Kanwarsingh1205
Welcome!
Hello, Kanwarsingh1205, and welcome to Wikipedia! Thank you for your contributions. I hope you like the place and decide to stay. Unfortunately, one or more of the pages you created, such as Siler Fishhook Cactus, may not conform to some of Wikipedia's guidelines, and may soon be deleted.
There's a page about creating articles you may want to read called Your first article. If you are stuck, and looking for help, please come to the New contributors' help page, where experienced Wikipedians can answer any queries you have! Or, you can just type {{helpme}} on this page, and someone will show up shortly to answer your questions. Here are a few other good links for newcomers:
- Starting an article
- Your first article
- Biographies of living persons
- How to write a great article
- The five pillars of Wikipedia
- Help pages
- Tutorial
I hope you enjoy editing here and being a Wikipedian! Please sign your name on talk pages using four tildes (~~~~); this will automatically produce your name and the date. If you have any questions, check out Wikipedia:Questions or ask me on my talk page. Again, welcome! GILO A&E⇑ 21:27, 22 April 2012 (UTC)
Speedy deletion nomination of Siler Fishhook Cactus
edit
If this is the first article that you have created, you may want to read the guide to writing your first article.
You may want to consider using the Article Wizard to help you create articles.
A tag has been placed on Siler Fishhook Cactus requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section A3 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because it is an article with no content whatsoever, or whose contents consist only of external links, a "See also" section, book references, category tags, template tags, interwiki links, a rephrasing of the title, or an attempt to contact the subject of the article. Please see Wikipedia:Stub for our minimum information standards for short articles. Also please note that articles must be on notable subjects and should provide references to reliable sources that verify their content.
If you think that the page was nominated in error, contest the nomination by clicking on the button labelled "Click here to contest this speedy deletion" in the speedy deletion tag. Doing so will take you to the talk page where you can explain why you believe the page should not be deleted. You can also visit the page's talk page directly to give your reasons, but be aware that once a page is tagged for speedy deletion, it may be removed without delay. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag yourself, but do not hesitate to add information that is consistent with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. If the page is deleted, you can contact one of these administrators to request that the administrator userfy the page or email a copy to you. GILO A&E⇑ 21:27, 22 April 2012 (UTC)
Synonym?
editHi Kanwarsingh1205, please forgive the above message; it shouldn't have been sent so soon after you started the article. Anyway, I have a different question. According to Pediocactus sileri, Sclerocactus sileri is a synonym. Do you know if this is up to date, and which name(s) is/are valid? Cheers, Melchoir (talk) 22:07, 22 April 2012 (UTC)
It is a synonym, and Wikipedia can't have two articles on the same species under different titles.
I understand that it may be necessary to have a complete article as part of student project work, in order for it to be assessed. But the way to do this is:
- Leave your article in your own userspace.
- When assessment is complete, merge the content into the existing article, or leave others to do it for you.
If you need any assistance or further advice, please leave a message on my talk page. Peter coxhead (talk) 10:58, 3 May 2012 (UTC)
Sclerocactus sileri and Pediocactus sileri
editI have now put an explanation of why these two appear not to be the same species after all at Sclerocactus sileri#Taxonomy and Pediocactus sileri#Taxonomy. There are now two separate articles. My apologies for the confusion, which was because editors had been following Anderson (2001) in treating these two as synonyms, which seems to be wrong – at least according to the Flora of North America. Peter coxhead (talk) 12:56, 4 May 2012 (UTC)