User talk:Esculapio

Stubby

If you want to leave me a message you can find me on it.wikipedia

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:

• Help:Contents provides a good introduction to editing Wikispecies.
• Templates are there to help you to follow our syntax and formatting standards.
• Have a look at Done and to do.

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!

Lycaon 18:37, 31 August 2006 (UTC)

Autopatrolled rights

Dear Esculapio, You have been granted autopatrolled user rights, which may be granted to experienced Wikispecies users who have demonstrated an understanding of Wikispecies policies and guidelines. In addition to what registered users can do, autopatrollers can have one's own edits automatically marked as patrolled (autopatrol). The autopatrol user right is intended to reduce the workload of new page patrollers and causes pages created by autopatrolled users to be automatically marked as patrolled. For more information, read Wikispecies:Autopatrollers.

This user has autopatrolled rights on Wikispecies. (verify)

You may as autpatroller use the autopatroller user box on your user page. Copy and paste the following code on your user page:

{{User Autopatroller}}

Dan Koehl (talk) 21:30, 26 February 2015 (UTC)

Patrolling rights

After you were granted patroller user rights, it seems you did zero patrolling. (since you are autopatroller, the pages you edit gets automatically marked. But if you have patrolled pages , and marked them patrolled, your edit gets a "marked revision (number) of page (page name) patrolled")

If you dont wish to patrol pages, this is no problem at all, but please inform me if you tried and experienced any difficaulties, or if you have any questions.

Since you have not made use of your patroller user rights, I need to know if you still want to keep them, because you plan to use them in the future, or likevise. If you are not interested in patrolling, you dont need to do anything, and I will remove the user rights in a couple of days.

In any case you will keep your autopatrol user right, but there is no need for both.

But please consider carrying out daily patrols of new pages and edits made by users who are not autopatrolled.

If you want to try to patrol pages:

In Special:NewPages you can see the not patrolled new pages with yellow background. Presently there are probably none, since the pages made today and the last days has been made by users who already have 'autopatrolled' user rights. But if you do, or you choose to see the last 500 newly made pages, you may se files with yellow background. You can click on such a file, and scroll down to absolute down-right corner, where you can read "mark as patrolled" or similair, becasue the contributor does not have autoptarolled/patrolled user rights. When you click on the link, the file becomes patrolled.

But theres older files that need patrolling. In unpatrolled pages on recent changes, and you will see a list of unpatrolled pages. You will see a red colored ! in front of the unpatrolled file. If you click on each diff, you can mark the diff patrolled.

Dan Koehl (talk) 14:24, 18 March 2015 (UTC)

1680 not patrolled edits (its even more than five!) Dan Koehl (talk) 16:57, 26 March 2015 (UTC)

Dear Esculapio, I removed your patrol rights since you havnt used them during the last month. You are still autopatrolled, and should you wish start patrol pages in the future, you will get your patrol rights back. Best regards, Dan Koehl (talk) 23:20, 26 March 2015 (UTC)

Chelonoidis gender

In 2014 you changed to masculine the gender of two species of Chelonoidis, Chelonoidis carbonaria and Chelonoidis denticulata. Why? Though some sources show some species as masculine, most do not. Even the sources that show these as masculine, show others, esp. Chelonoidis nigra as feminine. The Turtles of the World, 7th edition, checklist (2014) referenced in Chelonoidis uses no unambiguously masculine specific epithets for Chelonoidis spp. and uses a few unambiguously feminine epithets for them: nigra, carbonaria, denticulata, phantastica, gigantea, tabulata, negrita, vicina, clivosa, and typica. IOW these experts have no doubt about the gender of Chelonoidis. They have no compunction against treating the masculine specific epithets found in the literature as correctable errors.

I wonder what contrary evidence you might have. DCDuring (talk) 03:18, 25 December 2016 (UTC)

Join discussions

At the water pump is presently discussed two topics;

1.) is to follow a previous consensus and change all [[BASEPAGENAME]] into [[susbt:BASEPAGENAME]], something which already has started.

2.) is what to do with the Category: <<taxon name>> (<<any country>>) files created by Stephen Thorpe. Some 5 000 have so far been moved together at Candidates for speedy deletion, but concearn has been objected, that some of those files may be useful, in all, or that parts should be transfered somewhere, before a major mass delete. Please join the discussion at pump and take part in shaping a consensus.

Best regards, MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 01:48, 27 January 2017 (UTC)

Acacia etc.

Hello I have reverted your edit on Acacia kirkii as WS now follows Acacia s.s. - see refs on its page. I have also made the taxon page Vachellia kirkii. I know that not everybody follows this taxonomy, as is their right, but WS does now follow it. Regards Andyboorman (talk) 18:05, 24 October 2017 (UTC)

Deletion

What does this mean?? Where is now placed Celastrales, Malpighiales and Oxalidales? Is it vandalism or is it legal change? --Kusurija (talk) 16:22, 6 April 2021 (UTC)

Also @Kusurija: I have rolled back this edit to the previous one. I appreciate that for taxa/clades above order WS is a mess and an inconsistent mixture of systems. Your well meaning edit has highlighted the problem. I will raise this once again on the Village Pump for wider discussion later in the day. However, WS is meant to be Linnaean across the board, but there is no agreed strict Linnaean taxonomy above the rank of order. However, the cladistic approach as found in APGIV has broad consensus. WS needs to discuss this before editors are encouraged to make edits above order and asked to concentrate on families, genera, species and so on. Please participate in the discussion once I open it later. Andyboorman (talk) 08:10, 7 April 2021 (UTC)

@Kusurija: according to APGIV, Celastrales, Malpighiales and Oxalidales are now part of COM clade. @Andyboorman: I wait for the discussion. --Esculapio (talk) 16:15, 7 April 2021 (UTC)

The Com Clade is embedded in the Rosids, although it forms a distinct phylogenetic cluster. I believe. Andyboorman (talk) 17:56, 7 April 2021 (UTC)

@Esculapio: Sorry, what means "COM"? --Kusurija (talk) 17:08, 7 April 2021 (UTC)

Initial letters of Celestrales, Oxalidales and Malpighales. Andyboorman (talk) 17:48, 7 April 2021 (UTC)