This is an archive of past discussions with User:FunkMonk. Do not edit the contents of this page. If you wish to start a new discussion or revive an old one, please do so on the current talk page.
This is to let you know that the Elasmosaurus article has been scheduled as today's featured article for July 28, 2020. Please check the article needs no amendments. If you're interested in editing the main page text, you're welcome to do so at Wikipedia:Today's featured article/July 28, 2020, but note that a coordinator will trim the lead to around 1000 characters anyway, so you aren't obliged to do so.
For Featured Articles promoted recently, there will be an existing blurb linked from the FAC talk page, which is likely to be transferred to the TFA page by a coordinator at some point.
Dear Funkmonk, you might have noticed that over the last few years my contributions to Wikipedia have gradually become less frequent. We made some plans for cooperation but I failed to fulfil my promises. This was caused by personal circumstances that prevented an adequate commitment on my part. The same situation now threatens to end my presence on Wikipedia completely. Before that point is reached, I thought it best to express my gratitude for your industry, intelligence, great artistic talent and civility that for so many years to me have been one of the main rewards and joys of being active as a Wikipedian. With great fondness,
Oh, I'm very sad to hear, but don't think I had any bad feelings about any collaborations, as far as I'm concerned, there is no set time frame for such, they're more like loose ideas that can gestate over an infinite amount of time. I hope any absence will only be temporary, and don't feel pressure for any commitments, it's a hobby for all of us, and it should only be done when we feel it's fun! I have really enjoyed our collaborations, and that I could always count on your advice when pinging you on any topic, from ankylosaurs to Dutch 15th century artists! So good luck with whatever is happening, and know that there'll always be a community here welcoming you back whenever you are able to return! FunkMonk (talk) 17:00, 5 July 2020 (UTC)
I have a dilemma. I am pretty sure that Lapitavenator is back under an IP address and has been contributing for months. I reported them thinking that they belonged to Falconfly because one of their drafts cited a preprint by Falconfly. I'm pretty sure that it is Lapitavenator because they using the same commons account as Tatelumps, for instance the image on Roxby Hall, and have the same interests. I'm ambivalent on confirming to the investigation it is them because they have done so much editing (over 500 edits in the last 2 weeks) and most of it is fine, and they have initially created many articles like Afrotapejara, Luchibang and currently has drafts for uncreated new dinosaur species Draft:Lusovenator and Draft:Aratasaurus. Articles created by socks tend to get automatically deleted regardless of other user input, and it's a pain to re-create them afterwards. The Takatika Grit theropod should probably be redirected, but that's fine. I have archives the two pterosaur articles for insurance. What do you think I should do? Kind regards. Hemiauchenia (talk) 19:32, 11 July 2020 (UTC)
Hi, yeah, that deletion spree that always happens after a sock is blocked certainly isn't helpful. The danger is that if we let him run along for too long, he will have created even more articles by the time someone else reports him which will then be deleted... Maybe we can negotiate with the admins about this, bring up the dilemma, because it is getting pretty ridiculous that we lose so many articles each time. He can in effect take articles hostage by creating them (hope this doesn't give him good ideas, lol)... FunkMonk (talk) 19:38, 11 July 2020 (UTC)
Your edit summary said "Unit orders are US style", which goes against WP:UNITS. So you didn't exactly make it clear that was what you were doing. FunkMonk (talk) 20:21, 16 July 2020 (UTC)
Hi, the title seems pretty odd? "Dansk tilbagetrækning fra EU på dansk" means "Danish retreat from EU in Danish". "In Danish" should not be part of the title... FunkMonk (talk) 19:49, 20 July 2020 (UTC)
It says it looks like an automatic translation. I guess you're not a native speaker? As far as I can see it is not a warning that it will be deleted? FunkMonk (talk) 18:26, 22 July 2020 (UTC)
This issue is a double issue, but the plan is to return to monthly henceforth.
A discussion at WikiProject Palaeontology about internal peer review processes led to the creation of a peer review space. In contrast to the more formal Peer Review, PalaeoPR focuses on short "fact checks", emphasizing content over style. Reviews are meant to be low commitment, with "drive-by reviews" encouraged. Since its inception on 8 July, seven articles have been submitted to PalaeoPR.
After a highly competitive third round, two Tree of Life editors advanced to the fourth round of the WikiCup: Dunkleosteus77 and Sainsf
A February 2020 paper published in PLOS noted that Mammalian Species is one of the most over-cited journals on Wikipedia relative to how frequently it is cited in other academic works.
Categorizing life with DexDor
DexDor is a WikiGnome with a particular interest in article categorization, including how organisms are categorized.
How did you become interested in editing biodiversity topics on Wikipedia?
I'm a wikignome who tries to remove unnecessary complexity and confusion in Wikipedia. I specialise in categorization. I've worked on categorization of several topic areas (e.g. military equipment) - anywhere where I see things like category tags on articles that the category text doesn't support. Categorization of organisms is one area I'm currently looking at (my essay on this).
You seem to be particularly interested in geographic categorization of organisms. What are some issues in this area?
One issue is that there are several possible relationships between an organism and a region (i.e. what the "of" in a "Xs of Y" means) - the organism may be found throughout the region, somewhere in the region, only in the region (i.e. endemic to that region) - there are categories for each of these (and others) and some categories have been unclear about their exact meaning. Then there's introductions by man, locally extinct species, occasional visitors...
Another issue is that some editors have thought it's appropriate to create categories for very small areas ("Spiders of Vatican City" is only a slight exaggeration) and put a few articles in them, thus creating a category that is both massively incomplete and non-defining for the articles in it.
There have been several (now blocked) editors who have been disruptive in this area, but a confusing and sprawling categorization scheme is also partly due to editors from a particular background categorizing a particular article in a way that appears to make sense, but doesn't really make sense in the wider categorization scheme - for example, if an article mentions the countries at the extremes of an animal's distribution, the animal is categorized just for those countries.
What potential solutions do you see for categorizing organisms by geography? How can other editors help address this issue, or at least, not make it worse?
We should have some guidelines that tell editors how to categorize any article about an organism (including any geographical categorization). I've started drafting guidelines at User:DexDor/BioCat. The guidelines are also a good way to ensure that the categorization of articles about organisms is aligned with categorization of other articles and may help us to identify where there are problems, inconsistencies etc in the categorization. I welcome suggestions for improvement of the guidelines (which should at some point be moved into WP:TOL).
Regarding geographical categorization of animals the main advice for editors would be to not create categories for any new areas and to only create a new category if you intend to populate it.
What have you learned from being a Wikipedia editor?
That lots of people (from varied backgrounds) each making (mostly) small improvements (like ants in an ants nest?) and only understanding some parts of Wikipedia can produce such a wonderful resource. But also, how that tends to result in ever-increasing complexity which negatively affects editors and readers.
Is there anything about your life outside Wikipedia that would surprise us?
... that despite being a member of the cat family, the jaguarundi has several features in common with mustelids such as otters and weasels? (2 June)
... that scientists were unsure whether the blue calamintha bee(pictured) still existed until it was observed again in March 2020? (2 June)
... that many of the animals regarded as pests have co-evolved with humans, adapting to the warm, sheltered conditions that a building provides? (3 June)
... that the banteng is the second endangered species to be successfully cloned, and the first clone to survive beyond infancy? (5 June)
... that cattle and deer sometimes stand under trees where southern plains gray langurs are feeding in order to consume the edible pieces that the monkeys drop? (10 June)
... that when boiled in milk, black coral(example pictured) emits a faint scent of myrrh? (21 June)
... that one of the factors affecting the future of the Huanchaca mouse is the increased cultivation of biofuels? (22 June)
... that the Strawberries and Cream Tree(pictured) is noted for producing pink blossoms on one side of the tree and white on the other, when it blooms every spring? (23 June)
... that the Chilean seaside cinclodes bobs its tail while it walks and flares its wings while it sings? (24 June)
... that Boie's frog(pictured) and the Banhado frog both resemble dead leaves on the floor of the forest? (25 June)
... that Markham's storm petrel, which nests in Peru and northern Chile, has been described as "one of the least known seabirds in the world"? (7 July)
... that the frog Corythomantis greeningi retreats into a hole, blocks the entrance with its spiny head, and injects venom into anything that tries to dislodge it? (18 July)
... that the reef box crab uses its powerful pincers to break open the shells of snails? (21 July)
... that the genus Pterodactylus(species depicted), the scientific name for a pterodactyl, had been considered a "wastebasket taxon" as many species were assigned to it and later reassigned? (23 July)
... that the sea urchin Abatus cordatus broods its young for nine months in pockets on its upper surface? (24 July)
... that Harold Clyde Bingham trailed a troop of gorillas for 100 hours in 1929? (25 July)
I had a problem, I am trying to find a paper called "A Miocene vertebrate faunule from the Malu member of Ceylon". cannot find it anywhere on the internet (or anywhere with open access that is) Not even Sci-hub works. But I know a user who seems to have access named Falconfly. Falconfly seems to have been banned due to threats he made. Since you seem to have interacted with him quite a lot, I wanted to ask, do you have access to the paper?--Bubblesorg (talk) 03:42, 10 August 2020 (UTC)
On August 7, WikiProject Palaeontology member Rextron discovered a suspicious taxon article, Mustelodon, which was created in November 2005. The article lacked references and the subsequent discussion on WikiProject Palaeontology found that the alleged type locality (where the fossil was first discovered) of Lago Nandarajo "near the northern border of Panama" was nonexistent. In fact, Panama does not even really have a northern border, as it is bounded along the north by the Caribbean Sea. No other publications or databases mentioned Mustelodon, save a fleeting mention in a 2019 book that presumably followed Wikipedia, Felines of the World.
The article also appeared in four other languages, Catalan, Spanish, Dutch, and Serbian. In Serbian Wikipedia, a note at the bottom of the page warned: "It is important to note here that there is no data on this genus in the official scientific literature, and all attached data on the genus Mustelodon on this page are taken from the English Wikipedia and are the only known data on this genus of mammals, so the validity of this genus is questionable."
Editors took action to alert our counterparts on other projects, and these versions were removed also. As the editor who reached out to Spanish and Catalan Wikipedia, it was somewhat challenging to navigate these mostly foreign languages (I have a limited grasp of Spanish). I doubted that the article had very many watchers, so I knew I had to find some WikiProjects where I could post a machine translation advising of the hoax, and asking that users follow local protocols to remove the article. I was surprised to find, however, that Catalan Wikipedia does not tag articles for WikiProjects on talk pages, meaning I had to fumble around to find what I needed (turns out that WikiProjects are Viquiprojectes in Catalan!) Mustelodon remains on Wikidata, where its "instance of" property was swapped from "taxon" to "fictional taxon".
How did this article have such a long lifespan? Early intervention is critical for removing hoaxes. A 2016 report found that a hoax article that survives its first day has an 18% chance of lasting a year.[1] Additionally, hoax articles tend to have longer lifespans if they are in inconspicuous parts of Wikipedia, where they do not receive many views. Mustelodon was only viewed a couple times a day, on average.
Mustelodon survived a brush with death three years into its lifespan. The article was proposed for deletion in September 2008, with a deletion rationale of "No references given; cannot find any evidence in peer-reviewed journals that this alleged genus actually exists". Unfortunately, the proposed deletion was contested and the template removed, though the declining editor did not give a rationale. Upon its rediscovery in August 2020, Mustelodon was tagged for speedy deletion under CSD G3 as a "blatant hoax". This was challenged, and an Articles for Deletion discussion followed. On 12 August, the AfD was closed as a SNOW delete. WikiProject Palaeontology members ensured that any trace of it was scrubbed from legitimate articles. The fictional mammal was finally, truly extinct.
At the ripe old age of 14 years, 9 months, this is the longest-lived documented hoax on Wikipedia, topping the previous documented record of 14 years, 5 months, set by The Gates of Saturn, a fictitious television show, which was incidentally also discovered in August 2020. How do we discover other hoax taxa? Could we use Wikidata to discover taxa are not linked to databases like ITIS, Fossilworks, and others?
Apororhynchus hemignathi, a spiny-headed worm with the distinction of being one of the first named animal taxa when organized alphabetically
This month's spotlight is with Mattximus, author of two Featured Articles and 29 Featured Lists at current count.
How did you become involved with editing biodiversity articles?
I think I have a compulsion to make lists, it doesn't show up in my real life, but online I secretly get a lot of satisfaction making orderly lists and tables. It's a bit of a secret of mine, because it doesn't manifest in any other part of my life. My background is in biology, so this was a natural (haha) fit.
You have an impressive number of FAs under your belt. Two of your more recent ones, Apororhynchus and Gigantorhynchus, are part of what you referred to as an "experiment". How did you choose these articles, and what's next for you in this experiment?
This experiment was just to see if I could get any random article to FA status, so I picked the very first alphabetical animal species according to the taxonomy and made that attempt. Technically, there isn't enough information for a species page so I just merged the species into a genus and went from there. It was a fun exercise, but doing it alone is not the most fun so it's probably on pause for the foreseeable future.
Note: Aporhynchus is the first alphabetical taxon as follows: Animalia, Acanthocephala, Archiacanthocephala, Apororhynchida, Apororhynchidae, Apororhynchus
What advice would you give to someone who wants to nominate their first FAC?
I would recommend getting a good article nominated, then a featured list up before tackling the FA. Lists are a bit more forgiving but give you a taste of what standards to expect from FA. The most time consuming thing is proper citations so make sure that is in order before starting either.
Is there anything that would surprise us to learn about your life off-Wikipedia?
My personality in real life does not match my wikipedia persona. I'm not a very organized, or orderly in real life, but the wikipedia pages I brought to FL or FA are all very organized. Maybe it's my outlet for a more free-flowing life as a scientist/teacher.
Anything else you'd like us to know?
The fact that wikipedia exists free of profit motive and free for everyone really is something special and I encourage everyone to donate a few dollars to the cause.
... that the flower buds of the woolly thistle(pictured) can be eaten in a similar way to artichokes? (8 August)
... that the French peanut is native to Brazil? (10 August)
... that the 800-year-old Minchenden Oak is one of the oldest trees in London? (14 August)
... that the forward-facing incisors of the extinct dolphin Ankylorhiza(restoration pictured) may have been used for ramming their prey, similar to a hunting method used by modern orcas? (16 August)
... that scientists accidentally created a hybrid of two endangered fish species, called the sturddlefish? (17 August)
... that despite having the widest distribution in the United States, the arid-land subterranean termite causes less structural damage than other members of its genus? (19 August)
... that in 2021, the dwarf periodical cicada(pictured) is due to emerge in parts of eastern North America, not having been seen for 17 years? (24 August)
Hi there, I'm pleased to inform you that I've begun reviewing the article Réunion swamphen you nominated for GA-status according to the criteria. This process may take up to 7 days. Feel free to contact me with any questions or comments you might have during this period. Message delivered by Legobot, on behalf of Gog the Mild -- Gog the Mild (talk) 13:41, 3 September 2020 (UTC)
TFA after TFA, thank you today for your share to Elasmosaurus, "the most viewed articles about a long-necked plesiosaur genus, and gets more hits than even Plesiosaurus itself"! --Gerda Arendt (talk) 09:35, 28 July 2020 (UTC)
... and another: Rodrigues rail, "about an obscure, extinct rail, the closest relative of the likewise extinct red rail, which was featured a few years ago. I've been sitting on this GA since 2012, while expecting Julian Hume to publish a monograph article about extinct Mascarene rails (like those about the parrots and pigeons from there), but now I'm not so sure it will come any time soon, and figured this would be as good a time as ever to polish and nominate it."! - What do you think about this nom? --Gerda Arendt (talk) 06:31, 31 July 2020 (UTC)
I'm running out of potential TFAs! I don't know much about opera, but I do like the Monteverdi I've heard, like Psalmus 126: Nisi Dominus... The nomination seems to have enough supports already to fly through? FunkMonk (talk) 10:51, 31 July 2020 (UTC)
Today, thank you for the Réunion Ibis, to which you "added practically all known info about, most PD images, and presented all controversies relating to the bird"! - The above went well, and the list appeared already on 21 August. Don't miss Monteverdi's Vespers on 1 September ;) --Gerda Arendt (talk) 09:05, 28 August 2020 (UTC)
Rhythm Is It! - I expanded that stub on my dad's birthday because we saw the film together back then, and were impressed. As a ref said: every educator should see it. Don't miss the trailer, for a starter. - A welcome chance to present yet another article by Brian on the Main page, Le Sacre du printemps. TFA day for me: tomorrow ;) - please watch then --Gerda Arendt (talk) 13:21, 31 August 2020 (UTC)
To answer your question: to avoid see of blue, it's a convention to NOT link composers when their work has an article, where everyone who doesn't know now Stravinsky or Beethoven can be sure to find a link to the composer. - The TFA happened, a tribute to Brian, in great collaboration, fine Main page, and see also. --Gerda Arendt (talk) 13:40, 4 September 2020 (UTC)
Nice to see you back! Yeah, all the back and forth we had at the FAC review was worth it, and thanks for your suggestions to the illustration! FunkMonk (talk) 16:41, 29 August 2020 (UTC)
You did a good job of drawing the illustration and I've looked at it several times over the years. I am well, but most likely I will not back on the wiki for a year or two owing to being busy working on a number of tasks. Snowman (talk) 17:08, 29 August 2020 (UTC)
The article Réunion swamphen you nominated as a good article has passed ; see Talk:Réunion swamphen for comments about the article. Well done! If the article has not already appeared on the main page as a "Did you know" item, or as a bold link under "In the News" or in the "On This Day" prose section, you can nominate it within the next seven days to appear in DYK. Bolded names with dates listed at the bottom of the "On This Day" column do not affect DYK eligibility. Message delivered by Legobot, on behalf of Gog the Mild -- Gog the Mild (talk) 23:42, 4 September 2020 (UTC)
If you think this page should not be deleted for this reason, you may contest the nomination by visiting the page and clicking the button labelled "Contest this speedy deletion". This will give you the opportunity to explain why you believe the page should not be deleted. However, be aware that once a page is tagged for speedy deletion, it may be deleted without delay. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag from the page yourself, but do not hesitate to add information in line with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. If the page is deleted, and you wish to retrieve the deleted material for future reference or improvement, then please contact the deleting administrator. Northern Escapee (talk) 19:11, 21 September 2020 (UTC)
Hmmm, I don't know, but I'd imagine the best solution would just be to upload the image in question as a file? Otherwise, I think the best place to ask about this would be the technical village pump:[2]FunkMonk (talk) 00:18, 26 September 2020 (UTC)
Thanks, I can't believe some of the typos I've made in that article, luckily a couple of people are cleaning up after me, hehe... FunkMonk (talk) 20:06, 30 September 2020 (UTC)
Thanks for uploading File:TN Primal Rage pal-front.jpg. The image description page currently specifies that the image is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, the image is currently not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the image was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that images for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).
Could you help me with getting acurate pieces of data and information and possibly teaching my friend william who is the artist for the project some extra drawing tips?--Bubblesorg (talk) 02:57, 11 October 2020 (UTC)
Thanks for uploading File:Sea Monsters wwd.jpg. The image description page currently specifies that the image is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, the image is currently not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the image was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that images for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).
Thanks for uploading File:BBCWWB large.jpg. The image description page currently specifies that the image is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, the image is currently not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the image was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that images for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).
Orphaned non-free image File:Walking with cavemen.jpg
⚠
Thanks for uploading File:Walking with cavemen.jpg. The image description page currently specifies that the image is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, the image is currently not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the image was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that images for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).
What skeletal or reference did you use for your chilantaisaurus drawing
I know you did this all the way back in 2008, but can you remember what skeletal or reference you used to make your chilantaisaurus drawing all those years ago?
It was originally drawn to be Neovenator, but then that article got many other restorations, so I just redid it as Chilantaisaurus, since the known material fit inside... FunkMonk (talk) 00:55, 21 October 2020 (UTC)
No, it was long before that existed, I think it was a skeletal on an Isle of Wight dinosaurs website, maybe it doesn't exist anymore. FunkMonk (talk) 03:16, 21 October 2020 (UTC)
An automated process has detected that when you recently edited Podokesaurus, you added links pointing to the disambiguation pages Washington and Specific name.
Hi there, I'm pleased to inform you that I've begun reviewing the article Podokesaurus you nominated for GA-status according to the criteria. This process may take up to 7 days. Feel free to contact me with any questions or comments you might have during this period. Message delivered by Legobot, on behalf of Jens Lallensack -- Jens Lallensack (talk) 22:22, 3 November 2020 (UTC)
Hi there, I'm pleased to inform you that I've begun reviewing the article Acamptonectes you nominated for GA-status according to the criteria. This process may take up to 7 days. Feel free to contact me with any questions or comments you might have during this period. Message delivered by Legobot, on behalf of Dunkleosteus77 -- Dunkleosteus77 (talk) 22:41, 14 November 2020 (UTC)
The article Podokesaurus you nominated as a good article has passed ; see Talk:Podokesaurus for comments about the article. Well done! If the article has not already appeared on the main page as a "Did you know" item, or as a bold link under "In the News" or in the "On This Day" prose section, you can nominate it within the next seven days to appear in DYK. Bolded names with dates listed at the bottom of the "On This Day" column do not affect DYK eligibility. Message delivered by Legobot, on behalf of Jens Lallensack -- Jens Lallensack (talk) 19:01, 16 November 2020 (UTC)
Hello! Voting in the 2020 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23:59 (UTC) on Monday, 7 December 2020. All eligible users are allowed to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once.
The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail.
You should not change anything in an article that is already sourced unless you first find better sources to replace it. FunkMonk (talk) 19:08, 26 November 2020 (UTC)
You should not change measurements anything without adding sources to the article, now you should instead bring suggested changes up on the article talk pages so they can be discussed first and double-checked. FunkMonk (talk) 21:00, 26 November 2020 (UTC)
By the authority vested in me by myself it gives me great pleasure to present you with this barnstar in recognition of your efforts in promoting many, many articles on dinosaurs. It is appreciated. Gog the Mild (talk) 16:03, 28 November 2020 (UTC)
Hi FunkMonk (I am back!). I saw that you recently deleted my size comparison image from the article on Cynthiacetus (yes, "Sneaking Stoat" have been my second name for some time). Was it something wrong with the Cynthiacetus? Conty~enwiki 20:01, 30 November 2020
Ah, sorry, and welcome back! I didn't actually notice you had added a new image, I reverted because you added pixel size forcing to the other image, which is discouraged. Anyway, it would be best to get the image reviewed at WP:Paleoart first.FunkMonk (talk) 19:08, 30 November 2020 (UTC)
No problem; it's in good condition so I didn't need to make a great deal of changes. It should easily pass GA anyway; good luck with your planned nom. Cheers, Baffle☿gab08:19, 3 December 2020 (UTC)
Oh, thanks, but it's as with the delegates, I don't think I would have much energy for writing and reviewing if I had to do administrative tasks too, my adminship on Commons is almost more than I can chew already... And hehe, I even have a userbox saying "This user thinks most administrators do a good job but has no wish to join them". But maybe when I "grow up" one day! FunkMonk (talk) 20:50, 30 November 2020 (UTC)
Here I was looking into you and I couldn't help think "why isn't FunkMonk" a sysop. Then I see I am going to have to talk you into it. So here goes. The nice thing about being a sysop on enwiki is that it doesn't have to distract you from what brings you joy. If you spend your time writing and reviewing now, after passing RfA you can still spend your time writing and reviewing. What it does do is give you options. So if you want to review some deleted contributions, now you can. If you come across a piece of obvious vandalism and need to page protect, you can do that too. Being a low key admin carries few downsides and some subtle advantages in some situations (i.e. low grade content disputes go my way a bit more easily than they did before). Would you perhaps be willing to reconsider? Best, Barkeep49 (talk) 21:33, 30 November 2020 (UTC)
The administrative toolset is formally the sysop permission. I tend to use sysop to try and emphasize the technical (NOBIGDEAL even though it kinda is) nature of the role. Best, Barkeep49 (talk) 15:19, 2 December 2020 (UTC)
The article Acamptonectes you nominated as a good article has passed ; see Talk:Acamptonectes for comments about the article. Well done! If the article has not already appeared on the main page as a "Did you know" item, or as a bold link under "In the News" or in the "On This Day" prose section, you can nominate it within the next seven days to appear in DYK. Bolded names with dates listed at the bottom of the "On This Day" column do not affect DYK eligibility. Message delivered by Legobot, on behalf of Dunkleosteus77 -- Dunkleosteus77 (talk) 17:21, 4 December 2020 (UTC)
Hi FunkMonk, the date and location of File:Thylacine pouch.jpg, which you uploaded aeons ago, has been changed on Thylacine. I'm not sure what is correct, but it certainly doesn't make sense that they're different. Was wondering if you had some insight. Best, CMD (talk) 11:13, 17 December 2020 (UTC)
This is to let you know that the Guadeloupe amazon article has been scheduled as today's featured article for January 28, 2021. Please check the article needs no amendments. If you're interested in editing the main page text, you're welcome to do so at Wikipedia:Today's featured article/January 28, 2021, but note that a coordinator will trim the lead to around 1000 characters anyway, so you aren't obliged to do so.
For Featured Articles promoted recently, there will be an existing blurb linked from the FAC talk page, which is likely to be transferred to the TFA page by a coordinator at some point.
But first today thank you for Achelousaurus, "about a ceratopsian (or "horned dinosaur") nominated for FAC in ten years, since 2007's Styracosaurus. This ceratopsian dinosaur is unusual in having bosses where most others of its kind had horns, and it has been theorised to have been a transitional form between horned and non-horned members of its group"! --Gerda Arendt (talk) 10:28, 19 December 2020 (UTC)
Wishing you and yours a Happy Holiday Season, from the horse and bishop person. May the year ahead be productive and distraction-free. Ealdgyth (talk) 14:48, 25 December 2020 (UTC)
By the authority vested in me by myself it gives me great pleasure to present you with this award in recognition of the thorough, detailed and actionable reviews you have carried out at FAC. This work is very much appreciated. Gog the Mild (talk) 22:31, 31 December 2020 (UTC)
Congratulations, FunkMonk! The article you nominated, Acamptonectes, has been promoted to featured status, recognizing it as one of the best articles on Wikipedia. The nomination discussion has been archived.This is a rare accomplishment and you should be proud. If you would like, you may nominate it to appear on the Main page as Today's featured article. Keep up the great work! Cheers, Gog the Mild (talk) via FACBot (talk) 00:07, 9 January 2021 (UTC)
While reviewing this one for URFA/2020, I discovered an update was needed, as all four species are now listed as endangered, not just three. I've updated it, but I'm not familiar with ref formatting standards for science articles, so could you look over my edits to make sure I didn't break the formatting sometime? Hog FarmBacon05:14, 17 January 2021 (UTC)
There is a specific "cite IUCN" template you can see in use for example at echo parakeet. But personally I think what you did is fine, but someone else is probably going to change it down the line. FunkMonk (talk) 05:51, 17 January 2021 (UTC)
Thank you today for Guadeloupe amazon, about "two obscure, extinct parrots for the price of one; one was found to be based on a description of the other in 2015, after being the source of speculation for more than a century. Little is known about this bird, but it is associated with some nice historical artwork and some interesting contemporary accounts, so I found it worthwhile to flesh out the article anyway."! - On the same page memory of Jerome Kohl, - more on my talk. --Gerda Arendt (talk) 08:43, 28 January 2021 (UTC)
Hey, I wasn't sure where it should be placed. I scrolled through the entire page and did not find a proper subject region. So did you just remove it completely? Or did you move it where it belongs? PalaeontologyAndOtherSciences (talk) 19:19, 30 January 2021 (UTC)
The info is already in the article under evolution, "The Columbian mammoth evolved from a population of M. trogontherii that had crossed the Bering Strait and entered North America about 1.5 million years ago; it retained a similar number of molar ridges. Mammoths derived from M. trogontherii evolved molars with 26 ridges 400,000 years ago in Siberia and became the woolly mammoth.[1] Woolly mammoths entered North America about 100,000 years ago." I'm not sure if it adds much to state again it was across Beringia, because it kind of goes without saying, it was the only route. FunkMonk (talk) 17:45, 31 January 2021 (UTC)
Disambiguation link notification for February 3
An automated process has detected that when you recently edited Cimoliopterus, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Alveolus.
On another note how long do you think the deliberation will take for the Bodashtart FAC. I ping'ed the lagging reviewer but did not get a response. I also wrote to them on their talk page to no avail. What do you advise me to do? _Elias Z. (talkallam) 10:20, 4 February 2021 (UTC)
Thanks for the invitations! I wish I had more sources about the subject, is there any single good book that gives an overview of Phoenician history? As for the FAC, as long as you have three supports it should be safe. So it's just a matter of waiting it out. FunkMonk (talk) 10:53, 4 February 2021 (UTC)
There are plenty of freely accessible materials, check WP:PHO's resources section. As for the join button I guess it's because of your browser, have you disabled pop-ups? Try from another browser or device. I am sure you will find your niche to contribute on the WikiProject, there a lot of work to be done and it's daunting really. I started the WP after discussing how little coverage and how poor the content was about Phoenicia. Even I found it difficult to find articles to work on but once you catch a thread you keep rolling. How's your French BTW cos most publications about the subject are in French. Elayi is a very good resource, I highly recommend her scientifically thorough works. There is a lottttt of free content but most of them are somewhat outdated. I assumed you were interested because I saw you uploaded images of archaeological objects from the national museum of beirut dating from Achaemenid Phoenicia which is one of my main areas of interest. I will think of a good and freely accessible resource and get back to you. _Elias Z. (talkallam) 22:28, 4 February 2021 (UTC)
For some reason I can't figure out what's wrong with the pop ups, tried in Chrome, still the same... I think I would get a notification if the pop up was blocked... As for French, sadly, I took German in school, which I regret to this day, haha... But yeah, I'm certainly interested in the history, I think I can mainly contribute as a reviewer and with images, as you point out. FunkMonk (talk) 15:31, 5 February 2021 (UTC)
Thanks for fixing it up, I thought it looked suspicious; a wolf found in Newfoundland does not make a newfound Newfoundland wolf! FunkMonk (talk) 22:44, 16 February 2021 (UTC)
Thank you for the article, introduced: "This little dinosaur may seem inconspicuous, but there are many interesting aspects to it. All known specimens were found stuck in what appears to have been mud pits formed by the footprints of giant dinosaurs (which gave it its name). while it had teeth when juvenile, these were entirely lost as it grew up, a feature only known from a few other animals. Adults appear to have been herbivorous, though it belonged in a group of otherwise carnivorous dinosaurs. In addition, its unusual hands were also thought to have implications for bird evolution, but this idea has fallen out of favour."! --Gerda Arendt (talk) 06:37, 12 March 2021 (UTC)
Thank you for recropping the ring ouzel photos. It was laziness on my part - although I knew of the existence of croptool, I had never used it. Instead, I used Photoshop and exported the jpg as "high" quality. -Aa77zz (talk) 11:34, 8 April 2021 (UTC)
No problem, I usually do it in Photoshop too (with the out put settings at max), but I figured the editor who reverted you would be happier seeing the word "lossless" in the upload summary... FunkMonk (talk) 11:39, 8 April 2021 (UTC)
Hey, thanks again for checking out Tibesti Mountains and attempting a rescue. I don't think I'll ever nominate it again. I think with articles that are by their nature hard to find sources for, there is always going to be this natural tension between truthfulness (and prose) and the requirements of FAC. For example, I was called out on applying the word "today" to a source from 2001. I think it's correct to call me out on this per the FAC rubric, but I was lucky to find a source dated as late as 2001 for the claim, and given its obviousness the truth correspondence principle almost requires me almost morally to say "today", for the reader's sake ha. Anyway, sorry to lament on your talk page, just wanted to explain why it probably won't pop up again at FAC. Cheers again for the attempted rescue and I'll see you round here. Brycehughes (talk) 10:07, 21 April 2021 (UTC)
No problem, it looked good as far as I read, and I'm sure this article could become FA, so I'd encourage you to continue work on it (perhaps a WP:peer review with focus on sourcing could help), but it's of course your call. So again, feel free to ping me if you take it further. As for articles where sources are hard to find, that's what I've dabbled in the most, and WP:RX is always a help for that, if you've identified some that you can't access. FunkMonk (talk) 11:21, 21 April 2021 (UTC)
Disambiguation link notification for April 26
An automated process has detected that when you recently edited Cimoliopterus, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Specific name.
Oh yeah, they have a bunch of rip offs there. Since it's freely licenced, there isn't much I can do, though. In theory I could contact them, but I don't care enough for that hassle... FunkMonk (talk) 19:57, 23 May 2021 (UTC)
Hi there, I'm pleased to inform you that I've begun reviewing the article Cimoliopterus you nominated for GA-status according to the criteria. This process may take up to 7 days. Feel free to contact me with any questions or comments you might have during this period. Message delivered by Legobot, on behalf of Jens Lallensack -- Jens Lallensack (talk) 20:21, 25 May 2021 (UTC)
Stegosaurus
The classification section seems poorly sourced, the first paragraph has no citations and [47] only supports the last sentence. Also once I send turtle to GA review, can we update Styracosaurus? LittleJerry (talk) 02:53, 26 May 2021 (UTC)
I think you have carte blanche to do whatever you want with those old articles, anything is an improvement by now. FunkMonk (talk) 21:40, 26 May 2021 (UTC)
The copy edit you requested from the Guild of Copy Editors of the article Cimoliopterus has been completed.
Please let me know if you have any questions or concerns.
You'll notice I placed a "Clarification needed" tag at the end of the second paragraph in the Cimoliopterus cuvieri I've removed the "sigfig=1" so it doesn't round off the conversion. I think thus makes more sense here. Please have a look and then remove the tag.
Best of luck with the GAN. It looks as though you've landed an engaged, thorough reviewer.
Thanks again, yeah, the clarification tag was all I had questions about, great copy-edit, you caught a lot of awful typos! FunkMonk (talk) 19:49, 9 June 2021 (UTC)
TFA
Thank you today for Podokesaurus, "about the first dinosaur discovered and named by a woman (Mignon Talbot in 1911), and also one of the first well-known small theropods discovered, which attracted international scientific interest at the time. Unfortunately, the only known specimen was destroyed by a fire, so it has become fairly obscure over time. All that will probably ever be known about the dinosaur is summarised here, so hopefully it can bring some attention to its historical importance."! --Gerda Arendt (talk) 06:31, 16 June 2021 (UTC)
Ok, but your review is extremely short, though, so you should maybe read through it carefully again and list every issue you can come up with. Both about how it is worded, and if something sounds implausible, if a source looks iffy, if an image doesn't fit, etc. You can check it up against the WP:manual of style in addition to the WP:good article criteria. At a glance, I can see there are a lot of WP:duplinks. FunkMonk (talk) 07:58, 9 July 2021 (UTC)
The article Cimoliopterus you nominated as a good article has passed ; see Talk:Cimoliopterus for comments about the article. Well done! If the article has not already appeared on the main page as a "Did you know" item, or as a bold link under "In the News" or in the "On This Day" prose section, you can nominate it within the next seven days to appear in DYK. Bolded names with dates listed at the bottom of the "On This Day" column do not affect DYK eligibility. Message delivered by Legobot, on behalf of Jens Lallensack -- Jens Lallensack (talk) 19:42, 9 July 2021 (UTC)
Disambiguation link notification for July 19
An automated process has detected that when you recently edited Greeks in Syria, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Greek-speaking Muslims.
I don't think this is an unpopular opinion, see [9] (from a completely different set of authors):
While Sinopterus is clearly a valid taxon and has obvious tapejarid affinities, Huaxiapterus and Nemicolopterus are probably junior synonyms of Sinopterus.
On 29 July 2021, Did you know was updated with a fact from the article Cimoliopterus, which you recently created, substantially expanded, or brought to good article status. The fact was ... that Cimoliopterus was among the first pterosaurs to be depicted as models (pictured) in Crystal Palace Park in the 1850s? The nomination discussion and review may be seen at Template:Did you know nominations/Cimoliopterus. You are welcome to check how many pageviews the nominated article or articles got while on the front page (here's how, Cimoliopterus), and if they received a combined total of at least 416.7 views per hour (i.e., 5,000 views in 12 hours or 10,000 in 24), the hook may be added to the statistics page. Finally, if you know of an interesting fact from another recently created article, then please feel free to suggest it on the Did you know talk page.
Is it safe to say that Bravoceratops is still valid?
The Navajoceratops and Terminocavus says that Bravoceratops is invalid, but the papers of Beg and Menefeeceratops later do mention Bravoceratops' name. but you said that the Beg Phylogenetic paper is already done before Bravoceratops is reinterpreted. Should we still wait until another paper after Menefeeceratops to conclude that others reject it being invalid?
The ones says that Qianzhousaurus is Alioramus should shut up
In the Daspletosaurus paper in 2017, Carr puts Qianzhousaurus as a species of Alioramus. In Reid says that there is no mention of Qianzhousaurus being a species of Alioramus. In fact every subsequent paper describing new genus of Tyrannosauroids mentioning Qianzhousaurus indicates that they all continue using the name. so those who says Qianzhousaurus is Alioramus should shut up, haha.
Personally I think it's almost pointless to have multiple species within dinosaur genera. There are no established standards for when to lump and when to split. FunkMonk (talk) 11:37, 1 August 2021 (UTC)
I wonder why even S.Paul and Horner doesn't lump Qianzhousaurus? though they deleted a lot of genera.
_Gazella_tilonura.png)
.jpg)
![[5]](https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Castor_range.png){kind=link}
