In this case the article is licensed under CC BY-SA 4.0. Under this license you are able to copy this into Wikipedia however you're required to attribute the source and provide a link to the license.
I usually do page patrol, keeping the vandals out. Coming across your cladograms reminds me why I do that. As one eukaryote to another... Thanks. Kleuske (talk) 17:39, 27 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Hi. Thanks for creating the page Cryptodifflugia leachi. I have edited this page to use a {{Speciesbox}} in accordance with Wikipedia:Automated_taxobox_system/taxonomy_templates. If you have a read it says it is not normally necessary to create taxonomy templates for species or lower ranks and gives an explanation of the common cases for taxonomy template creation. The list of taxonomy templates that exist for species is here, which is essentially a list of special cases. Unnecessary taxonomy templates go here to await deletion. Thanks. YorkshireExpat (talk) 19:51, 14 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]
An article you recently created, Rhopalophora (beetle), is not suitable as written to remain published. It needs more citations from reliable, independent sources. (?) Information that can't be referenced should be removed (verifiability is of central importance on Wikipedia). I've moved your draft to draftspace (with a prefix of "Draft:" before the article title) where you can incubate the article with minimal disruption. When you feel the article meets Wikipedia's general notability guideline and thus is ready for mainspace, please click on the "Submit your draft for review!" button at the top of the page. Hitro talk08:50, 15 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]
If you think this page should not be deleted for this reason you may contest the nomination by visiting the page and clicking the button labelled "Contest this speedy deletion". This will give you the opportunity to explain why you believe the page should not be deleted. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag from the page yourself. LizRead!Talk!01:25, 23 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
To reply, leave a comment here and begin it with {{Re|SunDawn}}. Please remember to sign your reply with ~~~~. (Message delivered via the Page Curation tool, on behalf of the reviewer.)
It's difficult to know exactly what to do about Template:Taxonomy/Ochrophyta. I agree that it should ideally not be set to be the same as Template:Taxonomy/Ochrophytina. But the problem is that there are articles with taxoboxes that use Template:Taxonomy/Ochrophyta that therefore show the hierarchy Phylum Gyrista – Subphylum Ochrophytina, so that if a simple change is made as you did, all their taxoboxes will change, which may not be what is intended. Also we can't end up with the hierarchy Phylum Gyrista – Phylum Ochrophyta. I created Template:Taxonomy/Ochrophyta/Phylum to deal with cases where the hierarchy should run Heterokonta – Phylum Ochrophyta.
@Peter coxhead What do you mean it shouldn't be the same? Ochrophytina is the new treatment for ochrophytes, the hierarchy should be Heterokont - Phylum Gyrista - Subphylum Ochrophytina. I strongly disagree with maintaining two different taxonomies in different articles. There's no need to maintain an old outdated one as far as I've seen. Can you link me to an example of an article that, according to you, requires Ochrophyta instead of Ochrophytina? ☽ Snoteleks ☾ ☽ Snoteleks ☾ 10:04, 16 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
I'm not saying that either hierarchy should be used (it's not an area where I have any up-to-date knowledge), merely that if you change a taxonomy template it propagates to all the articles that use it. If you are sure that this is correct, then the correct procedure is not to try to make Template:Taxonomy/Ochrophyta the same as Template:Taxonomy/Ochrophytina, but to change the taxoboxes and taxonomy templates that use Template:Taxonomy/Ochrophyta to use Template:Taxonomy/Ochrophytina.
Look at Template:Taxonomy/Pelagophyceae for example. This contains |parent=Ochrophyta, referenced to WoRMS, which has Phylum Ochrophyta. If you believe that this is the wrong hierarchy, then change Template:Taxonomy/Pelagophyceae to have |parent=Ochrophytina, with a reference.
At present, it's a total muddle, since many taxonomy templates have their parent set to Phylum Ochrophyta but display Subphylum Ochrophytina. It's what results from trying to redirect taxonomy templates, instead of fixing them properly by changing the parent of the subordinates. My actions are just a temporary fix to prevent Phylum Gyrista – Phylum Ochrophyta appearing anywhere. Peter coxhead (talk) 10:30, 16 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
These are the taxonomy templates where you need to change the parent and reference if you want use Subphylum Ochrophytina:
You would also need to check that the articles affected don't say anything about Phylum Ochrophyta. I repeat that I have no view on whether this change should be made or not. Peter coxhead (talk) 10:39, 16 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
No, no, no! You must not move taxonomy templates! Those you've moved need to be moved back. If you don't understand how taxonomy templates work, please ask first. You can change the parent, fine, but the title of the taxonomy template and the taxon it points to MUST match. Peter coxhead (talk) 16:27, 16 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
@Peter coxhead But I'm also changing the taxon it points to, though. Is that still a problem? I'm not moving any template without also moving the taxon page it links to, and every taxobox seems fine after the two changes. ☽ Snoteleks ☾ 16:29, 16 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
How do I point to the new one? Do I just write "|same_as="? Does this have the same effect as a page move and redirect? Also, for future reference, what do I do if a taxon that has a template goes defunct? ☽ Snoteleks ☾ 16:41, 16 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Ok, let's take a simple example. Family Xidae has a taxonomy template at "Template:Taxonomy/Xidae" with |rank=familia. It gets reduced to the subfamily Xinae. So you first create a NEW taxonomy template at "Template:Taxonomy/Xinae" with |rank=subfamilia. Then you find all the taxonomy templates that have |parent=Xidae and change them to have |parent=Xinae. NO taxonomy templates are moved. When there are no uses of "Template:Taxonomy/Xidae" and if you are sure it won't ever be used again, then you blank it, replacing all the content by "Category:Unnecessary taxonomy templates". (An admin occasionally deletes the contents of this category.)
|same_as= is meant for very special cases where the same taxon is used in different ways in different hierarchies. The taxonomy template with |same_as= will have the same link as the one pointed to, but some other difference, and a qualified name. Peter coxhead (talk) 17:07, 16 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
No problem; the automated taxonomy system and taxonomy templates are complex. A key point is that a taxonomy template called "Template:Taxonomy/X" (or "Template:Taxonomy/X/qualifier") should display the name "X" in the taxobox and link to the article at "X".
Hello! Voting in the 2022 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23:59 (UTC) on Monday, 12 December 2022. 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.
If you think this page should not be deleted for this reason you may contest the nomination by visiting the page and clicking the button labelled "Contest this speedy deletion". This will give you the opportunity to explain why you believe the page should not be deleted. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag from the page yourself. LizRead!Talk!01:18, 1 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Please do not remove all of the contents of a category so it is tagged for speedy deletion, CSD C1, as an empty category. This is called "emptying categories out of process" and can be seen as disruptive editing and your edits reverted.
If you believe a category should be deleted, merged or renamed, please nominate it at Categories for Discussion. These deletion discussions are even more important with categories than articles because categories are interconnected and exist in a categorical hierarchy. Changes or deletion of a category could affect similar categories that might also warrant deletion or renaming. The editors who are regulars at CFD have an almost encyclopedic memory of how different groups of categories are structured so they are an invaluable resource if you are interested in recategorization a field. Please take the time to make use of CFD in the future. Thank you. LizRead!Talk!03:44, 31 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
I guess I should specify that I'm talking about long-existing categories that were created by other editors. If you created a category and decide that it was made in error, there is no problem with emptying it and blanking the page. LizRead!Talk!04:00, 31 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
@Liz Okay, I understand. I won't do this again, I see it is disruptive especially without asking around. Should I revert the edits I did? ☽ Snoteleks ☾ 06:28, 31 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Hello! Thanks for writing this article. I encourage and hope you will write more! Have a good day!
To reply, leave a comment here and begin it with {{Re|SunDawn}}. Please remember to sign your reply with ~~~~. (Message delivered via the Page Curation tool, on behalf of the reviewer.)
Thanks for all your work on this article. I have a fixed a few more links to disambiguation pages but there are quite a few more where I couldn't work out from the context the correct article, so I have tagged these. Could you take another look as you obviously have the specialised knowledge in this area which I lack.— Rodtalk15:38, 4 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]
You can highlight links to dab pages by going to your "preferences" (drop down menu top right), choose the "gadgets" tab & scroll down to "Appearance" & put a tick next to "Display links to disambiguation pages in orange".— Rodtalk09:03, 5 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Oooh I had no idea, I was only able to see it reflected on the edit history of the page. Thank you, this is incredibly useful. ☽ Snoteleks ☾ 09:27, 6 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Um, sorry to have to mention this but I've come across a couple of articles lately where you've left cladograms totally unformatted, i.e. the cladotext is just one indigestible lump. This does make editing and maintenance very difficult; I've formatted some of the trees for you, but it would be much appreciated if you could indent them with linebreaks to make them readily maintainable. Many thanks, Chiswick Chap (talk) 15:58, 7 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]
@Chiswick Chap What do you mean by my attention? I thought the person nominating the article had to wait for it to be reviewed as a good article. It is my first time doing this, am I missing something? ☽ Snoteleks ☾ 09:46, 8 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Ah, right. Well, I have written my review, which is on the GAN page, linked above. The idea is that you, the nominator, then respond to each item individually (WP:GAN/I#N4). When the reviewer is satisfied that all the items have been actioned appropriately, the GA is passed.
The article Vampyrellida you nominated as a good article has passed ; see Talk:Vampyrellida for comments about the article, and Talk:Vampyrellida/GA1 for the nomination. Well done! If the article has not already appeared on the main page as a "Did you know" item, or as a bold link under "In the News" or in the "On This Day" prose section, you can nominate it within the next seven days to appear in DYK. Bolded names with dates listed at the bottom of the "On This Day" column do not affect DYK eligibility. Message delivered by ChristieBot, on behalf of Chiswick Chap -- Chiswick Chap (talk) 14:42, 9 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]
That's wonderful, thank you so much! Could I suggest this: "... that there are microorganisms known as vampire amoebae(example pictured), named after their vampire-like feeding mechanism?" ☽ Snoteleks ☾ 13:46, 12 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]
On 5 May 2023, Did you know was updated with a fact from the article Vampyrellida, which you recently created, substantially expanded, or brought to good article status. The fact was ... that vampire amoebae are naked? The nomination discussion and review may be seen at Template:Did you know nominations/Vampyrellida. You are welcome to check how many pageviews the nominated article or articles got while on the front page (here's how, Vampyrellida), and the hook may be added to the statistics page after its run on the Main Page has completed. 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.
The article Cafileria you nominated as a good article has passed ; see Talk:Cafileria for comments about the article, and Talk:Cafileria/GA1 for the nomination. Well done! If the article has not already appeared on the main page as a "Did you know" item, or as a bold link under "In the News" or in the "On This Day" prose section, you can nominate it within the next seven days to appear in DYK. Bolded names with dates listed at the bottom of the "On This Day" column do not affect DYK eligibility. Message delivered by ChristieBot, on behalf of Chiswick Chap -- Chiswick Chap (talk) 08:20, 5 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]
On 20 May 2023, Did you know was updated with a fact from the article Cafileria, which you recently created, substantially expanded, or brought to good article status. The fact was ... that the microscopic organism Cafileria is the only living being that connects its nucleus to its mitochondria? The nomination discussion and review may be seen at Template:Did you know nominations/Cafileria. You are welcome to check how many pageviews the nominated article or articles got while on the front page (here's how, Cafileria), and the hook may be added to the statistics page after its run on the Main Page has completed. 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.
For your absolutely amazing work at WikiProject Protista. I'm normally hanging around WikiProject Insects and WP:GA, and came across your work browsing the backlong. For an editor who's only been around for two years or so, you're work is amazing quality. Keep it up!!!
The article Syssomonas you nominated as a good article has passed ; see Talk:Syssomonas for comments about the article, and Talk:Syssomonas/GA1 for the nomination. Well done! If the article has not already appeared on the main page as a "Did you know" item, or as a bold link under "In the News" or in the "On This Day" prose section, you can nominate it within the next seven days to appear in DYK. Bolded names with dates listed at the bottom of the "On This Day" column do not affect DYK eligibility. Message delivered by ChristieBot, on behalf of Etriusus -- Etriusus (talk) 20:02, 22 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Did you intend to an outcome where domain Eukaryota is displayed for all animal and fungus taxa when you made that edit request to the taxonomy template? If that was not your intention, I guess that at least Breviatea and Apusomonadida should be linked into the taxonomy template Template:Taxonomy/Amorphea/showdomain (and any other opisthokonts that aren't strictly fungi/animals), and the main Amorphea taxonomy template shouldn't have been edited in the first place. If you did intend to show the domain for animals and fungi, that should be discussed more broadly (Template:Taxonomy/Eukaryota/displayed is pointless if there is a consensus to always display a domain for plants, animals and fungi). Plantdrew (talk) 03:24, 30 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]
EDIT TO ADD: I had forgotten that Template:Taxonomy/Amorphea/showdomain was something I created. I have no objections to renaming that template in some way or deprecating it in favor of another solution, but displaying Eukaryota in taxoboxes for animals and fungi hasn't been standard practice on Wikipedia and should be discussed at WP:TOL if it is intended to be standard practice going forward. Plantdrew (talk) 03:36, 30 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]
@Plantdrew This actually started because of a GA review for Syssomonas where the reviewer asked me to show the domain in the taxobox. I didn't know that Template:Taxonomy/Amorphea/showdomain existed, so I checked the TSAR template and saw that the way the domain is shown is through a /display addition. So yes, my intention was to display the domain Eukaryota. However, now that you mention it, I didn't realize that obviously this outcome would display the domain in all animal and fungal taxoboxes. I just wanted it to be displayed in protist taxoboxes. I wouldn't oppose its display on animal and fungi taxoboxes. I will consult WP:TOL to see if they agree. If not, I would like to find a way to only display it in all protist pages, like the TSAR pages. —Snoteleks 🦠08:27, 30 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]
August 2023 Good Article Nominations backlog drive
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 article Holozoa you nominated as a good article has passed ; see Talk:Holozoa for comments about the article, and Talk:Holozoa/GA1 for the nomination. Well done! If the article has never appeared on the Main Page as a "Did you know" item, and has not appeared within the last year either as "Today's featured article", or as a bold link under "In the news" or in the "On this day" prose section, you can nominate it within the next seven days to appear at DYK. Bolded names with dates listed at the bottom of the "On this day" column do not affect DYK eligibility. Message delivered by ChristieBot, on behalf of Esculenta -- Esculenta (talk) 23:01, 7 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Autoconfirmed rights
Hi, Snoteleks. I was wondering if you have considered applying for WP:AUTOPATROLLED rights. Generally speaking you need at least 25 articles created in order to gain this privilege, and you seem to be quite a prolific editor with plenty of experience and quite a few articles created. It would not help you much per se except to save you the notification that your article has been reviewed and to automatically release your new articles for search engine indexing, but it would also help the new page review backlog. I'm almost certain you would be granted it given your editing history, and to my understanding the privilege stays with you indefinitely. It's of course up to you; it's still always good to have another pair of eyes on a new article. All the best, TheTechnician27(Talk page)23:01, 12 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Hey @TheTechnician27, thank you for reaching out to me about this! I have not considered it until now, since I was never bothered by the notifications. However, knowing now that it would save a lot of time at the backlog, I definitely will apply. Thanks so much, —Snoteleks (Talk)07:05, 13 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks so much! It usually takes a couple days, but I'm confident you'll get accepted for it. The main benefit both for you and the project at large is that your new articles will immediately get released for indexing by search engines. That is, once you publish an article with autopatrolled rights, you'll immediately be able to see it show up on search engines like DuckDuckGo, Google, Bing, etc. TheTechnician27(Talk page)17:12, 13 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Hello, Snoteleks. Your account has been granted the "extendedmover" user right, either following a request for it or demonstrating familiarity with working with article names and moving pages. You are now able to rename pages without leaving behind a redirect, move subpages when moving the parent page(s), and move category pages.
Please take a moment to review Wikipedia:Page mover for more information on this user right, especially the criteria for moving pages without leaving a redirect. Please remember to follow post-move cleanup procedures and make link corrections where necessary, including broken double-redirects when suppressredirect is used. This can be done using Special:WhatLinksHere. It is also very important that no one else be allowed to access your account, so you should consider taking a few moments to secure your password. As with all user rights, be aware that if abused, or used in controversial ways without consensus, your page mover status can be revoked.
Hi Snoteleks, I just wanted to let you know that I have added the autopatrolled user right to your account. This means that pages you create will automatically be marked as 'reviewed', and no longer appear in the new pages feed. Autopatrolled is assigned to prolific creators of articles, where those articles do not require further review, and may have been requested on your behalf by someone else. It doesn't affect how you edit; it is used only to manage the workload of new page patrollers.
Since the articles you create will no longer be systematically reviewed by other editors, it is important that you maintain the high standard you have achieved so far in all your future creations. Please also try to remember to add relevant WikiProject templates, stub tags, categories, and incoming links to them, if you aren't already in the habit; user scripts such as Rater and StubSorter can help with this. As you have already shown that you have a strong grasp of Wikipedia's core content policies, you might also consider volunteering to become a new page patroller yourself, helping to uphold the project's standards and encourage other good faith article writers.
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)
Chromosome scaffold, which you submitted to Articles for creation, has been created.
Congratulations, and thank you for helping expand the scope of Wikipedia! We hope you will continue making quality contributions.
The article has been assessed as Start-Class, which is recorded on its talk page. Most new articles start out as Stub-Class or Start-Class and then attain higher grades as they develop over time. You may like to take a look at the grading scheme to see how you can improve the article.
Since you have made at least 10 edits over more than four days, you can now create articles yourself without posting a request. However, you may continue submitting work to Articles for creation if you prefer.
If you have any questions, you are welcome to ask at the help desk. Once you have made at least 10 edits and had an account for at least four days, you will have the option to create articles yourself without posting a request to Articles for creation.
WikiProject Articles for creation is holding a month long Backlog Drive!
The goal of this drive is to reduce the backlog of unreviewed drafts to less than 2 months outstanding reviews from the current 4+ months. Bonus points will be given for reviewing drafts that have been waiting more than 30 days. The drive is running from 1 November 2023 through 30 November 2023.
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)
I noticed you tried to take Kingdom of misfits to Redirects for Discussion. Initiating some of the formal discussion processes on Wikipedia (such as RfD) often entails making edits to multiple pages and substituting different templates. There's a tool called Twinkle that makes it much easier to initiate formal discussions with a single edit (Twinkle makes the other necessary edits for you). It can be enabled in Preferences->Gadgets->Browsing. Plantdrew (talk) 22:52, 14 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]
DYK for Hyalospheniidae
On 27 November 2023, Did you know was updated with a fact from the article Hyalospheniidae, which you recently created, substantially expanded, or brought to good article status. The fact was ... that many hyalospheniid amoebae(example pictured) construct shells by stealing mineralized particles from the shells of their prey? The nomination discussion and review may be seen at Template:Did you know nominations/Hyalospheniidae. You are welcome to check how many pageviews the nominated article or articles got while on the front page (here's how, Hyalospheniidae), and the hook may be added to the statistics page after its run on the Main Page has completed. 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.
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)
Hi Snoteleks, just touching base from Australia. I noticed your extensive re-working of Taxonomy of Protista per the Adl et al., 2019 treatment for which you deserve appreciation for the effort involved (which is largely thankless as I know...). I have made a comment or 2 on the "talk" page for that article regarding possibly including more on the alternative kingdom level treatment of protists as implemented at CoL, GBIF, etc. which you may to comment on further; I can always add something to the article to cover this aspect if you wish, or of course feel free to do so as well. Best regards - Tony Rees, IRMNG (my production for the past 18 years, hopefully to give away at some point!!) Tony 1212 (talk) 00:32, 16 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Hi Snoteleks (real name if you wish??), I did a very brief pass through your impressive "Adl et al. plus later work" section, at this stage just looking for things that I did not have in my own holdings (currently doing a bit of an update for the period 2015-2022 in the main, making updates, additions as needed; I have many of the required new names from ION and AlgaeBase, but not all are yet added in). During this process I notices a few issues where I have 1 thing that I believe is correct, you have another, which I set down below for your perusal and possible incorporation if you agree! Probably not a complete list since I only looked at portions of your work that pertain to 2013 and later, but some things of interest here, hopefully! Best - Tony
However note:
- Spironematellidae is a replacement name for Spironemidae (and probably should have authorship Silva, 1970, who created it under the botanical Code ("Spironematellceae"); I believe the authorship still stands if the name is used as a zoological taxon); Spironemidae is invalid (based on a preoccupied genus name)
- Spironema in Hemimastigophora (author is Klebs, 1892) is a preoccupied name in botany (Spironema Rafinesque, 1838 in Lauraceae and Spironema Lindley, 1840 in Commelinaceae) and in zoology (Spironema Meek, 1864, a fossil mollusc); replacement name is Spironematella
Thus both Hemimastix and Stereonema should be placed in Spironematellidae, also (if you do this) Spironema included as a syn. of Spironematella, and Spironemidae as a syn. of Spironematellidae.
Agogonidae Galindo, Prokina, Torruella, López-García & Moreira 2022. Agogonia.[95]
- year is 2023 according to published work at https://academic.oup.com/gbe/article/15/4/evad058/7111303 (authors erroneously use 2022 in text, for new taxa)
Colpodellida Cavalier-Smith 1993, emend. Adl et al. 2005, 2019 - maybe add note that in AlgaeBase (botanical treatment) this order is currently treated as the botanical order Colpodellales within its own phylum Chromeridophyta, class Colpodellophyceae and subclass Colpodellophycidae. Includes Chromerida (for the photosynthetic species only), the latter used as order sin Ruggiero et al., 2015 and some more recent works.
Colpodellaceae Adl et al., 2019 - authority should possibly be Simpson & Patterson, 1996 (original publication in zoology, as Colpodellidae; authorship transfers unchanged when botanical names are used in zoology)
"Aquavolonida Bass & Berney 2018. Aquavolon, Lapot gusevi.[67]" - Lapot is a genus, does not need specific name attached.
"Pluriformea[d] Hehenberger et al. 2017
Corallochytrium limacisporium Raghu-Kumar 1987
Syssomonas multiformis[d] Tikhonenkov, Hehenberger, Mylnikov & Keeling 2017"
- similarly, don't need species epithts, just genera
"Stramenopiles incertae sedis:
Environmental clades MAST-21, MAST-25 Massana et al. 2014
Platysulcus tardus Shiratori, Nakayama & Ishida 2015
Kaonashia insperata Weston, Eglit & Simpson 2023[35]"
- don't need to cite species; Platysulcus is in Platysulcidae; Kaonashia is in Kaonashiidae
Oblongichytrida Bennett et al. 2017. Oblongichytrium.
- suggest putting Oblongichytrida in quotes, as per original work, since there it is a provisional grouping, not formally defined
Flamellidae Cavalier-Smith 2016
- according to my records, Cavalier-Smith was incorrect in listing this as fam. nov.; it was already named, by Lahr & Katz in Lahr et al., 2011 (Lahr, D. J. G.; Grant, J.; Nguyen, T.; Lin, J. H.; Katz, L. A. (2011). Comprehensive phylogenetic reconstruction of Amoebozoa based on concatenated analyses of SSU-rDNA and actin genes. PLoS ONE. 6(7): e22780., available online at https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0022780)
Gymnodiniales F. Stein 1878 - lacking families
Torodiniales Boutrup, Moestrup & Daugbjerg 2016 - same
Gonyaulacales Taylor 1980 - same
Peridiniales Haeckel 1894 - same
Dinophysales Kofoid 1926 - same
Prorocentrales Lemmermann 1910 - same
-you can maybe get these from IRMNG, e.g. for Gonyaulacales see https://www.irmng.org/aphia.php?p=taxdetails&id=10358 (includes some genera not allocated to family), plus https://www.irmng.org/aphia.php?p=taxdetails&id=115060 - however maybe print (non database) sources might be better - but I can see it would be a big effort!!
Gilchristidae Ito, Ishihara & Imai 2014. Gilchristia.
- Gilchristidae Ito, Ishihara & Imai 2014 should read Gilchristinidae Ito, Ishihara & Imai 2014 (previously Gilchristidae). Gilchristia should read Gilchristina (=nom. nov. for Gilchristia, preoccupied)
- Digilchristia is a second genus in Gilchristinidae, per original description, also http://oakorn.ru/articles/Rhinozeta.pdfTony 1212 (talk) 19:24, 23 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Hi Tony! Thanks for noticing me of all of these. Snoteleks is fine, no worries; you can also call me William, the english version of my real name. I appreciate your efforts on that page so much. I will do what I can to include them.
About Hemimastigophora, I had no idea it was supposed to be a replacement name for the first family. I must have completely skimmed through the paper and not actually read it. Thanks for pointing this out. I also partly fixed the pertaining hemimastigote articles.
Fixed Agogonidae date.
Added Triassothamnidae and some of Entactinaria with it, but there are still a lot more fossil families (and other orders) to add.
That is so strange, this is the first time I hear of Chromeridophyta and such names. Thanks for the notice.
Agreed that the authority should remain as Simpson & Patterson 1996, but I am too weary so I will just put it as a synonym.
Fixed Lapot.
Fixed pluriformean genera, as well as Bicellum, which was also written as species and not genus.
Again I did not notice that Kaonashia had its own family. Fixed both.
Placed Oblongichytrida in quotes.
Good eye. Fixed authority of Flamellidae. Weirdly enough, this is not the time Cavalier-Smith assigned himself as the author of something he did not describe in the first place.
Yeah, the dinoflagellates need a lot of work. I hope I can get around adding all the families soon.
Hi Snoteleks, no worries, multiple eyes can spot things one pair can miss... also as you will appreciate, I only looked at a subset of your entries. It is a big and brave task to maintain this page, you have my compliments! I try to maintain my own database of 500k+ genus names (maybe 300k valid taxa), for "all life", however in parts it is still waiting for attention for the most recent changes/new names to be added (currently around 70% through a "catch up" task for recently published zoological genus + subgenus names as recorded in ION, for the period 2015-2022 approx).
As an aside, I was pleased to note that one of your cited recent references, for Raphidocystidae Zlatogursky 2018 (DOI: 10.1016/j.ejop.2018.03.006) cites my own work from 1980 - just 44 years ago now! (my paper was Rees, A.J.J., Donaldson, D.A., Leedale, G.F., 1980. Morphology of the scales of the freshwater heliozoan Raphidocystis tubifera (Heliozoa, Centrohelidia) and organization of the intact scale layer. Protistologica 26, 565—570). Funny how things come around!! I was 27 at the time, the work came from my Ph.D thesis, which was mostly on freshwater microalgae, but a few non-algal protists crept in as well... Gordon Leedale (Euglenoid expert) was my supervisor back in the day.
I am happy to receive notice of any changes/additions needed to my own holdings as well, not that you will probably have the time to look there (www.irmng.org) - you can leave notes for me at https://species.wikimedia.org/wiki/User_talk:Tony_1212 if you ever need to. I am sure to have the odd error or things that have changed since making/importing relevant records from elsewhere.
What an honor to be working with an actual protistologist! And your IRMNG maintenance must be a lot of hard work, it is admirable. I don't normally visit databases but perhaps for diatoms and dinoflagellates it will come in handy, so I will make sure to leave notes for you if I have any questions. Thanks a lot. —Snoteleks (Talk)13:02, 24 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)
Hi Snoteleks! I noticed you have some more articles at GAN, which is great. It would also be great if you are able to do some reviews as well, since you have a lot of experience with taxa articles now. I'd be happy to review Chrompodellid or Parvilucifera if you are able to review another Biology/Medicine GAN as well. I can also help you through the review or provide a second set of eyes if you'd like, the first review is definitely the hardest. Just let me know! Fritzmann (message me) 15:04, 28 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Hello there! I would like to start reviewing other GANs, it would be helpful for everyone. I haven't had much time lately but I will check the Biology/Medicine GANs for ones that could interest me. Thanks for suggesting this to me. —Snoteleks (Talk)15:57, 28 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
For your first GA review, and another successful promotion with Parvilucifera, congratulations! Thank you for your continued hard work in improving the quality of diverse organisms on Wikipedia. Fritzmann (message me) 19:29, 4 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
On 15 April 2024, Did you know was updated with a fact from the article Ochrophyte, which you recently created, substantially expanded, or brought to good article status. The fact was ... that ochrophyte algae have twice as many membranes around their chloroplasts as plants? The nomination discussion and review may be seen at Template:Did you know nominations/Ochrophyte. You are welcome to check how many pageviews the nominated article or articles got while on the front page (here's how, Ochrophyte), and the hook may be added to the statistics page after its run on the Main Page has completed. 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.
@Liz, I apologize for so many speedy deletions suddenly. Yesterday I tried to do a Category redirect for all those pages, several times, but Wikipedia has seen me do it too many times and it started mistaking me for a bot. A red text message popped up in the edit page, telling me that I had to wait some time before trying to redirect another category. Any ideas how I could fix this? — Snoteleks (talk)21:07, 17 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
That's a new one for me. I've never heard of that. Do you know how to create a category redirect as opposed to an article redirect? It's {{category redirect|Category:Target category}}.
I actually came to your talk page to warn you about emptying categories "out of process" rather than taking them to WP:CFD to be considered for deletion, renaming or merging. Is this an issue? LizRead!Talk!02:31, 18 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
@Liz Yes, that's the template I have been using. I tried to redirect again and it looks like the cooldown period ended, because it finally lets me save the page. It's definitely a new one for me too. To be fair, I have been mass-redirecting categories for the past few days, perhaps Wikipedia has an automatic detection mechanism for such occurrences incase they are bots. — Snoteleks (talk)11:26, 18 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Yes, I noticed this yesterday, but thank you for pointing it out. I initially was not aware of the Category:Trebouxiophyceae genera or other class-level categories. I have to move the genera to said categories instead of the general Category:Chlorophyta genera. — Snoteleks (talk)10:55, 23 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
As far as I can tell, all articles of Spirocuta and its children taxa only refer to the Spirocuta/clade template. No articles exist for the obsolete taxa Heteronematina and Peranemea. — Snoteleks (talk)22:37, 28 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)
Hi there, I'm pleased to inform you that I've begun reviewing the article Rapaza 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 ChristieBot, on behalf of Esculenta -- Esculenta (talk) 01:22, 8 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
@Wolverine XI Thank you for reviewing it! I must say I'm confused though, I don't remember working on the GAN talk, or noticing that the GAN review ever began. I will check if the article follows your recommendations/criticisms. — Snoteleks (talk)17:35, 22 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Disambiguation link notification for August 27
An automated process has detected that when you recently edited Chlorophyta, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Coccoid.
Eumycota as "cladistically included but traditionally excluded taxa" is misinterpretation. Opisthosporidias definition (doi 10.3389/fmicb.2014.00112) was not cladistic, but includes following statements:
superphylum includes three phyla: Microsporidia, Cryptomycota and Aphelida
they are not fungi – it is a group of Opisthokonta, sister to Fungi
It could be transformed into a cladistic definition (≈ a clade that includes Rozella allomycis, Aphelidium deformans, Glugea weissenbergi but not Agaricus campestris) but it would be a not allowed "original research".
The statement Eumycota is cladistically included into Opisthosporidia is also an "original research", changing the definition of the taxon.
The thing is, cladistically Opisthosporidia does form a paraphyletic group toward Eumycota. Aphelida is more closely related to Eumycota, while Cryptomycota and Microsporidia are a separate clade (see: any phylogenetic analysis, including the one present in the Opisthosporidia article).
The template {{Paraphyletic group}} is used correctly in this context. It is intended to be used for paraphyletic groups, where the |includes parameter is what the paraphyletic group actually contains (for example, Crustacea includes all the crustacean classes), and the |excludes parameter is what its monophyletic counterpart contains (for example, Crustacea excludes Hexapoda even though Hexapoda has evolved from crustaceans; the monophyletic counterpart would be Pancrustacea). — Snoteleks (talk)19:52, 10 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
I can only agree with all you wrote, but the problem is the text "Cladistically included but traditionally excluded taxa", which is not correct. Is it originated in the template? Is it applied to all paraphyletic groups? There are taxons which are defined cladistically, but later the supposed grouping appear paraphyletic/polyphyletic and the definition is invalid (innerly inconsistent) so such taxon is not existing – in such cases the problematic text is a complete nonsens, if applied.
Possible correct wording (I am not a native English speaker, language correction may be needed) "Taxa to be included to get a clade / to reach monophyly".
Btw. cladistically the taxon including all Microsporidia, Cryptomycota, Aphelida, and Eumycota is not Opisthosporidia but Fungi, see the cladistic (PhyloCode like) definition (doi:10.5598/imafungus.2018.09.02.05):
"Fungi R.T. Moore, Bot. Marina23: 371 (1980)
Definition: The smallest crown clade containing Rozella allomycis F.K. Faust 1937, Batrachochytrium dendrobatidis Longcore et al. 1999, Allomyces arbusculus E.J. Butler 1911, Entomophthora muscae (Cohn) Fresen.1856, Coemansia reversa Tiegh. & G. Le Monn. 1873, Rhizophagus intraradices (N.C. Schenck & G.S. Sm.) C. Walker & A. Schüßler 2010, Rhizopus oryzae Went & Prins. Geerl. 1895, Saccharomyces cerevisiae Meyen 1838, and Coprinopsis cinerea (Schaeff.) Redhead et al. 2001. This is a minimum-crown-clade definition." --Petr Karel (talk) 07:45, 11 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
It is indeed something originated by the template itself, and is meant to apply to all paraphyletic groups with said template. I think the best solution is to ask in the template talk that the text be changed to "Cladistically excluded" instead of "Cladistically included but traditionally excluded", since I agree it is very confusing otherwise. — Snoteleks (talk)18:03, 11 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Protist: TSAR
I would be careful with TSAR, at least in formulations ("probable hypothesis" instead of fact). It is the result of analyses of one group of scientists and their citations by the same group (see the refs in SAR supergroup and Telonemia, documenting that TSAR "is widely accepted by the scientific community"). Do you know any analysis of an independent group, confirming this clade? I would appreciate it, but the history of placing many orphan groups into the eukarytic cladogram made me sceptical.
@Petr Karel Good point. It is true that Telonemia is not often included in analyses. I did see an analysis that recovered TSAR, from a different group of scientists (doi:10.1038/s41586-018-0708-8), but another (albeit not yet peer-reviewed) did not have the same result (doi:10.21203/rs.3.rs-5059906/v1). I am definitely considering moving Telonemia into the orphan section and changing the title of this section to SAR, just to be safe, but maybe it could stay this way until it is disproven by a peer-reviewed analysis. In any case, thanks for bringing this into my attention, and for the feedback in general, much appreciated! — Snoteleks (talk)16:39, 13 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
ArbCom 2024 Elections voter message
Hello! Voting in the 2024 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23:59 (UTC) on Monday, 2 December 2024. 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.
.jpg)
_(20536251169).jpg)
.jpg)
,_El-Al_river_(cropped).jpg)
.jpg)
.jpg)
.jpg)
.jpg)
.jpg)
.jpg)
.jpg)
