User talk:FunkMonk/Archive 13

Salafism

There's a discussion that you might be interested in here. GregKaye ✍♪ 20:20, 11 December 2014 (UTC)

A barnstar for you!

	The Tireless Contributor Barnstar
	thanks for contributing here.i have never seen an non-admin with so many edis(how did you get your edit count on over 50000 edits) Regisaurusjacobi 09:17, 9 December 2014 (UTC)

• Heheh, thanks. Well, I've been here since 2007, after all... FunkMonk (talk) 09:24, 9 December 2014 (UTC)
• well,and I have created an account only today--Regisaurusjacobi 09:27, 9 December 2014 (UTC) — Preceding unsigned comment added by Regisaurusjacobi (talk • contribs)

Well, then you only need to edit for a few years... A good task could be to add references to non-referenced paleo articles, there are quite a few. FunkMonk (talk) 09:31, 9 December 2014 (UTC)

and expand these stubs Category:Therapsid stubs --Regisaurusjacobi 09:51, 9 December 2014 (UTC)

Yep, list of therapsids for example, has many unsourced stubs, and even missing articles. Sources can be found on Google Scholar[1], by searching a taxon name. FunkMonk (talk) 09:53, 9 December 2014 (UTC)

yeah, the list has problems:eg bauria is not valid.but,how to take part in a wiki project anyway?--Regisaurusjacobi 10:44, 9 December 2014 (UTC) — Preceding unsigned comment added by Regisaurusjacobi (talk • contribs)

Well, just add a userbox, then people will know your "allegiance". You can sign up somewhere as well, but it is pretty useless. What counts is good edits. FunkMonk (talk) 10:47, 9 December 2014 (UTC)

like this page creation ?also could you give me the english version of Google Scholar,because i cant read your version --Regisaurusjacobi 11:11, 9 December 2014 (UTC)?--Regisaurusjacobi 11:11, 9 December 2014 (UTC)

Looks good, just remember that only genus and species names should use italics, not family names, etc. Here's English Google Scholar: http://scholar.google.com/ FunkMonk (talk) 11:24, 9 December 2014 (UTC)

this?--Regisaurusjacobi 09:32, 10 December 2014 (UTC)

Heheh, back in business! FunkMonk (talk) 10:17, 10 December 2014 (UTC)

yeah,the funny stuff that the IP wrote--Regisaurusjacobi 11:22, 10 December 2014 (UTC) — Preceding unsigned comment added by Regisaurusjacobi (talk • contribs)

Now we only need the land before time stuf... FunkMonk (talk) 11:43, 10 December 2014 (UTC)

i have it here--Regisaurusjacobi 08:12, 11 December 2014 (UTC)

File:Pterosaur in the sky.png do you like my image?--Regisaurusjacobi 10:08, 11 December 2014 (UTC)

Fun, though I'm afraid it's a copyright violation... FunkMonk (talk) 10:34, 11 December 2014 (UTC)

copyvio?not really(ok if the websites where I got the images use the CC-BY-SA 3,and kaleb the pterosaur oc is copyrighted to me,it cant be one)--Regisaurusjacobi 08:11, 12 December 2014 (UTC)

why do you have your crap on a separate page and not on your user page?(and,by the way,do you find my userpage crappy?)--Regisaurusjacobi 08:40, 12 December 2014 (UTC)

Well, I don't want to expose everyone to all that crap when they click on my page. Yours probably looks better than mine. FunkMonk (talk) 10:06, 12 December 2014 (UTC)

Hello! There is a DR/N request you may have interest in

This message is being sent to let you know of a discussion at the Wikipedia:Dispute resolution noticeboard regarding a content dispute discussion you may have participated in. Content disputes can hold up article development and make editing difficult for editors. You are not required to participate, but you are both invited and encouraged to help this dispute come to a resolution. The discussion is at DRN:Tyrannosaurus. Please join us to help form a consensus. Thank you! 98.193.124.175 (talk) 07:35, 16 December 2014 (UTC)

Tiktaalik

Hi there :) I'm thinking of removing the image of Tiktaalik venturing onto land which you placed in the article, but your remarks suggest you may have come across some new research which shows Tiktaalik was not fully aquatic. There must have always been fish that would occassionally leave water, but the case with Tiktaalik is really problematic due to its massive body (c. 30 pounds and some 6 feet long) and unossified spine. We just don't know, so unless you provide a reliable source to accompany the image I'll try to remove it. Regards, Sceptic view (talk) 19:46, 15 December 2014 (UTC)

• Google scholar is your friend. "With robust pelvic and pectoral fins and girdles, a flattened head, loss of the extrascapular and opercular bones, and expanded ribs, among other characteristics, Tiktaalik was likely a denizen of a continuum of channel, shallow water, and mudflat habitats where appendage-based support, locomotion, and head mobility would have been advantageous."[2] Furthermore, the article itself says "And maybe occasionally, using its very specialized fins, for moving up overland". It's a good idea to read the actual text before making assumptions, you know. FunkMonk (talk) 19:51, 15 December 2014 (UTC)

I was familiar with the results of the study writing my previous post. The point is that a very cautious assumption ("maybe occasionally") made by the most ardent proponents of Tiktaalik as a key species in the transition from water to land does not really authorise anyone to include an image (in any encyclopedia article) implying that Tiktaalik actually ventured onto land. At the very least you should quote Shubin's words (or somehow reflect his caution) in the image caption - otherwise the graphics is clearly misleading, not to mention that it's against WP:POV. Sceptic view (talk) 16:40, 16 December 2014 (UTC)

1: No one has refuted that it could venture onto land, if you know of any such sources, it is up to you to provide them. It is simply not controversial. 2: The image is from a museum, which would make it pretty reliable in itself. 3: As the authors point out, many modern fish that are much less adapted to land can move around there with no problem. FunkMonk (talk) 17:11, 16 December 2014 (UTC)

1) You're right. No one has refuted just like no one has proved. These are just speculations. If we refer to experts' speculations we should call them accordingly and not present them as some definte findings. The image is based on speculations (which at preset cannot be solved really) but there is no info which should make an average reader aware of this fact. And that is the problem. 2) Come on... 3) I have no problem with fish moving onto land. But Tiktaalik was no mudskipper. Its spine was unossified and it was some 1000 times heavier. Shubin and friends are well aware of that and hence their caution.

In my opinion the article in its present form is getting biased toward the point of view shared by Shubin and Daeschler whose current research seems focused on trying to defend Tiktaalik's significant position it had during 2006-2010. The mention of Zachelmie trackways is put in such a way so as to diminish their significance, though both Ahlberg and his Polish colleagues have clearly defined them as tetrapod and not fishapod or elpistostegalian in origin. In the light of these findings Tiktaalik's phylogenetic position has become much less clear than it was prior to 2010 - again, no mention of that in the article. It still looks like it was written before 2010. And your image only strengthens this bias. No wonder the scientific community has no regard for Wikipedia and people like Ahlberg even do not care about present their knowledge here. Let's try to make articles better and more neutral, otherwise Wikiedia will never crawl out of its disrepute. Sceptic view (talk) 22:31, 16 December 2014 (UTC)

1: That means we can have no restorations of extinct animals on Wikipedia, since they're all just hypothetical speculation. Great. In all seriousness, if something isn't contested, it isn't controversial. The animal and the claims about it have been known for years, and if the claim was so far fetched, we would have seen many refutations by now. Also note that the image doesn't show the animals walking on land. They're simply poking their heads up from the water, and you don't have to be a mudskipper to be able to do that, or more.[3] FunkMonk (talk) 22:35, 16 December 2014 (UTC)

If there are no more suitable images one can use whatever there is provided it is placed in a proper context. And what is the context in the article? animal that lived on the bottom of shallow waters and perhaps even out of the water for short periods, with a skeleton indicating that it could support its body under the force of gravity whether in very shallow water or on land. Are these Shubin's words? No, they are taken from a pop science piece and you have accompanied them with the image taken at some Polish museum which has to display some catchy stuff to attract visitors and make its living. One reads the text then looks right at your graphics and the conclusion is clear - experts agree the animal could definitely walk on land. The text itself is also misleading in that it describes Tiktaalik's limbs, ribs and neck and avoids any mention of its unossified, thick-packed and non-interlocking vertebrae or no traces of differentiated and/or jointed distal radial bones. That is accompanied by a supposition that Zachelmie tracks were made by walking fish implying Tiktaalik-like animal, which is a total crap - Tiktaalik may have been able to move in shallow waters, but by no means could it leave marks like those discovered in Poland - but an average reader does not know these facts and so they are led to believe stuff which has little to do with the real story.

Another thing is that the context for the image which may have been given at the museum is totally unknown (there might be some information provided which explains to visitors that presenting Tiktaalik as a semi-aquatic species is just a tentative hypothesis and that Polish paleontologists discovered unambiguous tetrapod tracks which predate the animal by some 12ma). As I said before the phylogenetic position of Tiktaalik has been drastically challenged in 2010 and there is no mention of that in the article.

Sceptic view (talk) 07:15, 17 December 2014 (UTC)

And I repeat, the paper (not a "pop science article"), which is now cited in the article, says: "With robust pelvic and pectoral fins and girdles, a flattened head, loss of the extrascapular and opercular bones, and expanded ribs, among other characteristics, Tiktaalik was likely a denizen of a continuum of channel, shallow water, and mudflat habitats where appendage-based support, locomotion, and head mobility would have been advantageous."[4] You need to point to an actual, published refutation of the claims, since the personal opinions of Wikipedia editors don't count for much in this context. Only the sources count. If there is a controversy, prove it. FunkMonk (talk) 09:37, 17 December 2014 (UTC)

Ahlberg has never directly challenged Shubin and vice versa, but I haven't read of Shubin saying anything positive at all about Zachelmie trackways that would support Ahlberg's conclusions, just on the contrary - and that is telling. The article at its present state is simply not balanced with explicit and unambiguous findings of Ahlberg presented as putative, "securely" dated (implying that we just have to take Ahlberg's word for that which is not the case) and juxtaposed with a crappy hypothesis that the tracks could have been made by a fish. Why don't you help me rewrite or at least agree on some semgments of the article so that it takes a more balanced approach giving equal weight to opinions of various experts and not just Shubin and friends? I don't feel like entering edit wars, so could we continue on Tiktaalik's talk page and agree on what and how to modify? Sceptic view (talk) 10:50, 17 December 2014 (UTC)

Well, it's not really the text we're disagreeing on, you can expand it as much as you want. But I find it a bit ridiculous that we should "censor" an image that illustrates an uncontroversial hypothesis, that is described in the text. And yet again, the animal is not even shown walking on land, it is just poking up its head. Many modern fish are able to do that, so it is a non-issue. FunkMonk (talk) 10:58, 17 December 2014 (UTC)

I'm not going to remove the image as it in a way does represent Shubin's viewpoint, but I believe the caption needs some modification not to misinform the reader. I have also started a new section at Tiktaalik's talkpage. You are more then welcome to express your view so that we don't fight over it later on when the modifications are incorporated into the article itself. Sceptic view (talk) 11:35, 17 December 2014 (UTC)

Cool, made some comments there. FunkMonk (talk) 11:36, 17 December 2014 (UTC)

Art Question

How good are you with mesonychian anatomy?--Mr Fink (talk) 18:27, 16 December 2014 (UTC)

• Heh, I guess that depends on the purpose... Edit: Oh, I see it's art related. Well, hit me! FunkMonk (talk) 18:32, 16 December 2014 (UTC)

What pointers do you recommend for improving my picture of Hapalodectes?--Mr Fink (talk) 19:03, 16 December 2014 (UTC)

Hmmm, the rhinarium seems a bit long and pointy, and the front paws a bit too robust? Also, hard to say much meaningful without a skeletal reference... FunkMonk (talk) 21:06, 16 December 2014 (UTC)

Thanks for the input.--Mr Fink (talk) 21:10, 16 December 2014 (UTC)

What do you think of these two [5] [6] so far?--Mr Fink (talk) 05:12, 18 December 2014 (UTC)

Looks cool, the posture of the gar also looks much more natural. You could perhaps place the front legs of the Sinonyx so they do not overlap that much, to get a stronger silhouette. FunkMonk (talk) 08:39, 18 December 2014 (UTC)

Okay. I originally intended to reposition the gar to better show off the canines of Hapalodectes' lower jaw: that it makes the gar's pose more natural is an added kudos. I'll fix Sinonyx's leg, too.--Mr Fink (talk) 14:54, 18 December 2014 (UTC)

Cool! Keep em coming! FunkMonk (talk) 15:09, 18 December 2014 (UTC)

A special greeting...

• Haha, genius! FunkMonk (talk) 15:20, 18 December 2014 (UTC)

Commons

hello FunkMonk, you've seen some of my images. so I would take off the lock Commons. already learned the lesson not to upload images that are not mine. I had to have another user and I'm spending money for a cyber and upload. I ask you please --Levi bernardo (talk) 19:57, 17 December 2014 (UTC)

to here is the link [7] and sorry for not having seen your message. because the Spanish wikipedia are used appose the responses of a message in the discussion of who sends --Levi bernardo (talk) 19:59, 17 December 2014 (UTC)

Alright, done! FunkMonk (talk) 15:05, 18 December 2014 (UTC)

Thanks--Levi bernardo (talk) 15:21, 18 December 2014 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for December 21

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Velociraptor, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Raúl Martín. 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.

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 09:00, 21 December 2014 (UTC)

Thanks

Thank you for your email response. I have asked Dimitri to fill in the appropriate email template and we will see if he is willing to go through the rigmarole. It looks like being a damp rather than cold Christmas. I guess you have more wind turbines than we do (though I can see three from my house), and we have more ash trees. Seasons greetings. Cwmhiraeth (talk) 06:55, 23 December 2014 (UTC)

Thanks, and believe it or not, I've never actually seen any of the wind turbines around here... We had some slush last week, probably the closest I'll see to snow this year. Happy new year, too! FunkMonk (talk) 14:22, 23 December 2014 (UTC)

Merry Christmas!

Oh, you'd better watch out, you'd better not cry, you'd better not pout, I'm telling you why Christmas Velociraptor is coming to town He sees you when you sleeping, he knows when you're awake, he knows if you've been bad or good, so be good for your life's sake Oh, you'd better watch out, you'd better not cry, you'd better not pout, I'm telling you why Christmas Velociraptor is coming to town Merry Christmas, and watch out for the Christmas Velociraptor, IJReid (talk) 25 December 2014

Hahah, I was just wondering where he had gone (we celebrate Christmas the 24th here), there he is! FunkMonk (talk) 21:09, 25 December 2014 (UTC)

Ah, In North America Christmas Eve is the 24th, so well, I guess this might be belated for you. I wouldn't have been able to do it yesterday, as that was the day I got back from a four day skiing/skating/tubing/swimming trip. IJReid (talk) 21:13, 25 December 2014 (UTC)

Some More Help

Can I get your input at this thread?--Mr Fink (talk) 01:04, 27 December 2014 (UTC)

Dodo and Looney Tunes.

Would like your thoughts at the Dodo talk page. 174.124.241.73 (talk) 03:20, 28 December 2014 (UTC)

Precious again

extinct creatures
Thank you for quality articles in Palaeontology and the Arab world, for bringing extinct creatures as Dodo and Mauritius Blue Pigeon back to the "life" of our attention with scientific precision, and for GA reviews, - you are an awesome Wikipedian!

--Gerda Arendt (talk) 08:15, 2 January 2013 (UTC)

Two years ago, you were the 353rd recipient of my PumpkinSky Prize, --Gerda Arendt (talk) 08:38, 2 January 2015 (UTC)

Thanks! FunkMonk (talk) 18:22, 2 January 2015 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for January 3

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Majungasaurus, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page ICZN. 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.

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 11:27, 3 January 2015 (UTC)

move

hi id like to inform you that I moved the funkmonk crap to User:FunkMonk/Amphitherium--Regisaurusjacobi 08:31, 7 January 2015 (UTC)

images

any issues?--Regisaurusjacobi 10:17, 7 January 2015 (UTC)

File:Regisaurus.jpg

regisaurus

File:Silphedosuchus.png

silphedosuchus

File:Urumchia.png

urumchia

• Whut, haha! Don't you think they need to be a bit more different? FunkMonk (talk) 11:05, 7 January 2015 (UTC)
• not shure the last two are known only by the skull and the regisaurus was the nearest relative known with postcrania so i made them similar.anyway i am working on more regisaurids so if you see another one inform me(i am currently working at this one)--Regisaurusjacobi 11:19, 7 January 2015 (UTC)
• hm,the only one who makes me concerns is urumchia because when i searched in the internet about it i cant find any images(not ewen scans from the paper)for the others i have images--Regisaurusjacobi 11:23, 7 January 2015 (UTC)

By the way, wouldn't I technically be the author of those images? FunkMonk (talk) 11:31, 7 January 2015 (UTC)

true.but actually both of us hold rights on the images(you hold the copyright for the original rattile,and I hold the copyright for the dewiations)but,anyway we are still friends--Regisaurusjacobi 09:59, 8 January 2015 (UTC)

Heheh, yes, the license states all authors and the source needs to be credited. FunkMonk (talk) 10:00, 8 January 2015 (UTC)

ok,going to fix it now and by the way could you check if there are problems with these

With which one? FunkMonk (talk) 10:08, 8 January 2015 (UTC)

the two first ones.also I added you to the rattile images--Regisaurusjacobi 10:10, 8 January 2015 (UTC)

What kind of problems? FunkMonk (talk) 10:11, 8 January 2015 (UTC)

copyright problems--Regisaurusjacobi 10:16, 8 January 2015 (UTC)

They seem alright to me. Only the one with Petrie was a problem... FunkMonk (talk) 10:24, 8 January 2015 (UTC)

ha you fell as well in the trap.that that you call petrie was actually kaleb--Regisaurusjacobi 11:17, 8 January 2015 (UTC)

Lol. Damn you, Kaleb! Damn you to Hell! FunkMonk (talk) 11:19, 8 January 2015 (UTC)

what?--Regisaurusjacobi 11:22, 8 January 2015 (UTC)

He is misleading. How did you get so interested in Regisaurus, by the way? FunkMonk (talk) 12:45, 8 January 2015 (UTC)

its my favorite,and again i found two more misleading OCsGladys and Tiffany --Regisaurusjacobi 07:36, 9 January 2015 (UTC)

would you mind taking an eye on this.that ip is doing nothing than distruction(they have informed him but he doesn't stop,also it the 7th ip he abuses)I have already revented 4 edits of him today--Regisaurusjacobi 10:12, 9 January 2015 (UTC)

I'm not an admin here, so can't do much! FunkMonk (talk) 12:33, 9 January 2015 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for January 11

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited 2015 Jabal Mohsen suicide attacks, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page North Lebanon. 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.

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 08:48, 11 January 2015 (UTC)

Geo Coordinates for type specimens ?

I'd like your opinion, since you are a shrewd and experienced editor. What are your thoughts on putting the geographic coordinates on an article, for the place from which the type specimen was obtained for a given species? It might make sense if the animal is only found in a small region of distribution. I had the coords up on the gray-tailed vole article, but the GA reviewer was uncertain. It could be cool, since it might make the animal pop up on Google Earth or similar mapping apps that show WP articles within a given region. Or maybe not, since it might be just confusing clutter... Thoughts? Gaff (talk) 00:16, 13 January 2015 (UTC)

A barnstar for you!

	The Original Barnstar
	Really appreciate your edits on extinct birds. Keep up the good work! Nascimentors (talk) 01:17, 13 January 2015 (UTC)

Thanks a lot! Still plenty of stuff to do, so any help is appreciated. By the way, is the name "Ara martinicus" used by any sources? If not, we'll still have to use the "wrong" name, as it is the official name, in spite of being incorrect. FunkMonk (talk) 04:47, 13 January 2015 (UTC)

Certainly I'll help whenever I can! Ara martinicus is mentioned by Rotschild in his book Extinct Birds (but, unfortunately, not the same case for A. erythrurus and A. erythrocephalus): https://archive.org/stream/extinctbirdsatte00roth#page/52/mode/2up Nascimentors (talk) 00:29, 14 January 2015 (UTC)

Ah, yes, though all modern sources use martinica, so it must have been emended at some point. I will ask at the bird project... FunkMonk (talk) 05:15, 14 January 2015 (UTC)

images(again)

any issues--Regisaurusjacobi 09:06, 13 January 2015 (UTC)

anybody here?hello?--Regisaurusjacobi 09:17, 13 January 2015 (UTC)

Again, when making derivative images, you need to credit the original artist, and link to the original file. FunkMonk (talk) 10:39, 13 January 2015 (UTC)

is this acceptable?it is petrie the pteranodon--Regisaurusjacobi 10:52, 13 January 2015 (UTC)

File:Petrie the pteranodon.png

As long as you did it entirely yourself. FunkMonk (talk) 05:06, 14 January 2015 (UTC)

its derived from my kaleb(you know who kaleb is) image and this is the design he has in Guido-a raptors life.the guido-a raptors life is mine,so it wouldn't make issues--Regisaurusjacobi 09:26, 14 January 2015 (UTC)

anybody here?hello?--Regisaurusjacobi 09:48, 14 January 2015 (UTC)

would you mind deleting this .i dont need it--Regisaurusjacobi 10:56, 14 January 2015 (UTC)

You made it yourself? FunkMonk (talk) 11:54, 14 January 2015 (UTC)

err,what?--Regisaurusjacobi 09:29, 15 January 2015 (UTC)

The image, what else? FunkMonk (talk) 09:52, 15 January 2015 (UTC)

sorry,but I am very busy at list of therapsids at the moment--Regisaurusjacobi 09:56, 15 January 2015 (UTC)

Heh, well, you asked, if you made the image yourself, there is no reason to delete, others might find it useful. FunkMonk (talk) 10:00, 15 January 2015 (UTC)

are there any issues with the page here--Regisaurusjacobi 10:03, 15 January 2015 (UTC)

what about this?its again from the land before time(hint:it says yep yep yep)--Regisaurusjacobi 11:39, 15 January 2015 (UTC)

File:Ducky the saurolophus.png

fan art

any issues ?--Regisaurusjacobi 08:04, 16 January 2015 (UTC)

anybody here?hello?--Regisaurusjacobi 08:20, 16 January 2015 (UTC)

a regisaurus for you

File:Regisaurus.jpg	a regisaurus for you
	hopefully it will eat you ALIVE! Regisaurusjacobi 09:36, 20 January 2015 (UTC)

im back

i have good news.check out this--Regisaurusjacobi 10:43, 20 January 2015 (UTC)

Heh, so what does it mean? I assume you can't be two places at once? FunkMonk (talk) 10:56, 20 January 2015 (UTC)

well im just the IP with an account--Regisaurusjacobi 11:00, 20 January 2015 (UTC)

see this too--Regisaurusjacobi 09:41, 21 January 2015 (UTC)

do you like this?--Regisaurusjacobi 09:52, 21 January 2015 (UTC)

File:FunkMonk.png

Whoops, seems I'll have to lay low for a while... FunkMonk (talk) 11:35, 21 January 2015 (UTC)

Thanks

Hi and thanks, at first can you say me this site is valid source or not? http://www.npr.org/blogs/parallels/2013/08/28/216385513/who-are-syrias-friends-and-why-are-they-supporting-assad

And can I ask you my question about Wikimedia or not? Regards Hananeh.M.h (talk) 13:31, 21 January 2015 (UTC)

You're welcome. That website is ok, but the fact that it is a blog within the website may be a bit iffy. If you want to use it, I don't think it's a problem. If you want to remove it, that could probably be argued for as well. As for Wikimedia, you can ask as well, I'm an admin at Commons. FunkMonk (talk) 13:36, 21 January 2015 (UTC)

Hi I want valid and update sources about Hezbollah specially relations between Syria and Hezbollah. Can you help me? please ping me to see your answer, ThanksHananeh.M.h (talk) 06:36, 22 January 2015 (UTC)

Well, you could try al Akhbar, then it at least won't be American-propaganda. FunkMonk (talk) 10:29, 22 January 2015 (UTC)

whoops

oh you are in big truble now...--Regisaurusjacobi 09:44, 22 January 2015 (UTC)

• Weegee? Where does that leave Waluigi?[8] FunkMonk (talk) 10:28, 22 January 2015 (UTC)

what?--Regisaurusjacobi 11:15, 22 January 2015 (UTC)

Your link features Weegee, which I assume is the evil Luigi, like Wario is to Mario. But what about Waluigi? FunkMonk (talk) 11:51, 22 January 2015 (UTC)

wait a minute:weegeepedia says that Malleo is the evil mario,which means wario and waluigi are either Fakegees or something else--Regisaurusjacobi 07:33, 23 January 2015 (UTC)

OMG... We have unravelled a conspiracy... FunkMonk (talk) 09:19, 23 January 2015 (UTC)

yeah,my userpage got vandalized two times today--Regisaurusjacobi 10:05, 23 January 2015 (UTC)

Ducky

Care to comment? Kind of makes me sad. Gaff (talk) 21:55, 23 January 2015 (UTC)

image

regarding https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Special:Contributions/182.239.95.137 https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Special:Contributions/183.207.229.134 https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Special:Contributions/183.207.229.15 and https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Special:Contributions/118.179.3.164 do you think File:War Flag of Novorussia.svg should be deleted?--Regisaurusjacobi 10:07, 27 January 2015 (UTC)

Well, if it is free, and has encyclopaedic value, then it shouldn't FunkMonk (talk) 10:14, 27 January 2015 (UTC)

yeah wery tricky indeed--Regisaurusjacobi 10:32, 27 January 2015 (UTC)

go away

have you become crazy or why did you stop replying.also stop that retarded edit war on pristerognathus I am SICK OF IT!!!!!!!!!!!(well,many say you are one of the greatest contributors here.i don't believe it.you are THE MOST BULLSHIT CONTRIBUTOR EVER!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!)

Heh, well, a wrong image is a wrong image! Ducky is nice, and thanks for the stuff below. FunkMonk (talk) 09:38, 20 January 2015 (UTC)

LOL I also have a littlefoot image.are there any issues with it--Regisaurusjacobi 09:42, 20 January 2015 (UTC)

File:Litllefoot the seismosaurus.png

Heh, as long as you use it on your userpage they should be ok, because images that are not in use and are not of "encyclopaedic value" may get deleted. FunkMonk (talk) 09:45, 20 January 2015 (UTC)

I think I need to get a wiki of my own--Regisaurusjacobi 09:47, 20 January 2015 (UTC)

I'm Frustrated Why every time I post something for the "Paraceratherium" article you reject it and replace it? You do the math, If you add 6.6-8.2ft to shoulders that are already 16ft high the outcome will be an animal that stands even higher than 20ft, it will be 22-24ft high and what's with you saying the weight of the Steppe Mammoth is equivalent to an Indricothere? That is not true. The Steppe Mammoth was 10 tonnes on average, and why do you have a problem with saying that males weighed 15-20 tonnes and females 11-12 tonnes? Huh? And how can you possibly say that 11 tonnes is "low", That's huge! I mean, honestly...good day sir. Even you must recognize that 11 tonnes is not "low". — Preceding unsigned comment added by 76.89.150.8 (talk) 19:18, 27 January 2015 (UTC)

Hi. The problem is that we as editors are not allowed to "do the math". We can only write what has been stated in published sources. We can't make stuff up ourselves. FunkMonk (talk) 19:32, 27 January 2015 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for January 30

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Deinocheirus, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page David Lambert. 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.

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 09:26, 30 January 2015 (UTC)

Wikia

I have currently tested the wikia account and IT WOKS!.--Regisaurusjacobi 14:50, 2 February 2015 (UTC)

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=AXwGVXD7qEQ FunkMonk (talk) 15:28, 2 February 2015 (UTC)

here is my new wiki--Regisaurusjacobi 09:29, 3 February 2015 (UTC)

Lol... By the way, I'd prefer if you did not use my real name. FunkMonk (talk) 11:30, 3 February 2015 (UTC)

doesn't matter,the name *** is the name of a Pristerognathus in my Fanfictions--Regisaurusjacobi 12:12, 3 February 2015 (UTC)

Ehm, well, then you should change it as a courtesy to me, after all, I started the Wiki for you. FunkMonk (talk) 12:14, 3 February 2015 (UTC)

Omg, you are in very big trouble now...--Regisaurusjacobi 12:31, 3 February 2015 (UTC)

Not sure why. Anyhow, it's better to solve this between ourselves, so remove my name, since I've helped you for no reason the last few weeks. FunkMonk (talk) 12:33, 3 February 2015 (UTC)

oh just shut up!--Regisaurusjacobi 12:36, 3 February 2015 (UTC)

I tried to be nice. Now I just changed the password to your Wiki. You had your chance. I will report you to the admins if you annoy me further, and you will be blocked from Wikipedia. FunkMonk (talk) 12:40, 3 February 2015 (UTC)

I'm really sorry that I have droven you mad,but honestly I'll go to remove it now.just set the password back again and then I'll remove it.im really sorry that I even did this.--Regisaurusjacobi 13:15, 3 February 2015 (UTC)

I told you three times without you doing anything. Only now that there are consequences you feel sorry. That means you are not to be trusted. FunkMonk (talk) 13:26, 3 February 2015 (UTC)

heh,well,I can't just drop the character out of my series.also I could not reply earlier because I was eating lunch(and my computer was shut down,so I could not reply in time)--Regisaurusjacobi 13:30, 3 February 2015 (UTC)

As is evident above, you did reply. Just not in any constructive way.FunkMonk (talk) 13:38, 3 February 2015 (UTC)

heh,did you know how much annoying you made me with the edit warring on Pristerognathus?also,your name can be seen on user:nobu tamura so what is the problem with your name(some times it is even on the files you uploaded)--Regisaurusjacobi 13:43, 3 February 2015 (UTC)

That would be all fine and dandy if your only reply wasn't "oh just shut up!" This will be my last word on this, have fun. FunkMonk (talk) 13:46, 3 February 2015 (UTC)

heh,well I am really sorry.the day at work today wasn't wery good and honestly I just got mad of this.then you just asked me to remove that name and you just made me more mad than I already was.so I just said that because I wanted you to stop annoying me.if I knew that you would do this then maybe I would not say this.and honestly,did you notice that I would be your only chance of getting unblocked?i am really really sorry that I even said it.this will be my last word on this too.have fun being blocked.--Regisaurusjacobi 13:55, 3 February 2015 (UTC)

Don't fuck up my talk page. You will likely be blocked. FunkMonk (talk) 14:29, 3 February 2015 (UTC)

Heh,you are pretty wrong:I have been vandalizing Wikipedia since 2012

Maybe I will give you the password one of these days if you behave. FunkMonk (talk) 15:41, 3 February 2015 (UTC)

Your GA nomination of Deinocheirus

Hi there, I'm pleased to inform you that I've begun reviewing the article Deinocheirus you nominated for GA-status according to the criteria. This process may take up to 7 days. Feel free to contact me with any questions or comments you might have during this period. Message delivered by Legobot, on behalf of Casliber -- Casliber (talk) 09:00, 5 February 2015 (UTC)

Apatosaurus

So what do you think we should do now? LittleJerry (talk) 14:53, 5 February 2015 (UTC)

A bit more to the intro at least. Haven't read the entire article, but will have a look soon. Perhaps a copy edit could be good? Personally, I think all sections could probably be expanded, but I guess it's up to you how much detail is to be included. FunkMonk (talk) 15:06, 5 February 2015 (UTC)

See talk. LittleJerry (talk) 22:28, 5 February 2015 (UTC)

help

I have some problems over here:I am trying to sing up as well but you have to get a confirmation email to create an account and I don't receive anything.would you mind creating me one with the usrename regisaurus and email over the password(my email is:regisaurusjacobi@Hotmail.com)--Regisaurusjacobi 09:42, 29 January 2015 (UTC)

Emails are automatically sent to the email you used to create your Wikipedia account. You can check in your preferences if it is turned on. FunkMonk (talk) 09:56, 29 January 2015 (UTC)

my inbox is empty,and I didn't use an email to sign up here.and it is in wikia I try to sign up--Regisaurusjacobi 10:00, 29 January 2015 (UTC)

Then you should add an email in your preferences. FunkMonk (talk) 11:20, 29 January 2015 (UTC)

what??--Regisaurusjacobi 12:33, 29 January 2015 (UTC)

Fixed. See preferences at top right. FunkMonk (talk) 15:51, 29 January 2015 (UTC)

I still don't understand.did it work signing up at wikia?--Regisaurusjacobi 16:31, 29 January 2015 (UTC)

Oh, I thought it was part of the Mediawiki network thing, but I have no idea what this is though... Why do you want a login there? FunkMonk (talk) 16:34, 29 January 2015 (UTC)

you can create your own wiki there.howewer you have to be emailconfirment to create a wiki there and I don't receive any confirmation email so please create an account there under the username "Regisaurus" and for email please insert your email(I guarantee you:it will not work with mine) and if you receive a confirmation email please click the link and that's it.then just email me the password of the wikia account and the the rest I can do alone.goodnight!--Regisaurusjacobi 17:15, 29 January 2015 (UTC)

Done. FunkMonk (talk) 17:27, 29 January 2015 (UTC)

did you receive a confirmation email from wikia?if yes then everything is ok--Regisaurusjacobi 12:37, 30 January 2015 (UTC)

Yup, and confirmed. FunkMonk (talk) 13:41, 30 January 2015 (UTC)

great,so I might create a wiki of my own if the internet connection is fixed(some times it is going today and sometimes it's not.this is possibly the weather because it is raining sometimes)also I still need to think what kind of wiki I'm going to create--Regisaurusjacobi 13:50, 30 January 2015 (UTC)

I vote for Land Before Time spoof. FunkMonk (talk) 14:23, 30 January 2015 (UTC)

yeah,my guido-a raptor's life is DEFINITELY a good subject for a wiki--Regisaurusjacobi 14:34, 30 January 2015 (UTC)

the connection isn't good at the moment so I have not created a wiki yet,but I'll give you it's Internet address if I create one--Regisaurusjacobi 13:13, 31 January 2015 (UTC)

Heheh, cool. FunkMonk (talk) 13:14, 31 January 2015 (UTC)

yeah,luckily it's good enough so that I can still edit--Regisaurusjacobi 13:16, 31 January 2015 (UTC)

regarding the deleted Pristerognathus image,I have noticed that it's noncommercial.howewer I can't find any evidence that it was also share alike so theoretically there would not be problems with it--Regisaurusjacobi 13:22, 31 January 2015 (UTC)

I could fix my internet connection and I am currently doing some research for crap that I'm going to insert in the wiki(not for my OC's but for other crap for example images)--Regisaurusjacobi 09:46, 1 February 2015 (UTC)

STOP IT FUNKMONK! That is in sources, 24.3 ft is not in sources, 26.2 ft now that's in sources! And they say he has a full height of 20 ft. And 15 tonnes is average for males, you have gotten to my last nerve! — Preceding unsigned comment added by 76.89.144.176 (talk) 20:19, 7 February 2015 (UTC)

The talk page of the article is where to discuss this, not here. And no, it is unknown whatever difference there was between the size of the males and females. FunkMonk (talk) 20:22, 7 February 2015 (UTC)

Well what on earth is yours because you obviously don't agree with mine! if you can think of something better, hey I respect it, but you're not even giving a reason to why you don't agree with my estimation. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 76.89.144.176 (talk) 22:35, 7 February 2015 (UTC)

I just gave you a perfectly good reason. There are no certain males and females known, so how can we list differences in their size? It is made up. And again, this is not the place to discuss it. FunkMonk (talk) 22:36, 7 February 2015 (UTC)

Your GA nomination of Deinocheirus

The article Deinocheirus you nominated as a good article has passed ; see Talk:Deinocheirus for comments about the article. Well done! If the article has not already been on the main page as an "In the news" or "Did you know" item, you can nominate it to appear in Did you know. Message delivered by Legobot, on behalf of Casliber -- Casliber (talk) 11:41, 8 February 2015 (UTC)

Pinacosaurus

Hallo, FunkMonk! First of all, many thanks for adding the pictures to the article. I think we can obtain another one. I believe images from Acta Palaeontologica Polonica can be used irrespective of their date? In Currie's 2011 article Currie, P.J., Badamgarav, D., Koppelhus, E.B., Sissons, R., and Vickaryous, M.K., 2011, "Hands, feet, and behaviour in Pinacosaurus (Dinosauria: Ankylosauridae)", Acta Palaeontologica Polonica 56(3): 489–504 a useful picture of juveniles as they had been discovered in 1990 is shown on page 491. It is in black-and-white and a bit marred by the fact explaining lettering is present, but still worthwhile, I feel. Greetings, --MWAK (talk) 14:34, 9 February 2015 (UTC)

Cool, yes, the license change was retroactive (I asked their editor), so I'll go ahead and upload... Oh, and luckily for us, the letters are not part of the image, they're on a separate "layer" in the PDF! FunkMonk (talk) 14:45, 9 February 2015 (UTC)

Great! I certainly would never have noticed that :o).--MWAK (talk) 07:48, 10 February 2015 (UTC)

Opinion needed

Hello FunkMonk, I hope you remember the failed GA review which occurred a few months ago, but I couldn't help myself but ask for your opinion on my latest edit(s). I have posted my future plans for the jack jumper ant article, and currently I am improving grammatical errors, full details can be read at the talk page. At the same time more errors might pop up during these fixes, but nonetheless it is being improved. However, the article has been expanded since the review, so more problems and issues will occur. Most of it is within the behavioural sections. One copyedit was also done after the review too.

But anyway, I want to know what your thoughts are on my edit of removing more than half of the info within the genetics section. Unnecessary info has been deleted (chromosome rearrangement, heterozygosities etc.) and somewhat contradicting info has been removed (the chromosome count). Does the current text within this section appear less confusing and relevant? An explanation of the species group can also be read in the "Taxanomy" section. I'm all for criticism to improve this particular section so it can be solved once and for all. Burklemore1 (talk) 05:29, 11 February 2015 (UTC)

I'll have a look soon! FunkMonk (talk) 10:39, 11 February 2015 (UTC)

Thanks, I appreciate it. :-) Burklemore1 (talk) 17:05, 11 February 2015 (UTC)

Generally looking much better, but I'm still not much of a medicine guy, so can't say much about that part... FunkMonk (talk) 19:08, 11 February 2015 (UTC)

Well that's good news, this could mean it could fare better in peer review and GA review. I hope the readability was much more satisfying for you. I have requested another copyedit for a firm check, even though I did say I'd request one after the issues were solved. I might speak to Snowman on medical aspects and see if he is happier with the edits in 'desensitization and prevention' and such, since he can easily point out these issues. But thanks for checking it out! Burklemore1 (talk) 04:42, 12 February 2015 (UTC)

A question

Hi, I found this image in Flickr: [9] I'm not sure about the license, could be upload to WikiCommons? --Rextron (talk) 04:19, 17 February 2015 (UTC)

License seems alright, also for this[10], but do you know what country it is in? If it is the US, it is a problem, but not in the UK, for example. FunkMonk (talk) 04:27, 17 February 2015 (UTC)

Apparently is in the US, since that probably it is from this exhbition of the Smithsonian:[11] --Rextron (talk) 04:56, 17 February 2015 (UTC)

Alright, in that case it may be ok, because it is a government owned museum as far as I know. The problem is with freedom of panorama[12], if you take a photo of a sculpture, you don't own the copyright, the artist who made the sculpture does. But works by the government are in the public domain, so it may fit here... So just make sure to note it's in the Smithsonian. FunkMonk (talk) 05:07, 17 February 2015 (UTC)

Ok then.--Rextron (talk) 05:13, 17 February 2015 (UTC)

Well, is done, I uploaded both images: [13] I must await any review?--Rextron (talk) 06:09, 17 February 2015 (UTC)

Nah, it's just a formality. FunkMonk (talk) 06:10, 17 February 2015 (UTC)

Ok, a final question: I took some photos of fossils of Titanoboa, but with bad quality... [14] [15] [16]. Do you think that are useless? --Rextron (talk) 06:34, 17 February 2015 (UTC)

I think they are good enough until better ones are found, at least the last one. You could perhaps fix the contrast and lighting in Photoshop? FunkMonk (talk) 14:48, 17 February 2015 (UTC)

Ok, I'll upload the last image, after fixing it.--Rextron (talk) 05:46, 18 February 2015 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for February 20

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Columbian mammoth, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Parkland. 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.

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 08:55, 20 February 2015 (UTC)

Thanks for reference

Thank you for the reference to http://www.information.dk/524863. XavierItzm (talk) 08:51, 23 February 2015 (UTC)

You're welcome. FunkMonk (talk) 13:05, 23 February 2015 (UTC)

Bumblebee

I think we've answered all your queries. A range map would be quite a project and certainly isn't required for GA; one could be drawn from the NHM data on the different groups. Do you know anyone who likes doing maps? Chiswick Chap (talk) 11:38, 23 February 2015 (UTC)

I could do one, I made the one for pinniped, quagga and others, I just need references. I'll probably add more comments when I read the "bumblebees and people" sections. FunkMonk (talk) 13:07, 23 February 2015 (UTC)

Gosh, that would be wonderful. The obvious place to start is the Bombus data at the Natural History Museum - if you click on a region of their map, you'll see the list of species in that region; and most of Africa, Australia etc have none at all. Your map could show the no. of spp. in each region as a colour intensity (eg deep blue for lots, pale sky blue for few, and all stations in between...), perhaps. Chiswick Chap (talk) 13:38, 23 February 2015 (UTC)

Alright, we can give it a try when I pass the article. FunkMonk (talk) 21:25, 23 February 2015 (UTC)

• Looking at their maps, they seem weirdly inexact, why use squares? Anyway, I'll try to paint on top of a clean map based on those squares, but since I don't want to do original research, the borders will be straight... FunkMonk (talk) 22:20, 24 February 2015 (UTC)
• I've now added a range map, Chiswick Chap, in rather low resolution, simply because the source maps are so inexact. Higher res would be misleading. But feel free to suggest changes (colour, etc.). FunkMonk (talk) 06:44, 26 February 2015 (UTC)

Many thanks, it's a big improvement. Shame to have such an obvious 'square' step, purely a low-res artefact in the data. Couldn't it just be approximated to a smooth edge? At the existing low-res scale, there's really no OR in that. Could be made dashed or fuzzy, I guess. Chiswick Chap (talk) 07:10, 26 February 2015 (UTC)

Alright, and on that note, do you think the white part in the upper left and lower right of South America is an error due to the squares (same with the tip of southeast Asia), or what?

Given that other squares extend far out into the ocean, the whitespace in these places must mean absence... though the edges may not be exactly N-S, W-E. Presence in a square colours the whole square, which doesn't prove there are bees right up to the edges. This means that interpolated contours should err on the side of caution, making the coloured area smaller, not larger. Chiswick Chap (talk) 08:01, 26 February 2015 (UTC)

Now the edges are more irregular. FunkMonk (talk) 08:06, 26 February 2015 (UTC)

Thank you so much! BTW, User:Cwmhiraeth and I are having a go at dragonfly: fancy joining us? Fabulous fossil-to-modern subject ... (but I think I'm going to have to try again with that cladogram). Chiswick Chap (talk) 08:25, 26 February 2015 (UTC)

Sounds cool, though I'm currently knee deep in Columbian mammoth and Baryonyx, which I already have trouble getting work done for due to real life work, but tell me if you need some image work... As for cladograms, you could check out: https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User:IJReid/sandbox/Cladogram_request FunkMonk (talk) 15:21, 26 February 2015 (UTC)

Heavy beasts! I'll ask if I get to the stage where I can specify an image. I know how to draw cladograms; just having trouble with the flaky state of knowledge at the moment. Chiswick Chap (talk) 15:27, 26 February 2015 (UTC)

Cheetal

Hello. Lets try again for Cheetal to become a GA. Cheers! Educationtemple (talk) 14:39, 3 March 2015 (UTC)

Could be nice, first step would be to fix the issues brought up during the last review. FunkMonk (talk) 15:16, 3 March 2015 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for March 5

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Irish elk, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Crystal Palace. 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.

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 09:08, 5 March 2015 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for March 12

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Temnodontosaurus, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Crystal Palace. 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.

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 09:27, 12 March 2015 (UTC)

Apatosaurus GA

Still no reviewer. Do you know anyone that could? LittleJerry (talk) 23:40, 14 March 2015 (UTC)

Most dinosaur editors are not involved in the GA/FA business, so it'll probably have to be someone from "outside the field", so not sure. But someone will surely come along, waiting times are getting longer these days. FunkMonk (talk) 01:28, 15 March 2015 (UTC)

Smilodon

Since you've been working on prehistoric mammals, did you ever consider Smilodon? LittleJerry (talk) 02:55, 24 March 2015 (UTC)

For FAC? I think we talked about it once. Now I'm working on Columbian mammoth and Baryonyx, which'll take some time to finish, but I think Smilodon deserves to be an FA as well... FunkMonk (talk) 09:15, 24 March 2015 (UTC)

Shuvuuia illustration

I would suggest that you update the head of your illustration of Shuvuuia to make it more accurate. While the top of the head in your illustration is flat, Jaime Headden's skeletal restores it as concave, something that could be fixed. The lower jaw is also straighter on your illustration than in Headden's skeletal, which is again concave. IJReid ^discuss 02:21, 26 March 2015 (UTC)

I'll give it a look, there may be more up to date diagrams than Headden's, though? By the way, cool that Deinocheirus just passed FAC, usually it only happens after four supports, so not sure what happened... FunkMonk (talk) 11:51, 26 March 2015 (UTC)

This[17] is apparently all that's known of the skull, so it seems to be unknown just how curvy the lower jaw was. The upper jawis not curvy, so that would make the lower jaw look less curvy when the mouth was closed, as the upper part of it would be occluded. But yeah, the forehead should slope more. And I'll give it some artistic changes as well, it is rather old, so I don't really like the style... FunkMonk (talk) 17:34, 26 March 2015 (UTC)

It should be better now, IJReid, but I'll modify it further soon. FunkMonk (talk) 15:40, 28 March 2015 (UTC)

Nice. How do you change it so quickly and well? IJReid ^discuss 15:44, 28 March 2015 (UTC)

Just painting roughly over an area, blocking out colours, and then adding details afterwards... Of course, helps to have a Wacom board... This one[18] was a little trickier to fix. FunkMonk (talk) 15:45, 28 March 2015 (UTC)

Columbian ground squirrel

I saw that you looked it over on the initial GA nom. I have not been able to get to it, because of other commitments. I will do some more work on it, then resubmit and ping you at that time. Hopefully you will be available at that time (no pressure). Your reviews are thorough and seem geared towards preparing the article for FAC. Not all GA reviews, in my opinion, have that quality. Cheers, --Gaff (talk) 23:59, 15 April 2015 (UTC)

Alright, not sure what went wrong, but you can notify me when the time comes. FunkMonk (talk) 10:58, 16 April 2015 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for April 20

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Okapi, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Equus. 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.

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 09:05, 20 April 2015 (UTC)

Wikispecies

I was wondering if you have ever considered assisting at Wikispecies also if you have the time. Not sure how much time you have and if you dont please dont worry. But if you have a little time the project could use more editors. Cheers Faendalimas ^talk 22:40, 24 April 2015 (UTC)

Ah, well, my work here is mainly in expanding few selected articles and adding images here, not so much maintanency/Wikignomish stuff, which I assume Wikispecies mostly consists of... FunkMonk (talk) 14:43, 25 April 2015 (UTC)

Your GA nomination of Columbian mammoth

Hi there, I'm pleased to inform you that I've begun reviewing the article Columbian mammoth you nominated for GA-status according to the criteria. This process may take up to 7 days. Feel free to contact me with any questions or comments you might have during this period. Message delivered by Legobot, on behalf of IJReid -- IJReid (talk) 23:20, 28 April 2015 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for April 29

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Columbian mammoth, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page America. 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.

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 08:57, 29 April 2015 (UTC)

Haplocanthosaurus

Your Haplocanthosaurus illustration may need a new head. Morvosaurus agilis (see here for the original description and figure) is considered to very likely be a synonym of Haplocanthosaurus, and it is known from the rear of the skull. Comparing the one figure to the skull rears of other genera (see [https://peerj.com/articles/857/ Tschopp et al. fig. 14), the skull seems most similar to either Suuwassea or Diplodocus. Both of these genera have low skulls, which might make a low skull probably for Haplocanthosaurus. IJReid ^discuss 14:40, 30 April 2015 (UTC)

Yeah, I was thinking already it needed a more diplodocoid like head... I wonder what the whole head could be shaped after? FunkMonk (talk) 18:11, 30 April 2015 (UTC)

Maybe a dicraeosaurid, or apatosaurine? IJReid ^discuss 13:26, 1 May 2015 (UTC)

How about now? FunkMonk (talk) 18:51, 1 May 2015 (UTC)

Looking good. IJReid ^discuss 17:40, 2 May 2015 (UTC)

Your GA nomination of Columbian mammoth

The article Columbian mammoth you nominated as a good article has passed ; see Talk:Columbian mammoth for comments about the article. Well done! If the article has not already been on the main page as an "In the news" or "Did you know" item, you can nominate it to appear in Did you know. Message delivered by Legobot, on behalf of IJReid -- IJReid (talk) 04:41, 3 May 2015 (UTC)

Casual Query

How good are you at reading Russian?--Mr Fink (talk) 02:40, 5 May 2015 (UTC)

About as good as Google translate lets me be.... FunkMonk (talk) 11:12, 5 May 2015 (UTC)

wooly mammoth

Hello FunkMonk, Should the reference be someplace else, in the Wooly Mammoth article? You removed this reference, writing "why was it in the middle of nowhere." I thought I had placed it at the end of the correct sentence. http://www.scientificamerican.com/article/mammoth-genomes-provide-recipe-for-creating-arctic-elephants Thank you, Jcardazzi (talk) 15:42, 5 May 2015 (UTC)jcardazzi

Hi, well, you placed it after an image, it should be after some relevant text. FunkMonk (talk) 15:58, 5 May 2015 (UTC)

Wikimedia Levant

Hey Funkmonk, hope all is well. I thought you might be interested in joining WikiMedia Levant. The project just started and admittedly I'm not too sure if it will be effective, but I agree that there needs to be better collaboration among editors in this particular subject area. Hopefully the creation of this group will be promising for all editors involved in Levant-related articles. If you are interested, just tack your name to the list. Cheers --Al Ameer (talk) 19:38, 17 May 2015 (UTC)

I saw it, but it seems it is mainly focused on people who currently live in the Levant? FunkMonk (talk) 20:30, 17 May 2015 (UTC)

It's apparently headquartered in Amman and it says its for "Arabic native Wikipedians in the Levant Region", but I'm sure it doesn't exclude editors like you and I who were not born there and cannot read/write in Arabic but who are interested in improving Syria/Lebanon/Palestine-related articles. After all, who better to edit Levantine articles on English Wikipedia than English-speaking editors of Levantine descent? Either way, I will seek that the project clarifies the matter. --Al Ameer (talk) 21:04, 17 May 2015 (UTC)

Alright. Perhaps Attar-Aram syria should be notified as well, he is currently doing a very important job of improving articles about various archaeological sites in the Syria. FunkMonk (talk) 21:09, 17 May 2015 (UTC)

His work really is impressive. Just sent him an invite. --Al Ameer (talk) 23:59, 17 May 2015 (UTC)

Woolly mammoth ref

In PeerJ. This might interest you. https://peerj.com/articles/318/ IJReid ^discuss 13:30, 21 May 2015 (UTC)

Certainly, a bit more for the disease paragraph! FunkMonk (talk) 13:45, 21 May 2015 (UTC)

Re: Hi

Hi, of course not bad feelings at all, but Im not sure what are u referring about. Since I'd been blocked for editing in some articles until May 2015 by the coordinated action of the pro-Ukrainian IV Reich cheerleader trolls, I aint made an edit in several months... Regards,--HCPUNXKID 22:03, 26 May 2015 (UTC)

Hah, well then all is well! FunkMonk (talk) 23:31, 26 May 2015 (UTC)

Mascarene grey parakeet

At first glance it looks up to FA, so I'd go for it. I've got family stuff today and tomorrow, so I can't go through in detail at present, but that shouldn't stop you nominating Jimfbleak - talk to me? 06:44, 31 May 2015 (UTC)

Thanks! Won't happen until the Columbian mammoth FAC is closed anyway. FunkMonk (talk) 06:47, 31 May 2015 (UTC)

Request for comments

A Request for Comments about the use of album covers is currently on at Talk:Shades of Deep Purple#Cover dispute. It would be greatly appreciated to have more opinions on the matter. Lewismaster (talk) 21:23, 31 May 2015 (UTC)

Columbian mammoth

Thanks! FunkMonk (talk) 02:07, 6 June 2015 (UTC)

any chance I could get you to rewrite your comments at File:Shanidar skull.jpg?

The "flower" hypothesis seems obsolete now. See [19] and [20]. Thanks. Doug Weller (talk) 11:10, 7 June 2015 (UTC)

Well, I never even read the text, I only transferred the free image from Flickr. You can modify it if you want. FunkMonk (talk) 11:11, 7 June 2015 (UTC)

uncivil edit summaries

Reconsider making any more WP:UNCIVIL edit summaries such as this one: [21]. This is not acceptable. Nulla Taciti (talk) 04:55, 12 June 2015 (UTC)

Are you Walid Jumblatt? Then accept my sincere apologies. FunkMonk (talk) 05:02, 12 June 2015 (UTC)