User talk:Shellnut/Archive 6
Checking other people's contributionsJust wanted to let you know that you can easily see if someone has currently been active on Wikipedia, and what they have been working on. When you are on their user page, go to the list of blue links on the lefthand side of the page under the Wikipedia logo. Under "Toolbox" there is a link called "User contributions". Click on this and you will be able to see up to 500 of the user's recent contributions listed day by day. Invertzoo (talk) 21:35, 26 February 2012 (UTC) DYK nomination of UnionoidaHello! Your submission of Unionoida at the Did You Know nominations page has been reviewed, and there still are some issues that may need to be clarified. Please review the comment(s) underneath your nomination's entry and respond there as soon as possible. Thank you for contributing to Did You Know! Froggerlaura (talk) 22:20, 26 February 2012 (UTC)
I have made great efforts to reword / rewrite the section on freshwater pearls to AVOID closely paraphrasing the reference. The problem I am seeing is one of factual content versus exact wording. I reasonably believe that I have reworded what can be reworded, and when factual information is listed I have reorganized it into an alpabetical list rather than the manner in which the source article listed it. If there is a specific problem of paraphrasing would someone please enlighten me so I can reword it. I really DO want to fix up this article properly, but maybe I am just too close to it to see the error(s), if any. Please advise. Shellnut (talk) 22:21, 8 March 2012 (UTC) Talkback!Hello, Shellnut. You have new messages at SarahStierch's talk page.
Message added 01:45, 7 March 2012 (UTC). You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template. DYK for Unionoida
Casliber (talk · contribs) 21:54, 12 March 2012 (UTC)
A barnstar for you!
Wikipedia:HighBeam/ApplicationsHi David. I've put my name on the list of applications for Wikipedia:HighBeam/Applications. I advise you to do the same and I'll give the same advise to InvertZoo. With the three of us, we are more likely to obtain at least one free, full-access, 1-year HighBeam Research account. Imagine, being able to read all those scientific articles that are now hidden beyond a paywall! JoJan (talk) 16:18, 21 March 2012 (UTC)
Your DYKI am sorry I have not been in touch much recently; I have been very busy writing several shell papers for Festivus. I regret that I have not taken the time yet to congratulate you on your first DYK, so here goes: Well done Shellnut!
Nuculanoida etc?Hello Shellnut. I put this note up on the project talk page but I am also posting it here in case you want to tackle it. I was fixing up this article a bit, because I am routinely looking at some stubs. I am not really familiar with the current and previous taxonomies, so can someone explain to me why we have articles on the order Nuculanoida as well as the order Nuculoida? Is the first one an error, or does it represent an older taxonomic term, or a taxonomic term that paleontologists use? We also have a stub article which purports to be on the "superfamily" Nuculoidea although WoRMS has this taxon listed as a genus! The articles on families Nuculidae and Nuculanidae are probably OK as they are, but this whole group of articles needs some careful checking and revision by someone who understands these groups and who can make the lists of taxa within the articles clearer and more self-evident so that one can easily understand the sequence of taxa in the hierarchy. Invertzoo (talk) 13:28, 25 March 2012 (UTC)
Your HighBeam account is ready!Good news! You now have access to 80 million articles in 6500 publications through HighBeam Research. Here's what you need to know:
Thanks for helping make Wikipedia better. Enjoy your research! Cheers, Ocaasi t | c 21:01, 13 April 2012 (UTC) You OK?I know you said you were snowed under at work but I was just checking to see if you were OK? I will be back in NYC tomorrow and therefore pretty soon I will be more active on here. I also wanted to ask you a couple questions about the Huber Bivalves book. Best, Invertzoo (talk) 03:09, 9 May 2012 (UTC)
Do you have the Huber book?Hello Shellnut. I believe I am correct in thinking that you have a copy of the Huber Bivalves book? If so, could you do us all a favor and look and see on what page he says that:
The statement will not be (should not be) in exactly those words. The Wikipedia article "Bivalvia" is currently under review for Featured Article status, and we need the page number for that info for the references. If you are able to track it down that would be great! All good wishes, Invertzoo (talk) 19:15, 8 July 2012 (UTC)
Shell macrophotographyHi. I began with large shells using a simple Panasonic Lumix DMC-LZ1 two years ago. All settings were made automatically. Then I changed to a Canon 500 D with Zoom objective and additional macro-lenses. At the moment I use the Canon 500 D with a Tamron 60mm Macro objective. With the Tamron I make the photos usually with F9 (sometimes up to F14), ISO 100, with variable exposure times (from 1/6 to 10 sec.). I use natural light, no artificial lightning. All photos with the Canon are made by photo stacking (Combine ZP), using 4 - 12 photos of each view, depending on the depth. Final work (colour correction, combination of the five views) is done with Adobe Photoshop and Photoshop Elements. I get the black background by putting the shells on black velvet, for black velvet produces not reflections (whereas e.g. black paper does; see for example [1]) --Llez (talk) 05:39, 4 August 2012 (UTC) Bivalve TaxonomyI've tracked you down as the one who added the 2010 taxonomy to the page on Bivalvia (since moved to its own page)--a very important contribution for which I created some redirects. True?? If so, a question: The family sphaeriidae or pisidiidae (the little freshwater "fingernail" and "pill" clams) is not included in the listing. They are classified with the Corbiculacea in some older classifications, and I was hoping to see where they stood under the new order. Were they left out of the original Proposed Taxonomy reference?Martino3 (talk) 02:59, 22 September 2012 (UTC)
Thanks for a really fabulous article Shellnut! I went through it this morning, and in order to create the standard Wikipedia structure for an article, I separated some of the info out into an introduction or "lede". (The lede is supposed to give the context and to summarize the article.) I added a couple of sentences to give the intro more context, and added a photo at the top, another Wikipedia convention. (The image I put in is perhaps not ideal, but it is better than no image, and it at least gives the context at a glance.) I put in two first level headings. I also changed those family names that had accidentally been put in italics to plain text. If you take a look you will see what I did. Many thanks for your great work. Invertzoo (talk) 14:06, 6 November 2012 (UTC) Copyvio in Ligament (bivalve)?Hello Shellnut. Wikipedia has very strict rules about copyright, which is a legal issue. You have to be very careful never to copy phrases or sentences from other sources. I could be wrong, but it appears to be the case that: "Interestingly, scallops, which swim by repeatedly clapping their valves together, recover a greater fraction of the work done on their abductin than do clams and other more sedentary forms." is copied verbatim from Steven Vogel 2003, Comparative Biomechanics: Life's Physical World. Princeton: Princeton University Press, (or perhaps it was copied from a site, book or whatever that had already copied it from that source). Whatever source you use for researching a topic, not only must you not copy anything verbatim, but close paraphrasing is also not allowed, as that counts as plagiarism. What you need to do is to read the source carefully until you understand it perfectly, and then put it on one side and write your own prose yourself from scratch. if a topic is too dense to do that, it is OK to make just a short stub and let someone else expand it later. Invertzoo (talk) 13:58, 10 November 2012 (UTC) The exceptions to this are small quotes directly from sources -- they have to be clearly marked as quotes, and also of course works that are completely in the public domain. The latter can be copied, but they have to be acknowledged as such at the top of the reference section. Invertzoo (talk) 13:58, 10 November 2012 (UTC)
Hello againNice to see you back. Hope you are doing well. Invertzoo (talk) 23:06, 6 September 2012 (UTC)
Done Images added to Trimusculidae and Siphonariidae as well as six new species articles. Shellnut (talk) 17:26, 17 November 2012 (UTC) Permission questionHello Shellnut, I left a reply for you on my talk page and I wanted also (for your convenience) to put Moonriddengirl's answer onto your talk page as well as copying it onto my talk page. When Moonriddengirl says "he" she doesn't mean you, she means the author of the images. If you have more questions or comments you can ask her directly. Invertzoo (talk) 22:10, 12 November 2012 (UTC)
Bivalves et al.Hey, thanks for the barnstar and invitation. As far as molluscs go, most of my contributions are on cephalopods, but I do venture into bivalve and gastropod articles every now and again. Cheers, mgiganteus1 (talk) 06:06, 18 November 2012 (UTC) Hello Shellnut. What I have done with the duplicate article Cymatium muricinum is that I took the little bit of extra info (and the extra reference) and added those to the Gutturnium muricinum article, and then I made the older article into a redirect page. If you don't know quite how to do that, let me know and I will explain it to you. It is useful to know. Best wishes and Happy Thankskgiving, Invertzoo (talk) 16:23, 22 November 2012 (UTC)
About the imagesThe shell that is shown in the taxobox at the top looks quite atypical for this species because it shows a less-than adult individual that was in a growth stage between varices when it died. The shell shows evidence that there was a thin body wall that had already formed and which had already reached part of the way towards another resting point, another varix-to-be, but the animal died before that could be achieved, and the existing thin shell material was accidentally broken off, back to the previous varix, very soon after. The varix that is now showing at the aperture of the shell was not the final adult varix, so it was not very thick and is more or less completely without the adult callus. In this species, when the final adult varix forms, the shell stops growing and the callus around the aperture gradually gets thicker and thicker, and whiter and whiter, until you get the appearance that is shown in your other photo, of form antillarum. Best Invertzoo (talk) 17:03, 22 November 2012 (UTC) Checking new bot stubsHello Shellnut. I just wanted to say that when Ganesh said "Please review" about the Trochidae stubs (in that message on the gastropod project talk page), he was asking if you would quickly look over the new stubs to see if they are OK. Usually a bot run of new stubs goes off without any hitches at all, and usually every new stub is just perfect, but we do need to look and check to see if the whole run is OK or not. This time there were in fact a few minor odd little glitches here and there, as you can see in the notes that JoJan and I left for Ganesh on his talk page here. I myself did not go through all 250 of the new stubs. In any case I wanted to explain that we do need people to do that kind of checking as if we keep our new stubs immaculate, then we are more likely to keep getting our stub runs OKed in the future, which is very important to us. Best wishes, Invertzoo (talk) 22:29, 28 November 2012 (UTC)
Barnstar
January 2013 Barnstar
LinkHello Shellnut, Hope you are doing OK. I sent you a regular email about LinkedIn. Best, Invertzoo (talk) 20:10, 6 February 2013 (UTC) Hello ShellnutIt was nice to talk to you yesterday; glad you are doing well. Invertzoo (talk) 13:13, 29 August 2013 (UTC) Books and Bytes: The Wikipedia Library NewsletterBooks and Bytes
Volume 1, Issue 1, October 2013 Greetings Wikipedia Library members! Welcome to the inaugural edition of Books and Bytes, TWL’s monthly newsletter. We're sending you the first edition of this opt-in newsletter, because you signed up, or applied for a free research account: HighBeam, Credo, Questia, JSTOR, or Cochrane. To receive future updates of Books and Bytes, please add your name to the subscriber's list. There's lots of news this month for the Wikipedia Library, including new accounts, upcoming events, and new ways to get involved... New positions: Sign up to be a Wikipedia Visiting Scholar, or a Volunteer Wikipedia Librarian Wikipedia Loves Libraries: Off to a roaring start this fall in the United States: 29 events are planned or have been hosted. New subscription donations: Cochrane round 2; HighBeam round 8; Questia round 4... Can we partner with NY Times and Lexis-Nexis?? New ideas: OCLC innovations in the works; VisualEditor Reference Dialog Workshop; a photo contest idea emerges News from the library world: Wikipedian joins the National Archives full time; the Getty Museum releases 4,500 images; CERN goes CC-BY Announcing WikiProject Open: WikiProject Open kicked off in October, with several brainstorming and co-working sessions New ways to get involved: Visiting scholar requirements; subject guides; room for library expansion and exploration Thanks for reading! All future newsletters will be opt-in only. Have an item for the next issue? Leave a note for the editor on the Suggestions page. --The Interior 20:23, 27 October 2013 (UTC) The Wikipedia Library SurveyAs a subscriber to one of The Wikipedia Library's programs, we'd like to hear your thoughts about future donations and project activities in this brief survey. Thanks and cheers, Ocaasi t | c 15:02, 9 December 2013 (UTC) Happy Holidays
Happy New Year 2014Dear Shellnut, Our vision for Wikipedia is one of beauty, natural symmetry and light. I wish you a Happy New Year, everything good for your family, your loved ones and yourself, peace and joy for all the people of the world. I also wish a joyful and peaceful expansion for Wikipedia; may our encyclopedia make information and education available, without charge, to everyone in the world. This is an automated message from CorenSearchBot. I have performed a search with the contents of Dalliconus edpetuchi, and it appears to be very similar to another Wikipedia page: Conasprella edpetuchi. It is possible that you have accidentally duplicated contents, or made an error while creating the page— you might want to look at the pages and see if that is the case. If you are intentionally trying to rename an article, please see Help:Moving a page for instructions on how to do this without copying and pasting. If you are trying to move or copy content from one article to a different one, please see Wikipedia:Copying within Wikipedia and be sure you have acknowledged the duplication of material in an edit summary to preserve attribution history. It is possible that the bot is confused and found similarity where none actually exists. If that is the case, you can remove the tag from the article. CorenSearchBot (talk) 01:01, 5 March 2015 (UTC) |