User talk:DrChrissy/Archive 6

Archive 1←Archive 4Archive 5Archive 6Archive 7Archive 8→Archive 10

Rodent

You recently made this edit in the article Rodent which added information on rats emitting ultrasonic sounds. When I came to reformat the reference, I found that the Science News source, currently #34, does not work. Can you improve it (or could the facts be covered by the journal article)? And can you provide a reference for the bat detector statement? Cwmhiraeth (talk) 10:23, 8 July 2014 (UTC)

I will chase down the original sources - Panksepp did work on "laughing rats". Likewise the bat detector ref. Not exactly important so I will delete if I can't find it, but will try to get a ref. first,__DrChrissy (talk) 21:12, 8 July 2014 (UTC)
Thanks or your participation in the article. I think the new taxbox would look better without the borders. LittleJerry (talk) 15:30, 24 July 2014 (UTC)
Would you be able to add information on rodent intelligence? Thank you. LittleJerry (talk) 20:35, 10 August 2014 (UTC)
I don't like writing about "intelligence" in non-human animals, but I will put in some information on cognitive ability and function.__DrChrissy (talk) 11:15, 11 August 2014 (UTC)
Okay. Thanks. LittleJerry (talk) 19:01, 11 August 2014 (UTC)
LittleJerry tells me you plan to add some information to the Rodent article on cognitive ability, and I know you have made some useful contributions in the past. We are thinking of nominating the article at FAC. Would you like to join us in a joint nomination? Cwmhiraeth (talk) 18:35, 12 August 2014 (UTC)
Hi Cwmhiraeth. Thank you for that invitation - much appreciated. I fully intended to contribute to get this aticle to FAC so I included sections on Cognition and Emotions, however, an editor has waded in removing material and adding inferior material without leaving edit summaries or taking potentially controversial edits to the Talk page. I have had exactly the same dealings with this editor on other articles in the past and it has caused me a great deal of stress. I will therefore be putting my efforts into other articles. Best of luck with the article.__DrChrissy (talk) 19:23, 13 August 2014 (UTC)
I did not remove any information, I merely merged your two paragraphs and added some on other species in a separate line. If I'm causing you stress them I'll bow out of this project. LittleJerry (talk) 23:19, 13 August 2014 (UTC)
Well, whoever did what, the new information looks good. Thank you for your help, DrChrissy. Do I remember hearing of experiments where animals cached food in a closed maze system but when they needed to recover it months later, the system was open so that they could bypass the long meandering passages and did so, exhibiting great spacial memory powers? Perhaps it wasn't rodents in the experiment. Cwmhiraeth (talk) 05:18, 14 August 2014 (UTC)
It is called "Latent learning" and has been demonstrated in laboratory rats__DrChrissy (talk) 10:25, 14 August 2014 (UTC)

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Mirror test, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Animal behaviour. 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.

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 08:55, 15 July 2014 (UTC)

Invitation to WikiProject Poultry

Hello, DrChrissy. You are invited to join WikiProject Poultry. Check out the project at WP:POULTRY and feel free to join if interested. NorthAmerica1000 12:31, 15 July 2014 (UTC)

Poikilotherm

DrChrissy,

I edited the page https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Poikilotherm yesterday. Why is the naked mole rat the only mammal thought to be poikilothermic ? The definition states that the body temperature varies. For example, bats are endothermic, but unlike homeothermic mammals like humans, their body temperature does drop significant when they hibernate. Why aren't they poikilothermic then ?

(this is one of the first times I edit on wikipedia so I don't know if this is the correct way to contact you) — Preceding unsigned comment added by Robxwiki (talk • contribs) 10:43, 5 August 2014 (UTC)

Hi, welcome to Wikipedia. The animals you mention do drop their body temperature, but it is for a relatively short period of time and it is still regulated. Poikilotherms conform to the ambient temperature all the time. If you enter information onto wikipedia, you must include references to verify this. Regarding where this should be discussed, the best place is actually on the Talk page of the article. It is not wrong to bring it here, but the Talk page will get a lot more people reading your message. Happy editing.__DrChrissy (talk) 11:36, 5 August 2014 (UTC)

Gulls and tool use

Hi Chrissy, I just wanted to ask you what you thought of these two gull videos. Pretty interesting, huh? I know that you're interested in animal behaviour. The bait fishing is already mentioned in the tool use by animals article, but it's the first time I've seen it on video. The tap thing is just totally unexpected. If someone hasn't trained the gull for that, then it's absolutely amazing. --Kurt Shaped Box (talk) 20:06, 5 August 2014 (UTC)

Rodent FA

Please respond to the FAC talk page. Its regarding the "Emotion" section. LittleJerry (talk) 23:16, 18 August 2014 (UTC)

Need you at talk again. LittleJerry (talk) 14:58, 14 September 2014 (UTC)

You will have seen Ucacha's comments at the Rodent FA page. Are you knowledgeable on / able to help with the evolutionary history and classification issues he raises? I am responsible for much of that section and doubt I can improve my efforts much, not having access to books and scientific papers that would help. Cwmhiraeth (talk) 08:52, 18 September 2014 (UTC)

Sorry, but that is well out of my sphere of expertise. I can't but help feel, with the greatest of respect, that the editor's assessing this article have underestimated the size of the article needed. I accept that not everything can be discussed, but this is such a large, diverse group that the article has to be large to give adequate coverage.__DrChrissy (talk) 08:58, 18 September 2014 (UTC)
And in my opinion, the behaviour of rodents is much more varied and of greater interest than say that of ungulates. Cwmhiraeth (talk) 10:27, 18 September 2014 (UTC)
Could you look at the FAC talk again? LittleJerry (talk) 13:52, 27 September 2014 (UTC)

DrChrissy, I don't want to cramp your style, but we are now at an incredibly delicate stage of an FA process - we are trying to undo an explicit 'oppose' by a person in authority. I'd suggest as delicately as I may that this might not be the ideal moment to make major changes, what would you think? I don't know what chance we have of persuading him to change his mind, but whatever chances we may have can only be narrowed by changes other than those demanded by reviewers, wouldn't you say? All the best, Chiswick Chap (talk) 14:35, 4 October 2014 (UTC)

I totally understand. Having worked with scientific editors all my career, they are those who must be obeyed (whether you agree with them or not!). I'll withdraw the table and other changes. I'll work more on the table and the others in my sandbox to give them a generic appearance and maybe reinstate them at a later date. Do you think these are a good way of comparing such a diverse group?__DrChrissy (talk) 14:47, 4 October 2014 (UTC)

Oh good. Yes, such tables are an excellent way of presenting facts and figures in a way that people can readily compare. Chiswick Chap (talk) 14:53, 4 October 2014 (UTC)

August 2014

Hello, I'm BracketBot. I have automatically detected that your edit to Knuckle-walking may have broken the syntax by modifying 2 "{}"s. If you have, don't worry: just edit the page again to fix it. If I misunderstood what happened, or if you have any questions, you can leave a message on my operator's talk page.

List of unpaired brackets remaining on the page:
  • from humans 6 million years ago, and humans evolved upright walking without knuckle-walking.<ref>{{cite journal|title=A new kind of ancestor: Ardipithecus unveiled.|author=Gibbons, Anne|journal=
  • ]s, which looked something like a cross between a [[Equidae|horse]] and a gorilla.<ref>{{cite journal|author=Tassy P.|year=1978|title=Chalicotherium: le ‘‘cheval-gorille’’|journal=La

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, BracketBot (talk) 10:25, 26 August 2014 (UTC)

Hello, I'm BracketBot. I have automatically detected that your edit to Knuckle-walking may have broken the syntax by modifying 1 "{}"s. If you have, don't worry: just edit the page again to fix it. If I misunderstood what happened, or if you have any questions, you can leave a message on my operator's talk page.

List of unpaired brackets remaining on the page:
  • from humans 6 million years ago, and humans evolved upright walking without knuckle-walking.<ref>{{cite journal|title=A new kind of ancestor: Ardipithecus unveiled.|author=Gibbons, Anne|journal=
  • ]s, which looked something like a cross between a [[Equidae|horse]] and a gorilla.<ref>{{cite journal|author=Tassy P.|year=1978|title=Chalicotherium: le ‘‘cheval-gorille’’|journal=La

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, BracketBot (talk) 10:34, 26 August 2014 (UTC)

Recent changes

Hi, it will probably be best if we sort things out quietly while the article is being evaluated. I'm sure we can find a sensible solution. No article can cover everything, and we need to give priority to reviewer's requests over our own preferences. In addition, substantial change during the process could itself be an issue. I'll help if anything needs doing. Meanwhile, thanks for your understanding. All the best, Chiswick Chap (talk) 10:37, 16 September 2014 (UTC)

My changes were to correct an inaccuracy - gliding is not unique to flying squirrels. Surely correcting a false statement is at the very heart of getting an article to FA status. I do not recollect any reviewer saying their preference was that gliding-related text should be removed. This editor MUST learn to use the Talk page, or at the very least, give justification in the edit summary. It is extremely disrespectful and disruptive to delete sections of other editor's work without giving any reason whatsoever. As you are aware, I have refused to work with this editor before because of exactly this pattern of behaviour.__DrChrissy (talk) 11:19, 16 September 2014 (UTC)
I didn't know. Please feel free to use me if I can mediate in any way. I'm sure there was no intention to offend. Your expertise is valuable to the project and we're very grateful for your contributions. I'll see if we can sort something out now. All the best, Chiswick Chap (talk) 11:50, 16 September 2014 (UTC)

Hello again, I felt I had to partially revert your recent edit as the reviewer has specifically commented on the undue nature of mentioning the cognition study. We are basically engaged in a life-or-death struggle to convince him that this is a worthy article, so we need to do whatever we can to keep him happy, that's the reasoning. There are still quite a few points outstanding in his list, with very likely more to follow, so we need to focus our energies on fixing those (and if you can help with any of them, it would be incredibly welcome). I hope, by the way, that you're feeling a bit more comfortable with the other editors now. All the best, Chiswick Chap (talk) 13:14, 30 September 2014 (UTC)

Animal anatomy project

Innotata is interested in setting up an animal anatomy project. I'm interested also providing there is at least another founder. Can we count you in? --Epipelagic (talk) 04:05, 14 October 2014 (UTC)

Maybe a task force from WikiProject animals? Montanabw(talk) 07:20, 15 October 2014 (UTC)
I have had a think about this. As I have stated elsewhere, I intensely dislike the WP attitude of using the word "animal" when they mean "non-human animal" thereby implying humans are not animals. I'm afraid the title of WikiProject animals perpetuates this and I would much rather direct my attention to a project/task force which does not.__DrChrissy (talk) 12:22, 15 October 2014 (UTC)
I know, but WP:Anatomy was pretty mean to Epipelagic when they proposed splitting into human and non-human sections. We'll get no help there. I guess my take is a) Do we need a project, however named or placed? (most likely yes), b) if so, where can it live in peace? I don't want to make the perfect into the enemy of the good.  :-P Montanabw(talk) 14:24, 15 October 2014 (UTC)

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Pregnancy (fish), you added links pointing to the disambiguation pages Moonfish, Molly and Swordtail. 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.

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 12:20, 16 October 2014 (UTC)

October 2014

Hello, I'm BracketBot. I have automatically detected that your edit to Pregnancy (fish) may have broken the syntax by modifying 1 "()"s. If you have, don't worry: just edit the page again to fix it. If I misunderstood what happened, or if you have any questions, you can leave a message on my operator's talk page.

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, BracketBot (talk) 11:45, 24 October 2014 (UTC)

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Pregnancy (fish), you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Marsupium. 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.

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 09:14, 25 October 2014 (UTC)

Swine

Glad you agree with my recent changes & comments on Domestic pig and Razorback. J. D. Crutchfield | Talk 15:21, 30 October 2014 (UTC)

A cup of coffee for you!

Thank you so much for your work on the rodent article and for contributing to its featured article review process. I am a big fan of rodents and am happy to see them well-represented on Wikipedia. It is not often that Wikipedia articles on a major class of animals gets promoted. Blue Rasberry (talk) 17:43, 31 October 2014 (UTC)
Thank you for that.__DrChrissy (talk) 21:16, 3 November 2014 (UTC)

Reference Errors on 1 November

Hello, I'm ReferenceBot. I have automatically detected that an edit performed by you may have introduced errors in referencing. It is as follows:

Please check this page and fix the errors highlighted. If you think this is a false positive, you can report it to my operator. Thanks, ReferenceBot (talk) 00:31, 2 November 2014 (UTC)

Hi

I was just wondering what type of cruelty it is? currently in the page several categories are given: neglect, food industry or factory farming, psychologic disorders, cultural, circus, film industry, warfare. which one of the categories the image belongs to? neither, because it is just a man beating a dog. My first impression was that perhaps the artist tries to show a case of sadistic beating...and my second thought was that it was not the most interesting image for the lead section, I could be wrong of course. By the way, why did you revert my edit! Kiatdd (talk) 20:38, 3 November 2014 (UTC)

Copying to Cruelty to animals talk page - the proper place for this discussion.__DrChrissy (talk) 20:53, 3 November 2014 (UTC)
I have replied to the message there.__DrChrissy (talk) 21:18, 3 November 2014 (UTC)

RM notice

You may be interested in Talk:Razorback#Requested move November 2014, as you participated in previous related discussions.  — SMcCandlish ☺ ☏ ¢ ≽ʌⱷ҅ᴥⱷʌ≼  12:33, 7 November 2014 (UTC)

Reference Errors on 10 November

Hello, I'm ReferenceBot. I have automatically detected that an edit performed by you may have introduced errors in referencing. It is as follows:

Please check this page and fix the errors highlighted. If you think this is a false positive, you can report it to my operator. Thanks, ReferenceBot (talk) 00:51, 11 November 2014 (UTC)

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Broiler, you added links pointing to the disambiguation pages Varus, Epidermis and Valgus. 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.

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 17:24, 11 November 2014 (UTC)

Reference Errors on 20 November

Hello, I'm ReferenceBot. I have automatically detected that an edit performed by you may have introduced errors in referencing. It is as follows:

Please check this page and fix the errors highlighted. If you think this is a false positive, you can report it to my operator. Thanks, ReferenceBot (talk) 00:29, 21 November 2014 (UTC)

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Feral pig, you added links pointing to the disambiguation pages Diurnal and Laggan. 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.

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 00:46, 23 November 2014 (UTC)

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Otter, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Marine. 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.

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 09:03, 30 November 2014 (UTC)

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Ambush predator, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Tripod fish. 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.

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 08:58, 7 December 2014 (UTC)

WikiVet

Hi Dr Chrissy

I work on the WikiVet (www.wikivet.net) and have been asked to give a talk today on wikis and animal welfare - I came across your great pages and was wondering if you could give me some indication of how often they are visited and who do you think uses them - tough questions I know.

Keep up the good work

Nick — Preceding unsigned comment added by Shorthovi (talk • contribs) 09:30, 8 December 2014 (UTC)

Hi Nick. Thanks for the compliment. It is relatively easy to find out how often a page is visited. Go to the page you are interested in, click on the "View History" tab at the top of the page, when this opens, click on the "Page view statistics" towards the top. As for the use of pages, I know they are used by some university degree students (including B.V.Sc. (I teach at Bristol, so I know this)), some animal welfare organisations, and other individuals concerned. If you look at the Talk pages of the articles that can sometimes give you an idea. Hope this helps. __DrChrissy (talk) 11:28, 8 December 2014 (UTC)

Feral Pig

I appreciate your hard work on the "Feral Pig" article, but I think you went a bit overboard with the most recent set of edits. Overall, I find your contributions to Domestic pig and Feral pig (and presumably elsewhere) have been valuable, so please accept this small criticism in that context. Consistency of terms is important, to prevent confusion or mistake; but strict uniformity can become boring and pedantic. It's not confusing or misleading, at least in the U.S. context, to refer to feral pigs also as feral hogs and razorbacks—terms which everybody agrees are synonymous and thus equally accurate—and the variety relieves the monotony a bit. I also think that, in a discussion of feral hogs and hunting, there's room for the more conversational style that existed before your rather clinical revisions. Some of your revisions indeed seem schoolmarmish to me, and a few, such as "U.S." for "United States", seem wholly arbitrary. (Wikipedia style prefers "U.S." over "US" and "U.S.A.", but not, as far as I can recall, over "United States".) I'm not going to undo any of them (at least not directly), but I do ask you to consider easing up a little bit, and letting the article retain a somewhat relaxed tone, where that doesn't interfere with accuracy. Encyclopedic prose doesn't have to be boring. I hope you'll agree. J. D. Crutchfield | Talk 17:20, 8 December 2014 (UTC)

Hi, thanks for the positive criticisms. Regarding United States being abbreviated to U.S., I always thought the abbreviation was preferred after the initial term. I can not state any WP policy to defend this and I shall bear it in mind for future edits. Regarding the use of "feral pig" - many of the references for the U.S. section simply talk about wild-ranging porcines; they do not distinguish between released/escaped wild boar, escaped domestic strains, or hybrids. Although the definition appears quite clear in the article, some editors have argued that "razorback" refers only to wild boar. I wanted to reduce the possibility of any ambiguity introduced into the article by reports from observers who may have used the term in a different way to the definition.__DrChrissy (talk) 22:19, 8 December 2014 (UTC)
I don't remember seeing anybody who claimed that razorback applied only to wild boar (assuming that by "wild boar" we mean the Eurasian wild boar—colloquially, any feral pig may be called a "wild boar"). Be that as it may, I think general usage makes razorback synonymous with the feral hog of the Southern U.S. (and, by extension, of Australia), regardless of possible admixtures of the Eurasian breed. One of the references in the article is to a book that's available on-line, which helpfully distinguishes between feral pigs, released Eurasian boar, and hybrids. I can't remember which one it is at the moment, but I skimmed its introduction not long ago, and it seemed to confirm my understanding of the terminology. I'll try to find it again when I get some time.
One thing I'm interested in knowing—and which bears on this question pretty closely—is whether feral swine are taxonomically distinguishable from Eurasian wild boar, the way feral dogs are distinguishable from wolves. Free-ranging feral dogs, where many breeds can intermix, tend to produce what we call "yellow dogs" with pointed ears and curled tails, and not wolves, as one might expect. I'm curious to know whether our razorbacks, assuming no admixture of Eurasian boar, can be distinguished from the Eurasian breed. I imagine the book I mentioned has something to say on the subject, but I don't know when I'll have time to read it. J. D. Crutchfield | Talk 17:05, 11 December 2014 (UTC)
I guess what I am trying to achieve here is accuracy in a non-accurate world. It is fine when we sit in our wiki ivory towers and come up with precise, science-backed definitions (and I definately include myself as one of these ivory tower inhabitants) but it is a different matter out here in the real world. Part of the problem here is that (newspaper) reporters do not respect such definitions. Reports of a large, free-ranging,, hairy pig with tusks suddenly warrants headlines of "Razorback" because this attracts more attention, regardless of whether it is a wild boar or a feral domestic pig or whatever! It is these reports which have been used in the article. Sure they are verifiable, but are they accurate? I also think the American and Australian colloquialisms may also differ. I lived in Australia for 12 years and during that time developed the understanding that a "razorback" was a particularly large, hairy, aggressive individual, usually a male(!). There was not, to my understanding, any inference about it being a domestic pig or wild boar. As for the appearance of hybrid pigs, I don't recall seeing any photos, but I imagine the characteristic ridge back of the boar might re-appear in hybrids, although diminished. As for the Yellow dog hybrid, I'm not surprised it does not appear as a wolf as the gene pool it originates from is greatly different due to artificial selection. You have got me thinking now - your description of the yellow dog hybrid sounds remarkably like a dingo! __DrChrissy (talk) 18:04, 11 December 2014 (UTC)
It is a dingo! Compare Dingo with Carolina dog (what I grew up calling a "yellow dog") with Indian pariah dog with all the examples in the gallery under Pariah dog. That's what you get if dogs of many breeds are allowed to intermix freely over many generations. You'd think they'd revert to the ancestral stock, i.e., wolves, but instead they breed true as yellow dogs. What I'm wondering is, do feral pigs do their version of the same thing—i.e., do they breed true as feral hogs that are distinguishable from the ancestral stock, or are American razorbacks simply wild boar, just like the Eurasian tribe? I think the answer to that question would resolve some doubts here.

The open gate

http://www.nytimes.com/2014/12/12/world/europe/dogs-in-heaven-pope-leaves-pearly-gate-open-.html User:Fred Bauder Talk 21:13, 12 December 2014 (UTC)

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Feral pig, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Black bear. 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.

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 09:31, 14 December 2014 (UTC)

Yellow Dogs

To follow up on our recent conversation, here's a page about an Iranian dog shelter, with lots of photos. See how many yellow (or reddish-yellow) dogs there are with pointy ears and curly tails! J. D. Crutchfield | Talk 17:15, 15 December 2014 (UTC)

Reference Errors on 22 December

Hello, I'm ReferenceBot. I have automatically detected that an edit performed by you may have introduced errors in referencing. It is as follows:

Please check this page and fix the errors highlighted. If you think this is a false positive, you can report it to my operator. Thanks, ReferenceBot (talk) 00:20, 23 December 2014 (UTC)

Pinging

You may want to take a look at this. Montanabw(talk) 00:22, 23 December 2014 (UTC)

Thanks for the heads-up__DrChrissy (talk) 19:41, 23 December 2014 (UTC)

Seasonal Greets!

Merry Christmas and a Prosperous 2015!!!

Hello DrChrissy, may you be surrounded by peace, success and happiness on this seasonal occasion. Spread the WikiLove by wishing another user a Merry Christmas and a Happy New Year, whether it be someone you have had disagreements with in the past, a good friend, or just some random person. Sending you a heartfelt and warm greetings for Christmas and New Year 2015.
Happy editing,
J. D. Crutchfield | Talk 18:18, 23 December 2014 (UTC)

Spread the love by adding {{subst:Seasonal Greetings}} to other user talk pages.

Reference Errors on 27 December

Hello, I'm ReferenceBot. I have automatically detected that an edit performed by you may have introduced errors in referencing. It is as follows:

Please check this page and fix the errors highlighted. If you think this is a false positive, you can report it to my operator. Thanks, ReferenceBot (talk) 00:16, 28 December 2014 (UTC)

Temple Grandin on ISAE page

Clearly Temple Grandin is a notable member - she has had a movie made about her life! — Preceding unsigned comment added by 128.210.150.233 (talk) 20:59, 29 December 2014 (UTC)

Archive 1←Archive 4Archive 5Archive 6Archive 7Archive 8→Archive 10