 | This user is busy with some real life headaches for the next few days and and may not respond swiftly to queries. |
[edit] More unIDed fungi
G'day Cas,
I've been frogging over the past few days, and the fungi season has definitely started! I have a coral fungi that I thought you would like for wiki, plus I also have a puff ball which I will upload later, will leave a message here when it is uploaded. Saw lots of fungi over the last few days, but only photographed the really interesting ones as I was using my small memory card, and wanted to leave some space for frogs.
http://www.flickr.com/photos/52507572@N00/465979784/?rotated=1&cb=1177065560324
Thanks. --liquidGhoul 10:41, 20 April 2007 (UTC)
- There was another nearby (about half a metre) which was 8cm tall, so I would go with Ramaria lorithamnus. It was taken in rainforest, was very little Eucalypt around. Do you want me to upload it to wiki? Thanks. --liquidGhoul 11:38, 20 April 2007 (UTC)
[edit] Nomenclature of fungi
Hey there. I recently stumbled across an issue of Nova Hedwigia Beheift titled "the genera of fungi" (or was it agaricaceae?). It's filled to the brink with mind-numbing nomenclatural discussions of all the genera ever described (I think, anyway). Would it be any use if I looked up the specific ref or any specific genera? Circeus 00:20, 14 June 2007 (UTC)
- That would be friggin' trés bién. The first one that would be absolutely great to get a clarification on is Agaricus which was called Psalliota in many texts fro many years and I've been mystified as to why. Other articles I intend cleaning up are Amanita muscaria, which is the one I intended taking to FA first but it just didn't come together well, Gyromitra esculenta as a future FA, Agaricus bisporus as a future FA, and cleaning up the destroying angels - Amanita virosa, Amanita bisporiga and Amanita verna. Boletus edulis would be a good one to check too. let me know if anything interesting pops up. I'll see ifd I can think of any other taxonomic quagmires later today. Work just got real busy :( cheers, Cas Liber | talk | contribs 02:01, 14 June 2007 (UTC)
- Generally, that's pretty arcane and only relevant to genus articles, or species that were tightly involving in defining them (for example, there seems to be an odd debate over the multiple type species for Amanita). I'll look up Agaricus, Amanita (since A. muscaria's the current type) and Psalliota. I'll also dig up the ref so you can look it up yourself, with any chance. Circeus 04:52, 14 June 2007 (UTC)
- Cool, keen to see what pops up. cheers, Cas Liber | talk | contribs 05:17, 14 June 2007 (UTC)
- I only quickly thumbed through it and noted the full ref (Donk, M.A. (1962). "The generic names proposed for Agaricaceae". Beiheifte zur Nova Hedwigia 5: 1-320. ISSN 0078-2238. ) because I forgot about it until the last minute. Psalliota looks like a classic synonym case. It shares the same type with Agaricus, and might be older. Circeus 01:02, 16 June 2007 (UTC)
-
- Weird! I thought Linnaeus was calling all sorts of things Agaricus so I wonder how it could predate that really....anyway I am curious.cheers, Casliber (talk · contribs) 02:46, 16 June 2007 (UTC)
Okay, First thing I have to say is... Damn, 18th-19th century taxonomy and nomenclature of fungi is a right mess. Whose bright idea was it to give fungi 3 starting dates in the ICBN???
LOTS of "per" in citation here. See [1]
- On Agaricus
- Etym.: Possibly "from Agarica of Sarmatica, a district of Russia" (!). Note also Greek ἀγαρικ[1]όν "a sort of tree fungus" (There's been an Agaricon Adans. genus, treated by Donk in Persoonia 1:180)
- Donk says Linnaeus' name is devalidated (so that the proper author citation apparently is "L. per Fr., 1821") because Agaricus was not linked to Tournefort's name (Linnaeus places both Agaricus Dill. and Amanita Dill. in synonymy), but truely a replacement for Amanita Dill., which would require that A. quercinus, not A. campestris be the type. This question compounded by the fact that Fries himself used Agaricus roughly in Linnaeus' sense (which leads to issues with Amanita), and that A. campestris was eventually excluded from Agaricus by Karsten and was apparently in Lepiota at the time Donk wrote this, commenting that a type conservation might become necessary.
- All proposals to conserve Agaricus against Psalliota or vice versa have so far been considered superfluous.
- On Lepiota
- Etym. Probably greek λεπις, "scale"
- Basionym is Agaricus sect. Lepiota Pers. 1797, devalidated by later starting date, so the citation is (Pers.) per S.F.Gray. It was only described, without species, and covered an earlier mentioned, but unnamed group of ringed, non-volvate species, regardless of spore color. Fries restricted the genus to white-spored species, and made into a tribe, which was, like Amanita repeatedly raised to genus rank.
- The type is unclear. L. procera is considered the type (by Earle, 1909). Agaricus columbrinus (L. clypeolarus) was also suggested (by Singer, 1946) to avoid the many combination involved otherwise in splitting Macrolepiota, which include L. procera. Since both species had been placed into different genera prior to their selection (in Leucocoprinus and Mastocephalus respectively), Donk observes that a conservation will probably be needed, expressing support for Singer's emendation.
- On Psalliota
- Etym.: ψάλιον, "ring"
- Psalliota was first published by Fries (1821) as trib. Psalliota. The type is Agaricus campestris (widely accepted, except by Earle, who proposed A. cretaceus). Kummer (not Quélet, who merely excluded Stropharia) was the first to elevate the tribe to a genus. Basically, Psalliota was the tribe containing the type of Agaricus, so when separated, it should have caused the rest of the genus to be renamed, not what happened. It seems to be currently not considered valid, or a junior homotypic synonym, anyway the explanation is that it was raised by (in retrospect) erroneously maintaining the tribe name.
- On Amanita
- Etym.: Possibly from Amanon,a mountain in Cilicia.
A first incarnation from Tentamen dispositionis methodicae Fungorum 65. 1797 is cited as devalidated: "Introduced to cover three groups already previously distinguished by Persoon (in [...] Tent. 18. 1797) under Agaricus L., but at that time not named. It is worth stressing that [The species now known as Amanita caesarea] was not mentioned."
- With Agaricus L. in use, Amanita was a nomen nudum per modern standard, so Persoon gave it a new life unrelated to its previous incarnations, and that is finally published after a starting date by Hooker (the citation is Pers. per Hook., 1821). He reuses Withering's 1801 definition (A botanical arrangement of British plants, 4th ed.). "The name Amnita has been considered validly published on different occasions, depending on various considerations." Proposed types include (given as Amanita. Sometimes they were selected as Agarici):
- A. livida Pers. (By Earle, in 1909). Had been excluded in Vaginata or Amanitopsis and could not be chosen.
- A. muscaria Pers. (By Clemens & Shear, 1931) for the genus (1801) from Synopsis fungorum, was generally transferred to the one from Hooker's Flora of Scotland, which is currently considered the valid publication of Amanita (or was in the 50s).
- A. phalloides (by Singer, 1936) for the 1801 genus.
- A.bulbosa (by Singer & Smith, 1946) for Gray's republication. This is incorrect as Gray's A. bulbosa is a synonym of A. citrina. Some authors consider Gray to be the first valid republisher.
- A. caeserea (by Gilbert, 1940). Troublesome because not known personally to Persoon or Fries.
Donk concludes the earliest valid type is A. muscaria, the species in Hooker, adding that he'd personally favor A. citrina.
- The name has been republished three times in 1821: in Hooker, Roques and Gray (in that order). Roques maintained Persoon's circumscription, including Amanitopsis and Volvaria. Gray excluded Amanitopsis and Volvariella into Vaginata. Right after, Fries reset the name by reducing the genus to a tribe of Agaricus, minus pink-spored Volvariella. This tribe became a subgenus, than genus via various authors, Quélet, altough not the first, often being attributed the change. Sometimes it was used in a Persoonian sense (whether that is a correct use according to ICBN is not clear to me).
- Homonyms of Amanita Pers. are Amanita adans. (1763, devalidated) and Amanita (Dill) Rafin. (1830)
- On Boletus
- Not including (Not in Agaricaceae, sorry).
Phew! Circeus 18:52, 18 June 2007 (UTC)
- I hope you intend to clean that prose ASAP? It's definitely not article-worthy as is. Circeus 01:05, 20 June 2007 (UTC)
- I'm working on it. Got distracted this morning...cheers, Casliber (talk · contribs) 01:08, 20 June 2007 (UTC)
LOL, I love your sense of humour. Maimonedes is a good reference. The reality is that Islam takes food restrictions from Judaism; and Christianity doesn't have any restriction (courtesy of three references in the New Testament). The reason why pork should be restricted (along with many other things) is not given explicitly in the Hebrew Bible, hence Bible commentators have been offering guesses since ancient times. My own favourite, however, is Mary Douglas, wife of Louis Leakey, daughter of a Lutheran pastor. Her theory is excellent, based on her cultural anthropological observations, with a decent feel for how Biblical text works. It's rather an abstract theory though. Anyway, I'll see if I can manage a literature review of dietry restrictions in the ANE, especially if there's anything explicit about pork. Don't think I'll find a reference for "why" the pork taboo is in place, though, if it's documented, I'd have read about that in commentaries. Perhaps a clay tablet with the answer has been destroyed in only the last few years during the "troubles" in Iraq. :( Alastair Haines (talk) 21:27, 7 April 2008 (UTC)
-
- This is the great thing about uncertainty. Lacking an answer, the reports of Maimonides, Mary Douglas and the other guy mentioned are fascinating.Cheers, Casliber (talk · contribs) 22:15, 7 April 2008 (UTC)
-
-
- Scotish pork taboo is a remarkable article! Thanks for that, lol. Alastair Haines (talk) 21:59, 8 April 2008 (UTC)
Spotted this. I'll look for a ref to the Maimonides comment. The normal teaching is that pork is no more or less offensive to Jews than any other forbidden meat (dog, horse etc) or forbidden part of kosher animal (blood, Gid Hanasheh etc). The pig (NB pig, not pork - an important distinction which is relevant for the Maimonides comment too, I note) is "singled out" because it alone of the animals that have one of the two "signs" (it has split hooves but doesn't chew the cud) lies down with its legs sticking out. Most quarapeds have their legs folded under them. There's a midrashic lesson to be learned there, apparently, that the pig is immodestly and falsely proclaiming its religious cleanliness, when it is not. Anyway, that said, I'll look into the M comment - he was quite ahead of his time in terms of medical knowledge (check his biog). And NB my OR/POV antennae buzzed when I read that little section. --Dweller (talk) 22:52, 7 April 2008 (UTC)
- Someone has tagged the Religious restrictions on the consumption of pork for OR, though the talk page seems to indicate it is for a different reason....Cheers, Casliber (talk · contribs) 23:03, 7 April 2008 (UTC)
-
- Hmm... makes me more dubious, but I'll check. btw... I'm not Alastair! --Dweller (talk) 23:10, 7 April 2008 (UTC)
Have found good stuff, including online version of Maimonides text. I'll dump it here for you to use as you wish.
I maintain that the food which is forbidden by the Law is unwholesome. There is nothing among the forbidden kinds of food whose injurious character is doubted, except pork (Lev. xi. 7), and fat (ibid. vii. 23). But also in these cases the doubt is not justified. For pork contains more moisture than necessary [for human food], and too much of superfluous matter. The principal reason why the Law forbids swine's flesh is to be found in the circumstance that its habits and its food are very dirty and loathsome. It has already been pointed out how emphatically the Law enjoins the removal of the sight of loathsome objects, even in the field and in the camp; how much more objectionable is such a sight in towns. But if it were allowed to eat swine's flesh, the streets and houses would be more dirty than any cesspool, as may be seen at present in the country of the Franks.[2]
So, Maimonides argues "pork contains more moisture than necessary [for human food], and too much of superfluous matter", whatever that means! More importantly, the "principal reason" is that if you keep pigs, you end up with a dirty and unhealthy environment. Important note: Maimonides was writing from Islamic Egypt at the time, which is why he mentions "as may be seen at present in the country of the Franks." (ie France)
The comments about the pig's habit of lying with its legs outstretched come from Midrash Vayikra Rabba (ch 13) where it is mentioned as part of an elaborate metaphor, but not in connection with any reason for particularly abhorring the creature.
Hope that helps. --Dweller (talk) 09:48, 8 April 2008 (UTC)
I see you've taken it on, good work. The display and vision bits at Crested Tern apply for all the genus. The opening sentence isn't fully supported by Bridge - although Elegant is very close, Lesser Crested isn't, other than being in the same genus. I won't abandon this article (after all, one good ... aaaarrrggh, it's catching), but let me know if there's anything specific esp from BWP, Olsen or Harrison, where I have the books. Now, must be time for a couple of slices of bread with some meat in. 10:36, 8 July 2008 (UTC)
[edit] Australian figs
Been a bit of a spike in editing the few days... Guettarda (talk) 00:22, 13 July 2008 (UTC)
- Cute tool that. We'll see how many GAs, DYKs and FAs we can get. Got bits and pieces of horticultural stuff to add yet :) ...just musing on how to bonsai my species... Cheers, Casliber (talk · contribs) 03:34, 13 July 2008 (UTC)
[edit] UFOINFO
Hi, a site called UFOINFO is used in multiple articles as reference. Do you think it should be considered RS? I cannot see any editorial board or anything by which it can be considered RS. Otolemur crassicaudatus (talk) 05:04, 10 August 2008 (UTC)
- Neither can I. I guess next step is googling principal writers to see if they are notable independently. Not really my area. Otherwise the newspaper reports listed on the website themselves may have to serve...Cheers, Casliber (talk · contribs) 05:11, 10 August 2008 (UTC)
[edit] Banksia sphaerocarpa var. pumilio
FloraBase has an entry for this, but no other information.[2] Know anything about it? Hesperian 04:54, 26 September 2008 (UTC)
- Never mind; I found it.[3] Hesperian 04:55, 26 September 2008 (UTC)
- ... and I see your name in the Acknowledgements too.... Hesperian 05:00, 26 September 2008 (UTC)
-
-
- XD - cool! We were all always arguing about the distinctness of northern ashbyii, and Alex told me about the incana. sphaerocarpa makes my eyes goggle, I knew about latifolia but had no knowledge of pumilio. Wow, must go and read it now. Cheers, Casliber (talk · contribs) 06:09, 26 September 2008 (UTC)
I guess you might want to have a look at this too. Hesperian 11:47, 26 September 2008 (UTC)
[edit] A book you might enjoy
It's all about flowers ... well, err, kind of.
- Patricia Fara, Sex, Botany and Empire: The Story of Carl Linnaeus and Joseph Banks, (Sydney: Allen & Unwin, 2003).
She's a senior tutor in philosophy at Cambridge, written several very entertaining and informative books related to the history of science, probably including her doctorate.
But I expect you know of her and this book already. I would have thought it a must read for the Banks-ia Study Group leader. ;) Alastair Haines (talk) 11:57, 7 January 2009 (UTC)
- Hmm, interesting. No I haven't heard of her. I will chase this up :) Cheers, Casliber (talk · contribs) 12:14, 7 January 2009 (UTC)
-
- Ah! Glad I mentioned it then. I'm very confident you'll find Patricia's writing as entertaining as it is informative. Cheers. Alastair Haines (talk) 03:02, 8 January 2009 (UTC)
[edit] Huia - suggestions
Re this:
- "In section "Relationship with humans", can the phrases, "In some legends," and "In other traditions," mention the legends and traditions? Not strictly necessary, I am suggesting this because the above lines are consider Weasel words.".
This will be hard to fix since I don't have the book Kotare used - and I wouldn't want to either, probably, since a pet hate of mine is anything which lumps traditions from different regions together without giving the sources. I would suggest getting rid of all of this:
- In Māori culture, only people of high rank wore Huia feathers.[9] In some legends, the Huia was one of the birds attained from the heavens by Tāwhaki so that his wife could decorate her hair with its feathers; this celestial origin meant that the feathers of the Huia were treated with the greatest respect.[5]
- In other traditions, the Huia was the leader of the hākuturi, the spirit guardians of the forest, which included Whiteheads and Riflemen.[5] A single Huia feather was worn as a talisman against misfortune. If a man dreamed of a Huia or its feathers, it meant his wife would conceive a daughter; if he dreamed of Kōtuku feathers it implied the conception of a son.[5]
We could use as a partial source Traditional Maori Stories by Margaret Orbell, Reed 1992, pp82-83, and rewrite as follows:
-
- In Māori culture, the "white heron and the huia were not normally eaten but were rare birds treasured for their precious plumes, worn by people of high rank".[ADD ORBELL REF]. <START FOOTNOTE: Orbell mentions some of the sacred associations of the Huia, saying [page 83] that if a man dreamed of a Huia or its feathers, it meant his wife would conceive a daughter.<END FOOTNOTE>
We can also add a supporting reference from this page: [4] and could perhaps still add the reference no [9].
Hope this helps Kahuroa (talk) 20:22, 9 January 2009 (UTC)
This medical mushroom article has seen significant change lately if you'd like to have a boo.LeadSongDog come howl 18:09, 25 March 2009 (UTC)
- Will try to. Casliber (talk · contribs) 06:15, 26 March 2009 (UTC)
[edit] RE Notable saying?
I recalled this one....Talk:Fes,_Morocco#Old_moroccan_saying - is it famous in morocco? Or just some anglophone urban myth...Casliber (talk · contribs) 02:02, 4 April 2009 (UTC)
- Replied at the article talk page. p.s. I like your Fez up there :) -- FayssalF - Wiki me up® 04:31, 4 April 2009 (UTC)
aka the Australian bush fly. It seems the proper name; Google. I found this here; Aussie salute and here; Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Aussie Salute (second nomination) and see it mentioned here; Wikipedia:WikiProject Australia/To-do ( which may be your doing ;). G'day, Jack Merridew 11:40, 4 April 2009 (UTC)
[edit] Re: Beetles, fungi and macro lenses
Hi Casliber. I saw the message you sent to fir0002. I doubt he'd be able to take any pictures of fungi since he is stuck in Melbourne due to university. I went for a walk through a cool temperate rainforest area of Wielangta forest today. I took a large number of pretty good quality fungus pictures. I need help with identifying them however, and have posted the images at Wikipedia_talk:WikiProject_Fungi#18_IDs_from_Wielangta_Forest.2C_Tasmania. I'd appreciate your help since you seem to be fairly knowledgeable in the area.
You also had some gear questions. Since you want to shoot insects too, I'd get a fairly long macro lens such as the tamron 180mm or the sigma 150mm. More critical than your choice of lens is your lighting. You want a 430ex or a 580ex (extremely useful for everything). For insects add a softbox, macro flash bracket and an E-TTL cord. The softbox and macro bracket can be easily home-made. For anything stationary ditch the bracket/softbox and use a $30 ebay shoot through umbrella and swivel, and some ~$30 ebay radio triggers. You will need a light stand or an assistant. For the stationary stuff I'd also consider a decent tripod, allowing you to balance ambient and flash light. The longest exposure in the fungi I've uploaded was four seconds, impossible without a tripod. Compare File:Wielangta Unidentified Fungus 5194.jpg (fill flash) with http://img6.imageshack.us/img6/579/img5192u.jpg, which is only ambient. Noodle snacks (talk) 11:49, 4 April 2009 (UTC)
I'm wondering where you stand professionally on the concept? Some are believers, others aren't ... I did a lot of work on that article before a certain ArbCom. It's still a pretty clean article. SandyGeorgia (Talk) 14:04, 4 April 2009 (UTC)
- Also, would you peek at my query at User talk:Awadewit#Dissertation as a source? Thanks, SandyGeorgia (Talk) 19:07, 4 April 2009 (UTC)
[edit] Banksia and climate change
This is an interesting paper: "Between 5% and 25% of [Banksia] species were projected to suffer range losses of 100% by 2080." I can send you a PDF if you're interested. Hesperian 23:59, 22 April 2009 (UTC)
- Yikes! Yes please. Casliber (talk · contribs) 00:25, 23 April 2009 (UTC)
-
- Done. Hesperian 00:41, 23 April 2009 (UTC)
The early morning sun hits the spires of Pura Besakih
DYK that the most important Hindu Temple in Bali has a single sentence of coverage? oldid :( Jack Merridew 16:43, 25 April 2009 (UTC)
- I get 5 days, right? Cheers, Jack Merridew 10:10, 26 April 2009 (UTC)
Karena ini, Anda harus menulis itu.
Saya akan pergi ke Kupang 25 Juli.
Mungkin Anda ikut?
Ta'at cuma kalo ada yang liat. ;)
Tapi di Wiki selalu ada yang liat. :(
Alastair Haines (talk) 10:10, 26 April 2009 (UTC)
-
- Oh crud, sorry Jack - Alastair's poem was very timely. Yes, 5 days it is. Casliber (talk · contribs) 10:25, 26 April 2009 (UTC)
-
- I have da book with a section on this; I don't have it with me at the moment. Thanks for the tweaks. I tweaked some of the images on Common. People should learn to hold their cameras level. The Pura Besakih particle really should be of the scale of Borobudur. Cheers, Jack Merridew 10:54, 26 April 2009 (UTC)
- ma'af lads, I'll be watching for black bamboo while I'm in Timor ;) Alastair Haines (talk) 10:30, 26 April 2009 (UTC)
- Hi Alastair, welcome back. Please note that my bahasa Indonesia is the pits; and that's four years along. It does take being tough to be here ;) Let me know if I can help. Been there, done that. Cheers, Jack Merridew 10:54, 26 April 2009 (UTC)
- See also
- Ahaaa. ok, that redlink will turn blue sometime soon....Casliber (talk · contribs) 13:31, 26 April 2009 (UTC)
- I was thinking that. There are some pics at Commons:Category:Pura Ulun Danu Batur and I have some, somewhere. It's quite picturesque and is shown prominently on things like Lonely Planet covers. Cheers, Jack Merridew 14:16, 26 April 2009 (UTC)
- See also also
I have unfortunately had to revert much of the changes you have made to the Alpha Centauri page - mainly to the structure revisions that you have done. While I agree it is best to standardise between bright star pages (i.e. Sirius), there is significant problems doing so to the Alpha Centauri page. The problem in previous edits is the confusion with Alpha Centauri the star and Alpha Centauri as a system. There was much about alpha centauri, especially its brightness compared to Arcturus as well as the relationship with Proxima Centauri. (See the Discussion with the associated page to this article.) It was thought best to avoid complexity by giving the basic information, and add complexity in sections so information could be understood at various levels of knowledge. Also as there is much interest in Alpha Centauri from children to amateur astronomers, it was best to give the introduction as brief as possible and explain the complexities as we go. As to modifications of articles as drastically as you have done to complex article, it might be better to do so with some discussion in the discussion section before doing so. Although I note that you have much experience in doing wiki edits, much better than me, it is better to make small changes in complex articles paragraph by paragraph than carte blanche changes. (I am very happy to discuss any issues on the article with you in the alpha centauri discussion to improve the article.)
As to the introduction, much of the additions you have made are actually speculative, and are not necessary on fact. I.e. "This makes it a logical choice as "first port of call" in speculative fiction about interstellar travel, which assumes eventual human exploration, and even the discovery and colonization of imagined planetary systems. These themes are common to many video games and works of science fiction." has little to do with the basic facts on alpha centauri. I.e. Nearest star, third brightest star, binary star, etc. As for "Kinematics" as a title, this is irrelevant (Sirius article also has it wrong). (Also see Discussion page for Alpha Centauri with SpacePotato) Note: I have contributed much to this page - 713 edits according to the statistics. (27th April 2008 to today) Arianewiki1 18:04, 6 August 2009 (UTC)
- O-kay...taken it to the talk page.Casliber (talk · contribs) 20:29, 6 August 2009 (UTC)
[edit] Judea and Samaria
Hi Casliber, if you have time, would you mind commenting here? SlimVirgin talk|contribs 19:44, 18 August 2009 (UTC)
[edit] Bract pattern
You know what I don't get? On page 245 of George (1981), and again on page 40 of Collins (2007), George gives a diagram showing the arrangement of unit inflorescences on a Banksia flower spike. Both diagrams clearly show a hexagonal layout; i.e. every common bract is surrounded by six equidistant common bracts, thus forming little hexagons. In support of this, George (1981) states "The unit inflorescences are so arranged on the axis that there are three pattern lines—vertical, and both dextral and sinistral spiral."
I haven't dissected an inflorescence, but in some species the pattern persists right through flowering and can be seen on the infructescence. You won't get a better example than this B. menziesii cone. Look at that pattern. There's no way you could call it hexagonal. It is a rectangular (or rather diamond, since the lines are diagonal) grid. Depending on how you define a neighbourhood, you could argue that each common bract has 4 or 8 neighbours, but there's no way you could argue for 6. Similarly, you could argue for two pattern lines (dextral and sinistral spiral) or four (dextral, sinistral, vertical and horizontal), but there is no way you could argue for 3, because there is no reason to include vertical whilst excluding horizontal). On top of that there is a beautiful symmetry in the way each common bract is surrounded by its own floral bracts and those of its neighbours. But George's diagrams destroy that symmetry.
I thought maybe B. menziesii was an exception to a general rule, but you can see the same diamond grid, though not as clearly, in File:Banksia serrata4.jpg, and I reckon (but am not certain) I can see it in my B. attenuata cone. And in File:Banksia prionotes mature cone.jpg too. What the heck is going on?
(I'm not just being a pretentious wanker here. I thought the diagram was interesting and informative enough for me to whip up an SVG version for Wikipedia. But since copying George's diagram isn't really on, and it is much better to go straight from nature if possible, I was basing my version on this B. menziesii cone. But it isn't going to work if the diagram shows a rectangular grid and the text has to say it is hexagonal.)
Hesperian 13:28, 29 August 2009 (UTC)
- Thanks for reminding me on this one - I think it was Alex (or Kevin??) who told me that every bract pattern was unique to a species and hence diagnostic, but as far as I know not much if anything has been published on this area. The similarity between archaeocarpa and attenuata was noted (the bract pattern remaining in the fossils). I seem to recall feeling bamboozled as well by the description when I read it some time ago. I will have to refresh myself with some bedtime reading....Casliber (talk · contribs) 13:50, 29 August 2009 (UTC)
- Update: I had a look at the pages in question in the banksia book(s), there is a little bit more in the 1981 monograph but not much. I meant to ring Alex George about this and should do so in the next few days...I guess the photos look sort of like hexagons stretched vertically :P Casliber (talk · contribs) 06:46, 2 September 2009 (UTC)
[edit] Question
If this is what developing flower pairs look like...
then what are these brown and white furry things?
I note that the last six images to be posted on your talk page were posted by me. I'm not sure whether to apologise....
What is going on in the lower image? Clearly this is an inflorescence in very early bud, but those furry white things are apparently not developing flower pairs. Are they some kind of protective bract or something?
Hesperian 01:24, 1 September 2009 (UTC)
- You certainly see those thingies on the developing buds of alot of banksias. I'd be intrigued what the Nikulinsky book, which is essentially a series of plates of a developing menziesii inflorescence, says (not sure, I don't recall whether it had commentary...). Another thing to look up. Was about to look up the patterns just now. Casliber (talk · contribs) 02:35, 1 September 2009 (UTC)
- Now I have looked at the books and bract architecture, question is are they common bracts or are they something which falls off (don't think so but..). Something else to ask Alex. Casliber (talk · contribs) 06:49, 2 September 2009 (UTC)
-
- Having found nothing in George, I've been reading Douglas's stuff on ontogeny of Proteaceae flowers, and found nothing there either.
If you snap a spike axis in half, they are just that brown colour, and essentially made of closely packed fuzz. I wonder if there is initially no gap in the axis for the flower to grow, so the developing flower literally has to shove some of the axis out in front of it as it extends. This would explain everything except for the white tip. Hesperian 10:23, 2 September 2009 (UTC)
I have today taken a long lunch and gone bushwalking with Gnangarra. While he took happy-snaps, I did some OR on this question. My diagnosis is: these are peduncles that have developed common bracts, but have not yet developed floral bracts or flowers.
In very young spikes like the one pictured here, they are not yet very densely packed together, so they can be perceived as individual peduncles. Given time, they will continue to grow, and as they do so they will become more and more densely packed together, until eventually they are jammed together so tightly that their dense coverings of hairs form the fibrous brown material that comprises a typical flower spike, and the common bracts at their apex will form the bract pattern on the surface of the spike. At that point, they will no longer be distinguishable as individual peduncles, but will simply be part of the spike.
When the flowers start to develop, they get squeezed together even more. At this point, sometimes, a peduncle may break off the axis and be squeezed right out of the spike as the flowers around it develop. Thus you may see one or two of these furry things sitting at random positions on the surface of a developed flower spike.
As evidence for this hypothesis I offer the following observations:
- Wherever one of those "furry things" is found loose on the surface of a spike, you will also find a gap in the bract pattern beneath it, where the common bract is absent;
- "Furry things" may occasionally be found partly out of the spike, but partly in, in which cases the white tip is quite obviously the common bract. In such cases removal of the "furry thing" leaves behind a visible hole in the spike where a common bract ought to be.
Hesperian 05:58, 15 September 2009 (UTC)
-
- Interesting - Gah! Forgot to ring Alex - evening is a crazy time with little availability for me, but will see what I can do. Casliber (talk · contribs) 20:57, 15 September 2009 (UTC)
Not OR any more. Look at the picture of "Banksia flower bud seen in profile" here: clear evidence of the common and floral bracts forming one of those little furry upside-down pyramids, with the flower arising from it. Hesperian 03:38, 19 September 2009 (UTC)
[edit] Special edition triple crown question
Hi- I'm assuming that you have a hand in the Durova's Triple crown, based on the edit history of the page. Anyhow, I was wondering if you also had a hand in the special edition crowns because Durova looks to have her hands full with numerous other things.
Here are discussions (one and two) about a special editiion triple crown for the WikiProject Video games. If this is something you don't handle or are too busy to handle, I more than understand. Thank you for your time. (Guyinblack25 talk 17:23, 30 September 2009 (UTC))
- Sounds fun. I should have some time free in a few hours. I ducked on now to make a statement quickly. Casliber (talk · contribs) 23:21, 30 September 2009 (UTC)
- The tricky issue is finding free images or navigating fair use policy - eg screenshots etc. I am not great on policy and will ask someone more clued in. Casliber (talk · contribs) 11:09, 1 October 2009 (UTC)
- Thanks for taking the time to do this. In regard to images, this free game controller image is frequently used for the Video games project. There are more video game-related icons on Commons as well as a category for video games in general. (Guyinblack25 talk 14:37, 1 October 2009 (UTC))
- Nearly my bedtime here, but tomorrow I'll take a look. Cheers, Casliber (talk · contribs) 14:38, 1 October 2009 (UTC)
-
-
- Update: Just browsing through old posts. I have an idea for this one now, just need some time...Casliber (talk · contribs) 13:14, 15 November 2009 (UTC)
- That's cool. Thanks for the update.
- And in addition to the editors listed here, PresN recently become a triple crown winner. His articles (DYK: Music of the Katamari Damacy series, GA: Music of the Final Fantasy series, and FC: List of Final Fantasy compilation albums) are music articles related to video game series. Please include him along with the others. (Guyinblack25 talk 16:04, 16 November 2009 (UTC))
[edit] Latest on B. brownii
http://www.springerlink.com/content/f22r726063l50761/ Hesperian 10:44, 8 November 2009 (UTC)
- Interesting - makes for some dry reading. Hadn't realised it was 10 populations out of 27 which have become extinct since 1996.. :( Casliber (talk · contribs) 10:47, 8 November 2009 (UTC)
- I should have read it before posting here, in which case I wouldn't have bothered posting here at all: it is as boring as bat shit. Hesperian 11:15, 8 November 2009 (UTC)
[edit] Parrot stuff
doi:10.1016/j.ympev.2009.08.021 is not finalized, but the preprint is ready and formatted. It may well be one of the most comprehensive and beautiful papers on the topic of Psittaciformes evolution. Only gripe: it still does not consider the fossil record fully. Is doi:10.1080/08912960600641224 really so hard to get? 2 cites in 3 years for what is essentially the baseline review is far too little... even Mayr does not cite it - granted, most is not Paleogene, but still...).
But that does not affect the new paper much, since they remain refreshingly noncommitted on the things they cannot reliably assess from their data. And data they have a lot. Also always nice to see geography mapped on phylogenetic trees. Dysmorodrepanis (talk) 01:19, 2 December 2009 (UTC)
- PDFs sent... let me know if need anything else. Sasata (talk) 08:17, 7 December 2009 (UTC)
- Thx :) Casliber (talk · contribs) 11:39, 7 December 2009 (UTC)
[edit] Peer review for book Brainwashing: The Science of Thought Control
I put the article about the book Brainwashing: The Science of Thought Control up for peer review. Input would be appreciated, at Wikipedia:Peer review/Brainwashing: The Science of Thought Control/archive1. Hope you are doing well, thought you might be interested in this article and subject matter. Cheers, Cirt (talk) 01:54, 2 December 2009 (UTC)
- Interesting - will take a look in a bit. Casliber (talk · contribs) 02:35, 2 December 2009 (UTC)
- Thank you! Cirt (talk) 14:34, 5 December 2009 (UTC)
[edit] Archaeopteryx lithographica
Hi, Cas;
It turned out that at least the first paragraph of Archaeopteryx lithographica is a slightly modified rip from Roger Tory Peterson's The Birds (try "This may have been one of the thecodonts" on Google Books"), so I have elected to redirect it now. The second paragraph (which has nothing to do with Archaeopteryx) may be a more heavily edited rip from the same source. J. Spencer (talk) 03:48, 4 December 2009 (UTC)
- Yes, I was planning to do that sometime. I couldn't imagine that the smaller page had anything on it that the FA didn't (just hadn't got round to comparing as yet). Casliber (talk · contribs) 04:05, 4 December 2009 (UTC)
[edit] The Chinese Restaurant
Hi, would you be kind enough to support again on my "The Chinese Restaurant" article? It was archived way to early :S. The article has been copy-edited twice since your conditional support, so perhaps you could fully support now? Thank you.--Music26/11 19:13, 5 December 2009 (UTC)
- [[5]] -- consensus for me specifically to produce an article (about 10 days before my wedding).
- I don't need to ask you to recuse yourself; but it's all the more important if it goes sideways, because worst case scenario would be subpoenaing you to give evidence regarding a NSW resident who had opinions regarding me personally, both before and after various discussions here at Wiki.
- Since I was recently published in the US as a religious expert, though, there are also options I'd like to avoid like formal processes regarding whether Wiki can be classed as a service provider, if it has and exercises powers to restrict protected speech, like widely recognised religious points of view.
- The best thing I can do to protect Wiki and keep peace is pray that cool, wise heads consign what should be a content issue back to the content basket. It's beneath the level of serious consideration.
- I trust ArbCom to finally defend me. However, if they don't, and these repeated unsupportable challenges against my professionalism as a writer are permitted to be published, I have no choice but to defend myself.
- Sorry to alert you to this in public, but at least it clearly indicates to any interested parties why you cannot comment publically. Alastair Haines (talk) 03:24, 6 December 2009 (UTC)
-
- (groan)..oh dear.. :/ Casliber (talk · contribs) 05:42, 6 December 2009 (UTC)
-
-
- It's OK mate, common sense prevailed, and quickly! I'm rather impressed. Relax friend, I think it might be all over for good at last.
- Butterflies, here I come! :) Alastair Haines (talk) 12:37, 6 December 2009 (UTC)
[edit] thanks for the introduction and further comments on schizophrenia
Thanks - the first five years following my diagnosis i spent actively resarching what schizophrenia meant. it was first coined as 'the schizophrenias' by a humanist doctor as it was previously referred to as s kind of dementia - however it has assumed many negative connotations since. the link between autism and schizophrenia is a promising one as you couldnt possibly get two more diametrically opposed labels in terms of public perception. Some of the original schizophrenias were hebophrenia - from the greek god hebes associated with onset in adolescence , apophenia meaning relating one unconnected thing with another etc etc , however the name has become homogenized over the recent years - there are of course links with previous hypotheses such as the bicameral mind and up and coming theories such as 'unfocussed semantic activation in the right hemisphere of the brain'. i have made a FOIA request to the bbc regarding which WHO ICD classification each criminal that a news story was reported on with a diagnosis of schizophrenia in the previous six months had and recieved the response that they could not disclose this due to patient confidentiality unless it was reported in the open courts which was highly unlikely. i have forwarded their response to the research and information compliance dpeartment of the courts to ask them to consider this. i belive the next ICD classification is due to be released in 2011/2012 and i intend to continue my campaign for the change of this damaging label till then. I am also a qualified social worker , registered unconditionally with the gscc and work part time as a web development consultant for the university of northumbria at newcastle. Where is the tilde on an apple mac keyboard?? §§§§ lol Retrieved from "http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User_talk:Darwinerasmus" —Preceding unsigned comment added by Darwinerasmus (talk • contribs) 20:19, 6 December 2009 (UTC)
- I have worked in psychiatry for 16 years now, generally in the public sector here in Australia. It is true that the range of symptoms is vast - when expalining the condition, I inform people that the range I see is everything from people successful in work and relationships with infrequent relapses and low (or no) regular medication, to those tormented by severe thought disorder and/or hallucinations and unable to care for themsleves.
- Name change is a vexed issue - has it been useful in cancer? Not sure....
- I also am suspicious of the use of diagnoses in hte media, and the mushrooming use of 'psychotic' to mean 'bad'. Casliber (talk · contribs) 20:32, 6 December 2009 (UTC)
Found the tilde , it is 'alt n' on a mac keyboard Darwinerasmus (talk) 21:03, 6 December 2009 (UTC) so you agree that there is a 'spectrum' of schizophrenic disorder as there is an 'autistic spectrum disorder' i have done inreach work to psychiatric hospitals and witnessed patients that appear to have a combination of both autism and 'psychosis' symptoms - interesting to note that eugen bleuler coined both terms autism and schizophrenia. i have put a query to the royal college of psychiatrists that if mirtazapine is a successful treatment for autism is it also a successful treatment for schizophrenia. they may of course never answer that as it was through twitter. problem with schizophrenia is it implies schism or jekkyl and hyde and is surely seriously outmoded as a term. i will feed back if i get a response from the courts information compliance department ... and now off to fresh new pastures in wikipedia - thank bran the blessed for salycin. Darwinerasmus (talk) 21:03, 6 December 2009 (UTC)
- I think the concept of schizophrenia and milder cases therein are alot more cohesive than the autism vs autism spectrum but I am not a child psychiatrist. I'd be (pleasantly) surprised if the Royal College responded via twitter :) Casliber (talk · contribs) 01:18, 7 December 2009 (UTC)
Im putting together some thoughts - and the latter parts are a bit haberdash - on what an 'Alternative Perception Spectrum' wiki might look like in a sandbox on my user page - i would appreciate your comments or the comments of any other wikipedian experts you may know when you have the time http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:Darwinerasmus Darwinerasmus (talk) 19:26, 7 December 2009 (UTC)
[edit] Triple Crown
Thanks very much my fellow Australian :) Very nice surprise. Happy future editing! Aaroncrick (talk) Review me! 07:53, 7 December 2009 (UTC)
- No probs :) Casliber (talk · contribs) 11:38, 7 December 2009 (UTC)
[edit] Parrot papers
Hi, been away for a few days. Simply mail me (stupendemys at googlemail) and I'll send you the papers! Dysmorodrepanis (talk) 11:52, 8 December 2009 (UTC)
- Thanks for the offer - another user kindly sent them to me. Fascinating reading, and might be actually good to really fix up the parrot article next...Casliber (talk · contribs) 13:57, 8 December 2009 (UTC)
[edit] RfA thankspam
 | Hello, Casliber! This is just a note thanking you for participating in my recent Request for Adminship, which passed with a total of 93 support !votes, 1 oppose and 3 editors remaining neutral. While frankly overwhelmed by the level of support, I humbly thank the community for the trust it has placed in me, and vow to use the tools judiciously and without malice.
|
Hi Cas, this fungus will be my next FAC attempt. I'd appreciate it if you could take a quick look and let me know if there's any obvious deficiencies. I'm a bit worried that the description section may be too technical; I've tried to explain things as much as possible, but I've been looking at it for too long and it all makes sense to me :) On a similar note, wanna collaborate on Agaricus bisporus? It's on my to-do list, and I saw it on yours as well. Sasata (talk) 05:10, 9 December 2009 (UTC)
- Yes, will look at that one, and yes, a collaboration on the common mushroom would be great. I like the idea of joint efforts to get the bigger meatier articles up to FA. Casliber (talk · contribs) 05:19, 9 December 2009 (UTC)
[edit] Cockatoo
Marvellous YellowMonkey (bananabucket) (Invincibles finally at Featured topic candidates) 22:20, 9 December 2009 (UTC)
- thx ++ :) Casliber (talk · contribs) 22:24, 9 December 2009 (UTC)
- I can only nom one at a time, I have about 7 more just sitting there with the cleanup done to the same stage as some of hte others that passed this year.... YellowMonkey (bananabucket) (Invincibles finally at Featured topic candidates) 23:54, 9 December 2009 (UTC)
[edit] RfA Thanks
 | Thank you for voting in my RfA, which passed with 51 supports, 4 opposes, and 3 neutrals. | |
MrKIA11 (
talk) 12:39, 10 December 2009 (UTC)
[edit] D&D wikiproject
Come on by and see what's been going on lately. :) BOZ (talk) 20:33, 11 December 2009 (UTC)
- I just was reading it. Casliber (talk · contribs) 20:34, 11 December 2009 (UTC)
- LOL, cool! BOZ (talk) 20:38, 11 December 2009 (UTC)
[edit] Cockatoo
Nice job! I don't want my nitpicking to hold up the FAC, but am glad to see you made the distinction between cockatiel and cockatoo care...I do exotics rescue and while pet care is beyond the scope of any wiki article, alot of folks who do well with 'tiels don't do so well when they make the jump to keeping Molucans, Umbrellas, etc. Common names are never official either, so I wouldn't see a problem using the more common "Umbrella" as opposed to "White". In the pop-culture section, no mention of Serpico or Baretta? From what I've heard in the bird circles, Baretta in particular got alot of folks interested in Cockatoos as late as the 90's! (Every now and then I'll still hear someone referring to them as "Baretta Birds") Also Hitchcock used a Black Palm in an early movie as an "evil bird". They are definitely the rarest to come across in the states. Most of this is probably miniscule and like I said, I don't want it to hold up the FAC, I'll definitely lend my support to promoting it, though.--Mike - Μολὼν λαβέ 01:37, 12 December 2009 (UTC)
- Thanks for the pop cult tips - if we can get RS's they are definitely going in !! Casliber (talk · contribs) 02:11, 12 December 2009 (UTC)
- YW I'd help some more, but I'm 400 miles from home and getting my own FAC nom beaten up at the moment. Here is a source for Baretta's Triton Cockatoo (Greater Sulfur Crested) and Serpico's Umbrella (aka White Cockatoo) [3] I'll try and find the Hitchcock source for the Black Palm.--Mike - Μολὼν λαβέ 09:28, 12 December 2009 (UTC)
Only one painter? You aren't trying.
Melchior d'Hondecoeter,
Joseph Wright of Derby and
Henry Stacy Marks did at least two each;
Joseph Cornell and
Jackson Pollack at least one (though whether you'd recognize theirs as cockatoos); and I'd be very surprised if they didn't appear in Aboriginal art. I'm sure I could think of some more if pushed.
Yomanganitalk 03:11, 12 December 2009 (UTC)
Hmm...this will be very useful for buffing up the cultural section..Jakob Bogdani was looking very lonely...now off to wrap some presents. Casliber (talk · contribs) 04:38, 12 December 2009 (UTC)
- If I get a thrill from seeing three of our finest editors collaborating to build better articles, have I been on Wiki too long? SandyGeorgia (Talk) 15:16, 12 December 2009 (UTC)
- Maybe you should get a pet Cockatoo then :) Casliber (talk · contribs) 19:04, 12 December 2009 (UTC)
- And the answer is yes. Yomanganitalk 00:39, 13 December 2009 (UTC)
PS: Dammit, can't find a reference stating Marks painted oodles of paintings on cockatoos....and Pollocks, well it doesn't really look like a cockatoo..was in two minds about adding it. Cornell's stuff is great, though. Casliber (talk · contribs) 20:04, 12 December 2009 (UTC)
- [6] Start there - I might have a book on him I can dig out later (though of course it doesn't need a citation unless it is likely to be challenged. Go on, resist.). Yomanganitalk 00:39, 13 December 2009 (UTC)
- A few more: Julius Jacob the elder, Henry Bright, Georges Barbier, Jan Baptist van Fornenburgh (he's early for a European, fl.1620), Edward Lear, Andrea Mantegna (very early, c.1496) ->
Yomanganitalk 12:30, 14 December 2009 (UTC) - And that picture of the Moluccan with its wings clipped is terrible. It looks like it's been through a lawn mower. Yomanganitalk 18:29, 14 December 2009 (UTC)
Wow, how on earth does Andrea Mantegna come across a Cockatoo???? Must add that somehow....Casliber (talk · contribs) 03:13, 16 December 2009 (UTC)
PPS: To Mike, I highly suspect shows like Serpico and Barretta contributed to the popularity of cockies as pets in the 1970s, but would need a ref for it. This is where I like seeing pop culutres influence on everydy life...Casliber (talk · contribs) 20:06, 12 December 2009 (UTC)
I only found one other print reference to Serpico but it was more of a comparison of Frank Serpico to Francis of Assisi in the Cockatoo scene, but that scene influenced Baretta. Fred in Baretta used to answer the phone, drink booze, etc. He was played by a bird smuggled into Hong Kong named Lala (he was smuggkled in a crate of chickens, hence the bird made chicken noises, too). Here's a source on that and popularity of Cockatoos afterward: [4] If that's too "popish" here's a better one and a link to 1 of two pages in particular about demand for cockatoos increasing, and how most people can't care for them, etc: [5] link to p165 on Google Books--Mike - Μολὼν λαβέ 22:02, 14 December 2009 (UTC)
[edit] DYK nomination of Banksia petiolaris
Hello! Your submission of Banksia petiolaris 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! hamiltonstone (talk) 02:48, 14 December 2009 (UTC)
Oops... Didn't notice your review of me over at Editor Review - a belated thanks. Promise to review Cockatoo! Aaroncrick (talk) Review me! 06:47, 14 December 2009 (UTC)
[edit] Poking an angry bear.
I just read your comment at ANI about the Scott/someone-else-whose-name-I-can't-remember spat. Some admins seem to think that the best way to calm down the angry bear whose lunch they've just eaten is by poking it with a sharp stick. I just hope that none of them ever try this on a real bear. Best wishes, DuncanHill (talk) 23:51, 14 December 2009 (UTC)
- Raaaargh :) Casliber (talk · contribs) 23:54, 14 December 2009 (UTC)
[edit] DYK for Banksia petiolaris
Materialscientist (
talk) 03:35, 15 December 2009 (UTC)
[edit] Question on FAC reviews
Having probably reviewed more of your FACs than anyone else's, I have a quick question on "appearances". When I'm reviewing a FAC, many of the changes I recommend are purely stylistic. It seems appropriate, since the quality of the prose is a requirement for an FA. But I'm not a professional writer, I have no training as a writer, I just follow Michael Rosenzweig's advice to use simple prose in the hope (and fear) that people will understand what you're saying. I was just wondering if my comments come off as overly pushy or something of the sort. Guettarda (talk) 14:46, 15 December 2009 (UTC)
- I guess what I try to do is sounds as positive/upbeat/encouraging as possible. Basically, think "is there anything that needs improving?" as I read. Also, anywhere possible I try to substitute plain english for jargon except if meaning is compromised or distorted. Exact meaning as intended trumps that. Anyway, if a new user to FAC I might leave as a comment rather than oppose to keep the mood okay. If something has a couple of supports but really has some deal-breakers outstanding, I might use oppose and qualify with a note that it is a placeholder. Anyway, that's my 2c :) Casliber (talk · contribs) 20:37, 15 December 2009 (UTC)
[edit] Thank you
Hi, Casliber. I'd like to thank you for your words on my behalf Here. Apparently it is practise to close the discussion before the subject gets to say anything on his own behalf? Just the least of the injustices done in this case, I think. Thank you for attempting to be a voice of reason there anyway. Regards. Dekkappai (talk) 19:32, 15 December 2009 (UTC)
[edit] A headsup to avoid a cock-up on cockies.
-
- Stone the flamen crows, mate! D'ja mean that them bananabenders we call cockies, and that wipe out tropical forests up near Townsville and the like, are called 'cockies' because of some Malay origin? D'ja mean that all a' them 'true blue whitemen' on the land that Banjo P. wrote about are kanakas! Me knackers tremble at the thought. If you put that on wiki and some cockie reads it, he'll go for the big spit without even touching a shot of Bundaberg rum.
- kakatúa, 'app. immed. through Dutch kaketoe; apparently influenced in form by cock. Several authorities say the name represents the call of the bird but see quot.1850.'
- quote 1850 = Journal of the Indian Archipelago, IV., 183 'Cockatoo, Malay Kakatuwah-a vice, a gripe (sic.Nishidani), and also the name of the bird, no doubt referring to its powerful bill.' (Ref. Oxford English Dictionary, Clarendon Press, Oxford, 2nd ed. Vol.3, p.411 sub cockatoo'). Cheers Nishidani (talk) 10:16, 16 December 2009 (UTC)
- Just checked the source.
- James Richardson Logan, The Journal of the Indian archipelago and Eastern Asia, Volume 4 (1850) Kraus Reprint 1970 p.183
-
-
- Compare Jeremy Mynott, Birdscapes: Birds in Our Imagination and Experience, Princeton University Press, 2009 (ISBN 0691135398,) p.319, 'from the Malay ‘’kakatuwa’’, which means “vice,” a reference to the strength of the beak.’ Regards Nishidani (talk) 10:34, 16 December 2009 (UTC)
oops, goofed up there. thx. Casliber (talk · contribs) 14:03, 16 December 2009 (UTC)
-
- That's for that cheerful badge, Cas. Whatever, if I can be of help on those finely crafted articles you and your mates work up, don't hesitate to ask. Asking me to thumb a book I'm known to have is 'no wucken furries', or politely, no skin off my prepuce, timewise. Best.Nishidani (talk) 14:38, 16 December 2009 (UTC)
[edit] DYK for Tricholoma saponaceum
Ucucha 11:42, 16 December 2009 (UTC)
Hi Cas, any chance you could add a Latin etymology to this yuletide lichen article? Thanks! Sasata (talk) 17:25, 16 December 2009 (UTC)
- I'll take a look. Casliber (talk · contribs) 20:07, 16 December 2009 (UTC)
[edit] Hilarious
[7] I was staring at the screen earlier this morning trying to think what should go into a "uses" section. While drinking my coffee... Guettarda (talk) 20:55, 16 December 2009 (UTC)
- I know. Ditto, and i was/am trying to cut down on my coffee consumption. Casliber (talk · contribs) 22:30, 16 December 2009 (UTC)
-
- Sadly, without coffee I wouldn't be coherent enough to get myself out the house in the morning. Cut back on coffee and I'd have to, I don't know, sleep more or something. Guettarda (talk) 22:59, 16 December 2009 (UTC)
OK, done. Now the hard part - coming up with a usable DYK hook. Interested? Guettarda (talk) 23:27, 16 December 2009 (UTC)
- Hell yeah...i was thinking something along the lines of ....DYK that the family rubiaceae contains the plants from which we get coffee, quinine, ipecac, and (indirectly) warfarin? Weird.....but essentially somesuch hook which lists a few whacky plants or plant products. Not sure how widely [[Guettarda speciosa}beach gardenia]] is grown... :) Casliber (talk · contribs) 23:31, 16 December 2009 (UTC)
PS: this has some other notable spp. to investigate. Casliber (talk · contribs) 23:35, 16 December 2009 (UTC)
-
- Hmm, yeah. The presence of myrmecophils keeps coming up... Guettarda (talk) 23:50, 16 December 2009 (UTC)
I know, I so wanna grow an antplant...just not sure if it is a tad too cold in sydney...Casliber (talk · contribs) 23:55, 16 December 2009 (UTC)
- In that case I suppose you were especially crushed to discover that GW was all a hoax? If it hadn't been for those pesky hackers you could have been growing true tropical plants in you back yard by the time the kids got out of school... :) Guettarda (talk) 06:08, 17 December 2009 (UTC)
The way I feel today (40C and high humidity)...I was hoping for another mini-ice age like 1400-1850....Casliber (talk · contribs) 06:43, 17 December 2009 (UTC)
- That sounds like summer around here! In the summer the wind feel like air off a blast furnace. In winter it strips the skin off your hands. If it wasn't for the tornadoes there'd be nothing good to say about Oklahoma weather...oh wait... Guettarda (talk) 06:48, 17 December 2009 (UTC)
We-ell, I am making a hedge of these in my new front garden, and have a tough decision between this and this somewhere out back. I was told the latter smell much nicer than the former...Casliber (talk · contribs) 06:54, 17 December 2009 (UTC)
[edit] cockatoo refs
I can certainly help with the second one - but it is Friday night and I am about to go out for drinks so it'll have to wait till tomorrow. I don't understand the first one. You are asking for a ref that explicitly states that the name Cacatuidae is derived from Cacatua? I will check HANZAB in the library but I doubt it will be there, it strikes me as something of a "well duh" kind of thing. Sabine's Sunbird talk 03:32, 18 December 2009 (UTC)
- No no, both being derived from the original malay word kakatua, is what I meant. Have fun drinking :) Casliber (talk · contribs)
- Oh, right. Yeah I can check, but the best source is a book in the library that specialises in bird names. I'll check them both. Sabine's Sunbird talk 03:38, 18 December 2009 (UTC)
- Okay, I have the info on the name. Both the sources I checked, which includes HANZAB Vol 4 pg 127, state that the name of the genus is from the malay name katatua (or kakak-tua, from kakatuwah, a vice). HANZAB also says that "However, according to Viellot (1817 Nouv. Dict. Hist. Nat. 17:6) the name is derived from the cries of white cockatoos". Sabine's Sunbird talk 02:37, 22 December 2009 (UTC)
- Thanks, and added. Casliber (talk · contribs) 05:40, 22 December 2009 (UTC)
[edit] Heeelp?
Hi Casliber, I saw your name on "Wikipedia administrators who will provide copies of deleted articles" and I am trying to recreate the article John Lyons (horse trainer) but apparently a previous version was deleted and I am having admin trouble slapping a speedy tag on it literally three seconds after I recreated it. Can you either save this from the "prod police" or toss me a copy of the deleted version so I can see what the problem was with the original? I'm not in the guy's cult or anything, he's just one of the natural horsemanship practitioners who needs a basic bio. Thanks. Montanabw(talk) 07:28, 18 December 2009 (UTC)
[edit] Looking for mentor
Hey, I'm looking for a wikimentor and I saw your name on the list of adopters and so was wondering if you could be my wikimentor. I don't particularly need too much help, but I only started 2 weeks ago and it would just be handy to have someone to be able to answer questions I have about wikipedia, in particular about wikitext. I understand if you are unable to adopt at this time or have any other problems though. Thanks, Forentitalk 09:02, 18 December 2009 (UTC)
- ask away. I will be glad to answer some questions, or point me to articles you want to write about. Casliber (talk · contribs) 10:11, 18 December 2009 (UTC)
- Thanks a lot. Also, should I ask the questions right here in this topic or somewhere else like on my userpage, because, just as a warning, eventually the questions will pile up... Anyway, first question, say I respond to a topic on my talkpage, will the person be alerted that I responded and if so, how? Forentitalk 10:37, 18 December 2009 (UTC)
- Keeping conversations on the one page is a good thing. Most people won't be alerted automatically but will have kept an eye on changes of pages on their watchlist. If they don't, there is a {{talkback}} templat you can use. Like this: Casliber (talk · contribs) 11:42, 18 December 2009 (UTC)
- Ahhh, I see now, thanks. On to the next question, about my userpage. Firstly, for future reference I am currently working on it in my sandbox. I've posted the question before, but haven't gotten a response yet so here it is:
- I am currently building my new userpage in my Sandbox. So far it is extremely complicated (to me) and I barely understand the formatting. If you go to the Sandbox, you can see my first sentence doesn't actually go to the end of the space. I was wondering if anyone could fix this, or even slightly simplify my page, because I know it can be a lot simpler and I've spent hours trying to fix this small problem.
- For some reason, the text looks fine on Firefox, however on IE the text only goes to a certain point on the page and then goes to a new line. I'm not sure how it looks i other people's browsers, so any help would be good. Forentitalk 11:53, 18 December 2009 (UTC)
- I am useless at formatting and layout stuff. This user is good at it - User talk:Jack Merridew. Casliber (talk · contribs) 11:56, 18 December 2009 (UTC)
- Ah, ok. I'm really bad at formatting and layout too. So this guy wouldn't mind if I just posted this problem on his talk page? Forentitalk 12:12, 18 December 2009 (UTC)
-
- Tell him I sent you there :) - he's also watching this page too - you know about the watchlist, right? Casliber (talk · contribs) 00:59, 19 December 2009 (UTC)
- You rang? Cheers, Jack Merridew 01:08, 19 December 2009 (UTC)
[edit] Yes The "Wendy James" Wiki has a INDEFINITE lock placed on it...Is Wikipedia Joking ????
Hi,
I noted you said that the Wendy James wiki could now be contributed to..
(Which I have complained it badly needs new contributions...)
Well I have looked into it..
After several mails to me from people wanting to contribute to it since I started writing there..
THEY ARE NOT ALLOWED...!?!?!
And there has been an INDEFINITE lock placed on it since JULY 2009 by "Brendon"...
JULY 2009...
It says that only (and I quote) "Established Persons" may contribute or edit the wiki in anyway..
(Which of course means no doubt just "Brendon" and your good self...!!!)
"Brendon" seems to have disappeared from Wikipedia for the time being..
(funnily enough)
So the "Wendy James" wiki entry is VERY FIRMLY STILL LOCKED for anyone else worldwide..
Doesn't that break at least ONE of the Pillars Of Wikipedia straight away..?
"Protection should never be used to keeping people from contributing or limit contributions to a select few.."
Of course I will make an official complaint about "Brendon" and get this lock lifted as soon as possible..
(Hopefully get "Brendon"'s editorial privilege revoked too..)
It of course merely RE-ENFORCES the lousy reputation this particular Wiki entry has on the internet..
Damaging Wendy James' already tattered image even more..if that's possible at this stage.
Thanks for listening.
(I do of course not blame you and will keep your name out of my official complaint..)
Wendtrut (talk) 16:20, 18 December 2009 (UTC)
- The page is semiprotected. To edit it, you just have to have an account at least four days old, and with at least ten edits. J.delanoygabsadds 16:24, 18 December 2009 (UTC)
[edit] Cockatoo map
It's there now: see User talk:Ucucha#Cockatoo map. And now I'm off to dinner. :) Ucucha 23:09, 18 December 2009 (UTC)
[edit] DYK nomination of Boletus subtomentosus
Hello! Your submission of Boletus subtomentosus 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! Materialscientist (talk) 00:55, 19 December 2009 (UTC)
[edit] Paging Dr. Casliber
I have observed and commented a lot of behavior here on wikipedia, most unappreciated. :)
I have read you are a psychiatrist, so maybe this would interest you, or maybe you already have observed this and can build on this observation.
Is there a name or any papers on the phenomena of a group ostracizing another group by jokes to:
- let off the stress of arguing
- belittle/subtly show that the minority groups comments are unimportant, and of no concern.
It seems like there is a definite pattern at times here on Wikipedia:
- intense argument,
- a couple of editors agree with the majority group of editors, followed by
- mocking jokes, sometimes subtly sometimes not so subtly. The subtly usually depends on the experience of the editor. The more experienced the editor, the more the personal attacks tend to be masked and retribution proof.
I have seen this repeatedly on wikipedia, two examples fresh on my mind:
- An admin's jokes about contributions being shit, complete with a picture of a fly on shit after days of intense arguing.
- Wikipedia_talk:Arbitration/Requests#Suppressed_some_edits. This exchange seems like several veteran editors subtly ostracizing User:Giano II.
The jokes don't necessarily have to be mocking the minority group, sometimes editors seem to just make jokes amongst themselves. It seems like these jokes are subtle, even unconscious way of saying, "move on nothing to see here, this editors concern is not going to be addressed, and will be ignored"
What do you think? Ikip 11:21, 19 December 2009 (UTC)
- Hmmm...yes I can safely say I've seen a pattern. Not sure of a particular name - will need to think on it. Casliber (talk · contribs) 11:53, 19 December 2009 (UTC)
-
- Oscar Wilde? Cheers, Jack Merridew 06:09, 22 December 2009 (UTC) and the wired piece *is* funny, although the wp-space copy was new to me as of last week
- Oscar Wilde was genuinely clever and funny. In my experience, some of these wikipedia comments are piety and unfunny, crudly intended to bait, silence, or bully the editor. Ikip 11:47, 22 December 2009 (UTC)
[edit] DYK for Boletus subtomentosus
Materialscientist (
talk) 11:42, 19 December 2009 (UTC)
[edit] Thanks
Thanks for the comment about the Rubiaceae on WT:PLANTS that got that page going. Although I like Rubes (cf., my user name) I knew nothing about their taxonomy. Now I've got a new way to waste time when I should be grading finals. Guettarda (talk) 16:49, 19 December 2009 (UTC)
- Yea, it's amazing that such a group is still so understudied - a genus like Gardenia is still a wastebasket taxon in 2009 (?????) and no-one has ever written a book on them, or even such a commonly cultivated plant such as Gardenia jasminoides..blew me away really. Casliber (talk · contribs) 19:13, 19 December 2009 (UTC)
[edit] DYK for Rubiaceae
Materialscientist (
talk) 03:42, 20 December 2009 (UTC)
While fixing the Ted Strehlow page, I noted while linking to 'quoll' that there is something askew on the Australian quoll classifications, and the Northern Quoll page, where the map shows it only in the far Northern Territory, when not speaking of the Western Quoll round Perth. In Barry Hill's book, he speaks of the western quoll, while meaning the northern quoll, as a key fixture in Central Australian Arrernte ceremonial, south of Alice Springs. It's no doubt probably extinct in the area, but the Northern Quoll must have extended its habitat further than the map allows. It's called tjilpa in the Aranda language. Kind of stuff right up your alley, and I hope you can keep an eye out for any further notices so this imprecision of denotation and mapping might be adjusted. Cheers. Nishidani (talk) 14:14, 21 December 2009 (UTC)
- Mind if I weigh in? The "western" quoll (D. geoffroii) actually formerly occurred in much of Australia, but is now extinct except in southwestern WA (MSW 3). The northern quoll (D. hallucatus) only occurs in northern NT (as well as northern WA and Qld). Therefore, a quoll somewhere south of Alice Springs would almost certainly be D. geoffroii, the western quoll. Ucucha 14:50, 21 December 2009 (UTC)
[edit] Need pages numbers for a citation you added
Hey Casliber, I'm trying to work my way up towards FAC for Zygoballus sexpunctatus. One of the issues that was brought up in the peer review is that the citation to Cassell's Latin Dictionary doesn't have any page numbers. If you have access to this book, and could add the page numbers, I would greatly appreciate it. Kaldari (talk) 17:23, 21 December 2009 (UTC)
-
- Cas is in the land of Oz-Nod at this hour. I'm his self-appointed drudge for 'roots', which might offend an Aussie ear, so I'll sub or locum-tenens for him. Cassell's Lat Dictionary is not a good source, particularly because 'punctatus' is not stricto sensu a Latin word, in the sense of classical Latin, but a denotative term in biological nomenclature. It came into use from Late medieval Latin punctare, from Latin punctum (point) which had an Italian reflex puntare, which, reassimilated back to the Latinate terminology of modern science, then gave us punctatio/ punctatus. These details may be sourced reliably to The Oxford English Dictionary, Clarendon Press, Oxford, 2nd ed.1989 vol.X11, pp.838-839 sub. punctate/punctation, whose first definition then follows:-
-
'1.Nat.Hist, and Path.Marked or studded with points or dots; having minute rounded spots, or (esp.) depressions resembling punctures, scattered over the surface; of the nature of or characterized by such markings' (p.838)
- In classical Latin it would be maculatus (as in spotted gum, eucalyptus maculatus). Dante himself, when speaking of 'spotted' animals, used the word 'gaetto' as in quella fiera a la gaetta pelle (Canto 1, Inferno). Regards Nishidani (talk) 18:20, 21 December 2009 (UTC)
- Thanks, but I also need the page number for "sex" meaning "six". (I know that's probably obvious, but FAC reviewers are an anal bunch). Kaldari (talk) 18:34, 21 December 2009 (UTC)
- No sooner said than done ((In puncto acto)), guvner. Sex. Six. P.G.W.Glare, Oxford Latin Dictionary, Clarendon Press, Oxford, 1982 p.1750 sub.sex.
- (wakes up. rubs eyes) ....oh, okay all done then. Right now where was I....Casliber (talk · contribs) 19:58, 21 December 2009 (UTC)
-
-
- My note may seem inadequate, obscure and intrusive. The problem however is that sexpunctatus cannot be referred to any Latin dictionary, since it is not strictly speaking Latin, but 'neo-Latin', an invented term. If FA reviewers require this, then they are asking the impossible. The only way to get round the problem is to break the word up into sex and punctatus and give different sources for each, an ugly solution, for it means referring sex to a Latin dictionary, and punctatus to another source which explains it is a term coined for biological taxonomy in relatively modern times (Linnaeus uses it for example in his Systema Naturae(per regna tria naturae :secundum classes, ordines, genera, species, cum characteribus, differentiis, synonymis, locis). Vol.2,913, to define Psocus sexpunctatus.
-
-
- Another way round this would be to cite for punctatus the gloss on the word to be found in G. M. Storr, Lawrence Alec Smith, Snakes of Western Australia, (edited R. E. Johnstone), Western Australian Museum, 1986, p. 103, where, commenting on ‘Rhinoplocephalus punctatus',(the spotted snake), we are informed that 'punctatus' means 'dotted'.Nishidani (talk) 09:23, 22 December 2009 (UTC)
I noticed that you are the main editor of Splendid Fairywren and wonder if you agree with me that three "predominantly"s in para one of the blurb might be too repetitious.
Also, I apologize to you for causing trouble on Major depressive disorder. I did not understand that because my sourcing concerns were policy based, they would be corrected even though it seemed like I was being ignored. I thought I had to make myself heard and never was my intent to be disruptive. I am sorry for giving that impression. Regards, —mattisse (Talk) 22:56, 21 December 2009 (UTC)
- That's okay, I was actually thinking we should work together on borderline personality disorder as a way of burying the hatchet and moving on, as focussing on the sourcing is essential. You are right about the 'predominantly's - I realised that I could remove two of them with predominantly no change to context :) Casliber (talk · contribs) 23:21, 21 December 2009 (UTC)
-
- Thank you for the offer. Let me know if you seriously take it on. (Is there anything new regarding that diagnosis??) Happy New Year! Regards, —mattisse (Talk) 00:15, 28 December 2009 (UTC)
[edit] Administrator incidents
A noticeboard devoted to discussing incidents requiring administrator attention is not the appropriate forum to discuss BLP-related forums (that may or may not exist). You should know better, Cas. Your recent edits have been fairly unusual (an MFD of a humorous project-space page, WTF?). You seem to be losing touch with the community pulse, which usually indicates that it's time for a wikibreak. It's December 22; you should take the rest of the year off and come back refreshed January 1. :-) Just some friendly wholly unsolicited advice. Cheers. --MZMcBride (talk) 06:22, 22 December 2009 (UTC)
- Amusing that you'd think deleting or moving to get a page deleted was unusual...almost as unusual as me and Ikip voting delete (chuckle). Thanks for the humorous post MZM. Cheers, Casliber (talk · contribs) 13:35, 22 December 2009 (UTC)
[edit] False Sockpuppet Accusation
Hi Cas, sorry to break the perma ban I had to request myself in order to be left in peace by certain persons and bother you again, but some poor soul has been wrongly accused of being a sockpuppet of me, by a couple of "the usual suspects". This is not fair, it's just a slur on the user concerned, and on myself, there wasn't even a proper sock check run...
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Sockpuppet_investigations/Zeraeph/Archive
User:Alamanth had nothing, whatsoever to do with me, and this is the first I have heard of him/her, today, check the actual pathways and I feel sure you will find that out. I have no sockpuppets. I also REALLY think it is time someone put a stop to User:Penbat's more abstract capacity for equal misinformation, he is filling up psyhology articles with left of field nonsense, most of which is, at best, a considerable distortion of any source he cites, and, at worse simply made up off the top of his head. signed - The REAL Zeraeph --109.79.193.159 (talk) 09:55, 22 December 2009 (UTC)
PS Merry Christmas
- (sigh) I had intended getting back into some psych articles...maybe I'll push this up the agenda....Casliber (talk · contribs) 10:56, 22 December 2009 (UTC)
-
- Thanks Cas...can you do something for Alamanth too? I give you my word of honour this is not even a person I KNOW. I can't even understand how they could have been banned, as me, without an IP check...it's insane...not to mention harassment of me and bullying of Alamanth - none of my business, but the Admins who enforced it really need to do a little self examination IMHO. Zed --109.79.217.91 (talk) 12:13, 22 December 2009 (UTC)
The nivea hook is wrong, dude. We don't know what Riche collected, because in his desperation to get back to the ship he threw his collections aside. It was Labillardiere who made those huge discoveries during the search for Riche. Hesperian 14:14, 22 December 2009 (UTC)
- man I am knackered and about to hit the sack. Can you tweak the hook? Even better if naturalist #2 finds them searching for naturalist #1....Casliber (talk · contribs) 14:15, 22 December 2009 (UTC)
- I've done the bare minimum necessary to make it accurate. I'm off to bed myself. G'night. Hesperian 14:20, 22 December 2009 (UTC)
You continued input on this talk page would be appreciated.--Scott Mac (Doc) 16:32, 22 December 2009 (UTC)
[edit] Happy holidays!
Best wishes for the holiday season and the upcoming new year! –
Juliancolton |
Talk 16:55, 22 December 2009 (UTC)
You are invited to join the discussion at Wikipedia talk:Community de-adminship/Draft RfC re: a 'Motion to close', which would dissolve Cda as a proposal. The motion includes an !vote. You have previously commented at Wikipedia:WikiProject Administrator. Jusdafax 00:15, 23 December 2009 (UTC)
[edit] DYK for Hydnophytum
⇌
Jake Wartenberg 19:42, 23 December 2009 (UTC)
[edit] Merry Christmas
A NobodyMy talk is wishing you a Merry Christmas! This greeting (and season) promotes WikiLove and hopefully this note has made your day a little better. Spread the WikiLove by wishing another user a Merry Christmas, whether it be someone you have had disagreements with in the past, a good friend, or just some random person. Don't eat yellow snow!
Spread the holiday cheer by adding {{subst:User:Flaming/MC2008}} to their talk page with a friendly message.
To those who make
Good Arguments, who are
appreciative, or
supportive. Sincerely, --
A NobodyMy talk 03:52, 24 December 2009 (UTC)
Merry Christmas. Interested in the sport? Aaroncrick (talk) 05:16, 24 December 2009 (UTC)
- A little bit :) Casliber (talk · contribs) 06:47, 24 December 2009 (UTC)
-
- Roll of the eyes* Could follow Essendon ... oh well :) Aaroncrick (talk) 06:50, 24 December 2009 (UTC)
Dear Casliber,
Thank you very, very much for the award. You really "made my day", no pun intended. I am greatly honored to accept it, and plan to contribute to the project. Just out of curiosity, how is this award handed out, and what are the criteria?
Best, Athenean (talk) 07:26, 24 December 2009 (UTC).
- Rlevse carried it on from a tradition started by Phaedriel some years ago. I agreed to look after it for a couple of days over Xmas. Morale building I guess ...no real criteria..... ;) Casliber (talk · contribs) 07:30, 24 December 2009 (UTC)
[edit] Merry Christmas, Casliber!
Many fungi and obscure single-celled organisms for your future articles, Cas. Have a wonderful holiday! --Moni3 (talk) 14:07, 24 December 2009 (UTC)
- Thx ++ (ducks out of room where presents are being unwrapped....uh oh...off again) Casliber (talk · contribs) 21:44, 24 December 2009 (UTC)
[edit] Trouted
You have been trouted for: I'm ... intrigued? —Preceding unsigned comment added by Newty23125 (talk • contribs) 14:20, 24 December 2009 (UTC)
[edit] And now, for FV's traditional last-minute nonsectarian holiday greeting!
 | | Here’s wishing you a happy end to the holiday season and a wonderful 2010.
Fvasconcellos (t·c) 15:08, 25 December 2009 (UTC) |
- Thx ++ - meant to do one of these meself....Casliber (talk · contribs) 20:39, 25 December 2009 (UTC)
[edit] Pudu GA Review
First off, Merry Christmas! Secondly, I went through your suggestions and made the necessary changes to the pudu deer article you were reviewing for GA. We appreciate your review and hope to see your input about our changes. Thanks!Lisa Anne93 (talk) 16:28, 25 December 2009 (UTC)
Made some more changes! I'm sorry to be on your case, but our Review week is almost up, and if you know AP Bio, you'll know we need the grade! Lisa Anne93 (talk) 01:40, 26 December 2009 (UTC)
- Okay, will prioritise. Casliber (talk · contribs) 05:15, 26 December 2009 (UTC)
- Thanks so much for your help, Casliber, and for spending your holiday saving my grade:)Lisa Anne93 (talk) 04:15, 27 December 2009 (UTC)
[edit] Merry Christmas and Happy New Year!
May the beneficial power of the badnjak be with you, Casliber, in the coming year :-) Vladimir (talk) 16:34, 25 December 2009 (UTC)
- Hahaha, I hope so :) Casliber (talk · contribs) 20:09, 25 December 2009 (UTC)
[edit] Breviceratops as synonym of Bagaceratops
On the Breviceratops talk page, you mentioned that it was considered a synonym of Bagaceratops, is this published? If so, the page should be merged. FunkMonk (talk) 22:06, 25 December 2009 (UTC)
[edit] Teamwork barnstar
 | | The Teamwork Barnstar |
| Cas, for being one of those awesome wikipedians who produces great content in a collegial manner, helping out all over, and great dispute resolution. — Rlevse • Talk • 13:50, 26 December 2009 (UTC) |
[edit] Editor Review thanks
 | Hello, Casliber! This is just a note thanking you for participating in my recent editor review. Thank you again for your view on my editing as I will be sure to keep your opinion and advice in mind!
IShadowed (Talk) |
[edit] Sorry for the trouting
I clicked it and didn't know what it was - I thought I'd not posted it but obviously I have. Newbie mistake there - my apologies. ^_^
Still getting used to things and the way they work. Thanks for your hospitable welcome!
Newty23125 (talk) 12:20, 27 December 2009 (UTC)
- Okay. Any questions, fire away then :) Casliber (talk · contribs) 13:17, 27 December 2009 (UTC)
[edit] FA-Team revival
I've made a proposal to bring the FA-Team out of inactivity—with a mission a bit different than we're used to. This is just a generic note I'm sending to members asking for their input. Cheers, Mm40 (talk) 01:27, 28 December 2009 (UTC)
[edit] Thanks For Your Reply To the Wendy James Wiki Lock Problem...
"You should be able to edit them now if you've edited more than ten times.."
Which average person has edited a Wiki entry more than ten times in a row..?
And if they did wouldn't they attract a SUSPICIOUS warning from Wikipedia itself about excessive edits..?
Certainly an OFFICIAL editor or a staffer at Wikipedia perhaps could edit an article that many times (which is fine)..
But even members of bands themselves on Wikipedia have not edited their OWN articles more than a handful of times..!!
(there is generally no need unless it is the occasional update as the article is usually the bands past history..and current activities which rarely change that much)
As I have said before..
This LOCK is clearly (and cynically?) designed for the exact opposite reason such concepts were introduced in the first place..
(Preventing abuse is one thing but preventing THE PUBLIC contributing on a PUBLIC WEBSITE which is currently looking for PERSONAL PUBLIC SUPPORT (see above) is very counter productive isn't it..?)
It should be removed immediately or else the entry itself should go..
(The "other" wiki articles on Transvision Vamp etc are open to any and all to edit and contribute and so are clearly fresher and more read than this one...)
In fact some aspects have recently been contributed to by myself on those very articles.
(Adding much needed facts and removing long mis-understood mistakes..)
I would quite happy give the "Wendy James" article the face lift it sorely needs..
But I (and everyone else in the public )have to actually get access to it first don't we...?
Thanks again for your kind words.
Wendtrut (talk) 17:34, 28 December 2009 (UTC)
- I will reply there. Casliber (talk · contribs) 20:38, 28 December 2009 (UTC)
- Blocked, fyi. Brandon (talk) 23:48, 28 December 2009 (UTC)
- Thx for looking into it - who would have thought Wendy James could have been such a controversial figure. Can yuo point me the socking info? cheers, Casliber (talk · contribs) 23:54, 28 December 2009 (UTC)
- This guy: 86.42.181.101 (talk · contribs), 86.42.135.61 (talk · contribs), 86.42.183.204 (talk · contribs), 86.42.164.177 (talk · contribs). I had forgotten he was IP hoping instead of using accounts, I'll go change the block reason. Brandon (talk) 03:42, 29 December 2009 (UTC)
[edit] Woodruff
Hi. Your move of Woodruff is causing some minor edit warring over the redirect left behind. I have posted a WP:RM to move Woodruff (disambiguation) over the redirect. --Una Smith (talk) 02:31, 29 December 2009 (UTC)
[edit] DYK for Banksia verticillata
Materialscientist (
talk) 11:43, 29 December 2009 (UTC)
[edit] DYK for Armillaria luteobubalina
Materialscientist (
talk) 11:43, 29 December 2009 (UTC)
[edit] Re coffee.Copied from my page
-
- From memory I think Australians would call that kind of flash mob something like the Sweet FA push ('push' as in Henry Lawson's famous 'The Bastard from the Bush'), 'Sweet' because also I take my several cups a day with sugar, but also 'Sweet Fanny Adams', which I believe is also an idiom current in the antipoedean lexicon.
- Two quick points. (1) Note 4 sources the text to Bennett Alan Weinberg & Bonnie K. Bealer's The world of caffeine: the science and culture of the world's most popular drug, but then fails, unaccountably, in the etymology section, to cite the same text pp.24-25, which has several paragraphs on, precisely, the etymology of the word, with several different hypotheses listed, most of them what are called technically 'folk etymologies'. So, the citations in notes 12-15 of the etymology section should have the Weinberg-Bealer reference, pp.24-25 added.
- (2)The O.E.D. is referred to in the etymology section, without specifying which edition, long or short, is meant. The full reference would be O.E.D. 2nd edition, Clarendon Press, Oxford vol.3 p.438 col.1 sub. coffee.
- (2b) the etymology paragraph relies on a synthesis of OED and Merriam-Webster, technically this makes it a WP:OR violation for nitpickers. For example, the OED gives Turkish kahveh, our text has Turkish 'kahve', small differences, as experienced women remind us, still count.
- There's another, double, WP:OR violation is stating that 'the word "coffee" entered the English language in 1598 via the Dutch koffie,' (source OED). The OED doesn't say this. It says the word entered European languages around 1600 apparently from Turkish kahveh. Then the OED gives, as the first known reference to foreign forms of the word coffee in English is to the 1598 translation of Linschoten's Travels (Dutch original 1595), where it appears as chaoua. The recognisable English form Coffa dates from 1603 onward. The OED again does not say it came into English via Dutch. It writes:-
-
'The European languages generally appear to have got the name from Turkish kahveh, about 1600, perh. through It(alian). caffè;. . .The English coffee, Dutch koffie, earlier German coffee, koffee, Russian kophe, kopheĭ, have o, apparently representing earlierau from ahw or ahv.
- (3) The text has 'In the languages of Ethiopia, terms such as bunna (in Amharic and Afan Oromo) and būn (in Tigrinya) are used.'
- This would require a citation, but the information is unnecessary. The Online OED has been accessed, and perhaps that has updated info. But in my second edition one reads:
-
'Some have conjectured that it is a foreign, perh. African, word disguised and have thought it connected with the name of Kaffa in the south Abyssinian highland, where the plant seems to be native. But of this there is no evidence, and the name qahwah is not given to the berry or plant, which is called bunn, the native name in Shoa being būn.'
- The OED therefore differs from our text, which however cites it. If you look at Weinberg and Bealer's book p.22, they write bunn is the Ethiopian and early Arabic term for coffee beans,'(not bunna).
-
-
- Suggested text rewrite therefore would be:
-
The first reference to "coffee" in the English language, in the form chaoua, dates to 1598. In English and other European languages, coffee derives from the Ottoman Turkish kahveh, via the Italian caffè. The Turkish word in turn was borrowed from Arabic: قهوة, qahwah. Arab lexicographers maintain that qahwah originally meant a kind of wine, and referred its etymology, in turn, to the verb qahiya, signifying "to have no appetite",[6], since this beverage was thought to dull one's hunger. Several alternative etymologies exist which hold that the Arab form may disguise a loanword from an Ethiopian or African source, suggesting Kaffa, the highland in southwestern Ethiopia, since the plant is indigenous to that area.[7][8] Best, Nishidani (talk) 16:13, 29 December 2009 (UTC)
- Wonderful - that'll do nicely. Casliber (talk · contribs) 20:34, 29 December 2009 (UTC)
[edit] DYK for Banksia repens
≈
Chamal talk ¤ 03:42, 30 December 2009 (UTC)
