User talk:Aa77zz

Welcome...

Hello, Aa77zz, and welcome to Wikipedia! Thank you for your contributions. I hope you like the place and decide to stay. Here are some pages that you might find helpful:

• Introduction
• The five pillars of Wikipedia
• How to edit a page
• Help
• How to write a great article
• Manual of Style

Please sign your name on talk pages using four tildes (~~~~); this will automatically produce your username and the date. If you need help, check out Wikipedia:Questions, ask me on my talk page, or place {{helpme}} on your talk page and ask your question there. Again, welcome! T L Miles (talk) 15:41, 26 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

You have been invited to join the WikiProject Africa, a collaborative effort focused on improving Wikipedia's coverage of Africa. If you'd like to join, just add your name to the member list. Thanks for reading!

T L Miles (talk) 15:41, 26 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Well it is your mother who put you here not me. Dr. Blofeld ^{White cat} 16:34, 22 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Hi, notice you were wondering about checking footnotes in preview. The way I've been using is to temporarily type {{reflist}} under the paragraphs you've edited, which shows the citations, then remember to delete it before saving the page. Sometimes it's easier to just save, if you're confident the footnote is right, so either way's ok. . . dave souza, talk 20:39, 8 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

You were kind enough to make a number of contributions to the article during the GA review process; so I thought you might like to know about it. If you would like to participate in the FAC reviwe process as well you can do so at Wikipedia:Featured article candidates/On the Origin of Species/archive1. Rusty Cashman (talk) 06:31, 5 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]

In appreciation of those very useful edits during the GA review and others later, I wanted to present you with this:

		The Copyeditor's Barnstar
		For improvements to On the Origin of Species and related articles Rusty Cashman (talk) 19:43, 21 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]

You're absolutely right: I planned on using the text to write my own, including other sources. As I was running out of time yesterday, I (foolishly..) decided to just upload the WWF text and continue working on it the other day.

Not taking into account the keen eye of Aa77zz of course. I will revert my edit and work on it in some offline program. Saw your copyedit work on some articles by the way, keep up the good work. Regards, Pim Rijkee (talk) 09:44, 21 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]

		The History of Evolution Award
		Here's a famous fish award, Aa77zz, with thanks for your good work on The Variation of Animals and Plants under Domestication and Clémence Royer. dave souza, talk 11:16, 1 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Many thanks for continuing to make improvements, I've replied on my talk page.[1] . dave souza, talk 17:30, 15 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I became interested in this area after seeing this article: http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/africa/8408568.stm Since then, your edits concur with my conclusions. Much of your work is supported by studying sequential satellite images on Google earth.

N.B. I am new to editing. I have made minor alterations to the the Goundam entry and aim soon to make a new entry for the Tassakane River.81.147.41.161 (talk) 19:42, 10 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, you can upload any visual work published before 1923 to Wikipedia under the {{PD-1923}} status. Since the work in question is still copyrighted in France, please remember to mark it with the {{Do not move to Commons}} warning as well. Jappalang (talk) 08:20, 1 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]

There's a weak consensus on the talk page for gathering the two sets of co-ordinates (the sinking and the museum) together in the infobox. Any view? --Old Moonraker (talk) 10:31, 21 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for the note. I will try to re-examine the articles on these dyes. I reworked them some months ago, but there are many forms of [CPh_w(C₆H₄NH₂)_x(C₆H₄NHMe)_y(C₆H₄N_Me)_z]⁺. If you can find broad references to their use (per WP:secondary), please add them, because we need general sources--Smokefoot (talk) 17:17, 30 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Aa77zz, I was wondering if you could help out at Timbuktu? I have put in some effort to expand it and give it more refs - but I've seen your edits (somehow our WP interests overlap, as I see your name on my watchlist quite often) and thought you might want to have a look. Any additions or suggestions are welcome. Let me know! Cheers, Pim Rijkee (talk) 19:55, 1 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Hi, I just noted we are both editing the article simultaneously, I'll try to stay away from the references. Doing a rewrite on #Origins now. Cheers, Pim Rijkee (talk) 23:43, 19 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Hi ... in the linked FAC, it's helpful if anyone who makes a comment or question adds something in bold at the beginning or end of their comments to make it clear that they either are or aren't satisfied with the answers they got ... something like "Issues resolved" or not resolved would help, even if you don't want to take the time to read it carefully and support or oppose. Thanks. - Dank (push to talk) 20:56, 25 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]

		The Reviewer Barnstar
		Thanks As77zz for your excellent review of The Magdalen Reading. The article is much better because of your comments and edits. Truthkeeper88 (talk) 14:15, 27 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Hi, I'm not sure if its within your area of interest, but I intend on taking Portrait of Monsieur Bertin to FAC within the next month, and would greatly appreciate help from you before or during, hopefully before. Your review of The Magdalen Reading was extreamly helpful; I suppose I think I would have a far stronger article if you had time. If not, no worries, thats fine too. Best regards. Ceoil 13:08, 19 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Oh well it was worth a try. See you at some stage, the likes of you will always be appreciated here, and take care. Ceoil 13:54, 19 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, I agree, there is no reason to add an anecdote which is not really about Nixon and expands the article by one percent.--Wehwalt (talk) 15:00, 17 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you for your good work on this article. Marshall46 (talk) 11:50, 7 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]

I like the pots and look at them whenever I visit the BM or the V&A. I have the huge book by Atasoy & Raby, the small book by Carswell and now several articles so it is just a matter of finding the time. Aa77zz (talk) 12:09, 7 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]

wow, many thanks for all the ref fiddling! HMallison (talk) 14:45, 4 November 2011 (UTC)[reply]

You sure have been busy! Many thanks again - not only was I at SVP in the meantime and thus w/o Internet ($13/day in room, $24/day for entire hotel - no thanks), but you came up with quite some stuff I would never have thought of. I did think of using a different group, btw, but expected to run out the letters of the alphabet, thus "upper-roman". However, many refs go to the entire Moser 2003 etc., so I guess it is better the way you edited it. :) HMallison (talk) 20:12, 8 November 2011 (UTC)[reply]

You got reverted, but its just one of thoes small things. Funnily there is talk of that article being a future project, so you might keep an eye. Best. Ceoil (talk) 20:32, 12 November 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Bach cantata: I would understand italics if the terms were left untranslated. But they are recognizable as "foreign" because they are capitalized, and they are translated. Why confuse by italics which normally indicate titles? --Gerda Arendt (talk) 14:38, 29 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]

I've commented on the article talk page. Aa77zz (talk) 15:03, 29 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]

On 21 February 2012, Did you know? was updated with a fact from the article Piyale Pasha Mosque, which you created or substantially expanded. The fact was ... that Iznik-tiled lunette panels believed to have been removed from Istanbul's Piyale Pasha Mosque in the 19th century are currently on display in various museums such as the Louvre and the V&A? The nomination discussion and review may be seen at Template:Did you know nominations/Piyale Pasha Mosque.You are welcome to check how many hits the article got while on the front page (here's how, quick check) and add it to DYKSTATS if it got over 5,000. If you know of another interesting fact from a recently created article, then please suggest it on the Did you know? talk page.

Casliber (talk · contribs) 07:03, 21 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for your feedback on Spanish conquest of Guatemala, the article has just been promoted. As always, it has come out of the review process in better shape than it went into it. All the best, Simon Burchell (talk) 15:45, 17 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Golden Wiki Award In recognition of all the work you’ve done lately! 66.87.0.87 (talk) 21:25, 1 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Aa77zz, sorry for yesterday's mess concerning my edits! I might have misjudged the relevance of that pps-show (which, by stupidly adding a vertical slash to http://nubiagroup-powerpoint-collection.blogspot.de/search/label/Mali, did not even show up - but you managed to open it). It's up to you whether it might fit to the general article http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mali. My opinion is that it gives a good overview for those, who haven't visited Mali yet, plus some information about the actual turmoil. Because you got involved with the topic, you might consent that http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Azalai still is imperfect. If you switch to the German version, you will notice that it contains descriptions of other salt mines or salines besides Taoudenni or Fachi/Bilma: Idjill in Mauretania, Amadror in Algeria and Tegguida-n-Tessoum in Niger. See http://www.abload.de/img/salzkarawanensahara01ogf.png - Regards with this photo of a Taoudenni-Timbuktu azalai: http://photography.nationalgeographic.com/photography/photo-of-the-day/caravanner-camels-stirton/ --Gerd.Seyffert (talk) 11:25, 24 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you for the information about Iznik tiles. I have amended the description for both the FP nomination, as well as the Commons VIS of which it is a part. Best-Godot13 (talk) 06:17, 9 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

If I nominate this image for Commons FP, may I credit you for descriptive information provided? Godot13 (talk) 07:54, 9 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

You are welcome to acknowledge my contribution - but I don't think it is strictly necessary. My sources are mainly on Iznik pottery and don't provide detailed information on the Dome of the Rock so I can't add any more on the tiles in your particular photograph. I generally try to provide as much information as possible with photos - to help other editors and prevent mistakes. best wishes Aa77zz (talk) 08:23, 9 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

An article that you have been involved in editing, Amadu's Jihad , has been proposed for a merge with another article. If you are interested in the merge discussion, please participate by going here, and adding your comments on the discussion page. Thank you. Aymatth2 (talk) 21:54, 15 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for your comments here; I've now responded to them, if you want to take a second look :). Ironholds (talk) 22:50, 24 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Hi! Thanks for your help with further reading on Fort Saint-André (Villeneuve-lès-Avignon), could you possibly add some to the nearby Tower of Philip the Fair? Thanks! ---Brigade Piron (talk) 11:18, 2 March 2013 (UTC)[reply]

		The Original Barnstar
		Thank you for your excellent work on Tower of Philip the Fair & Fort Saint-André Brigade Piron (talk) 17:11, 20 March 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Many thanks for this. I still have quite of bit to add to the Tour Philippe-le-Bel article and I haven't yet obtained a good source for the Fort. I'm spending a few days near Villeneuve next week and plan to visit the tower. Aa77zz (talk) 07:41, 21 March 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you for helping to improve the Gospel of the Ebionites article. The article was recently promoted to FA. Ignocrates (talk) 15:13, 23 June 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for your comments on the talk page, I've taken them on board and commented there. I've also edited the article accordingly Jimfbleak - talk to me? 06:03, 29 June 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for your edits. It's a mixed blessing having such an old page nominated for TFA (dead links, incorrectly formatted refs from later editors, changes in FA style, like not having refs in the lead, 300px taxobox....). At least there's some time to clear it up. Are you happy with the TFA blurb? It's on my talk page. Thanks again Jimfbleak - talk to me? 09:51, 19 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]

I've seen your comments, I'll check in the morning Jimfbleak - talk to me? 19:05, 20 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Replied on CHM talk page Jimfbleak - talk to me? 10:07, 21 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Hi, thanks for your interest in Mosques commissioned by the Ottoman dynasty. However Rüstem Pasha (groom) was not a member of the dynasty. So I removed his name. Happy editing Nedim Ardoğa (talk) 16:11, 19 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for offer. I had a quick run through my FAs. Although several use old images, most seemed of acceptable quality. The weakest I think were:

• File:Red-billed Chough.jpg
• File:PyrrhocoraxPEremita.jpg
• File:Rallusaquaticusegg.png

Jimfbleak - talk to me? 10:06, 21 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for that, much improved. I'm sure you are right about aging, the ground colour should be cream, not yellow. I don't want to make work for you though... Jimfbleak - talk to me? 15:48, 21 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, I blame him for me getting it wrong ): Jimfbleak - talk to me? 05:20, 17 August 2013 (UTC)[reply]

I notice some very useful points in your recent edit summaries (e.g. pruning Futher Reading – I agree with you). I wonder if I can persuade you to look in at the peer review here and comment more extensively on how we can improve the article? No rush at all, but if you can find time and inclination we shall be very glad to see you. Tim riley (talk) 10:51, 7 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for that, I hadn't even notice the copyright text. It's a much better image, in glorious colour too! I have a purge button on my tabs which I think must be a Preferences option, that seems to deal with caching issues OK Jimfbleak - talk to me? 06:51, 3 November 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Now this has gone through, I can nominate the waxwing at any time. Thanks for fixing the typos; it's amazing how you develop a blind spot to your own obvious errors. Anything you thing needs fixing/adding before I nominate? Thanks Jimfbleak - talk to me? 06:43, 18 November 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Many thanks Jimfbleak - talk to me? 12:59, 18 November 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you for your very good questions on my talk page. My reply got a bit lengthy, so I've left it over there, also in case anybody else wants to chip in with any thoughts. I'm afraid I don't seem to have been able to give you very many precise black-and-white answers, but please do tell me what you think of what I've written, and I hope it's of at least some use. All best, Jheald (talk) 19:28, 20 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]

It's interesting, I was having a look to see what venues available generally for discussing techniques and best practice for image restoration on Commons, and there seem to be surprisingly little. Commons talk:Media restoration exists, but there seems to be surprisingly little there. User:Durova and User:Adam Cuerden both seem to have done a lot, and Durova posted some notes at Wikiversity:Image_restoration/Basic_steps_of_a_restoration, but I think she's no longer active.

Commons has Commons:Graphic Lab and en-wiki has WP:Graphics Lab, which both take requests. But there seems to be very little central discussion of what the community thinks are actual best techniques and best practices. I suppose there's always Commons:Village Pump and Commons:Graphics village pump, but not much that seems more specific. Have you been able to find any?

On a different topic, I see that you've done quite a lot of work on European explorers of Africa. I've been trying to organise some of the the British Library Flickr collection's Africa titles at Commons:Commons:British Library/Mechanical Curator collection/Synoptic index, Africa, but I've been finding it hard going. I'm not even sure that my basic approach of trying to break it into Northern/Eastern/Western/Central/Southern really works. For example, explorations of the African Great Lakes (eg David Livingstone), or a trek from Angola to Zanzibar -- are they properly filed in Central; or Eastern; or even Southern? Should Heinrich Barth's journey go into Northern; or Western (eg Timbuctoo); or even Central (Lake Chad?). And it doesn't help that the usage of the time often doesn't at all relate to the most common present-day usage (eg Western sometimes meaning Gabon or the Congo; Central including anything more than a dozen miles inland; or Southern seemingly sometimes including almost anything south of the Equator.

So I'd be really grateful for another pair of eyes looking over that list, and any thoughts or suggestions or improvements that occurred to you. Jheald (talk) 15:55, 22 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Forgive me for popping in, but if there's anything I can do to help, please let me know! Adam Cuerden ^(talk) 16:53, 22 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Just to add, I've now made some changes to the Commons project page for the BL Flickr Commons collection, which I hope gives a bit more useful advice now about uploading a new version vs overwriting. Let me know if you think this is enough, or whether there's still more that could be usefully clarified.

Adam has left some useful notes on my talk page about my cleaning of Le Keux pictures of Cambridge, which may be of interest. He's also made quite a substantial update to Durova's notes at Wikiversity. Jheald (talk) 21:21, 23 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Many thanks for this. Aa77zz (talk) 16:34, 11 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]

You are welcome, also to look at more of my articles. (Almost) as soon as you made your thoughtful comment, it got promoted ;) --Gerda Arendt (talk) 17:07, 11 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Two years ago, you were recipient no. 792 of Precious, a prize of QAI! --Gerda Arendt (talk) 10:11, 11 March 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Today, we enjoy Frigatebird on the Main page, followed by most welcome feast of joy pictured! --Gerda Arendt (talk) 07:02, 22 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Six years now! --Gerda Arendt (talk) 06:46, 11 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you today for what you added to Francis Willughby, introduced by Jim: "I live about 20 miles from Willughby's former home, and the publication of two major books in the last few years made it a no-brainer to write about the "first true ornithologist"." - Proud to share the page, with Jessye Norman, Naomi Munakata and Jennifer Bate, a bit of a sad record. --Gerda Arendt (talk) 08:18, 29 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Done, I think the links are autofixed. Anything coming up at GAN or FAC? Jimfbleak - talk to me? 12:07, 30 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Sorry, I wasn't canvassing, I meant have you got anything in the pipeline that I can review? I'm aware it's a bit one-way at the moment Jimfbleak - talk to me? 13:20, 30 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]

I've located the sources for all the subspecies authorities, and most have links too. There is one in German and four in Russian (two to the same article) where I can't find a link. My lack of Russian is an obvious problem, so I've put a request on the resources page to see if anyone can link the Buturlin articles. Portenko is probably still within copyright, and the German paper I simply haven't been able to find Jimfbleak - talk to me? 12:57, 26 May 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for the helpful edits! Much appreciated. Mike Christie (talk - contribs - library) 11:29, 2 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]

This is to advise you and other peer reviewers that the article has been nominated at FAC, and that any further comments should be raised there. Brianboulton (talk) 17:52, 10 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Great work! I just went to that article to clean it up—it having been on my to-do list for a while—only to find it in good condition and well-referenced. Srnec (talk) 00:11, 23 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]

I'll see what I can do with Krusch's MGH edition, but my Latin isn't good. Srnec (talk) 00:52, 25 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for comments. Just to let you know I'm going to be in London for a few days, so it may take a while to deal with your points. Starkey is a bit of a problem. She's definitely right on the alignment, I've every reason to think that she's right on the sundial, which is a very early vertical descender, and she probably saw the 2001 restoration papers which I can't access. The skulls and crossbones on the gateway look old enough, although some parts of the gate have been repaired— I think that will be hard to ref from another source though. Jimfbleak - talk to me? 20:04, 20 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]

I only have access to jstor, but if you email me I can send you the HBW online text if that helps Jimfbleak - talk to me? 10:50, 3 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]

I'll have a look and see what I've got in my books Birds of western Polynesia might be good Jimfbleak - talk to me? 13:10, 3 December 2014 (UTC).[reply]

We saw an adult male of this species in Fiji, fortunately the only plumage in which it is easily distinguished from its relatives. The book only gives field guide level info, so no real help to you, sorry Jimfbleak - talk to me? 06:57, 4 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]

I notice it's some time since you edited at the FAC. Is there an outstanding issue that I've missed? Thanks Jimfbleak - talk to me? 07:09, 10 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks, I'm going out in a bit, so I'll look at the FAC when I can. If there is anything on any of the frigatebirds that you can't see on HBWalive, let me know. Magnificent and Ascension have occurred in the UK, so there will be something in british Birds, but it will mostly be identification and vagrancy stuff. Jimfbleak - talk to me? 11:51, 10 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Incidentally, St Helen's Etwall is also well off the standard east-west line, it would be interesting to follow that up, but unlike Ashby, which is open all day every day, Etwall is open just for two hours on Wednesday afternoon, and pre-Christmas commitments mean that I might not get there in the near future Jimfbleak - talk to me? 11:59, 10 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for your support. I've uploaded an image of Robert Mundy and his wives, but I'm not sure it's usable. The slab is worn and the contrast is poor, and I lack the skills to enhance the image to make it clearer Jimfbleak - talk to me? 14:42, 11 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]

That's definitely better. I think it would look effective if it could be made to look almost like a line drawing, but that's way beyond my skills Jimfbleak - talk to me? 15:35, 11 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]

The family texts on HBW are actually usually more extensive than the species accounts. Both sent, let me know if any problems. I usually listen to tweet of the day, but haven't over Christmas due to a baby granddaughter in the house I didn't want to risk disturbing at 6 am. I must admit, it never occured to me to actually read the articles. All the best, Jimfbleak - talk to me? 07:15, 29 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks a lot for the reference contribution. Please, if you have a couple of minutes, double-check the navigation template at the bottom, Im not 100% its correct regarding number of species. Dan Koehl (talk) 23:21, 30 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for creating Haseki Sultan Complex, Aa77zz!

Wikipedia editor TheLongTone just reviewed your page, and wrote this note for you:

Nice article on an important building, I'm a big fan of Sinan.

To reply, leave a comment on TheLongTone's talk page.

Learn more about page curation.

What really puzzles me is Sinan's birth date. It seems implausible for several reasons:I do have a fairly modern book about him which makes him about a decade younger.TheLongTone (talk) 15:44, 25 February 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Loads of good hard editing work on the Berkhamsted article. Big thankyou -- BOD -- 23:36, 6 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Very much appreciate your improvements to the citations/references. Sometimes my laziness was to blame, I am sorry. :) for help

Apologises regarding the removal of the church gates citation after you improved it, as you pointed out it did not relate to the text in question. I am highly impressed by your many improvements to the sources in the Berkhamsted article. As usual I am hoping the simple citation to the HertLis website is ok in the demography section or do you think each sentence (covering a different topic) will need its own citation to the specific table it represents? -- BOD -- 21:55, 7 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Though the Berko page belongs to nobody and everybody, I really want to thank you — for the numerous and continuing excellent editing contributions you have been making. Your hard work is highly appreciated.-- BOD -- 17:57, 9 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]

On 14 June 2015, Did you know was updated with a fact from the article Frigatebird, which you recently created or substantially expanded. The fact was ... that the male frigatebird (pictured) attracts a mate with its red gular pouch? The nomination discussion and review may be seen at Template:Did you know nominations/Frigatebird. You are welcome to check how many page hits the article got while on the front page (here's how, live views, daily totals), and it may be added to the statistics page if the total is over 5,000. Finally, if you know of an interesting fact from another recently created article, then please feel free to suggest it on the Did you know talk page.

Thanks, if you get a moment then give out a barnstar today. Victuallers (talk) 07:27, 14 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Did you have any more points you wanted to raise at the Emu FAC? Cwmhiraeth (talk) 13:04, 5 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Hi, please ping me when you've finished so as to avoid edit conflicts. Thanks, Martin of Sheffield (talk) 22:38, 28 December 2015 (UTC)[reply]

@Martin of Sheffield:, I'm done. Aa77zz (talk) 22:40, 28 December 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Why did you remove the original IOC reference? The version I listed was the first one in which Ptilotula was recognised as a genus as per the citation in text. If you want to change the format of that reference, that's fine but it should still refer to version 3.4 and not 6.1.

Also I believe the references to Mathews 1912 are in error in the documents using them (eg Nyari and Joseph 2011). Mathews made no mention of Ptilotula in the 1912 paper. It is not until the 1913 handlist that he created the genus. I think Nyari and Joseph got their reference wrong, and everyone else has followed their mistake. Does wikipedia protocol mean this error must be upheld until it is corrected in current literature?

Jippa99 (talk) 22:39, 28 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Hi, I've a possible suggestion: Redirecting your userpage to your user_talk prevents you showing up as a redlink in conversations. Feel free to ignore if you've already thought of it and decided against! T.Shafee(Evo﹠Evo)^talk 12:17, 5 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]

7&6=thirteen (☎) has given you a Dobos torte to enjoy! Seven layers of fun because you deserve it. To give a Dobos torte and spread the WikiLove, just place {{subst:Dobos Torte}} on someone else's talkpage, whether it be someone you have had disagreements with in the past or a good friend.

7&6=thirteen (☎) 14:17, 15 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you for your contributions with the references. If we can interest you in the article as a whole we have finally got it up for peer review, and any comments you might like to make would be gladly received. Tim riley talk 17:01, 24 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for your work on Mr Hobson Jobson! Carbon Caryatid (talk) 15:21, 4 March 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Aa77zz, I noticed you re-added Whistling thrush to Category:Bird genera after I had removed it. See WP:INCOMPATIBLE for why this article shouldn't be in that category. "Whistling thrush" is not a genus; Myophonus is. This is one of the types of cases where redirects get categories. --BDD (talk) 16:06, 14 July 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Category:Linaria (bird genus), which you created, has been nominated for possible deletion, merging, or renaming. A discussion is taking place to see if it abides with the categorization guidelines. If you would like to participate in the discussion, you are invited to add your comments at the category's entry on the categories for discussion page. Thank you. BDD (talk) 12:44, 5 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]

I'm expanding Eurasian rock pipit, and I'd like to verify and/or link the text support by ref 5. I found Yarrell's book here, but it doesn't appear to contain the required text. Given your expertise in these matters, I wondered if you could help sort this out, thanks Jimfbleak (talk) 08:25, 30 September 2016 (UTC)[reply]

I'll take a look later today. Aa77zz (talk) 08:29, 30 September 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Jimfbleak: The reference was muddled. The BHL has scans of 4 editions of A History of British Birds (1843). The year and page numbers corresponds to the 4th edition and not the 2nd. Yarrell died in 1856 and the 4th edition was revised by Alfred Newton. I've met Newton before - his work seems very solid. I've updated the reference - but haven't checked whether it supports all the facts in the article. Aa77zz (talk) 10:43, 30 September 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Many thanks, I'll see if it supports the text, which needs tweaking anyway Jimfbleak (talk) 10:49, 30 September 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for spending your Sunday doing so many sound files! You must be feeling at a loose end now! The other thing we were doing at the British Library was to add the files onto foreign language Wikipedias, but there were two that are of particular importance Wikispecies which acts just like other wikpedias (you access it through the left side bar), and Wikidata. I want to write a help sheet tonight, but basically it is quite simple.

• Enter wikidata from the left side bar
• You will need to add a new 'statement' called audio
• Cut and paste the sound file (without [[ ]] or 'File: ' into the box provided

Now if you scroll down to the bottom of page- you see a list of countries and the page name. From there we can add the same audiofile to multiple languages.

--ClemRutter (talk) 08:43, 10 October 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Those were really all fairly nit-picky idiom edits that I did, but thank you for thanking me for them. I noticed that you had done some serious editing on the article before that which was all stuff that needed to be done, like verb agreement with the subject.

I am not sure how you wound up at this article but you did it some good. If French wine and/or Provence is within your spheres of interest, I thought you might like to know that there are a cluster of articles in the translation-cleanup queue that have to do with the south of France, although I believe that the Chateau de l'Hers is the only one I have declared finished. Biarritz, Abbey of St Pons, Castellane, Notre-Dame de la Garde... also some that aren't online yet like Wines of the Avignon popes. If not fine, just thought I would mention it, but I *was* wondering if you know of any specialized resources in the areas of either medieval construction or winemaking -- I am finding myself at somewhat of a loss amid the many words for "wall", "Barrel" and "variety" .. either way thanks...Elinruby (talk) 20:25, 19 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, will you be finishing your FAC review for grasshopper? LittleJerry (talk) 18:21, 13 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]

	The Original Barnstar
	Thank you for giving me such a thorough review of the mangrove swallow! RileyBugzYell at me | Edits 19:32, 14 January 2017 (UTC)[reply] Many thanks. Aa77zz (talk) 20:25, 15 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Your comments would be welcome here! Johnbod (talk) 10:29, 7 February 2017 (UTC)[reply]

I noticed you have crossed out your agreement to the article title change proposal - but all your comments suggest a basic agreement with the proposal and an acceptance that the vast majority of sources write Iznik pottery rather than İznik pottery. Tiptoethrutheminefield (talk) 16:21, 2 March 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Gatoclass (talk) 00:02, 19 May 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Hello! Back in 2014 you moved the article Torra di Santa Maria Chjapella to Tour de Santa Maria della Chiappella, saying "Reliable sources and IGN maps use French". Last month it was improperly moved (via copy-paste) back to the Torra title. I have just deleted that article per G6 so that the move from the Tour page could be done properly. The person requesting the deletion had no opinion about what the title should be, they just wanted to have the move done properly rather than via copy-paste. I noticed that no reason was given for the move to Torra, and personally I wondered whether the title might not be better as "Tower of" to match the lede sentence. Anyhow, I thought I would call the situation to your attention and see if you have any opinion where we should be. And if you need admin help to carry something out, let me know. Thanks. --MelanieN (talk) 15:33, 6 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]

	The Tireless Contributor Barnstar
	Your diligent and tireless contributions to FAC reviews makes you a tireless contributor! Adityavagarwal (talk) 09:41, 8 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]

	Wish you a Merry Christmas and a prosperous New Year 2018!
	A very Happy, Glorious, Prosperous Christmas and New Year! God bless!  — Adityavagarwal (talk) 17:10, 22 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]

And the same to you. Aa77zz (talk) 20:42, 23 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Hello! I am the one who originally wrote the Sedge Wren page. I noticed you have made some changes to the taxonomy section and switch the latin name from C.platensis to C.stellaris . I was wondering where you took this information from. When I do a quick search through the scientific literature, all the articles published in 2017 still refer to the Sedge Wren as C. platensis and I cannot find any sources saying that the name changed. The Cornell University database and the Interagency Taxonomic Information System also still refer to it as C. platensis. I am simply curious to know if the name has changed and where I can find that information! Thank you and have a nice day!

Hi Aa77zz: Just wondering about your "order flip" in the convert template for the red warbler article. Can I ask why you felt the need to do that? Now, the imperial units no longer match the reference they were taken from (which had imperial, rather than metric, units). Perhaps this is something that is now mandated in MOS (a person could spend the rest of their life trying to wade through the zillions of rules there) and I just haven't run across it before? MeegsC (talk) 16:23, 29 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]

I've replied on the article talk page. Aa77zz (talk) 16:55, 29 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks! That explanation makes perfect sense... :) MeegsC (talk) 10:08, 30 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Hello can you develop Crested auklet to be a featured article--Anass (talk) 18:54, 29 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]

		The Guidance Barnstar
		For being very quick on the uptake and helping me to access HBW so I could improve the Pied-winged swallow! Captain Eek Edits Ho Cap'n! 12:42, 10 December 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Many thanks. - Aa77zz (talk) 13:15, 10 December 2018 (UTC)[reply]

I notice you that you have been working on improving the Berko article, many thanks for your good work on numerous citation fixes, copy editing and all manner of other good work on the page. Thanks :). ~ BOD ~ ^TALK 18:12, 6 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for creating Socotra white-eye.

I have just reviewed the page, as a part of our page curation process and note that:

Keep up the good work on these bird stubs.

To reply, leave a comment here and prepend it with {{Re|Onel5969}}. And, don't forget to sign your reply with ~~~~ .

Message delivered via the Page Curation tool, on behalf of the reviewer.

Onel5969 ^{TT me} 22:55, 23 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for your help with the Pitta FAC; I was wondering if you wanted to respond to Dyanega's comment so I can close this off as done for it. Sabine's Sunbird talk 04:09, 27 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Your contributions to this article have been excellent. A little harsh though on my source for Godman's botannical interests. The All About Horsham article of Godman is one of a series written for the journal by historians and librarians from the Horsham Society and Horsham Museum. Robina Arbuthnott (nee Axford) can name Josiah Wedgwood III, Charles Darwin and Ralph Vaughan Williams amongst her decendents. Moreover she lived at Godman's home of South lodge after the Second World War and her cousins were Eva and Edith Godman. She is an amateur historian of impeccable integrity. Dorkinglad (talk) 14:56, 5 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]

I am happy to send you the article as Mrs Arbuthnott adds additional information from her research to the subject matter Dorkinglad (talk) 14:56, 5 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for taking the time to reply on my talk page. I can not compete (not that was the intention) with your resources on this subject. It is appreciated. You are clearly a scholarly contributor. I thought Robina Arbuthnott's article to be of interest. However the only part I chose to add was on the plant collection as most of the rest does not contain scholarly references. There is an obituary published by RHS for Godman. It is on-line at https://royalsocietypublishing.org/doi/pdf/10.1098/rspb.1920.0020

It gives a flavour as to the character of Godman and might be of interest. A man with the wealth to indulge his many passions. A fascinating man. I have enjoyed this correspondence. Dorkinglad (talk) 17:41, 5 February 2019 (UTC)

 — Amakuru (talk) 00:01, 13 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Many thanks for your help with getting this to FA Jimfbleak - talk to me? 06:47, 20 March 2019 (UTC)[reply]

I wanna push this to the usual destinations, but have intermittent time and energy, and it isn't quite coming together like the two gannet articles. I'd be grateful for any help in this direction :) Cas Liber (talk · contribs) 13:41, 27 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Cas - The article is already well on the way. I won't have much time to look at it until the end of next week when I return to London. I'm currently in Corsica and have guests to entertain. Aa77zz (talk) 06:52, 28 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]

I didn't necessarily mean straightaway and should have clarified that. I have been buffing this article on and off for months and just felt a bit blocked on it. Wow Corsica sounds cool! Cas Liber (talk · contribs) 17:47, 28 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]

I've been working on this recently with a view to FAC. Since it's a bit of a departure from my usual stuff, I wondered if you could please have a quick look. I'm still polishing, so I'm not looking for a detailed review, just whether you can see any obvious problems or omissions, thanks Jimfbleak - talk to me?

I'll take a look. I've seen many early paintings containing goldfinches but I've not been to The Hague and seen Fabritius's picture. When accompanying my wife to view collections of "primitives" I search out goldfinches in pictures of the Madonna and child. When I looked at the 1946 book by Friedmann (in the British Library), I came away slightly confused about the symbolism (charadrius transferred to goldfinch, an augur in time of disease etc). I'm visiting Florence next week and will seek out Rachael's Madonna del cardellino in the Uffizi. - Aa77zz (talk) 11:20, 15 January 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Greetings from the Guild of Copy Editors, a WikiProject dedicated to improving Wikipedia articles through copy editing. You are receiving this invitation because someone has noticed the quality of your edits and your commitment to improving the content of Wikipedia. Please see our project page for more information and reasons to join. You may wish to join us during our backlog elimination drives, help fulfill editor requests, or simply become a part of our supportive community. We hope to help you so that you can help make Wikipedia a better place! ~~~~

Notice your work there, have you seen the recent biographical work by Charles Allen? Shyamal (talk) 14:49, 13 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Shyamal - thanks for your note. I wasn't aware of Allen. I'll take a look when I visit a library (unlikely to be soon). I came across Hodgson when checking on the authorities for birds - he introduced 29 genera and 77 species (in the latest ioc list). - Aa77zz (talk) 15:05, 13 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Yes he was prolific. I once looked at all the "taxa" that he had named (based on an older IOC list) and he does come up in the top - https://public.tableau.com/profile/shyamal4878#!/vizhome/Book2_6604/Sheet1 Allen's book The Prisoner of Kathmandu deals more with the Nepal and Indian politics of the period, and only bits on ornithology (with some serious errors caused by a misunderstanding of zoological nomenclature) [I wish Allen had sent me a draft, because I was surprised when someone else noticed the errors and noted that I had been acknowledged (unknown to me), almost making me responsible for those slip-ups!] Shyamal (talk) 15:25, 13 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Are you still up for Secretarybird? LittleJerry (talk) 20:45, 3 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]

LittleJerry: I'll help but I won't lead. The British Library is closed so I cannot help with offline sources. - Aa77zz (talk) 07:33, 4 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]

We've pretty much got the backbones of it in the material already. Will take a look in next 24 hours to figure out where to next. Cas Liber (talk · contribs) 11:36, 4 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Need your help at the FAC. LittleJerry (talk) 21:30, 29 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]

The source that I used for the aforementioned names was Avibase. In fact, I used the same source for several other birds as well:

• the European greenfinch,
• the common chaffinch,
• the common blackbird,
• the common starling,
• the house sparrow (all but three (which weren't there)),
• the rock dove.

If you want to check them out, please do.2600:1700:7E31:5710:9973:60E1:C13D:E79C (talk) 16:35, 14 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Hi, do you my any chance have access to this article? cheers Jimfbleak - talk to me? 13:00, 10 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Replied by email - Aa77zz (talk) 13:15, 10 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Hi. Do you know another study for the phylogeny of this clade aside from Tello et al. (2009)? I want to incorporate a cladogram to the article.

• Tello, J.G. et al. (2009) Phylogeny and phylogenetic classification of the tyrant flycatchers, cotingas, manakins, and their allies (Aves: Tyrannides)

There is an article on the suboscines published today here:

• Harvey, M.G.; Bravo, G.A.; Claramunt, S.; Cuervo, A.M.; Derryberry, G.E.; Battilana, J.; Seeholzer, G.F.; McKay, J.S.; O’Meara, B.C.; Faircloth, B.C.; Edwards, S.V.; Pérez-Emán, J.; Moyle, R.G.; Sheldon, F.H.; Aleixo, A.; Smith, B.T.; Chesser, R.T.; Silveira, L.F.; Cracraft, J.; Brumfield, R.T.; Derryberry, E.P. (2020). "The evolution of a tropical biodiversity hotspot". Science. 370 (6522): 1343–1348. doi:10.1126/science.aaz6970. {{cite journal}}: Cite has empty unknown parameter: |1= (help)

The authors sampled 1,287 species of the 1,306 recognised species of suboscines and used the DNA flanking UCEs to construct the phylogeny. I haven't yet read the paper BUT I cannot find a detailed cladogram - Fig 1 in the article is useless and I haven't found one in the Supplementary Materials. Table S14 lists the paraphyletic genera - but doesn't explain why they are paraphyletic. They compare their results with:

• Jetz, W.; Thomas, G.H.; Joy, J.B.; Hartmann, K.; Mooers, A.O. (2012). "The global diversity of birds in space and time". Nature. 491 (7424): 444–448. doi:10.1038/nature11631.

and find many differences - but Fig S37 doesn't help. I assume the authors will publish another paper in which they provide more details. - Aa77zz (talk) 19:32, 11 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Ornithodiez - Chesser et al have published a cladogram of subfamily Fluvicolinae in the Tyrannidae. The phylogeny is based on the same data as that used in Harvey et al 2020 above.

• Chesser, R.T.; Harvey, M.G.; Brumfield, R.T.; Derryberry, E.P. (2020). "A revised classification of the Xolmiini (Aves: Tyrannidae: Fluvicolinae), including a new genus for Muscisaxicola fluviatilis". Proceedings of the Biological Society of Washington. 133 (1): 35–48. doi:10.2988/20-00005.

Email me if you cannot access the article. - Aa77zz (talk) 08:55, 12 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]

There is also this (cited by Chesser et al):

• Ohlson, J.I.; Irestedt, M.; Filho, H.B.; Ericson, P.G.P.; Fjeldså, J. (2020). "A revised classification of the fluvicoline tyrant flycatchers (Passeriformes, Tyrannidae, Fluvicolinae)". Zootaxa. 4747 (1): 167–176. doi:10.11646/zootaxa.4747.1.7.

We need to wait to see whether and how the IOC make changes to the taxonomy. - Aa77zz (talk) 09:10, 12 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Did you read this study?

• Braun, E.L. & Kimball, R.T. (2021) Data Types and the Phylogeny of Neoaves.

--Ornithodiez (talk) 17:42, 14 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for the note - I'll take a look. - Aa77zz (talk) 17:46, 14 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Aa77zz: I'm working on expanding the common pochard article, and have found a weird discrepancy concerning type species for Aythya. Have a look at this reference from Spencer Baird (showing that common pochard is the type specimen) and this reference from Robert Ridgway which list as a reference this article in Isis von Oken from 1822 where Boie discusses classification and shows (on page 564) the same. So which is right?! MeegsC (talk) 21:03, 2 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]

MeegsC For type species I look at Peters - in this case Vol 1 2nd edition 1979 and on page 482 there is

"Aythya Boie, 1822, (before May), Tagebuch Reise Norwegen, p. 351. type by monotypy Anas marila Linnaeus"

I also look at H&M4 Vol 1 - p. 14 has "Aythya Boie 1822 Anas marila Linnaeus 1761" which you can see here.

Boie appears to have two publications in 1822. In the first: Tagebuch gehalten auf einer reise durch Norwegen im jahre 1817 right at the end of the book on page 351 he has a list which includes:

"130. Aythya marila - Anas marila Lin"

As only one species is mentioned it is "type by monotypy". The other (I assume later) 1822 publication is in Isis von Oken where in col. 564 Boie lists the species in Aythya but doesn't specify which is the type. (I believe some ornithologists used to assume that the first on the list was the type - but this isn't accepted by the ICZN.) For interest you can look at the Richmond index cards:
http://www.zoonomen.net/cit/RI/Genera/A/a01402a.jpg
http://www.zoonomen.net/cit/RI/Genera/A/a01403a.jpg
http://www.zoonomen.net/cit/RI/Genera/A/a01404a.jpg

So "modern" sources agree that the type species is Anas marila Linnaeus 1761 - ie the greater scaup.

I hope this helps. Cheers - Aa77zz (talk) 22:22, 2 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Interesting! I would have assumed that since he doesn't actually mention Aythya in the article about the birds he'd seen in Norway (other than in that list of species) that he'd already set it up elsewhere. MeegsC (talk) 22:35, 2 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]

By the way what are "Richmond index cards"? MeegsC (talk) 22:50, 2 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]

In the book Boie mentions Aythya marila on page 308. - Aa77zz (talk) 22:54, 2 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]

I get that. But in the other article, he's actually talking about classification. To me, it makes sense that that's where he's setting up his new genus. But clearly, other experts disagree! MeegsC (talk) 23:12, 2 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]

A short explanation of the Richmond cards is given here. - Aa77zz (talk) 22:58, 2 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks! MeegsC (talk) 23:12, 2 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Precious

Seven years!

--Gerda Arendt (talk) 07:56, 11 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you today for your share in Indian roller, - great collaboration! --Gerda Arendt (talk) 07:05, 2 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]

I wonder if you would be kind enough to take a look at this when you get a chance? I'm thinking of running it at FAC, but it seems a bit short and has only 17 distinct refs. In particular, I can't find anything about plant interest, but neither the nature reserve's own website nor the lengthy British Birds article, co-authored by six people connected to the reservoir, make any mention of anything botanical, so perhaps there is simply nothing special there? Jimfbleak - talk to me? 12:37, 18 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]

I'll take a look over the next few day and reply on the talk page - but I know nothing about reservoirs. - Aa77zz (talk) 13:07, 18 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]

I think that I've gone about as far as I reasonably can with expanding the text, thanks for all your help. We have family coming over the weekend and a plumber in on Tuesday (probably), but I'll probably take it to FAC after that before I get bogged down with scheduling TFA for July Jimfbleak - talk to me? 13:58, 27 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]

This is to let you know that the above article has been scheduled as today's featured article for September 2, 2021. Please check the article needs no amendments. If you're interested in editing the main page text, you're welcome to do so at Wikipedia:Today's featured article/September 2, 2021. Congratulations on your work!—Wehwalt (talk) 21:23, 8 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Is it fine to cite a Russian book on bird articles? 2001:4455:1A9:E100:B5A0:86C7:B3DD:D339 (talk) 09:15, 14 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

It all depends on the circumstances. If the first formal description of a species (ie the protologue) was in Russian, then it is important to cite the Russian source, but if you are describing a bird that is endemic to Australia, then there is likely to be an authorative source in English and it would be perverse to cite a Russian source. It would make it difficult for other editors to verify that the source supported the information in the Wiki article. - Aa77zz (talk) 20:15, 14 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

I see, thanks. I've done translating everything at Siberian nuthatch. Hopefully, it will be okay on GAN just like the other nuthatches articles that I translated/worked on that was recently promoted. 2001:4455:1A9:E100:2DCE:2265:A4C4:DD2 (talk) 10:13, 16 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Hi there. Looks like you're doing some good work on the various Amazon articles. Are you going to be doing them all, in the same manner? Reason I ask is that Tres Marías amazon is in a fairly sorry state and could do with a lot of work. I haven't been able to find that much about the species to add. Just a thought for you (if you get that far), as your research skills seem better than mine. Take care!--Iloveparrots (talk) 10:52, 20 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Iloveparrots - I was working through all the articles on bird species that were named by Linnaeus in 1758 and adding a Taxonomy section. At the same time I often update the taxonomy of the genus articles. I have a few more parrots to update in Psittaculidae. - Aa77zz (talk) 11:05, 20 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Cool. :) I think Yellow-headed amazon needs some work with regards to the taxonomy too, fwiw... Iloveparrots (talk) 12:27, 20 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Iloveparrots: I've looked at the Tres Marías amazon article. The IOC is the only list to treat this bird as a full species and it seems that the evidence for species status is very weak. The parrot is likely to be reclassified as a subspecies when the lists are rationalised. (if that ever happens). - Aa77zz (talk) 09:20, 23 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for expanding the article though. There are a bunch of these taxonomic disputes between the various authorities. The eclectus parrot seems to be another big, contentious one. Also with the Psittacula species and new genus names. I just recently saw that Birdlife International (but no-one else yet) considers the citron-crested cockatoo to be a separate species too. Iloveparrots (talk) 17:30, 23 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]