User talk:JoJan/Archive 4

Re: Leaf Morphology Chart

Hello JoJan - Thanks for the nice comment on the chart. It is nice to hear that the article originator likes the addition. If you'd like to support it a bit further, and thereby maybe bring a bit more attention to the Leaf article, I am submitting the chart as a featured picture candidate, and you could leave a comment there. Debivort 09:52, 6 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I voted in your favor JoJan 17:24, 7 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Cavolinioidea

A concern has been raised about the source you give in this article regarding the new family, genera, and species listed there. Reportedly these were not actually published in the Bulletin of the Natural History Museum and the form of the citation brings its validity into question (for example, the specificity of the date but lack of information as to volume or page numbers). Could you please verify and explain where this information comes from? --Michael Snow 21:10, 6 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I've been looking in Google for hours and, just as you, I couln't retrieve the origin of this reference. Anyway, references about this specialized topic are very few. I added three new references, one of which is rather recent. JoJan 17:24, 7 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]
I have received a complaint from the same user about Cavolinioidea (see my talk page). I think his complaints are ungrounded, as this is likely a simple error and he's drawing it quite out of proportion. I think his complaint is unjustified, since he didn't contact the editors of the article first before he made the complaint. People make mistakes, and mistakes like these are easily corrected. Any one of us is reasonable enough to have accompdated his changes without any fuss. I mean...it's sea butterflies for crying out loud. I don't see an issue. --DanielCD 18:36, 8 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Answer on User talk:DanielCD JoJan 19:46, 8 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Mr JoJan, Mr DanielCD, I was (and am !) the one complaining, albeit to the wrong person. My experience with Wikipedia can be counted in days, and in my first look at the 'history' of the Cavolinioidea page I saw the name DanielCD repeatedly. This made me incorrectly suppose that he was the original editor of that page. DanielCD: my apologies, I was jumping to conclusions ! But my complaint is NOT ungrounded, this was a rough violation of copyright !

Then to Mr JoJan .... It must have been you, as I now saw that the first introduction of Cavolinioidea came from you. Sir, you used unpublished data from a manuscript that I submitted 2002 for Bulletins of the Natural History Museum (Geological Series). You refer to that periodical, and mention a date of 17 July 2002. Curiously enough, that is the date of my letter to Dr John Whittaker (The Natural History Museum, London), with which I submitted the manuscript. He, as the editor of that periodical, assured me recently (email 26 December 2005) that the manuscript left his office only to one reviewer, which was Dr Paul Jeffery, at the time also in the London Museum, now in the Natural History Museum Oxford UK. Paul Jeffery equally assured me (email 8 January 2006) that he gave my manuscript to nobody (both emails are available for whoever wants to read them).

I have a few questions, Mr JoJan: WHERE and from WHO did you get my manuscript ?? That you actually had it in your hands is clear from the contents of the Cavolinioidea page, and from the date you gave. Some of the data you could have taken from my website (http://sites.waldonet.net.mt/ariewe), where I put a summary of my paper. But not the date of that letter !

Next question: do you really think to have the right to use unpublished data for a Wikipedia page ? This truely is a case of scientific misbehaviour and it might be useful to read the page in Wikipedia on 'copyright'. Not only did you publish MY names, but you did so even without mentioning the authorship or referring to a source ! Of course not, there was no source, my paper was only published last December, and in another periodical. I changed that in the meantime on the Wikipedia Cavolinioidea page. Also I corrected there the Cuvierinidae and Praecuvierinidae family sections, as they contained a lot of errors. There are far more errors in the Cavolinioidea part, and maybe I find the time to correct them.

Mr JoJan ... this kind of behavior is not usual among people working scientificly. Now the changes are done in Wikipedia, but how do you think to make the corrections to all further sites using Wikipedia info ?

Last remarks: Mr JoJan, please DO NOT invent vernacular names for fossil or recent molluscs. Both for english AND dutch vernacular names there are commissions. Please, schoenmaker, hou je bij je leest !

I would appreciate an email-discussion about this, and we could do that in using our own language (Dutch). I prefer to state my name and email-address here, as I did after changing the Cavolinioidea page ! I'm not used to hiding behind a nickname.

Arie W. Janssen 20:20, 8 January 2006 (UTC) ariewjanssen@waldonet.net.mt[reply]

Other sites use Wiki info at their own risk, and if they use data and it's wrong, that's their problem. The policies are well stated that the info is not at all guaranteed to be accurate. I think this is a simple misunderstanding, and if anything that needs to be fixed, we will do everything we can to fix it. We realize you have a problem, and want to help you make it right. Please settle down, and state exactly what you feel the extent of the problem is, how much you feel you've been wronged, and what you think needs to be done. If there's an error, let's get working on it. (I will also place this on his talk page). --DanielCD 23:18, 8 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Also: Guys, I'm sorry I don't speak Dutch (I certainly wish I did). JoJan, perhaps you can relate that I am willing to forgo my normal activities and offer any assistance you guys might need in rectifying the situation. Good luck, and feel free to message me at any time. --DanielCD 23:28, 8 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Wheew. All ends for the better. I was beginning to get really confused; I think I was only getting little bits of the discussion. But it looks like the sun has come out again. Thanks, and cheers! --DanielCD 14:17, 9 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]

a favor regarding a math page

Hello JoJan - you are familiar with my illustrations (the leaf one). I was hoping to ask a favor of you. I placed an illustration on a math page, and there has been some discussion about whether it helps or not. I realize this isn't your field necessarily, but would you mind looking at a version with the figure: [1] and one without: [2] to see which you like better? Thanks! Debivort 06:51, 8 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Your illustration on tetrahedral symmetry is just awesome and fully instructive. But I'm not the one to judge if it also belongs in the article on cycle graphs. I once studied the symmetry groups in chemistry, but that's a very long time ago. Anyway, your illustration has already found its deserved place in the article on tetrahedral symmetry. And I hope you'll make a lot more of these graphs and illustrations. A picture can tell more than a hundred words. JoJan 10:06, 8 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]


Tree of Life/Update of the Angiosperm Phylogeny Group

I'd just like to note that following my inquiry about this article's reproduction of copyrighted material, the article has been deleted and marked as a copyright violation. JoJan, I would request that in the future you be more cautious about importing copyrighted articles into Wikipedia! MrDarwin 03:15, 10 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]

request fo radula picture

Hello JoJan - I would be happy to make the radula illustration you suggested. Do you envision it with a schematic showing how the radula functions at large scale, and then three panels showing details of the teeth? If that's what you had in mind, let me know and I'll start on it, otherwise, please feel free to give me additional guidance. Debivort 21:13, 15 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I had the following in mind :
  • a first illustration showing a transverse view of the radula in the buccal cavity in a retracted state and then in a protruded state (with the radula in a different color to enhance its visibility), each time also showing the cartilaginous base, he odontophore protractor muscle, the radula protractor muscle and the radula retractor muscle.
  • a second schematic illustration with the seven different types of radula, with different colors for the central tooth, the lateral teeth and the marginal teeth.
I hope the links I provided, will give you enough guidance how to proceed. I know it is a technical and somewhat obscure matter, but it shouldn't be too hard to draw. I worked hard on that article and with these illustrations it would be complete. JoJan 14:41, 16 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]

ArbCom

I want to thank everyone who took the time to vote on my ArbCom candidacy. I have placed some thoughts on this matter on my user page and would welcome your thoughts.--Edivorce 22:33, 23 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Warning

{{defban}}

This message was not signed but came from User:Holboin who has sent the same unfounded message to several other users in a matter of minutes. JoJan 17:05, 26 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]

The user has been blocked for 24 hours. JoJan 17:17, 26 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Actually, User:Holboin has been indefinitely blocked by another administrator. JoJan 17:21, 26 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]

English

The usual way to say what you have on your main page as " make myself be understood in German." is: " make myself understood in German." I am not sure what the "be" does to the meaning, but it might even change the meaning of "understood" from a remark on language to one on personality (as in "my best friend, Joop, really understands me"). Carrionluggage 05:19, 29 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Wiki formatting for Mozilla

I use Mozilla (1.0.7) and this very page does not display correctly (as happens with many other user and user talk pages, seldom in actual encyclopedia entries). In Mozilla the spaceman item (picture of the day) is level with your face and sort of puts graffiti on it. In Internet Explorer it is lower down the page. Since you are an admin, maybe you could take a more general look at such problems. ThanksCarrionluggage 05:27, 29 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I did not see the filesize option you mentioned but got 1280x1024 and your page is still a mess, with the lettering for the space photo overlying your face.

I do not know where to find the "monobook" option nor the "Village Pump" and I do not think I will look for the latter as I would prefer to work on content, not format. It's OK by me - I just skip the badly formatted pages. Thought as an admin. you might want to pursue this. If you tell me where to click to get "monobook" I'll try that. Thanks again. Carrionluggage 18:02, 29 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks again, again. My skin is the default, monobook. I don't mean to importune you about the general formatting problem, but it's your talk page that looks about as bad as anything I've seen and I thought you had perhaps a task force or phalanx or even a legion of admins ready to tackle formatting/portability issues. I can always revert to Internet Explorer if stuck. I fear if I prime the "pump" there might be a flood (of suggestions). By the way my Mozilla Firefox is based on Mozilla 5 so I think that should be OK. Odd that the pages look OK to you, yourself, but there are so many variables I give up on it. I mean that besides the "skin" etc there is the graphics card in my PC and its software, etc. And maybe some Mozilla settings. I might try on my Mac laptop to see if it is better. Thanks again. Carrionluggage 20:30, 29 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]

draft radula diagram

hello JoJan - I have made a draft diagram of the radula. It was hard for me to figure out where the muscles were supposed to be, so their placement may need adjusting (or massive catastrophic revision!). The source I used for that aspect was here. I hope to have time soon to make the second chart with the radula teeth types. Debivort 08:26, 29 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]

You've done it again ! This draft shows in a simple and informative way how how the radula works inside the buccal cavity. As to the placement of the muscles, there are small differences between the genera. So, I wouldn't worry too much about that. But I have two suggestions (if you could still alter slightly the picture) :
  • there should be a maxilla in the upper jaw, and a cartilage under the rasping part of the radula. Look for this on [3]. It is the letter B (B = Kiefer) and D (D = Radukakorpel) in that drawing.
  • at the entrance of the mouth, there is a continuous line between the upper part and the lower part, giving the impression that the mouth is closed. This black line should be removed.
I realize that it must have been hard for you to make this simplified schematic view of the buccal cavity. And I appreciate this. As to the second scheme with the different types of radula, the article Radula and the drawing on [4] should give you ample indications how to draw. JoJan 15:32, 29 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Is D in [5] the odontophore? I'll assume for now that it is. Debivort 18:37, 29 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Yes, it is. Sorry about this. JoJan 18:59, 29 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]
No need to apologize! Making an illustration is a great way to learn a topic, so I am enjoying this. Here is a new version. Debivort 19:36, 29 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]
I've put it already in the Radula article. And there is a surprise waiting for you on your user page. JoJan 19:50, 29 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]
JoJan, you've made my day (yay first barnstar!). Thanks for the kind acknowledgement. Keep an eye out for a draft of the radula types chart in the next few days. Debivort 20:11, 29 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]
You've deserved it fully. Enjoy it ! JoJan 20:15, 29 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Fauna

Oops, I keep finding more work for you. But I adore your prehistoric fauna, and think some of them deserve a better home than Wiki. Here is the story: When I was a boy (1942 - 1948 or so) my dad got me two books: The Sea for Sam and The Earth for Sam, with wonderful illustrations and descriptions of trilobites, Icthyosaurus, Hesperornis, Dimetrodon, Triceratops, Pterodactyls, Equus Scotti, Sabre-Toothed tigers, and probably even Notharctus and Nothrotheriops shastensis. Oh, Wooly Mammoths, too. Anyway, these books captivated me and helped me on the road to science. These books are now ruined in their later editions (rewritings!), and on that I blame, in part, the ascendancy of "Creationism." The later editions contain pictures of dredges used to dig up undersea fossils, maybe a few photos of bones or rocks, etc. No imaginative drawings. These books are killers of interest for the 8 to 16 year old. Dry and dull. If only someone could make new editions, or write new books under different names, it would be wonderful. I'm into astrophysics, relativity and cosmology, and planetary physics, and am not a suitable author. You might be. Willing to give it a try? Carrionluggage 20:45, 29 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Oh dear, pestering you on English again. There must be a better term than on your main page, "were the authors of new species". You know, there are so many people, especially in the U.S., who believe in only One Author of new species. Maybe you want "namers of new species" or "identifiers" - or there must be a special word for the person identifying and naming a new species.... Carrionluggage 20:50, 29 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]
First : the word "author". Well actually, this is the right name for someone who has identified a new taxon. See List of botanists by author abbreviation. And as to the prehistoric fauna : no, I didn't write those articles. I'm writing a wide variety of articles, mostly botanical articles, especially about orchids. But you could take up contact with Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Tree of Life. The authors of those articles will be able then to react to your propositions. And third : I'm glad we have a collaborator with such a specialized experience : astrophysics, relativity and cosmology, and planetary physics. JoJan 10:17, 30 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Maastricht/Maestricht

You might want to look at Comte_de_Rochambeau which says: "He took part in the siege of Maestricht in 1748 and became..." . It is my impression that in a spelling reform a lot of words with "ae" for the long "a" in Dutch had their spelling changed to have an "aa" instead. So that article on Rochambeau might be fixed with the newer spelling (after all, we do not write about Chaucer in Middle English). But the situation is complicated by the Maastricht entry itself, because "Maestricht" is listed as a French spelling, while in fact it might be old Dutch. Incidentally, my father fought in the "Meuse Argonne" in the U.S. forces 1918 and I lived in Holland (on César Franklaan, Heemstede) in the mid 1970's, but I never knew until today that "Meuse" and "Maas" were the same river. Thanks for all the other information. I fear that Wiki-projects may be dead ends and was hoping you knew someone who would take on the big project to write a book for young people. Yes, the books I mentioned had flora, too - giant Cycads, ferns, and so on. Carrionluggage 21:27, 30 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]

According to Webster's New Collegiate Dictionary the geographical names Maastricht and Maestricht are both allowed in English. However, Maastricht is the official name. It is also used by Wikipedia in the article Maastricht. Therefore, I have made the change to the Comte de Rochambeau article. As to that book you so fondly remember, have you ever looked at Wikibooks [6], with more than 13,000 books (and the list is growing). There is also a special section for WikiJunior books. This shows that there are quite a number of contributors to this project. This is also happening in wikipedias in other languages, such as the German Wikipidea, where they are even printing the wikibooks (Wikipress). Their latest release is a book about the Red Cross, with one of my photos incorporated in the composite image on the cover. And as to wars, we both have common memories : my grandfather fought in the hell of Ypres in the WWI, while my father fought against the Germans in WWII and was taken prisoner of war. Luckily, both survived the horrors of war. JoJan 13:45, 31 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I am glad the Wikibooks is doing good things. I will take a look sometime. Ypres - my gosh - I hope he was not gassed. Carrionluggage 16:39, 31 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Question about Vanilla kinabaluensis

Hi JoJan. I saw that on December 2004, you added 'Vanilla kinabaluensis' to http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_vanilla_species . I am trying to source for this species of orchid in Malaysia. Would you by any chance remember how you got to know about this species and if you saw a live specimen, where?
Many thanks,
Lee (support@shuetech.com)

This entry came from [http://www.kew.org/wcsp/prepareChecklist.do;jsessionid=88DBFB5050F36B15DD041440E1641302?checklist=monocots%40%40031310120061350485

World Checklist of Monocotyledons, Royal Botanic Gardens, Kew]. And no, I've never seen a live specimen. There is a report about this species online in [http://www.arbec.com.my/pdf/art4mayjun99.pdf AN ENUMERATION OF ORCHID COLLECTIONS FROM THE KELABIT HIGHLANDS]. I hope this will help you. JoJan 16:50, 2 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks

Thanks for helping the user try to find a barnstar. I have moved your message to his talk page. [7] --a.n.o.n.y.m t 16:08, 3 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]

radula teeth types chart

I must admit I am having a bit of trouble understanding everything enough to make the second chart image. It would be a great service if you could modify an image such as this one, maybe by pointing out the central, lateral and marginal teeth in each example? I don't need anything fancy - just a definitive labeling, so that I can go forward with the illustration with a bit more confidence. Thanks if you get a chance! Debivort 01:23, 4 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I've been very busy lately. And then I have been pondering your question. I've colored the teeth on the chart in different colors, so as to distinguish them. But I don't want to put this (clumsy) attempt as an image in Wikipedia. Therefore, if you could send me an email (see toolbox : email this user), I'll send you the image by email with some instructions. JoJan 09:39, 9 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]


Possibly unfree Image:Coelogyne-speciosa.jpg

An image that you uploaded or altered, Image:Coelogyne-speciosa.jpg, has been listed at Wikipedia:Possibly unfree images. If the image's copyright status cannot be verified, it may be deleted. Please go to its page to provide the necessary information on the source or licensing of this image (if you have any), if you are interested in it not being deleted. Thank you.

Can't find anything on the site that says images are public domain or freely useable -Nv8200p talk 02:33, 7 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]

The right copyright tag is {{copyrighted free use}}. See authorisation by the copyright holder in the Commons : [8]. JoJan 09:57, 7 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Conchology

You might not be the person to ask this, but I found you in the history of Mollusc; I've totally revamped the Conchology page, basing it structurally on Entomology, and I was wondering if you wouldn't mind taking a look and maybe cleaning it up/ giving feedback/correcting typos/whatever neccesary. I would appreciate it. Thanx! BTW, I'm going to take a look at this Gastropods project...СПУТНИКССС Р 22:07, 7 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]

You've done an excellent job. The article covers the many facets of conchology. I've added a reference to Thomas Say and a few typographical corrections. JoJan 10:42, 8 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Subst on welcome templates

Remember to use subst on welcome templates, eg. {{subst:welcome}} - as stated in WP:SUBST, it reduces load on the servers and makes the greeting more personal. Thanks. haz (user talk)e 15:25, 8 February 2006

Thanks for the hint. JoJan 15:32, 8 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Blocking

Hello, JoJan. Keep up the good work! Can I just comment about your blocking technique? I noticed you blocked WheelsonOwenX'sBUSgoroundandround (talk • contribs • page moves • block user • block log) for 24 hours. If you look at the user's block log you'll see that I had, nearly ten minutes beforehand, already indefinitely blocked this user. Your 24 hour block meant that my indef block was removed and your 24-hour block replaced it (a shorter block overrides a much longer one). Another admin has now replaced my original indefinite block. Please can you be more careful? Before blocking a user, could you please consult the block log to see whether the user has already been blocked? Otherwise you don't know whether you are undoing another admin's block. The quickest link to a user's block log is from the top of their contributions history. We don't want the Willy vandals to slip through more than we can help, do we?! Best wishes, RobertG ♬ talk 16:15, 8 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]

subst

When using template tags on talk pages, don't forget to substitute with text by adding subst: to the template tag. For example, use {{subst:test}} instead of {{test}}. This reduces server load and prevents accidental blanking of the template.

Thanks! howcheng {chat} 20:07, 9 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]




Hello Joan, My name is Giorgio Fiorelli, I am an orthodontist from Italy. I have just registered, wrote a few words and uploaded a couple of pictures, just to start a topic and see how this worked. I am astonished. Ten minutes later you have edited this article and added links, is this magic? I am quite excited by this site, I would like to talk about this to some colleagues. Do you think this could be the right place to start writing a specilaty encyclopedia? Thanks - Giorgio --Giorgio Fiorelli 14:31, 11 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you for the image search! :) I really appreciate it. Lady Aleena 14:25, 12 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]


I really was not expecting an award, thanks! Actually my article is still incomplete I will have to add more material. On the other hand I have to admidt that I have a lot of material (all original) ready to publish, since I am working on a book. I have looked for orthodontists within the community but I coud not spot anyone (a couple of general dentists are there). However I know many excellent clinicians, teachers and researchers in my field, I hope I will convince them to join this project in the future. I have a question for you: is there he possibility to embed swf, avi and mpg files in a wiki article? I think the answer is no, so in my article I added an extenal link, but I ask you to be 100% sure. Thanks again for your welcome. Giorgio --Giorgio Fiorelli 19:08, 12 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]

As Wikipedia is totally copyright free, copyrighted extentions are not allowed. However, if you can convert those files to an allowed file type, that's fine. See on the Commons for allowed file types : [9]. And as to your award, you've deserved it. I don't easily give an award to someone and you're only my third recipient and the first award given by me to a newcomer. And as to finding collaborators, you've given the right signal. The wiki-community is already very large (I think over 700,000 registered users in the en.wikpedia). Eventually someone will stick his/her neck out and come forward just as this happened to me. At the beginning, I started working on specialized articles in malacology. At that time I was the only one. Now there are several people adding stuff to these articles now and then. When I started writing botanical articles about orchids, again I was about the only one. Now I have to thread very carefully in this field, or someone will change my text and ask explanations why I did this or that. So much for the better. And so it goes on in every field. The Wikiportal:Chemistry has been working with only a few dedicated collaborators for a long time. Now there are many specialists working in this field. When I was working on the articles on Florence, Siena, Lucca and Pisa and the many monuments and churches in those cities, soon others gave their contributions. And then someone from Italy thanked me for writing in detail about these cities. Therefore, just go on writing and do your thing. In time, others will come along and give you a helping hand. That's how Wikipedia grows and that's the true spirit of the internet. JoJan 19:43, 12 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]
I guess you come to Tuscany often. I live in Arezzo and have a part time job at Siena University. Let me know if you are around here :-)--Giorgio Fiorelli 23:25, 12 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Well, I'm planning another trip to Italy with a duration of about a week in early April. I will stay in Rimini and make visits from there to Ravenna, San Marino and Bologna. Especially Bologna, since I wrote the biography of Jacopo della Quercia and I want to make photos in detail of his "Porta magna" of the San Petronio basilica in Bologna (these were the inspiration for Michelangelo for his "Creation of Adam" in the Sistine Chapel). JoJan 08:59, 13 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Frog won!

 Thank you for your support of the Article Improvement Drive.
This week Frog was selected to be improved to featured article status.
Hope you can help…

Dijxtra 21:17, 12 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for the scape work!

So nice to see the page done up nicely, rather than my stubby stub :). SB Johnny 15:20, 16 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]

please block an anonynmous user

Hi JoJan. Would you please consider blocking User talk:216.124.112.140? They have been blocked previously for vandalism, but have persisted since the block was lifted, and already accumulated 3 warnings on their user page in the last 3 days alone. Thanks Debivort 23:32, 24 February 2006 (UTC) PS - I will get around to the radula types chart. Soon. Promise.[reply]

I've given a 48 hour block JoJan 08:53, 25 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]

VWN en WCN

Beste allemaal Al enige tijd is er een Nederlandstalig chapter in oprichting, te vinden op http://nl.wikimedia.org . Dit wordt de Vereniging Wikimedia Nederland (VWN). Je kunt je interesse om lid te worden van deze vereniging hier aangeven.

Deze vereniging gaat eind augustus/begin september een Wikimedia Conferentie in Nederland (WCN) houden, volgend op Wikimania in Boston, gedeeltelijk erop inspelend middels een aantal discussiegroepen. Om iets dergelijks te organiseren is imput erg gewenst. Dus als je wilt meehelpen, of als je interesse hebt om bij een dergelijk evenement aanwezig te zijn, geef dat dan aan op nl.wikimedia. Ik hoop daar snel je imput tegemoet te zien! Met vriendelijke groet, effeietsanders 15:38, 25 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Hairy lobster

Why did you delete Hairy lobster? If you realized it was already created, why not just add a #Redirect? I have recreated it. Ebeisher 19:38, 8 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

The Genipa Picture you needed!

Hey JoJan!

I am fairly new and want to help others out a bit! I have got a Picture of the Genipa Plant you needed, you put a request for it. You can see this if you put genipa in the search box, I have already uploaded it. Please post on my talk page too, since I have none!! Thanks, Syed (HassanG)

There is a problem with the Genipa photo. You mentioned, "taken by a friend", but then this friend would be employed by the National Botanical Gardens in Havana, since this photo was taken from the page : [10]. If this is so, you have to obtain his permission to upload this photo under the copyright rules of Wikipedia. If not, then this image will be deleted shortly. Anyway, I thank you for your efforts trying to provide me with a requested image. If you have questions, regarding these copyrights, see Wikipedia:Copyrights or ask me. JoJan 20:36, 10 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Wikipedia:Scientific peer review

Sounds like fun, actually. Thanks for bringing it up - I wasn't aware of this project. So what do I do if I'm interested - nominate myself? Guettarda 16:17, 12 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

You can volunteer on that page. Look at the three others who already volunteered and give likewise your credentials. I think it is essential to have at least two from our Tree of Life-project on that board. I can't volunteer. I simply don't have the credentials. But I hope others will volunteer too. The field we cover, biology, is so broad, that we need all the experts we can get on that board. Good luck. JoJan 19:12, 12 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Type genus

I note that you are adding "type genus" to plant family names. This does not look like a good idea to me:

  • from a nomenclatural perspective "type genus" is an unofficial term, not recognised in the ICBN
  • from a taxonomic perspective, a "type genus" is confusing as it suggests that it refers to an actual genus, which need not be the case.

Sometimes it may be very useful to indicate the type genus in the text of an entry, but this will vary from case to case. Including information bordering on the apocryphal in a taxobox is likely to be confusing. Best wishes, Brya 08:10, 15 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Type genus is indeed an unofficial term in the ICBN. But Art 18 of ICBN describes how a family name is formed and this implies the notion "type genus". As to your second point, this is the case for instance in Caryophyllaceae, derived from Caryophyllum as type genus, a pre-Linnaean name for Dianthus. But Art 18.3 still accepts the name Caryophyllaceae as valid. Art 18.5 even points out the types of certain families. Therefore the notion "type genus" may not be offical, but it is used in the ICBN and certainly widely used in other instances (see also database of GRIN). Therefore the idea doesn't look too bad to me. And while checking for the mentioning of the type genus, I've stumbled across families that hadn't been treated yet (see Ancistrocladus). At the same time, I've been pondering to make redirects from names of families that have become a synonym for an accepted name. JoJan 11:22, 15 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Thank you for the prompt response. I should point out that you are not expressing this carefully. In taxonomy "type genus" is an unofficial term, but it is not an "unofficial term in the ICBN": the ICBN has explicitly rejected this term as being misleading. So any implication of the "notion type genus" is rather vague in a strict nomenclatural framework. If this notion were to be formally labelled the term chosen for this is quite unlikely to be "type genus".
Of course the phrase is widely used unofficially, and it may be a convenience to use it in the text of an article (which is rather different from a formal framework like a taxobox).
As to the second point, there is rather a clear distinction between a "generic name" and a "genus". A particular genus has only one correct name although it may have dozens of synonyms. Synonyms are names (that not correct), but a synonym is not a genus: otherwise there would be dozens of genera instead of just the one. Someone who is going to look for the genus Caryophyllus will be in for quite a search, and is not likely to come to a correct conclusion (for example it is wrong to state that Caryophyllaceae is based on a pre-Linnaean name for the genus Dianthus). Listing Caryophyllus as the type genus of Caryophyllaceae is not likely to help the reader in any way: it is the sort of detail that is at best irrelevant, and at worst hopelessly confusing: it is a lose-lose strategy.
A reader interested in the family Caryopyllaceae will want to know about what plants are in the family, what they look like, why they are in the family, what they are used for, etc, etc. Brya 17:07, 15 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

There is a proposal to restore the notion "type genus " in the ICBN, Vienna Code 2006 (http://botgard.bio.uu.nl/Taxonomy/ortho-2.htm]: 

Proposal 293   /  Art 19  prop. M  [Index]

Replacing “equivalent to that type” which refers to a name. A name (a word, a label) can hardly be equivalent to a type (which is a physical specimen or an illustration). [back]

Also adding a Note. This is a more radical solution than proposal 292, and aims at readability.

[Another option would be to restore “type genus” as it existed in the Code before 1983:

19.3 The name of any taxon of a rank below family and above genus which includes the type genus of the correct name of the family to which it is assigned is to be based on the name of that genus, ... [1978]

this would lead to Vienna Code:

19.3. The name of any subdivision of a family that includes the type of the adopted, legitimate name of the family to which it is assigned is to be based on the name of the type genus of that family (but see Art. 19.7).

and for the proposed provision (proposal 281)

19.4. The name of any subdivision of a family that includes the type of a name listed in App. IIB (i.e. a name of a family conserved against all unlisted names, see Art 14.5) is to be based on the name of the type genus of the listed family name, unless this is contrary to Art. 19.3 (but see 19.7).

A restoration of “type genus” would have to be done in Art 10.6, either by adding a Note or by adjusting the text of Art 10.6 . Presumably this would be accompanied by similarly restoring “type species” in Art 10.1]

JoJan 08:46, 16 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

As you can see, the discussion about the notion "type genus" is not over yet. But anyway, I'll stop adding the template type genus to the taxoboxes. A mentioning within the text seems preferable for the moment.Agreed ? JoJan 08:50, 16 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Thank you, a mention within the text (when useful) is quite acceptable. Indeed it will be interesting to see what the next edition of the ICBN will look like: it is hard to phrase this exactly as it is a rather difficult concept. Brya 14:02, 16 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Black Smoker

Yes, well sort of anyway. If came from a handout from my marine geology professor, so nothing that one could really put in the reference section. If you don't think this is appropriate i won't object if you take it out. However if you do take it out could you put a note on the talk page asking for proper references of how much water goes thru them per year. The bellman 01:22, 17 March 2006 (UTC) Update: sorry i should have looked at the talk page before i said that as i see you already asked. Sorry. The bellman 01:28, 17 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Delaid script

Hello, I noticed you were doing speedy deletions recently, and I thought you might be interested in a tool I wrote. It speeds up speedy deletions (and WP:PROD deletions) by filling in some of the fields for you. Instructions, questions and feedback go to User talk:R3m0t/delaid.js. r3m0t talk 13:25, 19 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for adjusting photo

Thanks!

Thanks for fixing the levels of my photo Chamaeleo jacksonii.jpg, which I'd never gotten around to doing myself. —Pengo 13:05, 21 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

i I've put it also on the Commons. Nice picture ! JoJan 14:18, 21 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for uploading Image:Green.darner2web.jpg. The image has been identified as not specifying the copyright status of the image, which is required by Wikipedia's policy on images. If you don't indicate the copyright status of the image on the image's description page, using an appropriate copyright tag, it may be deleted some time in the next seven days. If you have uploaded other images, please verify that you have provided copyright information for them as well.

For more information on using images, see the following pages:

This is an automated notice by OrphanBot. For assistance on the image use policy, see User talk:Carnildo/images. 17:11, 23 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

The problem not with me but with Orphanbot. JoJan 08:20, 26 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Please weigh in on this subject here. - UtherSRG (talk)

Barnstar

Hi Jo - many thanks, very much appreciated!

This one was on my local park pond today - MPF 01:57, 26 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Megachilidae

I like what you did with photos on the leaf-cutting bees page. Sometimes those photos look crappy spread out all over hell like they were before. Nickrz 21:47, 27 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Radula types chart

File:Radula types.png

At last, here it is. I'm again sorry for the delay, but my edit count history tells an interesting story regarding my contributing time (or lack thereof) in the last couple months. 452 edits in Jan, 26 in Feb - thanks alot dissertation research! I couldn't illustrate the other types without images as guides, so if you have some references for the other 2 kinds, I can add them to the chart. The toxoglossan one is slightly different than the example you send me, but based on SEM images I found on the web such as this one [11] Debivort 13:04, 28 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

This chart is excellent. There is no need to ad the other two types. These are explained in the text and any reader can now see how a radula looks like. And this, thanks to you ! JoJan 13:43, 31 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I am really sorry

I really had a very busy time lately and little, if any, time for Wikipedia. So I have missed your message of MArch 17. I hope you are having fun in these days, let me know when you are back. By the way, is there a notify function so that when someone writes into my talk page I can be aware of that? I would be happy to participate to the board, I will wait my "Virgilio" to be back from Italy. So you can tell me what I should do about it. Giorgio

Iris latifolia?

Hoi Jan

Thank you for your many flora and biology-related contributions. A while ago I uploaded the image now used for Iris latifolia. However, I'm not quite sure about the taxonomy, and there seem to be various scientific names assigned to that same species. I assume you have access to authoritative taxonomical information on the iris, as I've noticed you have worked on the article Iris (plant). Could you please check out for me if the information in Iris latifolia is ok? Jens Nielsen 16:24, 13 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Hello Jens, nice to be appreciated. As to Iris latifolia, it is always hard to identify by photo alone. But in my opinion it looks like Iris latifolia. It has the typical broad, hanging petals that look like wings. If the spot in the middle has a golden-yellow colour with little white stripes on the side, then it is Iris latifolia. The problem is, I can't see it clearly on your picture since I cannot aggrandize it (something wrong today with the servers of the Commons ?). My "authoritative taxonomical information" is sadly restricted to my botany books and whatever I can find on the internet. There is a good picture at [12] and compare it with your own photo. BTW, the article needs a lot more information + a taxobox. Sorry, i can't devote more time to the article, but I'm very busy at the moment treating about 700 photos in Photoshop and preparing to write the corresponding historical articles about churches and monuments I've visited on my latest trip to Italy. Anyway, I hope all this is of some help to you. JoJan 12:50, 14 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]
before I check with my other photo's, I'll hasten to add that the specimen is found in the Pyrenees. Does that make certain that it is I. latifolia? I'll add the taxobox later. Jens Nielsen 15:17, 14 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Iris latifolia is called in French "Iris des Pyrénées" (See here : [13]). If your photo matches the photos shown here, then you can be pretty sure. According to my botany book I. latifolia is also originally found in Spain. It was at the origin of most holticultural bulbous irises. JoJan 15:59, 14 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Hello!

I just want to say hi. Have a great day. Take care. Ω Anonymous anonymous Ψ: ''Have A Nice Day'' 19:49, 15 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Monascus purpureus

Hello, I've just made an article for a mold, Monascus purpureus. Could you check it? Thanks, Badagnani 21:35, 27 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Weather lore

Hello.

When this article was first proposed for Feature Article status, you very kindly supported the nomination. Some are now seeking to remove that status. I hope you will take part in the discussion here. Thanks! Denni ☯ 18:46, 5 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

In reference to Bio-barnstar proposal: What is the next move?

There was much talk lately about the bio-barnstar proposal, but these past 5 days there hasn't been more said. What is next? What is there to be done? Can we move this foward...? It is the first time I involve myself in a barnstar proposal and I do not know what is the procedure. I seem to read there is quite a support for a bio-barnstar and a considerable preference for the second proposal... Please, could someone tell me what next? Thanks.--Francisco Valverde 17:43, 10 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Answer on his talk page. JoJan 18:03, 10 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Basilica_of_San_Francesco_d%27Assisi

Greetings! Skimming it quickly, it looks quite good; but I'll have a closer look to see if I can help. Nice work! Antandrus (talk) 18:32, 10 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Deletion

You deleted the silicon optix page because the information on it was minimal. Wouldn't it have been better to just add to the page...

Anyone creating a new article should at least make it into a stub. Very short articles providing little or no context (CSD A1) are speedily deleted. But you can start all over again (preferably in a text editor) and write this time an article that is fit to be included in an encyclopedia. JoJan 17:57, 11 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Realth Chalmers

HI, Realth Chalmers is an approximation of his Welsh name, of which I don't know the exact spelling - however this appears to be the name under which his works appear in the libraries of The University of Wales and Lampeter. I am unsure how to cite book references? Do I need to find the actual title of the book or its reference code? Thanks PatrickSW 18:19, 11 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

General information can be found at WP:CITE. In this case I would mention : author,year, the title of the book, editor and (if possible) ISBN number. I would equally mention that Realth Chalmers is only an approximation of his Welsh name. And, off course, additional information is always welcome. JoJan 18:26, 11 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
You can also include him in the List of anthropologists. JoJan 18:28, 11 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
OK, I've added the book reference as a footnote in the main article. Thanks very much for your help :) PatrickSW 19:24, 11 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Stanhopea

Greetings JoJan, Rudolf Jenny does not consider Stan. nigrovoiolacea a valid species, but a variety of Stan. tigrina. with which I agree with.

Dr. Rudolf Jenny considers it to be a dark-colored variant of Stanhopea tigrina Bateman ex Lindley. For now, Stan. nigroviolacea should be maintained as a variety of Stan. tigrina, this based on the illustration by Morren and the indications by Kennedy in 1977" (Jenny 1999)

TheAlphaWolf suggested that listing all of the relatives in Stanhopea was superfluous when the user could just click Stanhopeinae I also agree with this.

Also Acopera is a subgenus within Gongora and Endresiella has been moved to Trevoria.

(The unsigned message above was added by User:Chounder on 12 May 2006)

Dr. Rudolf Jenny is certainly an expert when it comes to Stanhopea (see references of Stanhopea). However, I find it strange that these changes about S. nigroviolacea have not been reported in the Orchid newsletter of Kew Gardens [14], neither in their authorative World Checklist of Monocotyledons. I guess botanical taxonomists will always disagree with each other. Anyway, the problem appears on the talk page of Stanhopea and anyone interested in these matters can consult this. JoJan 17:20, 12 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Image:Pinguiculalaueana1web.jpg

Hi - According to the copyright notice currently on the source website, this image is licensed as {{noncommercial}}, not GFDL. Did the source website say it was licensed as GFDL when you uploaded it? Thanks -SCEhardT 19:44, 15 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Authorisation was received by email. Answer on the user page of SCEhardt. JoJan 17:04, 16 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks! I've changed the tag to {{CopyrightedFreeUse}} as you suggested since that is less restrictive than GFDL. -SCEhardT 19:08, 16 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

User OMG...

Hi, I noticed your welcome message to User:OMGFucker. I just indef. blocked due to profanity in the username. Maybe you missed it due to the language difference? Just thought you should know. Best, Kaisershatner 14:50, 22 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Answer on the talk page of Kaisershatner JoJan 14:53, 22 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks for your note. About "Dan brown"...there are many people named "Dan Brown." Let's see if he impersonates anyone before deciding that name can't be used.  :) Kaisershatner 15:02, 22 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for the speedy deletes

Very... speedy of you :D – Gurch 18:30, 26 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

May I ask why Movement of Spiritual Inner Awareness was deleted? As I recall, I created that page because there was already an unfulfilled link to it at Arianna Huffington, and another (via the acronym, MSIA) at Eckankar. Mporter 10:56, 30 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks

Thanks for the deletion of all the Image talks I tagged. ;-) DGX 17:43, 27 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

152.157.130.163

Howdy. 152.157.130.163 may require a block. Thanks in advance. Rsm99833 19:03, 5 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

24 hour block. JoJan 19:13, 5 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Family and other data for Charles van de Velde

Hi JoJan, maybe you remember me from some Red-Cross-related exchanges on Wikimedia Commons. I don't know whether you are interested in genealogy but perhaps you can help. I'm trying to compile an article for the German Wikipedia about Charles van de Velde, a fellow countryman of you, who is on record as being one of two people who used the Red Cross symbol in an armed conflict for the first time in history. It seems that he is largely forgotten in Red Cross history, so it's very painstaking and cumbersome to compile bit after bit of information from many different sources. The current German article, which you can find here, is what I got up to now. As you can see, it's not that much though it's already the most complete source I could find on the WWW. My question is whether you see any chances to find more information via sources, printed or otherwise, which are unavailable to me due to language barriers? From what I found, he was a captain and cartographer for the Royal Dutch Navy as well as a landscapist so maybe you have some ideas where to look for additional data. Especially family data, e.g. whether he was married or had children, would be nice. Maybe they are available from some genealogy databases? Any help is greatly appreciated! --Uwe 13:00, 6 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I'm afraid that I can't find more information about this man than what you have written already (BTW nice work !). But I've put your request on the Dutch Wikipedia Hulp gevraagd. I hope that this will attract the attention of a specialist in Red Cross history. I've asked them to contact you on your German userpage. Let's hope for the best. JoJan 19:09, 6 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Great idea & thanks a lot for your help. For some mysterious reasons, this man seems to be largely unknown. For example, I found his dates and places of birth & death only after extensive search, and not via some Red-Cross-related source but in the database of the Rijksbureau voor Kunsthistorische Documentatie. The information about his education and his time in Indonesia is from an online version of an art exhibition catalog, and so on. It's beyond me that a man who was rightly honored by a memorial seems to get so little attention. Anyway, let's hope that your idea yields some information. --Uwe 19:30, 6 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

My RFA

Thanks
Thanks
JoJan/Archive 4, thank you for participating in my RfA. It passed with an amazingly unopposed 77/0/1. Thanks for the support everybody! If you see me doing anything wrong, want to ask me something, or just want to yell in my general direction, leave me a note on my talk page. I promise to try and knock out Wikipedia's problems wherever I may find them!

Staxringold talkcontribs 19:58, 6 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for taking a fair look...

Thanks for taking a fair look at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Shaker Aamer.

Two more articles about Guantanamo detainees have been nominated for deletion:

Would you feel up to taking a look at them?

Shall I let you know if other articles about Guantanamo detainees come up for deletion?

Thanks. -- Geo Swan 01:53, 10 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Request for JoJan

Hoi JoJan,

Eigenlijk heb ik een vraag..

Voor zover ik kan achterhalen heeft u een paar gigantisch mooie tekeningen van bessen (aan de plant) op de website van wikipedia gezet. Ik ben momenteel bezig met het maken van een boek over (wilde) bessen in Finland (waar ik momenteel woonachtig ben). Dit boek zal niet worden gepubliceerd, omdat ik de informatie van internet af haal en dit samenstel tot een nieuwe content. Dit boek is dus alleen voor privegebruik.

Het betreft de afbeeldingen op deze url: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Category:National_Agricultural_Library_images

Zou u me misschien zo vriendelijk willen zijn de betreffende afbeeldingen (van de bessen aan de plant)per email naar me te verzenden (als mogelijk in een groter formaat)?

het email adres is: robert.baaten@ncp.fi

Alvast hartelijk bedankt hiervoor!

Oh ja, uw informatie over planten is echt onwijs goed beschreven. Ik kan het werk van een proffesional wel waarderen hier op wikipedia!

met vriendelijke groet,

Robert Baaten

answer per email JoJan 14:32, 14 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Real Name

Can you please put your real name so other wikipedia users can call you by your actual name rather than just a stupid name like JoJan. And Also, NEVER EVER BLOCK ME AGAIN, IT IS VERY DISTURBING JOJAN.--Jsalims 03:26, 15 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

You wish ! JoJan 04:53, 15 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Basilica of San Domenico

Hi! Thanks for your nice addings to Basilica of San Domenico in Bologna. As you see, your edit help is welcome in the art sector (see for example the main sights section that I'm slowly trying to add in an extended form to main Italian cities - examples Asti, Oristano, Ascoli Piceno, Terracina, Enna, etc.) Just some notes of style: 1)according to Wikipedia:Manual of Style titles of headers must have no capitals, save the first word. 2) Beware of near images creating blank spaces when the text in the mid is short. To avoid the problem, try listing the images in sequence: i.e. [[Image:image 1.jpg]] [[image:image 2.jpg]] ...text... instead of [[image:image1.jpg]] ...not enough text to avoid blank spaces.... [[image:image2.jpg]] Some suggestions: churces in Venice, Milan, Cremona and Naples are mostly missing. Bye and thanks for the good work. user:Attilios

Thanks for your nice words. I've been writing for some time art articles about cities that I've personally visited lately : Florence, Pisa, Lucca, Siena, Ravenna, Bologna. Articles still in the pipeline : Rimini and San Marino. Probable visits in the future : Mantua and Verona. When necessary, I also try to write a new biography of artists : Nicola Pisano, Niccolò dell' Arca, Ventura Salimbeni or adding text to existing articles. Lots of work. You might also take a look at my latest addition : Arca di San Domenico. As to blank spaces, I always try to avoid them, but on the other hand I like to put the images next to the describing text. This is not always possible if one puts the images in consequence. In order to obtain the optimal partition text + images, one has to rely more on one's good judgment. JoJan 05:20, 16 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

WikiProject Plants

Would you be able to help me get some thistle and Cruciferae-related articles to featured status?? I'd appreciate it. I've also just joined the WikiProject Plants too. --Sunholm(talk) 14:12, 18 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Delete the Article "House of Payne"

How do I delete an article, beacause I need to delete an article called "House of Payne" beacause no one uses that article.--Jsalims 17:15, 22 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Gustave Rolin-Jaequemyns

Hi JoJan, it's me again with another question. This time I've written an article for the German Wikipedia about the lawyer Gustave Rolin-Jaequemyns from Belgium, founder of the Institut de droit international (see de:Gustave Rolin-Jaequemyns). Somewhere I found the information that he served as Minister of the Interior in Belgium for six years, without any specification exactly when. Do you see any possibility to find out more information about him (any significant information beyond what's already in the article)? Specifically, it would be nice to know when he was Minister of the Interior, and his place of birth and death are also still missing. Thanks in advance for any possible help! --Uwe 22:21, 28 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Great, thanks a lot for your marvellous work! Despite his achievements, it seems that little information is publicly available about this man. Again, thank you so much! --Uwe 11:10, 29 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]