User talk:Circeus

From Wikispecies
Jump to navigation Jump to search

Your talk page[edit]

Please undelete your talk page, which is a record that should be available to all Wikispecies users. If you wish to archive it, you should do so using page names like User talk:Circeus/Archive 1, et seq. Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 17:05, 12 November 2017 (UTC)

Your edits to {{IPNI}}[edit]

Can you explain these? You seem to have broken pages like Cattleya_×_hardyana which I've had a head scratch trying to figure out how to repair.

ShakespeareFan00 (talk) 13:31, 13 January 2018 (UTC)

MY apologies for a cryptic message. And yes this has now been 'temporarily' repaired. ShakespeareFan00 (talk) 09:30, 16 January 2018 (UTC)

Invitation to join the Ten Year Society[edit]

Ten Year Society.svg

Dear Circeus,

I'd like to extend a cordial invitation to you to join the Ten Year Society, an informal group for editors who've been participating in the Wikispecies project for ten years or more.

Best regards,

Dan Koehl (talk) 00:39, 25 February 2018 (UTC)

Share your experience and feedback as a Wikimedian in this global survey[edit]

WMF Surveys, 18:35, 29 March 2018 (UTC)

Reminder: Share your feedback in this Wikimedia survey[edit]

WMF Surveys, 01:34, 13 April 2018 (UTC)

Your feedback matters: Final reminder to take the global Wikimedia survey[edit]

WMF Surveys, 00:43, 20 April 2018 (UTC)

Solanum and Särkinen[edit]

I noticed that you've made some work involving the author name Särkinen when dealing with the Solanum genus, so I went ahead and created Tiina E. Särkinen to help out, and also added the author link to the templates I could find that cites her work. –Tommy Kronkvist (talk), 04:35, 18 September 2018 (UTC).

Repository category P[edit]

Did you already notice, that Category:P does not refer to herbarium P? See Solanum sambiranense. Regards --Franz Xaver (talk) 10:19, 22 November 2018 (UTC)

Na & Ya[edit]

You recently deleted {{Na}} and {{Ya}}, though each has a number of inbound links. What should be done with them? Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 16:34, 29 November 2018 (UTC)

unless I'm mistaken, every single one of those inbound links are from transclusions of {{Check mark templates}}, and I'm pretty sure not a single template listed there is used anywhere else. I suspect 99% of what's to be found on {{Done/See also}} sees no use whatsoever, and personally I'd happily delete the whole lot. I don't think we really need ca. 15 ways to template "done/yes". Circeus (talk) 17:29, 29 November 2018 (UTC)
You shouldn't be deleting content created by other editors in good faith (i.e. other than spam, etc) without discussing it with them, or on a noticeboard. In this case, I won't dispute the deletion, but please clean up after yourself. Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 10:39, 30 November 2018 (UTC)
Well, covnersely, templates that aren't meant to be brought in use immediately shouldn't be mass created either. Circeus (talk) 18:09, 30 November 2018 (UTC)

Turkish[edit]

I use this template for botanists. see, Hayri Duman --Fagus (talk) 14:48, 18 July 2019 (UTC)

159.146.45.117[edit]

Will you please block the above ip without talk page access? It's an xwiki vandal. Praxidicae (talk) 20:19, 11 August 2019 (UTC)

Community Insights Survey[edit]

RMaung (WMF) 14:34, 9 September 2019 (UTC)

Reminder: Community Insights Survey[edit]

RMaung (WMF) 19:14, 20 September 2019 (UTC)

Reminder: Community Insights Survey[edit]

RMaung (WMF) 17:04, 4 October 2019 (UTC)

ISSN for New York State Museum and Science Service Bulletin[edit]

Since you edited Template:Wilcox, 1957 to link to ISSN 0278-3355 just earlier, I thought it might be worth making a note here of my own findings, just in case you were going to make that ISSN page.

According to pages such as this I found via Google, there actually seems to be two ISSNs for the journal: ISSN 0097-028X and ISSN 0278-3355. As far as I can tell so far "New York State Museum and Science Service Bulletin" uses ISSN 0097-028X, while its later title, "New York State Museum Bulletin" uses ISSN 0278-3355 instead? I don't know for sure if this is correct or not though. Hope this helps though! Monster Iestyn (talk) 05:19, 6 October 2019 (UTC)

@Monster Iestyn: It's really a shame that the xISSN service of worldcat was terminated. It was incredibly convenient to clear up exactly these issues. As it happens I was using BPH, a resource specialised in periodicals with botanical content, which in this instance was not detailed enough. I decided I wanted to piece it up fully and so I went searching in the Library of Congress catalog, and here's the full, complicated picture:
  • Bulletin of the New York State Museum of Natural History (vol 1-2(7), 1887-1889): ISSN 1066-8020
  • Bulletin of the New York State Museum (vol.2(8)-118, 1889-1908): ISSN 1066-8039
  • Museum Bulletin (New York State Museum) (vol. 119-180, 1908-1916): ISSN 1066-8012
  • New York State Museum Bulletin (Vol. 181-337, 1916-1944): ISSN 0097-0271
  • Bulletin (New York State Museum, 1945) (vol. 338-351, 1945-1956): no formal, separate issn
  • Bulletin (New York State Museum and Science Service) (vol. 352-424, 1956-1974): ISSN 0097-028X
  • Bulletin (New York State Museum : 1976) (vol. 425-, 1976-): ISSN 0278-3355 (often referred to as "New York State Museum bulletin")
So you are right that the correct ISSN is 0097-028X, the big confusion (irrelevant to us, but worth noting) is that while one can just treat the 1945-1956 run as continuing the previous run, we still have three runs basically titled "Bulletin of the New York State Museum"! Hopefully we won't have many references from this mess XD. Circeus (talk) 07:25, 6 October 2019 (UTC)
Oh wow, six different ISSNs for one periodical? That's even more confusing than I thought, but very interesting none-the-less. Monster Iestyn (talk) 13:23, 6 October 2019 (UTC)
That's par for the course actually, since technically a periodical is supposed to get a new ISSN every time its title change (this is not always respected, though). For an actual weird one, I'd look at IPNI's treatment of Adansonia. Circeus (talk) 14:44, 6 October 2019 (UTC)

template Chapman, 1929[edit]

Dear, your persistent identifier links to the publication catalog, while the url links directly to the paper. I don't like this.--Hector Bottai (talk) 22:24, 7 October 2019 (UTC)

And if there is any alteration in the structure of the AMNH website, the link will immediately break, and i don't like that. Circeus (talk) 22:53, 7 October 2019 (UTC)

Template "access"[edit]

I seem to have gotten a slight misunderstanding of some of the access codes. I do understand that most Zootaxa articles are not open access. But Zootaxa sells these articles individually without having to buy an entire volume. That was my reasoning for "hybrid" template. There does not appear to be a "Paywall" template without lengthy typing. What is best? Neferkheperre (talk) 18:47, 10 October 2019 (UTC)

The rule of thumb I'm using is "if you have to pay, it's automatically closed access". So far, I've used hybrid (all four options are lowercase, btw) only for jstor free-to-read articles (e.g. [1], [2]...) where reading requires you to register a free account (with some restrictions, like no more than 4 articles at a time, and you have to wait like, a week or something to swap one out...).
The other potential instance I can think of that may call for it is ResearchGate links of the "request full-text" variety (e.g.), but I haven't put any so far in templates because there IMO is no guarantee of actually obtaining the article. It's possible more cases could crop up (google books links where access is dependent on country, maybe?). Circeus (talk) 21:54, 10 October 2019 (UTC)

Kardakoff[edit]

I've made some link additions to the Template. Thanks. Accassidy (talk) 21:03, 11 October 2019 (UTC)

Magasin de zoologie[edit]

Thanks for indicating the ISSN, created the page: ISSN 1259-6515. Cheers.--Hector Bottai (talk) 20:14, 26 October 2019 (UTC)

Circeus[edit]

  • Circeus is changing every day my additions in a way we didn't agree. The same way Stohner did. If he is changing my additings one time more, I stop with wikimedia. I have done this more then 10 years with pleasure.

I Hope that Circues take over my additions (over the 250.000).PeterR (talk) 18:37, 28 October 2019 (UTC)

Peter, how could I know about any disagreement there might be when this is the first time I hear that you are objecting to anything I've been doing? User talk pages are there for a reason, you know.
(for everyone else wondering, this is probably—as this is the first time I hear about this, I can't be entirely sure—about how I've been recently monitoring and standardizing the new reference templates as they are created). Circeus (talk) 18:59, 28 October 2019 (UTC)
I moved this to the talk page of Circeus, @PeterR: please explain what the issue is. Cheers Scott Thomson (Faendalimas) talk 19:06, 28 October 2019 (UTC)

Psammophilocyclops[edit]

Thanks for your reminder. I have checked current usage and updated the relevant Discussion page (please see under first topic here: https://species.wikimedia.org/wiki/Talk:Psammophilocyclops?veaction=editsource). MKOliver (talk) 02:00, 30 October 2019 (UTC)

@MKOliver: I should point out that in general, I don't think we should hide stuff on the talk page unless it's really not relevant to the reader. If sources disagree about the status/spelling etc. of a name, then as far as I'm concerned the wikispecies page should just up and say so. Circeus (talk) 02:03, 30 October 2019 (UTC)

Reference template[edit]

  • I see you still try to change my reference templates. The only change you may do is to add the bulletins. Other changes are not good. If you still changing my Reference templates I stop with wikimedia. Their are a lot (1000+) reference templates that don't content after the agreements. PeterR (talk) 09:09, 30 October 2019 (UTC)
@Peter: what exactly are you referring to I am not aware of any agreement that would preclude Circeus from doing what he has been doing, Adding BHL and ISSN's and Categories to the reference templates is a good idea and not one I would disagree with. All ref templates should have the category added, which is in noinclude space, people should be able to find these refs. The pages on Wikispecies, no matter what they are, are public domain, they do not belong to any one of us. Cheers Scott Thomson (Faendalimas) talk 16:49, 30 October 2019 (UTC)
Appreciate your edit on templates. Meanwhile nothing is wrong in adding the publisher institution like here, I bet some user would be interested in knowing that the American Museum Novitates belong to the American Museum of Natural History of New York, why supressing that?. Please don´t do it again.--Hector Bottai (talk) 01:31, 4 November 2019 (UTC)
@Hector Bottai: In order to keep them short, we generally don't add publisher and place of publication to reference templates for cited journals. Instead, that information can be found on the specific journal's own page (via the ISSN link). We do however add publisher and place of publication to reference templates for cited books – the reason for this is of course that contrary to scientific journals, the books haven't got any dedicated Wikispecies pages (nor ISSN's). This is hinted in the Help:Reference section#Reference Templates guideline.
Also, at the moment the {{Zimmer, 1941}} lists the publisher as "The American Museum of Natural History New York City" instead of "The American Museum of Natural History, New York City". –Tommy Kronkvist (talk), 02:11, 4 November 2019 (UTC).
@Tommy Kronkvist: More zoology work ought to have dedicated pages the way complex botanical works already do, though, e.g. for stuff like template:H. Adams & A. Adams, 1853-1858, Template:Koch, 1877 or Template:Walker, 1858b (the last of these I'm about 99% sure was actually issued in 1857). These pages are very useful as central places to compile publication information, especially publication dates, and to list the templates for individual parts. Circeus (talk) 14:51, 4 November 2019 (UTC)
I agree. Some of them would become huge, but that can be managed by use of {{Collapse top}} or other layout templates, or perhaps even subpages. A lot of work though… By the way, keeping an eye out for particularly small or big pages could be useful. When using the search function the results are listed together with data about the size of the found pages, e.g. "502 bytes (29 words)" for {{Koch, 1877}}. Do you know if there's a way to add a "size request" parameter to the search strings, sort of in the same way as we can use for example intitle: and insource: to our searches? –Tommy Kronkvist (talk), 15:54, 4 November 2019 (UTC).
Can't say i know of a way, I'm afraid. Maybe AWB can somehow extract that sort of information? Circeus (talk) 15:57, 4 November 2019 (UTC)

Reference templates[edit]

Circeus,

What are you doing with the reference templates? I see by template:Flores & Carrara, 2006 that you didn't change anything only add Open access or Paywall. This is against the standard reference page.PeterR (talk) 18:01, 4 November 2019 (UTC)

I have been cleaning templates that said their DOIs are broken. I actually made a mistake with this one and put it as closed instead of broken. Why do you even care? I have been careful about touching "your" templates. Are you going to be stalking every single of my edits now? Circeus (talk) 18:06, 4 November 2019 (UTC)
No I'm not stalking you. I was interested how you update the templates. — The preceding unsigned comment was added by PeterR (talkcontribs).
@PeterR: Sorry. Given how the previous discussion on the topic went, I jumped unnecessarily. Aside from keeping an eye on new templates and the stuff listed on my userpage, I've been doing various lesser maintenance thing when I come across them, such as the leftover external link in templates (far as I can tell, pretty much all of these that could be fixed have now been), the broken DOIs, and (just created it today) References published ahead of print, which I will need to check in details later on. Circeus (talk) 19:55, 12 November 2019 (UTC)

ResearchGate[edit]

I have been rather wary of using Research Gate links on Wikispecies for copyright reasons. Many of us on Research Gate send pdfs by private e-mail when requested for that reason. Neferkheperre (talk) 18:32, 8 November 2019 (UTC)

Maria Helena M. Galileo taxa[edit]

Please can you move the Maria Helena M. Galileo taxa to Maria Helena Mainieri Galileo taxa. PeterR (talk) 12:06, 12 November 2019 (UTC)

I've used the alternate name option of the {{Taxa authored}} templates instead. Does the job just as well. Circeus (talk) 19:59, 12 November 2019 (UTC)
I see still Maria Helena M. Galileo taxa. The agreement is to use the full namesPeterR (talk) 09:36, 13 November 2019 (UTC)
Are you doing the move to Maria Helena Mainieri Galileo taxa or have I do it by hand?PeterR (talk) 13:14, 13 November 2019 (UTC)
@PeterR: right now I'm fine with how the pages are connected (why make it possible to link a category that has a different name in the base if we intend to forbid it completely anyway?). You're welcome to move them if you aren't. Circeus (talk) 13:17, 13 November 2019 (UTC)
    • I believe you don't understand how we have to work. If you know the complete author names, you move the old one with or without abbrevation to the complete author name. This is an agreement from many years ago. When I Get a new species from Maria Helena Mainieri Galileo I add this species with Maria Helena Mainieri Galileo taxa. Such you want you get two different author taxa for the same person. But I do the transfer by my self.PeterR (talk) 18:29, 13 November 2019 (UTC)

Trigonopterus acuminatus[edit]

On the page from Trigonopterus acuminatus is een photo. How can I get the fotos from Trigonopterus in ZooKeys 888: 75-93. on the same way?PeterR (talk) 11:59, 13 November 2019 (UTC)

@PeterR: If you (or anyone else) takes the time to upload them to commons, sure, though the versions in Narakusumo et al. might require some cropping and removal of the figure number to achieve a look mimicking that of the other paper. Circeus (talk) 12:04, 13 November 2019 (UTC)

Acer[edit]

Hi Circeus - the 'traditional' infrageneric classification of Acer isn't supported by genetic data. Until clarified by new information (which it isn't yet), best to leave the genus without any subdivisions. Thanks! - MPF (talk) 23:01, 19 November 2019 (UTC)

@MPF: Look, I'm working with Special:UnusedTemplates right now, and if all those series page exist (and I should point out most all the other series page do), then they should use the series template, if a series is invalid, its proper synonym is not the species, it is the next-higher correct/valid name. Circeus (talk) 23:05, 19 November 2019 (UTC)
OK! Not sure they might not be, if the series is monotypic, though? But probably better to just delete them? - MPF (talk) 23:14, 19 November 2019 (UTC)
There seems to be a whole bunch of sections and Series in need of either deletion or redirection. At the moment i'm tied up with unusedtemplates. Circeus (talk) 23:18, 19 November 2019 (UTC)

Template:A/testcases[edit]

You recently deleted Template:A/testcases, which I created, with the rationale of "housekeeping". Please restore it, asap. Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 23:03, 19 November 2019 (UTC)

I am not recreating a nontemplate (if a template is not in use, then it's not a tempalte) which was literally a copypaste of part of the template's documentation. If you need use cases that badly, that's what your own userspace is for. Circeus (talk) 23:08, 19 November 2019 (UTC)