User talk:DenesFeri/Archív01

From Wikispecies
Jump to navigation Jump to search

Welcome to Wikispecies!

Hello, and welcome to Wikispecies! Thank you for your contributions. I hope you like the place and decide to stay. Here are some pages you might like to see:

If you have named a taxon, then it is likely that there is (or will be) a Wikispecies page about you, and other pages about your published papers. Please see our advice and guidance for taxon authors.

If you have useful images to contribute to Wikispecies, please upload them at Wikimedia Commons. This is also true for video or audio files containing bird songs, whale vocalization, etc.

Please sign your comments on talk pages using four tildes (~~~~); this will automatically produce your username (if you're logged in) and the date. Please also read the Wikispecies policy What Wikispecies is not. If you need help, ask me on my talk page, or in the Village Pump. Again, welcome! OhanaUnitedTalk page 20:30, 9 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Hystrix[edit]

It's been a while since I added it (2008). I believe it came from http://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1111/j.1469-7998.1980.tb04250.x/abstract OhanaUnitedTalk page 20:31, 9 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]

As for that, I'm not sure. OhanaUnitedTalk page 20:06, 11 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Application for Checkuser[edit]

Referring to earlier discussions regarding a local Checkuser policy, I herebye apply to get Checkuser user rights, although we havnt reached a consensus reg Checkuser policy, but I want to give it a try if I can get the required votes. For a request to succeed a minimum of 25 support votes and an 80% positive vote are required (subject to the normal bureaucrat discretion). Requests for checkuser run for two weeks, and I ask kindly that somone starts the poll, like we do for adminship applications.

Please also note that CheckUser actions are logged, but for privacy reasons the logs are only visible to other Checkusers. Because of this, Wikispecies must always have no fewer than two checkusers, for mutual accountability. I dont want to suggest anyone, but hope that someone feel inspired and will step forward and also apply for checkuser.

My request to the Wikispecies community is here

Dan Koehl (talk) 01:40, 28 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Another application for Check User[edit]

As pointed out above by User:Dan Koehl, we need at least two Check Users for this wiki. I am nominating myself and would be happy to receive any feedback that you have to give (positive, negative, or neutral). Wikispecies:Checkusers/Requests/Koavf. Thanks. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 05:08, 28 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Additional Checkuser Application[edit]

I also have added my name to those willing to be a checkuser. Please see my application here Wikispecies:Checkusers/Requests/Faendalimas. I listed this yeasterday but have been encouraged to do a mass mail. I would also take the opportunity to make sure everyone knows that any editor can vote but that it is imperative that as many do as possible, for all 4 of the current applicants, please have your say. Checkuser voting has strict policy rules regarding number of votes. You will have other messages from the other Users concerned you can also read about it in the discussion on the Village Pump - Wikispecies:Village_Pump#Application_for_Checkuser. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 17:53, 29 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Standing for role of checkUser[edit]

Like some of our colleagues (who I support), I am offering to serve as a checkuser, not least to ensure adequate coverage in case one of the others is unavailable.

Please comment at Wikispecies:Checkusers/Requests/Pigsonthewing.

[Apologies if you receive a duplicate notification; I wasn't aware of Wikispecies:Mail list/active users, and sent my original notification to the list of administrators instead.] MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 13:59, 1 February 2017 (UTC)[reply]

RFC on Checkusers[edit]

With one week to go I wanted to remind everyone of the importance of voting on the current CheckUser applications. They can all be found together on a single RFC: Wikispecies:Requests_for_Comment#Checkusers.

It is extremely important with votes such as this for everyone to be involved. There are strict rules in the Wikimedia Foundation Policy guidelines on these votes. I would urge people to have a good understanding of what a CheckUser does. This can be read up on here on the page discussing CheckUser's Wikispecies:Checkusers. Links on this page will take you to other policy information on Meta, HowTo for our site etc.

I would also urge people to look at our own policy development and some past discussion on this can be found here: Wikispecies_talk:Local_policies#Local_CU_Policy.

Wikispecies has in the past had issues that has required the intervention that is supported by the ability to do a CheckUser. Many of us are aware of this. The capacity to do this ourselves greatly speeds up this process. Although SockPuppetry can sometimes be identified without using a CheckUser in order to do the necessary steps to stop it or even prevent it requires evidence. We all know that sockpupets can do significant damage.

This is an important step for Wikispecies. It is a clear demonstration we can run ourselves as a Wiki Project part of Wiki Media Foundation. When I and several others first discussed this we knew it would be difficult at the time to meet all the criteria. We have only now decided to try and get this feature included in Wikispecies. By doing this it can lead to other areas where Wikispecies can further develop its own policies. In some areas we have unique needs, different to the other Wiki's. It is timely we were able to develop all these policies.

Scott Thomson (Faendalimas) talk

MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 14:15, 4 February 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Patroller?[edit]

Dear, DenesFeri! Would you accept to be a Patroller on Wikispecies? Wikispecies need more Patrollers and presently there is only 35 out of 150 active users.
Please see Patrollers for information about patrollers rights. If you are positive, I can nominate you on the requests for patroller rights on your behalf.

Dan Koehl (talk) 14:17, 4 February 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Dear @Dan Koehl:,

Yes, I would accept to be a Patroller here in the Wikispecies. I am already a Patroller in the Huwiki. Regards. DenesFeri (talk) 10:26, 11 February 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Great, thanks. Dan Koehl (talk) 10:28, 11 February 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Patrolling rights[edit]

Dear DenesFeri, You have been granted Patroller user rights, which may be granted to experienced Wikispecies users who have demonstrated an understanding of Wikispecies policies and guidelines.

The user right Patroller gives the user a right to have their page edits automatically marked as patrolled, but also to patrol new pages and mark them as patrolled. For more information, read Wikispecies:Patrollers.

This user has Patroller rights on Wikispecies. (verify)

You may as Patroller use the Patroller user box on your user page. Copy and paste the following code on your user page:
{{User Patroller}}

Please consider carrying out daily patrols of new pages and edits made by users who are not autopatrolled. Here you can see the Patrol statistics for the last 7 days on specieswiki.

Dan Koehl (talk) 10:29, 11 February 2017 (UTC)[reply]

@Dan Koehl: Thank you! I will do my best. DenesFeri (talk) 10:35, 11 February 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Request for vote reg use of BASEPAGENAME[edit]

The previous discussions regarding if we should subst:ing BASEPAGENAME and change all [[BASEPAGENAME]] into [[susbt:BASEPAGENAME]] did not really reach a consensus.

Please vote here on the Village pump!

If you are not sure on your opinion, you can read and join the discussion about the claimed advantages and disadvantages of using BASEPAGENAME

MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 13:29, 11 February 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Wikispecies Oversighter[edit]

Wikispecies has no local Oversighter. Since I had the communitys confidence regarding the previous application for Checkusers rights, as per local Oversight policy on META, I hereby apply to get Oversighters user rights, as a request to the Wikispecies community.

Application is located at Requests for Comment.

Please also note that Oversighter actions are logged, but for privacy reasons the logs are only visible to other Oversighters. Because of this, Wikispecies must always have no fewer than two oversighters, for mutual accountability. I don't want to suggest anyone, but hope that someone feel inspired and will step forward and also apply for oversighters rights.

Dan Koehl through MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 15:01, 3 March 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks, but no thanks! I don't have time for this, and I don't have abbility to do this kind of work. To be a Patroller is enough for me. Regards. DenesFeri (talk) 08:41, 4 March 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Maybe you still want to vote? Dan Koehl (talk) 08:46, 4 March 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Oversight nomination[edit]

Please refer to Wikispecies:Oversighters/Requests/Koavf for a second Oversight nomination. Note that we must have at least two Oversigthers in order for anyone to have these user rights. All feedback is welcome. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 19:50, 3 March 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks, but no thanks! I don't have time for this, and I don't have abbility to do this kind of work. To be a Patroller is enough for me. Regards. DenesFeri (talk) 08:41, 4 March 2017 (UTC)[reply]

author templates etc.[edit]

Hello. please use the templates {{A|}}and {{Aut|}} for author names. I also suggest you have a good look through the help sections. However, please keep editing and contributing and if you nay questions use my talk page or the VP. Regards Andyboorman (talk) 09:07, 6 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Hi, OK; thanks! DenesFeri (talk) 09:12, 6 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]

No problems - these templates automatically format the author names, which is great. Having said that it helps a lot to use the correct author standard form, for example, on Aepyceros melampus, the correct standard form for Lichtenstein, Martin Hinrich Carl von (1780-1857) is Licht. - see my edit. The best source for standard forms and author names is IPNI. This source is mostly about plant names, but has loads of authors as well, but spelling can be highly anglisised . Hope this helps. Andyboorman (talk) 16:13, 6 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]
@Burmeister: So it was dad who was the author of Aepyceros melampus - I am no zoologist clearly, but original was not correct either? Andyboorman (talk) 16:59, 6 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]
@Andyboorman: Corrected to Hinrich Lichtenstein and add the primary reference. About the Licht. versus Hinrich Lichtenstein as link, is more consistent use the full entry name (at least in zoology pages, I don't known the practice for plants). Thanks Burmeister (talk) 17:14, 6 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]
@Burmeister: For plants we use the standard form as part of the full scientific name, which should also include abbreviated details of the publication see here Stellaria L. Sp. PL. 1: 421 (1753). However, we use the full author name and source for the protologue, as first citation in the reference section. I know things are different for zoology. Hopefully this helps both yourself and @DenesFeri: Regards Andyboorman (talk) 17:58, 6 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Picidae[edit]

Hi Denes - I saw you'd edited a few Picidae species to remove subspecies which have been proposed for species splits, but which have not been (or not yet been) accepted; please check against the IOC World Bird List first (Picidae here), to see what the currently accepted circumscriptions are. Thanks! - MPF (talk) 18:24, 20 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Also while I'm on, I saw your edit on Plumeria obtusa; this is not correct - when a subspecies or variety is distinguished, the members of the species not so distinguished become the type subspecies or variety. This is an autonym, automatically taking the same name as the species, and has to be retained: please don't remove them! Thanks again :-) MPF (talk) 18:24, 20 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Hi @MPF:, I only wanted it to create some order. I made some order among this birds in the huwikipedia, useing many different refrences. I thought that I should do it here also. DenesFeri (talk) 07:54, 21 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Vernacular names[edit]

Ahoj, obecné názvy taxonů v maďarském jazyce vždy začínají malým písmenem. Proto jsem revertoval tvou editaci./Hello, the common names of Hungarian taxa always start with a lower case. That's why I've reversed your editing./Helló, a magyar taxonok közös neve mindig kisbetűvel kezdődik. Ezért változtattam meg a szerkesztést.--Rosičák (talk) 17:40, 26 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Promiň, že na tom trvám, i když jsi rodilý mluvčí./Sajnálom, hogy ragaszkodom hozzá, még akkor is, ha anyanyelvű.--Rosičák (talk) 17:44, 26 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Hi @Rosičák:, You still didn't tell me the reason, and useing google translate didn't help either. Please write to me in English. DenesFeri (talk) 10:44, 28 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Hi, so very briefly. The reason is spelling of names in Hungarian. Next I explained here.--Rosičák (talk) 12:26, 30 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Calidris[edit]

Hi Denes - do you have a citation for authorship of this as Gmelin, 1789? All the sources I checked give it as Merrem, 1804, so I put this back. I'll be happy to change to Gmelin if you have the literature citation for it. Thanks! - MPF (talk) 00:27, 28 September 2018 (UTC) Also as a small aside, it isn't necessary to add a carriage return after each VN, it just makes for lots of tedious scrolling when editing, without affecting the appearance of the published page ;-) MPF (talk) 00:27, 28 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Hi @MPF:, The Gmelin was my mistake. You have right. DenesFeri (talk) 10:42, 28 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks! - MPF (talk) 14:36, 28 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Wikispecies:Requests for Comment[edit]

Please discuss here. Please make your point of view freely. Regards.--Rosičák (talk) 11:20, 7 October 2018 (UTC)[reply]

capital letters[edit]

hi denesferi - does hungarian never use capital letters, anywhere? not even in the page title, or at the start of a line, or in an index? if no, then it is right to decapitalise hungarian vernacular names in the vernacular name lists. but if hungarian starts pages and new sentences with capitals (as i see hungarian wikipedia articles do!), then please leave the capital letter in place, exactly as it is in the relevant hungarian wikipedia article title. thanks! - MPF (talk) 09:37, 10 December 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Hi @MPF:, OK. But someone told meg exactly the opposite of this. So I don't know anymore what to do. Regards. DenesFeri (talk) 09:42, 10 December 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks! Title case makes the best sense, as it means anyone can copy directly from wikipedia article titles (listed at wikidata) without the need for special knowledge on what within-text conventions are for a language; it also looks a lot better to have uniform treatment in the lists. So it is what we have in the Help:Vernacular names section guidelines ;-) MPF (talk) 10:07, 10 December 2018 (UTC)[reply]
@MPF:, OK. Than the Capital Letters stay. DenesFeri (talk) 10:19, 10 December 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Köszi! MPF (talk) 10:42, 10 December 2018 (UTC)[reply]