User talk:JoJan/Archive 14

File permission problem with File:Least Chipmunk1.jpg

Thanks for uploading File:Least Chipmunk1.jpg. I noticed that while you provided a valid copyright licensing tag, there is no proof that the creator of the file agreed to license it under the given license.

If you created this media entirely yourself but have previously published it elsewhere (especially online), please either

• make a note permitting reuse under the CC-BY-SA or another acceptable free license (see this list) at the site of the original publication; or
• Send an email from an address associated with the original publication to permissions-enwikimedia.org, stating your ownership of the material and your intention to publish it under a free license. You can find a sample permission letter here. If you take this step, add {{OTRS pending}} to the file description page to prevent premature deletion.

If you did not create it entirely yourself, please ask the person who created the file to take one of the two steps listed above, or if the owner of the file has already given their permission to you via email, please forward that email to permissions-enwikimedia.org.

If you believe the media meets the criteria at Wikipedia:Non-free content, use a tag such as {{non-free fair use in|article name}} or one of the other tags listed at Wikipedia:File copyright tags#Fair use, and add a rationale justifying the file's use on the article or articles where it is included. See Wikipedia:File copyright tags for the full list of copyright tags that you can use.

If you have uploaded other files, consider checking that you have provided evidence that their copyright owners have agreed to license their works under the tags you supplied, too. You can find a list of files you have created in your upload log. Files lacking evidence of permission may be deleted one week after they have been tagged, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you. Magog the Ogre (talk) 01:50, 1 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

File permission problem with File:Coconut-palms-Martinique.we.jpg

Thanks for uploading File:Coconut-palms-Martinique.we.jpg. I noticed that while you provided a valid copyright licensing tag, there is no proof that the creator of the file agreed to license it under the given license.

If you created this media entirely yourself but have previously published it elsewhere (especially online), please either

• make a note permitting reuse under the CC-BY-SA or another acceptable free license (see this list) at the site of the original publication; or
• Send an email from an address associated with the original publication to permissions-enwikimedia.org, stating your ownership of the material and your intention to publish it under a free license. You can find a sample permission letter here. If you take this step, add {{OTRS pending}} to the file description page to prevent premature deletion.

If you did not create it entirely yourself, please ask the person who created the file to take one of the two steps listed above, or if the owner of the file has already given their permission to you via email, please forward that email to permissions-enwikimedia.org.

If you believe the media meets the criteria at Wikipedia:Non-free content, use a tag such as {{non-free fair use in|article name}} or one of the other tags listed at Wikipedia:File copyright tags#Fair use, and add a rationale justifying the file's use on the article or articles where it is included. See Wikipedia:File copyright tags for the full list of copyright tags that you can use.

If you have uploaded other files, consider checking that you have provided evidence that their copyright owners have agreed to license their works under the tags you supplied, too. You can find a list of files you have created in your upload log. Files lacking evidence of permission may be deleted one week after they have been tagged, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you. Kelly ^hi! 04:03, 1 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

File permission problem with File:Rihiveli-Male-Maldives.web.jpg

Thanks for uploading File:Rihiveli-Male-Maldives.web.jpg. I noticed that while you provided a valid copyright licensing tag, there is no proof that the creator of the file agreed to license it under the given license.

If you created this media entirely yourself but have previously published it elsewhere (especially online), please either

• make a note permitting reuse under the CC-BY-SA or another acceptable free license (see this list) at the site of the original publication; or
• Send an email from an address associated with the original publication to permissions-enwikimedia.org, stating your ownership of the material and your intention to publish it under a free license. You can find a sample permission letter here. If you take this step, add {{OTRS pending}} to the file description page to prevent premature deletion.

If you did not create it entirely yourself, please ask the person who created the file to take one of the two steps listed above, or if the owner of the file has already given their permission to you via email, please forward that email to permissions-enwikimedia.org.

If you believe the media meets the criteria at Wikipedia:Non-free content, use a tag such as {{non-free fair use in|article name}} or one of the other tags listed at Wikipedia:File copyright tags#Fair use, and add a rationale justifying the file's use on the article or articles where it is included. See Wikipedia:File copyright tags for the full list of copyright tags that you can use.

If you have uploaded other files, consider checking that you have provided evidence that their copyright owners have agreed to license their works under the tags you supplied, too. You can find a list of files you have created in your upload log. Files lacking evidence of permission may be deleted one week after they have been tagged, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you. Kelly ^hi! 04:04, 1 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

File permission problem with File:Japanese-Cherry.web.jpg

Thanks for uploading File:Japanese-Cherry.web.jpg. I noticed that while you provided a valid copyright licensing tag, there is no proof that the creator of the file agreed to license it under the given license.

If you created this media entirely yourself but have previously published it elsewhere (especially online), please either

• make a note permitting reuse under the CC-BY-SA or another acceptable free license (see this list) at the site of the original publication; or
• Send an email from an address associated with the original publication to permissions-enwikimedia.org, stating your ownership of the material and your intention to publish it under a free license. You can find a sample permission letter here. If you take this step, add {{OTRS pending}} to the file description page to prevent premature deletion.

If you did not create it entirely yourself, please ask the person who created the file to take one of the two steps listed above, or if the owner of the file has already given their permission to you via email, please forward that email to permissions-enwikimedia.org.

If you believe the media meets the criteria at Wikipedia:Non-free content, use a tag such as {{non-free fair use in|article name}} or one of the other tags listed at Wikipedia:File copyright tags#Fair use, and add a rationale justifying the file's use on the article or articles where it is included. See Wikipedia:File copyright tags for the full list of copyright tags that you can use.

If you have uploaded other files, consider checking that you have provided evidence that their copyright owners have agreed to license their works under the tags you supplied, too. You can find a list of files you have created in your upload log. Files lacking evidence of permission may be deleted one week after they have been tagged, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you. Kelly ^hi! 04:04, 1 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

File permission problem with File:Beachwalk.jpg

Thanks for uploading File:Beachwalk.jpg. I noticed that while you provided a valid copyright licensing tag, there is no proof that the creator of the file agreed to license it under the given license.

If you created this media entirely yourself but have previously published it elsewhere (especially online), please either

• make a note permitting reuse under the CC-BY-SA or another acceptable free license (see this list) at the site of the original publication; or
• Send an email from an address associated with the original publication to permissions-enwikimedia.org, stating your ownership of the material and your intention to publish it under a free license. You can find a sample permission letter here. If you take this step, add {{OTRS pending}} to the file description page to prevent premature deletion.

If you did not create it entirely yourself, please ask the person who created the file to take one of the two steps listed above, or if the owner of the file has already given their permission to you via email, please forward that email to permissions-enwikimedia.org.

If you believe the media meets the criteria at Wikipedia:Non-free content, use a tag such as {{non-free fair use in|article name}} or one of the other tags listed at Wikipedia:File copyright tags#Fair use, and add a rationale justifying the file's use on the article or articles where it is included. See Wikipedia:File copyright tags for the full list of copyright tags that you can use.

If you have uploaded other files, consider checking that you have provided evidence that their copyright owners have agreed to license their works under the tags you supplied, too. You can find a list of files you have created in your upload log. Files lacking evidence of permission may be deleted one week after they have been tagged, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you. Kelly ^hi! 08:18, 1 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

File permission problem with File:Cordate leaf.JPG

Thanks for uploading File:Cordate leaf.JPG. I noticed that while you provided a valid copyright licensing tag, there is no proof that the creator of the file agreed to license it under the given license.

If you created this media entirely yourself but have previously published it elsewhere (especially online), please either

• make a note permitting reuse under the CC-BY-SA or another acceptable free license (see this list) at the site of the original publication; or
• Send an email from an address associated with the original publication to permissions-enwikimedia.org, stating your ownership of the material and your intention to publish it under a free license. You can find a sample permission letter here. If you take this step, add {{OTRS pending}} to the file description page to prevent premature deletion.

If you did not create it entirely yourself, please ask the person who created the file to take one of the two steps listed above, or if the owner of the file has already given their permission to you via email, please forward that email to permissions-enwikimedia.org.

If you believe the media meets the criteria at Wikipedia:Non-free content, use a tag such as {{non-free fair use in|article name}} or one of the other tags listed at Wikipedia:File copyright tags#Fair use, and add a rationale justifying the file's use on the article or articles where it is included. See Wikipedia:File copyright tags for the full list of copyright tags that you can use.

If you have uploaded other files, consider checking that you have provided evidence that their copyright owners have agreed to license their works under the tags you supplied, too. You can find a list of files you have created in your upload log. Files lacking evidence of permission may be deleted one week after they have been tagged, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you. Kelly ^hi! 11:38, 1 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

File permission problem with File:Elliptical leaf.JPG

Thanks for uploading File:Elliptical leaf.JPG. I noticed that while you provided a valid copyright licensing tag, there is no proof that the creator of the file agreed to license it under the given license.

If you created this media entirely yourself but have previously published it elsewhere (especially online), please either

• make a note permitting reuse under the CC-BY-SA or another acceptable free license (see this list) at the site of the original publication; or
• Send an email from an address associated with the original publication to permissions-enwikimedia.org, stating your ownership of the material and your intention to publish it under a free license. You can find a sample permission letter here. If you take this step, add {{OTRS pending}} to the file description page to prevent premature deletion.

If you did not create it entirely yourself, please ask the person who created the file to take one of the two steps listed above, or if the owner of the file has already given their permission to you via email, please forward that email to permissions-enwikimedia.org.

If you believe the media meets the criteria at Wikipedia:Non-free content, use a tag such as {{non-free fair use in|article name}} or one of the other tags listed at Wikipedia:File copyright tags#Fair use, and add a rationale justifying the file's use on the article or articles where it is included. See Wikipedia:File copyright tags for the full list of copyright tags that you can use.

If you have uploaded other files, consider checking that you have provided evidence that their copyright owners have agreed to license their works under the tags you supplied, too. You can find a list of files you have created in your upload log. Files lacking evidence of permission may be deleted one week after they have been tagged, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you. Kelly ^hi! 11:38, 1 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Image permissions

I took a quick look your upload log - some of the images I could verify I moved out to Commons. I decided to move on to other, older images that need my attention more, but the following image I ran across have issues with verifications/permissions:

1. File:Ancistrochilus.jpg
2. File:Iris-versicolor.jpg
3. File:Miltonia 'Aquarius'.jpg

I noticed a lot of your free images have been uploaded recently - I just respectfully ask that in the future you upload them directly to Commons. They're going to end up there eventually, and you save a lot of work by volunteers like me by putting them there in the first place. With respect - Kelly ^hi! 03:54, 2 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

The File:Ancistrochilus.jpg came from this website (now on archive.web) : [1] and with this authorisation : Commons:Authorization to use material from http://www.larsen-twins.dk. Their files are accepted on the Commons e.g. Commons:File:Cymbidium pumilum larsen-twins 01.jpg (this is one among the many). Their website has been for a long time one of the rare suppliers of photo material about orchids to wikipedia. I've written more than a hundred articles about orchids, and I was glad that I could use those photos.

As to the recent uploading to en.wikipedia of a number of public domain photos of gastropods from http://www.biolib.cz, this was done because at the time I didn't know that the license PD-author|name also applied in the Commons There are about 2,500 photos to upload from this website and I've uploaded already more than 500 (I've stopped counting them), first in the en.wikipedia and then in the Commons (Commons:Category:Images by Jan Delsing). The ones remaining in en.wikipedia are gradually being moved to the Commons, whenever I come across them.

And as to those photos of leave shapes, they're copyright violations. My bad. I wonder why I hadn't noticed this then. I'll delete them right away. On second thought I found this text on the archive.web of Tripod [2]  : "Our Image Gallery has over 10,000 images for your site. All free and all easy to add. Choose from photos, clipart, and other essentials like backgrounds and buttons." They even tell you how to add those images to your own website [3]. But this doesn't constitute enough proof to match our present license policy. JoJan (talk) 14:38, 2 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks - I was looking for an OTRS ticket # on the Larsen twins images - here is the discussion at the Noticeboard over there. Kelly ^hi! 19:47, 2 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

I've sent today a new request for authorisation under the CC.attribution 3.0 - unported license to the Larsen brothers in Denmark. JoJan (talk) 16:55, 3 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

I have trouble contacting them. My email bounces back every time. Their new website www.orkidebilleder.dk is a 404 (See also [4]). It is available on web.archive.org :[5] but their website hasn't been updated since December 2007. I suppose they have gone offline. Sending a mailform through this archived website is impossible. I'm a bit stuck. JoJan (talk) 19:20, 3 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for being watchful

Dear JoJan,

I really appreciate you taking the efforts to fix my typos on Babu Genu Said page. Wikipedia has been a reliable source thanks to volunteers like you!

Wish you a happy new year!

Sanjay — Preceding unsigned comment added by Sanjaymjoshi (talk • contribs) 00:30, 3 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Speedy deletion nomination of File:Least Chipmunk1.jpg

A tag has been placed on File:Least Chipmunk1.jpg requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section F9 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because the image appears to be a blatant copyright infringement. For legal reasons, we cannot accept copyrighted images or text borrowed from other web sites or printed material, and as a consequence, your addition will most likely be deleted.

If you think that this notice was placed here in error, you may contest the deletion by adding {{hang on}} to the top of the page that has been nominated for deletion (just below the existing speedy deletion, or "db", tag; if no such tag exists, then the page is no longer a speedy delete candidate and adding a hang-on tag is unnecessary), coupled with adding a note on the talk page explaining your position, but be aware that once tagged for speedy deletion, if the page meets the criterion, it may be deleted without delay. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag yourself, but don't hesitate to add information to the page that would render it more in conformance with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. Kelly ^hi! 23:23, 5 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

{{OTRS-pending}} JoJan (talk) 14:52, 6 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Move request

• Coral nudibranch -> Phyllodesmium horridum
• Coral nudibranch change to disambig for Phyllodesmium horridum and for Phyllodesmium serratum.

--Snek01 (talk) 15:13, 8 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

 Done JoJan (talk) 15:28, 8 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Toolbar hacks

Beste collega. De oude toolbar was eindeloos aanpasbaar en gedocumenteerd op Wikisource. Dankzij het Wikipedia Usability Initiative echter, wordt men als gebruiker standaard aan de vector skin geholpen (no real problem) en in Special:Preferences onder Editing aan de “Enable enhanced editing toolbar” wat wel degelijk een beta feature wordt genoemd en ook is (problem).

Die beta toolbar is in feite poepsimpel aan te passen… als developer dan.

Ik heb een aantal ugly hacks geprobeerd om die nieuwe toolbar te beïnvloeden, maar het systeem was duidelijk niet onder de indruk.

Momenteel zijn er vier opties:

• de beta toolbar uitschakelen in de preferences en de oude toolbar aanpassen, piece of cake
• geduldig wachten op / zoeken van de betere hacker die de beta toolbar fnuikt
• betere hackers aansporen om versneld de beta toolbar te fnuiken
• developers aansporen om te documenteren hoe je als gebruiker de beta toolbar aanpast

Ik verwacht van een Wikipedia Usability Initiative niet dat ze de beste keuzes voor elke gebruiker maken, ik zou het echter wel appreciëren mochten ze duidelijk en vindbaar documenteren hoe je de keuzes kan personaliseren…

Vriendelijke groet, Dolledre (talk) 01:13, 17 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Bedankt voor de inspanning. Ik za maar voortploeteren zoals gewoonlijk en mijn ogen verder verslijten. JoJan (talk) 09:22, 17 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Ondertussen ben 'k aan documentatie geholpen: http://usability.wikimedia.org/wiki/Toolbar_customization , http://usability.wikimedia.org/wiki/Toolbar_customization/Library , http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:RefToolbar_2.0 (je zoekt het op Meta of via Google, maar zo vind je het dus niet), en er zou een werkende basic aanpassing op de nl wictionary functioneren. Het wordt m.a.w. wel degelijk opgelost ;-) Vriendelijke groet, Dolledre (talk) 00:50, 18 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Hallo JoJan/Archive 14. De oplossing zou op http://nl.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Gebruiker:Kwikipopsok/vector.js&oldid=24204459 staan, al is er zeker een betere beschrijving en 'n beter icoontje te verzinnen. Vriendelijke groet, Dolledre (talk) 01:33, 31 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Liotiidae

Hi, [6]. Consider informing Wikiproject Gastropods when creating any change above subfamily level. --Snek01 (talk) 01:15, 21 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Slovenian Technical Museum

Can you delete Slovenian Technical Museum redirect page? I made a mistake, it is wrong. Slovenian Technical Museum is located in Chaterhouse Bistra.--Pinky sl (talk) 10:37, 21 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Done. JoJan (talk) 11:28, 21 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

one Phymorhynchus

Hello, was there any content in deleted [7] article Phymorhynchus cingulata? If yes, I request for renewal, if no, I will start it with some content. This was no surpisingly spelling error. Thanks. --Snek01 (talk) 14:07, 22 January 2011 (UTC) That is strange... we need more refs for it. I will try to verify it. --Snek01 (talk) 14:15, 22 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

I found a double entry in WoRMS : Phymorhynchus cingulatus (Dall, 1890) AphiaID: 434618 [8] and Phymorhynchus cingulatus Warén& Bouchet, 2009 AphiaID: 458597 [9]. To find out what had happened, I sent an email to WoRMS. Shortly afterwards, I received an email from dr. P. Bouchet with an explanation : " These are two taxonomically valid different species, but Phymorhynchus cingulatus Warén & Bouchet, 2009 is of course nomenclaturally invalid because it is a secondary homonym of Phymorhynchus cingulatus (Dall, 1890). Our oversight in our 2009 paper. Warén will publish a correction in due course".

I've deleted the last entry awaiting a new epithet for the second species (Warén& Bouchet, 2009). The epithet for the first species (Dall, 1890) has been changed by dr. Bouchet in WoRMS from cingulata to cingulatus on 7 September 2010 (in accordance with the concordance of gender). This was brought to my attention while checking the list of species in Phymorhynchus, during my checking of Phymorhynchus species in the list "unaccepted" of Ganeshbot. The species (Dall, 1890) is also accepted under the same name ending on -us in gastropods.com [10]. The species Phymorhynchus cingulatus Warén& Bouchet, 2009 has been entered by dr. Bouchet himself as such in WoRMS, while his paper states Phymorhynchus cingulata. Now the best thing we can do is to wait for a revision of the name. Then the newly named species can be entered validly in our article in wikipedia. JoJan (talk) 20:08, 22 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks! Good work! I have added the info to the Phymorhynchus article. I have added also a question to PLoS One, which species is mentioned in doi:10.1371/journal.pone.0011967 to be sure also about this one. Interesting. --Snek01 (talk) 21:32, 22 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Please ignore my edits to your talk page

Was having a play! Egg Centric (talk) 01:09, 23 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

The Wikipedia:Sandbox allows you to carry out experiments. JoJan (talk) 03:12, 23 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Admin involvement needed

Hi. There is an endless sabotage going on in the Rumi article page that needs closer attention. I've done my best to prevent certain people from sabotaging the page but since nothing is stopping these people from trying to destroy the page by removing reliable sources and other serious things, I think it's about time to inform an administrator about what's going on. 84.23.140.55 (talk) 11:07, 25 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

I've semi-protected the article for a period of 1 month. I hope this helps, as it did in the past. JoJan (talk) 15:23, 25 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Antillophos

Hello, Antillophos bahamasensis deleted? Didn't you wanted to delete bahamensis instead? --Snek01 (talk) 22:24, 25 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

No, I did the right thing. See : Worms : [11] JoJan (talk) 09:00, 26 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

File:Genliseapygmaea2web.jpg listed for deletion

A file that you uploaded or altered, File:Genliseapygmaea2web.jpg, has been listed at Wikipedia:Files for deletion. Please see the discussion to see why this is (you may have to search for the title of the image to find its entry), if you are interested in it not being deleted. Thank you. Kelly ^hi! 06:27, 29 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

I've sent a request for a ticket to OTRS JoJan (talk) 08:18, 29 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Possibly unfree File:Genlisearepens1web.jpg

A file that you uploaded or altered, File:Genlisearepens1web.jpg, has been listed at Wikipedia:Possibly unfree files because its copyright status is unclear or disputed. If the file's copyright status cannot be verified, it may be deleted. You may find more information on the file description page. You are welcome to add comments to its entry at the discussion if you are interested in it not being deleted. Thank you. --Kelly ^hi! 06:28, 29 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

I've sent a request for a ticket to OTRS JoJan (talk) 08:18, 29 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, JoJan. You have new messages at JamesBWatson's talk page.
You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.

JamesBWatson (talk) 10:37, 10 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Help with Vandal

Hi. Similar to the Rumi page (thanks for listening), I would like to inform you that similar revert war is going on in the Avicenna page. Apparently, someone with an IP address has been trying very hard to undermine the integrity of a page that complies with WP:RS and pushing his POV. I'm concerned that the page is under serious attack because of this distortion campaign. And, since I'm opposed to edit warring and the IP user has been given a decent explanation by another user about his/her disruptive editing, I think it's about time to inform you about the situation and why I think it's important to take preventive measures against what to me is a clear sign of history fabrication and POV pushing.84.23.140.55 (talk) 12:43, 15 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]

I've semi-protected the article for a period of 1 month. This should quiet down the discussions. Full protection was not deemed necessary as User : Daiel Grant has been given an indef block. Cheers. JoJan (talk) 13:57, 15 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Very reasonable response. You've been very helpful. Thank you! 84.23.140.55 (talk) 19:21, 15 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Wiki Loves Monuments 2011

Hoi JoJan, zou je een blik willen werpen op nl:Wikipedia:De kroeg#Wiki Loves Monuments 2011? Alvast bedankt, multichill (talk) 10:32, 19 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Nassarius etymology

Hello, I noticed you recently did a lot of work on the Nassarius page. I was wondering if you know of the origin of the word "Nassarius" - its etymology/ what is it named after?Michaelwild (talk) 18:29, 3 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

The name is derived from the Latin word "nassa", meaning a fyke (a bag-shaped fish trap) (fyke being derived from the old Dutch word "fuycke"). From what I remember from my Latin lessons a long, very long, time ago, Nassarius would then mean "someone using a fyke". Hope this helps. JoJan (talk) 18:45, 3 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Wendelstein Railway

Hallo JoJan, Please see my comment about Wendelstein Railway (de:Wendelsteinbahn) at Talk:Wendelstein Railway#Translation. Groetjes, Peter Horn User talk 15:08, 11 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Beste Peter, ik vrees dat mijn kennis van het Duits echt onvoldoende is om mij aan deze vertaling te wagen. Er zullen wel voldoende medewerkers in wikipedia zijn die deze taak aankunnen. Groetjes JoJan (talk) 15:36, 11 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Beste JoJan,
No problem, I left a note at User talk:Bermicourt#Parameters & Translations.. User:Bermicourt will take care of this...eventually. Groetjes, Peter Horn User talk 17:55, 11 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Input invited

Hallo JoJan,
Your input is invited in Talk:Jordaan#Origen of the name. Groetjes, Peter Horn User talk 18:14, 11 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

I gave a reply at that talk page. JoJan (talk) 19:05, 11 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Moving California sea slug

Hi JoJan, I think we should move this article to California sea hare, the name by which this species is more commonly known (try a google search and compare the 2 results). I cannot move it. Would you move it if you think this is appropriate? Thanks, Invertzoo (talk) 14:37, 16 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Done. JoJan (talk) 15:27, 16 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Editing Ain't No Fun (If The Homies Can't Have None): Translated

Actually a simple google search shows that the subject of this article was trivially easily to determine: It was a narrative translation into standard English of a Snoop Dogg song "Editing Ain't No Fun (If The Homies Can't Have None)".

This is almost certainly not suitable for an encyclopaedia like ours, but it was not speedy deletable. Thryduulf (talk) 18:14, 17 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

I would like this undeleted as, looking at the deleted text, I think it is possible that it could be converted into an encyclopaedic treatment of the song. AfD is the proper place for this, not speedy deletion. Thryduulf (talk) 18:18, 17 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for pointing this out. I simply had no idea as rap is not my cup of tea. Even as a "translation", this would mean that this is a copyvio and falls under CSD: G12. If you think that you can improve the article and give it an encyclopaedic treatment, then I'm willing to undelete it. I trust that you can circumvent the copyright. But I recommend to that you do so in a sandbox of your user space. Give me a quick answer because I'm about to call it a day. JoJan (talk) 18:27, 17 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Rap isn't my cup of tea either, but it was explicitly linked as an example of when a long article can be an A1 speedy (see WT:CSD). I don't think it is a copyright violation as it isn't a straight translation, but more a descriptive narrative of what is happening (based on my quick reading of the actual lyrics). I don't have time to do anything now, but I am always keen that speedy deletion only be used when it is actually allowed to be. Thryduulf (talk) 18:30, 17 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

I agree with your strict interpretation of the rules of CSD. But I still think if this wasn't an A1 then it certainly was a G12. But this is an academic discussion leading nowhere. Even in AfD it would have been deleted right away as WP:OR. Anyway, if you want to give this article an encyclopaedic treatment later on, give me a sign and I'll undelete it and move it to your sandbox tomorrow or whenever you like. Cheers. JoJan (talk) 18:47, 17 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Service award level

There has been a major revision of the the Service Awards: the edit requirements for the higher levels have been greatly reduced, to make them reasonably attainable.

Because of this, your Service Award level has been changed, and you are now eligible for a higher level. I have taken the liberty of updating your award on your user page.

Herostratus (talk) 12:35, 21 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Actually you jumped two levels, to Master Editor. Congratulations, and thank you for your many contributions! Herostratus (talk) 12:35, 21 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks

Thank you for updating the strombid gastropod articles JoJan! The genus Strombus has been going through a major revision as of late. Daniel Cavallari (talk) 21:54, 25 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

I'm still in the process of updating those articles. It takes a lot of work. Furthermore, all the photos in the Commons about former Strombus species have to be edited and relocated in new categories etc. JoJan (talk) 09:06, 26 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

We Are Defiance

Hi JoJan,

are you able to remove the article about We Are Defiance in my Articles Room? Tomorrow the band will release their debut album at Tragic Hero. Goroth (talk) 18:06, 28 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Can you give me a link to "We Are Defiance" ? And what do you mean by "remove" : 1) moving to the main space or 2) deleting the article ? JoJan (talk) 08:49, 29 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Of course: We Are Defiance German Amazon store, WAD Official MySpace and Tragic Hero Records Official. I don't know how the guides of notability are. Many band's articles I wrote and saved at en:WP were deleted. Sorry for my worse english language :s. If it is possible (the band pass notability) please put it into the main space if it don't reach notability at the moment please put it at User:Goroth/We Are Defiance. I just want add that WAD toured through the USA with Get Scared, Dr. Acula and I Am Ghost. Singer Brian Calzini and ex-A Day to Remember guitarist Tom Denney are friends till going on High School. Goroth (talk) 16:46, 29 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

We don't put copyrighted material in wikipedia (such as from the above links), not even in your own user space. If you want to write in your own words an article about this group, open a new sandbox in your user space and try to follow the rules of Wikipedia:Notability (people) and give reliable secondary sources (review articles, well-known magazines, ...) as reference. Then you stand a good chance of your article being retained. JoJan (talk) 17:25, 29 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Okay, by time I will start a new article. Thank for helping me. Goroth (talk) 18:50, 29 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

A pie for you!

Invertzoo has given you a fresh pie! Pies promote WikiLove and hopefully this one has made your day better. Spread the WikiLove by giving someone else a fresh pie, whether it be someone you have had disagreements with in the past or a good friend. Bon appétit!^†

Delete?

Hi JoJan, I see there is a disambiguation page for "Chocolata" as a specific name for three gastropods. I think some of us agreed a while ago that these particular disambiguation pages are worthless, since specific epithets are never used by themselves, especially not with a capital letter! If you feel it is appropriate to delete this page maybe you can do so? Thanks, Invertzoo (talk) 17:10, 9 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]

I've deleted the page as a CSD G6 (housekeeping : unnecessary disambiguation page). JoJan (talk) 17:43, 9 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks JoJan! Invertzoo (talk) 23:26, 10 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Disruptive edits

Dear JoJan. I would like to notify you that a user with clear POV has been flooding Iran-related articles, here on English Wikipedia, with irrelevant scripts that have nothing to do with Iran. Despite his unwillingness to change this disruptive behavior and despite his disregard of others who have reverted his edits, he continues to insert Azeri Latin alphabets in articles that fall outside the scope of Project Republic of Azerbaijan, especially since such alphabets are not used in Iranian writing system. Because such Azeri Latin alphabets have been added to more than one article that fall outside the scope of Project Republic of Azerbaijan, I consider such edits to be WP:VAND. But, I have no interest in edit warring, unlike the person in question who forcefully pushes for irrelevant alphabets on different WP pages and keeps reverting in an endless loop.

Here is a pattern: [12], [13], [14], [15], [16], [17], [18]

Notice that none of the articles above are in in any way associated with Project Republic of Azerbaijan. I simply don't think giving weight to Azeri Latin scripts, as he has been doing, on an article that falls outside Project Republic of Azerbaijan is justified, especially as such alphabets are not used in the Iranian writing system. Thank you.84.23.140.55 (talk) 01:36, 15 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]

However problematic, this isn't a case of vandalism but of content dispute with one person pushing his own opinion. I cannot find any rules regarding the use of disputed spelling in a foreign language, except Wikipedia:Naming conventions (use English), where it states "The native spelling of a name should generally be included in the first line of the article" (bolding by me). It seems to me that the native spelling for Farah Pahlavi is the spelling in the Persian language. If the dispute goes on, you can always request outside input at Wikipedia:Requests for comment. JoJan (talk) 16:39, 15 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Engelstalige Wikipedia, La Esterella

Hey Sonuwe, ken jij iemand die goed Engels kan en ook op de Engelse wikipedia zit? voor daar het Engels te verbeteren, ik heb die pagina daar gemaakt maar mijn Engels en het google translate Engels zitten natuurlijk fouten in http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/La_Esterella

bedankt Klodde (overleg) 18 apr 2011 20:01 (CEST)

Beste Klodde, JoJan die ook heeft bijgedragen aan het artikel over La Esterella is zelfs overwegend actief op de Engelse Wikipedia. Bij hem ben je aan het juiste adres. Groeten, {{Gebruiker:Sonuwe/Handtekening}} 18 apr 2011 20:46 (CEST)

bedankt ;) Klodde (overleg) 18 apr 2011 21:20 (CEST)

Klodde (talk) 19:23, 18 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]

La Esterella

Hello JoJan, Please take a look at La Esterella. The initiator User:Klodde had written a message on my dutch talk page to find a contributor who can correct the article that he started on the English Wikipedia. Of course, you were the first person in my mind (contributor to the dutch article + very active here on the English Wikipedia + my English is not that good). Best regards, Groeten, Sonuwe (talk) 19:22, 18 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]

See also above. (bewerkingsconflict). Sonuwe (talk) 19:23, 18 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]

I have edited the article. JoJan (talk) 16:15, 19 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]

thanks Klodde (talk) 19:00, 19 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Walraversijde

Hi JoJan. Recently I wrote an article on Walraversijde using English sources. I've just noticed that it was you who uploaded the excellent images, and that, way back in 2005, you wrote a longer version of the article on the Dutch Wikipedia using the original Dutch sources. Would you be interested in collaborating some time, and taking the English version to GA or FA? --Epipelagic (talk) 09:08, 23 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for noticing my work on the nl.wikipedia. I've visited this marvelous museum several times as I live close by. As a result of my photos on the Commons, a few years ago I received an email from a historical society in the USA, asking for more close-ups of clothes and shoes, as they wanted to reproduce them in an exact manner. My article on the nl.wikipedia is very complete and I have thought of proposing it for featured article in the nl.wikipedia (I already have several). But since this has taken in the past so much of my spare available time, I decided not to give it a try (as I've declined for several other articles). As to your question : I'm willing to help you achieving GA or FA for this article. But I'm not a native English speaker. The MoS is not my cup of tea. The best I can offer is a translation (partial or complete) of my text, so that you can work on it to improve it. I also possess the books (in Dutch language) : (Kightly, Ch. et al,.2003) - Walraversijde 1465 (van archeologische opgraving tot daadwerkelijke reconstructie) and (Marnix Pieters et al.) : Oostende : stadsvernieuwing en Archeologie. If you need more information, these books will probably provide it. JoJan (talk) 16:06, 23 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]

That's great. I'll come back to this later. I'll try to look after the MoS side. I don't think you need to translate the Dutch article, since the Google translation seems to do a remarkably good job. That should be workable, so long as I can ask you to clarify some ambiguities and check a few things. A significant issue is that the Dutch article does not have inline citations. Do you have access to digital versions of the original sources you could make available to me? --Epipelagic (talk) 11:38, 24 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]

I'm afraid none of these books in Dutch language are online. Anyway, if you need any help clarifying some issues, just ask. JoJan (talk) 18:17, 24 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Rostellariidae

This is an automated message from CorenSearchBot. I have performed a web search with the contents of Rostellariidae, and it appears to be a substantial copy of http://www.stromboidea.de/?n=Species.Rostellariidae.

It is possible that the bot is confused and found similarity where none actually exists. If that is the case, you can remove the tag from the article. The article will be reviewed to determine if there are any copyright issues.

If substantial content is duplicated and it is not public domain or available under a compatible license, it will be deleted. For legal reasons, we cannot accept copyrighted text or images borrowed from other web sites or printed material. You may use such publications as a source of information, but not as a source of sentences. See our copyright policy for further details. (If you own the copyright to the previously published content and wish to donate it, see Wikipedia:Donating copyrighted materials for the procedure.) CorenSearchBot (talk) 17:38, 1 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]

The bot is confused. Content comes from Bouchet, P. (2010). Rostellariidae. In: Bouchet, P.; Gofas, S.; Rosenberg, G. (2010) World Marine Mollusca database. Accessed through: World Register of Marine Species at http://www.marinespecies.org/aphia.php?p=taxdetails&id=387400 on 2011-05-01. his work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-Share Alike 3.0 License. The above link http://www.stromboidea.de/?n=Species.Rostellariidae was not used and I was not aware of its existence. JoJan (talk) 17:45, 1 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Move request

Williamia (gastropod) -> Williamia. It is not a valid homonym. If is is a synonym of a plant, then {{for}} will be applied. --Snek01 (talk) 20:59, 10 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Done. JoJan (talk) 14:21, 11 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks.

Stanleya (plant) -> Stanleya

And then

{{for|the freshwater snail|Stanleya neritinoides}}

can be applied. --Snek01 (talk) 17:15, 19 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Refused. There is already a disambiguation page for Stanleya. JoJan (talk) 17:27, 19 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Umbilicate pebblesnail -> Clappia umbilicata. This scientific name is more often used than common. --Snek01 (talk) 22:03, 26 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Done. JoJan (talk) 16:46, 30 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Antrobia breweri -> Antrorbis breweri --Snek01 (talk) 19:56, 28 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Done. JoJan (talk) 17:15, 30 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]

New DAB page for snail species epithet Eucosmia

Hi JoJan, This disambiguation page was recently created a few days ago. I explained the reasons against doing this kind of thing and the editor has agreed to have it deleted. The discussion is partly on the article talk page and partly on the user's talk page. Do you agree that it is not a useful DAP? Should it be listed for deletion? Is that how this is done? Invertzoo (talk) 19:39, 1 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]

The disambiguation page has been deleted under "G7. Author requests deletion". JoJan (talk) 16:07, 2 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Punctuation, using a colon?

Hello JoJan, I just wanted to explain that in English we do not leave a space before a colon, at least not for the last 2 centuries. Instead it goes like this: no space is needed. Also if you are mentioning the common name in the intro of an article, you don't even need to put in a colon, you can just say, "Jojanus wikipediensis, common name the Wikipedia jojan, is a species of sea snail..."

OK, thanks and best wishes, Invertzoo (talk) 22:44, 23 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for pointing this out. We do use a space before a colon in Dutch language and I assumed this was the same in English. JoJan (talk) 19:01, 24 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]

It used to be the case in English 200 years ago, but not any more. I don't know when it changed. Thanks, Invertzoo (talk) 14:16, 13 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Move request

• Melanatria -> Madagasikara

per doi:10.1111/j.1095-8312.2009.01390.x. --Snek01 (talk) 23:59, 29 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]

I've made the move to Madagasikara (gastropod), as Madagasikara was already a redirect to Madagaskar. As I cannot see the whole article but just the abstract, I've to put my trust in your having studied the whole article. You have to clean up the text of the genus (authority ?) and the articles about the species (taxoboxes, authority etc.). JoJan (talk) 08:14, 30 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Nice one!

I like the new article you created, Lip (gastropod), a good idea! Invertzoo (talk) 14:17, 13 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]

It was getting on my nerves that I couldn't make a link each time I mentioned "outer lip" in a description. It was certainly an article missing in the Category:Mollusc anatomy.JoJan (talk) 14:34, 13 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]