Welcome to my talkpage! This is a place for correspondence regarding articles with which I am involved or may be able to help, or any Wiki issue. Or for an occasional driveby greeting from an old friend. The following rules are simple and I kindly request you to follow them here:
If I left you a message, please answer on your talk page; I will watchlist it so you don't need to ping me. And if you leave me a message I will answer on my talk page, generally without a ping. You may want to watch this page until you are responded to, or specifically let me know where you'd prefer the reply.
The second round of the 2020 WikiCup has now finished. It was a high-scoring round and contestants needed 75 points to advance to round 3. There were some very impressive efforts in round 2, with the top ten contestants all scoring more than 500 points. A large number of the points came from the 12 featured articles and the 186 good articles achieved in total by contestants, and the 355 good article reviews they performed; the GAN backlog drive and the stay-at-home imperative during the COVID-19 pandemic may have been partially responsible for these impressive figures.
Our top scorers in round 2 were:
Epicgenius, with 2333 points from one featured article, forty-five good articles, fourteen DYKs and plenty of bonus points
Gog the Mild, with 1784 points from three featured articles, eight good articles, a substantial number of featured article and good article reviews and lots of bonus points
The Rambling Man, with 1262 points from two featured articles, eight good articles and a hundred good article reviews
Harrias, with 1141 points from two featured articles, three featured lists, ten good articles, nine DYKs and a substantial number of featured article and good article reviews
The rules for featured article reviews have been adjusted; reviews may cover three aspects of the article, content, images and sources, and contestants may receive points for each of these three types of review. Please also remember the requirement to mention the WikiCup when undertaking an FAR for which you intend to claim points. Remember also that DYKs cannot be claimed until they have appeared on the main page. As we enter the third round, any content promoted after the end of round 2 but before the start of round 3 can be claimed now, and anything you forgot to claim in round 2 cannot! Remember too, that you must claim your points within 14 days of "earning" them. When doing GARs, please make sure that you check that all the GA criteria are fully met.
Hello Sainsf -- it's been a week since you indicated an interest in reviewing Junko Tabei, so I thought I would check in. Are you still able to take on this review? I've noticed you're handling quite a few GA reviews at once right now, which must be challenging. Alanna the Brave (talk) 00:32, 2 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Hi :) Sorry for the delay. I thought I'll be able to finish off all the reviews last week but I got caught up with a few articles of mine and couldn't devote more time as I was busy irl. I was actually going to finish adding all my comments to my four remaining reviews today. Cheers, Sainsf·(How ya doin'?)02:56, 2 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
On 4 May 2020, Did you know was updated with a fact from the article Vietnam mouse-deer, which you recently created, substantially expanded, or brought to good article status. The fact was ... that the Vietnam mouse-deer, which had been feared to have gone extinct nearly 30 years ago, was sighted again in 2019? The nomination discussion and review may be seen at Template:Did you know nominations/Vietnam mouse-deer. You are welcome to check how many page hits the article got while on the front page (here's how, Vietnam mouse-deer), and it may be added to the statistics page if the total is over 5,000. Finally, if you know of an interesting fact from another recently created article, then please feel free to suggest it on the Did you know talk page.
WikiProject Birds gained a new task force. A discussion determined that WikiProject Poultry might be more successful as a task force, with the move completed 15 April.
Round 2 of the WikiCup wrapped up this month. Several editors moved on to Round 3 by scoring points in biodiversity-related areas, including Sainsf, Casliber, Dunkleosteus77, CaptainEek, Guettarda, and Enwebb. Dunkleosteus77 finished at the top of the Tree of Life pack with 608 points, finishing 9th overall in the round.
After a relatively quiet February and March, with only 11 total articles nominated for GA and none for FAC, April brought a shower of nominations. In total, 5 articles were nominated for FAC, 1 for FLC, and 11 for GA.
Tree of Life's growing featured content
Inspired by a March 2020 post at WikiProject Medicine detailing the growth of Featured Articles over time, we decided to reproduce that table here, adding a second table showing the growth of Good Articles. Tree of Life articles are placed in the "Biology" category for FAs, which has seen a growth of 381% since 2008. Only two other subjects had a greater growth than Biology: Business, economics, and finance; and Warfare.
Percentage Growth in FA Categories, 2008–2019, Legend: Considerably above average, Above average, AverageBelow average , Considerably below average, Poor
Note A: Total is off by one; not worth looking for the error.
Note B Three food biographies moved [1] per discussion at WT:FAC
Note: The very odd dates used in earlier years result from pulling old data from the talk page at WP:FAS.
Good Article Category as of
Feb 23, 2008
Sep 16, 2008
Sep 16, 2010
Dec 1, 2011
Jan 1, 2015
Jan 1, 2020
Pct chg Feb 2008 to 2011
Pct chg Feb 2008 to 2020
Agriculture, food and drink
27
34
37
55
113
226
104%
737%
Art and architecture
134
188
321
450
683
1022
236%
663%
Engineering and technology
256
396
882
1198
1828
2407
368%
840%
Geography and places
191
248
424
523
716
1052
174%
451%
History
261
312
651
825
1219
1894
216%
626%
Language and literature
173
215
377
462
686
982
167%
468%
Mathematics
19
22
27
30
36
67
58%
253%
Media and drama
403
658
1352
1300
3070
3961
223%
883%
Music
357
527
997
1437
2532
3892
303%
990%
Natural sciences
544
686
1275
1717
2404
3426
216%
530%
Philosophy and religion
134
174
244
294
365
557
119%
316%
Social sciences and society
468
549
790
998
1430
1854
113%
296%
Sports and recreation
384
546
1074
1402
2350
3802
265%
890%
Video games
168
220
373
443
684
1349
164%
703%
Warfare
155
241
989
1654
2544
3996
967%
2478%
Total
3674
5016
9813
12788
20660
30487
248%
730%
Organisms*
119
130
402
528
685
1017
344%
755%
*subset of natural sciences
Unsurprisingly, the number of GAs has increased more rapidly than the number of FAs. Organisms, which is a subcategory of Natural sciences, has seen a GA growth of 755% since 2008, besting the Natural sciences overall growth of 530%. While Warfare had far and away the most significant growth of GAs, it's a clear outlier relative to other categories.
... that although the alpine bartsia has a wide range in Europe and North America, it is known in the British Isles only from a few locations in northern England and the central Scottish Highlands? (19 April)
... that the orange-band surgeonfish(pictured) can change colour from dark to light almost instantaneously? (21 April)
Hi there, I'm pleased to inform you that I've begun reviewing the article Sun bear you nominated for GA-status according to the criteria. This process may take up to 7 days. Feel free to contact me with any questions or comments you might have during this period. Message delivered by Legobot, on behalf of Chiswick Chap -- Chiswick Chap (talk) 13:00, 10 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Hi Sainsf, the Peter Hammersley article is a recent short biography I came across today and I which thought you might be interested in reviewing for GA status. The main author, Dumelow, is happy for me to take it through the process and will help as needed (see the article talk page).
Also, re the Christie review, I feel we have responded to the other editors' additional comments and, as they have made no further comments, I wondered what your thoughts were on taking that review forward. Thanks again. ~ RLO1729💬07:30, 11 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Hello again :) Thank you so much for the award and the kind words! It has been a pleasure working with you and getting to know you and your work. About the review proposal, I think I will take a break from reviews for a few weeks as I wish to focus more on content creation, so I will be happy to take this up if it is still unreviewed in June. Don't worry about the Christie review, I am going to return to it later today. It should be good enough to address an editor's comments and any further issues they may point out and if it's not an issue big enough to stall promotion then we can move ahead. Sainsf·(How ya doin'?)07:49, 11 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Hi! As I said in a message above, I am thinking of taking a break from new GA reviews for the next few weeks. But as yours is an already open review, I will take this one after a week to refresh myself and give a detailed review. I saw the review comments and the article, seems we need a complete review here before promotion. Let me know if this works, and I will leave a note on the review page. Cheers, Sainsf·(How ya doin'?)11:55, 11 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
This was a particularly long and complex review for which you deserve a separate, special barnstar! Cheers, :). ~ RLO1729💬14:21, 11 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Hello Sainsf. You are invited to join the new WikiProject India 10,000 Challenge, a challenge which aims to see 10,000 improvements, destubs, and creations for Indian articles, covering every state of India and topic. Articles on all related topics are welcome. We need numbers to make this work and do something extraordinary for India on Wikipedia! Every 100 articles submitted will be copied into the wider Asian challenge. Sign up on the page if interested and start contributing! If you know someone who might be interested, please invite them by:
Hi there, I'm pleased to inform you that I've begun reviewing the article Banteng you nominated for GA-status according to the criteria. This process may take up to 7 days. Feel free to contact me with any questions or comments you might have during this period. Message delivered by Legobot, on behalf of Chiswick Chap -- Chiswick Chap (talk) 09:20, 15 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
On 24 May 2020, Did you know was updated with a fact from the article Canada lynx, which you recently created, substantially expanded, or brought to good article status. The fact was ... that populations of the Canada lynx(pictured) undergo cyclic rises and falls in line with those of the snowshoe hare? The nomination discussion and review may be seen at Template:Did you know nominations/Canada lynx. You are welcome to check how many page hits the article got while on the front page (here's how, Canada lynx), and it may be added to the statistics page if the total is over 5,000. Finally, if you know of an interesting fact from another recently created article, then please feel free to suggest it on the Did you know talk page.
I don't know you and you don't know me, but that doesn't mean you're not excellent, and it doesn't mean I can't recognize it. So here's to you for your oh-so-numerous contributions to make Canada Lynx what it is today! DRosenbach(Talk | Contribs)17:15, 24 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
@DRosenbach: This is lovely! You just made my day :D Now that I know you, I took some time out to know your work better and I am amazed by your efforts, most notably on articles in the field of medicine, over 15 years to make Wikipedia what it is today :) A big thank you, and stay safe! Sainsf(t·c)17:35, 24 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
@Sainsf: Hey there...I fixed two typos in my barnstar for you, and fixed them here but can't seem to find where it is located on your user page. Maybe you could repost it. Sorry for the inconvenience! DRosenbach(Talk | Contribs)23:39, 16 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Thank you so much for your work on the article. Your edits are completely fine, and that line in Taming is much simpler now. Cheers, Sainsf(t·c)14:47, 25 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
On 27 May 2020, Did you know was updated with a fact from the article Meerkat, which you recently created, substantially expanded, or brought to good article status. The fact was ... that meerkats(examples pictured) use alarm calls that can identify the type of predator posing the risk, the level of danger, and the caller itself? The nomination discussion and review may be seen at Template:Did you know nominations/Meerkat. You are welcome to check how many page hits the article got while on the front page (here's how, Meerkat), and it may be added to the statistics page if the total is over 5,000. Finally, if you know of an interesting fact from another recently created article, then please feel free to suggest it on the Did you know talk page.
Re the Banteng change, the source can be found in the preceding sentence in the article, which links to the wikipedia entry for Jembrana disease. I thought it was redundant to cite again, but maybe that's against the protocol. Do I need to make the edit again? How do I resolve this? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Jimmytarrant (talk • contribs) 15:22, 27 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Jimmytarrant, thanks for the clarification and updating the material. Even if something is supported by citations in another article linked in your article, you have to provide the same citation in your article so it is not redundant. I have changed it back to your version and added the necessary citation. Cheers, Sainsf(t·c)15:33, 27 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
DYK for Sun bear
On 30 May 2020, Did you know was updated with a fact from the article Sun bear, which you recently created, substantially expanded, or brought to good article status. The fact was ... that the sun bear(pictured) is the smallest of all bear species? The nomination discussion and review may be seen at Template:Did you know nominations/Sun bear. You are welcome to check how many page hits the article got while on the front page (here's how, Sun bear), and it may be added to the statistics page if the total is over 5,000. Finally, if you know of an interesting fact from another recently created article, then please feel free to suggest it on the Did you know talk page.
On 1 June 2020, Did you know was updated with a fact from the article Jaguarundi, which you recently created, substantially expanded, or brought to good article status. The fact was ... that despite being a member of the cat family, the jaguarundi has several features in common with mustelids such as otters and weasels? The nomination discussion and review may be seen at Template:Did you know nominations/Jaguarundi. You are welcome to check how many page hits the article got while on the front page (here's how, Jaguarundi), and it may be added to the statistics page if the total is over 5,000. Finally, if you know of an interesting fact from another recently created article, then please feel free to suggest it on the Did you know talk page.
You have made some articles into GA as they are interesting topic for readers such as banteng, a first successfully cloned animals and a prominent animals such as Cheetah and sun bear. Thank you as they are helpful for readers. 126.65.212.179 (talk) 12:41, 1 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]
I'd like to extend a cordial invitation to you to join the Ten Year Society, an informal group for editors who've been participating in the Wikipedia project for ten years or more.
This month saw two Tree of Life editors gain the mop: CaptainEek (WikiProjects Birds and Plants) and Cwmhiraeth (familiar name at DYK, WikiProjects Plants, Animals, and Insects)
The April – May GAN backlog drive finished up, clearing the queue from nearly 700 outstanding nominations to about 350.
Interview with Jts1882
This month we're joined by Jts1882, who is active in depicting evolutionary relationship of taxa via cladograms. Part of this includes responding to cladogram requests, where interested editors can have cladograms made without using the templates themselves.
How did you come to be interested in systematics? Are you interested in systematics broadly, or is there a particular group you're most fond of?
As long as I can remember I’ve been interested in nature, starting with the animals and plants in the garden, school grounds, and local wood, and then more general wildlife worldwide. An interest in how things are classified grew from this. I like things to be organised and understanding the relationships between things and systems (not just living things) is a big part of that. Biology was always my favourite subject in school and took up a disproportionate part of my time. My interest in systematics is broad as I’d like to comprehend the whole tree of life, but the cat family is my favourite group.
What's the background behind cladogram requests? I see that it isn't a very old part of the Tree of Life
Well I can’t take any credit for the cladogram requests page, although I help out there sometimes. It was created by IJReid and there are several people who have helped there more than me. I think the motivation is that creating cladograms requires a knowledge of the templates that is daunting for many editors. It was one way of helping people who want to focus on content creation.
My main contribution to the cladograms is converting the {{clade}} template to use a Lua module. The template code was extremely difficult to follow and had to be repetitive (I can only admire the efforts of those who got the thing to work in the first place). The conversion to Lua made it more efficient, allowed larger and deeper cladograms, plus facilitating the introduction of new features. The cladogram request page was recently the venue for discussion on making time calibrated cladograms, which is now possible, if not particularly user friendly.
What advice do you have for an editor who wants to learn how to make cladograms?
The same advice I would give to someone facing any computer problem, just try it out. Start by taking existing code for a cladogram and make changes yourself. The main advice would be to format it properly so indents match the brackets vertically. Of course, not everyone wants to learn and if someone prefers to focus on article content there is the cladogram request page.
Examples of cladograms Jts1882 has created, showing different proposed clades for Neoaves
Do you have any personal projects or goals you're working towards on Wikipedia?
As I said I like organisation and systems. So I find efforts like the automated taxobox system and {{taxonbar}} appealing. I would like to see more reuse of the major phylogenetic trees on Wikipedia with more use of consensus trees on the higher taxa. Too often they get edited based on one recent report and/or without proper citation. Animals and bilateria are examples where this is a problem.
Towards this I have been working on a system of phylogeny templates that can be reused flexibly. The {{Clade transclude}} template allows selective transclusion, so the phylogenetic trees on one page can be reused with modifications, i.e. can be pruned and grafted, used with or without images, with or without collapsible elements, etc. I have an example for the Angiosperm Phylogeny Group classification (see {{Phylogeny/APG IV}}) and one for squamates that also includes collapsible elements (see {{Phylogeny/Squamata}}).
A second project is to have a modular reference system for taxonomic resources. I have made some progress along this lines with the {{BioRef}} template. This started off simply as a way of hardlinking to Catalog of Fishes pages and I’ve gradually expanded it to cover other groups (e..g. FishBase, AmphibiaWeb and Amphibian Species of the World, Reptile Database, the Mammalian Diversity Database). The modular nature is still rudimentary and needs a rewrite before it is ready for wider use.
What would surprise your fellow editors to learn about your life off-Wikipedia?
I don’t think there is anything particularly surprising or interesting about my life. I’ve had an academic career as a research scientist but I don't think anyone could guess the area from my Wikipedia edits. I prefer to work on areas where I am learning at the same time. This why I spend more time with neglected topics (e.g. mosses at the moment). I start reading and then find that I’m not getting the information I want.
Anything else you'd like us to know?
My interest in the classification of things goes beyond biology. I am fascinated by mediaeval attempts to classify knowledge, such as Bacon in his The Advancement of Learning and Diderot and d’Alembert in their Encyclopédie. They were trying to come up with a universal scheme of knowledge just as the printing press was allowing greater dissemination of knowledge.
With the internet we are seeing a new revolution in knowledge dissemination. Just look at how we could read research papers on the COVID virus within weeks of its discovery. With an open internet, everyone has access, not just those with the luxury of books at home or good libraries. Sites like the Biodiversity Heritage Library allow you to read old scientific works without having to visit dusty university library stack rooms, while the taxonomic and checklist databases provide instant information on millions of living species. In principle, the whole world can now find out about anything, even if Douglas Adams warned we might be disinclined to do so.
This is why I like Wikipedia, with all its warts, it’s a means of organising the knowledge on the internet. In just two decades it’s become a first stop for knowledge and hopefully a gateway to more specialised sources. Perhaps developing this latter aspect, beyond providing good sources for what we say, is the next challenge for Wikipedia.
... that Tetraponera penzigi is one of several species of ant that protect whistling thorn trees in East Africa from grazing giraffes and rhinoceroses? (3 May)
... that the Vietnam mouse-deer, which had been feared to have gone extinct nearly 30 years ago, was sighted again in 2019? (4 May)
... that most branchiobdellids use crayfish as hosts, living on their heads, carapaces, or claws, but in some instances inside their gill cavities? (5 May)
... that the northern plains gray langur monkey (example pictured) is killed in India for food and to prevent crop raiding, despite being considered sacred by Hindus? (12 May)
... that the leech Limnatis nilotica can affect humans and livestock, entering hosts through the mouth, nose, or other orifices? (12 May)
... that the tree Barteria fistulosa is associated with Tetraponera aethiops, an aggressive species of ant that lives in its hollow branches and twigs? (15 May)
... that Miller's langur, one of the rarest primates in Borneo, was feared to be extinct until a 2012 study rediscovered it in an area where it was previously unknown? (16 May)
... that most of the known Gigantopithecus fossils are of teeth because the other bones are likely to have been eaten by porcupines? (17 May)
... that Tetraponera tessmanni, a very aggressive ant, is able to establish dominance over the whole of the liana in which it lives, which may be 50 m (164 ft) long? (17 May)
... that the Arizona dampwood termite exclusively colonizes dead parts of standing trees? (22 May)
... that Megaceroides algericus is one of only two deer species known to have been native to Africa, alongside the Barbary stag? (23 May)
... that besides eating ants and termites, the waved woodpecker feeds on fruits, berries, and seeds? (24 May)
... that populations of the Canada lynx(pictured) undergo cyclic rises and falls in line with those of the snowshoe hare? (25 May)
... that despite being known as the Mexican hydrangea, Clerodendrum bungei is neither from Mexico nor a species of hydrangea? (25 May)
... that meerkats(examples pictured) use alarm calls that can identify the type of predator posing the risk, the level of danger, and the caller itself? (27 May)
... that the frog Boophis fayi can be identified by its unusual green-and-turquoise eyes? (30 May)
... that members of the fly family Apystomyiidae(example depicted) have been found in Late Jurassic sediments in Kazakhstan? (30 May)
... that the sun bear(pictured) is the smallest of all bear species? (31 May)
On 4 June 2020, Did you know was updated with a fact from the article Banteng, which you recently created, substantially expanded, or brought to good article status. The fact was ... that the banteng is the second endangered species to be successfully cloned, and the first clone to survive beyond infancy? The nomination discussion and review may be seen at Template:Did you know nominations/Banteng. You are welcome to check how many page hits the article got while on the front page (here's how, Banteng), and it may be added to the statistics page if the total is over 5,000. Finally, if you know of an interesting fact from another recently created article, then please feel free to suggest it on the Did you know talk page.
Thank you for improving articles in June. I can proudly present a FA, quite a gift after a year without, and a FL is in the making, comments welcome. --Gerda Arendt (talk) 12:49, 21 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Hello Sainsf. I found you from the page Albert Camus; as Camus in one of my fev. writers. I read your user page, and it inspired me to make this request. I just nominated my article Siddhantasara (written by Indian Gujarati language writer Manilal Dwivedi) for GA. Could you review it, if you find it interesting. If you can't help, no problem at all. --Gazal world (talk) 18:04, 17 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]
The third round of the 2020 WikiCup has now come to an end. The 16 users who made it into the fourth round each had at least 353 points (compared to 68 in 2019). It was a highly competitive round, and a number of contestants were eliminated who would have moved on in earlier years. Our top scorers in round 3 were:
Epicgenius, with one featured article, 28 good articles and 17 DYKs, amassing 1836 points
The Rambling Man , with 1672 points gained from four featured articles and seventeen good articles, plus reviews of a large number of FACs and GAs
Gog the Mild, a first time contestant, with 1540 points, a tally built largely on 4 featured articles and related bonus points.
Between them, contestants managed 14 featured articles, 9 featured lists, 3 featured pictures, 152 good articles, 136 DYK entries, 55 ITN entries, 65 featured article candidate reviews and 221 good article reviews. Additionally, MPJ-DK added 3 items to featured topics and 44 to good topics. Over the course of the competition, contestants have completed 710 good article reviews, in comparison to 387 good articles submitted for review and promoted. These large numbers are probably linked to a GAN backlog drive in April and May, and the changed patterns of editing during the COVID-19 pandemic. As we enter the fourth round, remember that any content promoted after the end of round 3 but before the start of round 4 can be claimed in round 4. Please also remember that you must claim your points within 14 days of "earning" them. When doing GARs, please make sure that you check that all the GA criteria are fully met. Please also remember that all submissions must meet core Wikipedia policies, regardless of the review process.
This issue is a double issue, but the plan is to return to monthly henceforth.
A discussion at WikiProject Palaeontology about internal peer review processes led to the creation of a peer review space. In contrast to the more formal Peer Review, PalaeoPR focuses on short "fact checks", emphasizing content over style. Reviews are meant to be low commitment, with "drive-by reviews" encouraged. Since its inception on 8 July, seven articles have been submitted to PalaeoPR.
After a highly competitive third round, two Tree of Life editors advanced to the fourth round of the WikiCup: Dunkleosteus77 and Sainsf
A February 2020 paper published in PLOS noted that Mammalian Species is one of the most over-cited journals on Wikipedia relative to how frequently it is cited in other academic works.
Categorizing life with DexDor
DexDor is a WikiGnome with a particular interest in article categorization, including how organisms are categorized.
How did you become interested in editing biodiversity topics on Wikipedia?
I'm a wikignome who tries to remove unnecessary complexity and confusion in Wikipedia. I specialise in categorization. I've worked on categorization of several topic areas (e.g. military equipment) - anywhere where I see things like category tags on articles that the category text doesn't support. Categorization of organisms is one area I'm currently looking at (my essay on this).
You seem to be particularly interested in geographic categorization of organisms. What are some issues in this area?
One issue is that there are several possible relationships between an organism and a region (i.e. what the "of" in a "Xs of Y" means) - the organism may be found throughout the region, somewhere in the region, only in the region (i.e. endemic to that region) - there are categories for each of these (and others) and some categories have been unclear about their exact meaning. Then there's introductions by man, locally extinct species, occasional visitors...
Another issue is that some editors have thought it's appropriate to create categories for very small areas ("Spiders of Vatican City" is only a slight exaggeration) and put a few articles in them, thus creating a category that is both massively incomplete and non-defining for the articles in it.
There have been several (now blocked) editors who have been disruptive in this area, but a confusing and sprawling categorization scheme is also partly due to editors from a particular background categorizing a particular article in a way that appears to make sense, but doesn't really make sense in the wider categorization scheme - for example, if an article mentions the countries at the extremes of an animal's distribution, the animal is categorized just for those countries.
What potential solutions do you see for categorizing organisms by geography? How can other editors help address this issue, or at least, not make it worse?
We should have some guidelines that tell editors how to categorize any article about an organism (including any geographical categorization). I've started drafting guidelines at User:DexDor/BioCat. The guidelines are also a good way to ensure that the categorization of articles about organisms is aligned with categorization of other articles and may help us to identify where there are problems, inconsistencies etc in the categorization. I welcome suggestions for improvement of the guidelines (which should at some point be moved into WP:TOL).
Regarding geographical categorization of animals the main advice for editors would be to not create categories for any new areas and to only create a new category if you intend to populate it.
What have you learned from being a Wikipedia editor?
That lots of people (from varied backgrounds) each making (mostly) small improvements (like ants in an ants nest?) and only understanding some parts of Wikipedia can produce such a wonderful resource. But also, how that tends to result in ever-increasing complexity which negatively affects editors and readers.
Is there anything about your life outside Wikipedia that would surprise us?
... that despite being a member of the cat family, the jaguarundi has several features in common with mustelids such as otters and weasels? (2 June)
... that scientists were unsure whether the blue calamintha bee(pictured) still existed until it was observed again in March 2020? (2 June)
... that many of the animals regarded as pests have co-evolved with humans, adapting to the warm, sheltered conditions that a building provides? (3 June)
... that the banteng is the second endangered species to be successfully cloned, and the first clone to survive beyond infancy? (5 June)
... that cattle and deer sometimes stand under trees where southern plains gray langurs are feeding in order to consume the edible pieces that the monkeys drop? (10 June)
... that when boiled in milk, black coral(example pictured) emits a faint scent of myrrh? (21 June)
... that one of the factors affecting the future of the Huanchaca mouse is the increased cultivation of biofuels? (22 June)
... that the Strawberries and Cream Tree(pictured) is noted for producing pink blossoms on one side of the tree and white on the other, when it blooms every spring? (23 June)
... that the Chilean seaside cinclodes bobs its tail while it walks and flares its wings while it sings? (24 June)
... that Boie's frog(pictured) and the Banhado frog both resemble dead leaves on the floor of the forest? (25 June)
... that Markham's storm petrel, which nests in Peru and northern Chile, has been described as "one of the least known seabirds in the world"? (7 July)
... that the frog Corythomantis greeningi retreats into a hole, blocks the entrance with its spiny head, and injects venom into anything that tries to dislodge it? (18 July)
... that the reef box crab uses its powerful pincers to break open the shells of snails? (21 July)
... that the genus Pterodactylus(species depicted), the scientific name for a pterodactyl, had been considered a "wastebasket taxon" as many species were assigned to it and later reassigned? (23 July)
... that the sea urchin Abatus cordatus broods its young for nine months in pockets on its upper surface? (24 July)
... that Harold Clyde Bingham trailed a troop of gorillas for 100 hours in 1929? (25 July)
LittleJerry, sure! I will be busy for the next few months but I will put up Cheetah for FA in a month or two. So I'll be free by the end of this year I guess. Cheers, Sainsf(t·c)13:13, 25 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Hey FunkMonk, sorry I have been away for like a year now. I did plan to return but honestly the FAC for Cheetah seems like a lot of work as the sole nominator for me at the moment, so the plans remain but maybe I will have time after a few months. LittleJerry, I am sorry I could not get back to you on Polar bear for so long. I hope that has not kept you waiting.. doesn't seem like I can do a lot of work at least for now but do let me know what your plans were or are for the article. All the best with it! Sainsf(t·c)11:49, 26 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Nice to hear back from you, as for cheetah, remember you'll already get my instant support, since I reviewed it with FAC in mind back then!
That's fine. I was working on other things. I plan on getting to polar bear after Indian roller and Turtle get passed FAC. Roller is at GAC and Turtle is almost at GAC. LittleJerry (talk) 21:19, 26 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]
WikiCup 2020 September newsletter
The fourth round of the competition has finished, with 865 points being required to qualify for the final round, nearly twice as many points as last year. It was a hotly competitive round with two contestants with 598 and 605 points being eliminated, and all but two of the contestants who reached the final round having achieved an FA during the round. The highest scorers were
Bloom6132, with 1478 points gained mainly from 5 featured lists, 12 DYKs and 63 in the news items;
HaEr48 with 1318 points gained mainly from 2 featured articles, 5 good articles and 8 DYKs;
Lee Vilenski with 1201 points mainly gained from 2 featured articles and 10 good articles.
Between them, contestants achieved 14 featured articles, 14 featured lists, 2 featured pictures, 87 good articles, 90 DYK entries, 75 ITN entries, 95 featured article candidate reviews and 81 good article reviews. Congratulations to all who participated! It was a generally high-scoring and productive round and I think we can expect a highly competitive finish to the competition.
Remember that any content promoted after the end of round 4 but before the start of round 5 can be claimed in round 5. Remember too that you must claim your points within 10 days of "earning" them. If you are concerned that your nomination will not receive the necessary reviews, please list it on Wikipedia:WikiCup/Reviews. It would be helpful if this list could be cleared of any items no longer relevant. If you want to help out with the WikiCup, please do your bit to keep down the review backlogs! Questions are welcome on Wikipedia talk:WikiCup, and the judges are reachable on their talk pages or by email. If you wish to start or stop receiving this newsletter, please feel free to add or remove yourself from Wikipedia:WikiCup/Newsletter/Send. Godot13 (talk), Sturmvogel 66 (talk), Vanamonde (talk), Cwmhiraeth (talk) MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 19:53, 1 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]
On August 7, WikiProject Palaeontology member Rextron discovered a suspicious taxon article, Mustelodon, which was created in November 2005. The article lacked references and the subsequent discussion on WikiProject Palaeontology found that the alleged type locality (where the fossil was first discovered) of Lago Nandarajo "near the northern border of Panama" was nonexistent. In fact, Panama does not even really have a northern border, as it is bounded along the north by the Caribbean Sea. No other publications or databases mentioned Mustelodon, save a fleeting mention in a 2019 book that presumably followed Wikipedia, Felines of the World.
The article also appeared in four other languages, Catalan, Spanish, Dutch, and Serbian. In Serbian Wikipedia, a note at the bottom of the page warned: "It is important to note here that there is no data on this genus in the official scientific literature, and all attached data on the genus Mustelodon on this page are taken from the English Wikipedia and are the only known data on this genus of mammals, so the validity of this genus is questionable."
Editors took action to alert our counterparts on other projects, and these versions were removed also. As the editor who reached out to Spanish and Catalan Wikipedia, it was somewhat challenging to navigate these mostly foreign languages (I have a limited grasp of Spanish). I doubted that the article had very many watchers, so I knew I had to find some WikiProjects where I could post a machine translation advising of the hoax, and asking that users follow local protocols to remove the article. I was surprised to find, however, that Catalan Wikipedia does not tag articles for WikiProjects on talk pages, meaning I had to fumble around to find what I needed (turns out that WikiProjects are Viquiprojectes in Catalan!) Mustelodon remains on Wikidata, where its "instance of" property was swapped from "taxon" to "fictional taxon".
How did this article have such a long lifespan? Early intervention is critical for removing hoaxes. A 2016 report found that a hoax article that survives its first day has an 18% chance of lasting a year.[1] Additionally, hoax articles tend to have longer lifespans if they are in inconspicuous parts of Wikipedia, where they do not receive many views. Mustelodon was only viewed a couple times a day, on average.
Mustelodon survived a brush with death three years into its lifespan. The article was proposed for deletion in September 2008, with a deletion rationale of "No references given; cannot find any evidence in peer-reviewed journals that this alleged genus actually exists". Unfortunately, the proposed deletion was contested and the template removed, though the declining editor did not give a rationale. Upon its rediscovery in August 2020, Mustelodon was tagged for speedy deletion under CSD G3 as a "blatant hoax". This was challenged, and an Articles for Deletion discussion followed. On 12 August, the AfD was closed as a SNOW delete. WikiProject Palaeontology members ensured that any trace of it was scrubbed from legitimate articles. The fictional mammal was finally, truly extinct.
At the ripe old age of 14 years, 9 months, this is the longest-lived documented hoax on Wikipedia, topping the previous documented record of 14 years, 5 months, set by The Gates of Saturn, a fictitious television show, which was incidentally also discovered in August 2020. How do we discover other hoax taxa? Could we use Wikidata to discover taxa are not linked to databases like ITIS, Fossilworks, and others?
This month's spotlight is with Mattximus, author of two Featured Articles and 29 Featured Lists at current count.
How did you become involved with editing biodiversity articles?
I think I have a compulsion to make lists, it doesn't show up in my real life, but online I secretly get a lot of satisfaction making orderly lists and tables. It's a bit of a secret of mine, because it doesn't manifest in any other part of my life. My background is in biology, so this was a natural (haha) fit.
You have an impressive number of FAs under your belt. Two of your more recent ones, Apororhynchus and Gigantorhynchus, are part of what you referred to as an "experiment". How did you choose these articles, and what's next for you in this experiment?
This experiment was just to see if I could get any random article to FA status, so I picked the very first alphabetical animal species according to the taxonomy and made that attempt. Technically, there isn't enough information for a species page so I just merged the species into a genus and went from there. It was a fun exercise, but doing it alone is not the most fun so it's probably on pause for the foreseeable future.
Note: Aporhynchus is the first alphabetical taxon as follows: Animalia, Acanthocephala, Archiacanthocephala, Apororhynchida, Apororhynchidae, Apororhynchus
What advice would you give to someone who wants to nominate their first FAC?
I would recommend getting a good article nominated, then a featured list up before tackling the FA. Lists are a bit more forgiving but give you a taste of what standards to expect from FA. The most time consuming thing is proper citations so make sure that is in order before starting either.
Is there anything that would surprise us to learn about your life off-Wikipedia?
My personality in real life does not match my wikipedia persona. I'm not a very organized, or orderly in real life, but the wikipedia pages I brought to FL or FA are all very organized. Maybe it's my outlet for a more free-flowing life as a scientist/teacher.
Anything else you'd like us to know?
The fact that wikipedia exists free of profit motive and free for everyone really is something special and I encourage everyone to donate a few dollars to the cause.
... that the flower buds of the woolly thistle(pictured) can be eaten in a similar way to artichokes? (8 August)
... that the French peanut is native to Brazil? (10 August)
... that the 800-year-old Minchenden Oak is one of the oldest trees in London? (14 August)
... that the forward-facing incisors of the extinct dolphin Ankylorhiza(restoration pictured) may have been used for ramming their prey, similar to a hunting method used by modern orcas? (16 August)
... that scientists accidentally created a hybrid of two endangered fish species, called the sturddlefish? (17 August)
... that despite having the widest distribution in the United States, the arid-land subterranean termite causes less structural damage than other members of its genus? (19 August)
... that in 2021, the dwarf periodical cicada(pictured) is due to emerge in parts of eastern North America, not having been seen for 17 years? (24 August)
On August 7, WikiProject Palaeontology member Rextron discovered a suspicious taxon article, Mustelodon, which was created in November 2005. The article lacked references and the subsequent discussion on WikiProject Palaeontology found that the alleged type locality (where the fossil was first discovered) of Lago Nandarajo "near the northern border of Panama" was nonexistent. In fact, Panama does not even really have a northern border, as it is bounded along the north by the Caribbean Sea. No other publications or databases mentioned Mustelodon, save a fleeting mention in a 2019 book that presumably followed Wikipedia, Felines of the World.
The article also appeared in four other languages, Catalan, Spanish, Dutch, and Serbian. In Serbian Wikipedia, a note at the bottom of the page warned: "It is important to note here that there is no data on this genus in the official scientific literature, and all attached data on the genus Mustelodon on this page are taken from the English Wikipedia and are the only known data on this genus of mammals, so the validity of this genus is questionable."
Editors took action to alert our counterparts on other projects, and these versions were removed also. As the editor who reached out to Spanish and Catalan Wikipedia, it was somewhat challenging to navigate these mostly foreign languages (I have a limited grasp of Spanish). I doubted that the article had very many watchers, so I knew I had to find some WikiProjects where I could post a machine translation advising of the hoax, and asking that users follow local protocols to remove the article. I was surprised to find, however, that Catalan Wikipedia does not tag articles for WikiProjects on talk pages, meaning I had to fumble around to find what I needed (turns out that WikiProjects are Viquiprojectes in Catalan!) Mustelodon remains on Wikidata, where its "instance of" property was swapped from "taxon" to "fictional taxon".
How did this article have such a long lifespan? Early intervention is critical for removing hoaxes. A 2016 report found that a hoax article that survives its first day has an 18% chance of lasting a year.[1] Additionally, hoax articles tend to have longer lifespans if they are in inconspicuous parts of Wikipedia, where they do not receive many views. Mustelodon was only viewed a couple times a day, on average.
Mustelodon survived a brush with death three years into its lifespan. The article was proposed for deletion in September 2008, with a deletion rationale of "No references given; cannot find any evidence in peer-reviewed journals that this alleged genus actually exists". Unfortunately, the proposed deletion was contested and the template removed, though the declining editor did not give a rationale. Upon its rediscovery in August 2020, Mustelodon was tagged for speedy deletion under CSD G3 as a "blatant hoax". This was challenged, and an Articles for Deletion discussion followed. On 12 August, the AfD was closed as a SNOW delete. WikiProject Palaeontology members ensured that any trace of it was scrubbed from legitimate articles. The fictional mammal was finally, truly extinct.
At the ripe old age of 14 years, 9 months, this is the longest-lived documented hoax on Wikipedia, topping the previous documented record of 14 years, 5 months, set by The Gates of Saturn, a fictitious television show, which was incidentally also discovered in August 2020. How do we discover other hoax taxa? Could we use Wikidata to discover taxa are not linked to databases like ITIS, Fossilworks, and others?
This month's spotlight is with Mattximus, author of two Featured Articles and 29 Featured Lists at current count.
How did you become involved with editing biodiversity articles?
I think I have a compulsion to make lists, it doesn't show up in my real life, but online I secretly get a lot of satisfaction making orderly lists and tables. It's a bit of a secret of mine, because it doesn't manifest in any other part of my life. My background is in biology, so this was a natural (haha) fit.
You have an impressive number of FAs under your belt. Two of your more recent ones, Apororhynchus and Gigantorhynchus, are part of what you referred to as an "experiment". How did you choose these articles, and what's next for you in this experiment?
This experiment was just to see if I could get any random article to FA status, so I picked the very first alphabetical animal species according to the taxonomy and made that attempt. Technically, there isn't enough information for a species page so I just merged the species into a genus and went from there. It was a fun exercise, but doing it alone is not the most fun so it's probably on pause for the foreseeable future.
Note: Aporhynchus is the first alphabetical taxon as follows: Animalia, Acanthocephala, Archiacanthocephala, Apororhynchida, Apororhynchidae, Apororhynchus
What advice would you give to someone who wants to nominate their first FAC?
I would recommend getting a good article nominated, then a featured list up before tackling the FA. Lists are a bit more forgiving but give you a taste of what standards to expect from FA. The most time consuming thing is proper citations so make sure that is in order before starting either.
Is there anything that would surprise us to learn about your life off-Wikipedia?
My personality in real life does not match my wikipedia persona. I'm not a very organized, or orderly in real life, but the wikipedia pages I brought to FL or FA are all very organized. Maybe it's my outlet for a more free-flowing life as a scientist/teacher.
Anything else you'd like us to know?
The fact that wikipedia exists free of profit motive and free for everyone really is something special and I encourage everyone to donate a few dollars to the cause.
... that the flower buds of the woolly thistle(pictured) can be eaten in a similar way to artichokes? (8 August)
... that the French peanut is native to Brazil? (10 August)
... that the 800-year-old Minchenden Oak is one of the oldest trees in London? (14 August)
... that the forward-facing incisors of the extinct dolphin Ankylorhiza(restoration pictured) may have been used for ramming their prey, similar to a hunting method used by modern orcas? (16 August)
... that scientists accidentally created a hybrid of two endangered fish species, called the sturddlefish? (17 August)
... that despite having the widest distribution in the United States, the arid-land subterranean termite causes less structural damage than other members of its genus? (19 August)
... that in 2021, the dwarf periodical cicada(pictured) is due to emerge in parts of eastern North America, not having been seen for 17 years? (24 August)
Hi, I'm planning to run Canada lynx as a TFA in October. I'm about to start scheduling that month, and just woundered if you wanted to do the TFA blurb? No problem if you don't fancy it, I'll do it otherwise, cheers Jimfbleak - talk to me?10:46, 8 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]
This is to let you know that the Canada lynx article has been scheduled as today's featured article for October 18, 2020. Please check the article needs no amendments. If you're interested in editing the main page text, you're welcome to do so at Wikipedia:Today's featured article/October 18, 2020, but note that a coordinator will trim the lead to around 1000 characters anyway, so you aren't obliged to do so.
For Featured Articles promoted recently, there will be an existing blurb linked from the FAC talk page, which is likely to be transferred to the TFA page by a coordinator at some point.
Thank you for the article, introduced: "a North American cat that I came across when I was looking for information on lynxes, and I realized our article on it can be improved a lot. I was fascinated by its unique appearance and its strong correlation with snowshoe hare populations."! --Gerda Arendt (talk) 08:02, 18 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]
@Gerda Arendt: Dear sister, you never fail to make me smile :) I promise to work harder once I return after I get some control over my extremely busy online college life. Thank you for making us all feel appreciated even in our absence! Sainsf(t·c)10:38, 20 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]
October GAN Backlog Drive As you have taken part in previous GAN Backlog drives, or are a prolific GAN reviewer, you might be interested to know that the October 2020 GAN Backlog Drive starts on October 1, and will continue until the end of the month.
Hi Sainsf. I was reading Scaly-breasted munia, an article you GARed back in 2012. I'm writing to you now as I saw you were deeply invested with its GA review. I strongly feel that the Foraging section in the article is far too long and not relevant enough to the bird itself. I think it should be removed from the munia article, and put into one in its own right - the research and effort that the original writers put into it, and the significance of the research they cited, is too significant for it to simply be deleted. What do you think? Wilhelm Tell DCCXLVIconverse | fings wot i hav dun11:30, 3 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Wilhelm Tell DCCXLVI, hi and apologies for such a late reply, I have been inactive here for months now. Thanks for approaching me but I think this is a discussion that should happen on the article's dedicated talk page or maybe on the relevant WikiProject. Personally yes, I do see the length of the section and not having gone through it fully on my own and not being quite experienced in this field, I can only suggest compression and not exactly evaluate the relevance of the material or whether it merits its own article. Cheers, Sainsf(t·c)08:04, 30 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]
WikiCup 2020 November newsletter
The 2020 WikiCup has come to an end, with the final round going down to the wire. Our new Champion is Lee Vilenski (submissions), the runner-up last year, who was closely followed by Gog the Mild (submissions). In the final round, Lee achieved 4 FAs and 30 GAs, mostly on cue sport topics, while Gog achieved 3 FAs and 15 GAs, mostly on important battles and wars, which earned him a high number of bonus points. The Rambling Man (submissions) was in third place with 4 FAs and 8 GAs on football topics, with Epicgenius (submissions) close behind with 19 GAs and 16 DYK's, his interest being the buildings of New York.
The other finalists were Hog Farm (submissions), HaEr48 (submissions), Harrias (submissions) and Bloom6132 (submissions). The final round was very productive, and besides 15 FAs, contestants achieved 75 FAC reviews, 88 GAs and 108 GAN reviews. Altogether, Wikipedia has benefited greatly from the activities of WikiCup competitors all through the contest. Well done everyone!
All those who reached the final will receive awards and the following special awards will be made, based on high performance in particular areas of content creation. So that the finalists do not have an undue advantage, these prizes are awarded to the competitor who scored the highest in any particular field in a single round, or in the event of a tie, to the overall leader in this field.
Gog the Mild (submissions) wins the featured article prize, for a total of 14 FAs during the course of the competition.
Hello! Voting in the 2020 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23:59 (UTC) on Monday, 7 December 2020. All eligible users are allowed to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once.
The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail.
I tried to give 2021 a good start by updating the QAI project topics. Please check and correct, - did you know that - at almost five years - you belong to the project's "oldest" active members? For moar private "happy new year" see here. --Gerda Arendt (talk) 19:31, 6 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Cite Unseen update
Hello! Thank you for using Cite Unseen. The script recently received a significant update, detailed below.
You can now toggle which icons you do or don't want to see. See the configuration section for details. All icons are enabled by default except for the new generally reliable icon (described below).
New categorizations/icons:
Advocacy: Organizations that are engaged in advocacy (anything from political to civil rights to lobbying). Note that an advocacy group can be reliable; this indicator simply serves to note when a source's primary purpose is to advocate for certain positions or policies, which is important to keep in mind when consuming a source.
Editable: Sites that are editable by the public, such as wikis (Wikipedia, Fandom) or some databases (IMDb, Discogs).
Predatory journals: These sites charge publication fees to authors without checking articles for quality and legitimacy.
Perennial source categories: Cite Unseen will mark sources as generally reliable, marginally reliable, generally unreliable, deprecated, and blacklisted. This is based on Wikipedia's perennial sources list, which reflects community consensus on frequently discussed sources. Sources that have multiple categorizations are marked as varied reliability. Note that generally reliable icons are disabled by default to reduce clutter, but you can enable them through your custom config. A special thanks to Newslinger, whose new Sourceror API provides the perennial sources list in a clean, structured format.
With the addition of the new categorizations, the biased source icon has been removed. This category was very broad, and repetitive to the new advocacy and perennial sources categorizations that are more informative.
You are receiving this message as a user of Cite Unseen. If you no longer wish to receive very occasional updates, you may remove yourself from the mailing list.
Welcome to the 2021 WikiCup!
Happy New Year and Happy New WikiCup! The competition begins today and all article creators, expanders, improvers and reviewers are welcome to take part. If you have already signed up, your submissions page can be found here. If you have not yet signed up, you can add your name here and the judges will set up your submissions page. Any questions on the rules or on anything else should be directed to one of the judges, or posted to the WikiCup talk page. Signups will close at the end of January, and the first round will end on 26 February; the 64 highest scorers at that time will move on to round 2. We thank Vanamonde93 and Godot13, who have retired as judges, and we thank them for their past dedication. The judges for the WikiCup this year are Sturmvogel 66 (talk·contribs·email) and Cwmhiraeth (talk·contribs·email). Good luck! MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 11:11, 1 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]
WikiCup 2021 March newsletter
Round 1 of the competition has finished; it was a high-scoring round with 21 contestants scoring more than 100 points. Everyone with a positive score moves on to Round 2, with 55 contestants qualifying. You will need to finish among the top thirty-two contestants in Round 2 if you are to qualify for Round 3. Our top scorers in Round 1 were:
Epicgenius led the field with a featured article, nine good articles and an assortment of other submissions, specialising on buildings and locations in New York, for a total of 945 points.
Bloom6132 was close behind with 896 points, largely gained from 71 "In the news" items, mostly recent deaths.
ImaginesTigers, who has been editing Wikipedia for less than a year, was in third place with 711 points, much helped by bringing League of Legends to featured article status, exemplifying how bonus points can boost a contestant's score.
Amakuru came next with 708 points, Kigali being another featured article that scored maximum bonus points.
Ktin, new to the WikiCup, was in fifth place with 523 points, garnered from 15 DYKs and 34 "In the news" items.
The Rambling Man scored 511 points, many from featured article candidate reviews and from football related DYKs.
Gog the Mild, last year's runner-up, came next with 498 points, from a featured article and numerous featured article candidate reviews.
Hog Farm, at 452, scored for a featured article, four good articles and a number of reviews.
Le Panini, another newcomer to the WikiCup, scored 438 for a featured article and three good articles.
Lee Vilenski, last year's champion, scored 332 points, from a featured article and various other sport-related topics.
These contestants, like all the others, now have to start again from scratch. In Round 1, contestants achieved eight featured articles, three featured lists and one featured picture, as well as around two hundred DYKs and twenty-seven ITNs. They completed 97 good article reviews, nearly double the 52 good articles they claimed. Contestants also claimed for 135 featured article and featured list candidate reviews. There is no longer a requirement to mention your WikiCup participation when undertaking these reviews.
Remember that any content promoted after the end of Round 1 but before the start of Round 2 can be claimed in Round 2. Invitations for collaborative writing efforts or any other discussion of potentially interesting work is always welcome on the WikiCup talk page. Remember, if two or more WikiCup competitors have done significant work on an article, all can claim points. If you are concerned that your nomination—whether it is a good article candidate, a featured process, or something else—will not receive the necessary reviews, please list it on Wikipedia:WikiCup/Reviews.
The second round of the 2021 WikiCup has now finished; it was a high-scoring round and contestants needed 61 points to advance to Round 3. There were some impressive efforts in the round, with the top eight contestants all scoring more than 400 points. A large number of the points came from the 12 featured articles and the 110 good articles achieved in total by contestants, as well as the 216 good article reviews they performed; the GAN backlog drive and the stay-at-home imperative during the COVID-19 pandemic may have been partially responsible for these impressive figures.
Our top scorers in Round 2 were:
The Rambling Man, with 2963 points from three featured articles, 20 featured article reviews, 37 good articles, 73 good article reviews, as well as 22 DYKs.
Epicgenius, with 1718 points from one featured article, 29 good articles, 16 DYKs and plenty of bonus points.
Bloom6132, with 990 points from 13 DYKs and 64 "In the news" items, mostly recent deaths.
Hog Farm, with 834 points from two featured articles, five good articles, 14 featured article reviews and 15 good article reviews.
Gog the Mild, with 524 points from two featured articles and four featured article reviews.
Lee Vilenski, with 501 points from one featured article, three good articles, six featured article reviews and 25 good article reviews.
Sammi Brie, with 485 points from four good articles, eight good article reviews and 27 DYKs, on US radio and television stations.
Ktin, with 436 points from four good articles, seven DYKs and 11 "In the news" items.
Please remember that DYKs cannot be claimed until they have appeared on the main page. As we enter the third round, any content promoted after the end of Round 2 but before the start of Round 3 can be claimed now, and anything you forgot to claim in Round 2 cannot! Remember too, that you must claim your points within 14 days of "earning" them (except for at the end of each round, when you must claim them before the cut-off date/time). When doing GARs, please make sure that you check that all the GA criteria are fully met.
Hi Sainsf. I hope you are doing well and staying safe during these times! Apologize to bother and posting a random request. I have just started to work on a stub (Fontainea Venosa)and had added some sections. Knowing your expertise, I would love if you can help me to review and left a comment on what I can do to improve my edits.
Would you be able to help me to provide feedback and help me out to add a geographical distribution image in the infobox as it seems to be your expertise? But no pressure if you are busy. That is completely fine and understandable :)
Hope to hear from you soon. The article is Fontainea Venosa
Hey Sparklingkull! The article seems to be in great shape at first glance, well done :) I will try to make time for this this weekend, I have been inactive here for months now. Stay safe! Sainsf(t·c)11:41, 26 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]
The third round of the 2021 WikiCup has now come to an end. Each of the sixteen contestants who made it into the fourth round had at least 294 points, and our top six scorers all had over 600 points. They were:
The Rambling Man, with 1825 points from 3 featured articles, 44 featured article reviews, 14 good articles, 30 good article reviews and 10 DYKs. In addition, he completed a 34-article good topic on the EFL Championship play-offs.
Epicgenius, a New York specialist, with 1083 points from 2 featured article reviews, 18 good articles, 30 DYKs and plenty of bonus points.
Bloom6132, with 869 points from 11 DYKs, all with bonus points, and 54 "In the news" items, mostly covering people who had recently died.
Gog the Mild, with 817 points from 3 featured articles on historic battles in Europe, 5 featured article reviews and 3 good articles.
Hog Farm, with 659 points from 2 featured articles and 2 good articles on American Civil War battles, 18 featured article reviews, 2 good articles, 6 good article reviews and 4 DYKs.
BennyOnTheLoose, a snooker specialist and new to the Cup, with 647 points from a featured article, 2 featured article reviews, 6 good articles, 6 good article reviews and 3 DYKs.
In round three, contestants achieved 19 featured articles, 7 featured lists, 106 featured article reviews, 72 good articles, 1 good topic, 62 good article reviews, 165 DYKs and 96 ITN items. We enter the fourth round with scores reset to zero; any content promoted after the end of round 3 but before the start of round 4 can be claimed in round 4. Please also remember that you must claim your points within 14 days of "earning" them (one contestant in round 3 lost out because of this). When doing GARs, please make sure that you check that all the GA criteria are fully met.
The fourth round of the competition has finished with over 500 points being required to qualify for the final round. It was a hotly competitive round with two contestants, The Rambling Man and Epicgenius, each scoring over 3000 points, and six contestants scoring over 1000. All but one of the finalists achieved one or more FAs during the round, the exception being Bloom6132 who demonstrated that 61 "in the news" items produces an impressive number of points. Other contestants who made it to the final are Gog the Mild, Lee Vilenski, BennyOnTheLoose, Amakuru and Hog Farm. However, all their points are now swept away and everyone starts afresh in the final round.
Round 4 saw the achievement of 18 featured articles and 157 good articles. Bilorv scored for a 25-article good topic on Black Mirror but narrowly missed out on qualifying for the final round. There was enthusiasm for FARs, with 89 being performed, and there were 63 GARs and around 100 DYKs during the round. As we start round 5, we say goodbye to the eight competitors who didn't quite make it to the final round; thank you for the useful contributions you have made to the Cup and Wikipedia, and we hope you will join us again next year. For other contestants, remember that any content promoted after the end of round 4 but before the start of round 5 can be claimed in round 5. Remember too that you must claim your points within 14 days of "earning" them.
If you are concerned that your nomination, whether it be for a good article, a featured process, or anything else, will not receive the necessary reviews, please list it on Wikipedia:WikiCup/Reviews Needed (remember to remove your listing when no longer required). If you want to help out with the WikiCup, please do your bit to help keep down the review backlogs! Questions are welcome on Wikipedia talk:WikiCup, and the judges are reachable on their talk pages or by email. If you wish to start or stop receiving this newsletter, please feel free to add or remove your name from Wikipedia:WikiCup/Newsletter/Send. Sturmvogel 66 and Cwmhiraeth. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 13:02, 2 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]
@LittleJerry: Hi there. Yeah I plan to but I am afraid I would not be able to work here significantly till next year, really busy with my career at this point. If you wish to work on it or need any help, I will try my best to assist. Let me know. Cheers, Sainsf(t·c)16:29, 18 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]
The WikiCup is over for another year and the finalists can relax! Our Champion this year is The Rambling Man (submissions), who amassed over 5000 points in the final round, achieving 8 featured articles and almost 500 reviews. It was a very competitive round; seven of the finalists achieved over 1000 points in the round (enough to win the 2019 contest), and three scored over 3000 (enough to win the 2020 event). Our 2021 finalists and their scores were:
All those who reached the final round will win awards. The following special awards will be made based on high performance in particular areas of content creation and review. Awards will be handed out in the next few days.
The Rambling Man (submissions) wins the reviewer prize, for 68 FAC reviews and 213 GAN reviews, both in round 5.
Epicgenius (submissions) wins the DYK prize, for 30 did you know articles in round 3 and 105 overall.
Bloom6132 (submissions) wins the ITN prize, for 71 in the news articles in round 1 and 284 overall.
Congratulations to everyone who participated in this year's WikiCup, whether they made it to the final round or not, and particular congratulations to the newcomers to the WikiCup, some of whom did very well. Wikipedia has benefitted greatly from the quality creations, expansions and improvements made, and the numerous reviews performed. Thanks to all who have taken part and helped out with the competition, not forgetting User:Jarry1250, who runs the scoring bot.
If you have views on whether the rules or scoring need adjustment for next year's contest, please comment on the WikiCup talk page. Next year's competition will begin on 1 January. You are invited to sign up to participate; the WikiCup is open to all Wikipedians, both novices and experienced editors, and we hope to see you all in the 2022 competition. Until then, it only remains to once again congratulate our worthy winners, and thank all participants for their involvement! If you wish to start or stop receiving this newsletter, please feel free to add or remove yourself from Wikipedia:WikiCup/Newsletter/Send. Sturmvogel 66 and Cwmhiraeth. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 19:56, 3 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Thank you today for Hartebeest, introduced (in 2016): "This article is about an African antelope. The article is very comprehensive and supported by a large number of credible sources, it is interesting throughout and goes well into almost all facets of the topic. Though this article did not do well in its initial FA nomination, I have improved it substantially since then. I believe this article greatly deserves to be a Featured Article."! --Gerda Arendt (talk) 07:34, 8 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Happy New Year and Happy New WikiCup! The 2022 competition has just begun and all article creators, expanders, improvers and reviewers are welcome to take part. Even if you are a novice editor you should be able to advance to at least the second round, improving your editing skills as you go. If you have already signed up, your submissions page can be found here. If you have not yet signed up, you can add your name here and the judges will set up your submissions page. Any questions on the rules or on anything else should be directed to one of the judges, or posted to the WikiCup talk page. Signups will close at the end of January, and the first round will end on 26 February; the 64 highest scorers at that time will move on to round 2. The judges for the WikiCup this year are: Sturmvogel 66 (talk·contribs·email) and Cwmhiraeth (talk·contribs·email). Good luck! MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 14:37, 5 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Welcome to the 2022 WikiCup!
Happy New Year and Happy New WikiCup! The 2022 competition has just begun and all article creators, expanders, improvers and reviewers are welcome to take part. Even if you are a novice editor you should be able to advance to at least the second round, improving your editing skills as you go. If you have already signed up, your submissions page can be found here. If you have not yet signed up, you can add your name here and the judges will set up your submissions page. Any questions on the rules or on anything else should be directed to one of the judges, or posted to the WikiCup talk page. Signups will close at the end of January, and the first round will end on 26 February; the 64 highest scorers at that time will move on to round 2. The judges for the WikiCup this year are: Sturmvogel 66 (talk·contribs·email) and Cwmhiraeth (talk·contribs·email). Good luck! MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 15:02, 5 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
... that the woodland garden(example pictured), "colourfully planted with exotic shrubs and herbaceous plants, dominated English horticulture from 1910 to 1960"? (February 17)
And so ends the first round of the WikiCup. Last year anyone who scored more than zero points moved on to Round 2, but this was not the case this year, and a score of 13 or more was required to proceed. The top scorers in Round 1 were:
Epicgenius, a finalist last year, who led the field with 1906 points, gained from 32 GAs and 19 DYKs, all on the topic of New York buildings.
AryKun, new to the contest, was second with 1588 points, having achieved 2 FAs, 11 GAs and various other submissions, mostly on the subject of birds.
Bloom6132, a WikiCup veteran, was in third place with 682 points, garnered from 51 In the news items and several DYKs.
GhostRiver was close behind with 679 points, gained from achieving 12 GAs, mostly on ice hockey players, and 35 GARs.
Kavyansh.Singh was in fifth place with 551 points, with an FA, a FL, and many reviews.
SounderBruce was next with 454 points, gained from an FA and various other submissions, mostly on United States highways.
Ktin, another WikiCup veteran, was in seventh place with 412 points, mostly gained from In the news items.
These contestants, like all the others who qualified for Round 2, now have to start scoring points again from scratch. Between them, contestants completed reviews of a large number of good articles as the contest ran concurrently with a GAN backlog drive. Well done all! To qualify for Round 3, contestants will need to finish Round 2 among the top thirty-two participants.
Remember that any content promoted after the end of Round 1 but before the start of Round 2 can be claimed in Round 2. Anything that should have been claimed for in Round 1 is no longer eligible for points. Invitations for collaborative writing efforts or any other discussion of potentially interesting work is always welcome on the WikiCup talk page. Remember, if two or more WikiCup competitors have done significant work on an article, all can claim points. If you are concerned that your nomination—whether it is at good article candidates, a featured process, or anywhere else—will not receive the necessary reviews, please list it on Wikipedia:WikiCup/Reviews Needed.
And so ends the first round of the WikiCup. Last year anyone who scored more than zero points moved on to Round 2, but this was not the case this year, and a score of 13 or more was required to proceed. The top scorers in Round 1 were:
Epicgenius, a finalist last year, who led the field with 1906 points, gained from 32 GAs and 19 DYKs, all on the topic of New York buildings.
AryKun, new to the contest, was second with 1588 points, having achieved 2 FAs, 11 GAs and various other submissions, mostly on the subject of birds.
Bloom6132, a WikiCup veteran, was in third place with 682 points, garnered from 51 In the news items and several DYKs.
GhostRiver was close behind with 679 points, gained from achieving 12 GAs, mostly on ice hockey players, and 35 GARs.
Kavyansh.Singh was in fifth place with 551 points, with an FA, a FL, and many reviews.
SounderBruce was next with 454 points, gained from an FA and various other submissions, mostly on United States highways.
Ktin, another WikiCup veteran, was in seventh place with 412 points, mostly gained from In the news items.
These contestants, like all the others who qualified for Round 2, now have to start scoring points again from scratch. Between them, contestants completed reviews of a large number of good articles as the contest ran concurrently with a GAN backlog drive. Well done all! To qualify for Round 3, contestants will need to finish Round 2 among the top thirty-two participants.
Remember that any content promoted after the end of Round 1 but before the start of Round 2 can be claimed in Round 2. Anything that should have been claimed for in Round 1 is no longer eligible for points. Invitations for collaborative writing efforts or any other discussion of potentially interesting work is always welcome on the WikiCup talk page. Remember, if two or more WikiCup competitors have done significant work on an article, all can claim points. If you are concerned that your nomination—whether it is at good article candidates, a featured process, or anywhere else—will not receive the necessary reviews, please list it on Wikipedia:WikiCup/Reviews Needed.
... that the flatworm Humbertium covidum(pictured), named after the COVID-19 pandemic, was classified in a study written mostly during the initial lockdown? (March 6)
... that the Door Tree(pictured), which stood for nearly 200 years, was cut down because of a brother's hatred? (March 8)
... that the nature documentary The Green Planet, narrated by David Attenborough, has been compared to both horror films and a "plant porno"? (March 10)
... that the colour of the markings on Nesticus cellulanus can vary depending on the light level of the habitat, with darker habitats causing lighter markings? (March 15)
... that the gonads of the banded bullfrog remain ripe during dry periods so that it can mate soon after rainfall? (March 17)
... that butterflies of the genus Anaea(example pictured) are said to have "commanded the admiration of even the most gold-mad conquistadores"? (April 16)
... that despite being described in 1840, the chestnut-backed buttonquail was only confirmed in Queensland in 2020? (April 21)
... that a species in the genus of sponges Pseudoceratina produces a chemical that can help prevent migration of metastatic breast cancer cells? (April 22)
... that Ulmus chuchuanus had to be renamed due to another fossil already having its original name? (April 26)
The second round of the 2022 WikiCup has now finished. It was a high-scoring round and contestants needed 115 points to advance to round 3. There were some very impressive efforts in round 2, with the top seven contestants all scoring more than 500 points. A large number of the points came from the 11 featured articles and the 79 good articles achieved in total by contestants.
Our top scorers in round 2 were:
Epicgenius, with 1264 points from 2 featured article, 4 good articles and 18 DYKs. Epicgenius was a finalist last year but has now withdrawn from the contest as he pursues a new career path.
AryKun, with 1172 points from two featured articles, one good article and a substantial number of featured article and good article reviews.
Bloom6132, with 605 points from 44 in the news items and 4 DYKs.
Sammi Brie, with 573 points from 8 GAs and 21 DYKs.
Ealdgyth, with 567 points from 11 GAs and 34 good and featured article reviews.
Panini!, with 549 points from 1 FA, 4 GAs and several other sources.
Lee Vilenski, with 545 points from 1 FA, 4 GAs and a number of reviews.
The rules for featured and good article reviews require the review to be of sufficient length; brief quick fails and very short reviews will generally not be awarded points. Remember also that DYKs cannot be claimed until they have appeared on the main page. As we enter the third round, any content promoted after the end of round 2 but before the start of round 3 can be claimed now, and anything you forgot to claim in round 2 cannot! Remember too, that you must claim your points within 14 days of "earning" them. When doing GARs, please make sure that you check that all the GA criteria are fully met.
You're receiving this message because you have conducted 5+ good article reviews or participated in previous backlog drives. Click here to opt out of any future messages.
Ko Olina Station and Center has been nominated for an individual good article reassessment. If you are interested in the discussion, please participate by adding your comments to the reassessment page. If concerns are not addressed during the review period, the good article status may be removed from the article. Ten Pound Hammer • (What did I screw up now?)02:02, 4 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]
You have been pruned from a list
Hi Sainsf! You're receiving this notification because you were previously listed at Wikipedia:WikiProject Biography/Members, but you haven't made any edits to the English Wikipedia in over 3 months.
Because of your inactivity, you have been removed from the list. If you would like to resubscribe, you can do so at any time by visiting Wikipedia:WikiProject Biography/Members.
The third round of the 2022 WikiCup has now come to an end. Each of the sixteen contestants who made it into the fourth round had at least 180 points, which is a lower figure than last year when 294 points were needed to progress to round 4. Our top scorers in round 3 were:
BennyOnTheLoose, with 746 points, a tally built both on snooker and other sports topics, and on more general subjects.
Bloom6132, with 683 points, garnered mostly from "In the news" items and related DYKs.
Sammi Brie, with 527, from a variety of submissions related to radio and television stations.
Between them contestants achieved 5 featured articles, 4 featured lists, 51 good articles, 149 DYK entries, 68 ITN entries, and 109 good article reviews. As we enter the fourth round, remember that any content promoted after the end of round 3 but before the start of round 4 can be claimed in round 4. Please also remember that you must claim your points within 14 days of "earning" them. When doing GARs, please make sure that you check that all the GA criteria are fully met. Please also remember that all submissions must meet core Wikipedia policies, regardless of the review process.
Hi. You are now listed as missing, as we seek to recognize those editors who impacted the project and are no longer contributing. Should you ever return or simply don't want to be listed, you are welcome to remove your name. Please do not see this message as any sort of prod to your activity on wiki, as we all would hope to enjoy life after having edited here.
Removal from member list
You have been inactive for more than 6 months and have been removed from the Wikipedia Birthday Committee birthday list. If you become active again please feel free to re-add yourself.
Hi Sainsf! You're receiving this notification because you were previously listed at Wikipedia:WikiProject India/Members, but you haven't made any edits to the English Wikipedia in over 1 year.
Because of your inactivity, you have been removed from the list. If you would like to resubscribe, you can do so at any time by visiting Wikipedia:WikiProject India/Members.
Hello, Sainsf, and welcome to Wikipedia! My name is Ian and I work with Wiki Education; I help support students who are editing as part of a class assignment.
I hope you enjoy editing here. If you haven't already done so, please check out the student training library, which introduces you to editing and Wikipedia's core principles. You may also want to check out the Teahouse, a community of Wikipedia editors dedicated to helping new users. Below are some resources to help you get started editing.
Puri has been nominated for a community good article reassessment. If you are interested in the discussion, please participate by adding your comments to the reassessment page. If concerns are not addressed during the review period, the good article status may be removed from the article. Onegreatjoke (talk) 00:11, 19 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
@LittleJerry: Hi, long time. Yeah, that was an article I would have loved to bring to FA, I am planning to return to editing at least a few times a week soon. We can work on that, sorry other stuff you proposed previously (I think it was Cheetah) has not really happened yet, but Blackbuck will be easier. Let's do this! Sainsf(t·c)10:49, 18 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]
This month has seen an incredible amount of activity creating high quality content, with 3 FAs, 3 FACs, and a veritable flood of GAs and GANs, not to mention the FLs and FLCs. To help maintain this high level of activity going forward, WikiProject Tree of Life is starting a new monthly rolling contest, inspired by the contest run by WikiProject Military History. This contest should hopefully help incentivize editors to contribute in ways that are less daunting than writing articles that are GA and FA-quality. Even improving articles from stub to start class, or helping other editors by reviewing their work at GAN, FAC, or FLC, gets you points, with bonus points for articles with especially high page views. Make sure to participate in any way you can, and help improve the 'pedia while having fun and winning Barnstars!
The first edition of our new monthly contest had perhaps a little less participation than I hoped for, but it still resulted in a huge amount of content work, mainly focussed on de-stubbing articles on little-known species, although we did also see two GAs for Holozoa and Hypericum perforatum. Overall, over 60 articles were improved, with most going from stubs or redlinks to fully fleshed out articles. The winner this month was Simongraham, who improved 21 articles about spiders, mainly to B and C class, and racked up 70 points, over twice the next highest. Hopefully, we'll continue to see such great work next month, with even more participants and even more articles improved.
Also anyone who wants to help coordinate the contest can just drop by at the talk page, I really need help.
September DYKs
Republicopteron douseae fossil
Male Phallichthys fish
Mimodactylus reconstruction
Adult ashy flycatcher
... that with all known Palaeorehniidae fossils (example pictured) being incomplete, the relationships of the family are uncertain? (September 2)
... that butterfly collector Ian Heslop was once required to supervise an execution? (September 3)
... that Phallichthys (literally 'penis fish') species are so called because the males (example pictured) have "comparatively huge" sex appendages? (September 8)
... that merry widows like soft bottoms? (September 10)
... that Mimodactylus(reconstruction pictured) is the first complete pterosaur from the Afro-Arabian continent? * ... that small Poecilia gillii males have longer sex organs than larger males, to facilitate mating with females that flee from them? (September 12)
The second edition of our monthly contest was even better than the last month, with 80 articles improved spanning the entire tree of life. The winner this month was Quetzal1964, who contributed to 47 articles, mainly relating to marine fish, and racked up 81 points in the process. In second place was simongraham, who got 60 points from 14 articles on various species of jumping spiders. simongraham is still at the top of our overall standings, with 130 points, and Quetzal1964's close behind on 108. The November edition of the contest is now open: feel free to drop by and participate if you work on any TOL-related articles this month.
October DYKs
Illustration of swordtail mollies
Lycorma meliae
Illustrations of the front foot (A) and hind foot (B) of Diplobune quercyi
... that the swordtail molly(examples pictured) and the Petén molly have been named and renamed so often, one even ending up with the other's name at one point, that the swordtail molly's current scientific name means 'confusion'? (October 8)
... that the early big cat Pachypanthera may have weighed as much as 142 kilograms (313 lb) and had teeth similar to a hyena's? (October 9)
... that ancient Greek philosopher Xenophon thought the alopekis was part dog, part fox? (October 11)
... that the wings of Lycorma meliae(example pictured) undergo multiple color changes throughout their lives? (October 16)
... that the three-toed species of Diplobune(fossils pictured) were mammals of the order of "even-toed ungulates"? (October 17)
... that although fossils of the extinct mammal Asiavorator were first found in 1922, the genus was not named until 73 years later, in 1995? (October 18)
... that in aquariums, the humpbacked limia is known to cannibalise the young? (October 21)
Hello! Voting in the 2023 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23:59 (UTC) on Monday, 11 December 2023. All eligible users are allowed to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once.
The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail.
The third edition of our monthly contest saw Quetzal1964 win for the second month in a row, scoring 68 points from 39 articles about a variety of marine fishes. In second place for the month is Olmagon, who scored 45 points from 10 articles on extinct crustaceans and geckoes. In the overall standings, Quetzal1964 leapfrogged over simongraham into first place, with 176 points from 109 articles; simongraham is now in second place with 136 points from 37 articles. The December edition of the contest is now open: feel free to drop by and participate if you work on any TOL-related articles this month.
New newsletter!
Now, this newsletter is technically not new, but I have only recently become aware of its existence and am only a month late, so it still counts. Wikiproject Fungi's Lichen task force has a new newsletter that is very nicely formatted and also features much better writing than this newsletter. Anyone interested in receiving the newsletter can add their name here.
November DYKs
A bacterium that thrives in the deep ocean
Georges Cuvier's reconstruction of Anoplotherium commune
Paroedura maingoka
Field of Wyethia amplexicaulis in bloom
An adult dwarf pufferfish
Adult Balkan terrapin
Planocarina marginata, a hyalospheniid amoeba
... that a variety of the Connecticut field pumpkin is known as "the original commercial jack-o'-lantern pumpkin"? (November 1)
... that insects not only destroyed the personal plant collection of John Hunter Thomas, but also bear his name? (November 3)
... that life exists in every part of the biosphere, from the deepest parts of the ocean (bacterium pictured) to altitudes of up to 64 km (40 miles) in the atmosphere? (November 6)
... that Sivapardus was larger than a leopard, smaller than a lion, and had a face like a cheetah? (November 7)
... that in 1822, the Paleogene mammal Anoplotherium commune(reconstruction pictured) was the first fossil species to be subjected to a brain cast study? (November 12)
... that the gecko Paroedura maingoka(pictured) imitates venomous scorpions to discourage predators? (November 13)
... that the scenic fields of northern wyethia(pictured) found in the western United States are sometimes a sign that an area has been overgrazed? (November 15)
... that at a maximum standard length of roughly 2 cm (0.8 in), dwarf pufferfish are some of the smallest pufferfish in the world? (November 18)
... that the authors of The Neanderthals Rediscovered learned that their book proposal had been accepted on the same day they took their twin sons home from hospital? (November 20)
... that hatchling Balkan terrapins are only 3 to 4 centimetres (1.2 to 1.6 in) in length, while adults (example pictured) can grow as long as 25 cm (9.8 in)? (November 21)
And so ends the fourth edition of the monthly rolling contest, as well as the 2023 Tree of Life Contest as a whole. This month saw simongraham win with a very impressive 120 points from 27 articles. Quetzal1964 was second with 74 points from 37 articles. The annual contest was a close race between simongraham and Quetzal1964; simongraham won first place with 256 points from 64 articles, and Quetzal1964 was second with 250 points from 146 articles. Snoteleks was third with 79 points from 33 articles. Congratulations to everyone who won this year and my gratitude to everyone else who helped raise the quality of articles in our little corner of Wikipedia this year. Additionally, a very Happy New Year to everyone in the project and here's looking forward to continuing our good work in 2024!
... that the green colour of bofedales(examples pictured) stands out in the yellow surrounding landscape? (December 6)
... that Desulfovibrio vulgaris can remove toxic heavy metals from the environment? (December 8)
... that Varroa destructor(example pictured), the Varroa mite, is an external parasitic mite that attacks and feeds on honey bees and is one of the most harmful honey-bee pests in the world? (December 11)
... that the Antarctic lichen Buellia frigida has been to outer space? (December 22)
... that the closest modern fern relatives to Dennstaedtia christophelii(fossil pictured) of the Pacific Northwest are tropical species from South America? (December 24)
... that in Icelandic folklore, the Yule cat eats people who do not receive new clothing for Christmas? (December 25)
California State Route 11 has been nominated for a good article reassessment. If you are interested in the discussion, please participate by adding your comments to the reassessment page. If concerns are not addressed during the review period, the good article status may be removed from the article. ChessEric01:33, 18 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Thank you for improving quality articles in February! - The image, taken on a cemetery last year after the funeral of a distant but dear family member, commemorates today, with thanks for their achievements, four subjects mentioned on the Main page and Vami_IV, a friend here. Listen to music by Tchaikovsky (an article where one of the four is pictured), sung by today's subject (whose performance on stage I enjoyed two days ago). -- Gerda Arendt (talk) 17:41, 20 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Our first double issue in almost four years, although we will try to return to a monthly schedule henceforth (incidentally, the last double issue saw Markham's storm petrel at GAN, and this one sees it finally pass FAC).
The March 2024 GAN Backlog Drive starts today; everyone is welcome to participate and help reduce the backlog of GANs.
The January edition of our monthly rolling contest was won by Quetzal1964 with 100 points from 40 articles, mainly related to various species of marine fish. simongraham was second with 80 points from 14 articles on jumping spiders.
The February edition saw Quetzal1964 win for the second time in a row, with 114 points from 43 articles. In second place was Snoteleks, with 21 points from 7 seven articles on various unicellular eukaryotes, including the GA Telonemia.
January DYKs
... that Dacrytherium, literally meaning 'tear beast', was named after its "tear-pit"? (3 January)
... that the wood-pasture hypothesis posits that semi-open wood pastures and not primeval forests are the natural vegetation of temperate Europe? (5 January)
... that until April 2023, when the genusTriassosculda was discovered, the mantis shrimp fossil record contained a gap of more than a hundred million years? (5 January)
... that although Olga Hartman believed that her basic research on marine worms had no practical value, it was applied to experimental studies of oysters? (6 January)
... that Oxford ivy grows towards the light to bloom and then towards the darkness when going to seed? (17 January)
... that S. F. Light(pictured) disliked using his full name? (20 January)
... that the fossil turtle Acherontemys was named for a "river of the fabled lower world"? (26 January)
... that having lived in Central Park for more than a year after becoming homeless, Flaco(pictured) has been accused of being a peeping tom? (19 February)
Clementine cake has been nominated for a good article reassessment. If you are interested in the discussion, please participate by adding your comments to the reassessment page. If concerns are not addressed during the review period, the good article status may be removed from the article. X (talk) 08:16, 21 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
The newsletter will not be returning to a monthly format (mainly because the author is busy failing every exam imaginable) and is on a bimonthly schedule for the foreseeable future.
The second round of the WikiCup was very competitive, requiring the highest points total to advance since 2014. Two TOL editors, AryKun and Fritzmann2002, advanced to the third round.
The March edition of our monthly rolling contest was won by simongraham, who amassed 118 points from 21 articles on various species of jumping spider; in second place was Quetzal1964 with 109 points from 53 articles on marine ray-finned fish.
Quetzal1964 and simongraham were also the top two in the April edition, although Quetzal was ahead this time, with 68 points to simongraham's 48. In the annual leaderboard, Quetzal and simongraham are in first and second place respectively, with 291 and 246 points; in third place is Snotoleks, with 76 points.
... that the cherry blossom was used symbolically in Japanese World War II propaganda, with falling petals representing "young soldiers' sacrifice for the emperor"? (8 March)
... that the Kīlauea lava cricket disappears from a lava field as soon as any plants start to grow there? (13 March)
... that Julian Assange's lawyer argued that the rules set by the Ecuadorian embassy requiring Assange to take care of his pet cat Michi were "denigrating"? (13 March)
... that mule deer sometimes prefer the flavor of one Rocky Mountain juniper tree, like "ice cream", over another? (21 March)
... that the skeleton panda sea squirt was known on the Internet for its skeleton-like appearance years before its formal description? (26 March)
... that only one fruit but several thousand seeds were known when Allenbya collinsonae was named? (26 March)
... that while named for alliums, the fossil Paleoallium(pictured) was not necessarily directly related to any allium species? (27 March)
... that the extinct genus Mixtotherium, meaning 'mixed beast', has traits of both extinct primates and hyraxes? (28 March)
... that the fossil fern Dickwhitea was described from a single block of chert? (28 March)
... that only six years after its 2016 discovery, the Meratus blue flycatcher(pictured) was found being sold in Indonesian songbird markets? (30 March)
... that the spirit liverwort is called such because of its proximity to the Māori afterlife? (31 March)
... that cultures of the fungus Lentinus brumalis have been flown on three different satellites? (31 March)
... that the English herbalist Nicholas Culpeper claimed that eating alkanet leaves would make a person's spit deadly to serpents? (31 March)
Eufriesea purpurata
Korowai gecko
Paleoallium billgenseli fossil
Male Meratus blue flycatcher
April DYKs
... that despite its name meaning 'unscented', Hypericum × inodorum can smell strongly of goat? (1 April)
... that color-changing cats(artist's impression pictured) could help us communicate with the future? (2 April)
... that the white-tailed jay(example pictured) found in Ecuador and Peru was once thought to have been brought to Mexico by pre-Columbian trade? (5 April)
Johor Bahru has been nominated for a good article reassessment. If you are interested in the discussion, please participate by adding your comments to the reassessment page. If concerns are not addressed during the review period, the good article status may be removed from the article. hundenvonPG (talk) 21:26, 27 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]