User talk:Amphioxys/Archive 1

Hey Fedor :) I hope you like the place and choose to stay.

Some links that may be of use:

• Wikipedia:Welcome, newcomers
• Wikipedia:How to edit a page
• Wikipedia:Village pump - ask questions you may have here, or leave a message on my talk page

Keep contributing, and don't forget to have fun :) Dysprosia 11:30, 30 Sep 2003 (UTC)

Kenneth Alan

Your comments would be very much appreciated at Wikipedia:Requests for comment/Kenneth Alan. Thank you. -- Decumanus | Talk 16:42, 8 Apr 2004 (UTC)

Strepsirhini -> Strepsirrhini

Actually, both spellings are correct. However, the single 'r' spelling is about 8 times more common than the double 'rr' spelling. Google give 2410 hits for 'r' and only 354 hits for 'rr'. So I'm reverting your changes. - UtherSRG 13:04, 5 Aug 2004 (UTC)

Dear UtherSRG,

I am not sure how much you know about taxonomy, but there can only be one proper spelling of a given taxon-name and that is the one originally used in the describing publication. Google can therefore not be the arbiter in this only the original description. And as it happens to be, 'Strepsirrhini' is the correct spelling according to Systema Naturae 2000 which is directly based on the authoritative work of McKenna and Bell.

I assume you are going to re-revert your changes again?

Cheers, Fedor 21:15, 9 Aug 2004 (UTC)

---

I contacted Tree-of-Life about the incorrect spelling of this group on their website and this is the reply I got:

Dear Fedor Steeman,

Thanks for bringing this to our attention.  We were following the spelling in Walker's Mammals
of the World, which is generally a reliable source for mammalian nomenclature.  In fact, 
Strepsirhini with one "r" is more commonly used in the primatological literature than Saint-
Hilaire's original spelling.  However, there doesn't seem to be a petition before the ICZN to 
adopt the more common spelling, so it looks like Strepsirrhini is still the valid name for the 
group.

I have corrected the name on the relevant Tree of Life pages.  However, I do not expect this to 
have much of an effect on the spelling on other web sites.  Several other web sites which are 
more commonly used as sources of information on mammals use the single "r" spelling, and most 
people still turn to print references as the final taxonomic authority.

Thanks for your interest in the Tree of Life project.

Katja Schulz

You can see the result on: Tree of Life: Strepsirrhini

Cheers, Fedor 07:51, 10 Aug 2004 (UTC)

Kenneth Alan

Kenneth Alan's case is now in arbitration. See Wikipedia:Requests for arbitration/Kenneth Alan. You may wish to add comment to Wikipedia:Requests for arbitration/Kenneth Alan/Evidence Mintguy (T) 14:11, 22 Aug 2004 (UTC)

3RR

Please notice that you just violated our WP:3RR policy on the page Netherlands. Any admin may block you for 24 hours. Please comply with our rules in the future. gidonb 06:43, 12 January 2006 (UTC)

No, you started by stepwisely reverting my edit e.g. here. I think it is highly arrogant that you climb up the ivory tower of npov and abiding by the rules, while you keep on pushing pov notions in the article. I rewrote the section (here) to be balanced and include both viewpoints, whilst removing semi-certain claims. Why don't read it first, before blindly reverting it again!? Fedor 09:05, 12 January 2006 (UTC)

Which is it, exactly?

Hi. I notice you've been quite, umm...active on the Netherland article! You're a dutchman so I'll ask you: as a dutchman, do you prefer the use of "the Netherlands" or "Netherland" in English? I personally use the latter. heh. -Chef Ketone 00:26, 13 January 2006 (UTC)

Well, I only use "Netherlands" in want for a better word. As far as I know, "Netherland" is non-existing in the English language, and I am do not feel comfortable to use words nobody knows. However, in Danish, that I learned and now master fluently, there is a choice between the singular form ("Nederland") and the plural for ("Nederlandene"). I prefer the singular form in any case, because it is clearer that it refers to the modern nation, and not the historical area, now usually referred to as the "Low Countries". Fedor 19:26, 14 January 2006 (UTC)

Cool. In Spanish I encountered something really odd...the nation is referred to (as you would expect) Países Bajos (translated, "Low Countries"), but when referring to the language, the language is called Neerlandés (translated, "Netherlandese", "Netherlandish" or "Netherlandic"). You would think that some group of linguists would get together for each language and decide once and for all what they're going to use. I like the Spanish intiative of using Neerlandés for the language, now just to refer to the country as Neerlandia. Chef Ketone 22:57, 14 January 2006 (UTC)

You have the exact same in French, with the country being called "Pays-Bas" with the adjective "néerlandais". Something like Neerlandia (Néerlandie?) might be even better. On the Latin wikipedia they use Nederlandia!Fedor 19:28, 15 January 2006 (UTC)

Image:Rodhocetus.png

Hi Fedor. This image was deleted because it had no copyright status tag, and had been tag as being of unknown copyright status for more than two weeks. I notice that now if has been re-uploaded, it has been tagged {{GFDL}} and has full source details, so there shouldn't be any problems with this image in future. Regards, CLW 13:07, 18 February 2006 (UTC)

What are you talking about? I had indicated the copyright status on the respective page for the image as early as 25 May 2004 (UTC) !!! So what do you mean that there is no copyright status!? And didn't you even bother to read the discussion page for Rodhocetus before you boldly started deleting things!? Fedor 08:28, 19 February 2006 (UTC)

VWN en WCN

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

Deze vereniging gaat eind augustus/begin september een Wikimedia Conferentie in Nederland (WCN) houden, volgend op Wikimania in Boston, gedeeltelijk erop inspelend middels een aantal discussiegroepen. Om iets dergelijks te organiseren is imput erg gewenst. Dus als je wilt meehelpen, of als je interesse hebt om bij een dergelijk evenement aanwezig te zijn, geef dat dan aan op nl.wikimedia. Ik hoop daar snel je imput tegemoet te zien! Met vriendelijke groet, effeietsanders 13:46, 25 February 2006 (UTC)

Hmm...

Ja, dansk er min modersmål men så er engelsk og fransk også. Jeg er ikke fortrolig med den entomologi af "Holland" på dansk. Personlig, jeg tror, at denne er underlig, men hvert sprog had sine ejendommelighede! Så hvad laver du i Danmark? Og hvorfor skriver du i dansk Wikipedia? Ifølge mig, ingen man læser den og det kvalitet niveau er kun middelmådig. Páll ^{(Die pienk olifant)} 17:24, 22 March 2006 (UTC)

Cetartiodactyla

Good job!--GRM 15:58, 3 January 2007 (UTC)

DUDE!!!

I enjoyed your little conversation with that guy in the Meganthropus article! You've really put him in his place (some confession chamber for having his faith shooken I guess)! ^^

Thanks!!! Amphioxys (talk) 20:38, 10 February 2016 (UTC)

European floods

I'm not sure that this list is particularly useful as we've got categories like Category:Floods_in_Europe, but I'd make a couple of suggestions anyway:

• You need to do something to make the Fatalities column sort properly - at present "4" sorts after "37". One way is to use {{sort}} and have a sort key which pads all the numbers out to perhaps 5 digits (00004 then files before 00037), but there may be some other way to indicate that the column is numerical and should be sorted that way.
• If you say "on the continent of Europe", then to most British people that means on the land mass which does not include outlying islands such as the UK and Ireland. "In Europe" would be clearer!
• The list has obviously got a long way to go.
• I think it would be clearer if the first column listed the floods using the title of their Wikipedia article - years as links are unintuitive, and it's not obvious that the two "2010"s lead to different articles. I'd expect "2009" to lead me to a list of all the floods in 2009, not one specific article.

PamD 22:58, 28 January 2013 (UTC)

Hi & thanks! I created this page, because I needed a good overview like page Floods in Australia. I needed something that likewise exclusively focused on the floods and added some extra data. It was actually prompted by my interest in climate change. This is just a stub, of course, and this page would become more informative with time. I will look at your suggestions for the article. Thanks! Fedor (talk) 06:55, 29 January 2013 (UTC)

I hope this is better. However, I noticed the {{unreferenced}} tag. Isn't that a bit heavy-handed, since I do link to other wikipedia articles that do have references? Of course, ideally, all references should preferably be on this page also. They will get there in time. Fedor (talk) 07:29, 29 January 2013 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for January 30

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that you've added some links pointing to disambiguation pages. Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.

Cape Coloureds (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver)

added links pointing to Asian and European

Coloured (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver)

added links pointing to Asian and European

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 09:00, 30 January 2014 (UTC)

What is the purpose of your table in Orch OR talk?

Hi, I noticed that you started a new table in Orch OR talk, overlooking that I have done something similar in paragraph format: Twenty Orch OR testable predictions (1998). You are welcome to just copy-paste some of my text into your table, but I do not see much benefit. All statements, among the 20 predictions of Orch OR, that were specific enough - like gap junctions between neurons and glia - are disproved experimentally, and I have cited relevant journal articles. All statements, among the 20 predictions of Orch OR, that are too general to be falsified by any conceivable experiment are not disproved, but they cannot be disproved in principle, and are therefore un-testable, in contradiction with the main claim "20 testable predictions". For example, what means anti-depressants "involve" microtubules ??? If "direct effect" is meant, then it is disproved, however, if "indirect effect" is meant, then anything has indirect effect on microtubules; the question is whether such indirect effect has any functional significance or not, and this question is avoided by the "wording" of the "testable prediction". Danko Georgiev (talk) 21:30, 1 April 2014 (UTC)

Oh hi! I kinda forgot about this little project. Basically, I just want to get to the bottom of this, because of conflicting claims. I don't feel it is specific enough and think it would be useful to visualize this to clear up exactly what is going on. Fedor (talk) 08:45, 8 April 2014 (UTC)

Your account will be renamed

Hello,

The developer team at Wikimedia is making some changes to how accounts work, as part of our on-going efforts to provide new and better tools for our users like cross-wiki notifications. These changes will mean you have the same account name everywhere. This will let us give you new features that will help you edit and discuss better, and allow more flexible user permissions for tools. One of the side-effects of this is that user accounts will now have to be unique across all 900 Wikimedia wikis. See the announcement for more information.

Unfortunately, your account clashes with another account also called Fedor. To make sure that both of you can use all Wikimedia projects in future, we have reserved the name Fedor~enwiki that only you will have. If you like it, you don't have to do anything. If you do not like it, you can pick out a different name. If you think you might own all of the accounts with this name and this message is in error, please visit Special:MergeAccount to check and attach all of your accounts to prevent them from being renamed.

Your account will still work as before, and you will be credited for all your edits made so far, but you will have to use the new account name when you log in.

Sorry for the inconvenience.

Yours,
Keegan Peterzell
Community Liaison, Wikimedia Foundation

23:53, 19 March 2015 (UTC)

ArbCom elections are now open!

Hi,
You appear to be eligible to vote in the current Arbitration Committee election. The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to enact binding solutions for disputes between editors, primarily related to serious behavioural issues that the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the ability 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 wish to participate, you are welcome to review the candidates' statements and submit your choices on the voting page. For the Election committee, MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 08:53, 23 November 2015 (UTC)

ArbCom Elections 2016: Voting now open!

Hello, Amphioxys. Voting in the 2016 Arbitration Committee elections is open from Monday, 00:00, 21 November through Sunday, 23:59, 4 December to all unblocked users who have registered an account before Wednesday, 00:00, 28 October 2016 and have made at least 150 mainspace edits before Sunday, 00:00, 1 November 2016.

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 wish to participate in the 2016 election, please review the candidates' statements and submit your choices on the voting page. Mdann52 (talk) 22:08, 21 November 2016 (UTC)

ArbCom Elections 2016: Voting now open!

Hello, Amphioxys. Voting in the 2016 Arbitration Committee elections is open from Monday, 00:00, 21 November through Sunday, 23:59, 4 December to all unblocked users who have registered an account before Wednesday, 00:00, 28 October 2016 and have made at least 150 mainspace edits before Sunday, 00:00, 1 November 2016.

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 wish to participate in the 2016 election, please review the candidates' statements and submit your choices on the voting page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 22:08, 21 November 2016 (UTC)

ArbCom 2017 election voter message

Hello, Amphioxys. Voting in the 2017 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23.59 on Sunday, 10 December. All users who registered an account before Saturday, 28 October 2017, made at least 150 mainspace edits before Wednesday, 1 November 2017 and are not currently blocked are eligible 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 wish to participate in the 2017 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 18:42, 3 December 2017 (UTC)