lucien Capet. And he is not alone, just to let you know.--Mishae (talk) 20:18, 20 May 2012 (UTC)

Linking to disambiguation pages

Hello, Mishae, and thank you for your edits. Your recent edits to Elipsocus pumilis, Ectopsocus briggsi, Ectopsocus petersi and other similar pages included a number of links to disambiguation pages. These include Ash, Elder, and Lime. I've corrected several of these, but you may want to have a look back at these and other pages you edited to ensure that there are no more links to disambiguation pages, or that my repairs have not accidentally linked to the wrong page. Happy editing, Cnilep (talk) 04:11, 25 May 2012 (UTC)

Species from Great Britain, most of them have a larger distribution in Europe

Hello Mishae, great to see you are still making species articles, keep it up! Would you be so kind to use Fauna Europaea for European species next to the source you are already using? You are now saying a species is found in Great Britain and Ireland, but most of these species have a much wider distribution. You can easily find the distribution (within Europe) of ALL European animals by using Fauna Europaea. Go to , Put the name of the genus in the field "(Sub) Genus" and the name of the species in "(Sub) species" and click search. Click on the species you are looking for in the result page. You get the page displaying the taxonomy of the species (including synonyms). Then scroll down and click "display in table" or "display on map" to see where the species is found in Europe. See for instance for Stenopsocus stigmaticus, a page you made recently. Cheers! Ruigeroeland (talk) 07:54, 25 May 2012 (UTC)

Common names and italics

Hello Mishae! May I ask why you are moving the italics from the binomial name to the common name, like you did here? Curiously, jonkerz ♠talk 00:31, 28 May 2012 (UTC)

Perhaps people would look onto a common name rather than a scientific name. O' and I don't move italics, I just add 2 extra (') to the bold text. Mean time, I remove the 2 (') from binomial name, in order for it not to look double bolded. If it bothers you, let me know.--Mishae (talk) 00:36, 28 May 2012 (UTC)
These changes should be reverted since binomial names should always be in italics, while common names should almost never be italicized; this is the style used throughout most of science, and also the style used on Misplaced Pages (see WP:ITALICS). jonkerz ♠talk 00:51, 28 May 2012 (UTC)
This is exactly what I tried to do. How about this: Grey Antbird--Mishae (talk) 00:52, 28 May 2012 (UTC)
The italics on the binomial name is good, but italic type should not be used on common names without a good reason, and your use goes against the established style. See Eurasian Tree Sparrow for an example of a featured article following the manual of style. jonkerz ♠talk 01:04, 28 May 2012 (UTC)
See, the user before me used bold text on binomial, I decided to correct it which ended up with this for example: Grey Antbird. Now, am I did this article right or not?--Mishae (talk) 01:08, 28 May 2012 (UTC)
This is how it should look. I only removed the italics from the common name. jonkerz ♠talk 01:13, 28 May 2012 (UTC)
Thanks! I apologize for anything that I did wrong, by trying to do it right.--Mishae (talk) 01:16, 28 May 2012 (UTC)
No problem :) Keep up the good work, cheers, jonkerz ♠talk 01:20, 28 May 2012 (UTC)
Before you go, question, is it the same with every animal? Because I used to do insects and I did the same thing there, no body told me though it was a mistake.--Mishae (talk) 01:23, 28 May 2012 (UTC)

(outdent) Yes, the same style should be used on all animal (and plant) articles. I corrected a few articles linked from your user page. Many other have been edited by other users, such as this article (the same user also posted a message to your talk page here). Here is an excerpt from WP:ITALICS about when italics should be used:

"Genus and all lower taxa (including species and subspecies), but not higher taxa. The entire scientific name should be italicized, except where an author, 'cf.', or some other interpolation is included in or appended to the name. (See #Scientific names for details.)"

If you're not certain, you can try to follow the link and see how it was done in that article. For example, on Early sunshiner, Carabidae should not be in italics, but Amara should. And Early sunshiner should be in bold because it's the article's title, and Amara famelica should be in italics because it's a binomial name.

I have to go to sleep now, but feel free to ask me anything if you have any questions, and I'll answer them in the morning. jonkerz ♠talk 01:55, 28 May 2012 (UTC)

commas and parentheses

Hi, Mishae. I see you're changing lead sentences in biology articles from the form "The Crimson-collared Tanager, Ramphocelus sanguinolentus," to the form "The Crimson-collared Tanager (Ramphocelus sanguinolentus),". Thanks for making them conform with the MOS. However, please note that when you do that, you should delete the second comma as well, so it should look like "The Crimson-collared Tanager (Ramphocelus sanguinolentus) is a rather small Middle American songbird." See Misplaced Pages:Manual of Style/Lead_section#Organisms. Thank you. —JerryFriedman (Talk) 05:12, 28 May 2012 (UTC)

I've fixed that article and Lazuli Bunting. You did it correctly at Rufous-bellied Saltator. —JerryFriedman (Talk) 05:14, 28 May 2012 (UTC)
Thanks for not blocking me, altough unfortunately, I already did the same thing to fishes and mammals alike.--Mishae (talk) 09:53, 28 May 2012 (UTC)

Persondata

Why are you removing persondata templates from articles? Deor (talk) 02:52, 29 May 2012 (UTC)

If the userbox is present why should the person data be there? Besides, there is more info in the texabox then in persondata, don't you think?--Mishae (talk) 02:54, 29 May 2012 (UTC)
Click on the link in my post above. Persondata is metadata that serves a different purpose from the displayed infoboxes in articles. Please revert your removals of these templates. Deor (talk) 03:02, 29 May 2012 (UTC)
I read it, but what purpose does it serve? Doesn't it takes some gigs away, like gigs on Wikiservers? By the way, I don't have any reverting tools such as HotCat and others, so can you do it for me. I will stop. Plus, from what I can tell only English, German, French, Polish, and Spanish have it, others don't, so whats the point?--Mishae (talk) 03:06, 29 May 2012 (UTC)
I don't use automated tools either, so I've asked at Misplaced Pages:Administrators' noticeboard/Archive236#Need a batch revert for someone to revert the removals. The relevant passage in the page I directed you to explains that persondata "unlike conventional Misplaced Pages content, can be automatically extracted and processed by cataloging tools and then used for a variety of purposes, such as providing advanced search capabilities, statistical analysis, automated categorization, and birthday lists". The information in infoboxes can't be used for these purposes. Deor (talk) 03:27, 29 May 2012 (UTC)
O.K. So, I stoped. Questions: 1. Is it designed for Misplaced Pages staff only (as far as I can tell from your post)? and 2. Why does Misplaced Pages need Categorization or Birthday lists in persondata if the userbox have exactly the same info, if not more detailed such as alma mater and other stuff, which all of the persondata lacks off? I'm sorry if I did something wrong, hope I won't be blocked!--Mishae (talk) 03:36, 29 May 2012 (UTC)
I've just finished reverting all of those edits (I think). Please do not do that again. The PERSONDATA is in the article for external websites to scan from database dumps because it is in machine-readable format. The infoboxes are so varied and commonly contain references that computers cannot parse the data. And no, I'm not going to block you. Reaper Eternal (talk) 03:44, 29 May 2012 (UTC)
Thanks for clarification Reaper, I am personaly sorry if I caused any destraction toward your site. Sometimes I use the common sense, but sometimes I lack of it. Plus, since I don't know Java, HTML, XML, or SQL scripts, my common sense versus computer language is apparently pointless. Again sorry if I caused any major trouble.--Mishae (talk) 03:47, 29 May 2012 (UTC)
(edit conflict) Hi Mishae, not to beat a dead horse (I think you have the idea now) but the equivalent of Persondata exists on around twenty Wikipedias including German de:Vorlage:Personendaten and French fr:Modèle:Métadonnées personne. Thanks for understanding, cheers! --joe decker 03:59, 29 May 2012 (UTC)

Thanks. You see, my assumption was at first, that PERSONDATA was used so that people could put an infobox instead of the PERSONDATA, and that was the reason why I deleted it. My other assumption was that it might take som gigs away, and perhaps thats the main reason why other Wikis such as Russian, Ukranian and Belarussian, among others, don't use it. But if its a useful tool, and it doesn't take a lot of space, despite having all caps, then I won't mess with it. Another question though, if its used to scan from database dumps of the external websites, why can't we use the same thing for every article? Every article is online based, so therefore, shouldn't it be used in every article, like animals for example?--Mishae (talk) 04:30, 29 May 2012 (UTC)

I can only answer some of those questions, if you want a smarter/deeper discussion on this I'd suggest here as a start.
But a few comments: it's important to understand that PERSONDATA is part of a whole variety of efforts to improve machine usability of the information in Misplaced Pages. (See, for example, dbPedia) And, like most of Misplaced Pages, it's a work in progress, which may explain why it's not "every" Misplaced Pages, etc.
For machine-usable information, you'd need to create a whole lot of structures for other types of information -- the characteristics important to, and generally available for people (birth date, occupation) don't necessarily make sense for biological species, or films, or... so longer term semantic machine-processable information would need to expand its range of templates, or ... well, we'll have to see. It may be (and again, WT:PERSONDATA is a better place to ask) this information will become a part of the new Wikidata initiative, but if it does, that information will have to come from somewhere, and right now the existing supply of PERSONDATA templates is in many ways the most reliable single place to start getting that information.
Hope this helps! --joe decker 05:44, 29 May 2012 (UTC)
There is something similar already in use, Misplaced Pages:WikiProject Microformats/hcard. CambridgeBayWeather (talk) 07:53, 29 May 2012 (UTC)
Many thanks, thats explain everything for me! So far I know of WikipediaCommons.--Mishae (talk) 12:37, 29 May 2012 (UTC)

Editing Misplaced Pages never takes "som gigs away". Edits, deletions, and other actions only ever increase the size of the database. Uncle G (talk) 13:24, 29 May 2012 (UTC)

  • Uncle G, can you please not mock my spelling. Plus, how do I know, as I said before, I don't know any computer language such as SQL and others. Thanks though, for your explanation.--Mishae (talk) 13:35, 29 May 2012 (UTC)
  • Uncle G, that is not wholly correct, though it is a message that needs constantly hammering home at RfD. While all edits do increase the size of the basic database, it is possible to increase it by less by making certain other changes at the same time, the "action" that reduces the saved page size, can reasonably be said to be decreasing the size of the database. For example removing all trailing spaces (from content pages alone) would decrease the size of the database by a significant amount (substantially over 30M), and every time a version of all pages was saved another 30M would be saved. So over about 30 edits a gig is saved. That is substantial. Add the mirrors, backups, copies and data dumps and the amount multiplies up substantially.

    Moreover reductions in page size do reduce the size of some of the XML dumps. Again many many copies of these are made, so we are talking significant amounts of disk, bandwidth, electricity, cost, CO2 etc.

    Thirdly, and somewhat tangentially, intelligent template coding can sometimes reduce the size of rendered pages substantially, although WP pages carry a massive overhead of cruft that we cannot affect. Rich Farmbrough, 16:34, 29 May 2012 (UTC).

    • You're going to confuse poor Mishae with this, especially with the Newspeak that "increasing the size of database by less than it could be increased by" equals "decreasing the size of the database". Away to The Pump with you, stingy whitespace-scrimper! ☺ Uncle G (talk) 17:31, 29 May 2012 (UTC)
Uncle G, as you can see I am not blind, and yes, I can tell the difference between quotation and mockery. I maybe miss understood you, but I certanly won't say "Any mockery exists solely in your mind", just because I miss understood you. To be honest, you are not perfect either (at least I think that, not all humans think the same). For example you wrote: "only ever". To me, that might be an incorect spelling of English, but how do I know. I'm Russian, I also have autism (if you didn't read my userpage yet). I don't even know what version of English do you speak, American, Australian, or British? And no, its not Rich Farmbrough that confuses me, its unfortunately you! At least the mentioning of The Pump was in my opinion unnecessary, not to mention I don't know anything about that either. Now, unlike Joe Decker, you are just started beating a dead horse (i.e. started a whole new discussion out of nothing). Do you want to continue? Fine, I will be more then happy to argue, and maybe either win or lose it. As far as sending Rich Farmbrough to The Pump, how about you turn yourself to the RfD? Maybe you will learn a thing or two.--Mishae (talk) 22:54, 29 May 2012 (UTC)
As far as this quotation from Rich Farmbrough goes: "Again many many copies of these are made, so we are talking significant amounts of disk". Bingo! That means that the more data we have in our Misplaced Pages the more disc space we need (i.e. buying new servers, etc). On whose money are we buying it? Aha! Ours. Yes, our money that we donate to this wonderful site goes to Wikimedia foundation to pay for servers and other technical stuff such software, and probably, yes, even the PERSONDATA (however, I might be wrong). I know that some of it goes into Jimbo Wales's and his 3 admins account as well, but thats another story for another discussion, which I don't want to start. On the other hand (since that data means articles), the more we have that data, the more users would come to join the project.--Mishae (talk) 23:19, 29 May 2012 (UTC)

Pointless edits

Please stop making edits such as this, which make no difference to the visual appearance of an article. That includes removing new-line characters that do not introduce line breaks, removing spaces in template syntax, and so on. Please also note that stub tags should not be moved before the categories, as you have been doing, and that two empty lines should be retained before the stub tag, to ensure it is separated from the articles' contents. --Stemonitis (talk) 18:36, 31 May 2012 (UTC)

Fine, I wont move the tag. Question: Can I somehow, patrol the articles by myself? At least the ones I write. I will try to make as less pointless edits as possible, but I don't understand whats wrong with it? Its not vandalism! O' and Rich Farmbrough told me by doing such edits it will minimize the ammount of space on servers.--Mishae (talk) 20:44, 31 May 2012 (UTC)
It does, but the community does not support it, partly because they do not understand it (there are some good reasons against it, but only one editor ever brings them up), so best to not worry about it until the culture has moved on. (The benefit is not huge.) Stubs, by the way should go after categories. Generally we try to make these small changes at the same time as something more substantial. This is where Uncle G's point is important. Again not a massive deal, but every increases the database size. Really we could put together a priority list
  1. Improving content
  2. Improving style (including little things like spelling and layout)
  3. Marking problems
  4. Avoiding excess edits
  5. Tiny improvements (on AWB "minor fixes)

So from my point of view if you are doing 1,2 or 3 doing 5 too is a good idea. But some people disagree, some of them quite violently.

One solution is to used AWB, which has an option "skip if minor fixes only" - this is fairly useful, as the community at large accepts that the AWB developers have their heads screwed on right, and draw the line between minor and non-minor in about the right place. All the best.

Rich Farmbrough, 21:15, 31 May 2012 (UTC).

So what if I do 4 and 5, will that be still O.K.? Question: So, how do I get that AWB thingy? Because I want it to be installed on my pages in the Ukranian Misplaced Pages, otherwise I was blocked there for 2 days for pointless edits, and I don't want it to happen here. Another thing, how long I need to wait till the community will move on, I don't want to wait a 100 years for it to happen! To be honest, I have my own reasons why I am doing it. Now, maybe its happens because of something else, but I get "error message" every few months from Misplaced Pages servers. To tell you the truth, my computer is only a year old, and I even use Google Chrome. Usually they are only few minutes, but once I had for an hour, until I restarted my computer, and Misplaced Pages went great from that point on. But it still reminds me of that.--Mishae (talk) 21:44, 31 May 2012 (UTC)
Rich is right that every edit increases the space on servers, but we should not really be worrying about server space as editors (WP:DWAP). It's more important not to clutter up other people's watchlists or Reent Changes pages. Of course, if you're making other, substantive, changes to an article, by all means reduce spaces (I routinely convert two or more space characters to one), but even there, you should be aware that some spaces can be considered useful. I, for one, find it much easier if there is an empty line after the taxobox, to separate the start of the prose content more clearly. The second empty line before the stub tag is also something for which there is broad consensus, although there is also a minority of editors who appear to dislike it. Without wishing to criticise Rich, and I'm trying to word this impartially, do note that his interpretation of when it is appropriate to make seim-automated minor edits has sometimes been at odds with community consensus. --Stemonitis (talk) 05:34, 1 June 2012 (UTC)
And edits like this are directly unhelpful (and came after I warned you to stop). Spaces within template markup are very useful for separating parameters; without them, the line wrapping in the edit box occurs only where there are spaces within a parameter, although one would usually want the whole value of a parameter to stay together, and for the different parameters to be separated. I don't know why you started thinking this was a productive avenue to go down, but I guarantee that it is not. It must stop now. Further edits of this nature may be seen as disruptive and could result in your being blocked from editing. --Stemonitis (talk) 05:42, 1 June 2012 (UTC)
Question: Are you the admin? If not, can I at least edit my articles that I wrote? Another question: Will it still be considered disruptive if I will do like 10 a day or less? Well, I got the point with the stub before the tag thing, so I came back and do the thing you told me on my pages only, I personaly consider it a good edit, not to mention in 2 articles I previously missed the wikification of the whole name of an entomologist, so I did that and some poinless edits at the same time. Another thing, sometimes I do the pointless edits, and after I saved I realized that I forgot to do the main edit. So I end up doing the edit twice, about which I am very sorry about. The reason why I went that way is because of Rich, and I weighted it on myself too. For example, white space only editing articles on insects will generate minus 60-70 mb. In my opinion thats huge. Not to mention I already agreed with Rich, that he will patrol the articles I will give him. I hope you don't mind, do you? Plus, how could I know which edits in your consensus opinion are helpful and which aren't? Maybe I should pay attention to what consensus wants, but then again, I never met anyone from it, so how could I know. I don't know, maybe currently I have this: I don't give a fuckism rule. Now I got it (I hope I am not too late): Aphthona flava and Opsilia coerulescens. Another question: are YouTube videos are O.,K?: Peters's Angola colobus--Mishae (talk) 20:50, 1 June 2012 (UTC)

Green-backed Sparrow

Thanks for letting me know, Misha, though I had nothing to do with that article. I definitely agree that detailed information on subspecies and distribution is valuable. I copyedited your additions. —JerryFriedman (Talk) 00:32, 3 June 2012 (UTC)

Dead BirdLife link and autopatrol

Hi again. The problem with the BirdLife link at Saffron-billed Sparrow was that it referred to the 2004 version, which is no longer available. I updated it to a link to the 2008 version (following the form at Common Tern, which is a featured article). I had to search BirdLife to find the ID number of the species.

I don't know what you mean by "autopatrol". If it's something only admins can do, I'm not an admin. If you just mean to put them on my watchlist, I'll do that.

Does that help? —JerryFriedman (Talk) 03:26, 4 June 2012 (UTC)

Okay, I've never used AWB or any bot. —JerryFriedman (Talk) 04:22, 5 June 2012 (UTC)

Talkback

Hello, Mishae. You have new messages at Worm That Turned's talk page.
Message added 19:57, 9 June 2012 (UTC). You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.

 Ryan Vesey Review me! 19:57, 9 June 2012 (UTC)

Personal attacks

Misha, you have called User:Stemonitis and me "reverting scum" and "fascistic". This is not acceptable language, and if I notice you referring to me or any other editor in similar way again I will report it at WP:ANI. PamD 22:51, 9 June 2012 (UTC)

Boo-hoo-hoo. The more you sent me threats like this the more I will say it. Infact thats actually the reason why I called you a "fascist". Because instead of ignoring my harsh dialogue you guys go rogue on it! I need help, not warnings, and not bans.

"if I notice you referring to me or any other editor in similar way again I will report it at WP:ANI" - If it offends you, and don't want to see it just ignore it! Is it that hard? My other suggestion would if you will just cut both of your eyes out, that might prevent you from seeing my pointless edits, and other crap that I do, that you don't like. Altough I don't want to be blocked by using threats now.--Mishae (talk) 04:33, 10 June 2012 (UTC)

Threats, etc.

Please stop I happened to see the relevant thread at WP:AN/I. If you have a condition on the autism spectrum, I understand that this can complicate your ability to communicate with others--I have volunteered with the special needs community for over a decade and I used to work in a rehab facility for kids with special needs. That makes sense to me. I also understand that if there's a language barrier, it will be tricky to express yourself. But if you know what words like "hate" and "fascist" mean, you also know how to say, "I disagree with you" and "I don't think you understand me." Any time you find yourself writing something that you know will get you in trouble, just delete it, go get something to drink or a bite to eat, and then come back and write your note in a more positive tone. I think everyone here can understand if you're having difficult with communicating, but I don't think anyone here is a bigot toward autistics. —Justin (koavf)❤T☮C☺M☯ 05:37, 10 June 2012 (UTC)

Also If you need help with something and think that I can assist you, let me know. —Justin (koavf)❤T☮C☺M☯ 05:45, 10 June 2012 (UTC)
Yes, it is difficult for me to communicate with people that are against me. I understand that Misplaced Pages is not a therapy, all I need help with is edits, and understanding other people. The thing is, I don't like forced apoligies, especially when I assume that that person will just say "thanks" and will persist on reverting, which will cause me to do it again, and I don't want that to happen! The thing is is that I am a part of special needs community, and its very difficult for me (despite my high functioning autism) to communicate with normal people in a normal way. You see, I do try my best, but it doesn't work that way. I was forced to cross out my rhetorics under a threat of being banned and people whining. How do you think that make me feel? The people at WP:AN/I don't seem to care! If you can, can you please go to the forum and explain couple of things to them that I just mentioned to you? Thanks! Another thing, can you give your personal e-mail? I think we might understand each other better that way, and maybe even become friends, of which I really want to.--Mishae (talk) 11:29, 10 June 2012 (UTC)

Orphaned pages

As you may have noticed, many of your pages like Cerobasis denticulata have had {{Orphan}} placed on them. The easiest way to de-orphan pages like this is to create a template or navbox that includes a link to all members of the Cerobasis genus. If you create templates for these, and for other articles I have been adding {{Orphan}} to, I can use AWB to add the template to all of the articles. Ryan Vesey Review me! 20:21, 10 June 2012 (UTC)

How do I create a navbox?--Mishae (talk) 20:54, 10 June 2012 (UTC)
I'll attempt to create an example.

{{Navbox |name = {{subst:PAGENAME}} |title = Insects in the '']'' genus |image = |above = |state = |listclass = hlist |group1 = |list1 = *''] *] *]'' |below = }}

Insects in the Cerobasis genus
You could create this at Template:Navbox Cerobasis and create similar ones for similar lists. Continue the list by adding the rest of the species. There is no reason to italicize each listing because you can put italics marks around the entire group in the list like I did. Ryan Vesey Review me! 21:06, 10 June 2012 (UTC)
I notice that you have added it to pages. I highly suggest that you create the various navboxes as templates and transclude them to the pages. Ryan Vesey Review me! 21:40, 10 June 2012 (UTC)
Something like this?: Template:Navbox Cerobasis--Mishae (talk) 21:50, 10 June 2012 (UTC)
Exactly, I was incorrect in the italics information, but I fixed it. I also modified the name parameter, because that is what gives people the ability to edit it. Ryan Vesey Review me! 21:56, 10 June 2012 (UTC)
In addition, remember to remove the orphan tag from anything you add it to. Ryan Vesey Review me! 21:57, 10 June 2012 (UTC)
First of all, I would like to apologize to you for any miss communication we had, and please don't revoke AWB! I didn't ment to use it in a malicius or distructive way, and since you showed me how to do it with a template (of which I didn't knew anything about), it will be great for me to learn how to activate an AWB.
  • Second, I would like to thank you for any assistance, and I am apologizing again for any trouble I caused, and I hope (and promise), I will keep it cool for the rest of the year and beyond (or at least I will try my hardest). =)--Mishae (talk) 22:12, 10 June 2012 (UTC)

Template:Navbox Agonum

No problem, I would like to see you continue to work with User:Koavf. I've got about 360 pages of your contributions that I am still going over with genfixes and typo fixes. Then, if you give me a list of the navboxes you create, I can add them to the articles for you. Ryan Vesey Review me! 22:20, 10 June 2012 (UTC)
Actualy I would like to do it myself, it will keep me busy. Your job as I wanted it to be is to AWB the pages. Another question: Is there is a site that I can find more information on scientists? You see, I think what I needed is this template. Now I can do my constructive editing without fear of being blocked.--Mishae (talk) 22:46, 10 June 2012 (UTC)
Hmm, I was wondering why you decided to add these nav boxes to species pages. Please note that species pages are not considered orphans if they are linked from the appropriate genus page, please read Misplaced Pages:TAXONORPHAN#Articles_that_may_be_difficult_to_de-orphan. Furthermore, all species in the genus are found on the genus page. If Nav boxes are added, this will create more work if new species are described or species are moved to other genera (which happens quite a lot with insects). All in all I'm not sure it is wise to add these to species pages. I would suggest to discuss this at the wikiproject Tree of Life or wikiproject Insects (since you are concentrating on insects). I seem to remember that the overall opinion regarding these nav boxes was that they were not useful, but dont have the time to search for that discussion at the moment. Ruigeroeland (talk) 12:56, 13 July 2012 (UTC)
Can you talk to Ryan Vesey about it? He was the one that told me it was O.K. to do it. Plus, the only way how to de-orphan them is to add that Navbox that Ryan told me about. I want to help your project, but if one will critisize me for "pointless edits", the other guy will critisize me for Navboxes, that were, mind you, approved by Ryan as a constructive edit, then I will be so confused. Either way, as long as people wont revert it, I shall continue. Again, talk with Ryan, not me. Thanks.--Mishae (talk) 19:41, 13 July 2012 (UTC)

Let's see here

Hi Mishae. I wasn't expecting to come back from my weekend to find all this. I've got a lot of points that I think should be made here, and I'm going to use a numbering system to help you digest my comments and so we can discuss them further.

  1. No one is "out to get you". I know it can feel like people are ganging up on you, but you'll find that people are just seeing the same problems and reacting against them. If you cannot behave in a manner that befits this encyclopedia, you will be removed from it.
  2. It is essential that you remain civil, polite or "nice". Even if you feelings are hurt, even if you feel that someone is being rude, lying or nasty in any way shape or form. You need to be the bigger person, and get help if you are having problems.
  3. You should do your best to assume good faith of those who talk to you. They are trying to help, even if they disagree with you. See the first point - no one is trying to get you.
  4. A Wiki means that anyone can edit anywhere. People do not need to be invited into a conversation. If editors want to join in on a discussion, we should encourage that - decisions are made by groups, not individuals. I encourage many editors to help out at my talk page, if you post there, it may not be me who replies.
  5. People will criticise you. You need to learn from these criticisms and improve yourself so that it doesn't happen again. This is perfectly natural and should be encouraged.
  6. Edit summaries are a good thing, they summarise what you did in that edit, which allows easier browsing of logs. Going against the suggestion to use them is problematic - please reconsider and get used to using them.
  7. You do not own your userpage. You do not own your talk page. You are allowed a lot of leeway in what goes on there, but it's not yours.
  8. You should not be worrying about how much database space is out there, that's for the foundation to sort out.
  9. Policy on other wikipedias (or indeed any other site) are not relevent. You need to work within the constraints of this site. If you believe a policy or guideline is incorrect, then start a discussion at the policy/guideline page. Do not flout the policy/guideline.
  10. Do not generalise. Quite simply, this is where a lot of your comments have caused problems. By generalising two people who have reverted you as reverters you are putting them into a category. You then saw that category as problematic and called them scum. By suggesting that the majority of people on this site are Jewish, you generalised (and what's more, I've seen no evidence of that). Comment specifically on the content eg "I think this was incorrectly reverted because" not the contributor "protect me from these reverting scum"
  11. I understand you have Autism and CP. I also understand that makes things more difficult for you, and am willing to take that into account. Things are more difficult for you than some other editors. However, this does not mean that you are allowed to do things that other editors are not. You have to work extra hard at interacting with other editors. I am sure you have the ability to do that, but if you do not, you will have to leave the encyclopedia.

I have removed AWB access. GraemeBartlett is correct, it is a tool - but at the moment, I do not believe that you are able to handle disagreements, so making large numbers of edits is not a good idea. I'm going to suggest that you prove to us that you can handle things for the next month, by either diffusing disagreements or following our dispute resolution process. If you do handle things properly, I (or any other administrator) can return it.

Where we go from here? I'm not going to formally mentor you, I don't have the time to take on that commitment. I will however be watching, and trying to help out where I can. You can come to me for advice or discussion, or especially any problems. Justin (koavf) has very kindly offered to help out too, and I hope you take him up on that offer.

Finally, I want to make this very clear to you. You're on very thin ice here. I personally considered blocking you, but decided to give you one last chance. I will not hesitate in blocking you in the future. Feel free to discuss any of this with me (or anything else), I will never block for civil discussion. Worm(talk) 11:01, 11 June 2012 (UTC)

First of all, I would like to apologize for any trouble I caused to you as well, and I thyank you for understanding. I really came here to help a project not to vandalise or disrupt it, Moreover, I didn't expect people to react so harshly to my edits, and no, I can't except criticism. Unfortunatelly, the autism doesn't allow me to except criticism in a civil manner. I will try my best, but I can't quarantee that I will be a nice guy, while people around me will be mean! Lets go over some of your comments that I still don't get:
  • Edit summaries are a good thing, they summarise what you did in that edit, which allows easier browsing of logs. Going against the suggestion to use them is problematic - please reconsider and get used to using them.
    • Its a suggestion (guideline), not a policy. I don't think anyone can be blocked for not using it.
  • You do not own your userpage. You do not own your talk page. You are allowed a lot of leeway in what goes on there, but it's not yours.
    • If its not mine than why its called My userpage or My talkpage?
  • You should not be worrying about how much database space is out there, that's for the foundation to sort out.
    • True. Maybe not, but if a server goes out for an hour, I can't edit then. Whats worse, I can't send a message to anyone about it because its down. I understand technical problems can arrise, but non of them suppose to take more than 10 minutes (even that sometimes can be a lot).--Mishae (talk) 14:03, 11 June 2012 (UTC)
I'm glad to hear how well you've taken my comments. There was a lot there, and there was a chance that it could have gone badly ;) Now - criticism, you *can* accept. It's difficult and you have to keep reminding yourself, but I know you can do it. We can work out some "escape routes" though - you can contact me if you get into problems, I expect Justin will make the same offer. That doesn't mean that I will instantly be on your side, but I will look at the situation and help you resolve it as best I can. It might mean that I agree with the other person, but I will help you understand why. I'm not looking for guarantees from you, I'm looking for you to try your hardest. As for the other points
  • "Guideline" doesn't mean "suggestion". Editors are expected to follow guidelines just as they would follow policy, it's not optional. It's more likely that there's an exception to a guideline than a policy, but that's the only real difference. You can be blocked for misleading edit summaries or abusive edit summaries, and if it's decided that your lack of edit summaries is disruptive, you can be blocked for that too. I don't think it's likely, but it's possible.
  • On "My userpage" and "My talkpage" you ask a very good question. Whilst you do not own the page, you "own it more than anyone else". Just like renting a house, it's yours in many ways, but you still have to follow certain rules, set down by the actual owner (eg. no pets). As I say, you get considerable leeway, but you cannot use it for "hate speech" or hosting or any number of other purposes.
  • Finally, when the server goes out, it's generally either due to an upgrade or someone playing with the databases. It's not due to the amount of whitespace there is in articles. I know it can be frustrating, and I suggest you do a little research into WP:BUGZILLA, which is where this sort of information is discussed. Worm(talk) 14:22, 11 June 2012 (UTC)

But the white space might have something to do with it.--Mishae (talk) 14:45, 11 June 2012 (UTC)

No. I can categorically tell you that the amount of white space in pages has nothing to do with the server going down. I say this as a website developer of many years. Worm(talk) 14:47, 11 June 2012 (UTC)
Well I am saying it as an administrative assistant (from a job which I came today), and there I use a server. O.K. that said, moving on... About AWB: Its sad that you revoked it considering that I did mentioned that I wont use it for threats or other malicious activities. I know that a lot of Wikipedians probably lost faith in me, but you know, I am calm now, and will remain like that with or without AWB. By revoking it, you are using it as a reward, not as a tool, which action contradicts to
(talk page stalker). Just one point, that removing white space won't save any database space anyway, because all the old versions are still retained - if you edit an article to remove white space, you will actually take up more server space because it now has to manage a new version of the article. -- Boing! said Zebedee (talk) 23:26, 11 June 2012 (UTC)
But then when it will get used to the new version, then there will be no problem!--Mishae (talk) 02:34, 12 June 2012 (UTC)
What he means is that all of the old versions are saved so removing white spaces just creates more information that must be saved, not less. Ryan Vesey Review me! 02:59, 12 June 2012 (UTC)
Question: What Navbox should I use for scientists? Should I use them by year and by country? And by field as well?--Mishae (talk) 03:10, 12 June 2012 (UTC)
I don't know if a navbox would be as appropriate for scientists as it would for the species. To de-orphan the scientists you should find pages that would benefit from a link to that scientist. If you point me to a specific scientist I can give you a more thorough idea. Ryan Vesey Review me! 03:17, 12 June 2012 (UTC)
Donald M. Weisman, just created by me 2 hours ago. Another question, should I wikify words like botanist, and other scientific fields in the articles about them, or its just common words that can be left as is?--Mishae (talk) 03:19, 12 June 2012 (UTC)
That one may be hard to de-orphan, in fact, I'm not entirely sure about his notability. Can you expand exactly what he did with Lepidoptera? Ryan Vesey Review me! 03:35, 12 June 2012 (UTC)
Here the site: ] Hope it helps!--Mishae (talk) 03:37, 12 June 2012 (UTC)
Question: When and how does Wikipedians nominate articles? I have one in my pile John C. Ewers, that screams for a good article at least!--Mishae (talk) 05:54, 12 June 2012 (UTC)
As Boing! said Zebedee points out, the very act of removing the whitespace increases the database size, however that's not the point here. The amount of whitespace in comparison to the amount of other text is negligible. It does have certain effects, as explained by Rich, when running reports or doing certain other tasks the whitespace can slow things down - as can every byte of data. However, those tasks are independent of the server going down - excess of whitespace does not lead to lack of server access. Anyway, I'll let you get back to the nomination discussion. Worm(talk) 08:29, 12 June 2012 (UTC)
Oh, and as for AWB, I'm not intentionally using it as a reward, though I can see that is a side effect. With any tool on wikipedia, you have the ability to use it incorrectly, and you have a responsibility to discuss feedback on those tools. AWB is a tool which allows you to make large numbers of edits, and so it's important that you react well to feedback on your use of the tool. For the moment, I've seen you reacting badly to feedback. I'm going to be watching for a little while to see if that's a one off, a common thing, or something you can change. At the end of that, I intend to give the tool back, or take some other action. Worm(talk) 08:36, 12 June 2012 (UTC)
Mishae, I've had a look and you seem to have been taking feedback well (especially the section below). Also, you've kept up the hard work in the mean time, and having made a spot check of your edits, I see no reason why you should not have AWB access back. As such, I've returned it to you. Keep up the good work. Worm(talk) 07:36, 17 July 2012 (UTC)

Copyright and paraphrasing

At Sitticus floricola, you wrote "It spins its cocoon in a place where there is tall vegetation". The original source is "It spins a cocoon in tall vegetation such as ...". I think these are too close, and the source doesn't allow commercial use, so we can not in general copy sentences like this. It would be great if you could go over your past contributions where you might have copied like this and fix any of these problems. Thanks, ErikHaugen (talk | contribs) 18:24, 12 June 2012 (UTC)

Thanks, I will try my best next time. You see, its difficult for me to tell the difference between close paraphrasing and copyvio. I got for copyvio in trouble on the Russian Misplaced Pages though. Let me know if you will spot anything else. is hard not to paraphrase you know.--Mishae (talk) 19:33, 12 June 2012 (UTC)
How is it now? Again, just let me know if you see something simmilar. I write a lot, and sometimes I don't have time to go over my sources and varify it.--Mishae (talk) 19:40, 12 June 2012 (UTC)
I think it's ok now. There really isn't any difference between close paraphrasing and copyright violation—close paraphrasing copyrighted material in a manner inconsistent with its license/fair use/etc is violating copyright. If you don't have time to verify things against sources, then slow down! Do that instead of writing more unverified stuff. But verifying some content doesn't have much to do with avoiding paraphrasing. You seem to operate by finding an article like the ones on britishspiders.org.uk and then attempting to get all the material into the new wikipedia article by rewording everything. I think this is ok, but you just need to be really sure that you use all your own words. It's easy to forget and word it in the way that you just read it, but you need to be sure not to do that. You seem to do a pretty good job of that most of the time, as far as I can tell. Thanks! ErikHaugen (talk | contribs) 19:58, 12 June 2012 (UTC)
Thanks again! Tell you what, I sometimes can't trust myself. The thing is, yes, I sometimes do it from one source (particularly spiders and scientists), sometimes 2 if I can find. The problem is, every time I put a name of a scientist for example, the first 10 sites say for example "We found Fabricius on Facebook", or any other scientists last name. So even if write it with the first name like John or Johan, it doesn't make a difference, and I don't have time to go through 1000 sites that the search engine throws on me, and I use all: Yahoo, Google, Google Chrome, Safari or Opera (If I will find a Mac nearby), Bing, you name it. But if I will use all of them I wouldn't have time to write even a stub! Get the point?--Mishae (talk) 20:17, 12 June 2012 (UTC)
I don't get it, actually, pardon. ErikHaugen (talk | contribs) 20:28, 12 June 2012 (UTC)
I believe he is saying that it is often difficult to find sources because of unrelated results in google searches. Mishae, when you do your searches, are you enclosing the first and last name in parentheses? For example, if I was a scientist, I could search "Ryan Vesey" instead of Ryan Vesey. Or you could decide that you want to make sure scientist appears so you could search for Ryan Vesey Scientist. Finally, try checking through Google scholar and google books . Ryan Vesey Review me! 20:33, 12 June 2012 (UTC)
Thank you! Thats exactly what I was trying to say. Every search engine carries more than a million sites, which are given to you in 10s on every page. Now, if I will use 2 or 6 engines just to find one person, I wouldn't even have time to write a stub, considering my job, etc. And scientists are hard. Try to find a scientist under the last name of Weisman. The first site you will find will be about Weisman museum, then kitchen, roofing, etc. Go further... Pretty much same thing. Entering first name Donald Weisman. We find lawyers under the same name, Facebook and LinkIn accounts, where no where is mentioned a word entomologist or botanist or any other scientific field. Now got it?--Mishae (talk) 20:40, 12 June 2012 (UTC)
Stalker: For flora and fauna, you can also search, for example:
  • Fabricus site:edu
  • Fabricus site:gov
  • Fabricus site:org
  • Fabricus -com
That helps get rid of commercial sites. Anna Frodesiak (talk) 05:46, 13 June 2012 (UTC)
Thanks for a tip I'll try it, but even with that is confusing. Scientists are ment to be for .edu, but some (if not most) of them own an organization of some kind, so it might fall under .org category as well.--Mishae (talk) 20:01, 13 June 2012 (UTC)

I was going to say the same thing, when there's plenty of google book hits like this there's no excuse to be using shoddy web databases. Google book ref maker will assist you in making quick citations. This sort of thing. ♦ Dr. Blofeld 23:32, 14 June 2012 (UTC)

Referencing

Whilst your new articles are appreciated, the sourcing isn't good enough. You just say "Description" etc. Please fill out your sources using proper Misplaced Pages:Citation templates and add title and publisher, author and date of source if applicable and access date. Example♦ Dr. Blofeld 23:20, 14 June 2012 (UTC)

Subspecies

Hello again Mishae, nice to see you are still creating beetle stubs and that you improved a lot! Keep it up. One thing: when you make subspecies, you should not use "binomial" and "binomial authority" but "trinominal" and "trinominal_authority". I fixed this in your recent batch. Furthermore, the link to the species (in the taxobox) in the last batch was bold, while it should be italic. I fixed this too. You should probably add a link to the subspecies on the species page, because at the moment, nothing links to these subspecies. You could consider to add the info about the subspecies to the species page like I always do. See for instance: Pseudacraea dolomena. But if you prefer making pages on the subspecies, feel free to continue. Cheers! Ruigeroeland (talk) 18:27, 16 June 2012 (UTC)

Dont forget to add "| synonyms =" to the taxobox if you add the synonyms to the article. See for instance your article Carabus perrini perrini, where I added it for you. Cheers!
Sorry that I forgot that once, usually I put them in, but some species or subspecies don't have them, so its difficult to know if they have them or not. Thanks for letting me know without blocking! Despite this, how am I doing on the subspecies? Another question: The articles on the subspecies I create are stubs, should we merge them into a species list, so that the reader could read about subspecies on the species article without links to subspecies? Would approve any advice.--Mishae (talk) 17:46, 19 June 2012 (UTC)

WikiProject assessment tags for talk pages

Thank you for your recent articles, including Carabus linnaei. When you create a new article, can you add the WikiProject assessment templates to the talk of that article? See the talk page of the article I mentioned for an example of what I mean. Usually it is very simple, you just add something like {{WikiProject Keyword}} to the article's talk, with keyword replaced by the associated WikiProject (ex. if it's a biography article, you would use WikiProject Biography; if it's a United States article, you would use WikiProject United States, and so on). You do not have to rate the article if you do not want to, others will do it eventually. Those templates are very useful, as they bring the articles to a WikiProject attention, and allow them to start tracking the articles through Misplaced Pages:Article alerts and other tools. This can help you too, as the WikiProject members will often defend your work from deletion and try to improve it further. Feel free to ask me any questions if you'd like more information. Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| reply here 12:02, 21 June 2012 (UTC)

MOS

Hello, Mishae. Please do not replace an n-dash with an m-dash in the lead sections of biographical articles as you did in Étienne Geoffroy Saint-Hilaire and in Robert Evans Snodgrass. The dates should be separated by an n-dash. Please read MOS:DASH, the Misplaced Pages Manual of Style regarding the use of dashes. Also read MOS:FLAGBIO: "Do not use flags to indicate locations of birth, residence, or death". --Omnipaedista (talk) 08:04, 12 August 2012 (UTC)

Please note that lead sections should not include places of birth and death (see MOS:DOB), and that the infobox field parameters "Residence" and "Citizenship" are (usually) left blank unless they are not subsequent to a person's nationality. Regards. --08:20, 12 August 2012 (UTC)
Do not link dates as you did in Andrew John Berger. Please see WP:DATELINK, WP:YEARLINK ("Year articles should not be linked unless they contain information that is relevant to the subject matter"), MOS:UNLINKYEARS, and WP:EASTEREGG ("Do not use piped links to create easter egg links"). Regards. --09:50, 12 August 2012 (UTC)

Your spam whitelist request

Thank you for making a request at MediaWiki talk:Spam-whitelist. I am sorry that it has taken this amount of time to attend to your request. Please be advised that we have been unable to close your request based on the information supplied. Please visit the whitelist request page and search for your name or the site you requested where you will see details of what additional information is required. Please note that replies here or on my talk page will not be taken into account. Please also note that if no information is received within two weeks from now, your request may be treated as withdrawn. Stifle (talk) 17:40, 9 September 2012 (UTC)

Traditio-ru.org and the spam whitelist

Please go back to MediaWiki talk:Spam-whitelist and provide the link in question by leaving off the http:// characters. The blacklist only blocks complete URLs, so if you link to www.traditio-ru.org/index/yourURLhere.htm you'll not have any trouble, even though http://www.traditio-ru etc. would be blocked. Nyttend (talk) 01:07, 12 September 2012 (UTC)

A few comments

Mishae, I just wanted to point out that a few of your recent edits are completely unnecessary, e.g. this one. I will explain why:

  1. The binomial authorities did not need to be expanded to full piped links per WP:NOTBROKEN. The redirects work just fine and we're not to make edits to "fix" redirects like this without a good reason.
  2. You again removed white space between "binomial_authority" and the equals sign and the text. This is, as noted, unnecessary. The extra spaces help some people edit. All of your white space removal is unnecessary. Please stop.
  3. Categories are usually listed in alphabetical order regardless of where the taxon category falls in that sequence. You shouldn't need to move categories around like this in the above diff unless to alphabetize them.
  4. Finally, the article Levenhookia preissii was already included in the most narrow category - Category:Endemic flora of Western Australia, a daughter category of Category:Endemic flora of Australia. The article does not need the parent category as well as the daughter category. In this case, you only need the daughter category. (If, however, a species is endemic to just Australia, then it should go in the "Endemic flora of Australia" category.)

I hope this helps. Cheers, Rkitko 02:40, 18 September 2012 (UTC)

O.K. I will discuss those complaints of yours here, but also with Ryan since I trust him a lot!
  1. There is a reason to do it: What if there will be a person with the same last name? Second of all I followed how the other users do it, so I surprised that you throw at me WP:NOTBROKEN thing, which I read numerous of times but this is rediculous!
  2. Category:Endemic flora of Western Australia is great, but why you don't want Category:Endemic flora of Australia to be present there too? Wont readers rether read Category:Endemic flora of Australia as well? We shouldn't be dictatorial toward our readers, and that gives them options on what else is there to look at. Or has the term "readers" just became a term, nothing more?
  3. Finally, I let Ryan know about it, and from this moment on, it will be discussed on his talkpage not mine, since I am afraid of being harrased by some users here!--Mishae (talk) 02:54, 18 September 2012 (UTC)
Mishae, let's continue to discuss it here. This doesn't involve Ryan Vesey, though he's more than welcome to participate if you would like his input. No one is here to harass you, so your talk page is an appropriate venue to discuss the issue.
  1. Binomial authorities for plants are standardized, that is there is one and only one Sond. or R.Br.. Those redirects will likely never change. In cases where the authority includes an abbreviation of the name, it is unambiguous. Some authorities are just the last name of the author and so linking just to the last name is a poor choice (e.g. Smith) - in those cases you would need to pipe the link but a previous editor should have already done that.
  2. Including both categories is WP:OVERCATEGORIZATION. You would be essentially including the category in two places in the hierarchy of the category system. It would be similar to including the genus category Category:Levenhookia and the family category Category:Stylidiaceae on the same article - we avoid this because Category:Stylidiaceae already contains everything within Category:Levenhookia. Think of them as nested sets. It's not dictatorial toward the reader, it's practical with respect to the size and manageability of the parent categories. Without this restriction, the parent category would grow to an enormous size that wouldn't be easily browsed. Done the proper way, it can be browsed by subcategory based on state.
Cheers, Rkitko 03:54, 18 September 2012 (UTC)
I'll start off by pointing out again that the spaces before and after the equal sign are a relatively minor issue. Mishae, I hope that you can attempt to avoid that (when you really think of it, removing those spaces costs more bytes in later discussion than it saves) but otherwise I think that's an issue that can best be avoided. On the topic of the redirects, the major reasons are "Introducing unnecessary invisible text makes the article more difficult to read in page source form." and "Non-piped links make better use of the "what links here" tool, making it easier to track how articles are linked and helping with large-scale changes to links." With the overcategorization, an editor can go to Category:Endemic flora of Western Australia and reach any of the other categories from there. In fact, because our policy is to "nest" categories as much as possible, if one article is not nested, it will cause greater confusion for the readers. Consider Category:1919 births and Category:1910s births. Both Paavo Aaltonen and Hans Aaraas were born in 1919; however, if one of those had the category 1919 births and the category 1910s births, a reader might think that all of the people born in 1919 are also in the category 1910s births. Then the reader will assume that only those people in Category:1910s births were actually born then. This same dilemma occurs with the flora categories. If a reader believed that all of the articles in Category:Endemic flora of Western Australia were also in the category Category:Flora of Western Australia it would be easy for them to assume that the larger category was all inclusive and they would never learn about the articles in the smaller category. Ryan Vesey 04:09, 18 September 2012 (UTC)

Mishae, in response to this comment, all flora that is only found in Western Australia and would go in Category:Endemic flora of Western Australia is therefore also endemic to Australia by its very nature, but we don't need to include that category because Category:Endemic flora of Western Australia is nested within Category:Endemic flora of Australia. We've given you other examples, e.g. year of birth or decade of birth and genus or family categories, that are similar and are clearly ridiculous when you think about implementing them that way. The way you began implementing the categories with regard to endemic flora followed a similar pattern. Now, on {{italic title}}, there was consensus to leave that in place where the taxobox or automatic taxobox is concerned. Yes, when properly formatted, the taxobox or automatic taxobox will italicize the article title. But if the article is ever moved or if the taxobox template is edited, someone who doesn't immediately know which element on the page was italicizing the article title would be thoroughly confused. That's why we leave the italic title template as an explicit reminder to editors who are unaware or don't know that the taxobox can italicize the article title, too, without any direct parameter - it just detects that the binomial parameter = article title and implements italics. A useful tool, but it's mysterious for those who open the editing window and don't immediately see how the title is being italicized. I hope that explains the issue. Cheers, Rkitko 11:49, 18 September 2012 (UTC)

Hmm, I'd be more curious if {{Italic title}} was in there and was redundant. Then I would operate under the assumption that the template did the italicizing. If the italicizing needed changing (in the case of Pinta Island tortoise), I believe the existence of {{italic title}} would be thoroughly confusing. Was there a discussion on this? If so, I will defer to that. On the topic of endemic flora of western australia, we should also consider that the very fact that something is endemic means we should be as specific as possible. If something was endemic to Minnesota, I could easily say it was endemic to the US, to North America, or to the Americas; however, the latter definitions are far too vague. Correct me if I'm wrong, but I believe that Category:Endemic flora of Australia is only for flora that is found in more than one region of Australia. Ryan Vesey 12:53, 18 September 2012 (UTC)
Thats exactly my point. It doesn't do anything other then confusing the editors and making editors believing that it does something while in reality it doesn't! I removed the italic title template from some articles by living the (') 2 of them on each side of the binomial title, its exactly the same! Moreover, the sister projects like German, French, Russian, Italian and Ukrainian Wikipedias (to name a few), don't use them. So you might ask, who does? Indonesian, Croatian, Norwegian, Turkish, Romanian, Portuguese and Serbian (to name a few), others have less then 200,000 articles. The only one that does use it and have a hefty amount of articles as well, is Spanish! Another thing, Rkitko mentioned that he would rather have then , just because in his opinion editors will change images. Question: When was the last time ANYBODY changed an image on their articles pages? How about the first article on Misplaced Pages back when it first was created, show me how many times you changed that articles image! Plus, there suppose to be a valid reason for articles image change, and you all know that more then I do!

Plus, as far as consensus goes, maybe its time to put that question again? I have my strong points to argue about it as you see above. Not to mention that consensus was reached without me knowing anything about it (I probably wasn't even a Wikipedian at that time). Its time to put it back on the table. Your thoughts?--Mishae (talk) 17:56, 18 September 2012 (UTC)

User talk:Mishae Add topic